Software Verification Examples

ISO ETA032913M5 Rev. 1

Berkeley, California, USA June 2013
Software Verification Examples
For ETABS

2013
Copyright
Copyright Computers & Structures, Inc., 1978-2013
All rights reserved.
The CSI Logoand ETABSare registered trademarks of Computers & Structures, Inc.
The computer program ETABSand all associated documentation are proprietary and
copyrighted products. Worldwide rights of ownership rest with Computers & Structures, Inc.
Unlicensed use of these programs or reproduction of documentation in any form, without
prior written authorization from Computers & 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 & Structures, Inc.
www.csiberkeley.com
[email protected] (for general information)
[email protected] (for technical support)


DISCLAIMER
CONSIDERABLE TIME, EFFORT AND EXPENSE HAVE GONE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT
AND DOCUMENTATION OF THIS SOFTWARE. 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
THIS PRODUCT.
THIS PRODUCT IS A PRACTICAL AND POWERFUL TOOL FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN.
HOWEVER, THE USER MUST EXPLICITLY UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF
THE SOFTWARE MODELING, ANALYSIS, AND DESIGN ALGORITHMS AND
COMPENSATE FOR THE ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT ADDRESSED.
THE INFORMATION PRODUCED BY THE SOFTWARE MUST BE CHECKED BY A
QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER MUST
INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE RESULTS AND TAKE PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE INFORMATION THAT IS USED.


i
Contents
Introduction
Methodology
Conclusions
Problems
Analysis Problems

1 Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads, Static Gravity Load Analysis
2 Three-Story Plane Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis
3 Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specific Static Lateral Load Analysis
4 Single Story Three-Dimensional Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis
5 Three-Story Three-Dimensional Braced Frame, Dynamic Response
Spectrum Analysis
6 Nine-Story Ten-Bay Plane Frame, Eigenvalue Analysis
7 Seven-Story Plane Frame, Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis
8 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis
9 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Unsymmetrical Building Frame, Dynamic
Response Spectrum Analysis
10 Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements, Nonlinear Time History
Analysis
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

ii
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

11 Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements, Nonlinear Time
History Analysis
12 Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis
13 Base Isolated Two-Story 3D Frame, Nonlinear Time History Analysis
14 Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame, Nonlinear Time History
Analysis
15 Wall Object Behavior, Static Lateral Loads Analysis
Design Examples

Steel Frame
AISC 360-05 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
AISC 360-05 Example 002 Build-up Wide Flange Member Under
Compression
AISC 360-10 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
AISC 360-10 Example 002 Build-up Wide Flange Member Under
Compression
AISC ASD-89 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
AISC ASD-89 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Compression
AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Combined
Compression & Biaxial Bending
AS 4100-1998 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression
AS 4100-1998 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
AS 4100-1998 Example 003 Wide Flange Member Under Combined
Compression & Bending
BS 5950-2000 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
BS 5950-2000 Example 002 Square Tube Member Under Compression &
Bending
CSA S16-09 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression &
Bending
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

iii
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

CSA S16-09 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Compression &
Bending
EC 3-2005 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Combined
Compression & Bending
EN 3-2005 Example 002 Wide Flange Section Under Bending
EN 3-2005 Example 003 Wide Flange Section Under Combined
Compression & Bending
IS 800-2007 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression
IS 800-2007 Example 002 Wide Flange Member Under Bending
IS 800-2007 Example 003 Wide Flange Member Under Combined
Compression & Biaxial Bending
NTC 2008 Example 001 Wide Flange Section Under Combined
Compression & Bending
NTC 2008 Example 002 Wide Flange Section Under Combined
Compression & Bending
NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 Wide Flange Member Under Compression
NZS 3404-1997 Example 002
Wide Flange Member Under Bending
NZS 3404-1997 Example 003
Wide Flange Member Under Combined
Compression & Bending
Concrete Frame
ACI 318-08 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
ACI 318-08 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
ACI 318-11 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
ACI 318-11 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
AS 3600-2009 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
AS 3600-2009 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
BS 8110-1997 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
BS 8110-1997 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

iv
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
EN 2-2004 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
EN 2-2004 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
HK CP-2004 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
HK CP-2004 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
IS 456-2000 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
IS 456-2000 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
NTC 2008 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
NTC 2008 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
KCI 1999 Example 001 Beam Moment Strength Using Equivalent
Rectangular Stress Distribution
KCI 1999 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
RCDF 2004 Example 001 Beam Moment Strength Using Equivalent
Rectangular Stress Distribution
RCDF 2004 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
TS 500-2000 Example 001 Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing
TS 500-2000 Example 002 P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column
Shear Wall
ACI 318-08 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for Wall
ACI 318-08 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for Wall
ACI 318-11 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for Wall
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

v
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

ACI 318-11 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for Wall
ACI 530-11 MasonryWALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for Wall
ACI 530-11 MasonryWALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for Wall
AS 360-09 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
AS 360-09 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
BS 8110-97 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
BS 8110-97 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
CSA A23.3-04 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
CSA A23.3-04 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
EC 2-2004 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
EC 2-2004 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Hong Kong CP-04 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Hong Kong CP-04 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Indian IS 456-2000 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Indian IS 456-2000 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Mexican RCDF-04 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Mexican RCDF-04 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
NZS-3103-2006 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
NZS-3103-2006 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Singapore CP65-99-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Singapore CP65-99-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Turkish TS 500-2000 WALL-001 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Turkish TS 500-2000 WALL-002 P-M Interaction Check for a Wall
Composite Beam

AISC 360-05 Example 001 Composite Girder Design
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

vi
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

AISC 360-10 Example 001 Composite Girder Design
AISC 360-10 Example 002 Composite Girder Design
BS 5950-90 Example 001
Steel Designers Manual Sixth Edition Design of
Simply Supported Composite Beam
CSA S16-09 Example 001 Handbook of Steel Construction Manual Tenth
Edition Composite Beam
EC 4-2004 Example 001 Steel Designers Manual Seventh Edition
Design of Simply Supported Composite Beam
Composite Column

AISC 360-10 Example 001 Composite Column Design
AISC 360-10 Example 002 Composite Column Design
AISC 360-10 Example 003 Composite Column Design


References
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


i
ETABS Software Verification Log
Revision
Number Date Description
0 19 Apr 2013 Initial release of ETABS 2013, Version 13.0.0





Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

INTRODUCTION 1
INTRODUCTION
This manual presents a set of simple building systems that have been analyzed using
ETABS 2013. The examples demonstrate some of the analytical capabilities of the ETABS
system.
The examples demonstrate the adequacy of the program for use in all applications,
including safety-related nuclear, as governed by 10CFR50 requirements as well as other
international QA standards, such as ISO 9000:2000 requirements.
METHODOLOGY
A series of test problems, or examples, designed to test the various elements and analysis
features of the program were created. For each example, this manual contains a short
description of the problem; a list of significant ETABS options tested; and a comparison of
key results with theoretical results or results from other computer programs. The
comparison of the ETABS results with results obtained from independent sources is
provided in tabular form as part of each example.
To validate and verify ETABS results, the test problems were run on a PC platform that
was a Dell machine with a Pentium III processor and 512 MB of RAM operating on a
Windows XP operating system.
Acceptance Criteria
The comparison of the ETABS 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 ETABS results and the independent results
within the larger of the accuracy of the typical ETABS output and the accuracy of the
independent result.
Acceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the
ETABS results and the independent results does not exceed five percent (5%). For internal
force and stress values, the difference between the ETABS results and the independent
results does not exceed ten percent (10%). For experimental values, the difference between
the ETABS results and the independent results does not exceed twenty five percent (25%).
Unacceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the
ETABS results and the independent results exceeds five percent (5%). For internal force
and stress values, the difference between the ETABS results and the independent results
exceeds ten percent (10%). For experimental values, the difference between the ETABS
results and the independent results exceeds twenty five percent (25%).
The percentage difference between results is typically calculated using the following
formula:
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

Summary of Examples 2
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

ETABS 2013 Result
Percent Difference 100 1
Independent Result





Summary of Examples
The example problems addressed plane frame, three-dimensional, and wall structures as
well as shear wall and floor objects. The analyses completed included dynamic response
spectrum, eigenvalue, nonlinear time history, and static gravity and lateral load.
Other program features tested include treatment of automatic generation of seismic and
wind loads, automatic story mass calculation, biaxial friction pendulum and biaxial
hysteretic elements, brace and column members with no bending stiffness, column pinned
end connections, multiple diaphragms, non rigid joint offsets on beams and columns, panel
zones, point assignments, rigid joint offsets, section properties automatically recovered
from the database, uniaxial damper element, uniaxial gap elements, vertical beam span
loading and user specified lateral loads and section properties.
Analysis: Of the fifteen Analysis problems, eight showed exact agreement while the
remaining seven showed acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and the cited
independent sources.
Design Steel Frame: Of the 26 Steel Frame Design problems, 17 showed exact
agreement while the remaining nine showed acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013
and the cited independent sources.
Design Concrete Frame: Of the 28 Concrete Frame Design problems, 16 showed exact
agreement while the remaining 12 shoes acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and
the cited independent sources.
Design Shear Wall: All 26 of the Shear Wall Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS 2013 and the cited independent sources.
Design Composite Beam: The 6 Composite Beam Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS 2013 and the cited independent sources.
Design Composite Column: The 3 Composite Column Design problems showed
acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and cited independent sources.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

CONCLUSIONS 3
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

CONCLUSIONS
ETABS 2013 is the latest release of the ETABS series of computer programs. Since
development, ETABS has been used widely for structural analysis. The ongoing usage of
the program coupled with continuing program upgrades are strong indicators that most
program bugs have been identified and corrected.
Additionally, the verification process conducted as described in this document
demonstrates that the program features tested are operating reliably and with accuracy
consistent with current computer technology capabilities.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis 1 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 1
Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis
Problem Description
This is a one-story, two-dimensional frame subjected to vertical static loading.
To be able to compare ETABS 2013 results with theoretical results using prismatic members
and elementary beam theory, rigid joint offsets on columns and beams are not modeled, and
axial and shear deformations are neglected. Thus, the automatic property generation feature
of ETABS 2013 is not used; instead, the axial area and moment of inertia for each member
are explicitly input.
Geometry, Properties and Loading
The frame is a three-column line, two-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are used. The
modulus of elasticity is 3000 ksi. All columns are 12"x24"; all beams are 12"x30".
The frame geometry and loading patterns are shown in Figure 1-1.
Pinned
Connection
10k/ft
Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq.
10
50k 50k 100k 100k 100k
Case 1
Case 2
Origin
Pinned
Connection
10k/ft
Eq. Eq. Eq. Eq.
10
50k 50k 100k 100k 100k
Case 1
Case 2
Origin

Figure 1-1 Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis 1 - 2
Err






Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Vertical beam span loading
No rigid joint offsets on beams and columns
Column pinned end connections
Results Comparison
The theoretical results for bending moments and shear forces on beams B1 and B2 are easily
obtained from tabulated values for propped cantilevers (American Institute of Steel Construc-
tion 1989). These values for beam B1 are compared with ETABS 2013 results in Table 1-1.

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case 1
Quantity Location
Load Case I
(Concentrated Load)
ETABS Theoretical
Bending Moments End I 0.00 0.00
Point 1,687.50 1,687.50
point 3,375.00 3,375.00
point -337.50 -337.50
End J -4,050.00 -4,050.00
Shear Forces End I -31.25 -31.25
Point -31.25 -31.25
point 68.75 68.75
point 68.75 68.75
End J 68.75 68.75

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case II
Quantity Location
Load Case II
(Uniformly Distributed Load)
ETABS Theoretical
Bending Moments End I 0.00 0.00
Point 2,430.00 2,430.00
point 2,430.00 2,430.00
point 0.00 0.00
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis 1 - 3
Err






Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case II
Quantity Location
Load Case II
(Uniformly Distributed Load)
ETABS Theoretical
End J -4,860.00 -4,860.00
Shear Forces End I -67.50 -67.50
Point -22.50 -22.50
point 22.50 22.50
point 67.50 67.50
End J 112.50 112.50
Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX1.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.
Conclusion
The comparison of results shows an exact match between the ETABS 2013 results and the
theoretical data.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 2 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 2
Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis
Problem Description
This is a three-story plane frame subjected to the El Centro 1940 seismic response spectra, N-S
component, 5 percent damping.
Assuming the beams to be rigid and a rigid offset at the column top ends of 24 inches (i.e.,
equal to the depth of the beams), and neglecting both shear deformations and axial defor-
mations, the story lateral stiffness for this example can be calculated (Przemieniecki 1968).
The example then reduces to a three-spring, three-mass system with equal stiffnesses and
masses. This can be analyzed using any exact method (Paz 1985) to obtain the three natural
periods and mass normalized mode shapes of the system.
The spectral accelerations at the three natural periods can then be linearly interpolated from
the response spectrum used.
The spectral accelerations can in turn be used with the mode shapes and story mass infor-
mation to obtain the modal responses (Paz 1985). The modal responses for story displace-
ments and column moments can then be combined using the complete quadratic combination
procedure (Wilson, et al. 1981).
Geometry, Properties and Loading
The frame is modeled as a two-column line, single bay system. Kip-inch-second units are
used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:
All columns are W14X90
All beams are infinitely rigid and 24" deep
Modulus of elasticity = 29500 ksi
Typical story mass = 0.4 kip-sec
2
/in
The column is modeled to have infinite axial area, so that axial deformation is neglected. Al-
so, zero column shear area is input to trigger the ETABS 2013 option of neglecting shear de-
formations. These deformations are neglected to be consistent with the hand-calculated model
with which the results are compared.
The frame geometry is shown in Figure 2-1.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 2 - 2
Err







Figure 2-1 Three-Story Plane Frame

Technical Features in ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Rigid joint offsets on beams and columns automatically calculated
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Results Comparison
The three theoretical natural periods and mass normalized mode shapes are compared in Ta-
ble 2-1 with ETABS 2013 results.
Table 2-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes
Mode Period, secs. Mode Shape ETABS Theoretical
1 0.4414
Roof Level 1.165 1.165
2
nd
Level 0.934 0.934
1
st
Level 0.519 0.519
2 0.1575
Roof Level 0.934 0.934
2
nd
Level -0.519 -0.519
1
st
Level -1.165 -1.165
3 0.1090 Roof Level 0.519 0.519
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 2 - 3
Err






Table 2-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes
Mode Period, secs. Mode Shape ETABS Theoretical
2
nd
Level -1.165 -1.165
1
st
Level 0.934 0.934

The story displacements and column moments thus obtained are compared in Table 2-2 with
ETABS 2013 results. The results are identical.

Table 2-2 Comparison of Displacements and Column Moments
Quantity ETABS Theoretical
Displacement at
Roof 2.139 2.139
2
nd
1.716 1.716
1
st
0.955 0.955
Moment, Column C1, at Base 11,730 11,730

Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX2.EDB. The response spectrum file is ELCN-RS1.
These files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.
Conclusion
The result comparison shows an exact match between the ETABS 2013 results and the theo-
retical data.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 3
Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis
Problem Description
The frame is modeled as a two-column line, single bay system. This three-story plane frame
is subjected to the following three code-specified lateral load cases:
UBC 1997 specified seismic loads (International Conference of Building Officials 1997)
IBC 2000 specified seismic loads (International Code Council, Inc. 2000)
UBC 1997 specified wind loads (International Conference of Building Officials 1997)
Geometry, Properties and Loads
Kip-inch-second units are used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:
All columns are W14X90
All beams are infinitely rigid and 24" deep
Modulus of elasticity = 29500 ksi
Poisson's ratio = 0.3
Typical story mass = 0.4 kip-sec
2
/in
The frame geometry is shown in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1 Three-Story Plane Frame

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3 - 2
Err






For the UBC97 seismic load analysis, the code parameters associated with the analysis are as
follows:
UBC Seismic zone factor, Z = 0.40
UBC Soil Profile Type = SC
UBC Importance factor, I = 1.25
UBC Overstrength Factor = 8.5
UBC coefficient C
t
= 0.035
UBC Seismic Source Type = B
Distance to Source = 15 km

For the IBC2000 seismic load analysis, the code parameters associated with the analysis are
as follows:
IBC Site Class = C
IBC Response Accel, S
s
= 1
IBC Response Accel, S
1
= 0.4
IBC Response Modification, R = 8
IBC Coefficient C
t
= 0.035
IBC Seismic Group = I

For the UBC97 wind load analysis, the exposure and code parameters associated with the analy-
sis are as follows:

Width of structure supported by frame = 20 ft
UBC Basic wind speed = 100 mph
UBC Exposure type = B
UBC Importance factor, I = 1
UBC Windward coefficient, C
q
= 0.8
UBC Leeward coefficient, C
q
= 0.5
Technical Features in ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Section properties automatically recovered from AISC database
Automatic generation of UBC 1997 seismic loads
Automatic generation of IBC 2000 seismic loads
Automatic generation of UBC 1997 wind loads
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3 - 3
Err






Results Comparison
For each of the static lateral load analyses, the story shears can be computed using the formu-
lae given in the applicable references. For the seismic loads, the fundamental period comput-
ed by ETABS 2013 can be used in the formulae. From ETABS results, this fundamental peri-
od is 0.5204 second. (Note the difference between the calculated fundamental period for this
example and Example 2, which neglects shear and axial deformations.)

Hand-calculated story shears are compared with story shears produced by the ETABS 2013
program in Table 3-1 for UBC seismic loads, Table 3-2 for IBC seismic loads and Table 3-3
for UBC wind loads.

Table 3-1 Comparison of Results for Story Shears-UBC 1997 Seismic
Level ETABS (kips) Theoretical (kips)
Roof 34.09 34.09
2
nd
56.82 56.82
1
st
68.19 68.19


Table 3-2 Comparison of Results for Story Shears-IBC 2000 Seismic
Level ETABS (kips) Theoretical (kips)
Roof 19.38 19.38
2
nd
32.25 32.25
1
st
38.64 38.64

Figure 3-3 Comparison of Results for Story Shears-UBC 1997 Wind
Level ETABS (kips) Theoretical (kips)
Roof 3.30 3.30
2
nd
9.49 9.49
1
st
15.21 15.21

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX3.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis 3 - 4
Err






Conclusion
The results comparison shows an exact match between the ETABS results and the theoretical
data.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 4 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 4
Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis
Problem Description
This is a one-story, four-bay, three-dimensional frame. The frame is subjected to the El Cen-
tro 1940 N-S component seismic response spectrum, for 5 percent damping, in two orthogo-
nal directions. The columns are modeled to neglect shear and axial deformations to be con-
sistent with the assumptions of hand calculations with which the results are compared.
The example is a three-degree-of-freedom system. From the individual column lateral
stiffnesses, assuming rigid beams and rigid offsets at column top ends equal to 36 inches (i.e.,
the depth of the beams) and neglecting both shear deformations and column axial defor-
mations, the structural stiffness matrix can be assembled (Przemieniecki 1968).
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The frame geometry is shown in Figure 4-1.

Figure 4-1 Single-Story Three-Dimensional Frame

The structure is modeled as a single frame with four column lines and four bays. Kip-inch-
second units are used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:

Columns on lines C1 and C2: 24" x 24"
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 4 - 2
Err






Columns on lines C3 and C4: 18" x 18"
All beams infinitely rigid and 36" deep

Modulus of elasticity = 3000 ksi
Story weight = 150 psf

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Three-dimensional frame analysis
Automatic story mass calculation
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Results Comparison
From the stiffness and mass matrices of the system, the three natural periods and mass nor-
malized mode shapes of the system can be obtained (Paz 1985). These are compared in Table
4-1 with ETABS 2013 results.
Table 4-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes
Mode Quantity ETABS Theoretical
1 Period, sec. 0.1389 0.1389
Mode Shape
X-translation -1.6244 -1.6244
Y-translation 0.0000 0.000
Z-rotation 0.0032 0.0032
2 Period, sec. 0.1254 0.1254
Mode Shape
X-translation 0.000 0.000
Y-translation 1.6918 1.6918
Z-rotation 0.000 0.000
3 Period,sec. 0.0702 0.070
Mode Shape
X-translation 0.4728 0.4728
Y-translation 0.000 0.000
Z-rotation 0.0111 0.0111

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 4 - 3
Err






Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX4.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.
Conclusion
The results comparison shows an exact match between the ETABS 2013 results and the theo-
retical data.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 5 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 5
Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis
Problem Description
This is an L-shaped building structure with four identical braced frames. All members (col-
umns and braces) carry only axial loads.
The structure is subject to the El Centro 1940 N-S component seismic response spectrum in
the X-direction. The structural damping is 5 percent. The structure is modeled by appropriate-
ly placing four identical planar frames. Each frame is modeled using three column lines. Kip-
inch-second units are used.
Geometry, Properties and Loading
The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29500 ksi and the typical member axial area as 6 in
2
. A
story mass of 1.242 kip-sec
2
/in and a mass moment of inertia of 174,907.4 kip-sec
2
-in are
used.
The geometry of the structure and a typical frame are shown in Figure 5-1.
Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Three-dimensional structure analysis using planar frames
Brace (diagonal) and column members with no bending stiffness
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Results Comparison
This example has been solved in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Peterson (1981). A
comparison of ETABS 2013 results for natural periods and key member forces for one
frame with these references is given in Table 5-1.



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 5 - 2
Err



























Figure 5-1 Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame Building


D
1
D
1
D
1
D
3
D
3
D
3
D
2
D
2
D
2
D
4
D
4
D
4 D
1
D
1
D
1
D
3
D
3
D
3
D
2
D
2
D
2
D
4
D
4
D
4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 5 - 3
Err






Table 5-1 Comparison of Results
Quantity ETABS
Wilson and
Habibullah Peterson
Period, Mode 1 0.32686 0.32689 0.32689
Period, Mode 2 0.32061 0.32064 0.32064
Axial Force
Column C1, Story 1
279.39 279.47 279.48
Axial Force
Brace D1, Story 1
194.44 194.51 194.50
Axial Force
Brace D3, Story 1
120.49 120.53 120.52

Computer File
The input data file is EX5.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.
Conclusions
The results comparison reflects acceptable agreement between the ETABS 2013 results and
reference data.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis 6 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 6
Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis
Problem Description
An eigenvalue analysis is completed.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The frame is modeled with eleven column lines and ten bays. Kip-ft-second units are used. A
modulus of elasticity of 432,000 ksf is used. A typical member axial area of 3ft
2
and moment
of inertia of 1ft
4
are used. A mass of 3kip-sec
2
/ft/ft of member length is converted to story
mass using tributary lengths and used for the analysis.
This is a nine-story, ten-bay plane frame, as shown in Figure 6-1.


Figure 6-1 Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis 6 - 2
Err






Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Eigenvalue analysis
Results Comparison
This example is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Bathe and Wilson
(1972). There are two differences between the ETABS 2013 analysis and the analyses of the
references. The models of the references assign vertical and horizontal mass degrees of free-
dom to each joint in the structure. However, the ETABS 2013 model only assigns horizontal
masses and additionally, only one horizontal mass is assigned for all the joints associated
with any one floor level.
The eigenvalues obtained from ETABS 2013 are compared in Table 6-1 with results from
Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Bathe and Wilson (1972).
Table 6-1 Comparison of Results for Eigenvalues
Quantity ETABS
Wilson and
Habibullah
Bathe and
Wilson
1 0.58964 0.58954 0.58954
2 5.53195 5.52696 5.52695
3 16.5962 16.5879 16.5878

Computer File
The input data filename for this example is EX6.EDB. This file is provided as part of the
ETABS 2013 installation.
Conclusions
Considering the differences in modeling enumerated herein, the results comparison between
ETABS and the references is acceptable.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 7
Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis
Problem Description
This is a seven-story plane frame. The frame is modeled with three column lines and two
bays. Kip-inch-second units are used. Because the wide flange members used in the frame
are older sections, their properties are not available in the AISC section property database
included with the ETABS program, and the required properties therefore need to be explic-
itly provided in the input data.
The example frame is analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) for gravity loads, static
lateral loads and dynamic response spectrum loads. DYNAMIC/EASE2 analyzes the ex-
ample frame under static lateral loads and dynamic response spectrum and time history
loads. A comparison of key ETABS results with Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and DY-
NAMIC/EASE2 results is presented in Tables 7-1, 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4. Note the difference in
modal combination techniques between ETABS and Wilson and Habibullah, which uses
complete quadratic combination (CQC), and DYNAMIC/EASE2, which uses square root
of the sum of the squares combination (SRSS).
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The gravity loads and the geometry of the frame are shown in Figure 7-1.
The frame is subjected to the following lateral loads:
Static lateral loads, shown in Figure 7-1
Lateral loads resulting from the El Centro 1940 N-S component seismic response spec-
tra, 5 percent damping
Lateral loads resulting from the El Centro 1940 N-S component acceleration time histo-
ry


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 - 2
Err






Vertical Loading,
typical for all
levels
All columns are W14s
All beams are W24s
Member weights are indicated
Typical story mass = 0.49 kip-sec /in
2
Global Reference Point
Vertical Loading,
typical for all
levels
All columns are W14s
All beams are W24s
Member weights are indicated
Typical story mass = 0.49 kip-sec /in
2
All columns are W14s
All beams are W24s
Member weights are indicated
Typical story mass = 0.49 kip-sec /in
2
Global Reference Point


Figure 7-1 Seven-Story Plane Frame
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 - 3
Err






Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
User-specified section properties
User-specified lateral loads
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Dynamic time history analysis
Results Comparison
The comparison of the results for all three analyses is excellent.
Table 7-1 Comparison of Results for Static Lateral Loads
Quantity ETABS
Wilson and
Habibullah DYNAMIC/EASE2
Lateral Displacement
at Roof
1.4508 1.4508 1.4508
Axial Force
Column C1, at ground
69.99 69.99 69.99
Moment
Column C1, at ground
2324.68 2324.68 2324.68


Table 7-2 Comparison of Results for Periods of Vibration
Mode ETABS
Wilson and
Habibullah DYNAMIC/EASE2
1 1.27321 1.27321 1.27321
2 0.43128 0.43128 0.43128
3 0.24204 0.24204 0.24204
4 0.16018 0.16018 0.16018
5 0.11899 0.11899 0.11899
6 0.09506 0.09506 0.09506
7 0.07951 0.07951 0.07951


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis 7 - 4
Err






Table 7-3 Comparison of Results for Response Spectrum Analysis
Quantity
ETABS
CQC
Combination
Wilson and
Habibullah
CQC
Combination
DYNAMIC/EASE2
SRSS
Combination
Lateral Displacement
at Roof
5.4314 5.4314 5.4378
Axial Force
Column C1 at ground
261.52 261.50 261.76
Moment
Column C1 at ground
9916.12 9916.11 9868.25


Table 7-4 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis
Quantity ETABS
Wilson and
Habibullah
Maximum Roof Displacement 5.49 5.48
Maximum Base Shear 285 284
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at ground 263 258
Maximum Moment, Column C1 at ground 9104 8740

Computer Files
The input data file is EX7.EDB. The input history is ELCN-THU. Time history results are
obtained for the first eight seconds of the excitation. This is consistent with DYNAM-
IC/EASE2, with which the results are compared. These computer files are provided as part
of the ETABS installation.
Conclusions
Noting the difference in modal combination techniques between ETABS and Wilson and
Habibullah, which uses complete quadratic combination (CQC), and DYNAMIC/EASE2,
which uses square root of the sum of the squares combination (SRSS), the results of the
testing are acceptable.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 8 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 8
Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional building frame subjected to a response spectrum of
constant amplitude. The three-dimensional structure is modeled as a single frame with nine
column lines and twelve bays. Kip-foot-second units are used.
For consistency with the models documented in other computer programs with which the
ETABS 2013 results are compared (see Table 8-1), no story mass moments of inertia are
assigned in the ETABS model.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 8-1.

13'
13'
35' 35'
25'
25'
Z
Y
X
STORY 1 CENTER OF MASS AT (38,27,13)
STORY 2 CENTER OF MASS AT (38,27,26)
TYPICAL STORY MASS = 6.212 kip-sec
2
/ft
B5 B6
B3 B4
B10 B12 B8
B7
B9
B1 B2
B11
C1 C2 C3
C4 C5 C6
C7 C8 C9
GLOBAL
AND FRAME
REFERENCE POINT

Figure 8-1 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Frame

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 8 - 2
Err






A response spectrum with a constant value of 0.4g is used. Other parameters associated
with the structure are as follows:
Columns Beams
Axial area 4 ft
2
5 ft
2

Minor moment of inertia 1.25 ft
4
1.67 ft
4

Major moment of inertia 1.25 ft
4
2.61 ft
4

Modulus of elasticity 350000 ksf 500000 ksf

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Three-dimensional frame analysis
User-specified section properties
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Comparison of Results
This example is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Peterson (1981). A
comparison of the key ETABS 2013 results with Wilson and Habibullah (Reference 1) and
Peterson (Reference 2) is shown in Table 8-1.
Table 8-1 Comparison of Results
Quantity ETABS Reference 1 Reference 2
Period, Mode 1 0.22708 0.22706 0.22706
Period, Mode 2 0.21565 0.21563 0.21563
Period, Mode 3 0.07335 0.07335 0.07335
Period, Mode 4 0.07201 0.07201 0.07201
X-Displacement
Center of mass, 2
nd
Story
0.0201 0.0201 0.0201
Computer File
The input data file is EX8.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installa-
tion.
Conclusion
The results comparison shows acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and the refer-
ences.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 9 - 1
EXAMPLE 9
Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story three-dimensional unsymmetrical building frame. The structure is sub-
jected to a seismic response spectrum along two horizontal axes that are at a 30-degree an-
gle to the building axes. The seismic excitation is identical to the one used in Wilson and
Habibullah (1992).
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 9-1. The three-dimensional structure is
modeled as a single frame with six column lines and five bays. Kip-foot-second units are
used. Typical columns are 18"x18" and beams are 12"x24". The modulus of elasticity is
taken as 432,000 ksf.

Figure 9-1 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Unsymmetrical Building Frame

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis 9 - 2
Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Three-dimensional frame analysis
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Results Comparison
The structure is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992). Key ETABS 2013 results
are compared in Table 9-1.
Table 9-1 Comparison of Results
Quantity ETABS
Wilson and
Habibullah
Period, Mode 1 0.4146 0.4146
Period, Mode 2 0.3753 0.3753
Period, Mode 3 0.2436 0.2436
Period, Mode 4 0.1148 0.1148
Period, Mode 5 0.1103 0.1103
Period, Mode 6 0.0729 0.0729
X- Displacement
Center of Mass at 2
nd
Story for:

Seismic at 30 to X 0.1062 0.1062
Seismic at 120 to X 0.0617 0.0617

Computer File
The input data file is EX9.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installa-
tion.
Conclusions
The results comparison shows exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and the reference
material.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 10 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 10
Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
This is a single bay three-story plane frame subjected to ground motion, as shown in Figure
10-1. The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis. Three
elements that absorb energy through hysteresis (ADAS elements as described in Scholl 1993
and Tsai, et al. 1993) are used to connect the chevron braces to the frame. Two models are
investigated. In the first model, the ADAS elements are intended to produce about 5% damp-
ing in the fundamental mode. In the second model, damping is increased to 25%. The manu-
facturer supplied the properties of the ADAS elements.
The ADAS elements are modeled in ETABS by assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the chevrons intersect the beams at each story.
The link properties use the uniaxial hysteretic spring property (PLASTIC1) and provide
beam-brace connectivity with nonlinear behavior in the U2 (shear in the 1-2 plane) direction.
Under this arrangement, displacements are transferred between the chevrons and the frame
via the link elements undergoing shear deformation.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The frame is modeled as a two-column line, one-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are used.
The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29000 ksi. Column, beam and brace section properties
are user-defined.
A single rigid diaphragm is allocated to each story level and connects all three point objects
(two column points and one mid-span point) at each story. Because of the rigid diaphragms,
no axial force will occur in the beam members. All members are assigned a rigid zone factor
of 1.
In both models the value of post yield stiffness ratio is taken as 5% and the time increment
for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 10 - 2
Err






D1
D1
D1
D2
D2
D2
2 1
D1
D1
D1
D2
D2
D2
2 1

Figure 10-1 Planar Frame with ADAS Elements

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Panel zones
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Ritz vectors
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 10 - 3
Err






Results Comparison
Sample results are compared in Table 10-1 with results from the nonlinear analysis program
DRAIN-2DX (Prakash, et al. 1993) for both 5% and 25% damping cases.
Table 10-1 Results Comparison
Level
5% Damping 25% Damping
ETABS DRAIN-2DX ETABS DRAIN-2DX
Comparison of Maximum Story Deflections
3
rd
4.57 4.57 2.10 1.92
2
nd
3.48 3.51 1.68 1.55
1
st
1.82 1.82 0.92 0.86
Comparison of Maximum Link Shear Force
3
rd
7.29 7.31 17.75 17.40
2
nd
13.97 13.92 36.70 36.20
1
st
17.98 18.00 47.79 47.10
Comparison of Maximum Brace Axial Force
3
rd
5.16 5.17 12.55 12.30
2
nd
9.88 9.84 25.95 25.60
1
st
12.71 12.70 33.79 33.28

Computer Files
The input data files for this example are EX10A.EDB (5% damping) and EX10B.EDB (25%
damping). The time history file is ELCN-THE. These files are provided as part of the ETABS
2013 installation.
Conclusions
The results comparison show acceptable to exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and
DRAIN-2DX.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 11 - 1
Err






Example 11
Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History
Analysis
Problem Description
The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis. Three viscous
damper elements of the type described in Hanson (1993) are used to connect the chevron
braces to the frame. Two models are investigated. In the first model, the damper elements are
intended to produce about 5% damping in the fundamental mode. In the second model, damp-
ing is increased to 25%.
The ETABS viscous damper element (DAMPER) is a uniaxial damping device with a linear
or nonlinear force-velocity relationship given by F = CV

.
The damper elements are modeled in ETABS by assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the chevrons intersect the beams at each story.
The link properties use the uniaxial damper property (DAMPER) and provide beam-brace
connectivity with nonlinear behavior in the U2 (shear in the 1-2 plane) direction. Under this
arrangement, displacements are transferred between the chevrons and the frame via the link
elements (dampers) undergoing shear deformation.
The time increment for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
This is a single-bay, three-story plane frame subjected to ground motion, as shown in Figure
11-1. The frame is modeled as a two-column line, one-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are
used. The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29000 ksi. Column, beam and brace section prop-
erties are user defined.
A single rigid diaphragm is allocated to each story level and connects all three point objects
(two column points and one mid-span point) at each story. Because of the rigid diaphragms,
no axial force will occur in the beam members. All members are assigned a rigid zone factor
of 1.



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 11 - 2
Err







Figure 11-1 Planar Frame with Damper Elements

Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Use of panel zones
Use of uniaxial damper elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Ritz vectors
Results Comparison
Sample results for = 1 are compared in Table 11-1 with results from the nonlinear analy-
sis program DRAIN-2DX (Prakash, et al. 1993) for both 5% and 25% damping cases.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 11 - 3
Err







Table 11-1 Results Comparison
Level
5% Damping 25% Damping
ETABS DRAIN-2DX ETABS DRAIN-2DX
Comparison of Maximum Story Deflections
3
rd
4.09 4.11 2.26 2.24
2
nd
3.13 3.14 1.75 1.71
1
st
1.63 1.63 0.89 0.87
Comparison of Maximum Link Shear Force
3
rd
6.16 5.98 14.75 14.75
2
nd
10.79 10.80 32.82 32.84
1
st
15.15 15.02 44.90 44.97
Comparison of Maximum Brace Axial Force
3
rd
4.36 4.23 10.43 10.43
2
nd
7.63 7.63 23.21 23.22
1
st
10.71 10.62 31.75 31.80

Computer File
The input data files for this example are EX11A.EDB (5% damping) and EX11B.EDB
(25% damping). The time history file is ELCN-THE. These files are provided as part of
the ETABS 2013 installation.
Conclusions
The comparison of results shows acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and DRAIN-
2DX.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 12
Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
A two-bay, seven-story plane frame is linked to a one-bay four-story plane frame using
ETABS 2013 GAP elements. The structure experiences pounding because of ground mo-
tion. The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis.
This example illustrates the use of gap elements to model pounding between buildings.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 12-1.
The combined structure is modeled as a single frame with five column lines and three beam
bays. Kip-inch-second units are used. The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29500 ksi. Col-
umn and beam section properties are user defined.
Through the joint assignment option, Column lines 4 and 5 are connected to Diaphragm 2.
Column lines 1 to 3 remain connected to Diaphragm 1 by default. This arrangement physi-
cally divides the structure into two parts. The interaction is provided via the gap elements,
which are used as links spanning Column lines 3 and 4. The local axis 1 of the links is in
the global X-direction.
Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Two-dimensional frame analysis
Use of uniaxial gap elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Use of multiple diaphragms
Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS 2013 is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Com-
puters and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified inde-
pendently). A comparison of key ETABS 2013 results with SAP2000 is presented in Table
12-1.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 2
Err







Figure 12-1 Planar Frame with Gap Elements




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 3
Err







Table 12-1 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis
Quantity ETABS SAP2000
Maximum Lateral Displacement at Roof 5.5521 5.5521
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at ground 266.89 266.88
A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 12-2. It shows the variations
of the displacement of Column lines 3 and 4 and the link force at Story 4. It is clearly evi-
dent that the link force is generated whenever the two column lines move in phase and their
separation is less than the specified initial opening or if they move towards each other out
of phase. For display purposes, the link forces are scaled down by a factor of 0.01.
Figure 12-2 Variations of Displacement of Column Lines 3 and 4
and Link Force at Story 4
Computer Files
The input data for this example is EX12.EDB. The time history file is ELCN-THU. Both of
the files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis 12 - 4
Err






Conclusions
The results comparison shows essentially exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and
SAP2000.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 13 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 13
Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional frame with base isolation. The structure is subjected
to earthquake motion in two perpendicular directions using the Loma Prieta acceleration
records.
Hysteretic base isolators of the type described in Nagarajaiah et al. (1991) are modeled us-
ing the ETABS 2013 ISOLATOR1 elements, which show biaxial hysteretic characteristics.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The structure is modeled as a single reinforced concrete frame with nine column lines and
twelve bays. The floor slab is taken to be 8 inches thick, covering all of the specified floor
bays at the base and the 1st story level. At the second story level the corner column as well
as the two edge beams are eliminated, together with the floor slab, to render this particular
level unsymmetric, as depicted in Figure 13-1.
A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi is used. The self-weight of concrete is taken as 150 pcf.
Kip-inch-second units are used.
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 13-1.
Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Three-dimensional frame analysis
Use of area (floor) objects
Use of biaxial hysteretic elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis using ritz vectors

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 13 - 2
Err







Figure 13-1 Base-Isolated Three-Dimensional Frame

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS 2013 is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Com-
puters and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified inde-
pendently). A comparison of key ETABS 2013 results with SAP200 is presented in Table
13-1.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 13 - 3
Err







Table 13-1 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis
Quantity ETABS SAP2000
Maximum Uy Displacement, Column C9 at 2
nd
Floor 3.4735 3.4736
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at base 13.56 13.55

A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 13-2. It shows the load-
deformation relationship in the major direction for a typical isolator member.

Figure 13-2 Load Deformation Diagram
Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX13.EDB. The time history files are LP-TH0 and
LP-TH90. All of these files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.
Conclusion
The results comparison shows essentially exact agreement between ETABS 2013 and
SAP2000.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 14
Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional frame with base isolation using friction pendulum
base isolators. The structure is subjected to earthquake motion in two perpendicular direc-
tions using the Loma Prieta acceleration records.
Friction pendulum type base isolators of the type described in Zayas and Low (1990) are
modeled using the ETABS 2013 ISOLATOR2 elements.
It is important for these isolator elements that the axial load from other loads be modeled
before starting the nonlinear analysis. This is achieved by using a factor of unity on the
dead load (self weight) on the structure in the nonlinear analysis initial conditions data.
Geometry, Properties and Loads
The structure is modeled as a single reinforced concrete frame with nine column lines and
twelve bays. The floor slab is taken to be 8 inches thick, covering all of the specified floor
bays at the base and the 1st story level. At the second story level, the corner column and the
two edge beams are eliminated, together with the floor slab, to render this particular level
anti-symmetric, as depicted in Figure 14-1.
The isolator properties are defined as follows:
Stiffness in direction 1 1E3
Stiffness in directions 2 and 3 1E2
Coefficient of friction at fast speed .04
Coefficient of friction at slow speed .03
Parameter determining the variation
of the coefficient of friction with velocity 20
Radius of contact surface in directions 2 and 3 60
A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi is used. The self-weight of concrete is taken as 150 pcf.
Kip-inch-second units are used.
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 14-1.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 2
Err







Figure 14-1 Base-Isolated Three-Dimensional Frame
Technical Features of ETABS 2013 Tested
Three-dimensional frame analysis
Use of area (floor) objects
Use of biaxial friction pendulum elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis using ritz vectors
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 3
Err






Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS 2013 is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Comput-
ers and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified independently). A
comparison of key ETABS results with SAP2000 is presented in Table 14-1.
Table 14-1 Comparison of Result for Time History Analysis
Quantity ETABS SAP2000
Maximum Uy Displacement, Column C9 at 2
nd
Floor 4.2077 4.2069
Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at base 38.25 38.25

A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 14-2. It shows the variation of
the displacement of the second story at column line 1.

Figure 14-2 Variation of Displacement
Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX14.EDB. The time history files are LP-TH0 and
LP-TH90. All of the files are provided as part of the ETABS 2013 installation.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis 14 - 4
Err






Conclusion
The results comparison shows acceptable agreement between ETABS 2013 and SAP2000.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 1
Err






EXAMPLE 15
Wall Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis
Problem Description
This example analyzes a series of wall configurations to evaluate the behavior of the
ETABS 2013 shell object with wall section assignments. All walls are subjected to a static
lateral load applied at the top of the wall.
The following walls are included:
Planar shear wall, shown in Figure 15-1
Wall supported on columns, shown in Figure 15-2
Wall-spandrel system, shown in Figure 15-3
C-shaped wall section, shown in Figure 15-4
Wall with edges thickened, shown in Figure 15-5
E-shaped wall section, shown in Figure 15-6
Geometry, Properties and Loads
A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi and a Poisson's ratio of 0.2 are used for all walls. Kip-
inch-second units are used throughout. The following sections describe the models for the
different walls.
Planar Shear Wall , Example 15a
This shear wall is modeled with one panel per story. Three different wall lengths of 120",
360" and 720" are analyzed. Also, one-story and three-story walls are analyzed, together
with the six-story wall shown in Figure 15-1. A wall thickness of 12" is used.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 2
Err







Figure 15-1 Planar Shear Wall, Example 15a
Wall Supported on Columns, Example 15b
This wall is modeled with two column lines. Columns are used for the first story, and the
top two stories have a single shell object with end piers, as shown in Figure 15-2. End
piers are 40" by 12" in cross section and panels are 12" thick. Columns are 40" by 20" in
cross section.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 3
Err









Figure 15-2 Wall Supported on Columns, Example 15b


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 4
Err






Wall-Spandrel System, Example 15c
This wall is modeled with four column lines. The spandrels are modeled as beams. Two
different spandrel lengths of 60" and 240" are analyzed. Each wall is modeled with two
shell objects per story. Three-story walls are also analyzed together with the six-story wall
shown in Figure 15-3. A wall and spandrel thickness of 12" is used.



Figure 15-3 Wall-Spandrel System, Example 15c



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 5
Err






Shaped Wall Section, Example 15d
This wall is modeled with six column lines and five shell objects per story, to model the
shape of the wall. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story wall, as
shown in Figure 15-4. A wall thickness of 6" is used.
TH
TH
TH
RD
ND
ST
ELEVATION
Y
X
100k
C6
C5
C4 C3
C1
C2
80
40
80 80 120
GLOBAL
REFERENCE
POINT
POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
100k
PLAN
TH
TH
TH
RD
ND
ST
ELEVATION
Y
X
100k
C6
C5
C4 C3
C1
C2
80
40
80 80 120
GLOBAL
REFERENCE
POINT
POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
100k
PLAN

Figure 15-4 C-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15d

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 6
Err






Wall with Edges Thickened, Example 15e
This wall is modeled with two column lines and one shell object, with end piers, per story
as shown in Figure 15-5. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story
wall shown in Figure 15-5.
TH
TH
TH
RD
ND
ST
Y
X
210
30 30
C1 C2
8
18
Global
Reference
Point
TH
TH
TH
RD
ND
ST
Y
X
210
30 30
C1 C2
8
18
Global
Reference
Point

Figure 15-5 Wall with Thickened Edges, Example 15e

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 7
Err






E-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15f
This wall is modeled with six column lines and five shell objects per story to model the
shape of the wall. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story wall, as
shown in Figure 15-6. A wall thickness of 6" is used.
TH
TH
TH
RD
ND
ST
ELEVATION
Y
X
100k
C6 C5 C4
C3 C1
C2
120
GLOBAL
REFERENCE
POINT
100k
PLAN
120
120
POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
120
120
120
120
120
120
6
5
4
3
2
1
BASELINE
TH
TH
TH
RD
ND
ST
ELEVATION
Y
X
100k
C6 C5 C4
C3 C1
C2
120
GLOBAL
REFERENCE
POINT
100k
PLAN
120
120
POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
120
120
120
120
120
120
6
5
4
3
2
1
BASELINE

Figure 15-6 E-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15f

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 8
Err






Technical Features of ETABS Tested
Use of area objects
Two-dimensional and three-dimensional shear wall systems
Static lateral loads analysis
Results Comparison
All walls analyzed in this example using ETABS 2013 were also analyzed using the gen-
eral structural analysis program SAP2000 (Computers and Structure 2002), using refined
meshes of the membrane/shell element of that program. The SAP2000 meshes used are
shown in Figures 15-7, 15-8, 15-9, 15-10, 15-11 and 15-12. For the SAP2000 analysis, the
rigid diaphragms at the floor levels were modeled by constraining all wall nodes at the floor
to have the same lateral displacement for planar walls, or by adding rigid members in the
plane of the floor for three-dimensional walls.

Figure 15-7 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15a

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 9
Err







Figure 15-8 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15b


Figure 15-9 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15c
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 10
Err








Figure 15-10 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15d


Figure 15-11 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15e
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 11
Err







Figure 15-12 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15f

The lateral displacements from the ETABS 2013 and SAP2000 analyses are compared in
Tables 15-1, 15-2, 15-3, 15-4, 15-5 and 15-6 for the various walls.
Table 15-1 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches), Example 15a
Number
of Stories
Wall Height
(inches)
Wall Length
(inches) ETABS SAP2000
6 720 120 2.3926 2.4287
360 0.0985 0.1031
720 0.0172 0.0186
3 360 120 0.3068 0.3205
360 0.0169 0.0187
720 0.0046 0.0052
1 120 120 0.0144 0.0185
360 0.0024 0.0029
720 0.0011 0.0013

Table 15-2 Results Comparison for Displacements (Inches), Example 15b
Location ETABS SAP2000
Story 3 0.0690 0.0671
Story 2 0.0524 0.0530
Story 1 0.0390 0.0412
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 12
Err






Table 15-3 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (inches)
Example 15c (1-4)
Number of Sto-
ries Beam Length (inches) ETABS SAP2000
6
60 0.0841 0.0869
240 0.1443 0.1505
3
60 0.0186 0.0200
240 0.0311 0.0332

Table 15-4 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches) at Load
Application Point, Example 15d (1-2)
Number of
Stories
Load
Direction
Displacement
Direction ETABS SAP2000
6
X X 0.8621 0.8936
X Z-Rotation 0.0185 0.0191
Y Y 1.1427 1.1882
3
X X 0.1242 0.1337
X Z-Rotation 0.0024 0.0025
Y Y 0.1614 0.1733

Table 15-5 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches),
Example 15e(1-2)
Number of Stories ETABS SAP2000
6 0.2798 0.2899
3 0.0451 0.0480

Table 15-6 Results Comparison for Displacements at Load Application,
Example 15f (1-2)
Number of
Stories
Load
Direction
Displacement
Direction ETABS SAP2000
6
X X 0.3695 0.3655
X Z-Rotation 0.0042 0.0039
Y Y 0.7286 0.7490
3
X X 0.0596 0.0628
X Z-Rotation 0.0005 0.0005
Y Y 0.0989 0.1058

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis 15 - 13
Err






Computer Files
The input data files for the planar shear walls are included as files EX15A1.EDB through
EX15A9.EDB. These and the following input data files are provided as part of the ETABS
installation.
The input data for the wall supported on columns is EX15B.EDB.
The input data files for the wall-spandrel system are 15C1.EDB through 15C4.EDB.
The input data files for the shaped wall section are included as files EX15D1.EDB and
EX15D2.EDB.
The input data for the wall with thickened edges are included as files EX15E1.EDB and
EX15E2.EDB.
The input data for the E-shaped wall section are included as files EX15F1.EDB and
EX15F2.EDB.
Conclusion
The results comparison show acceptable agreement between ETBAS 2013 and SAP2000.
In general, the comparisons become better as the number of stories increases.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 1
AISC 360-05 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
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 three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 5 ft, 11.667 ft and 35 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING









TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section Compactness Check (Bending)
Member Bending Capacities
Unsupported length factors

Member Properties
W18X50
E = 29000 ksi

Fy = 50 ksi
Loading
w = 0.45 klf (D)
w = 0.75 klf (L)
Geometry
Span, L = 35 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example F.1-2a from the
AISC Design Examples, Volume 13 on the application of the 2005 AISC
Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-05).
Output Parameter

ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Cb (
b
L =5ft)
1.004 1.002 0.20%
b n
M | (
b
L =5ft) (k-ft)
378.750 378.750 0.00%
Cb (
b
L =11.67ft)
1.015 1.014 0.10%
b n
M | (
b
L =11.67ft) (k-ft)
307.124

306.657 0.15%
Cb (
b
L =35ft)
1.138 1.136 0.18%
b n
M | (
b
L =35ft) (k-ft)
94.377 94.218 0.17%
COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-05 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W18x50
bf = 7.5 in, tf = 0.57 in, d = 18 in, tw = 0.355 in
2 18 2 0.57 16.86
f
h d t in = = - =
0
18 0.57 17.43
f
h d t in = = =
S33 = 88.9 in
3
, Z33 = 101 in
3

Iy =40.1 in
4
, ry = 1.652 in, Cw = 3045.644 in
6
, J = 1.240 in
4
33
40.1 3045.644
1.98
88.889
y w
ts
I C
r in
S
-
= = =
0 . 1 =
m
R for doubly-symmetric sections
Other:
c = 1.0
L = 35 ft

Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(0.45) + 1.6(0.75) = 1.74 k/ft
2
8
u
u
w L
M = = 1.7435
2
/8 = 266.4375 k-ft

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
579 . 6
57 . 0 2
50 . 7
2
=
-
= =
f
f
t
b

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 4
152 . 9
50
29000
38 . 0 38 . 0 = = =
y
p
F
E

p
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:
16.86
47.49
0.355
w
h
t
= = =
553 . 90
50
29000
76 . 3 76 . 3 = = =
y
p
F
E

p
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:
33
50 101 5050
p y
M F Z k in = = - =

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:
Critical Lengths:
29000
1.76 1.76 1.652 70.022 5.835
50
p y
y
E
L r in ft
F
= = - = =
2
33
33
0.7
1.95 1 1 6.76
0.7
y
o
r ts
y o
F
S h E Jc
L r
F S h E Jc
| |
= + +
|
\ .
2
29000 1.240 1.0 0.7 50 88.9 17.43
1.95 1.98 1 1 6.76
0.7 50 88.9 17.43 29000 1.240 1.0
r
L
- - - | |
= - + +
|
- - -
\ .

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 5
16.966
r
L ft =

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:
For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification factor is
calculated using the following equation:

0 . 3
3 4 3 5 . 2
5 . 12
max
max
s
+ + +
=
m
C B A
b
R
M M M M
M
C Eqn. 1
Where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-span
moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum mid-span
moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
2
1
1
4
b
A C
L
M M
L
| |
= =
|
\ .


Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 5 ft:

max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 5
1 1 0.995
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
12.5 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.995 4 1.00 3 0.995
b
C =
+ + +

1.002
b
C =
p b
L L < , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
5050
n p
M M k in = =
0.9 5050 / 12
b n
M = -
378.75
b n
M k ft =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 6
Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 11.667
1 1 0.972
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
12.5 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.972 4 1.00 3 0.972
b
C =
+ + +

1.014
b
C =

r b p
L L L < < , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
( )
p
p r
p b
y p p b n
M
L L
L L
S F M M C M s
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|

=
33
7 . 0
( )
11.667 5.835
1.014 5050 5050 0.7 50 88.889 4088.733
16.966 5.835
n
M k in
( | |
= - - =
| (

\ .


0.9 4088.733 / 12
b n
M = -
306.657
b n
M k ft =

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 35
1 1 0.750
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .
.
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
12.5 1.00
1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.750 4 1.00 3 0.750
b
C =
+ + +

1.136
b
C =
r b
L L > , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 7
2
33
2
2
078 . 0 1
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
ts
b
o
ts
b
b
cr
r
L
h S
Jc
r
L
E C
F
t

2
2
2
1.136 29000 1.24 1 420
1 0.078 14.133
88.889 17.4 1.983
420
1.983
cr
F ksi
t - - - | |
= + =
|
-
\ .
| |
|
\ .

p cr n
M S F M s =
33

14.133 88.9 1256.245
n
M k in = - =
0.9 1256.245 / 12
b n
M = -
94.218
b n
M k ft =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 1
AISC 360-05 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
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.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression)
Warping constant calculation, Cw
Member compression capacity with slenderness reduction

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

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

Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Slender Slender 0.00%
|cPn (kips) 506.1 506.1 0.00 %
COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-05 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi

Section: Built-Up Wide Flange
d = 17.0 in, bf = 8.00 in, tf = 1.00 in, h = 15.0 in, tw = 0.250 in.
Ignoring fillet welds:

A = 2(8.00)(1.00) + (15.0)(0.250) = 19.75 in
2

3 3
3
2(1.0)(8.0) (15.0)(0.25)
85.35 in
12 12
= + =
y
I
85.4
2.08 in.
19.8
= = =
y
y
I
r
A


+ =
x x
I Ad I
2

3 3
2 4
(0.250)(15.0) 2(8.0)(1.0)
2(8.0)(8.0) 1095.65 in
12 12
= + + =
x
I
1 2
1 1
' 17 16 in
2 2
+ +
= = =
t t
d d
2 2
4
' (85.35)(16.0)
5462.583 in
4 4
-
= = =
y
w
I d
C
3 3 3
4
2(8.0)(1.0) (15.0)(0.250)
5.41 in
3 3
+
= = =

bt
J
Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L = 15 ft

Loadings:

Pu = 1.2(70.0) + 1.6(210) = 420 kips



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 4
Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification Section E7
Localized Buckling for Flange:

4.0
4.0
1.0
b
t
= = =
29000
0.38 0.38 9.152
50
p
y
E
F
= = =
p
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:
15.0
60.0
0.250
h
t
= = = ,
29000
1.49 1.49 35.9
50
r
y
E
F
= = =
r
> , Localized web buckling
Web is Slender.
Section is Slender

Member Compression Capacity:
Elastic Flexural Buckling Stress
Since the unbraced length is the same for both axes, the y-y axis will govern by
inspection.

( )
6 . 86
08 . 2
12 15 0 . 1
=
-
=
y
y
r
KL

( )
2
2
2
2
6 . 86
29000 -
=
|
.
|

\
|
=
t t
r
KL
E
F
e
= 38.18 ksi

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 5
Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress
Note: Torsional buckling will not govern if KLy > KLz, however, the check is included
here to illustrate the calculation.

( )
y x
z
w
e
I I
GJ
L K
EC
F
+
(

+ =
1
2
2
t

( )
2
2
29000 5462.4 1
11200 5.41
1100 85.4
180
e
F
t
(
- -
= + - (
+
(

= 91.8 ksi > 38.18 ksi

Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.

Fe = 38.18 ksi

Section Reduction Factors

Since the flange is not slender,
Qs = 1.0

Since the web is slender,
For equation E7-17, take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0

( )
29000
4.71 4.71 113 86.6
1.0 50
y
y y
KL
E
QF r
= = > =

So
( ) 1.0 50
38.2
0.658 1.0 0.658 50 28.9 ksi
(
(
( = = = - =
(
( (


y
e
QF
F
cr y
f F Q F

( )
0.34
1.92 1 , where
(
= s =
(

e
E E
b t b b h
f b t f

( )
( )
29000 0.34 29000
1.92 0.250 1 15.0 in
28.9 15.0 0.250 28.9
(
= s
(

e
b
12.5 in 15.0 in = s
e
b

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 6
therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2
2 12.5 0.250 2 8.0 1.0 19.1 in = + = + =
eff e w f f
A b t b t
where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.

19.1
0.968
19.75
eff
a
A
Q
A
= = =
( ) ( ) 1.00 0.968 0.968
s a
Q Q Q = = =

Critical Buckling Stress
Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies

( )
29000
4.71 4.71 115.4 86.6
0.966 50
y
y y
KL
E
QF r
= = > =

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

When 4.71
y
E KL
QF r
>
( ) 1.0 50
38.18
0.658 0.966 0.658 50 28.47 ksi
(
(
( = = - =
(
( (


y
e
QF
F
cr y
F Q F

Nominal Compressive Strength

28.5 19.75 562.3 kips = = - =
n cr g
P F A
0.90 | =
c

( ) 0.90 562.3 506.1kips | = = =
c n cr g
P F A > 420 kips
506.1kips | =
c n
P
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 1
AISC 360-10 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
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 three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 5 ft, 11.667 ft and 35 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING









TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacities
Unsupported length factors

Member Properties
W18X50
E = 29000 ksi

Fy = 50 ksi
Loading
w = 0.45 klf (D)
w = 0.75 klf (L)
Geometry
Span, L = 35 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example F.1-2a from the
AISC Design Examples, Volume 13 on the application of the 2005 AISC
Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-10).
Output Parameter

ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Cb (
b
L =5ft)
1.004 1.002 0.20%
|
b n
M (
b
L =5ft) (k-ft)
378.750 378.750 0.00%
Cb (
b
L =11.67ft)
1.015 1.014 0.10%
|
b n
M (
b
L =11.67ft) (k-ft)
307.124

306.657 0.15%
Cb (
b
L =35ft)
1.138 1.136 0.18%
|
b n
M (
b
L =35ft) (k-ft)
94.377 94.218 0.17%
COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-10 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W18x50
bf = 7.5 in, tf = 0.57 in, d = 18 in, tw = 0.355 in
2 18 2 0.57 16.86 in = = - =
f
h d t
0
18 0.57 17.43 in = = =
f
h d t
S33 = 88.9 in
3
, Z33 = 101 in
3

Iy =40.1 in
4
, ry = 1.652 in, Cw = 3045.644 in
6
, J = 1.240 in
4
33
40.1 3045.644
1.98 in
88.889
-
= = =
y w
ts
I C
r
S

0 . 1 =
m
R for doubly-symmetric sections
Other:
c = 1.0
L = 35 ft
Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(0.45) + 1.6(0.75) = 1.74 k/ft
2
8
u
u
w L
M = = 1.7435
2
/8 = 266.4375 k-ft
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
579 . 6
57 . 0 2
50 . 7
2
=
-
= =
f
f
t
b

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 4
152 . 9
50
29000
38 . 0 38 . 0 = = =
y
p
F
E

p
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:
16.86
47.49
0.355
w
h
t
= = =
553 . 90
50
29000
76 . 3 76 . 3 = = =
y
p
F
E

p
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:
33
50 101 5050 k-in = = - =
p y
M F Z

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:
Critical Lengths:
29000
1.76 1.76 1.652 70.022 in 5.835 ft
50
= = - = =
p y
y
E
L r
F
2
33
33
0.7
1.95 1 1 6.76
0.7
y
o
r ts
y o
F
S h E Jc
L r
F S h E Jc
| |
= + +
|
\ .
2
29000 1.240 1.0 0.7 50 88.9 17.43
1.95 1.98 1 1 6.76
0.7 50 88.9 17.43 29000 1.240 1.0
r
L
- - - | |
= - + +
|
- - -
\ .

16.966 ft =
r
L
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 5
Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:
For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification
factor is calculated using the following equation:
0 . 3
3 4 3 5 . 2
5 . 12
max
max
s
+ + +
=
m
C B A
b
R
M M M M
M
C Eqn. 1
where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-
span moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum
mid-span moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
2
1
1
4
b
A C
L
M M
L
| |
= =
|
\ .

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 5 ft:

max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 5
1 1 0.995
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
12.5 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.995 4 1.00 3 0.995
b
C =
+ + +

1.002
b
C =
p b
L L < , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
5050 k-in = =
n p
M M
0.9 5050 / 12 | = -
b n
M
378.75 k-ft | =
b n
M

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 11.667
1 1 0.972
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 6
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
12.5 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.972 4 1.00 3 0.972
b
C =
+ + +

1.014
b
C =
r b p
L L L < < , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
( )
p
p r
p b
y p p b n
M
L L
L L
S F M M C M s
(
(

|
|
.
|

\
|

=
33
7 . 0
( )
11.667 5.835
1.014 5050 5050 0.7 50 88.889 4088.733 k-in
16.966 5.835
( | |
= - - =
| (

\ .

n
M
0.9 4088.733 / 12 | =
b n
M
306.657 k-ft | =
b n
M

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 35
1 1 0.750
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .
.
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
12.5 1.00
1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.750 4 1.00 3 0.750
b
C =
+ + +

1.136
b
C =
r b
L L > , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
2
33
2
2
078 . 0 1
|
|
.
|

\
|
+
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
ts
b
o
ts
b
b
cr
r
L
h S
Jc
r
L
E C
F
t

2
2
2
1.136 29000 1.24 1 420
1 0.078 14.133 ksi
88.889 17.4 1.983
420
1.983
- t - - | |
= + =
|
-
\ .
| |
|
\ .
cr
F
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 7
p cr n
M S F M s =
33

14.133 88.9 1256.245 k-in = - =
n
M
0.9 1256.245 / 12 | =
b n
M
94.218 k-ft | =
b n
M

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 1
AISC 360-10 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
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.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression)
Warping constant calculation, Cw
Member compression capacity with slenderness reduction

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
Example E.2 AISC Design Examples, Volume 13.0 on the application of the 2005
AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-10).

Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Slender Slender 0.00%
|cPn (kips) 506.1 506.1 0.00 %
COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-10 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi

Section: Built-Up Wide Flange
d = 17.0 in, bf = 8.00 in, tf = 1.00 in, h = 15.0 in, tw = 0.250 in.

Ignoring fillet welds:

A = 2(8.00)(1.00) + (15.0)(0.250) = 19.75 in
2

3 3
3
2(1.0)(8.0) (15.0)(0.25)
85.35
12 12
y
I in = + =
. 08 . 2
8 . 19
4 . 85
in
A
I
r
y
y
= = =

+ =
x x
I Ad I
2

3 3
2 4
(0.250)(15.0) 2(8.0)(1.0)
2(8.0)(8.0) 1095.65
12 12
x
I in = + + =
1 2
1 1
' 17 16
2 2
t t
d d in
+ +
= = =
2 2
4
' (85.35)(16.0)
5462.583
4 4
y
w
I d
C in
-
= = =
4
3 3 3
41 . 5
3
) 250 . 0 )( 0 . 15 ( ) 0 . 1 )( 0 . 8 ( 2
3
in
bt
J =
+
= =

Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L = 15 ft

Loadings:
Pu = 1.2(70.0) + 1.6(210) = 420 kips

Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification Section E7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 4
Localized Buckling for Flange:
4.0
4.0
1.0
b
t
= = =
29000
0.38 0.38 9.152
50
p
y
E
F
= = =
p
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:
15.0
60.0
0.250
h
t
= = = ,
29000
1.49 1.49 35.9
50
r
y
E
F
= = =
r
> , Localized web buckling
Web is Slender.
Section is Slender

Member Compression Capacity:
Elastic Flexural Buckling Stress
Since the unbraced length is the same for both axes, the y-y axis will govern by
inspection.

( )
6 . 86
08 . 2
12 15 0 . 1
=
-
=
y
y
r
KL

( )
2 2
2 2
29000
86.6
t t -
= =
| |
|
\ .
e
E
F
KL
r
= 38.18 ksi

Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress
Note: Torsional buckling will not govern if KLy > KLz, however, the check is included
here to illustrate the calculation.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 5
( )
2
2
1
(
t
= + (
+
(

w
e
x y
z
EC
F GJ
I I
K L

( )
2
2
29000 5462.4 1
11200 5.41
1100 85.4
180
(
t - -
= + - (
+
(

e
F = 91.8 ksi > 38.18 ksi

Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.

Fe = 38.18 ksi

Section Reduction Factors

Since the flange is not slender,
Qs = 1.0

Since the web is slender,
For equation E7-17, take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0

( )
29000
4.71 4.71 113 86.6
1.0 50
y
y y
KL
E
QF r
= = > =

So
( ) 1.0 50
38.2
0.658 1.0 0.658 50 28.9 ksi
(
(
( = = = - =
(
( (


y
e
QF
F
cr y
f F Q F

( )
0.34
1.92 1 , where
(
= s =
(

e
E E
b t b b h
f b t f

( )
( )
29000 0.34 29000
1.92 0.250 1 15.0 in
28.9 15.0 0.250 28.9
(
= s
(

e
b
12.5 in 15.0 in = s
e
b
therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2
2 12.5 0.250 2 8.0 1.0 19.1 in = + = + =
eff e w f f
A b t b t
where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 6

19.1
0.968
19.75
eff
a
A
Q
A
= = =
( ) ( ) 1.00 0.968 0.968
s a
Q Q Q = = =

Critical Buckling Stress
Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies

( )
29000
4.71 4.71 115.4 86.6
0.966 50
y
y y
KL
E
QF r
= = > =

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

When 4.71
y
E KL
QF r
>
( ) 1.0 50
38.18
0.658 0.966 0.658 50 28.47 ksi
(
(
( = = - =
(
( (


y
e
QF
F
cr y
F Q F

Nominal Compressive Strength

28.5 19.75 562.3 kips = = - =
n cr g
P F A
0.90 | =
c

( ) 0.90 562.3 506.1kips | = = =
c n cr g
P F A > 420 kips
506.1kips | =
c n
P
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 1
AISC ASD-89 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
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. The selected member is non-compact due to
flange criteria.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING









TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity


Member Properties
W6X12, M10X9,
W8X10
E = 29000 ksi

Fy = 50 ksi
Loading
w = 1.0 klf

Geometry
Span, L = 12.65 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

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

ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Non-Compact Non-Compact 0.00%
Design Bending Stress, fb
(ksi)
30.74 30.74 0.00%
Allowable Bending Stress,
Fb (ksi)
32.70 32.70 0.00 %
COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W8x10
bf = 3.94 in, tf = 0.205 in, d = 7.98 in, tw = 0.17 in
2 7.89 2 0.205 7.48 in = = - =
f
h h t
Member:
L = 12.65 ft
lb = 3 ft
Loadings:
w = 1.0 k/ft
2
8
wL
M = = 1.012.65
2
/8 = 20.0 k-ft
Design Bending Stress
33
/ 20 12 / 7.8074
b
f M S = = -
30.74 ksi =
b
f

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
3.94
9.610
2 2 0.205
f
f
b
t
= = =
-

65 65
9.192
50
p
y
F
= = =
435 . 13
50
95 95
= = =
y
r
F

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 4
p
> , Localized flange buckling is present.
r
< ,
Flange is Non-Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:
7.89
46.412
0.17
w
d
t
= = =
No axial force is present, so 0 and 0 0.16, so = = = s
a
a
y
f P
f
A F

640 640 0
1 3.74 1 3.74 90.510
50 50
a
p
y y
f
F F

| |
| |
= = - =
|
|
|
\ .
\ .

p
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.

Section is Non-Compact.

Section Bending Capacity
Allowable Bending Stress
Since section is Non-Compact
33
0.79 0.002
2
f
b y y
f
b
F F F
t
| |
=
|
|
\ .

( ) 33
0.79 0.002 9.61 50 50
b
F = - -
33
32.70 ksi =
b
F



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 5

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 3.0 ft:
Critical Length, lc:

=
y
f
y
f
c
dF
A
F
b
l
000 , 20
,
76
min
76 3.94 20, 000 3.94 0.205
min ,
7.89 50 50
c
l
- - -
=
`
-
)

{ } min 42.347, 40.948
c
l =
40.948 in =
c
l
22
3 12 36 in = = - =
b
l l
c
l l <
22
, section capacity is as follows:
33
32.70 ksi =
b
F



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 1
AISC ASD-89 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
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 Stress Design Manual of
Steel Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7. The
column K factors were overwritten 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

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression)
Member compression capacity

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

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

Output Parameter

ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Design Axial Stress, fa (ksi) 15.86 15.86 0.00%
Allowable Axial Stress,
Fa (ksi)
16.47 16.47 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: A36 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 36 ksi
Section: W12x120:
bf = 12.32 in, tf = 1.105 in, d =13.12 in, tw=0.71 in
A = 35.3 in
2

rx=5.5056 in
Member:
K = 2.13
L = 15 ft
Loadings:
P = 560 kips
Design Axial Stress:
560
35.3
a
P
f
A
= =
15.86 ksi =
a
f

Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
12.32
5.575
2 2 1.105
f
f
b
t
= = =
-

65 65
10.83
36
p
y
F
= = =
p
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 4

Localized Buckling for Web:
15.86
0.44
36
a
y
f
F
= =
13.12
18.48
0.71
w
d
t
= = =
Since 0.44 0.16
a
y
f
F
= >
257 257
42.83
36
p
y
F
= = =
p
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.

Member Compression Capacity
( )
638 . 69
5056 . 5
12 15 13 . 2
=
- -
=
x
x
r
KL

2 2
2 2 29000
126.099
36
t t -
= = =
c
y
E
C
F

552 . 0
099 . 126
638 . 69
= =
c
x
x
C
r
KL

c
x
x
C
r
KL
<
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 5
3
2
8
1
8
3
3
5
2
1
0 . 1
|
|
.
|

\
|

|
|
.
|

\
|
+

|
|
.
|

\
|

=
c
x x
c
x x
y
c
x x
a
C
r KL
C
r KL
F
C
r KL
F
( )
( ) ( )
3
2
552 . 0
8
1
552 . 0
8
3
3
5
36 552 . 0
2
1
0 . 1
+
-
)
`

=
a
F
16.47 ksi =
a
F

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 1
AISC LRFD-93 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with an ultimate uniform load of 1.6 klf. The flexural moment capacity
is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction, Lb = 4.375 ft,
11.667 ft and 35 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING









TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity
Unsupported length factors

Member Properties
W18X40
E = 29000 ksi

Fy = 50 ksi
Loading
wu = 1.6 klf

Geometry
Span, L = 35 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are comparing with the results of Example 5.1 in the 2
nd

Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, pages 5-12 to 5-15.
Output Parameter

ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Cb (
b
L =4.375ft)
1.003 1.002 0.10%
|
b n
M (
b
L =4.375 ft) (k-ft)
294.000 294.000 0.00%
Cb (
b
L =11.67 ft)
1.015 1.014 0.10%
|
b n
M (
b
L = 11.67ft) (k-ft)
213.0319

212.703 0.15%
Cb (
b
L = 35ft)
1.138 1.136 0.18%
|
b n
M (
b
L = 35ft) (k-ft)
50.6845 50.599 0.17%
COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-93 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Fr = 10 ksi (for rolled shapes)
50 10 40 ksi = = =
L y r
F F F
Section: W18x40
bf = 6.02 in, tf = 0.525 in, d = 17.9 in, tw = 0.315 in
2 17.9 2 0.525 16.85 in = = - =
c f
h d t
A = 11.8 in
2

S33 = 68.3799 in
3
, Z33 = 78.4 in
3

Iy = 19.1 in
4
, ry = 1.2723 in
Cw = 1441.528 in
6
, J = 0.81 in
4

Other:
L = 35 ft
|b = 0.9
Loadings:
wu = 1.6 k/ft
2
8
u
u
w L
M = = 1.635
2
/8 = 245.0 k-ft
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
6.02
5.733
2 2 0.525
f
f
b
t
= = =
-

65 65
9.192
50
p
y
F
= = =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 4
p
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Localized Buckling for Web:
16.85
53.492
0.315
c
w
h
t
= = =
640 640
90.510
50
p
y
F
= = =
p
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity
33
50 78.4 3920 k-in = = - =
p y
M F Z

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:
Critical Lengths:
1
33
29000 11153.85 0.81 11.8
1806 ksi
2 68.3799 2
t t - - -
= = =
EGJA
X
S

2 2
4 33
2
22
1441.528 68.3799
4 4 0.0173 in
19.1 11153.85 0.81
| | | |
= = =
| |
-
\ . \ .
w
C S
X
I GJ

22
300 300 1.2723
53.979 in 4.498 ft
50
-
= = = =
p
y
r
L
F

2 1
22 2
1 1
r L
L
X
L r X F
F
= + +
2
1.27 1810
1 1 0.0172 40 144.8 in 12.069 ft
40
-
= + + - = =
r
L
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 5

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:
For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification
factor is calculated using the following equation:
0 . 3
3 4 3 5 . 2
5 . 12
max
max
s
+ + +
=
m
C B A
b
R
M M M M
M
C Eqn. 1
where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-
span moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum
mid-span moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
2
1
1
4
b
A C
L
M M
L
| |
= =
|
\ .


Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4.375 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 4.375
1 1 0.996
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
12.5 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.996 4 1.00 3 0.996
b
C =
+ + +

1.002
b
C =
p b
L L < , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
33 33
50 78.4 3920 1.5 1.5 68.3799 50 5128.493 k-in = = = - = < = - - =
n p y y
M M F Z S F
0.9 3920 / 12 | = -
b n
M
294.0 k-ft | =
b n
M

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 6
Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 11.667
1 1 0.972
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .

( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
12.5 1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.972 4 1.00 3 0.972
b
C =
+ + +

1.014
b
C =
r b p
L L L < < , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
( )
33
b p
n b p p L p
r p
L L
M C M M F S M
L L
(
| |
= s ( |
|

(
\ .


( )
11.667 4.486
1.01 3920 3920 40 68.4 2836.042 k-in
12.06 4.486
( | |
= - =
| (

\ .

n
M
0.9 2836.042 / 12 | = -
b n
M
212.7031 k-ft | =
b n
M

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:
max
1.00
B
M M = =
2 2
1 1 35
1 1 0.750
4 4 35
b
A C
L
M M
L
| | | |
= = = =
| |
\ . \ .
.
( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( )
12.5 1.00
1.00
2.5 1.00 3 0.750 4 1.00 3 0.750
b
C =
+ + +

1.136
b
C =
r b
L L > , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
p cr n
M S F M s =
33

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 7
2
22 22
| | t t
= +
|
\ .
b
cr W
b b
C E
M EI GJ I C
L L

2
1.136 29000
29000 19.1 11153.85 0.81 19.1 1441.528
35 12 35 12
- t t - | |
= - - - + -
|
- -
\ .
cr
M
674.655 k-in = =
n cr
M M
0.9 674.655 / 12 | = -
b n
M
50.599 k-ft | =
b n
M
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 1
AISC LRFD-93 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BIAXIAL BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A check of the column adequacy is checked for combined axial compression and
flexural loads. The column is 14 feet tall and loaded with an axial load,
1400
u
P = kips and bending,
ux uy
M , M = 200k-ft and 70k-ft, respectively. It is
assumed that there is reverse-curvature bending with equal end moments about
both axes and no loads along the member. The column demand/capacity ratio is
checked against the results of Example 6.2 in the 3
rd
Edition, LRFD Manual of
Steel Construction, pages 6-6 to 6-8.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING




TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity
Demand/capacity ratio, D/C

Member Properties
W14X176
E = 29000 ksi

Fy = 50 ksi
Loading
Pu = 1,400 kips
Mux = 200 kip-ft
Muy = 70 kip-ft
Geometry
H = 14.0 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
Example 6.2 in the 3
rd
Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, pages 6-6 to
6-8.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
c n
P | (kips)
1937.84 1937.84 0.00%
b nx
M | (k-ft)
1200

1200 0.00%
b ny
M | (k-ft)
600.478 600.478 0.00%
D/C 0.974 0.974 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-93 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: ASTM A992 Grade 50 Steel
Fy = 50 ksi, E = 29,000 ksi

Section: W14x176
A = 51.8 in
2
,
bf = 15.7 in, tf = 1.31 in, d = 15.2 in, tw = 0.83 in
2 15.2 2 1.31 12.58
c f
h d t in = = - =
Ix = 2,140 in
4
, Iy = 838 in
4
, rx = 6.4275 in, ry = 4.0221 in
Sx = 281.579 in
3
, Sy = 106.7516 in
3
,

Zx = 320.0 in
3
, Zy = 163.0 in
3
.

Member:
Kx = Ky = 1.0
L = Lb = 14 ft

Other
0.85 | =
c

0.9 | =
b


Loadings:
Pu = 1400 kips
Mux = 200 k-ft
Muy = 70 k-ft

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
( ) ( )
/ 2
15.7 / 2
5.99
1.31
= = =
f
f
b
t

65 65
9.19
50
= = =
p
y
F

<
p
, No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 4
Localized Buckling for Web:
12.58
15.16
0.83
= = =
c
w
h
t

0.9 51.8 50 2331 kips | = | = - - =
b y b g y
P A F
1400
0.601
2331
= =
|
u
b y
P
P


Since 0.601 0.125 = >
|
u
b y
P
P

191 253
2.33
| |
= >
|
|
|
\ .
u
p
b y y y
P
P F F

( )
191 253
2.33 0.601 46.714 35.780
50 50
= = > =
p

<
p
, No localized web buckling
Web is Compact.

Section is Compact.

Member Compression Capacity:

For braced frames, K = 1.0 and KxLx = KyLy = 14.0 ft, From AISC Table 4-2,

1940 kips | =
c n
P

Or by hand,

1.0 14 12 50
0.552
4.022 29000
- -
= = =
t - t
y y
c
y
K L F
r E

Since 1.5, <
c

( )
2 2
0.552
0.658 50 0.658 44.012 ksi = = - =

c
cr y
F F

0.85 44.012 51.8 | = | = - -
c n c cr g
P F A
1937.84 kips | =
c n
P

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 5
From LRFD Specification Section H1.2,

1400
0.722 0.2
1937.84
= = >
|
u
c n
P
P


Therefore, LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a governs.

Section Bending Capacity
50 310
1333.333 k-ft
12
-
= = =
px y x
M F Z
py y y
M F Z =
However,
163
1.527 1.5,
106.7516
y
y
Z
S
= = >
So
3
1.5 1.5 106.7516 160.1274 in = = - =
y y
Z S

50 160.1274
667.198 k-ft
12
-
= =
py
M

Member Bending Capacity

From LRFD Specification Equation F1-4,

yf
y p
F
E
r L 76 . 1 =
29000
1
1.76 4.02 14.2 ft 14 ft
12
50
= = > =
p b
L L

| = |
b nx b px
M M
0.9 1333.333 | = -
b nx
M
1200 k-ft | =
b nx
M

| = |
b ny b py
M M
0.9 667.198 | =
b ny
M
600.478 k-ft | =
b ny
M

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 6

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending

From LRFD Specification section C1.2, for a braced frame, Mlt = 0.

,
1 ntx x ux
M B M = where 200 =
ntx
M kip-ft; and
,
1 nty y uy
M B M = where 70 =
nty
M kip-ft

1
1
1
1
>
|
|
.
|

\
|

=
e
u
m
P
P
C
B

For reverse curvature bending and equal end moments:

0 . 1
2
1
+ =
M
M


|
|
.
|

\
|
=
2
1
4 . 0 6 . 0
M
M
C
m

( ) 2 . 0 0 . 1 4 . 0 6 . 0 = =
m
C
( )
2
1 2
t
=
e
EI
p
KL


( )
2
1 2
29000 2140
21, 702
14.0 12
t - -
= =
-
e x
p kips
( )
2
1 2
29000 838
8, 498
14.0 12
t - -
= =
-
e y
p

1
1
1
1
>
|
|
.
|

\
|

=
x e
u
mx
x
P
P
C
B
1
0.2
0.214 1
1400
1
21702
x
B = = >
| |

|
\ .

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS
REVISION NO.:
0


AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 7
1
1
=
x
B
1
1
1
1
>
|
|
.
|

\
|

=
y e
u
my
y
P
P
C
B
1
0.2
0.239 1
1400
1
8498
y
B = = >
| |

|
\ .

1
1
=
y
B
200 200 0 . 1 = - =
ux
M kip-ft;
and
70 70 0 . 1 = - =
uy
M kip-ft

From LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a,

1400 8 200 70
0.974 1.0
1940 9 1200 600.478
| |
+ + = <
|
\ .
, OK
0.974
D
C
=

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 1
AS 4100-1998 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 200 kN. This example
was tested using the AS4100-1998 steel frame design code. The design capacities
are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING













L = 6 m





TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression)
Section compression capacity
Member compression capacity
Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa



Loading

N = 200 kN

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
N
L
A A
Section A-A
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
also available through the program Help menu.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Section Axial Capacity,
Ns (kN)
6275 6275 0.00%
Member Axial Capacity,
Nc (kN)
4385 4385 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm
2

bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
r33 = 139.15 mm, r22 = 89.264 mm
Member:
le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
* 200 N kN =
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
( )
350 20 250
5.89
2 250 2 28 250
f w y
e
f
b t f
t

= = =
- -

Flange is under uniform compression, so:
9, 16, 90
ep ey ew
= = =
5.89 9
e ep
= < = , No localized flange buckling
Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:
331 250
16.55
250 20 250
y
e
w
f
h
t
= = =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 4
Web is under uniform compression, so:
30, 45, 180
ep ey ew
= = =
16.55 30
e ep
= < = , No localized web buckling
Web is compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Compression Capacity:
Section is not Slender, so Kf = 1.0
3
1 25,100 250 / 10
s f n y
N K A f = = - -
6275kN =
s
N

Member Weak-Axis Compression Capacity:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so
22 33
1
e e
k k = =
22 33
22 33
6000 6000
67.216 and 43.119
89.264 139.15
= = = =
e e
l l
r r

Buckling will occur on the 22-axis.
( )
22
22
22
1 250
6000
67.216
250 89.264 250
-
= = - =
f y
e
n
K f
l
r

22
22 2
22 22
2100( 13.5)
20.363
15.3 2050

o = =
+
n
a
n n

22
0.5
b
o = since cross-section is not a UB or UC section
22 22 22 22
67.216 20.363 0.5 77.398 = + o o = + - =
n a b

22 22
0.00326( 13.5) 0.2083 0 q = = >
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 5
2 2
22
22
22 2 2
22
77.398
1 1 0.2083
90 90
1.317
77.398
2 2
90 90
| | | |
+ + q + +
| |
\ . \ .
= = =
| | | |
| |
\ . \ .


2
22 22
22 22
90
1 1
c
o

| |
| |
| |
|
| =
|
|
|
| \ .
\ .
\ .

2
22
90
1.317 1 1 0.6988
1.317 77.398
c
o
| |
| |
| |
|
= = |
|
|
| -
\ .
\ .
\ .

22 22
= o s
c c s s
N N N
22
0.6988 6275 4385 kN = - =
c
N
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 1
AS 4100-1998 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object bending strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored moment Mx = 1000 kN-m. This
example was tested using the AS 4100-1998 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING













L = 6 m





TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Member bending capacity
Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa



Loading

Mx = 1000 kN-m


Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
M
x

L
A A
Section A-A
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
also available through the program Help menu.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Section Bending Capacity,
Ms,major (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Member Bending Capacity,
Mb (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
I22 = 200,000,000 mm
4

Z33 = 2,936,555.891 mm
2

S33 = 3,350,000 mm
2
J = 5,750,000 mm
4

Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm
6

Member:
le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
* 1000 kN-m =
m
M
This leads to:
2
* 250 kN-m = M
3
* 500 kN-m = M
4
* 750 kN-m = M
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
( )
350 20 250
5.89
2 250 2 28 250

= = =
- -
f w y
e
f
b t f
t

Flange is under uniform compression, so:
9, 16, 90 = = =
ep ey ew

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 4
5.89 9 = < =
e ep
, No localized flange buckling
Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:
331 250
16.55
250 20 250
= = =
y
e
w
f
h
t

Web is under bending, so:
82, 115, 180 = = =
ep ey ew

16.55 30 = < =
e ep
, No localized web buckling
Web is compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Bending Capacity:
min( ,1.5 )
e c
Z Z S Z = = for compact sections
2
33 33
3, 350, 000 mm = =
e c
Z Z
2
33 , major 33
250 3, 350, 000 / 1000 = = = -
s s y e
M M f Z
33 ,major
837.5 kN-m = =
s s
M M
Member Bending Capacity:
kt = 1 (Program default)
kl = 1.4 (Program default)
kr = 1 (Program default)
lLTB = le22 = 6000 mm
2
1 1.4 1 6000 8400 mm = = - - - =
e t l r LTB
l k k k l

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 5
2 2
22
2 2
| |
| | | | t t
= = +
|
| |
|
\ . \ . \ .
w
oa o
e e
EI EI
M M GJ
l l

2 5 8 2 5 12
2 2
2 10 2 10 2 10 4.59 10
76, 923.08 5, 750, 000
8, 400 8, 400
| | | | | | t - - - - t - - - -
= = - +
| | |
|
\ . \ . \ .
oa o
M M

1786.938 kN-m = =
oa o
M M

2
2
837.5 837.5
0.6 3 0.6 3
1786.938 1786.938
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
| o = + = + |
| |
| |
| |
\ .
| \ .
\ .
\ .
\ .
\ .
s s
s
oa oa
M M
M M
0.7954 o =
s

( ) ( ) ( )
2 2 2
2 3 4
1.7
2.5
* * *
o = s
+ +
*
m
m
M
M M M

( ) ( ) ( )
2 2 2
1.7 1000
1.817 2.5
250 500 750
-
o = = s
+ +
m


0.7954 1.817 837.5
b m s s
M M o o = = - -
s
M
1210.64 kN-m 837.5 kN-m = s
b
M

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 1
AS 4100-1998 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object interacting axial and bending strengths are tested in this
example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N = 200 kN;
Mx = 1000 kN-m. This example was tested using the AS4100-1998 steel frame
design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand
calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L = 6 m






Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa



Loading

N = 200 kN
Mx = 1000 kN-m


Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
N
M
x

L
A A
Section A-A
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending, compression)
Section bending capacity with compression reduction
Member bending capacity with in-plane compression reduction
Member bending capacity with out-of-plane compression reduction
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Reduced Section Bending Capacity,
Mr33 (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Reduced In-Plane Member Bending
Capacity,
Mi33 (kN-m)
823.1 823.1 0.00%
Reduced Out-of-Plane Member
Bending Capacity, Mo (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX003
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm
2

I22 = 200,000,000 mm
4

I33 = 486,000,000 mm
4

J = 5,750,000 mm
4

Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm
6


Member:
lz=le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
| =0.9
Loadings:
* 200 N kN =
* 1000
m
M kN m =
Section Compactness:
From example SFD IN-01-1, section is Compact in Compression
From example SFD IN-01-2, section is Compact in Bending
Section Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, 6275kN =
s
N
Member Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1,
22
4385 kN =
c
N
Section Bending Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-2,
33 , major
837.5 kN-m = =
s s
M M

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 4
Section Interaction: Bending & Compression Capacity:
33 33 33
* 200
1.18 1 1.18 837.5 1 837.5
0.9 6275
| |
| |
= = - s =
| |
| -
\ .
\ .
r s s
s
N
M M M
N

33
953.252 837.5
r
M = s
33
837.5kN-m =
r
M

Member Strong-Axis Compression Capacity:
Strong-axis buckling strength needs to be calculated:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so
33
1
e
k =
33
33
6000
43.119
139.15
e
l
r
= =

( )
33
33
33
1 250
6000
43.119
250 139.15 250
f y
e
n
K f
l
r

-
= = - =
33
33 2
33 33
2100( 13.5)
19.141
15.3 2050

o = =
+
n
a
n n

33
0.5
b
o = since cross-section is not a UB or UC section
33 33 33 33
43.119 19.141 0.5 52.690 = + o o = + - =
n a b


33 33
0.00326( 13.5) 0.1278 0 q = = >
2 2
33
33
33 2 2
33
52.690
1 1 0.1278
90 90
2.145
52.690
2 2
90 90
| | | |
+ + q + +
| |
\ . \ .
= = =
| | | |
| |
\ . \ .


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 5
2
33 33
33 33
90
1 1
| |
| |
| |
|
| o =
|
|
|
| \ .
\ .
\ .
c

2
33
90
2.145 1 1 0.8474
2.145 50.690
| |
| |
| |
|
o = = |
|
|
| -
\ .
\ .
\ .
c

33 33
= o s
c c s s
N N N
33
0.8474 6275
c
N = -
33
5318
c
N kN =

Member Interaction: In-Plane Bending and Compression Capacity:
min
max
0
0
1000
| = = =
m
M
M

Since the section is compact,
3 3
33
33 33
1 1 * *
1 1 1.18 1
2 2
| |
| |
| | + | + | | | | |
| = + |
| | |
|
|
| |
\ . \ .
\ .
\ .
\ .
m m
i s
c c
N N
M M
N N

3 3
1 0 200 1 0 200
837.5 1 1 1.18 1
2 0.9 5318 2 0.9 5318
i
M
| | | |
+ + | | | | | |
| = + |
| | |
| |
- -
\ . \ . \ .
\ .
\ .

823.11 kN-m =
i
M

Member Interaction: Out-of-Plane Bending and Compression Capacity:
3
22
1
1 1 *
0.4 0.23
2 2
o =
| |
| | | | | |
+ |
| |
|
|
\ .
\ .
\ .
bc
m m
c
N
N

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 6
3
1
1 0 1 0 200
0.4 0.23
2 2 0.9 4385
o =
| |
| | | |
+
|
| |
|
-
\ . \ .
\ .
bc

4.120 o =
bc


( )
2
2 6 12
2
2
6
8
33 22
2 10 4.59 10
6000
76923.08 5.75 10
4.86 2 10
25100
t
t - - - -
= + = - - +
+
+ -
w
z
oz
g
EI
l
N GJ
I I
A


11
4.423 10 kN = -
oz
N


33 b o m s sx
M M o o = w/ an assumed uniform moment such that o
m
=1.0
33
1.0 0.7954 837.5 666.145 kN-m = - - =
b o
M


33 33 33
22
* *
1 1
| | | |
= o s
| |
| |
\ . \ .
o bc b o r
c oz
N N
M M M
N N

33 11
200 200
4.12 666.145 1 1 2674 837.5
0.9 4385 0.9 4.423 10
o
M
| | | |
= - = s
| |
- - -
\ . \ .

33
837.5 kN-m =
o
M
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 1
BS 5950-2000 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this 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 the
mid-span of 136 kN. This example was tested using the BS 5950-2000 steel
frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



L=6.5 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Section shear capacity
Material Properties
E = 205000 MPa

v = 0.3
G = 78846.15 MPa



Loading

W = 69 kN/m
P = 136 kN

Design Properties
Ys = 275 MPa
Section: UB533x210x92
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are hand calculated based on the methods in 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 ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%
Design Moment,
M33 (kN-m)
585.4 585.4 0.00%
Design Shear, Fv (kN) 292.25 292.25 0.00%
Moment Capacity,
Mc (kN-m)
649.0 649 0.00%
Shear Capacity, Pv (kN) 888.4 888.4 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-2000 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
E = 205000 MPa
Ys = 275 MPa
1.0 275 MPa = - =
y s
Y
Section: UB533x210x92
Ag = 11,700 mm
2
D = 533.1 mm, b = 104.65 mm
t = 10.1 mm, T = 15.6 mm
2 533.1 2 10.1 501.9 mm = = - = d D t
Z33 = 2,072,031.5 mm
3

S33 = 2,360,000 mm
3

Loadings:
Paxial = 0
wu = (1.4wd + 1.6wl) = 1.4(15) + 1.6(30) = 69 kN/m
Pu = (1.4Pd + 1.6Pl) = 1.4(40) + 1.6(50) = 136 kN
2 2
69 6.5 136 6.5
8 4 8 4
u u
u
w l P l
M
- -
= + = +
585.4 kN-m =
u
M
69 6.5 136
2 2
u u
v
w l P
F
+ - +
= =
292.25 kN =
v
F


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 4

Section Compactness:
1
0
y
P
r
dt
= = (since there is no axial force)
2
0
g y
P
r
A
= = (since there is no axial force)
275 275
1
275
c = = =

y


Localized Buckling for Flange:
104.65
6.71
15.6
= = =
b
T

9 9 = c =
ep

6.71 9 = < =
p
, No localized flange buckling
Flange is Class 1.

Localized Buckling for Web:
501.9
49.69
10.1
= = =
d
t

Since r1 = r2 = 0 and there is no axial compression:
80 80 = c =
p

49.69 80 = < =
p
, No localized web buckling
Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 1.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 5

Section Shear Capacity:
2
2
533.1 10.1 5, 384.31mm = = - =
v
A Dt
2 2
0.6 0.6 275 5384.31
v y v
P A = = - -
2
888.4 kN =
v
P

Section Bending Capacity:
With Shear Reduction:
2
0.6 533 292.3 kN - = > =
v v
P kN F
So no shear reduction is needed in calculating the bending capacity.
33 33
1.2 275 2, 360, 000 1.2 275 2, 072, 031.5
c y y
M S Z = s = - s - -
649 kN-m 683.77 kN-m = s
c
M
649 kN-m =
c
M


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





BS 5950-2000 Example 002

SQUARE TUBE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to 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 the BS 5950-2000
steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent
hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING













H =5 m





TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Section bending capacity
Material Properties
E = 205000 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 78846.15 MPa


Loading

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


Design Properties
Y
s
=355 MPa

Section A-A
N
M
x

M
y

H
A A
BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 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 ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%
Axial Capacity,
N
c
(kN)
773.2 773.2 0.00%
Bending Capacity,
M
c
(kN-m)
68.3 68.3 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-2000 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
E = 205000 MPa
G = 78846.15 MPa
Y
s
= 355 MPa
1.0 355MPa = =
y s
Y
Section: RHS 150x150x6.3:
A
g
= 3580 mm
2

D = B = 150 mm, T=t = 6.3 mm
3 3 150 2 6.3 131.1mm = = = = = b B t d D T
r
33
= 58.4483 mm
Z
33
= 163,066.7 mm
3
S
33
= 192,301.5 mm
3


Loadings:
N = 640 kN
M
x
= 10.5 kN-m
M
y
= 0.66 kN-m
F
v33
= M
x
/H = 10.5 / 5 = 2.1 kN

Section Compactness:
1
640
0.002183
131 6.3 355
y
P
r
dt
= = =


275 275
0.880
355
y

= = =

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Localized Buckling for Flange:
131.1
20.81
6.3
= = =
b
T

131.1
28 80 28 0.880 80 0.880
6.3
= < = <
p
d
t

24.6 49.6 = <
p

20.81 24.6 = < =
p
, No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:
131.1
20.81
6.3
= = =
d
t
:
1
64 64 0.88
40 40 0.88 56.3 35.2
1 0.6 1 0.6 0.002183

= < = < = >
+ +
p
r

So 35.2 =
p

20.81 35.2 = < =
p
, No localized web buckling
Web is compact.
Section is Compact.
Member Compression Capacity:
33 33 33
22 33
33 33
1.0 5000
85.546
58.4483

= = = = =
e
l K l
r r

{ }
22 33
max , 85.546 = =
2 2
205000
0.2 0.2 15.1
355

= = =

o
y
E

Robertson Constant: a = 2.0 (from Table VIII-3 for Rolled Box Section in CSI
code documentation)
Perry Factor: ( ) ( )
0
0.001 0.001 2 85.546 15.1 0.141 = = = a
BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Euler Strength:
2 2
2 2
205000
276.5
85.546

= = =

E
E
MPa
( ) ( )
1 355 0.141 1 276.5
355.215MPa
2 2
+ + + +
= = =
y E

2 2
276.5 355
215.967MPa
335.215 335.215 276.5 355


= = =
+ +
E y
c
E y

3580 215.967
c g c
N A = =
773.2kN
c
N =
Section Shear Capacity:
1.0 275MPa = =
y s
Y
2
150
3580 1790mm
150 150

= = =

+ +

v g
D
A A
D B

2
0.6 0.6 355 1790
v y v
P A = =
381.3kN =
v
P
Section Bending Capacity:
With Shear Reduction
0.6 228.8kN 2.1kN = > =
v v
P F
So no shear reduction is needed in calculating the bending capacity.
33 33
1.2 355 192,301.5 1.2 355 163,066.7 = =
c y y
M S Z
68.3kN-m 69.5kN-m =
c
M
68.3kN-m =
c
M
With LTB Reduction
Not considered since the section is square.
BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 5
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 1
CSA S16-09 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example.
A simply supported beam is (a) laterally restrained along its full length, (b)
laterally restrained along its quarter points, at mid-span, and at the ends (c)
laterally restrained along mid-span, and is subjected to a uniform factored load of
DL = 7 kN/m and LL = 15 kN/m. This example was tested using the CSA S16-
09 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
Handbook of Steel construction (9
th
Edition) results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



L = 8.0 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity, Mr (fully restrained)
Member bending capacity, Mr (buckling)
Member bending capacity, Mr (LTB)

Material Properties
E = 2x10
8
kN/m
2
Fy = 350 kN/m
2

Loading


WD = 7 kN/m
WL = 15 kN/m

Design Properties
ASTM A992
CSA G40.21 350W
W410X46
W410X60
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 2

RESULT COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from Examples 1, 2 and 3 on pages 5-84 and 5-85
of the Hand Book of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by Canadian
Institute of Steel Construction.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%
Design Moment, Mf (kN-m) 250.0

250.0 0.00%
(a) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of
W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 0 m
278.775 278.775 0.00%
(b) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of
W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 2 m
268.97 268.83 0.05%
(c) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of
W410X60 (kN-m) w/ lb = 4 m
292.10 292.05 0.02%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-09 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: CSA G40.21 Grade 350W
fy = 350 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923 MPa
Section: W410x46
bf = 140 mm, tf = 11.2 mm, d = 404 mm, tw = 7 mm
2 404 2 11.2 381.6 mm
f
h d t = = - =
Ag = 5890 mm
2

I22 = 5,140,000 mm
4

Z33 = 885,000 mm
3

J = 192,000 mm
4

11 6
1.976 10 mm
w
C = -
Section: W410x60
bf = 178 mm, tf = 12.8 mm, d = 408 mm, tw = 7.7 mm
2 408 2 12.8 382.4 mm = = - =
f
h d t
Ag = 7580 mm
2

I22 = 12,000,000 mm
4

Z33= 1,190,000 mm
3

J = 328,000 mm
4

11 6
4.698 10 mm
w
C = -
Member:
L = 8 m
= 0.9

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 4
Loadings:
wf = (1.25wd + 1.5wl) = 1.25(7) + 1.5(15) = 31.25 kN/m
2
2
31.25 8
8 8
f
f
w L
M
-
= =
250 kN-m =
f
M
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
.1
145 145
7.75
350
Cl
y
F
= = =
W410x46
140
6.25
2 2 11.2
f
f
b
t
= = =
-

.1 Cl
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Class 1.
W410x60
178
6.95
2 2 12.8
f
f
b
t
= = =
-

.1 Cl
< , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Class 1.

Localized Buckling for Web:
.1
1100 1100 0
1 0.39 1 0.39 58.8
5890 350 350
f
Cl
y y
C
C F

| |
| |
= = =
|
|
|
-
\ .
\ .

W410x46
381.6
54.51
7
w
h
t
= = =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 5
.1 Cl
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Class 1.
Section is Class 1

W410x60
382.4
49.66
7.7
w
h
t
= = =
.1 Cl
< , No localized web buckling
Web is Class 1.
Section is Class 1

Calculation of 2:
2 is calculated from the moment profile so is independent of cross section and is
calculated as:
max
2
2 2 2 2
max
4
4 7 4
a b c
M
M M M M
e
-
=
+ + +

where: Mmax = maximum moment
Ma = moment at unrestrained span
Mb = moment at unrestrained span
Mc = moment at unrestrained span

Section Bending Capacity for W410x46:
75 . 309 10 / 000 , 885 350
6
33
= - = = Z F M
y p
kN-m
0.9 309.75 278.775 | = - =
p
M kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb =0 mm (Fully Restrained):
Lb = 0, so Mmax = Ma = Mb = Mc = Mu = 250 kN-m and 2 = 1.000
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 6
2
2
22 22
0
e t t | |
= +
|
\ .
u w
E
M EI GJ I C as L
L L

33
33 33 33
1.15 1 0.28
(
= | s |
(

p
r p p
u
M
M M M
M

33
0.28 0
p
u
u
M
as M
M

33 33 33
leading to 1.15 = | > |
r p p
M M M
So
33 33
278.775 kN-m = | =
r p
M M

Member Bending Capacity for Lb =2000 mm:
8 2 2
@ 3.5 m
2 4 2 4

= + = + =
b b
a a
L L L
M x
2
2
31.25 8 3.5 31.25 3.5
246.094 kN-m
2 2 2 2
e e
- - -
= = =
f a f a
a
Lx x
M
Ma = Mc = 246.094 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm
Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm

2
2 2 2 2
4 250
1.008
250 4 246.094 7 250 4 246.094
-
e = =
+ - + - + -

2 = 1.008

2
2
22 22
e t t | |
= +
|
\ .
u w
E
M EI GJ I C
L L

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 7
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
5 6 3
2
5
6 9
2 10 5.14 10 76923 192 10
1.008
2 10
2000
5.14 10 197.6 10
2000
u
M
- - - - - -
- t
= | |
t -
|
+ - -
|
\ .

6
537.82 10
u
M = - N-mm = 537.82 kN-m

0.67 0.67 309.75 208 537.82 kN-m, so
p u
M M = - = < =
33
33 33 33
1.15 1 0.28
(
= | s |
(

p
r p p
u
M
M M M
M

33
309.75
1.15 0.9 309.75 1 0.28 268.89 kN-m 278.775 kN-m
537.82
r
M
(
= - - = <
(


33
268.89 kN-m
r
M =

Section Capacity for W410x60:
5 . 416 10 / 000 , 1190 350
6
33
= - = = Z F M
y p
kN-m
0.9 416.5 374.85 | = - =
p
M kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4000 m:
8 4 4
@ 3 m
2 4 2 4

= + = + =
b b
a a
L L L
M x
2
2
31.25 8 3 31.25 3
234.375 kN-m
2 2 2 2
e e
- - -
= = =
f a f a
a
Lx x
M
Ma = Mc = 234.375 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm
Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm
2
2 2 2 2
4 250
1.032
250 4 234.375 7 250 4 234.375
-
e = =
+ - + - + -

2 = 1.032
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 8

2
2
22 22
e t t | |
= +
|
\ .
u w
y
E
M EI GJ I C
L L

( ) ( ) ( )
( )
( ) ( )
5 6 3
2
5
6 9
2 10 12 10 76923 328 10
1.032
2 10
4000
12 10 469.8 10
4000
u
M
- - - - - -
- t
= | |
t -
|
+ - -
|
\ .

6
362.06 10
u
M = - N-mm = 362.06 kN-m

0.67 0.67 309.75 279 362.06 kN-m, so
p u
M M = - = < =
33
33 33 33
1.15 1 0.28
(
= | s |
(

p
r p p
u
M
M M M
M

33
416.5
1.15 0.9 416.5 1 0.28
362.06
r
M
(
= - -
(


33
292.23 kN-m
r
M =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 1
CSA S16-09 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments Cf = 2000 kN;
Mfx-top= 200 kN-m; Mfx-bottom= 300 kN-m. This example was tested using the CSA
S16-09 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with
Handbook of Steel Construction (9
th
Edition) results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2000 kN



















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity with no mid-span loading
Material Properties
E = 200,000 MPa

= 0.3
G= 76,923.08 MPa





Loading Design Properties
fy = 345 MPa

Cf = 2000 kN
Mfx-top = 200 kN-m
Mfx-bottom = 300 kN-m


A
3.7 m

A
Mxf = 200 kN-m
Mxf = 300 kN-m


Section A-A
W310x118
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from Example 1 on page 4-114 of the Hand Book
of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by the Canadian Institute of Steel
Construction.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%
Axial Capacity, Cr (kN) 3849.5 3849.5 0.00%
Bending Capacity, Mr33
(kN-m)
605.5 605.5 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-09 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.










Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 345 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923.08 MPa
Section: W310x118
Ag = 15000 mm
2

r33 = 135.4006 mm, r22 = 77.5457 mm
I22 = 90,200,000 mm
4
Z33 = 1,950,000 mm
3
J = 1,600,000 mm
4

12 6
1.966 10 mm
w
C = -
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
22 33
0 0 77.5457 135.4006
o o o
r x y r r = + + + = + + +
2 2
24346.658 mm
o
r =
Member:
lz= le33 = le22 = 3700 mm (unbraced length)
kz=k33 = k22 =1.0
0.9 | =

Loadings:
2000 kN
f
C =
, top
200 kN-m
a xf
M M = =
, bottom
300 kN-m
b xf
M M = =


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 4
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
.1
145 145
7.81
345
Cl
y
F
= = =
.2
170 170
9.15
345
Cl
y
F
= = =
307
8.21
2 2 18.7
f
f
b
t
= = =
-

.1 .2 Cl Cl
< < ,
Flange is Class 2.

Localized Buckling for Web:
345 15000
5175 kN
1000
y y g
C f A
-
= = =
.1
1100 1100 2000
1 0.39 1 0.39 50.30
5175 345
f
Cl
y y
C
C F
| |
| |
= = =
|
|
|
\ .
\ .

276.6
23.24
11.9
w
h
t
= = =
.1 Cl
< ,
Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 2

Member Compression Capacity:
Flexural Buckling
n = 1.34 (wide flange section)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 5
22 22
22 33 22
22
1.0 3700 345
max( , ) 0.6308
77.5457 200000
y
f
k l
r E
-
= = = = =
t

( ) ( )
1 1
2 2 1.34
1.34
1 0.9 15000 345 1 0.6308
n
n
r g y
C A F

-
= | + = - - - +
3489.5 kN
r
C =

Torsional & Lateral-Torsional Buckling
2 2 5
2 2
33 33
33
2 10
2643 MPa
1 3700
135.4006
ex
E
F
k l
r
t t -
= = =
- | | | |
|
|
\ .
\ .

2 2 5
2 2
22 22
22
2 10
867 MPa
1 3700
77.5457
ey
E
F
k l
r
t t -
= = =
- | | | |
|
|
\ .
\ .

( )
2
2 2
1
w
ez
g o
z z
EC
F GJ
A r
k l
| |
t
| = +
|
\ .
( )
2 5 12
6
2
2 10 1.966 10 1
76923.08 1.6 10
15000 24347
1 3700
ez
F
| |
t - - - -
| = + - -
|
-
-
\ .

1113.222 MPa
eZ
F =
( )
min , , 867 MPa
e ex ey ez ey
F F F F F = = =
( ) ( )
1 1
2 2 1.34
1.34
1 0.9 15000 867 1 0.6308
n
n
r g e
C A F

-
= | + = - - - +
9674.5 kN
r
C = (does not govern)

Section Bending Capacity:
33 33
1, 950, 000 345 672.75 kN-m
p y
M Z F = = - =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 6
Member Bending Capacity:
2
2
1.75 1.05 0.3 2.5
a a
b b
M M
M M
| | | |
e = + + s
| |
\ . \ .

2
2
200 200
1.75 1.05 0.3 2.583 2.5
300 300
| | | |
e = + + = s
| |
\ . \ .

So
2
2.5 e =
2
2
22 22
22 22
u w
E
M EI GJ I C
l l
| | e t t
= +
|
\ .
2
5
5 7 6 7 12
2.5 2 10
2 10 9.02 10 76923.08 1.6 10 9.02 10 1.966 10
3700 3700
u
M
| | - - -
= - - - - - - + - - -
|
\ .
t t

3163.117 kN-m
u
M =
Since
33
0.67
u p
M M > -
33
33 33 33
1.15 1 0.28
p
r p p
u
M
M M M
M
(
= | s |
(


33
672.75
1.15 0.9 672.75 1 0.28 0.9 672.75
3163.117
r
M
(
= - - s -
(


33
654.830 605.475
r
M = s
33
605.5 kN-m
r
M =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 1
EN 3-2005 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example considering in-plane
behavior only.
A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 210 kN and My,Ed = 43
kN-m. This example was tested using the Eurocode 3-2005 steel frame design
code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L = 3.5 m





TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (beam-column)
Member interaction capacities, D/C, Method 1
Material Properties
E = 210x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 80770 MPa



Loading

N = 210 kN
My,Ed = 43 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
Section: IPE 200
NEd
L
A A
Section A-A
My,Ed
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. This example was taken from "New
design rules in EN 1993-1-1 for member stability," Worked example 1 in section
5.2.1, page 151.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%
D/CAxial 0.334 0.334 0.00%
D/CBending 0.649 0.646 0.46%
COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S235
fy = 235 MPa
E = 210,000 MPa
G = 80,770 MPa
Section: IPE 200
A = 2848 mm
2
h = 200 mm, bf = 100 mm, tf = 8.5 mm, tw = 5.6 mm, r = 12 mm
2 200 2 85 183 mm
w f
h h t = = - =
2
100 5.6 2 12
35.2 mm
2 2
f w
b t r
c

-
= = =
Iyy = 19,430,000 mm
4

Wel,y = 194,300 mm
3

Wpl,y = 220,600 mm
3

Member:
Lyy = Lzz = 3,500 mm (unbraced length)
0
1
M
=
1
1
M
=
y = 0.21

Loadings:
210, 000 N
Ed
N =
, , Left
0 N-m
Ed y
M =
, , Right
43000 N-m
Ed y
M =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 4
Section Compactness:
235 235
1
235
y
f
c = = =
1
1 1 1
2 2
Ed
w y
N
ht f
| |
s o = s
|
|
\ .

1 210, 000
1 0.6737
2 2 200 5.6 235
| |
o = =
|
- - -
\ .


Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending and compression
.1
9 9 1
13.36
0.6737
cl
c -
= = =
o


35.2
4.14
8.5
e
f
c
t
= = =
.1
4.14 13.36
e cl
= < =
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:
0.5, so o >
.1
396 396 1
51.05
13 1 13 0.6737 1
cl
c -
= = =
o -
for combined bending & compression
183
28.39
5.6
e
w
d
t
= = =
.1
32.68 51.05
e cl
= < =
So Web is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Since Flange and Web are Class 1, Section is Class 1.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 5
Section Compression Capacity:
3 6
,
2.848 10 235 10 669 kN
c Rk y
N Af

= = - - - =

Member Compression Capacity:
2 2 6 6
22
, 22 2 2
210000 10 19.43 10
3287 kN
3.5
cr
EI
N
L

t t - - - -
= = =

Section Bending Capacity:
6 6
, , ,
220.6 10 235 10 51.8 kN-m
pl y Rk pl y y
M W f

= = - - - =

Interaction Capacities - Method 1:
Member Bending & Compression Capacity with Buckling
Compression Buckling Factors
3 6
3
,
2.858 10 235 10
0.451
3287 10
y
y
cr y
Af
N

- - -
= = =
-


( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.21 0.451 0.2 0.451 0.628
y y y y
( ( | = + o + = + - + =

( ) ( )
2 2 2 2
1 1
0.939 1
0.628 0.628 0.451
y
y y y
_ = = = s
( (
| + | +
( (


Auxiliary Terms
,
,
210
1
1
3287
0.996
210
1 0.939 1
3287
Ed
cr y
y
Ed
y
cr y
N
N
N
N

= = =
_

6
,
6
,
220.6 10
1.135 1.5
194.3 10
pl y
y
el y
W
w
W

-
= = = s
-


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 6
Cmo Factor
, , right
3
, , left
0
0
43 10
Ed y
y
Ed y
M
M
= = =
-

( )
, 0
,
0.79 0.21 0.36 0.33
Ed
my y y
cr y
N
C
N
= + +
( )
,0
210
0.79 0.21 0 0.36 0 0.33 0.782
3287
my
C = + - + =
, 0
0.782
my my
C C = = because no LTB is likely to occur.
Elastic-Plastic Bending Resistance
Because LTB is prevented, bLT = 0 so aLT = 0
( )
2 2 2
22
,
1
1.6 1.6
1 1 2
Ed
yy y my my y LT
c Rk
y y
M
N
C w C C b
N
w w
(
(
| |
(
= +
|
|
(
\ .
(

( )
3
2 2 2
3
1.6 1.6 210 10
1 1.135 1 2 0.782 0.451 0.782 0.451 0
669 10 1.135 1.135
1.0
yy
C
(
(
- | |
= + - - - -
(
|
-
\ .
(
(


6
,
6
,
194.3 10
1.061 0.881
220.6 10
el y
yy
pl y
W
C
W

-
= > = =
-

3
Axial 3
,
1
210 10
/
669 10
0.939
1
Ed
c Rk
y
M
N
D C
N
-
= =
-
_

Axial
/ 0.334 D C =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 7
3
, , right
Bending
3 3
, ,
3
, 1
0.782 43 10
/ 0.996
210 10 51.8 10
1 1.061
1
3287 10 1
my Ed y
y
pl y Rk
Ed
yy
cr y M
C M
D C
M
N
C
N
(
(
(
(
- - (
(
= =
(
(
| | | | - -
(

(
| |
|
- (

\ .

\ .

Bending
/ 0.646 D C =
Total
/ 0.980 D C =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 1
EN 3-2005 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A beam is subjected to factored load N = 1050 kN. This example was tested
using the Eurocode 3-2005 steel frame design code. The design capacities are
compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING











L = 1.4 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness (beam)
Section shear capacity
Section bending capacity with shear reduction

Material Properties
E = 210x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 80770 MPa



Loading

N = 1050 kN


Design Properties
fy = 275 MPa
Section: 406x178x74 UB
N
Ed

L/2
A
A
Section A-A
L/2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.5 on pp. 53-55 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 1 Class 1 0.00%
Section Shear Resistance,
Vpl,Rd (kN)
689.2 689.2 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance,
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
412.8 412.8 0.00%
Section Shear-Reduced Bending
Resistance, Mv,y,Rd (kN-m)
386.8 386.8 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
fy = 275 MPa
E = 210000 MPa
Section: 406x178x74 UB
A = 9450 mm
2
b = 179.5 mm, tf = 16 mm, h = 412.8 mm, tw = 9.5 mm, r = 10.2 mm
2 412.8 2 16 380.8 mm
w f
h h t = = - =
( ) ( ) 2 412.8 2 16 10.2 360.4 mm
f
d h t r = + = - + =
2 179.5 9.5 2 10.2
74.8 mm
2 2
w
b t r
c
-
= = =
Wpl,y = 501,000 mm
3

Other:
0
1.0
M
=
1.2 q =

Loadings:
0 kN
Ed
N =
1050 kN N = @ mid-span
Results in the following internal forces:
525 kN
Ed
V =
367.5 kN-m
Ed
M =


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 4
Section Compactness:

235 235
0.924
275
y
f
c = = =

Localized Buckling for Flange:
.1
9 9 0.924 8.32
cl
= c = - = for pure compression
74.8
4.68
16
e
f
c
t
= = =
.1
4.68 8.32
e cl
= < =
So Flange is Class 1 in pure compression

Localized Buckling for Web:
.1
72 72 0.924 66.56
cl
= c = - = for pure bending
360.4
37.94
9.5
e
w
d
t
= = =
.1
37.94 66.56
e cl
= < =
So Web is Class 1 in pure bending

Since Flange & Web are Class 1, Section is Class 1.

Section Shear Capacity
2
min
1.2 380.8 9.5 4341mm
v w w
A h t

= = - - = q
( ) 2 ( 2 ) 9450 2 179.5 16 9.5 2 10.2 16
v f w f
A A bt t r t = + + = - - + + - -
2
min
4021.2 mm
v v
A A

= <
So
2
4341 mm
v
A =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 5
,
0
4341 275
689, 245
1.0 3 3
y
v
pl Rd
M
f
A
V N

| | | |
= = =
| |
\ . \ .

,
689.2 kN
pl Rd
V =

Section Bending Capacity
,
, ,
0
1501, 000 275
412, 775, 000 N-mm
1
pl y y
c y Rd
M
W f
M
-
= = =

, ,
412.8 kN-m
c y Rd
M =

With Shear Reduction:
2
2
,
2 2 525
1 1 0.27
689.2
Ed
pl Rd
V
V
| |
- | |
= = =
|
|
|
\ .
\ .

2
380.8 9.5 3617.6 mm
w w w
A h t = = - =
2 2
, , ,
0
275 0.27 3617.6
1, 501, 000
4 1.0 4 9.5
y
w
v y Rd pl y
M w
f
A
M W
t

| | | | -
= =
| |
-
\ . \ .

, ,
386, 829, 246 N-mm
v y Rd
M =
, ,
386.8 kN-m
v y Rd
M =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 1
EN 3-2005 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P = 1400 kN and
major-axis bending moment M = 200 kN-m. This example was tested using the
Eurocode 3-2005 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared
with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING











L = 0.4 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section bending capacity with compression reduction

Material Properties
E = 210x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 80769 MPa



Loading

P = 1400 kN
M = 200 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
P
L
A
A
Section A-A
M
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is also
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%
Section Compression Resistance,
Npl,Rd (kN)
2937.5 2937.5 0.00%
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
Mpl,y,Rd (kN-m)
524.1 524.5 -0.08%
Section Reduced Bending Resistance,
Mn,y,Rd (kN-m)
341.9 342.2
-0.09%


COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX003
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210000 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm
2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 10.2 mm
2 467.2 2 19.6 428 mm
w f
h h t = = - =
( ) ( ) 2 467.2 2 19.6 10.2 407.6 mm
f
d h t r = + = - + =
2 192.8 11.4 2 10.2
80.5 mm
2 2
w
b t r
c
-
= = =
Wpl,y = 2,232,000 mm
3

Other:
0
1.0
M
=

Loadings:
1400 kN P = axial load
Results in the following internal forces:
1400 kN
Ed
N =
M = 200 kN-m

Section Compactness:
235 235
1
235
y
f
c = = =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 4
1
1 1 1
2 2
Ed
w y
N
ht f
o
| |
s = s
|
|
\ .

1 1, 400, 000
1 2.7818 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235
| |
o = = >
|
- - -
\ .

1.0 o =

Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
.1
9 9 1
9
1
cl
c -
= = =
o

80.5
4.11
19.6
e
f
c
t
= = =
.1
4.11 9
e cl
= < =
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:
0.5, so o >
.1
396 396 1
33.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl
c -
= = =
o -
for combined bending & compression
407.6
35.75
11.4
e
w
d
t
= = =
.1
35.75 33.00
e cl
= > =
.2
456 456 1
38.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl
c -
= = =
o -

.2
35.75 38.00
e cl
= < =

So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 5
Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity
,
0
12, 500 235
1
y
pl Rd
M
Af
N
-
= =

,
2937.5 kN
pl Rd
N =

Section Bending Capacity
,
, ,
0
2, 232, 000 235
1
pl y y
pl y Rd
M
W f
M
-
= =

, ,
524.5 kN-m
pl y Rd
M =

Axial Reduction
,
1400kN 0.25 0.25 2937.5 734.4 kN
Ed pl Rd
N N = > = - =
0
428 11.4 235
1400kN 0.5 0.5 573.3 kN
1
w w y
Ed
M
h t f
N
- -
= > = - =

So moment resistance must be reduced.

,
1400
0.48
2937.5
Ed
pl Rd
N
n
N
= = =
2
12, 500 2 192.8 19.6
0.40
12, 500
f
A bt
a
A

- -
= = =
, , , ,
1 1 0.48
524.5
1 0.5 1 0.5 0.4
N y Rd pl y Rd
n
M M
a

= = -
-

, ,
342.2 kN-m
N y Rd
M =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





IS 800-2007 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored load N =1 kN. This example was
tested using the Indian IS 800:2007 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L =3m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (column)
Member compression capacity
Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923 MPa


Loading

N =1 kN

Design Properties
f
y
= 250 MPa
f
u
= 410 MPa
Section: ISMB 350
N
Ed

L
A A
Section A-A
IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 9.2 on pp. 765-766 in Design of Steel Structures by N. Subramanian.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Plastic Plastic 0.00%
Design Axial Strength, N
crd
733.85 734.07 -0.03%
COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: Fe 250
E = 200,000 MPa
f
y
= 250 MPa
Section: ISMB 350
A = 6670 mm
2
b = 140 mm, t
f
= 14.2 mm, d = 350 mm, t
w
= 8.1 mm, r = 1.8 mm
( ) ( ) 2 350 2 14.2 1.8 318mm
f
h d t r = + = + =
r
y
= 28.4 mm, r
z
= 143 mm
Member:
KL
y
= KL
z
= 3,000 mm (unbraced length)
0
1.1
M
=

Loadings:
1kN
Ed
N =

Section Compactness:
250 250
1
250
y
f
= = =
Localized Buckling for Flange:
8.4 8.4 1 8.4
p
= = =

70
4.93
14.2
e
f
b
t
= = =
4.93 8.40
e p
= < =
So Flange is Plastic in compression
IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Localized Buckling for Web:
/ & 42 42
p s
N A = = = for compression
318
39.26
8.1
e
w
d
t
= = =
39.26 42
e s
= < =
So Web is Plastic in compression

Since Flange & Web are Plastic, Section is Plastic.

Member Compression Capacity:

Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
350
2.5 1.2
140
f
h
b
= = >
and
14.2mm 40mm
f
t = <
So we should use the Buckling Curve a for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve b
for the y-y axis (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7).

Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve a, 0.21 = (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
Euler Buckling Stress:
2 2
2 2
200,000
4485MPa
3,000
143
cc
z z
z
E
f
K L
r

= = =
| | | |
|
|
\ .
\ .

250
0.2361
4485
y
z
cc
f
f
= = =
IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.21 0.2361 0.2 0.2361 ( ( = + + = + +


0.532 =
Stress Reduction Factor:
2 2 2 2
1 1
0.9920
0.532 0.532 0.2361
= = =
+ +

,
0
250
0.992 255.5MPa
1.1
y
cd z
M
f
f = = =

Y-Y Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, 0.34 = (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
Euler Buckling Stress:
2 2
2 2
200,000
177MPa
3,000
28.4
cc
z z
z
E
f
K L
r

= = =
| | | |
|
|
\ .
\ .

250
1.189
177
y
y
cc
f
f
= = =
( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.34 1.189 0.2 1.189 ( ( = + + = + +


1.375 =
Stress Reduction Factor:
2 2 2 2
1 1
0.4842
1.375 1.375 1.189
= = =
+ +

,
0
250
0.4842 110.1MPa
1.1
y
cd y
M
f
f = = =

Governs
,
6670 110.1
d cd y
P Af = =
734.07kN
d
P =
IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 5
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





IS 800-2007 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous beam is subjected to factored distributed load w =48.74 kN/m.
This example was tested using the Indian IS 800:2007 steel frame design code.
The design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING























Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923 MPa


Loading

w = 48.74 kN/m

Design Properties
f
y
=250 MPa
Section: ISLB 500
w
L
1
A
A
Section A-A
L
2
L
3

L
1
= 4.9 m L
2
= 6 m L
3
= 4.9 m
IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (beam)
Section shear capacity
Member bending capacity

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 10.8 on pp. 897-901 in Design of Steel Structures by N. Subramanian.
The torsional constant, I
t
, is calculated by the program as a slightly different
value, which accounts for the percent different in section bending resistance.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Plastic Plastic 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance,
M
d(LTB)
(kN-m)
157.70 157.93 0.14%
Section Shear Resistance,
V
d
(kN)
603.59 603.59 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: Fe 250
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76,923 MPa
f
y
= 250 MPa

Section: ISLB 500
(Note: In ETABS, the section is not available with original example properties,
including fillet properties. A similar cross-section with fillet r =0 was used, with
similar results, shown below.)
A = 9550 mm
2
h = 500 mm, b
f
= 180 mm, t
f
= 14.1 mm, t
w
= 9.2 mm
180
90mm
2 2
f
b
b = = =
( ) ( ) 2 500 2 14.1 0 471.8mm
f
d h t r = + = + =
I
z
= 385,790,000 mm
4
, I
y
= 10,639,000.2 mm
4

Z
ez
= 1,543,160 mm
3
, Z
pz
= 1,543,200 mm
3

r
y
= 33.4 mm
Member:
L
left
= 4.9 m
L
center
= 6 m (governs)
L
right
= 4.9 m
KL
y
= KL
z
= 6,000 mm (unbraced length)
0
1.1
M
=


IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Loadings:
0kN
Ed
N =
48.75kN/m =

Section Compactness:
250 250
1
250
y
f
= = =
r
1
= 0 since there is no axial force

Localized Buckling for Flange:
9.4 9.4 1 9.4
p
= = =

90
6.38
14.1
e
f
b
t
= = =
6.38 9.40
e p
= < =
So Flange is Plastic in pure bending

Localized Buckling for Web:
1
84 84 1
84
(1 ) (1 0)
p
r

= = =
+ +

471.8
51.28
9.2
e
w
d
t
= = =
51.28 84.00
e p
= < =
So Web is Plastic in pure bending

Since Flange & Web are Class 1, Section is Plastic.

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Section Shear Capacity:
0
250
500 9.2
3 1.1 3
y
d w
M
f
V ht = =

603.59kN
d
V =

Member Bending Capacity
500 14.1 485.9
f f
h h t = = =
3
3 3 3 3
5 4
2
2 180 14.1 485.9 9.2
4.63 10 mm
3 3 3 3 3
f f
i i i w
t
b t
bt d t
I

= = + = + =

From Roark & Young, 5th Ed., 1975, Table 21, Item 7, pg.302
1 2 1 2
and
f f
t t t b b b = = = = for symmetric sections
( ) ( )
2 3 3
2 3 3
1 2 1 2 11 6
3 3 3 3
1 1 2 2
485.9 14.1 14.1 180 180
8.089 10 mm
12 12 14.2 180 14.2 180
f
w
h t t b b
I
t b t b

= = =
+ +

C
1
= 1.0 (Assumed in example and specified in ETABS)
( ) ( )
2
2
1 2 2
y
w
cr t
EI
EI
M C GI
KL KL
| |

| = +
|
\ .

( ) ( )
2 2 11
2 2
200,000 10,639,000.2 200,000 8.089 10
1.0 76,923 462,508
6,000 6,000
cr
M
| |

| = +
|
\ .

215,936,919.3N-mm
cr
M =
0.21
LT
=
1.0
b
=
1 1,543,200 250
1.337
215,936,919.3
b pz y
LT
cr
Z f
M

= = =
IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 5
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.21 1.337 0.2 1.337
LT LT LT LT
( ( = + + = + +


1.5127
LT
=
2 2
1
1.0 =
+
LT
LT LT LT

2 2
1
0.450 1.0
1.5127 1.5127 1.337
= =
+
LT

0
0.450 250
102.3MPa
1.1
LT y
bd
M
f
f


= = =

3
,
1543.2 10 102.3 157,925,037.7N-mm
d LTB pz bd
M Z f = = =
,
157.93kN-m =
d LTB
M

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 6
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





IS 800-2007 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BIAXIAL BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
In this example a beam-column is subjected factored distributed load N =2500
kN, M
z
=350 kN-m, and M
y
=100 kN-m. The element is moment-resisting in
the z-direction and pinned in the y-direction. This example was tested using the
Indian IS 800:2007 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared
with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L =4 m







Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa


Loading

N = 2500 kN
Mz,top = 350 kN-m
Mz,bot = -350 kN-m
My,top = 100 kN-m
My,bot = 0
Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: W310x310x226

A A
L N
Y-Axis

M
y,bot


M
y,top


Z-Axis

M
z,top


M
z,bot


Section A-A
Y-Y
Z-Z
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section Compactness Check (Beam-Column)
Section Compression Capacity
Section Shear Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Section Bending Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Member Compression Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Member Bending Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Interaction Capacity, D/C, for Major & Minor Axes
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is also
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 13.2 on pp. 1101-1106 in Design of Steel Structures by N.
Subramanian.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Plastic Plastic 0.00%
Plastic Compression Resistance,
N
d
(kN)
6520 6520 0.00%
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
P
dz
(kN)
6511 6511 0.00%
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
P
dy
(kN)
5295 5295 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance,
M
dz
(kN-m)
897.46 897.46 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance,
M
dy
(kN-m)
325.65 325.65 0.00%
Buckling Resistance in Bending,
M
dLTB
(kN-m)
886.84 886.84 0.00%
Section Shear Resistance,
V
dy
(kN)
1009.2 1009.2 0.00%
Section Shear Resistance,
V
dz
(kN)
2961.6 2961.6 0.00%
Interaction Capacity, D/C 1.050 1.050 0.00%
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX003
CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: Fe 410
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76,923.08 MPa
f
y
= 250 MPa
Section: W310x310x226
A = 28,687.7 mm
2
b
f
= 317 mm, t
f
= 35.6 mm, h = 348 mm, t
w
= 22.1 mm, r = 0 mm
317
158.5
2 2
f
b
b mm = = = ,
( ) ( ) 2 348 2 35.6 0 276.8
f
d h t r mm = + = + =
I
z
= 592,124,221 mm
4
, I
y
= 189,255,388.9 mm
4

r
z
= 143.668 mm, r
y
= 81.222 mm
Z
ez
= 3,403,012. 8 mm
3
, Z
ey
= 1,194,040.3 mm
3

Z
pz
= 3,948,812.3 mm
3
, Z
py
= 1,822,502.2 mm
3

I
t
= 10,658,941.4 mm
6
, I
w
= 4.611 10
12
mm
6


Member:
L
y
= L
z
= 4,000 mm (unbraced length)
0
1.1
M
=

Loadings:
2500 P kN =
25
z
V kN =
175
y
V kN =
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





1
350
z
M kN m

=
2
350
z
M kN m

=
1
100
y
M kN m

=
2
0
y
M kN m

=

Section Compactness:
250
1
250 250
y
f
= = =
1
2,500,000
2.01676
2.5
246.8 22.1
1.1
y
w
mo
P
r
f
dt

= = =


Localized Buckling for Flange:
9.4 9.4 1 9.4
p
= = =

158.5
4.45
35.6
e
f
b
t
= = =
4.45 9.40
e p
= < =
So Flange is Plastic in pure bending

Localized Buckling for Web:
1
84 84 1
27.84
(1 ) (1 2.01676)
p
r

= = =
+ +


246.8
11.20
22.1
e
w
d
t
= = =
11.20 27.84
e p
= < =
So Web is Plastic in bending & compression

Section is Plastic.
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 5
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





Section Compression Capacity:
0
28687.7 250
1.1
g y
d
M
A f
N

= =
6520
d
N kN =

Section Shear Capacity:
For major z-z axis
2
348 22.1 7690.8
vz w
A ht mm = = =
0
250
7690.8
3 1.1 3
y
Pz vz
M
f
V A

= =
1009.2
Pz
V kN =

For minor y-y axis
2
2 2 317 35.6 22,570.4
vy f f
A b t mm = = =
0
250
22570.4
3 1.1 3
y
Py vy
M
f
V A

= =
2961.6
Py
V kN =

Section Bending Capacity:
For major z-z axis
0 0
1.2
1 3,948,812.3 250 1.2 3,403,012.8 250
1.1 1.1
b pz y ez y
dz
M M
Z f Z f
M



= = =
897.46 933.54
dz
M kN m kN m =
897.46
dz
M kN m =
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 6
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0






For minor y-y axis
0 0
1.2
1 1,822,502.2 250 1.2 1,194,040.3 250
1.1 1.1
b py y ey y
dy
M M
Z f Z f
M



= = =
414.21 325.65
dy
M kN m kN m =
325.65
dy
M kN m =

With Shear Reduction:
For major z-z axis
25 0.6 0.6 1009.2 605.5
z Pz
V kN V kN = < = = No shear reduction is needed.

For minor y-y axis
175 0.6 0.6 2961.6 1777
y Py
V kN V kN = < = = No shear reduction is needed.

With Compression Reduction:
2500
0.383
6520
d
P
n
N
= = =

For major z-z axis
( ) ( ) 1.11 1 1.11 897.46 1 0.383
ndz dz dz
M M n M = =
614.2 897.46
ndz
M kN m kN m = <

For minor y-y axis, since 0.2 n >
( )( ) ( )( ) 1.56 1 0.6 1.56 325.65 1 0.383 0.383 0.6
ndy dy
M M n n = + = +
308.0
ndy
M kN m =
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 7
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





Member Compression Capacity:
Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
348
1.1 1.2
317
f
h
b
= = <
and
35.6 40
f
t mm mm = <
So we should use the Buckling Curve b for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve c for the
y-y axis (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7).
Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, 0.34 = (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
0.65
z
K =
2600
0.65 4000 2600 , 18.097
143.668
z z
z z
z
K L
K L mm
r
= = = =
Euler Buckling Stress:
( )
2 2
, 2 2
200,000
6027
18.097
cr z
z z
z
E
f MPa
K L
r

= = =
| |
|
\ .

,
250
0.2037
6022
y
z
cr z
f
f
= = =
( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.34 0.2037 0.2 0.2037
z z z z
( ( = + + = + +


0.5214
z
=
Stress Reduction Factor:
2 2 2 2
1 1
0.9987
0.5214 0.5214 0.2037
z
z z z

= = =
+ +

,
0
250
0.9987 226.978
1.1
y
cd z
M
f
f MPa

= = =
,
226.978 28,687.7
dz cd z g
P f A = =
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 8
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





6511
dz
P kN =

Y-Y Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve c, 0.49 = (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
1.00
y
K =
4000
1 4000 4000 , 49.25
81.222
y y
y y
y
K L
K L mm
r
= = = =
Euler Buckling Stress:
( )
2 2
, 2 2
200,000
813.88
49.25
cr y
y y
y
E
f MPa
K L
r

= = =
| |
|
|
\ .

,
250
0.5542
813.88
y
y
cr y
f
f
= = =
( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.49 0.5542 0.2 0.5542
y y y y

( ( = + + = + +


0.7404
y
=
Stress Reduction Factor:
2 2 2 2
1 1
0.8122
0.7404 0.7404 0.5542
y
y y y

= = =
+ +

,
0
250
0.8122 184.584
1.1
y
cd y
M
f
f MPa

= = =
,
184.584 28,687.7
dy cd y g
P f A = =
5295
dy
P kN =



IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 9
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





Member Bending Capacity:
C
1
= 2.7 (Program Calculation from AISC equation, where C
1
< 2.7 )
( ) ( )
2
2
1 2 2
y
w
cr t
EI
EI
M C GI
KL KL

| |
| = +
|
\ .
( ) ( )
2 2 12
2 2
200,000 189,300,000 200,000 4.611 10
2.7 76,923.08 10,658,941.4
4,000 4,000
cr
M

| |

| = +
|
\ .

15,374,789,309
cr
M N mm =

0.21
LT
=
1.0
b
=
1 3,948,812.3 250
0.2534
15,374,789,309
b pz y
LT
cr
Z f
M

= = =
( ) ( )
2 2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.21 0.2534 0.2 0.2534
LT LT LT LT
( ( = + + = + +

0.5377
LT
=
2 2
1
1.0
LT
LT LT LT

=
+ +

2 2
1
0.9882 1.0
0.5377 0.5377 0.2534
LT
= =
+ +

0
0.9882 250
224.58
1.1
LT y
bd
M
f
f MPa

= = =
3,948,812.3 224.58 886,839,489
dLTB pz bd
M Z f N mm = = =
886.84
dLTB
M kN m =




IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 10
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending
Member Bending & Compression Capacity with Buckling
Z-Z Axis
2500
0.3839
6511
z
dz
P
n
P
= = =
( ) ( ) ( ) 1 0.2 1 0.2037 0.2 0.3839 1 0.8 1 0.8 0.3839
z z z z
K n n = + = + + = +
1.0014 1.3072
z
K = so 1.0014
z
K =
2
1
350
1
350
z
M
M

= = =
0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4 1 0.2 0.4 0.4
mz mz
C so C = + = + = > =

Y-Y Axis
2500
0.4721
5295
y
dy
P
n
P
= = =

( ) ( ) ( ) 1 0.2 1 0.554 0.2 0.4721 1 0.8 1 0.8 0.4721
y y y y
K n n = + = + + = +
1.167 1.378
y
K = so 1.167
y
K =
2
1
0
0
100
y
M
M
= = =
0.6 0.4 0.6 0.4 0 0.6 0.4 0.6
my my
C so C = + = + = > =

Lateral-Torsional Buckling
0.4
mLT
C =
0.1 0.1
1 1
0.25 0.25
LT y y
LT
mLT mLT
n n
K
C C

=


IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 11
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.: 0





0.1 0.2534 0.4721 0.1 0.4721
1 0.920 1 0.831
0.4 0.25 0.4 0.25
LT
K

= = =


0.920
LT
K =

Formula IS 9.3.2.2 (a)

2500 1.167 0.6 100 0.920 350
5295 325.65 886.84
y my y
LT z
dy dy dLTB
K C M
K M D P
C P M M

= + + = + +
0.472 0.215 0.363
D
C
= + +
1.050
D
C
= (Governs)

Formula IS 9.3.2.2 (b)

0.6
2500 0.6 1.167 0.6 100 1.0014 0.4 350
6511 325.65 886.84
y my y
z mz z
dz dy dLTB
K C M
K C M D P
C P M M

= + + = + +
0.384 0.129 0.158
D
C
= + +
0.671
D
C
=
IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 12
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


NTC 2008 Example 001 - 1
NTC 2008 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In this example a continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P =
1400 kN and major-axis bending moment M = 200 kN-m. The beam is
continuously braced to avoid any buckling effects. This example was tested using
the Italian NTC-2008 steel frame design code. The design capacities are
compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING










L = 0.4 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section shear capacity
Section bending capacity with compression & shear reductions
Interaction capacity, D/C

Material Properties
E = 210x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 80769 MPa



Loading

P = 1400 kN
M = 200 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
P
L
A
A
Section A-A
M
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


NTC 2008 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NTC-2008.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%
Section Compression Resistance,
Nc,Rd (kN)
2797.6 2797.6 0.00%
Section Shear Resistance,
Vc,Rd,y (kN)
719.2 719.2 0.00%
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
499.1 499.1 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance Axially
Reduced,
MN,y,Rd (kN-m)
310.8 310.8 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance Shear
Reduced,
MV,y,Rd (kN-m)
481.3 481.3 0.00%
Interaction Capacity, D/C 0.644 0.644 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


NTC 2008 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210000 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm
2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 10.2 mm
2 467.2 2 19.6 428 mm
w f
h h t = = - =
( ) ( ) 2 467.2 2 19.6 10.2 407.6 mm
f
d h t r = + = - + =
2 192.8 11.4 2 10.2
80.5 mm
2 2
w
b t r
c
-
= = =
Wpl,y = 2,230,000 mm
3

Other:
0
1.05
M
=

Loadings:
1400 kN P = axial load
200 kN-m
y
M = bending load at one end
Results in the following internal forces:
1400 kN
Ed
N =
500 kN
Ed
V =
,
200 kN-m
y Ed
M =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


NTC 2008 Example 001 - 4
Section Compactness:
235 235
1
235
y
f
c = = =
1
1 1 1
2 2
Ed
w y
N
ht f
| |
s o = s
|
|
\ .

1 1, 400, 000
1 2.7818 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235
| |
o = = >
|
- - -
\ .

1.0 o =

Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
.1
9 9 1
9
1
cl
c -
= = =
o

80.5
4.11
19.6
e
f
c
t
= = =
.1
4.11 9
e cl
= < =
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression

Localized Buckling for Web:
0.5, so o >
.1
396 396 1
33.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl
c -
= = =
o -
for combined bending & compression
407.6
35.75
11.4
e
w
d
t
= = =
.1
35.75 33.00
e cl
= > =
.2
456 456 1
38.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl
c -
= = =
o -

.2
35.75 38.00
e cl
= < =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


NTC 2008 Example 001 - 5
So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity
, ,
0
12, 500 235
1.05
y
c Rd pl Rd
M
Af
N N
-
= = =

,
2797.6 kN
c Rd
N =

Section Shear Capacity
( ) ( )
,
2 2 12, 500 2 192.8 19.6 19.6 11.4 2 10.2
V y f f w
A A bt t t r = + + = - - + + -
2
,
5, 565.5 mm
V y
A =
, ,
0
235
5, 565.5
3 1.05 3
y
c Rd y vy
M
f
V A = = -

, ,
719.2 kN
c Rd y
V =
1.0 q =
467.1 72 235 72 235
37.5 72
11.4 1.0 235
w y
h
t f
= = < = =
q

So no shear buckling needs to be checked.

Section Bending Capacity
,
, , , ,
0
2, 230, 000 235
1.05
pl y y
c y Rd pl y Rd
M
W f
M M
-
= = =

, ,
499.1kN-m
c y Rd
M =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


NTC 2008 Example 001 - 6
with Shear Reduction
,
500 kN 0.5 359.6 kN
Ed c Rd
V V = > - = Shear Reduction is needed
2
467.2 11.4 4, 879.2 mm
v w
A ht = = - =
2
2
,
2 2 500
1 1 0.1525
719.2
Ed
c Rd
V
V
| |
- | |
= = =
|
|
|
\ .
\ .

2 2
,
, , , ,
0
0.1525 4879.2
2, 230, 000 235
4 4 11.4
1.05
v
pl y yk
w
y V Rd y c Rd
M
A
W f
t
M M
( ( -
-
( (
-

= = s

, ,
481.3 kN-m
V r Rd
M =

with Compression Reduction
,
1400
0.50
2797.6
Ed
pl Rd
N
n
N
= = =
2
12, 500 2 192.8 19.6
0.40 0.5
12, 500
f
A bt
a
A

- -
= = = s
, , , ,
1 1 0.5
499.1
1 0.5 1 0.5 0.4
N y Rd pl y Rd
n
M M
a

= = -
-

, ,
310.8 kN-m
N y Rd
M =


Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending
Section Bending & Compression Capacity
Formula NTC 4.2.39
2 5
2
, , ,
, , , , , ,
200
0 0.414 0.644
310.8
n
y Ed y Ed z Ed
N y Rd N z Rd N y Rd
M M M
D
C M M M
( (
(
= + = + = s =
( (
(
( (


0.644
D
C
= (Governs)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





NTC 2008 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In this example a continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P =
1400 kN, major-axis bending moment M
y
=200 kN-m, and a minor axis bending
moment of M
z
=100 kN-m. This example was tested using the Italian NTC-2008
steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent
hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

















L =0.4 m







Material Properties
E = 210x10
3
MPa
v = 0.3
G = 80769 MPa


Loading

P =1400 kN
M
z,top
=100 kN-m
M
z,bot
=-100 kN-m
M
y,top
=200 kN-m
M
y,bot
=0

Design Properties
f
y
=235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A A
L P
Y-Axis

M
y,bot


M
y,top


Z-Axis

M
z,top


M
z,bot


Section A-A
Y-Y
Z-Z
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section shear capacity for major & minor axes
Section bending capacity for major & minor axes
Member compression capacity for major & minor axes
Member bending capacity
Interaction capacity, D/C, for major & minor axes
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NTC-2008.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.





















NTC 2008 Example 002 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Class 2 Class 2 0.00%
Section Compression Resistance,
N
c,Rd
(kN)
2,797.6 2,797.6 0.00%
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
N
byy,Rd
(kN)
2,797.6 2,797.6 0.00%
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
N
bzz,Rd
(kN)
2,797.6 2,797.6 0.00%
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
M
c,y,Rd
(kN-m)
499.1 499.1 0.00%
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
M
c,z,Rd
(kN-m)
84.8 84.8 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance Shear Reduced,
M
V,y,Rd
(kN-m)
470.1 470.1 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance Axially Reduced,
M
N,y,Rd
(kN-m)
310.8 310.8 0.00%
Section Bending Resistance Axially Reduced,
M
N,z,Rd
(kN-m)
82.26 82.26 0.00%
Member Bending Resistance,
M
b,Rd
(kN-m)
499.095 499.095 0.00%
Section Shear Resistance,
V
c,y,Rd
(kN)
667.5 667.5 0.00%
Section Shear Resistance,
V
c,z,Rd
(kN)
984.7 984.7 0.00%
Interaction Capacity, D/C 2.044 2.044 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210,000 MPa
G = 80,769 MPa
f
y
= 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm
2
b = 192.8 mm, t
f
= 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, t
w
= 11.4 mm, r = 0 mm
2 467.2 2 19.6 428mm
w f
h h t = = =
( ) ( ) 2 467.2 2 19.6 0 428mm
f
d h t r = + = + =
2 192.8 11.4 2 0
90.7mm
2 2
w
b t r
c

= = =
W
pl,y
= 2,230,000 mm
3

W
pl,z
= 379,000 mm
3

r
yy
= 191.3 mm
r
zz
= 43.3331 mm
I
zz
= 23,469,998 mm
4

12 6
1.176 10 mm
w
I =
I
T
= 1,210,000 mm
4

Member:
L = L
b
= L
unbraced
= 400 mm
K
yy
= 1.0, K
zz
= 1.0
Other:
0
1.05
M
=
1
1.05
M
=
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Loadings:
1400kN P = axial load
1
100kN-m
z
M

=
2
100kN-m
z
M

=
1
200kN-m
y
M

=
2
0kN-m
y
M

=
Results in the following internal forces:
1400kN
Ed
N =
,
200kN-m
y Ed
M =
,
100kN-m
z Ed
M =
,
500kN-m
y Ed
V =
,
0kN-m
z Ed
V =

Section Compactness:
235 235
1
235
y
f
= = =
1
1 1 1
2 2
Ed
w y
N
ht f
| |
=
|
|
\ .

1 1,400,000
1 2.7818 1,
2 2 467.2 11.4 235
so
| |
= = >
|

\ .

1.0 =

Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
.1
9 9 1
9
1
cl

= = =

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 5
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





90.7
4.63
19.6
e
f
c
t
= = =
.1
4.63 9
e cl
= < =
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression
Localized Buckling for Web:
0.5, so >
.1
396 396 1
33.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl

= = =

for combined bending & compression
428
37.54
11.4
e
w
d
t
= = =
.1
37.54 33.00
e cl
= > =
.2
456 456 1
38.00
13 1 13 1 1
cl

= = =


.2
37.54 38.00
e cl
= < =
So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.
Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity
, ,
0
12,500 235
1.05
y
c Rd pl Rd
M
Af
N N

= = =

,
2,797.6kN
c Rd
N =

Section Shear Capacity
For major y-y axis
( ) ( )
,
2 2 12,500 2 192.8 19.6 19.6 11.4 2 0
V y f f w
A A bt t t r = + + = + +
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 6
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





2
,
5,165.7mm
V y
A =
, ,
0
235
5,165.7
3 1.05 3
y
c y Rd vy
M
f
V A = =

, ,
667.5kN
c y Rd
V =

For minor z-z axis
2
,
12,500 428 11.4 7,620.8mm
V z w w
A A h t = = =
, ,
0
235
7,620.8
3 1.05 3
y
c z Rd vy
M
f
V A = =

, ,
984.7kN
c z Rd
V =
1.0 =
428 72 235 72 235
37.5 72
11.4 1.0 235
w
w y
h
t f
= = < = =

So no shear buckling needs to be checked.

Section Bending Capacity
For major y-y axis
,
, , , ,
0
2,230,000 235
1.05
pl y y
c y Rd pl y Rd
M
W f
M M

= = =

, ,
499.1kN-m
c y Rd
M =

For minor z-z axis
,
, , , ,
0
379,000 235
1.05
pl z y
c z Rd pl z Rd
M
W f
M M

= = =

, ,
84.8kN-m
c z Rd
M =
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 7
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0






With Shear Reduction
For major y-y axis
, , ,
500kN 0.5 333.7kN
y Ed c y Rd
V V = > = Shear Reduction is needed
2
467.2 11.4 4,879.2mm
v w
A ht = = =
2
2
,
2 2 500
1 1 0.2482
667.5
Ed
c Rd
V
V
| |
| |
= = =
|
|
|
\ .
\ .

2 2
,
, , , ,
0
0.1525 4879.2
2,230,000 235
4 4 11.4
1.05
v
pl y yk
w
y V Rd y c Rd
M
A
W f
t
M M
( (

( (

= =

, ,
470.1kN-m
V r Rd
M =


For minor z-z axis
, , ,
0kN 0.5
z Ed c z Rd
V V = < No shear Reduction is needed

With Compression Reduction
,
1400
0.50
2797.6
Ed
pl Rd
N
n
N
= = =
2
12,500 2 192.8 19.6
0.40 0.5
12,500
f
A bt
a
A

= = =

For major y-y axis
, , , ,
1 1 0.5
499.1
1 0.5 1 0.5 0.4
N y Rd pl y Rd
n
M M
a

= =


, ,
310.8kN-m
N y Rd
M =

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 8
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





For minor z-z axis
n a <
2 2
, , , ,
0.5 0.4
1 84.8 1
1 1 0.4
N z Rd pl z Rd
n a
M M
a
( (
| | | |
= =
( (
| |

\ . \ .
( (


, ,
82.26kN-m
N z Rd
M =


Member Compression Capacity:
Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
Steel is S235
467.2
2.4 1.2
192.8
f
h
b
= = >
and
19.6mm 40mm
f
t = <
So we should use the Buckling Curve a for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve b
for they-y axis (NTC 2008, Table 4.2.VI).

Y-Y Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve a, 0.21 = (NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VI)
1.00
y
K =
,
,
400
1 400 400mm, 2.091
191.3
cr y
cr y y y
y
L
L K L
r
= = = = =
( )
2 2
, 2 2
210,000
5,925,691kN
12,500 2.091
cr y
y y
y
E
N
K L
A
r

= = =
| |
|
|
\ .

,
12,500 235
0.022
5,925,691
y
y
cr y
Af
N

= = =
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 9
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





( )
( )
2
2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.21 0.022 0.2 0.022 y y
y y
(
( = + + = + +

(


0.482
y
=
Stress Reduction Factor:
2 2 2
2
1 1
1.0388
0.482 0.482 0.022
y
y
y y
= = =
+
+

1.0388 1.0, 1.0
y y
so = > =
,
1
1.0 12,500 235
1.05
y y
byy Rd
M
Af
N


= =

,
2,797.6kN
byy Rd
N =
Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, 0.34 = (NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VI)
1.00
z
K =
,
,
400
1 400 400mm, 9.231
43.33
cr z
cr z z z
z
L
L K L
r
= = = = =
( )
2 2
, 2 2
210,000
304,052kN
12,500 9.231
cr z
z z
z
E
N
K L
A
r

= = =
| |
|
\ .

,
12,500 235
0.098
304,052
y
z
cr z
Af
N

= = =
( )
( )
2
2
0.5 1 0.2 0.5 1 0.34 0.098 0.2 0.098 z z
z z
(
( = + + = + +

(


0.488
z
=
Stress Reduction Factor:
2 2 2
2
1 1
1.0362
0.488 0.488 0.098
z
z
z z
= = =
+
+

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 10
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





1.0362 1.0, 1.0
z z
so = > =
,
1
1.0 12,500 235
1.05
z y
bzz Rd
M
Af
N


= =

,
2,797.6kN
bzz Rd
N =

Member Bending Capacity:
467.2
2.4 2
192.8
f
h
b
= = >
So we should use the Buckling Curve c for lateral-torsional buckling (NTC
2008, Table 4.2.VII).
0.49
LT
=
,0 0.4 LT = (default for rolled section)
0.75 = (default for rolled section)

2 1
0, 200kN-m
B y A y
M M M M

= = = =
2
2
0 0
1.75 1.05 0.3 1.75 1.05 0.3 1.75
200 200
B B
A A
M M
M M
| |
| |
= + = + =
| |
\ .
\ .


Corrective Factor is determined from NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VIII
1 1
1.329
1.33 0.33 1.33 0.33 1.75
c
k = = =



( )
( )
2
2
,
2 2
,
cr z T
w z
cr
z z
cr z
L GI
I EI
M
I EI
L
| |

|
= +
|
\ .

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 11
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





2 12 2
2 2
210,000 23,469,998 1.176 10 400 80,769 1,210,000
1.75
400 23,469,998 210,000 23,469,998
cr
M
| |
= +
|

\ .

119,477,445,900N-mm
cr
M =

,
2,230,000 235
0.066
119,477,445,900
pl y y
LT
cr
W f
M

= = =
( )
( )
2
2
,0 0.5 1 0.5 1 0.49 0.066 0.4 0.75 0.066 LT LT LT
LT LT
(
( = + + = + +

(

0.420
LT
=

( )
( )
( ) ( )
2
2
1 0.5 1 1 2 0.8 1 0.5 1 1.329 1 2 0.066 0.8 0.987 LT
c
f k
(
(
= = =
(


2
2 2
1 1 1 1
1.0
LT
LT
LT LT LT
or
f f
| |
=
|
+ + \ .

2
2 2
1 1 1 1
1.0
0.987 0.066 0.987
0.420 0.420 0.75 0.066
LT
or
| | | |
=
| |
\ . \ .
+ +

( ) 1.2118 1.0 230.9
LT
or =
so
1.0
LT
=

, ,
1
235
1.0 2,230,000
1.05
y
b Rd LT pl y
M
f
M W = =

,
499.095kN-m
b Rd
M =

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending
Section Bending & Compression Capacity
NTC 2008 Example 002 - 12
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Formula NTC 4.2.39
2 5
2 5 0.5
, ,
, , , ,
200 100
0.414 1.630
310.8 82.3
n
y Ed z Ed
N y Rd N z Rd
M M
D
C M M

( (
( (
= + = + = +
( (
( (
( (


2.044
D
C
= (Governs)

Member Bending & Compression Capacity: Method B
k factors used are taken from the software, and determined from Method 2 in
Annex B of Eurocode 3.
0.547
yy
k =
0.479
yz
k =
0.698
zy
k =
0.798
zz
k =

Formula NTC 4.2.37
, ,
, ,
1 1 1
y Ed z Ed
Ed
yy yz
y yk pl y yk pl z yk
LT
M M M
M M
N D
k k
Af W f W f
C
= + +

= + +

1,400 200 100

0.547 0.479
1 12,500 235 2,230,000 235 379,000 235
1
1.05 1.05 1.05
D
C

0.5 0.22 0.56
D
C
= + +
1.284
D
C
=

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 13
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0





Formula NTC 4.2.38
, ,
, ,
1 1 1
y Ed z Ed
Ed
zy zz
z yk pl y yk pl z yk
LT
M M M
M M
N D
k k
Af W f W f
C
= + +

1,400 200 100
0.698 0.798
1 12,500 235 2,230,000 235 379,000 235
1
1.05 1.05 1.05
D
C
= + +

0.5 0.28 0.941
D
C
= + +
1.721
D
C
=

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 14
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 1
NZS 3404-1997 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 200 kN. This example
was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L = 6 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (compression)
Section compression capacity
Member compression capacity
Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa



Loading

N = 200 kN

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
N
L
A A
Section A-A
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0.00%
Section Axial Capacity, Ns (kN) 6275 6275 0.00%
Member Axial Capacity, Nc (kN) 4385 4385 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX001
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm
2

bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
r33 = 139.15 mm, r22 = 89.264 mm
Member:
le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame

Loadings:
* 200 kN N =

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
( )
350 20 250
5.89
2 250 2 28 250
f w y
e
f
b t f
t

= = =
- -

Flange is under uniform compression, so:
9, 16, 90
ep ey ew
= = =
5.89 9
e ep
= < = , No localized flange buckling
Flange is compact



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 4
Localized Buckling for Web:
331 250
16.55
250 20 250
y
e
w
f
h
t
= = =
Web is under uniform compression, so:
30, 45, 180
ep ey ew
= = =
16.55 30
e ep
= < = , No localized web buckling
Web is compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Compression Capacity:
Section is not Slender, so Kf = 1.0
3
1 25,100 250 / 10
s f n y
N K A f = = - -
6275kN
s
N =

Member Weak-Axis Compression Capacity:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so
22 33
1
e e
k k = =
22 33
22 33
6000 6000
67.216 and 43.119
89.264 139.15
e e
l l
r r
= = = =
Buckling will occur on the 22-axis.

( )
22
22
22
1 250
6000
67.216
250 89.264 250
f y
e
n
K f
l
r
-
= = - =
22
22 2
22 22
2100( 13.5)
20.363
15.3 2050
n
a
n n

o = =
+

22
0.5
b
o = since cross-section is not a UB or UC section
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 5
22 22 22 22
67.216 20.363 0.5 77.398
n a b
= + o o = + - =

22 22
0.00326( 13.5) 0.2083 0 q = = >
2 2
22
22
22 2 2
22
77.398
1 1 0.2083
90 90
1.317
77.398
2 2
90 90
| | | |
+ + q + +
| |
\ . \ .
= = =
| | | |
| |
\ . \ .



2
22 22
22 22
90
1 1
c
| |
| |
| |
|
| o =
|
|
|
| \ .
\ .
\ .

2
22
90
1.317 1 1 0.6988
1.317 77.398
c
| |
| |
| |
|
o = = |
|
|
| -
\ .
\ .
\ .


22 22 c c s s
N N N = o s
22
0.6988 6275 4385 kN
c
N = - =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
1



NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 1
NZS 3404-1997 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object bending strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored moment Mx = 1000 kN-m. This
example was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame design code. The
design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L = 6 m






TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Member bending capacity
Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa



Loading

Mx = 1000 kN-m


Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Mx
L
A A
Section A-A
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
1



NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness Compact Compact 0%
Section Bending Capacity,
Ms,major (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0%
Member Bending Capacity,
Mb (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
1



NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
I22 = 200,000,000 mm
4

Z33 = 2,936,555.891 mm
2

S33 = 3,350,000 mm
2
J = 5,750,000 mm
4

Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm
6

Member:
le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame

Loadings:
* 1000 kN-m
m
M =
This leads to:
2
* 250 kN-m M =
3
* 500 kN-m M =
4
* 750 kN-m M =

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
( )
350 20 250
5.89
2 250 2 28 250
f w y
e
f
b t f
t

= = =
- -

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
1



NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 4
Flange is under uniform compression, so:
9, 16, 90
ep ey ew
= = =
5.89 9
e ep
= < = , No localized flange buckling
Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:
331 250
16.55
250 20 250
y
e
w
f
h
t
= = =
Web is under bending, so:
82, 115, 180
ep ey ew
= = =
16.55 30
e ep
= < = , No localized web buckling
Web is compact.

Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:
min( ,1.5 )
e c
Z Z S Z = = for compact sections
2
33 33
3, 350, 000 mm
e c
Z Z = =
2
33 , 33
250 3, 350, 000 / 1000
s s major y e
M M f Z = = = -
33 , major
837.5 kN-m
s s
M M = =

Member Bending Capacity:
kt = 1 (Program default)
kl = 1.4 (Program default)
kr = 1 (Program default)
lLTB = le22 = 6000 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
1



NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 5

2
1 1.4 1 6000 8400 mm
e t l r LTB
l k k k l = = - - - =
2 2
22
2 2
w
oa o
e e
EI EI
M M GJ
l l
| |
| | | | t t
= = +
|
| |
|
\ . \ . \ .

2 5 8 2 5 12
2 2
2 10 2 10 2 10 4.59 10
76, 923.08 5, 750, 000
8, 400 8, 400
oa o
M M
| | | | | | t - - - - t - - - -
= = - +
| | |
|
\ . \ . \ .

1786.938 kN-m
oa o
M M = =

2
2
837.5 837.5
0.6 3 0.6 3
1786.938 1786.938
s s
s
oa oa
M M
M M
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
|
| o = + = + |
| |
| |
| |
\ .
| \ .
\ .
\ .
\ .
\ .
0.7954
s
o =
( ) ( ) ( )
2 2 2
2 3 4
1.7
2.5
* * *
m
m
M
M M M
o = s
+ +
*

( ) ( ) ( )
2 2 2
1.7 1000
1.817 2.5
250 500 750
m
-
o = = s
+ +


0.7954 1.817 837.5
b m s s
M M = o o = - -
s
M s
1210.64 kN-m 837.5 kN-m = s
b
M


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 1
NZS 3404-1997 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object interacting axial and bending strengths are tested in this
example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N= 200 kN;
Mx= 1000 kN-m. This example was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame
design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand
calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING














L = 6 m





Material Properties
E = 200x10
3
MPa

v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa



Loading

N = 200 kN
Mx = 1000 kN-m


Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
N
Mx
L
A A
Section A-A
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Section bending capacity with compression reduction
Member in-plane bending capacity with compression reduction
Member out-of-plane bending capacity with compression reduction
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Compactness` Compact Compact 0.00%
Reduced Section Bending Capacity,
Mrx (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%
Reduced In-Plane Member Bending
Capacity,
Mix (kN-m)
823.1 823.1 0.00%
Reduced Out-of-Plane Member
Bending Capacity, Mo (kN-m)
837.5 837.5 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX003
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm
2

I22 = 200,000,000 mm
4

I33 = 486,000,000 mm
4

J = 5,750,000 mm
4

Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm
6


Member:
lz=le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
| =0.9

Loadings:
* 200 kN N =
* 1000 kN-m
m
M =

Section Compactness:
From example SFD IN-01-1, section is Compact in Compression
From example SFD IN-01-2, section is Compact in Bending

Section Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, 6275kN
s
N =


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 4
Member Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1,
22
4385 kN
c
N =

Section Bending Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-2,
33 , major
837.5 kN-m
s s
M M = =

Section Interaction: Bending & Compression Capacity:
33 33 33
* 200
1.18 1 1.18 837.5 1 837.5
0.9 6275
r s s
s
N
M M M
N
| |
| |
= = - s =
| |
| -
\ .
\ .

33
953.252 837.5
r
M = s
33
837.5kN-m
r
M =

Member Strong-Axis Compression Capacity:
Strong-axis buckling strength needs to be calculated:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so
33
1
e
k =
33
33
6000
43.119
139.15
e
l
r
= =

( )
33
33
33
1 250
6000
43.119
250 139.15 250
f y
e
n
K f
l
r
-
= = - =
33
33 2
33 33
2100( 13.5)
19.141
15.3 2050
n
a
n n

o = =
+

33
0.5
b
o = since cross-section is not a UB or UC section
33 33 33 33
43.119 19.141 0.5 52.690
n a b
= + o o = + - =

33 33
0.00326( 13.5) 0.1278 0 q = = >
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 5
2 2
33
33
33 2 2
33
52.690
1 1 0.1278
90 90
2.145
52.690
2 2
90 90
| | | |
+ + q + +
| |
\ . \ .
= = =
| | | |
| |
\ . \ .


2
33 33
33 33
90
1 1
c
| |
| |
| |
|
| o =
|
|
|
| \ .
\ .
\ .

2
33
90
2.145 1 1 0.8474
2.145 50.690
c
| |
| |
| |
|
o = = |
|
|
| -
\ .
\ .
\ .


33 33 c c s s
N N N = o s
33
0.8474 6275
c
N = -
33
5318 kN
c
N =

Member Interaction: In-Plane Bending & Compression Capacity:
min
max
0
0
1000
m
M
M
| = = =
Since the section is compact,
3 3
33
33 33
1 1 * *
1 1 1.18 1
2 2
m m
i s
c c
N N
M M
N N
| |
| |
| | + | + | | | | |
| = + |
| | |
|
|
| |
\ . \ .
\ .
\ .
\ .

3 3
1 0 200 1 0 200
837.5 1 1 1.18 1
2 0.9 5318 2 0.9 5318
i
M
| | | |
+ + | | | | | |
| = + |
| | |
| |
- -
\ . \ . \ .
\ .
\ .

823.11 kN-m
i
M =


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 6
Member Interaction: Out-of-Plane Bending & Compression Capacity:
3
22
1
1 1 *
0.4 0.23
2 2
bc
m m
c
N
N
o =
| |
| | | | | |
+ |
| |
|
|
\ .
\ .
\ .

3
1
1 0 1 0 200
0.4 0.23
2 2 0.9 4385
bc
o =
| |
| | | |
+
|
| |
|
-
\ . \ .
\ .

4.120
bc
o =

( )
2
2 6 12
2
2
6
8
33 22
2 10 4.59 10
6000
76923.08 5.75 10
4.86 2 10
25100
w
z
oz
g
EI
l
N GJ
I I
A
t
t - - - -
= + = - - +
+
+ -


11
4.423 10 kN
oz
N = -


33 b o m s sx
M M = o o w/ an assumed uniform moment such that
m
o =1.0
33
1.0 0.7954 837.5 666.145 kN-m
b o
M = - - =


33 33 33
22
* *
1 1
o bc b o r
c oz
N N
M M M
N N
| | | |
= o s
| |
| |
\ . \ .

33 11
200 200
4.12 666.145 1 1 2674 837.5
0.9 4385 0.9 4.423 10
o
M
| | | |
= - = s
| |
- - -
\ . \ .

33
837.5 kN-m
o
M =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 1
ACI 318-08 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.
This example is tested using the ACI 318-08 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L
10' = 120"
Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 13.5 in
b = 10.0 in
I = 3,413 in
4
13.5"
10"
2.5"
Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in
2
fy = 60 k/in
2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-08 Building Code.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mu (k-in) 1460.4 1460.4 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (in
2
) 2.37

2.37 0.00%
Design Shear Force, Vu 37.73 37.73 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Av/s (in
2
/in) 0.041 0.041 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
As,min = d b
f
w
y
200
= 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
= d b
f
f
w
y
c
'
3
= 0.427 sq-in
1
4000
0.85 0.05 0.85
1000
c
f
|
' | |
= =
|
\ .

max
0.003
0.003 0.005
c d = =
+
5.0625 in
max 1 max
a c | = = 4.303 in
Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft
8
2
l w
M
u
u
= = 9.73610
2
/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
The depth of the compression block is given by:
b f
M
d d a
c
u

'
2
85 . 0
2
= = 4.183 in (a < amax)
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As =
|
.
|

\
|

2
a
d f
M
y
u

=
( ) 2 / 183 . 4 5 . 13 60 9 . 0
4 . 1460
- -

As = 2.37 sq-in
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:
= 0.75
Check the limit of
c
f ' :

c
f ' = 63.246 psi < 100 psi
The concrete shear capacity is given by:
Vc = 2
c
f ' bd = 12.807 k
The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:
Vs = 8
c
f ' bd = 51.229 k
The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:
( Vc/2) = 6.4035 k
Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu s (Vc/2),

s
A
v
= 0,
else if (Vc/2) < Vu s Vmax

s
A
v
=
min
( )
u c v
ys
V V A
f d s
|
|
| |
>
|
\ .

where:

min
3
max 50 ,
4
v w w
c
yt yt
A b b
f
s f f
| | | |
| |
' =
| | `
|
| |
\ .
\ . \ . )

else if Vu > Vmax,
a failure condition is declared.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 5
Combo1
Vu = 9.736(5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k
( )
max
/ 2 6.4035 37.727 64.036
c u
V k V k V k | | = s = s =

min
10 10 3
max 50 , 4, 000
60, 000 60, 000 4
v
A
s
| | | | | |
=
`
| | |
\ . \ . \ . )


{ }
2
min
max 0.0083 , 0.0079 0.0083
v
A in
s in
| |
= =
|
\ .


s
A
v
=
2 2
( )
0.041 0.492
u c
ys
V V in in
f d in ft
|
|

= =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 1
ACI 318-08 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and
moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Pu=398.4 kips




















Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in
2
fy = 60 k/in
2

b = 14 in
d = 19.5 in


A
10
Section A-A
14"
2.5"
22"
A
Muy=332k-ft

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 Ex002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fc = 4 ksi fy = 60 ksi
b = 14 inch d = 19.5 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
87 87
= = 19.5 = 11.54
87 + 87 + 60
b t
y
c d
f
inch

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where
= 0.85 = 0.85 4 14 = 47.6 - -
'
c c
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) = - 0.85 = 4 60 - 0.85 4 = 226.4 -
' '
s s y c
C A f f kips
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
4
s s s s y
T = A f = f f < f
= 47.6 + 226.4 - 4
n s
P a f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


( )
1
=
2
(
| |
+
| (
\ .

'
n c s '
a
P C d - C d - d
e

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 8.5 inch
= 10 + 8.5 = 18.5
' "
e = e + d inch.

( )
1
= 47.6 19.5 226.4 19.5 - 2.5
2
(
| |
+
| (
\ .

n
a
P a -
18.5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 4

2
= 50.17 1.29 + 208
n
P a - a (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

= 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 - a inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
= 50.17 11.43 1.29 11.43 + 208 = 612.9 - -
n
P - kips

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.


19.5 - 13.45
= 87 = 39.13
13.45
| |
|
\ .
s
f ksi
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.00135

6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:

( ) ( ) = 47.6 11.43 + 226.4 - 4 39.13 613.9 =
n2
P kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
= 612.9 510.8
12
| |
=
|
\ .
n n
M = P e kips-ft

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
( )
13.45 - 2.5
= 0.003 = 0.00244 > 0.00207
13.45
c
| |
=
|
\ .
'
s y
ksi
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Calculate | ,
= = 19.5
t
d d inch, c = 13.45 inch
c
t
(at the tension reinforcement level) =
19.45 - 13.45
0.003 = 0.00135
13.45
| |
|
\ .


Since 0.002 c <
t
, then | = 0.65

( ) = 0.65 612.9 398.4
n
P | = kips
( ) = 0.65 510.8 332 | =
n
M k-ft.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 1
ACI 318-11 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.
This example is tested using the ACI 318-11 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L
10' = 120"
Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 13.5 in
b = 10.0 in
I = 3,413 in
4
13.5"
10"
2.5"
Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in
2
fy = 60 k/in
2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-11 Building Code.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mu (k-in) 1460.4 1460.4 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (in
2
) 2.37

2.37 0.00%
Design Shear Force, Vu 37.73 37.73 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Av/s (in
2
/in) 0.041 0.041 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
As,min = d b
f
w
y
200
= 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
= d b
f
f
w
y
c
'
3
= 0.427 sq-in
1
4000
0.85 0.05 0.85
1000
c
f
|
' | |
= =
|
\ .

max
0.003
0.003 0.005
c d = =
+
5.0625 in
max 1 max
a c | = = 4.303 in
Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft
8
2
l w
M
u
u
= = 9.73610
2
/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
The depth of the compression block is given by:
b f
M
d d a
c
u

'
2
85 . 0
2
= = 4.183 in (a < amax)
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As =
|
.
|

\
|

2
a
d f
M
y
u

=
( ) 2 / 183 . 4 5 . 13 60 9 . 0
4 . 1460
- -

As = 2.37 sq-in
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:
= 0.75
Check the limit of
c
f ' :

c
f ' = 63.246 psi < 100 psi
The concrete shear capacity is given by:
Vc = 2
c
f ' bd = 12.807 k
The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:
Vs = 8
c
f ' bd = 51.229 k
The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:
( Vc/2) = 6.4035 k
( Vc + 50 bd) = 11.466 k
Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu s (Vc/2),

s
A
v
= 0,
else if (Vc/2) < Vu s Vmax

s
A
v
=
min
( )
u c v
ys
V V A
f d s
|
|
| |
>
|
\ .

where:

min
3
max 50 ,
4
v w w
c
yt yt
A b b
f
s f f
| | | |
| |
' =
| | `
|
| |
\ .
\ . \ . )

else if Vu > Vmax,
a failure condition is declared.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 5
Combo1
Vu = 9.736(5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k
( )
max
/ 2 6.4035 37.727 64.036
c u
V k V k V k | | = s = s =

min
10 10 3
max 50 , 4, 000
60, 000 60, 000 4
v
A
s
| | | | | |
=
`
| | |
\ . \ . \ . )


{ }
2
min
max 0.0083 , 0.0079 0.0083
v
A in
s in
| |
= =
|
\ .


s
A
v
=
2 2
( )
0.041 0.492
u c
ys
V V in in
f d in ft
|
|

= =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 1
ACI 318-11 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and
moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Pu=398.4 kips




















Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in
2
fy = 60 k/in
2

b = 14 in
d = 19.5 in


A
10
Section A-A
14"
2.5"
22"
A
Muy=332k-ft

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 Ex002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fc = 4 ksi fy = 60 ksi
b = 14 inch d = 19.5 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
87 87
= = 19.5 = 11.54
87 + 87 + 60
b t
y
c d
f
inch

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where
= 0.85 = 0.85 4 14 = 47.6 - -
'
c c
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) = - 0.85 = 4 60 - 0.85 4 = 226.4 -
' '
s s y c
C A f f kips
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
4
s s s s y
T = A f = f f < f
= 47.6 + 226.4 - 4
n s
P a f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


( )
1
=
2
(
| |
+
| (
\ .

'
n c s '
a
P C d - C d - d
e

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 8.5 inch
= 10 + 8.5 = 18.5
' "
e = e + d inch.

( )
1
= 47.6 19.5 226.4 19.5 - 2.5
2
(
| |
+
| (
\ .

n
a
P a -
18.5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 4

2
= 50.17 1.29 + 208
n
P a - a (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

= 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 - a inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
= 50.17 11.43 1.29 11.43 + 208 = 612.9 - -
n
P - kips

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.


19.5 - 13.45
= 87 = 39.13
13.45
| |
|
\ .
s
f ksi
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.00135

6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:

( ) ( ) = 47.6 11.43 + 226.4 - 4 39.13 613.9 =
n2
P kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
= 612.9 510.8
12
| |
=
|
\ .
n n
M = P e kips-ft

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
( )
13.45 - 2.5
= 0.003 = 0.00244 > 0.00207
13.45
c
| |
=
|
\ .
'
s y
ksi
Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Calculate | ,
= = 19.5
t
d d inch, c = 13.45 inch
c
t
(at the tension reinforcement level) =
19.45 - 13.45
0.003 = 0.00135
13.45
| |
|
\ .


Since 0.002 c <
t
, then | = 0.65

( ) = 0.65 612.9 398.4
n
P | = kips
( ) = 0.65 510.8 332 | =
n
M k-ft.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 1

AS 3600-2009 Example 001
Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced T-Beam
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify slab flexural design. The load level is
adjusted for the case corresponding to the following conditions:
The stress-block extends below the flange but remains within the balanced
condition permitted by AS 3600-09.
The average shear stress in the beam is below the maximum shear stress
allowed by AS 3600-09, requiring design shear reinforcement.
A simple-span, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 500-mm-deep T-beam with a
flange 100 mm thick and 600 mm wide is considered. The beam is shown in
Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite element mesh of frame elements
automatically generated. The maximum element size has been specified to be
500 mm. The beam is supported by columns without rotational stiffnesses and
with very large vertical stiffness (1 10
20
kN/m).
The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL30) and one live load case (LL130), with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 30, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combinations (COMB130) is defined using the AS 3600-09 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead load and 1.5 for live load. The model is analyzed for both
of these load cases and the load combination.
The beam moment and shear force are computed analytically. Table 1 shows the
comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2 shows the
comparison of the design shear reinforcements.




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 2
Beam Section
75 mm
100 mm
300 mm
600 mm
75 mm
500 mm
Shear Force
Bending Moment
2000 mm 2000 mm 2000 mm
Beam Section
75 mm
100 mm
300 mm
600 mm
75 mm
500 mm
Shear Force
Bending Moment
2000 mm 2000 mm 2000 mm

Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Clear span, L = 6000 mm
Overall depth, h = 500 mm
Flange thickness, Ds = 100 mm
Width of web, bw = 300 mm
Width of flange, bf = 600 mm
Depth of tensile reinf., dsc = 75 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 3
Effective depth, d = 425 mm
Depth of comp. reinf., d' = 75 mm

Concrete strength, f

c = 30 MPa
Yield strength of steel, fy = 460 MPa
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m
3

Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 25x10
5
MPa
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 2x10
8
MPa
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2

Dead load, Pd = 30 kN
Live load, Pl = 130 kN
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement

RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip.
They match exactly for this problem. Table 1 also shows the design
reinforcement comparison.
Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements
Method Moment (kN-m)
Reinforcement Area (sq-cm)
As
+

ETABS 462 33.512
Calculated 462 33.512
A
+
,min s
= 3.00 sq-cm


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 4
Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements
Shear Force (kN)
Reinforcement Area,
s
A
v

(sq-cm/m)
ETABS Calculated
231 12.05 12.05


COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-2009 EX001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 5
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
| = 0.8 for bending
2 2
0.67 0.85, 1.0 0.003 ' 0.91
c
where f o o s s = = , use
2
0.85 o =
2
0.67 0.85, 1.05 0.007 ' 0.84
c
where f o s s = = , use 0.84 =
0.36
u
k s
max
0.84 0.36 425 128.52
u
a k d mm = = =
2
,
. min
ct f
st b w
sy
f
D
A b d
d f
o
'
| |
=
|
\ .

where for L- and T-Sections with the web in tension:
500 D h mm = =
1/ 4
0.20 1 0.4 0.18 0.20
f f
s
b
w w
b b
D
b D b
o
| | | |
| |
= + >
| | |
\ .
\ . \ .
= 0.2378
,
' 0.5 ' 0.5 30 3.3
ct f c
f f MPa = = =
460 500
sy y
f f MPa MPa = = s
2
,
. min
0.2378
ct f
st
sy
f
D
A bd
d f
'
| |
=
|
\ .

= 0.2378 (500/425)
2
3.3/460 300425
= 299.9 mm
2

COMB130
V
*
= (1.2Pd + 1.5Pl) = 231kN
*
*
3
V L
M = = 462 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 6
*
2
2
2
'
c f
M
a d d
f b
=
o |
= 100.755 mm (a > Ds), so design as a T-beam.
The compressive force developed in the concrete alone is given by the following
methodology:
The first part of the calculation is for balancing the compressive force from the
flange, Cf, and the second part of the calculation is for balancing the compressive
force from the web, Cw. Cf is given by:
( ) ( )
2 max
min , 765
f c f w s
C f b b D a kN ' = o =
Therefore,
2
1
765
1663.043
460
f
s
sy
C
A mm
f
= = =
and the portion of M
*
that is resisted by the flange is given by:
( )
max
min ,
2
s
uf f
D a
M C d
| |
= |
|
\ .
= 229.5 kN-m
Again, the value for | is 0.80 by default. Therefore, the balance of the
moment, M
*
to be carried by the web is:
*
uw uf
M M M = = 462 229.5 = 232.5
The web is a rectangular section of dimensions bw and d, for which the design
depth of the compression block is recalculated as:
2
1
2
2
uw
c w
M
a d d
f b
=
' o |
= 101.5118 mm
a1 s amax , so no compression reinforcement is needed, and the area of tension
reinforcement is then given by:
2
1
2
=
| |
|
|
\ .
uw
s
sy
M
A
a
f d
= 1688.186 mm
2

2 1 s s st
A A A + = = 3351.23 sq-mm = 33.512 sq-cm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 7
Shear Design
| = 0.7 for shear
Calculated at the end of the beam, so M=0 and Ast = 0.
The shear force carried by the concrete, Vuc, is calculated as:
1 3
1 2 3
0
st
uc v o cv
v o
A
V b d f kN
b d
(
' = | | | =
(


where,
( )
1/ 3
' ' =
cv c
f f = 3.107 N/mm
2
4MPa s
1
1.1 1.6 1.1
1000
| |
| = >
|
\ .
o
d
=1.2925,
2 = 1 since no significant axial load is present
3 = 1
bv = bw = 300mm as there are no grouted ducts
do = d = 425 mm
The shear force is limited to a maximum of:
. max
0.2 ' =
u c o
V f bd = 765 kN
And the beam must have a minimum shear force capacity of:
. min
0.6 0 0.6 300 425 77
u uc w o
V V b d kN = + = + =
*
231 / 2 0
uc
V kN V = > | = , so reinforcement is needed.
*
. max
231 535.5
u
V kN V kN = s | = , so concrete crushing does not occur.
{ }
2
min
'
max 0.35 , 0.06 max 228.26, 214.33
c v sv w
sy sy
f b A b mm
s f f m

| |
= =
`
|
\ .

)


2
min
228.26
sv
A mm
s m
| |
=
|
\ .


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS2013
REVISION NO.:
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 8
COMB130
Since
*
. min . max
53.55 231 535.5
u u
V kN V kN V kN | = < = s | =
( )
*
min
cot
uc
sv sv
sy o v
V V
A A
s f d s
|
| |
= >
|
| u
\ .

uv = the angle between the axis of the concrete compression strut and the
longitudinal axis of the member, which varies linearly from 30
degrees when V
*
=|Vu,min to 45 degrees when V
*
=|Vu,max = 35.52
degrees
uv = 35.52

degrees
( )
( )
2 2
min
213 0
1205.04 228.26
0.7 460 425 cot 35.52
sv sv
o
A mm A mm
s m s m

| |
= = > =
|
\ .


2
12.05
sv
A cm
s m
=



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 1
AS 3600-2009 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 1733 kN and moment My = 433 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1733 kN





















Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 433 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.004

1.00 0.4%
COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-2009 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
( )
600 600
= = 490 = 277.4
600 + 600 + 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:
=
c s
N C C T +
where

2
0.85 30 350 8925
c c
C f ab a a ' = = = o
( ) ( )
2
2500 460 0.85 30 1, 086, 250
s s y c
C A f f ' = = =

o N
Assume compression steel yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500 2500
s s s s y
T = A f = f f f < f =
1
8925 1.086, 250 2500
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
2
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and '' d = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm

( )
1
8925 490 1, 086, 250 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .



2
9404.8 9.597 1, 004, 489 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 4
4) Assume c = 333.9 mm, which exceeds cb (296 mm).
0.84 333.9 280.5 a = = mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
8925 280.5 9.597 280.5 1, 004, 489 2, 888, 240 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 333.9
600 280.5
333.9
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa

s t s s
f E c = c = = 0.0014

6) Substitute a = 280.5 mm and fs = 280.5 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
8925 280.5 1, 086, 250 2500 280.5 2, 887, 373 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,888,240 (less than 1% difference)

250
2888 722
1000
M Ne
| |
= = =
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
( )
333.9 60
0.003 0.0025 0.0023
333.9
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is
= N 2888 1733 | = kN
= M
250
2888 0.60 2888 433
1000 1000
e
| = = kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 1
BS 8110-1997 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

Example Description
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 36.67 kN/m. This example was tested using the BS 8110-97 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L
6 m
Material Properties
E = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 490 mm
W = 36.67 kN/m
550 mm
230mm
60 mm
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 7.2 on page 149 of Reinforced Concrete
Design by W. H. Mosley, J. H. Bungey & R. Hulse.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mu (kN-m) 165.02 165.02 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 964.1

964.1 0.00%
Design Shear, Vu (kN) 92.04 92.04 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Asv/sv (mm
2
/mm) 0.231 0.231 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-1997 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
2
, min
0.0013 0.0013 230 550 164.45
s w
A b h mm = = =

Design Combo COMB1
wu = =36.67 kN/m
8
2
l w
M
u
u
= = 165 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
K =
2
d b f
M
cu
= 0.0996 < 0.156
If K s 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete
beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:
z = d
)
`

+
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0
K
s 0.95d = 427.90 mm
The ultimate resistance moment is given by:
( )
1.15
s
y
M
A
f z
= = 964.1 sq-mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
2
92.04
2
U U
L
V d e
| |
= =
|
\ .
kN at distance, d, from support
U
V
v
b d
= = 0.8167 MPa
vmax = min(0.8
cu
f , 5 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa
max
v v s , so no concrete crushing
The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:
4
1
3
1
2 1
400 100 79 . 0
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
d bd
A k k
v
s
m
c

= 0.415 MPa
k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,
and is conservatively taken as 1 .
k2 =
3
1
25
|
.
|

\
|
cu
f
= 1.06266, 1 s k2 s
3
1
25
40
|
.
|

\
|

m, concrete = 1.25
0.15 s
bd
A
s
100
s 3
bd
A
s
100
=
100 266
0.2359
230 490
=
1 1
4 4
400 400
0.95 1, so
d d
| | | |
= >
| |
\ . \ .
is taken as 1.
fcu s 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v s vmax
( )
yv
w c
v
sv
f
b v v
s
A
87 . 0

=
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 5

( ) ( ) 0.8167 0.4150
0.87 0.87 460
c w sv
v yv
v v b A
s f

= =
-
= 0.231 sq-mm/mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 1
BS 8110-1997 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 1971 kN and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 493 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994

1.00 0.40%
COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-1997 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
( )
700 700
490 312
700 / 700 460 / 1.15
b t
y s
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:
c s
N C C T = +
where

0.67
0.67 1.5 30 350 4667
c cu
C f ab a a
M
= = =

( ) ( )
2500
0.4467 460 0.4467 30 971, 014
1.15
s
s y cu
s
A
C f f
'
= = =

N
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T f f f = = = <

1
4, 667 971, 014 2174
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and '' d = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm

( )
1
4, 667 490 971, 014 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .


2
4917.9 5.018 897, 926 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 4

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

0.9 364 327.6 a = = mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
4917.9 327.6 5.018 327.6 897, 926 1, 970, 500 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


490 364
700 242.3
364
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa

s t s s
f E = = c c = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:

( ) ( )
1
4, 667 327.6 971, 014 2174 242.3 1, 973,163 N = + = N

which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)


250
= 1971 493
1000
M = Ne
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

( )
365 60
0.0035 0.00292 0.0023
365
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .


Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, the section capacity is

N = 1971 kN
M = 493 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 1
CSA A23.3-04 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 92.222 kN/m. This example is tested using the CSA A23.3-04 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L
6 m
Material Properties
E = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 546 mm
W = 92.222 kN/m
600 mm
400mm
54 mm
Design Properties
fc = 40 MPa

fy = 400 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 2.2 on page 2-12 in Part II on Concrete Design
Handbook of Cement Association of Canada.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mf (kN-m) 415.00 415.00 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 2466

2466 0.00%
Design Shear, Vf (kN) 226.31 226.31 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm
2
/mm) 0.379 0.379 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
|c = 0.65 for concrete
|s = 0.85 for reinforcement
As,min =
0.2
c
y
f
f
'
b h = 758.95 mm
2
o1 = 0.85 0.0015f'c > 0.67 = 0.79
|1 = 0.97 0.0025f'c > 0.67 = 0.87
cb =
y
f + 700
700
d = 347.45 mm
ab = |1cb = 302.285 mm
COMB1
8
2
l w
M
u
f
= = 415 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
b f
M
d d a
c c
f
| o '
2
1
2
= = 102.048 mm
If a s ab, the area of tension reinforcement is then given by:
|
.
|

\
|

=
2
a
d f
M
A
y s
f
s
|
= 2466 mm
2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 4
2
, min , min ,
4 4
min , min 758.95, 2466 758.95
3 3
s s s required
A A A mm
| | | |
= = =
` `
| |
\ . \ . ) )

Shear Design
The basic shear strength for rectangular section is computed as,
|c = 0.65 for shear
{ = 1.00, for normal density concrete
v
d is the effective shear depth. It is taken as the greater of
0.72h = 432 mm or 0.9d = 491.4 mm (governing).
= | 0.18 since minimum transverse reinforcement is provided
f
V = 92.222(3 - 0.546) = 226.31 kN
c c c w v
V f b d | | ' = = 145.45 kN
d b f V
w c c r
' 25 . 0
max ,
| = = 1419.60 kN
u = 35 since 400 ' 60
y c
f MPa and f MPa s s
( )
v yt s
c f
v
d f
V V
s
A
|
u tan
= = 0.339 mm
2
/mm
'
min
0.06
c v
y
f A
b
s f
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.379 mm
2
/mm (Govern)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 1
CSA A23.3-04 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 2098 kN and moment My = 525 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2098 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fc = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 525 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.029

1.00 2.90%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 Ex002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
700 700
= = 490 = 296
700 + 700 + 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
r c s
P C C T +
where
c 1
= = 0.65 0.805 30 350 = 5494.1
c c
C f ab a a | o - - -
'

( ) ( )
s
= - 0.805 = 0.85 2500 460 - 0.805 30 = 926,181
'
s s y c
C A f f | - -
'
N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
s
2500 2125
s s s s s y
T = A f = 0.85 f f f < f | - =
= 5, 494.1 + 926,181 - 2125
r s
P a f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


( )
1
=
2
'
r c s '
a
P C d - C d - d
e
(
| |
+
| (
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 215 mm
= 250 + 215 = 465
' "
e = e + d mm

( )
1
= 5, 494.1 490 926,181 490 - 60
465 2
r
a
P a -
(
| |
+
| (
\ .



2
= 5789.5 5.91 + 856, 468.5
r
P a - a (Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 4

4) Assume c = 355 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

= 0.895 355 = 317.7 a - mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:

( )
2
= 5789.5 317.7 5.91 317.7 + 856, 468.5 = 2, 099, 327.8
r
P - - N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 350 mm.


490 - 355
= 700 = 266.2
355
s
f
| |
|
\ .
MPa
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.0013

6) Substitute a = 317.7 mm and fs = 266.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pr2:

( ) ( ) = 5, 494.1 317.7 + 926,181 - 2125 266.2 2,106,124.9
r2
P = N
Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,012,589.8 (less than 1% difference)
250
= 2100 525
1000
r r
M = P e
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
( )
355 - 60
= 0.0035 = 0.00291 > 0.0023
355
'
s y
c
| |
=
|
\ .

Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

=
r
P 2098 kN
=
r
M 525 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 1
EN 2-2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 36.67 kN/m. This example is tested using the Eurocode concrete design code.
The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L
6 m
Material Properties
E = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 490 mm
b = 230 mm
550 mm
230mm
60 mm
Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa

fyk = 460 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution.


Country
c

s

cc
o
1
k
2
k
3
k
4
k
CEN Default, Slovenia, Sweden, Portugal 1.5 1.15 1.0 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25
UK 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.40 1.25 0.40 1.25
Norway 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25
Singapore 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.40 1.25 0.54 1.25
Finland 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.44 1.10 0.54 1.25
Denmark 1.45 1.2 1.0 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25
Germany 1.5 1.15 0.85 0.64 0.80 0.72 0.80
Poland 1.4 1.15 1.0 0.44 1.25 0.54 1.25















Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 3
Country
Design
Moment,
MEd (kN-m)
Tension
Reinforcing,
As+ (sq-mm)
Design Shear,
VEd
(kN)
Shear
Reinforcing,
Asw/s (sq-
mm/m)
% diff.
Method ETABS Hand ETABS Hand ETABS Hand ETABS Hand 0.00%
CEN Default,
Slovenia,
Sweden, Portugal
165 165 916 916 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
UK 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Norway 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Singapore 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Finland 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Denmark 165 165 950 950 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Germany 165 165 933 933 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%
Poland 165 165 925 925 110 110 249.4 249.4 0.00%


COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 4
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for both of the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
m, concrete = 1.50
1.0
cc
o =
1
0.44 k = ( )
2 4 2
1.25 0.6 0.0014 / 1.25
cu
k k c = = + =
3
0.54 k =
/
cd cc ck c
f f o = = 1.0(30)/1.5 = 20 MPa
/
yd yk s
f f = = 460/1.15 = 400 Mpa
0 . 1 = q for fck 50 MPa
8 . 0 = for fck 50 MPa
bd
f
f
A
yk
ctm
s
26 . 0
min ,
= = 184.5 sq-mm,
where
3 / 2
3 . 0
cwk ctm
f f = = 0.3(30)
2/3
= 2.896 N/sq-mm
, min
0.0013
s
A bh =
= 164.5 sq-mm

COMB1

The factored design load and moment are given as,
wu = 36.67 kN/m
8
2
l w
M
u
= = 36.676
2
/8 = 165.0 kN-m
The limiting value of the ratio of the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state
to the effective depth, ( )
lim
/ x d , is given as,
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 5

2
1
lim
k
k
d
x
=
|
.
|

\
|
o
for fck s 50 MPa ,
where 1 o = , assuming no moment redistribution


( )
1
lim 2
1 0.44
0.448
1.25
k x
d k
o

| |
= = =
|
\ .


The normalized section capacity as a singly reinforced beam is given as,

(

|
.
|

\
|

|
.
|

\
|
=
lim lim
lim
2
1
d
x
d
x
m

= 0.29417

The limiting normalized steel ratio is given as,

lim
lim
lim
2 1 1 m
d
x
=
|
.
|

\
|
= e = 0.3584

The normalized moment, m, is given as,
2
cd
M
m
bd f q
= =
6
2
165 10
230 490 1.0 20
-
- - -
=0.1494 <
lim
m so a singly reinforced
beam will be adequate.

e = 1 1 2m = 0.16263
lim
e <

cd
s
yd
f bd
A
f
q
e
(
=
(
(

=
1.0 20 230 490
0.1626
400
- - - (
(

=916 sq-mm
Shear Design
The shear force demand is given as,
/ 2 110.0
Ed
V L e = = kN
The shear force that can be carried without requiring design shear reinforcement,
( )
1/ 3
, , 1 1
100
Rd c Rd c ck cp w
V C k f k b d o
(
= +


( )
1/ 3
,
0.12 1.6389 100 0.0 30 0.0 230 490 0
Rd c
V kN
(
= - - - + - =


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 6
with a minimum of:

, min 1 Rd c cp
V v k bd o ( = +

=
| | 0.4022 0.0 230 490 45.3 + - = kN
where,

200
1 2.0 k
d
= + s = 1.6389

1
0
0.0 0.02
230 490
S
A
bd
= = = s
As = 0 for l at the end of a simply-supported beam as it taken as the tensile
reinforcement at the location offset by d+ldb beyond the point considered.
(EN 1992-1-1:2004 6.2.2(1) Figure 6.3)
0.0
Ed
cp
c
N
A
o = =

,
0.18 /
Rd c c
C = =0.12

3/ 2 1/ 2
min
0.035 0.4022 v k fck = =

The maximum design shear force that can be carried without crushing of the
notional concrete compressive struts,
( )
, max 1
/ cot tan
Rd cw cd
V bzv f o u u = +
where,
1.0
cw
o =
0.9 441.0 z d = = mm

1
0.6 1 0.528
250
ck
f
v
(
= =
(



( )
1
0.5 sin 5.33
0.2 1 / 250
Ed
ck ck
v
f f
u

= =

where,
0.9761
Ed
Ed
w
V
v
b d
= =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 7
21.8 45 u s s , therefore use 21.8 u =


( )
, max 1
/ cot tan 369
Rd cw cd
V bzv f o u u = + = kN

, max Rd Ed
V V > , so there is no concrete crushing.
The required shear reinforcing is,

110.0 1 6
249.4
460
cot
441 2.5
1.15
sw Ed
ywd
A V e
s zf u
-
= = =
- -
sq-mm/m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 1
EN 2-2004 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 2374 kN and moment My = 593 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25 bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result
is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short, non-sway
member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2374 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties
Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 593 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.009

1.00 0.90%
COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fck = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
700 700
= = 490 = 312
700 + / 700 + 460 / 1.15
b t
y
c d
f
s
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:
c s
N C C T = +
where

30
1.0 350 7000
1.5
ck
c cc
c
f
C ab a a = o = =

2500 30
460 1.0 956, 521.7
1.15 1.5
s ck
s y cc
s c
A f
C f
| | '
| |
= o = =
| |

\ .
\ .
N
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T f f f = = = <

1
7, 000 956, 521.7 2174
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
2
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm
( )
2
1
7, 000 490 956, 521.7 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .


2
2
= 7376.3 + 884, 525.5 N a - 7.527a (Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 4
4) Assume c = 356 mm, which exceed cb (312 mm).
0.8 356 284.8 a = = mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
7376.3 284.8 7.527 284.8 884, 525.5 2, 374,173 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 356 mm.

490 356
700 263.4
356
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa

s t s s
f E c = c = = 0.00114

6) Substitute a = 284.8 mm and fs = 263.4 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
7, 000 284.8 956, 522 2174 263.5 2, 377, 273 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2, 374,173 (less than 1% difference)

250
2374 593.5
1000
M Ne
| |
= = =
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
( )
356 60
0.0035 0.0029 0.0023
356
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is
N = 2,374 kN
M = 593 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 1
HK CP-2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load of 36.67 kN/m.
This example is tested using the HK CP 2004 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

Section A-A
C
L
6 m
Material Properties
E = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 490 mm
w = 36.67 kN/m
550 mm
230mm
60 mm
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 2
CONCLUSION
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution based on section 6.1 of Hong Kong Code of Practice for Structural
Use of Concrete 2004.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, M (kN-m) 165.02 165.02 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 964

964 0.00%
Design Shear, V (kN) 92.04 92.04 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm
2
/mm) 0.231 0.231 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: HK CP-2004 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
, min
0.0013
s
A bh =

= 164.5 sq-mm
Design Combo COMB1
wu = =36.67 kN/m
8
2
l w
M
u
u
= = 165 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
K =
2
d b f
M
cu
= 0.0996 < 0.156
If K s 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete
beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:
z = d
)
`

+
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0
K
s 0.95d = 427.900 mm
The ultimate resistance moment is given by:
( )
1.15
s
y
M
A
f z
= = 964 sq-mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
Vu = =92.04 kN at a distance, d, from support
V
v
bd
= = 0.8167 MPa
vmax = min(0.8
cu
f , 7 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa
max
v v s , so no concrete crushing
The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:
4
1
3
1
2 1
400 100 79 . 0
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
d bd
A k k
v
s
m
c

= 0.4150 MPa
k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,
and is conservatively taken as 1 .
k2 =
3
1
25
|
.
|

\
|
cu
f
= 1.06266, 1 s k2 s
3
1
25
40
|
.
|

\
|

m, concrete = 1.25
0.15 s
bd
A
s
100
s 3
bd
A
s
100
=
100 266
0.2359 0.15
230 490
= >
1 1
4 4
400 400
0.95 1, so
d d
| | | |
= >
| |
\ . \ .
is taken as 1.
fcu s 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v s vmax
( )
yv
w c
v
sv
f
b v v
s
A
87 . 0

=

( )
yv
w c
v
sv
f
b v v
s
A
87 . 0

= = 0.231 sq-mm/mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 1
HK CP-2004 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 1971 kN and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with the computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 493 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994

1.00 0.60%
COMPUTER FILE: HK CP-2004 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
( )
700 700
490 312
700 / 700 460 / 1.15
b t
y s
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

c s
N C C T = +
where

0.67
0.67 1.5 30 350 4667
c cu
C f ab a a
M
= = =

( ) ( )
2500
0.4467 460 0.4467 30 971, 014
1.15
s
s y cu
s
A
C f f
'
= = =

N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T f f f = = = <

1
4, 667 971, 014 2174
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm

( )
1
4, 667 490 971, 014 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .


2
4917.9 5.018 897, 926 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0


HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 4

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceed cb (312 mm).
0.9 364 327.6 a = = mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
4917.9 327.6 5.018 327.6 897, 926 1, 970, 500 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 364
700 242.3
364
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa

s t s s
f E c = c = = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
4, 667 327.6 971, 014 2174 242.3 1, 973,163 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)

250
= 1971 493
1000
| |
=
|
\ .
M = Ne kN-m

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
( )
365 60
0.0035 0.00292 0.0023
365
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, the section capacity is

= N 1971 kN
= M 493 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 1
IS 456-2000 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 37.778 kN/m. This example is tested using the IS 456-2000 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L

6 m
Material Properties
E = 19.365x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 8068715.3kN/m
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 562.5 mm
w = 37.778 kN/m
600 mm
300mm
37.5 mm
Design Properties
fck = 15 MPa

fy = 415 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

The example problem is same as Example-1 given in SP-16 Design Aids for
Reinforced Concrete published by Bureau of Indian Standards. For this example
a direct comparison for flexural steel only is possible as corresponding data for
shear steel reinforcement is not available in the reference for this problem.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mu (kN-m) 170.00 170.00 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 1006

1006

0.00%
Design Shear, Vu (kN) 113.33 113.33 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Asv/s (mm
2
/mm) 0.333 0.333 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: IS 456-2000 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
m, concrete = 1.50
o = 0.36
| = 0.42

, min
0.85
s
y
A bd
f
> = 345.63 sq-mm
COMB1
Mu = 170 kN-m
Vu = 113.33 kN-m

max
0 53 if 250 MPa
250
0 53 0 05 if 250 415 MPa
165
415
0 48 0 02 if 415 500 MPa
85
0 46 if 500 MPa
y
y
y
u ,
y
y
y
. f
f
. . f
x
d f
. . f
. f
s

< s

< s

>

d
Xu max ,
= 0.48
The normalized design moment, m, is given by
2
u
w ck
M
m
b d f o
= = 0.33166
Mw,single = ofckbwd
2

(

d
x
d
x
u u max , max ,
1 | = 196.436 kN-m > Mu
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 4
So no compression reinforcement is needed

1 1 4
2
u
m x
d
|
|

=
= 0.3983
)
`

=
d
x
d z
u
| 1 = { } 3983 . 0 42 . 0 1 5 . 562 - = 468.406
( )
u
y s
M
As
f z
| |
| =
|
\ .

= 1006 sq-mm

Shear Design
tv =
bd
V
u
= 0.67161
tmax = 2.5 for M15 concrete
k = 1.0
1 if 0 Under Tension
u
P , o = s
0.15 s
bd
A
s
100
s 3

100
0.596
s
A
bd
=
0.49
c
t = From Table 19 of IS 456:2000 code, interpolating between rows.
tcd = kotc = 0.49
The required shear reinforcement is calculated as follows:
Since tv > tcd

( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
( )
0.67161 0.49 300
0.4 0.4 300
max , max ,
415 415
v cd sv
y y
y
b A b
s f f
t t

-
-
= =
` `
1.15 1.15

)
)

{ }
2
max 0.333, 0.150 0.333
sv
A mm
s mm
= =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 1
IS 456-2000 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 1913 kN and moment My= 478 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 25M
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1913 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fc = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 478 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997

1.00 0.30%
COMPUTER FILE: IS 456-2000 Ex002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results. The larger variation is due to equivalent rectangular compression block
assumption.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
700 700
= = 490 = 296
700 + 700 + 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
c s
N C C T +
where
0.36
= = 0.4286 30 350 = 4500
0.84
c ck
C f ab a a - -
( ) ( )
2500
= - 0.4286 = 460 - 0.4286 30 = 972, 048
1.15
'
s
s y ck
s
A
C f f

- N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T = = f f < f

=
1
= 4500 + 972, 048 - 2174
s
N a f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
2
1
=
2
'
c s '
a
N C d - C d - d
e
(
| |
+
| (
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 215 mm
= 250 + 215 = 465
' "
e = e + d mm

( )
2
1
= 4500 490 972, 048 490 - 60
465 2
a
N a -
(
| |
+
| (
\ .



2
2
= 4742 4.839 + 898, 883 N a - a (Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 4

4) Assume c = 374 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

= 0.84 374 = 314.2 a - mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
= 4742 314.2 4.039 314.2 + 898, 883 = 1, 911, 037 N - - N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.


490 - 374
= 700 = 217.11
374
s
f
| |
|
\ .
MPa
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.0011

6) Substitute a = 314.2 mm and fs = 217.11 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:

( ) ( ) = 4500 314.2 + 972, 048 - 2174 217.4 1, 913, 765
1
N = N
Which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,911,037 (less than 1% difference)
250
= 1913 478
1000
M = Ne
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
( )
374 - 60
= 0.0035 = 0.0029 > 0.0023
374
'
s y
c
| |
=
|
\ .

Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

= N 1913 kN
= M 478 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 001 - 1
NTC 2008 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 36.67 kN/m. This example is tested using the Italian NTC 2008 concrete
design code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with
independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L
6 m
Material Properties
E = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 490 mm
b = 230 mm
550 mm
230mm
60 mm
Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa

fyk = 460 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, MEd (kN-
m)
165.00 165.00 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 933

933 0.00%
Design Shear, VEd (kN) 110.0 110.0 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Asw/s (mm
2
/m) 345.0 345.0 0.00%







COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 Ex001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for both of the load combinations:
c, concrete = 1.50
0.85
cc
o =
1
0.44 k = ( )
2 4 2
1.25 0.6 0.0014 / 1.25
cu
k k c = = + =
3
0.54 k =
/
cd cc ck c
f f o = = 0.85(30)/1.5 = 17 MPa
yd
f =
y
s
f

460
1.15
= 400 Mpa
0 . 1 = q for fck 50 MPa
8 . 0 = for fck 50 MPa
bd
f
f
A
yk
ctm
s
26 . 0
min ,
= = 184.5 sq-mm,
where
3 / 2
3 . 0
cwk ctm
f f = = 0.3(30)
2/3
= 2.896 N/sq-mm
, min
0.0013
s
A bh =
= 164.5 sq-mm

COMB1

The factored design load and moment are given as,
wu = 36.67 kN/m
8
2
l w
M
u
= = 36.676
2
/8 = 165.0 kN-m
The limiting value of the ratio of the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state
to the effective depth, ( )
lim
/ x d , is given as,
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 001 - 4

2
1
lim
k
k
d
x
=
|
.
|

\
|
o
for fck s 50 MPa ,
where 1 o = , assuming no moment redistribution


( )
1
lim 2
1 0.44
0.448
1.25
k x
d k
o

| |
= = =
|
\ .


The normalized section capacity as a singly reinforced beam is given as,

(

|
.
|

\
|

|
.
|

\
|
=
lim lim
lim
2
1
d
x
d
x
m

= 0.29417

The limiting normalized steel ratio is given as,

lim
lim
lim
2 1 1 m
d
x
=
|
.
|

\
|
= e = 0.3584

The normalized moment, m, is given as,
2
cd
M
m
bd f
= =
6
2
165 10
230 490 17
-
- -
=0.1758 <
lim
m so a singly reinforced beam
will be adequate.

e = 1 1 2m = 0.1947
lim
e <

cd
s
yd
f bd
A
f
e
(
=
(
(

=
17 230 490
0.1947
400
- - (
(

=933 sq-mm
Shear Design
The shear force demand is given as,
/ 2 110.0
Ed
V L e = = kN
The shear force that can be carried without requiring design shear reinforcement,
( )
1/ 3
, , 1 1
100
Rd c Rd c ck cp w
V C k f k b d o
(
= +


( )
1/ 3
,
0.12 1.6389 100 0.0 30 0.0 230 490 0
Rd c
V kN
(
= - - - + - =


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 001 - 5
with a minimum of:

, min 1 Rd c cp
V v k bd o ( = +

=
| | 0.4022 0.0 230 490 45.3 x + = kN
where,

200
1 2.0 k
d
= + s = 1.6389

1
0
0.0 0.02
230 490
S
A
bd
= = = s
As = 0 for l at the end of a simply-supported beam as it taken as the tensile
reinforcement at the location offset by d+ldb beyond the point considered.
(EN 1992-1-1:2004 6.2.2(1) Figure 6.3)
0.0
Ed
cp
c
N
A
o = =

,
0.18 /
Rd c c
C = =0.12

3/ 2 1/ 2
min
0.035 0.4022 v k fck = =

The maximum design shear force that can be carried without crushing of the
notional concrete compressive struts,

, max 2
cot cot
' 297
1 cot
Rd c cd
V zb f kN
o 0
o
0
| | +
= =
|
+
\ .

where,
0.9 441.0 z d mm = =
1.0
c
o = since there is no axial compression
' 0.5
cd cd
f f =

0
90 o = for vertical stirrups

( )
1
0.5 sin 5.33
0.2 1 / 250
Ed
ck ck
v
f f
0

= =

where,
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 001 - 6
0.9761
Ed
Ed
w
V
v
b d
= =
21.8 45 0 s s , therefore use 21.8 0 =

The required shear reinforcing is,

( )
6 2
1 110.0 10
249.4
460
cot cot sin
441 2.5
1.15
sw Ed
ywd
A V mm
s zf m o 0 o
= = =
+

The minimum required shear reinforcing is,
2
min
1.5 1.5 230 345.0
sw
A mm
b
s m
| |
= = =
|
\ .
(controls)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 002 - 1
NTC 2008 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 2174 kN and moment My = 544 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5-25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2174 kN





















Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fck = 25 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 544 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 002 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.005

1.00 -0.50%
COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 Ex002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 25 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3) d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
700 700
= = 490 = 296
700 + 700 + 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
c s
N C C T +
where
c
0.85 30
= = 350 = 5950
1.5
ck
c
f
C ab a a
o -
-

c
2500 0.85 30
= - = 460 - = 963, 043
1.15 1.5
'
s ck
s y
s
A f
C f
o

| |
- | |
|
|

\ .
\ .
N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T = = f f < f

=
1
= 5, 950 + 963, 043 - 2174
s
N a f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
2
1
=
2
'
c s '
a
N C d - C d - d
e
(
| |
+
| (
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 215 mm
= 250 + 215 = 465
' "
e = e + d mm

( )
2
1
= 5950 490 963, 043 490 - 60
465 2
a
N a -
(
| |
+
| (
\ .


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NTC 2008 Example 002 - 4

2
2
= 6270 + 890, 556 N a - 6.3978a (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 365 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

= 0.8 365 = 292 a - mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
= 6270 292 6.3978 292 + 890, 556 = 2,175, 893 N - -
2
N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 356 mm.


490 - 365
= 700 = 240.0
365
s
f
| |
|
\ .
MPa
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 284.8 mm and fs = 263.4 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:


( ) ( ) = 5950 292 + 963, 043 - 2174 240.0 2,178, 683
1
N = N

Which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,175, 893 (less than 1% difference)

250
= 2175 544
1000
M = Ne
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

( )
365 - 60
= 0.0035 = 0.0029 > 0.0023
365
'
s y
c
| |
=
|
\ .

Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

= N 2,174 kN
= M 544 kN-m


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 001 - 1
KCI 1999 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Design moment calculation, Mu.

Minimum tension reinforcement, As

Design Shear , Vu

Area of shear reinforcement, Av



Section A-A
C
L



6.0 m

Material Properties
E = 3.37E10
5
kgf/sq-cm

= 0.2
G = 1.40E10
5
kgf/sq-cm
8.8x1010416666.7kN/
m
2
Section Properties

A
A


h = 55.0 cm
b = 30.0 cm
d = 49.0 cm

49 cm
30 cm
6.0 cm
Design Properties
fc = 305.9 kgf/sq-cm

fy = 4690.69 kgf/sq-cm
Uniform factored load
u
e = 74.4082 kgf/cm (D+L)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 001 - 2
RESULT COMPARISON
The independent results are hand calculated based on the Korean KCI-99 code.


Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mu (kgf-m) 33484

33484 0.00%
As (cm
2
) 19.46 19.46 0.00%
Design Shear, Vu (kgf) 22322.5 22322.5 0.00%
Av/s (cm
2
/cm) 0.0621 0.0621 0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: KCI 1999 EX001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.









Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.85,
As,min =
0.80 '
14
max ,
c
y y
f
bd bd
f f


`

)
= 4.39 sq-cm
1
280
0.85 0.007 0.8319
10
c
f
|
' | |
= =
|
\ .

max
6000
27.50
6000
y
c d
f
= =
+
cm
max 1 max
a c | = = 22.88 cm
Comb1
u
e = 74.4082 kgf/cm
8
2
l w
M
u
u
= = 74.4082600
2
/8 = 3,348,400 kgf-cm = 33,484 kgf-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
b f
M
d d a
c
u

'
2
85 . 0
2
= = 11.70 cm (a < amax)
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As =
|
.
|

\
|

2
a
d f
M
y
u

=
( ) 0.85 4690.69 49 11.70 / 2
3, 348, 400
- -

As = 19.46 sq-cm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:
= 0.80
The shear demand, Vu , is given as,

2
( / 2) 22, 323
u u
V L e = = kgf
The concrete shear capacity is given by:
Vc = 0.53 ' 13, 626
c
f bd = kgf
The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:
Vmax =
( )
2.12 '
c
Vc f bd + = 68,132 kgf
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length is
calculated as follows:
If Vu s Vc,

s
A
v
= 0,
else if Vc < Vu s Vmax,

s
A
v
=
( )
u
ys
V V
f d
|
|

,
but at least,
0.2 '
3.5
max b, 0.0224
c v
y y
f A
b
s f f


= =
`

)
sq-cm/cm
else if Vu > Vmax,
a failure condition is declared.
Comb1
Vu = 22,323 kgf

s
A
v
=
d f
V V
ys
c u

) (
= 0.0621 sq-cm/cm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 002 - 1
KCI 1999 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 2020kN and
moment My = 505kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the calculated result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My = 493 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.980

1.00 2.04%
COMPUTER FILE: KCI 1999 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
600 600
= = 490 = 277
600 + 600 + 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

c s
N C C T = +
where
0.85 ' 0.85 30 350 8925
c c
C f ab a a = = =
( ) ( ) 0.85 ' 2500 460 0.85 30 1, 086, 250
s s y c
C A f f ' = = = N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
s s s s y
T A f f f f = = <
1
8925 1, 086, 250 2500
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:
( )
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




KCI 1999 Example 002 - 4
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm
( )
1
8925 490 1, 086, 250 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .


2
2
9405 9.5968 1, 004, 489 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 335 mm, which exceed cb (277 mm).
= 0.836 335 = 280 a - mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
9405 280 9.5968 280 1, 004, 489 2, 885, 500 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 335
600 277.6
335
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa

s t s s
f E c = c = = 0.0014

6) Substitute a = 280 mm and fs = 277.6 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
8925 280 1, 086, 250 2500 277.6 2, 891, 250 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,885,500 (less than 1% difference)

250
2884 721
1000
M Ne
| |
= = =
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
( )
335 60
0.003 0.0025 0.0023
335
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is
N = ( ) 2885 | = 2020 kN
M = ( ) 721 | = 505 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 1
RCDF 2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 6.58 Ton/m (64.528 kN/m). This example was tested using the Mexican
RCDF 2004 concrete design code. The computed moment and shear strengths are
compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING













L = 6 m















Material Properties
E = 1979899 kg/cm
2
= 0.2
G = 824958 kg/cm
2
Section Properties

h = 0.65 m
r = 0.05 m
b = 0.30 m
W = 6.58 Ton/m
(64.528 kN/m)

Design Properties

fc = 200 kg/cm
2
(19.6133 MPa)

fy = 4200 kg/cm
2
(411.88 MPa)



C
L
L
A
A
W Ton/m b
h
r
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Design moment calculation, M and factored moment resistance, Mu.

Minimum reinforcement calculation, As

Design Shear Strength, V, and factored shear strength, Vu

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 5.2 on page 92 of Aspectos Fundamentales
del Concreto Reforzado Fourth Edition by scar M. Gonzlez Cuevas and
Francisco Robles Fernndez-Villegas.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment (kN-m) 290.38 290.38 0%
As (mm
2
) 1498

1498 0%
Design Shear (kN) 154.9 154.9 0%
Av/s (mm
2
/m) 563 563 0%
COMPUTER FILE: RCDF 2004 EX001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results for bending and an acceptable-conservative comparison for shear.




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 3
GEOMETRY AND PROPERTIES
Clear span, L = 6 m
Overall depth, h = 650 mm
Width of beam, b = 300 mm
Effective depth, d = 600 mm
Concrete strength, fc = 19.61 N/ mm
2

Yield strength of steel, fy = 411.88 N/ mm
2

Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m
3

Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 20.6x10
3
N/ mm
2

Modulus of elasticity, Es = 20.0x10
4
N/ mm
2

Poissons ratio, v = 0.2


HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
*
' 19.61
15.69
1.25 1.25
c
c
f
f = = = MPa
c s
b
c s yd
E
c d
E f
c
c
=
+
= 355.8 mm
amax =
1 b
c | = 302.4 mm
where,
*
1
1.05
140
c
f
|
| |
=
|
\ .
,
1
0.65 0.85 | s s
2
min
0 22
425 8
c
s ,
y
. f '
A bd . mm
f
= =

COMB1
u
e = 6.58 ton/cm (64.528kN/m)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 4

2
8
u
u
l
M
e
= = 64.5286.0
2
/8 = 290.376 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by: (RCDF-NTC 2.1, 1.5.1.2)

2
*
2
0.85
u
c R
M
a d d
f F b
= = 154.2 mm
where 0.9
R
F =
Compression steel not required since a < amax.
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As =
2
u
R y
M
a
F f d
| |

|
\ .
=
( )
2
1498
0.9(411.88) 600 154.2 / 2
290376000
mm =

Shear Design
The shear demand is computed as:
( ) / 2
u
V L d e = =15.79 ton (154.9 kN) at distance, d, from support for
this example
The shear force is limited to a maximum of,

( )
*
max
0.8
cR c cv
V V f A = +
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
( )
*
0.3 0.2 20
cR Rv c cv
V F f A = + = ( ) 0.3 0.8 0.3665 15.69 300 600 - - -
=43.553 kN where 0.8
Rv
F =
The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:
2
min
0.1 '
289
c v
y
f A mm
b
s f m
| |
= =
|
\ .
(RCDF-NTC 2.5.2.3, Eqn 2.22)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 5
( )
2
154.9 0.8 43.553
563
0.8 411.88 600
u Rv cR v
Rv ys
V F V A mm
s F f d m

-
= = =
- -

(RCDF-NTC 2.5.2.3, Eqn 2.23)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 1
RCDF 2004 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1794 kN
and moment My = 448 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with a computed result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1794 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 448 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: RCDF 2004 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
( )
600 600
490 277
600 600 460
b t
y
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

c s
N C C T = +
where

*
0.85 0.85 0.8 30 350 7140
c c
C f ab a a = = =

( ) ( )
*
0.85 2500 460 0.85 0.8 30 1, 099, 000
s s y c
C A f f ' = = = N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

( )
2500
s s s s y
T A f f f f = = <
1
7140 1, 099, 000 2500
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm

( )
1
7140 490 1, 099, 000 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .


2
2
7542 7.677 1, 016, 280 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 4
4) Assume c = 347 mm, which exceeds cb (277 mm).
= 0.836 347 = 290 a a = | -
1
mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
7542 290 7.677 290 1, 016, 280 2, 557, 824 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.
490 347
600 247.3
347
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa
s t s s
f E c = c = = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 290 mm and fs = 247.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
7140 290 1, 099, 000 2500 247.3 2, 551, 350 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,557,824 (less than 1% difference)

250
2552 638
1000
M Ne
| |
= = =
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
( )
347 - 60
= 0.003 = 0.0025 > 0.0023
347
'
s y
c
| |
=
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

= N ( ) 2551 1794
R
F = kN
= M ( ) 638 448
R
F = kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 1
NZS 3101-2006 Example 001
Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify the flexural and shear design. The load
level is adjusted for the case corresponding to the following conditions:
The stress-block dimension, a, extends below,
max
a , which requires that
compression reinforcement be provided as permitted by NZS 3101-06.
The average shear stress in the beam is below the maximum shear stress
allowed by NZS 3101-06, requiring design shear reinforcement.
A simple-span, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 560-mm-deep beam is modeled.
The beam is shown in Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite
element mesh of frame elements, automatically generated. The maximum
element size has been specified to be 200 mm. The beam is supported by joint
restraints that have no rotational stiffness. One end of the beam has no
longitudinal stiffness.
The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL50) and one live load case (LL130) with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 50, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combination (COMB130) is defined using the NZS 3101-06 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead loads and 1.5 for live loads. The model is analyzed for
both of those load cases and the load combinations.
Table 1 shows the comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2
shows the comparison of the design shear reinforcements.



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 2



Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 3
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Clear span, L = 6000 mm
Overall depth, h = 560 mm
Width of beam, b = 300 mm
Effective depth, d = 500 mm
Depth of comp. reinf., d' = 60 mm
Concrete strength, fc = 30 MPa
Yield strength of steel, fy = 460 MPa
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m
3

Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 25x10
5
MPa
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 2x10
5
MPa
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2

Dead load, Pd = 50 kN
Live load, Pl = 130 kN
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement

RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip
with the moments obtained using the analytical method. They match exactly for
this problem. Table 1 also shows the comparison of design reinforcements.
Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements
Method
Moment
(kN-m)
Reinforcement Area (sq-mm)
As
+
As
-

ETABS 510 3170 193
Calculated 510 3170 193

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 4
Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements
Shear Force (kN)
Reinforcement Area,
s
A
v

(sq-mm/m)
ETABS Calculated
255 1192.5 1192.5


COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-2006 EX001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 5
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
|b = 0.85
1
0.85 for 55MPa
c
f ' o = s
1
0.85 for 30,
c
f ' | = s
=
+
c
b
c y s
c d
f E
c
c
= 283.02 mm
amax = 0.75|1cb= 180.42 mm
2
150, 000
c
A b d mm = =
min
446 5
4
max
1 4 456 5

'
=

c
c
y
s ,
c
y
f
A .
f
A
A
. .
f
mm
2

= 456.5 mm
2

COMB130
V
*
= (1.2Pd + 1.5Pl) = 255 kN
*
*
3
V L
M = = 510 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
*
2
'
1
2
c b f
M
a d d
f b
=
o |
= 194.82 mm ; a >
max
a
Since
max
a a > , compression reinforcing is required.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 6

The compressive force, C, developed in the concrete alone is given by:
1 max
1 380 2
c
C f ba , . kN o ' = =
The resisting moment by the concrete compression and tension reinforcement is:
* max
2
c b
a
M C d
| |
= |
|
\ .
= 480.8 kN-m
Therefore the moment required by concrete compression and tension
reinforcement is:
* * *
29.2
s c
M M M kN m = =
The required compression reinforcing is given by:
( )
( )
*
2
1
193
'
s
s
s c b
M
A mm
f f d d
' = =
'
' o |
, where
max
, max
1
0.75 0.75 283.02 212.26
b b
a
c c mm
|
= = = =
, max
, max
, max
'
b
s c s y
b
c d
f E f
c
c
(
'
= s
(
(

;
212.26 60
0.003 200, 000 430 460
212.26
s y
f MPa f MPa
(
'
= = s =
(


430
s
f MPa
'
=
The required tension reinforcing for balancing the compression in the concrete is:
*
2
1
max
3, 001
2
c
s
y b
M
A mm
a
f d
= =
| |
|
|
\ .

And the tension required for balancing the compression reinforcement is given
by:
( )
*
2
2
169.9
'
s
s
y b
M
A mm
f d d
= =
|

Therefore, the total tension reinforcement,
1 2 s s s
A A A = + is given by:
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 7
2
1 2
3001 169.9 3170.5
s s s
A A A mm = + = + =
Shear Design
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
C C CV
V v A = , where
C d a b
v k k v = , and
1.0
d
k = since shear reinforcement provided will be equal
to or greater than the nominal amount required.

a
k = 1.0 (Program default)
0.07 10 '
s
b C
A
v f
bd
| |
= +
|
\ .
, except
b
v is neither less than
0.08 '
C
f nor greater than 0.2 '
C
f and ' 50
C
f MPa s
0.4382
C
v =
The average shear stress is limited to a maximum limit of,
vmax = min{ } 0.2 , 8 MPa '
c
f = min{6, 8} = 6 MPa
For this example, the nominal shear strength provided by concrete is:
0.4382 300 500 65.727
C C CV
V v A kN = = - - =
*
*
max
1.7
w
V
v MPa v
b d
= = < , so there is no concrete crushing.
If v
*
> vmax, a failure condition is declared.
For this example the required shear reinforcing strength is:
|s = 0.75
*
S C
S
V
V V =
|
=
255
65.727
0.75
= 274.3 kN
The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:
Since { } 560 max 300 , 0.5 0.5 300 150
w
h mm mm b mm = > = =
|svc = 0.328 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 8
|svmax = 4.5 MPa
So |svc < v
*
s |svmax, and shear reinforcement is required and calculate as:
2
274.27 1E6
1192.5
460 500
v S
yt
A V
mm
s f d
-
= = =
-

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 1
NZS 3101-2006 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
*
= 2445 kN and moment My = 611 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2445 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties Design Properties
fc = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My= 611 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994

1.00 0.60%
COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-2006 Ex002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:

Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
600 600
= = 490 = 277
600 + 600 + 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
*
c s
N C C T +
where
= 0.85 = 0.85 30 350 = 8925
c c
C f ab a a - -
'

( ) ( )
= - 0.85 = 2500 460 - 0.85 30 = 1, 086, 250
'
s s y c
C A f f -
'
N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
( )
2500
s s s s y
T = A f = f f < f
= 8, 925 + 1, 086, 250 - 2500
*
s
N a f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:


( )
1
=
2
* '
c s '
a
N C d - C d - d
e
(
| |
+
| (
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 215 mm
= 250 + 215 = 465
' "
e = e + d mm

( )
1
= 8, 925 490 1, 086, 250 490 - 60
465 2
*
a
N a -
(
| |
+
| (
\ .



2
= 9, 404.8 9.6 + 1, 004, 489.2
*
N a - a (Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 4

4) Assume c = 330 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

= 0.85 330 = 280.5 a - mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:

( )
2
= 9, 404.8 280.5 9.6 280.5 + 1, 004, 489.2 = 2, 887, 205.2
*
N - - N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 330 mm.


490 - 330
= 600 = 290.9
330
s
f
| |
|
\ .
MPa
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.00145

6) Substitute a = 280.5 mm and fs = 290.9 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N
*
2:

( ) ( ) = 8, 925 280.5 + 1, 086, 250 - 2500 290.9 2, 862, 462.5
2
N =
*
N
Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,887,205.2 (less than 1% difference)
250
= 2877 719
1000
* *
M = N e
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
( )
330 - 60
= 0.003 = 0.00245 > 0.0023
330
'
s y
c
| |
=
|
\ .

Compression steels yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is

=
*
N 0.85- 2877 = 2445 kN
=
*
M 0.85- 719 = 611 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 1
SS CP 65-1999 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform unfactored dead load and
imposed load of 25 and 19 kN/m respectively spanning 6m. This example is
tested using the Singapore CP65-99 concrete design code. The flexural and shear
reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



d=490 mm









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As

Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min

Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av

Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min
Section A-A
C
L

6 m

A
A
h=600 mm
b=300mm

Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa
fyv = 250 MPa

300mm 300mm
Dead Load=25kN/m
Live Load=19kN/m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

The detailed work-out of the example above can be obtained from Example 3.4
of Chanakya Arya (1994). Design of Structural Elements. E & FN Spon, 54-55
Output Parameter

ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Mu (kN-m) 294.30 294.30 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 1555

1555 0.00%
Design Shear, Vu (kN) 160.23

160.23 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Asv/sv (mm
2
/mm) 0.730 0.730 0.00 %
COMPUTER FILE: SS CP 65-1999 EX001
CONCLUSION
The computed flexural results show an exact match with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
m, steel = 1.15
, min
0.0013
s
A bh =
, where b=300mm, h=600mm
= 234.00 sq-mm
Design Combo COMB1
wu = =65.4 kN/m
8
2
l w
M
u
u
= = 294.3 kN-m
d w
l w
V
u
u
u
=
2
= 160.23 kN
The depth of the compression block is given by:
K =
2
d b f
M
cu
= 0.108 < 0.156
If K s 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete
beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:
z = d
)
`

+
9 . 0
25 . 0 5 . 0
K
s 0.95d = 473.221 mm, where d=550 mm
The ultimate resistance moment is given by:
( )
1.15
s
y
M
A
f z
= = 1555 sq-mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0



SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
Vu = =160.23 kN at distance, d, from support
w
V
v
b d
= = 0.9711 MPa
vmax = min(0.8
cu
f , 5 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa
max
v v s , so no concrete crushing
The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:
4
1
3
1
2 1
400 100 84 . 0
|
.
|

\
|
|
.
|

\
|
=
d bd
A k k
v
s
m
c

= 0.4418 MPa
k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,
and is conservatively taken as 1 .
k2 =
3
1
30
|
.
|

\
|
cu
f
= 1.0, 1 s k2 s
1
3
80
30
| |
|
\ .

m = 1.25
0.15 s
bd
A
s
100
s 3
100 100 469
300 550
s
A
bd
-
=
-
= 0.2842
1 1
4 4
400 400
0.95 1, so
d d
| | | |
= >
| |
\ . \ .
is taken as 1.
fcu s 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v s vmax

( ) ( ) 0.9711 0.4418
0.87 0.87 250
c w sv
v yv
v v b A
s f

= = = 0.730 sq-mm/mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 1
SS CP 65-1999 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1971 kN
and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the calculated result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties
Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa

fy = 460 MPa

b = 350 m
d = 490 mm

A
3 m
A
My = 493 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994

1.00 0.60%
COMPUTER FILE: SS CP 65-1999 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balanced condition:
( )
700 700
490 296
700 700 460
b t
y
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

c s
N C C T = +
where

0.67
0.67 1.5 30 350 4667
c cu
C f ab a a
M
= = =

( ) ( )
2500
0.4467 460 0.4467 30 971, 014
1.15
s
s y cu
s
A
C f f
'
= = =

N
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).

( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T f f f = = = <

1
4, 667 971, 014 2174
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 215 mm
250 215 465 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm

( )
1
4, 667 490 971, 014 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .



2
4917.9 5.018 897, 926 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 4

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceeds cb (296 mm).
= 0.9 364 = 327.6 a - mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
4917.9 327.6 5.018 327.6 897, 926 1, 970, 500 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 364
700 242.3
364
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
MPa

s t s s
f E c = c = = 0.0012

6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
4, 667 327.6 971, 014 2174 242.3 1, 973,163 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)

250
= 1971 493
1000
M = Ne
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
( )
364 60
0.0035 0.0029 0.0023
364
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is
= N 1971 kN
= M 493 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

- 1

TS 500-2000 Example 001
Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load of 36.67 kN/m.
This example is tested using the Turkish TS 500-2000 concrete design code. The
flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING















Clear span, L = 6000 mm
Overall depth, h = 550 mm
Width of beam, b = 230 mm
Effective depth, d = 490 mm
Concrete strength, fck = 30 MPa
Yield strength of steel, fyk = 420 MPa
Concrete unit weight, wc = 0 kN/m
3

Modulus of elasticity, Ec = 25x10
3
MPa
Modulus of elasticity, Es = 2x10
5
MPa
Poissons ratio, v = 0.2
Section A-A
C
L

6 m
Material Properties
E = 25.000x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
Section Properties
A
A


d = 543.75 mm
550 mm
230mm
60 mm
Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa

fy = 420 MPa
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement

RESULTS COMPARISON

Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Design Moment, Md (kN-m) 165.02 165.02 0.00%
Tension Reinf, As (mm
2
) 1022

1022

0.00%
Design Shear, Vd (kN) 110.0 110.0 0.00%
Shear Reinf, Asw/s (mm
2
/mm) 0.2415 0.2415 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: TS 500-2000 EX001
CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
30
20
1.5
ck
cd
mc
f
f = = =

420
365
1.15
yk
yd
ms
f
f = = =

cu s
b
cu s yd
E
c d
E f
c
c
=
+
= 304.6 mm
amax =
1
0.85
b
k c = 212.3 mm
where, ( )
1
0.85 0.006 25 0.82
ck
k f = = ,
1
0.70 0.85 k s s
2
min
0 8
315 5
ctd
s ,
yd
. f
A bd . mm
f
= =
Where
0.35
0.35 30
1.278
1.5
cu
ctd
mc
f
f = = =

COMB1
d
e = 36.67 kN/m
2
8
d
d
L
M
e
= = 36.676
2
/8 = 165.02 kN-m
The depth of the compression block is given by:
2
2
0.85
d
cd
M
a d d
f b
= = 95.42 mm
Compression steel not required since a < amax.
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As =
2
d
yd
M
a
f d
| |

|
\ .
=
( ) 365 490 95
165
2
E6
.41 /

As = 1022 mm
2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 4
Shear Design
The shear demand is computed as:

2
d
L
V
e
= =110.0 kN at face of support for this example
The shear force is limited to a maximum of,

max
0.22
cd w
V f A = = 496 kN
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
0.65 1
d
cr ctd
g
N
V f bd
A
| |

= +
|
|
\ .
=93.6 kN, where 0
d
N =
0.8
c cr
V V = = 74.9 kN
The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:
If
d cr
V V s
2
min
0.3 0.2415
sw ctd
ywd
A f mm
b
s f mm
| |
= =
|
\ .
(min. controls) (TS 8.1.5, Eqn 8.6)

If
max cr d
V V V s s
( )
2
0.1962
d c sw
ywd
V V A mm
s f d mm

= = (TS 8.1.4, Eqn 8.5)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 1
TS 500-2000 Example 002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1908 kN
and moment My = 477 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the computed result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1908 kN





















TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED
Tied reinforced concrete column design
Material Properties
Ec = 25x10
6
kN/m
2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m
2





Section Properties
Design Properties
fck = 25 MPa

fyk = 420 MPa

b = 350 mm
d = 550 mm

A
3 m
A
My = 477 kN-m
Section A-A
550mm
350mm
60 mm
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.992

1.00 0.80%
COMPUTER FILE: TS 500-2000 EX002
CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fck = 25 MPa fyk = 420 MPa
b = 350 mm d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 167.46 mm < (2/3)d = 326.67 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

( )
5
5
0.003 2x10 600
= = 490 = 305
0.003 2x10 + 600 + 420 / 1.15
b t
yk
c d
f
-
-
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
c s
N C C T +
where
= 0.85 = 0.85 25 / 1.5 350 = 4, 958
c ck
C f ab a a - -

( )
2500
0.85 420 0.85 25 / 1.5 882, 246
1.15
s ck
s yk
s c
A f
C f
| | '
= = =
|

\ .
N
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

( )
2500
2174
1.15
s s s
s s y
s
A f f
T = = f f < f

=
1
4, 958 882, 246 2,174
s
N a f = + (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

( )
1
2
c s
a
N C d C d d
e
(
| |
' = +
| (
'
\ .


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 215 mm
= 250 + 215 = 465 ' '' e = e + d mm

( )
1
4, 958 490 882, 246 490 60
465 2
a
N a
(
| |
= +
| (
\ .


2
2
5525 5.3312 815, 840 N a a = + (Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0




TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 4
4) Assume c = 358.3 mm, which exceed cb (305 mm).

= 0.85 358 = 304.6 a - mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
( )
2
2
5525 304.6 5.3312 304.6 815, 840 1, 907, 643 N = + = N

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 359 mm.

490 358.3
600 220.2
358.3
s
f
| |
= =
|
\ .
> 420 MPa
=
s t s s
= f E = 0.0011

6) Substitute a = 304.6m and fs 221.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
( ) ( )
1
4, 958 304.6 882, 246 2174 220.2 1, 907, 601 N = + = N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,002,751 (less than 1% difference)

250
= 1908 477
1000
M = Ne
| |
=
|
\ .
kN-m

7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
( )
358 60
0.003 0.0025 0.0021
358
s y
| |
' c = = > c =
|
\ .

Compression steel yields, as assumed.

8) Therefore, section capacity is
= N 1908 kN
= M 477 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 735 k and
moments M
uy
= 1504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING






Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2



Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 4 k/in
2
f
y
= 60 k/in
2

tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5 = 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.007

1.00 0.70%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model. The values of
u
M and
u
P were large enough
to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where
' = = = 0.85 0.85 412 40.8
c c
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' = + +
' '
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5
T = A f A f +
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + + +
' '
1 1 1 2 2 1 1
3 3 4 4 5 5
40.8 0.85 0.85 0.85
0.85
n s C s c s c
s c s s s s
P a A f f A f f A f f
A f f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2 1 2 3 4
1
3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s C s T s
e
(
| |
' = + +
| (
'
\ .

(Eqn. 2)

where ( )
1 1 1
0.85 ' ' =
s s c
C A f f ; ( ) 0.85 ' ' =
sn n sn c
C A f f ;
sn sn sn
T f A = ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 28
inch
24.54 28 52.55 e e d ' '' = + = + = inch.

4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),

= 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 a - inch

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 4
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c d
c
= 0.0028; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 60.00 ksi
2
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c s d
c
= 0.0014
2 s
f = 40.75 ksi
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.0000
3 s
f = 00.29 ksi
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.0014
4 s
f = 40.20 ksi
5
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0028
5 s
f = 60.00 ksi

Substitute in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal gives,

=
n1
P 1035 k
=
n2
P 1035 k

n n
M Pe = = 1035(24.54) / 12 = 2116 k-ft

6) Determine if | is tension controlled or compression controlled.

= 0.00244 c
t
, = 0.0021 c
y

for 0.005
y t
c < c < ; ( )
0.005
0.005
t
t c
y
| |
c
| = | | =
|
|
c
\ .
0.712

7) Calculate | ,


( ) = 0.711 1035 735
n
P | = kips

( )
= 0.711 2115 1504
n
M | = k-ft.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load P
u
= 2384 k and moments M
u3
= 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2



Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 4 k/in
2
f
y
= 60 k/in
2

tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending

1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P
were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model interaction diagram. The values of
u
M
and
u
P were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to
one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
n1 c s
P C C T +

where

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( )
' = 0.85 8 8
cw c
C f a
( ) ( )
' = 0.85 8 98 40
cf c
C f
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5 s6 s6
T = A f + A f A f +
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )
P ' ' ' ' = + + +
' ' ' ' + + + +
1 1 1
2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
0.85 8 8 0.85 8 98 40 0.85
0.85 0.85
n c c s c
s c s c s s s s s s
f a f A f f
A f f A f f A f A f A f

(Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' ' + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(
+

1
2
2 3 4 5
-
1
2
4 3 2
f
cf cw f s
n
s s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d
P
e
C s C s T s T s
(Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 4
where ( )
' ' =
1 1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f , ( )
' ' = 0.85
sn n sn c
C A f f ,
sn sn sn
T f A = , and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d''
98 8
2

=
= 45 inches

= 46.78+ 45 = 91.78 ' '' = + e e d inches

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58
inches.

= = = 0.85 0.85 44.58 37.89 a c inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00273;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 60.00 ksi
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00152
2 s
f = 44.07 ksi
3
2 '
0.003
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00310
3 s
f = 8.94 ksi
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00090
4 s
f = 26.2 ksi
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00211
5 s
f = 60.00 ksi
6
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00333
6 s
f = 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give

=
n1
P 3148 k
=
n2
P 3148 k

n n
M Pe = = 3148(46.78) / 12 = 12,273 k-ft


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 5

6) Determine if | is tension controlled or compression controlled.

= 0.00332 c
t
, = 0.0021 c
y

for 0.005
y t
c < c < ; ( )
0.005
0.005
t
t c
y
| |
c
| = | | =
|
|
c
\ .
0.757

7) Calculate the capacity,

( )
= 0.757 3148 2384
n
P | = kips
( )
= 0.757 12, 273 9293
n
M | = k-ft.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 735 k and
moments M
uy
= 1,504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 2







TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.007

1.00 0.70%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2



Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 4 k/in
2
f
y
= 60 k/in
2

tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5 = 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL

1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model. The values of
u
M and
u
P were large enough
to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where
' = = = 0.85 0.85 412 40.8
c c
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5
T = A f A f +
( ) ( ) ( )
( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + + +
' '
1 1 1 2 2 1 1
3 3 4 4 5 5
40.8 0.85 0.85 0.85
0.85
n s c s c s c
s c s s s s
P a A f f A f f A f f
A f f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' = + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)

where ( )
1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f ' ' = ; ( )
' ' = 0.85
sn n sn c
C A f f ;
sn sn sn
T f A = ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and '' d = 28
inch
' '' = + = + = 24.54 28 52.55 e e d inch.

4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),
= 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 a - inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 4
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0028;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 60.00 ksi
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0014
2 s
f = 40.75 ksi
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.0000
3 s
f = 00.29 ksi
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.0014
4 s
f = 40.20 ksi
5
87
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0028
5 s
f = 60.00 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 1035 k
=
n2
P 1035 k

n n
M Pe = = 1035(24.54) / 12 = 2116 k-ft

6) Determine if | is tension controlled or compression controlled.

= 0.00244 c
t
, = 0.0021 c
y

for 0.005
y t
c < c < ; ( )
0.005
0.005
t
t c
y
| |
c
| = | | =
|
|
c
\ .
0.712

7) Calculate | ,

( )
= 0.711 1035 735
n
P | = kips

( ) = 0.711 2115 1504
n
M | = k-ft.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load P
u
= 2384 k and moments M
u3
= 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2



Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 4 k/in
2
f
y
= 60 k/in
2

tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending

1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P
were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model interaction diagram. The values of
u
M
and
u
P were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to
one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
n1 c s
P C C T +

where
c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( )
' = 0.85 8 8
cw c
C f a
( ) ( )
' = 0.85 8 98 40
cf c
C f
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5 s6 s6
T = A f + A f A f +
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )
' ' ' ' = + + +
' ' ' ' + + + +
1 1 1
2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
0.85 8 8 0.85 8 98 40 0.85
0.85 0.85
n c c s c
s c s c s s s s s s
P f a f A f f
A f f A f f A f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
( | |
' ' + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(
+

1
2
2 3 4 5
1
2
4 3 2
f
cf cw f s
n
s s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d
P
e
C s C s T s T s
(Eqn. 2)

where ( )
' ' =
1 1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f , ( ) 0.85
sn n sn c
C A f f ' ' = ,
sn sn sn
T f A = , and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d''
98 8
2

= = 45 inches
' '' = + = + = 46.78 45 91.78 e e d inches
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 4

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58
inches.

= 0.85 c=0.85 44.58 = 37.89 a - - inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain
then,
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00273;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 60.00 ksi
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00152
2 s
f = 44.07 ksi
3
2 '
0.003
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00310
3 s
f = 8.94 ksi
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00090
4 s
f = 26.2 ksi
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00211
5 s
f = 60.00 ksi
6
0.003
s
d c
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00333
6 s
f = 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give

=
n1
P 3148 k
=
n2
P 3148 k

n n
M Pe = = 3148(46.78) / 12 = 12,273 k-ft

6) Determine if | is tension controlled or compression controlled.
= 0.00332 c
t
, = 0.0021 c
y

for 0.005
y t
c < c < ; ( )
0.005
0.005
t
t c
y
| |
c
| = | | =
|
|
c
\ .
0.757

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 5
7) Calculate the capacity,

( ) = 0.757 3148 2384
n
P | = kips
( ) = 0.757 12, 273 9, 293
n
M | = k-ft.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. A reinforced masonry wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 556
k and moments M
uy
= 1331 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each
end and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center each of face module (The reinforcing is
not aligned with the conventional masonry block spacing for calculation
convenience. The same excel spreadsheet used in other concrete examples was
used here). The total area of reinforcement is 5.20 in
2
. The design capacity ratio
is checked by hand calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013
program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.014

1.00 1.40%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 530-11 MASONRY WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 2250 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 750 k/in
2



Section Properties Design Properties
f m = 2.5 k/in
2
f
y
= 60 k/in
2

tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5 = 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control

1) A value of e = 28.722 inches was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P
were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model. The values of
u
M and
u
P were large
enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the
neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that
equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where
' = | = =
1
0.8 2.512 24.0
c m
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.8 0.8 0.8
s s m s m s m
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5
T = A f A f +
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + + +
1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
24 0.8 0.8 0.8
n s m s m s m s s s s
P a A f f A f f A f f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' = + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s T s T s
e

(Eqn. 2)
where ( )
1 1 1
0.8
s s m
C A f f ' ' = ; ( ) 0.8
sn n sn m
C A f f ' ' = ;
sn sn sn
T f A = ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 28
inch
' '' = + = + = 28.722 28 56.72 e e d inch.

4) Using c = 32.04 inch (from iteration),

= 0.80 332.04 = 25.64 a - inch

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 4
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0025 and c= 32.04 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.0025
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00207;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 60.00 ksi
2
'
0.0025
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00125
2 s
f = 36.30 ksi
3
2 '
0.0025
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00016
3 s
f = 4.62 ksi
4
0.0025
s
d c s
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00093
4 s
f = 27.10 ksi
5
0.0025
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00203
5 s
f = 58.70 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 618 k;
=
n2
P 618 k

n n
M Pe = = 618(28.72) / 12 = 1479 k-ft

6) Calculate | ,

( ) = 0.9 618 556
n
P | = kips
( ) = 0.9 1479 1331
n
M | = k-ft.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load P
u
= 1496 k and moments M
u3
= 7387 k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Column Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: ACI 530-11 MASONRY WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 3600 k/in
2
= 0.2
G = 1500 k/in
2



Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 4 k/in
2
f
y
= 60 k/in
2

tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending

1) A value of e = 59.24 inches was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P
were taken from the ETABS 2013 test model interaction diagram. The values of
u
M
and
u
P were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to
one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

=
n1 c s
P C C T +

where

' = | = =
1
0.8 2.512 24.0
c m
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.8 0.8 0.8
s s m s m s m
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5 s6 s6
T = A f A f A f + +
( ) ( )
( )
' ' ' ' = + + +
' '
1 1 1 2 2
3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
24 0.8 0.8
0.8
n s m s m
s m s s s s s s
P a A f f A f f
A f f A f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s6
:

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
+ + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(


1 2
2
3 4 5
' ' 4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
(Eqn. 2)

where ( )
1 1 1
0.8
s s m
C A f f ' ' = ; ( ) 0.8
sn n sn m
C A f f ' ' = ;
sn sn sn
T f A = ; and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 45
inch

' '' = + = + = 59.24 45 104.24 e e d inch.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 4
4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 41.15
inches.

0.8 0.8 41.15 32.92 a c = = = inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0025 and c = 41.15 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.0025
s
c d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00226;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 60.00 ksi
2
'
0.0025
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00116
2 s
f = 33.74 ksi
3
2 '
0.0025
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00007
3 s
f = 2.03 ksi
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00102
4 s
f = 29.7 ksi
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00212
5 s
f = 60.00 ksi
6
0.0025
s
d c
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00321
6 s
f = 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give

=
n1
P 1662 k
=
n2
P 1662 k

n n
M Pe = = 1662(41.15) / 12 = 8208 k-ft

6) Calculate the capacity,

( ) = 0.9 1622 1496
n
P | = kips
( ) = 0.9 8208 7387
n
M | = k-ft.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 3438 kN and
moments M
uy
= 2003 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING





Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-09 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 582.6 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

' = = = 0.85 0.85 30 300 7650
c c
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) ( )

' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5
T = A f A f +
( ) ( )
( )


' ' = + + +
'
1 1 1 2 2
3 3 4 4 5 5
7650 0.85 0.85
0.85
n s c s c
s c s s s s
P a A f f A f f
A f f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
= + + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
' 3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)

where ( )
' =
1 1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f ; ( )
2 2 2
0.85
s s c
C A f f ' = ; ( )
3 3
0.85
s s c
C f f ' ;
4 4 4 s s s
T f A = and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and '' d = 700mm

' '' = + = + = 582.6 700 1282.61 e e d mm.


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 4
4) Using c = 821.7 mm (from iteration),

= c = 0.84 821.7=690.2 a - mm, where 1.05 0.007( ) 0.84
c
f ' = =

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 30 inch, the steel stresses and
strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0028;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460.00 ksi
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0015
2 s
f = 307.9 ksi
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.0003
3 s
f = 52.3 ksi
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.0010
4 s
f = 203.2 ksi
5
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0023
5 s
f = 458.8 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 5289 kN
=
n2
P 5289 kN

n n
M Pe = = 5289(582.6) / 1000000 = 3081 k-ft

6) Calculate | ,

( ) = 0.65 5289 3438
n
P | = kN
( ) = 0.65 3081 2003
n
M | = kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load P
u
=
11175 kN and moments M
uy
= 12564 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.999

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-09 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1124.3 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where

= 0.85 = 0.85 30 300 = 7650
'
c c
C f ab a a - -

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( )
' = 0.85 200 200
cw c
C f a
( )
' = 0.85 200 2500
cf c
C f
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
= + +
4 4 5 5 6 6 s s s s s s
T A f A f A f
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )
' ' ' ' = + + +
' ' ' ' + + + +
1 1 1
2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
0.85 8 8 0.85 8 98 0.85
0.85 0.85
n c c s c
s c s c s s s s s s
P f a f A f f
A f f A f f A f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(
+

1
2
2 3 4 5
'
1
2
4 3 2
f
cf cw f s
n
s s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d
P
e
C s C s T s T s
(Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 4
where ( )
' ' =
1 1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f , ( )
' ' = 0.85
sn n sn c
C A f f , =
sn sn sn
T f A , and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, '' d
2500 200
2

= = 1150 mm

' '' = + = + = 1124.3 1150 2274.3 e e d mm

(4) Using c = 1341.6 mm (from iteration)

= | = =
1
0.851341.6 1140.4 a c mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1341.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
' | |
c =
|
\ .
1
0.003
s
c d
c
= 0.00278; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 460.0 MPa
' | |
c =
|
\ .
2
0.003
s
c s d
c
= 0.00199
2 s
f = 398.7 MPa
' | |
c =
|
\ .
3
2
0.003
s
c s d
c
= 0.00121
3 s
f = 242.2 MPa
| |
c = c
|

\ .
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00080
4 s
f = 160.3 MPa
| |
c = c
|

\ .
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00158
5 s
f = 16.8 MPa
| |
c =
|
\ .
6
0.003
s
d c
c
= 0.00237
6 s
f = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give,

=
n1
P 17192 kN
=
n2
P 17192 kN

n n
M Pe = = 17192(1124.3) / 1000000 = 19329 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 5
6) Calculate | ,
( ) | = = 0.65 17 1 7 92 5 1 11
n
P kN
( ) | = = 0.65 19329 12564
n
M kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 3246 kN and
moments M
uy
= 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997

1.00 0.30%
COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-97 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, c
b
:

( )
700 700
1450 922.7
700 / 700 460 / 1.15
b t
y s
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

= = =

0.67 0.67
30 300 4020
1.5
c cu
m
C f ab a a
| | | | | | ' ' '
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
1 2 3
1 2 3
0.67 0.67 0.67
s s s
s s c s c s c
s m s m s m
A A A
C f f f f f f
= +

4 5
4 5
s s
s s
s s
A A
T f f
| | | | ' '
' ' = + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| | '
' +
|

\ .
1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5
3 4 5
0.67 0.67
4709
0.67
s s
n s c s c
s m s m
s s s
s c s s
s m s s
A A
P a f f f f
A A A
f f f f
(Eqn. 1)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' ' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C d d s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)
where
1
1 1
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
2
2 2
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
3
3 3
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
4
4 4
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
T f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and '' d = 700 mm
' '' = + = + = 606.5 700 1306.5 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 875.2 mm (from iteration), which is more than c
b
(722.7mm).
= | = =
1
0.9875.2 787.7 a c mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00330;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00190
2 s
f = 380.1 MPa
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00050
3 s
f = 100.1 MPa
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00090
4 s
f = 179.8 MPa
5
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00230
5 s
f = 459.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 3246 kN
=
n2
P 3246 kN

n n
M Pe = = 3246(606.5) / 1000 = 1969 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load P
u
=
8368 kN and moments M
uy
= 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 2









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.001

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-97 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where
c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( ) =

0.67
200 200
cw cu
m
C f a
( ) =

0.67
200 2500
cf cu
m
C f
| | | | | | ' ' '
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
1 2 3
1 2 3
0.67 0.67 0.67
s s s
s s c s c s c
s m s m s m
A A A
C f f f f f f
s4 s5 s6
s4 s5 s6
A A A
T = f f f + +

s s s

( ) ( )
| | '
' = + +
|

\ .
| | | | ' '
' ' + + + +
| |

\ . \ .
1
1 1
2 3 4 5 6
2 3 4 5 6
0.67 0.67 0.67
200 200 200 2500
0.67 0.67
s
n cu cu s c
m m s m
s s s s s
s c s c s s s
s m s m s s s
A
P f a f f f
A A A A A
f f f f f f f
(Eqn. 1)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4 5
4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw f s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
( | |
' ' + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(
+

(Eqn. 2)
where
1
1 1
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
0.67
sn
sn sn c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
0.67
sn
sn sn c
s m
A
T f f
| |
' =
|

\ .

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 1150 mm

' '' = + = + = 1430 1150 2580 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),

= | = =
1
0.91160 1044 a c mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.0035
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00320;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
'
0.0035
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00181
2 s
f = 362.0 MPa
3
2 '
0.0035
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00042
3 s
f = 84.4 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00097
4 s
f = 193.2 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00235
5 s
f = 460.00 MPa
6
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00374
6 s
f = 460.00 MPa


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 5
Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 8368 kN
=
n2
P 8368 kN

n n
M Pe = = 8368(1430) / 1000 = 11,967 kN-m


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 3870 kN
and moments M
uy
= 2109 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at
each end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.038

1.00 3.80%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA-A23.3 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 545 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, c
b
:

( ) = = =
+ +
700 700
1450 875
700 700 460
b t
y
c d
f
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

' = | o = =
1
0.65 0.805 30 300 4709
c c c
C f ab a a
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' ' ' ' = | o + | o + | o
'
1 1 1 2 2 1 3 3 1 s s s s c s s s c s s s c
C A f f A f f A f f
= | + |
4 4 5 5 s s s s s
T A f A f

( ) ( )
' ' ' ' = + + | | |
1 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5
4709 0.805 0.805
n s c s c s s s s s s
P a A f f A f f A f A f A f (Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' ' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C d d s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 4
where ( )
' ' = | o
1 1 1 1 s s s s c
C A f f ; ( )
2 2 2 1 s s s s c
C A f f ' ' = | o ; ( )
3 3 3 1 s s s s c
C A f f ' ' = | o ;
4 4 4 s s s s
T f A = | and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and '' d = 700 mm

' '' = + = + = 545 700 1245 e e d inch.

4) Using c = 894.5 mm (from iteration), which is more than c
b
(875mm).

= c = 0.895 = 800.6
1
894.5 | - a mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00330;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460.0 MPa
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00193
2 s
f = 387.0 MPa
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00057
3 s
f = 113.1 MPa
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00080
4 s
f = 160.8 MPa
5
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00217
5 s
f = 434.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 3870 kN
=
n2
P 3870 kN

n n
M Pe = = (545) / 3870 1000 = 2109 kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load P
u
=
10687 kN and moments M
uy
= 13159 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.994

1.00 0.40%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA-A23.3-04 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:

f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 1231.3 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where

c 1
= = 0.65 0.805 30 300 = 4709
c
' | o - - -
c
C f ab a a

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( ) =
c 1
200
c
' | o
cw
C f a - 200
( ) =
c 1
2002500
c
' | o
cf
C f
( ) ( ) ( )
1 1 1 2 2 1 3 3 1 s s s s c c s s s c c s s s c c
C A f f A f f A f f ' ' ' ' ' ' = | o | + | o | + | o |
4 4 5 5 6 6 s s s s s s s s s
T A f A f A f = | + | + |

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1 1 1 1 1 1
2 2 1 3 3 1 4 4 5 5 6 6
200 200 200 2500
n c c c c s s s c c
s s s c c s s s c c s s s s s s s
P f a f A f f
A f f A f f A f A f A f
' ' ' ' = | o + | o + | o | +
' ' ' ' | o | + | o | | | |

(Eqn. 1)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4 5
4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw f s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
( | |
' ' + + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(


(Eqn. 2)
where ( )
1 1 1 1 s s s s c c
C A f f ' ' = | o | ; ( )
1 sn s sn sn c c
C A f f ' ' = | o | ;
4 s s sn sn
T f A = | and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
d'' = 700 mm
1231.3 1050 2381.3 e e d ' '' = + = + = inch.

4) Using c = 1293.6 mm (from iteration),
1
0.8951293.6 1157.8 a c = | = = mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0030 and c = 1293.6 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00323;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460.0 MPa
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00198
2 s
f = 397.0 MPa
3
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00074
3 s
f = 148.1 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00175
4 s
f = 100.9 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00299
5 s
f = 349.8 MPa
5
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00230
6 s
f = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 10687 kN
=
n2
P 10687 kN
n n
M Pe = = (1231.3) / 100 10687 0000 = 13159 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 4340 kN and
moments M
uy
= 2503 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 2









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.993

1.00 0.70%
COMPUTER FILE: EUROCODE 2-2004 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 576.3 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, c
b
:

( )
700 700
1450 922.7
700 / 700 460 / 1.15
b t
y s
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where
o
= = =

1.0 30
300 6000
1.5
cc ck
c
m
f
C ab a a

| | | | | | o o o
= + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
1 2 3
1 2 3
s cc ck s cc ck s cc ck
s s s s
s m s m s m
A f A f A f
C f f f
= +

4 5
4 5
s s
s s
s s
A A
T f f


| | | | o o
= + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| | o

|

\ .
1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5
3 4 5
6000
s cc ck s cc ck
n s s
s m s m
s cc ck s s
s s s
s m s s
A f A f
P a f f
A f A A
f f f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 4
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)

where
| | o
=
|

\ .
1
1 1
s cc ck
s s
s m
A f
C f ;
2
2 2
s cc ck
s s
s m
A f
C f
| | o
=
|

\ .
;
3
3 3
s cc ck
s s
s m
A f
C f
| | o
=
|

\ .
;
( )
4
4 4
s
s s
s
A
T f =

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and '' d = 700 mm
' '' = + = + = 576.73 700 1276.73 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 885.33 mm (from iteration), which is more than c
b
(922.7mm).

= c = 0.80 885.33=708.3 a -
1
mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 885.33 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00330;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00192
2 s
f = 383.7 MPa
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00054
3 s
f = 107.0 MPa
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00085
4 s
f = 169.7 MPa
5
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00223
5 s
f = 446.5 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
=
n1
P 4340 kN
=
n2
P 4340 kN
n n
M Pe = = 4340(708.3) / 1000 = 2503 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
=
11605 kN and moments M
uy
= 15342 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: EUROCODE 2-2004 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1322 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

Where

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( ) ( )
o
= = =

0.85 30
200 200 200 200 3400( 200)
1.5
cc ck
cw
m
f
C a a a
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
o
= = =

0.85(30)
200 2500 1000 200 2500 1000 5,100, 000
1.5
cc ck
cf
m
f
C

| | | | | | o o o
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
1 1 2 2 3 3
cc ck cc ck cc ck
s s s s
m m m
f f f
C A f A f A f
= + +

4 4 4
4 5 6
s s s
s s s
s s s
f f f
T A A A


| | | | o o
= + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| | o
+
|

\ .
1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5 6
3 4 5 6
3400( 200) 5,100, 000
s cc ck s cc ck
n s s
s m s m
s cc ck s s s
s s s s
s m s s s
A f A f
P a f f
A f A A A
f f f f

(Eqn. 1)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:

( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
f
f
a
1
2 =
T 2s T s
cf cw s1
n2
s2 s3 s4 s5
t
C d - d' C d - t C d - d'
P
e
C 4s C 3s
( | |
+ + +
( |
\ .
(
'
(
+

(Eqn. 2)

where
1
1 1
s cc ck
s s
s m
A f
C f
| | o
=
|

\ .
;
2
2 2
s cc ck
s s
s m
A f
C f
| | o
=
|

\ .
;
3
3 3
s cc ck
s s
s m
A f
C f
| | o
=
|

\ .
;
( )
4
4 4
s
s s
s
A
T f =

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 700 mm
' '' = + = + = 1322 700 2472 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 1299 mm (from iteration),

= | = =
1
0.8951299 1163 a c mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 1299 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00323;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00199
2 s
f = 398.2 MPa
3
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00075
3 s
f = 150.3 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00049
4 s
f = 97.5 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00173
5 s
f = 345.4 MPa
6
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00297
6 s
f = 460.00 MPa


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 5
Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 11605 kN
=
n2
P 11605 kN

n n
M Pe = = 11605(1322) / 1000 = 15342 kN-m


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 3246 kN and
moments M
uy
= 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997

1.00 0.30%
COMPUTER FILE: HONG KONG CP-04 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, c
b
:

( )
700 700
1450 922.7
700 / 700 460 / 1.15
b t
y s
c d
f
= = =
+ +
mm

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

= = = 4020
c
C f ab a a - -

cu
0.67 0.67
30 300
1.5
m

| | | | | | ' ' '
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
1 2 3
1 2 3
0.67 0.67 0.67
s s s
s s c s c s c
s m s m s m
A A A
C f f f f f f
s4 s5
s4 s5
A A
T = f f +

s s

| | | | ' '
' = + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| | '
' +
|

\ .
' 1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5
3 4 5
0.67 0.67
4709
0.67
s s
n s c s c
s m s m
s s s
s c s s
s m s s
A A
P a f f f f
A A A
f f f f
(Eqn. 1)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' ' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C d d s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)
where
1
1 1
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
2
2 2
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|
\ .

;
3
3 3
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|
\ .

;
4
4 4
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
T f f
| |
' =
|
\ .

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 700 mm
' '' = + = + = 606.5 700 1306.5 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 875.2 mm (from iteration), which is slightly more than c
b
(922.7 mm).
1
= c = 0.9 875.2=787.68 a | - mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 875.2 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
=0.00330;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
=0.00190
2 s
f = 380.1 MPa
3 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
=0.00050
3 s
f = 100.1 MPa
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
=0.00090
4 s
f = 179.8 MPa
5
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
=0.00230
5 s
f = 459.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 3246 kN
=
n2
P 3246 kN

n n
M Pe = = 3246(606.5) / 1000 = 1969 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load P
u
=
8368 kN and moments M
uy
= 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 2









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.001

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: HONG KONG CP-04 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( ) =

0.67
200 200
cw cu
m
C f a
( ) =

0.67
200 2500
cf cu
m
C f
| | | | | | ' ' '
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .
1 2 3
1 2 3
0.67 0.67 0.67
s s s
s s c s c s c
s m s m s m
A A A
C f f f f f f
= + +

4 5 6
4 5 6
s s s
s s s
s s s
A A A
T f f f
( ) ( )
| | '
' = + + +
|

\ .
| | | | ' '
' ' + + +
| |

\ . \ .
1
1 1
2 3 4 5 6
2 3 4 5 6
0.67 0.67 0.67
200 200 200 2500
0.67 0.67
s
n cu cu s c
m m s m
s s s s s
s c s c s s s
s m s m s s s
A
P f a f f f
A A A A A
f f f f f f f
(Eqn. 1)



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4 5
4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw f s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
( | |
' ' + + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(


(Eqn. 2)

where
1
1 1
0.67
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
0.67
sn
sn sn c
s m
A
C f f
| |
' =
|

\ .
;
0.67
sn
sn sn c
s m
A
T f f
| |
' =
|

\ .

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 1150 mm

' '' = + = + = 1430 1150 2580 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),

= | = =
1
0.91160 1044 a c mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00320;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00181
2 s
f = 362.0 MPa
3
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00042
3 s
f = 84.4 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00097
4 s
f = 193.2 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00235
5 s
f = 460.00 MPa
6
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00374
6 s
f = 460.00 MPa


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 5
Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 8368 kN
=
n2
P 8368 kN

n n
M Pe = = 8368(1430) / 1000 = 11,967 kN-m


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load P
u
= 3146 kN and
moments M
uy
= 1875 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 2










TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.035

1.00 3.50%
COMPUTER FILE: INDIAN IS 456-2000 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

F
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 596 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where
ck
0.36
= = 0.4286 30 300 = 3857
0.84
c
C f ab a a - - , where 0.84
u
a x =
( ) ( ) ( )
' ' '
' ' ' = + +

1 2 3
1 2 3
0.4286 0.4286 0.4286
s s s
s s c s c s c
s s s
A A A
C f f f f f f
s s
s4 s5
s4 s5
A A
T = f f

+
( ) ( )
( )
' '
' ' = + + +

'
+

1 2
1 1 2
' 3 4 5
3 4 5
3857 0.4286 0.4286
0.4286
s s
n s c s c
s s
s s s
s c s s
s s s
A A
P a f f f f
A A A
f f f f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' ' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

2 1 2 3 4
1
2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C d d s C s T s
e
(Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 4
where ( )
1
1 1
0.4286
s
s s c
s
A
C f f ' =

; ( )
2
2 2
0.4286
s
s s c
s
A
C f f ' =

;
( )
3
3 3
0.4286
s
s s c
s
A
C f f ' =

; ( )
4
4 4
s
s s
s
A
T f =

and the bar strains and stresses are

determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 700 mm
' '' = + = + = 596 700 1296 e e d mm.

4) Using c = 917.3 mm (from iteration)

= | = =
1
0.84 917.3 770.5 a c mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 917.3 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.0035
s
c d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00331;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
'
0.0035
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00197
2 s
f = 394.8 MPa
3
2 '
0.0035
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00064
3 s
f = 127.7 MPa
4 5 s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00070
4 s
f = 139.4 MPa
5
0.0035
s
d c
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00203
5 s
f = 406.5 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 3146 kN
=
n2
P 3146 kN

n n
M Pe = = 3146(596) / 1000 = 1875 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002

FRAME P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 8426
kN and moments M
uy
= 11670 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted below.
The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 2












TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.003

1.00 0.30%
COMPUTER FILE: INDIAN IS 456-2000 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show a very close match with the independent results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:

1) A value of e = 1385 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were taken
from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values for
u
M
and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a flexural D/C
ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by
iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T
where
c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( )
ck
0.36
= 200 200
0.84
cw
C f a - , where
u
0.84x a =
( )
ck
0.36
= 200 2500-1000
0.84
cf
C f
ck ck ck
s s s
0.36 0.36 0.36
= - + - -
0.84 0.84 0.84
' ' '
s1 s2 s3
s s1 s2 s3
A A A
C f f f f f f

| | | | | |
+
| | |
\ . \ . \ .

s s s
s4 s5 s6
s4 s5 s6
A A A
T = f f f

+ +
( ) ( )
ck ck ck ck
s s
ck
s s s s
0.36 0.36 0.36 0.36
= 200 200 + 200 2500-1000 - + -
0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84
0.36
- -
0.84
' '
s1 s2
n1 s1 s2
'
s3 s4 s5 s6
s3 s4 s5 s6
A A
P f a - f f f f f
A A A A
f f f f f


| | | |
+
| |
\ . \ .
| |
+
|
\ .

(Eqn. 1)





Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
f
f
a 1
= T 2s T s
2
n2 cf cw s1 s2 s3 s4 s5 '
t
P C d - d' C d - t C d - d' C 4s C 3s
e
( | |
+ + + +
( |
\ .


(Eqn. 2)
Where
1 ck
s
0.36
-
0.84
'
s1
s s1
A
C f f

| |
=
|
\ .
;
2 ck
s
0.36
-
0.84
'
sn
s sn
A
C f f

| |
=
|
\ .
; ( )
4
sn
s sn
s
A
T f

= and the bar

strains and stresses are determined below.


The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
"
d = 1150 mm
=1138 +1150 = 2535
' "
e = e+d mm.


4) Using c = 1298.1 mm (from iteration)

= c = 0.84 1298.1=1090.4 a | -
1
mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1298.1 mm, the steel stresses and
strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
=0.00323;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa

2
'
0.0035
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
=0.00199
2 s
f = 398.0 MPa
3
2 '
0.0035
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
=0.00075
3 s
f = 150.0 MPa
4 5
2
s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
=0.00049
4 s
f = 98.1 MPa
5 5 s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
=0.00173
5 s
f = 346.1 MPa
6
0.0035
s
d c
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
=0.00297
6 s
f = 460.0 MPa




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 5
Substitute in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the two equations
are equal gives,

=
n1
P 8426 kN
=
n2
P 8426 kN


n n
M Pe = = 8426(1385) / 1000 = 11670 kN-m


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load P
u
= 3545 kN and
moments M
uy
= 1817 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 2









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.016

1.00 1.60%
COMPUTER FILE: MEXICAN RCDF-04 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 512.5 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.


2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where


*
0.85 0.85 0.8 30 300 6120
c c
C f ab a a = = =
( ) ( ) ( )
* * *
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.8 0.85 0.8 0.85 0.8
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f = + +


s4 s4 s5 s5
T = A f A f +

( ) ( )
( )
* *
1 1 1 2 2
*
3 3 4 4 5 5
6120 0.85 0.8 0.85 0.8
0.85 0.8
n s c s c
s c s s s s
P a A f f A f f
A f f A f A f
= + + +



(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2 1 2 3 4
1
3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s C s T s
e
(
| |
' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

(Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 4
where
( )
*
1 1 1
0.85 0.8
s s c
C A f f = ;
( )
*
2 2 2
0.85 0.8 =
s s c
C A f f ;
( )
*
3 3
0.85 0.8
s s c
C f f ;
4 4 4 s s s
T f A = and the bar strains are determined below. The
plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 700mm
512.5 700 1212.5 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm.

4) Using c = 936.2 mm (from iteration)

0.85 916.2 805 a c = | = = mm,

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 936.2 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c d
c
= 0.0028; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 460.00 MPa
2
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c s d
c
= 0.0017
2 s
f = 343.6 MPa
3 5
2 | |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.0005
3 s
f = 119.3 MPa
4 5
| |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.0060
4 s
f = 105.4 MPa
5
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0175
5 s
f = 329.3 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 5064 kN
=
n2
P 5064 kN

n n
M Pe = = 5064(512.5) / 1000000 = 2595 kN-m






Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 5
7) Calculate
n
P | and,
n
M | ,

( ) = 0.70 5064 3545
n
P | = kips
( ) = 0.70 2595 1817
n
M | = k-ft.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load P
u
= 10165 kN and moments M
u3
= 11430 kN-
m. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.000%
COMPUTER FILE: MEXICAN RCDF-04 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1124.4 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( )
' = 0.85 0.8 200 200
cw c
C f a
( )
' = 0.85 0.8 2001500
cf c
C f
( ) ( ) ( )

' ' ' = + +
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.8 0.85 0.8 0.85 0.8
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f
s4 s4 s5 s5 s6 s6
T = A f A f A f + +

( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )


' ' ' = + +
' ' + +
1 1 1
2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
0.85 0.8 200 200 0.85 0.8 2001500 0.85 0.8
0.85 0.8 0.85 0.8
n c c s c
s c s c s s s s s s
P f a f A f f
A f f A f f A f A f A f
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
(
| |
' ' + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(
+

1
2
2 3 4 5
1
2
4 3 2
f
cf cw f s
n
s s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d
P
e
C s C s T s T s
(Eqn. 2)

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 4
where ( )
1 1 1
0.85 0.8
s s c
C A f f ' = , ( ) 0.85 0.8
sn n sn c
C A f f ' = ,
sn sn sn
T f A = , and the
bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section,
'' d
2500 200
2

= = 1150 mm
=1124.4 +1150 = 2274.4
' "
e = e+d mm

4) Using c = 1413 mm (from iteration)

= 0.85c = 0.85 1413=1201 a - mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1413 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
'
0.003
s
c d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00279;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 460.0 MPa
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00181
2 s
f = 362.2 MPa
3
2 '
0.003
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00083
2 s
f = 166.8 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00014
3 s
f = 28.6 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00112
4 s
f = 223.9 MPa
6
0.003
s
d c
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00210
5 s
f = 419.3 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
=
n1
P 14522 kN
=
n2
P 14522 kN
n n
M Pe = = (1124.4) / 100 14522 0000 = 16328 kN-m

6) Calculate
n
P | and
n
M | ,
( ) 1452 0.70 1016 2 5
n
P | = = kN
( ) 0.70 16382 11430
n
M | = = kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 1
EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001
P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 4549 kN and
moments M
uy
= 2622 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING






Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-06 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 576.2 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

0.85 0.85 30 300 7650
c c
C f ab a a ' = = =
( ) ( ) ( )
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f ' ' ' = + +


s4 s4 s5 s5
T = A f A f +

( ) ( )
( )
1 1 1 2 2
3 3 4 4 5 5
7650 0.85 0.85
0.85
n s c s c
s c s s s s
P a A f f A f f
A f f A f A f
' ' = + + +
'


(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
2 1 2 3 4
1
3 2
2
n c s s s s
a
P C d C d d C s C s T s
e
(
| |
' = + + +
| (
'
\ .

(Eqn. 2)

where ( )
1 1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f ' = ; ( )
2 2 2
0.85 ' =
s s c
C A f f ; ( )
3 3
0.85 '
s s c
C f f ;
4 4 4 s s s
T f A = and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d'' = 700mm

576.2 700 1276.4 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 4
4) Using c = 821.7 mm (from iteration),

= c = 0.85 821.7=698.46 a - mm,

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 821.7 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c d
c
= 0.0028; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 460.00 MPa
2
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c s d
c
= 0.0015
2 s
f = 307.9 MPa
3 5
2 | |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.0003
3 s
f = 52.3 MPa
4 5
| |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.0010
4 s
f = 203.2 MPa
5
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.0023
5 s
f = 458.8 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 5352 kN
=
n2
P 5352 kN

n n
M Pe = = 5352(576.4) / 1000000 = 3085 kN-m

6) Calculate | ,

( ) = 0.85 5352 4549
n
P | = kN
( ) = 0.85 3085 2622
n
M | = kN-m

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load P
u
=
13625 kN and moments M
uy
= 16339 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 2








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.000

1.00 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-06 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 result shows a very close match with the independent result.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1199.2 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

0.85 0.85 30 300 7650
c c
C f ab a a ' = = =

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( ) 0.85 200 200
cw c
C f a ' =
( ) 0.85 200 2500
cf c
C f ' =
( ) ( ) ( )
1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s c s c s c
C A f f A f f A f f ' ' ' ' ' ' = + +
4 4 5 5 6 6 s s s s s s
T A f A f A f = + +
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1 1 1
2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6
0.85 8 8 0.85 8 98 0.85
0.85 0.85
n c c s c
s c s c s s s s s s
P f a f A f f
A f f A f f A f A f A f
' ' ' ' = + + +
' ' ' ' + + + +
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4 5
4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw f s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
(
| |
' ' + + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(


(Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 4
where ( )
1 1 1
0.85
s s c
C A f f ' ' = , ( ) 0.85
sn n sn c
C A f f ' ' = ,
sn sn sn
T f A = , and the bar strains
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d''
2500 200
2

= = 1150 mm
1199.2 1150 2349.2 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm

4) Using c = 1259.8 mm (from iteration),
1
0.851259.8 1070.83 a c = | = = mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1259.8 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.003
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00276;
s s y
f E F = c s ;
1 s
f = 460.0 MPa
2
0.003
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00167
2 s
f = 333.3 MPa
3
2
0.003
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00057
3 s
f = 114.2 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00052
4 s
f = 104.9 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
| |
c = c
|

\ .
= 0.00167
5 s
f = 324.0 MPa
6
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00272
6 s
f = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 16029 kN
=
n2
P 16029 kN
n n
M Pe = = 16029(1199.2) / 1000000 = 19222 kN-m

6) Calculate | ,
( ) 0.85 16029 13625
n
P | = = kN
( ) 0.85 19222 16339
n
M | = = kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 1

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load P
u
= 3246 kN and
moments M
uy
= 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING




Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 2










TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997

1.00 0.30%
COMPUTER FILE: SINGAPORE CP65-99 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f
c
= 30MPa f
y
= 460 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm
1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, c
b
:
( )
700 700
= = 1450 = 922.7
700 + / 700 + 460 / 1.15
b t
y s
c d
f
mm
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
= +
n c s
P C C T
where

0.67 0.67
30 300 4020
1.5
c cu
m
C f ab a a = = =

1 2 3
1 2 3
0.67 0.67 0.67
s s s
s s c s c s c
s m s m s m
A A A
C f f f f f f
| | | | | | ' ' '
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .

4 5
4 5
s s
s s
s s
A A
T f f = +


1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5
3 4 5
0.67 0.67
4709
0.67
s s
n s c s c
s m s m
s s s
s c s s
s m s s
A A
P a f f f f
A A A
f f f f
| | | | ' '
' ' = + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| | '
' +
|

\ .
(Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about A
s5
:
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4
1
2
2
c s s
n
s s
a
C d C d d C d d s
P
e
C s T s
(
| |
' ' + + +
| (
= \ .
(
'
(

(Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 4

where
1
1 1
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f ;
2
2 2
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f ;
3
3 3
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f ;
4
4 4
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
s
s s c
s m
A
T f f and the bar strains and
stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 700 mm
606.5 700 1306.5 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm.

4) Using c = 887.5 mm (from iteration), which is slightly more than c
b
(922.7mm).

1
0.90875.2 787.6 a c = | = = mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 875.2 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00330; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
0.0035
s
c s d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00190
2 s
f = 380.1 MPa
3 5
2 | |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00050
3 s
f = 100.1 MPa
4 5
| |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00090
4 s
f = 179.8 MPa
5
0.0035
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00230
5 s
f = 459.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 3246 kN
=
n2
P 3246 kN

n n
M Pe = = 3246(606.5) / 1000 = 1969 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 1

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load P
u
=
8368 kN and moments M
uy
= 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 2









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 1.001

1.00 0.10%
COMPUTER FILE: SINGAPORE CP65-99 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 30 MPa

f
y
= 460 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:
= +
n c s
P C C T
where

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( )
0.67
200 200
cw cu
m
C f a =

( ) =
cu
0.67
2002500
m

cf
C f
1 2 3
1 2 3
0.67 0.67 0.67
s s s
s s c s c s c
s m s m s m
A A A
C f f f f f f
| | | | | | ' ' '
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .

4 5 6
4 5 6
s s s
s s s
s s s
A A A
T f f f = + +


( ) ( )
1
1 1
2 3 4 5 6
2 3 4 5 6
0.67 0.67 0.67
200 - 200 200 2500
0.67 0.67
s
n cu cu s c
m m s m
s s s s s
s c s c s s s
s m s m s s s
A
P f a f f f
A A A A A
f f f f f f f
| | '
' = + + +
|

\ .
| | | | ' '
' ' + + +
| |

\ . \ .
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4 5
4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw f s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
( | |
' ' + + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(


(Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 4

where
1
1 1
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
s
s s c
s m
A
C f f ;
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
sn
sn sn c
s m
A
C f f ;
0.67 | |
' =
|

\ .
sn
sn sn c
s m
A
T f f
and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 1150 mm

1430 1150 2580 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm.

4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),

1
0.91160 1044 a c = | = = mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.0035
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c d
c
= 0.00320; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 460 MPa
2
0.0035
| |
c =
|
\ .
s
c s d
c
= 0.00181
2 s
f = 362.0 MPa
3
2
0.0035
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c s d
c
= 0.00042
3 s
f = 84.4 MPa
4 6
2 | |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00097
4 s
f = 193.2 MPa
5 6
| |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00235
5 s
f = 460.00 MPa
6
0.0035
| |
c =
|
\ .
s
d c
c
= 0.00374
6 s
f = 460.00 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 8368 kN
=
n2
P 8368 kN

n n
M Pe = = 8368(1430) / 1000 = 11,967 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 1

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load P
u
= 3132 kN and
moments M
uy
= 1956 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm
2
. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 2












TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Wall flexural demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.997

1.00 0.30%
COMPUTER FILE: TURKISH TS 500-2000 WALL-001
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 25 MPa

f
y
= 420 MPa
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d = 50 mm
s = 350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f
c
= 25 MPa f
y
= 420 MPa
b = 300mm h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 715 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values
for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:
= +
n c s
P C C T
where

0.67
0.85 25 300 3350
1.5
ck
c
c
f
C ab a a = = =

1 2 3
1 2 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
s s s
s s ck s ck s ck
s c s c s c
A A A
C f f f f f f
| | | | | | ' ' '
= + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .

4 5
4 5
s s
s s
s s
A A
T f f = +


1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5
3 4 5
0.85 0.85
3350
0.85
s s
n s ck s ck
s c s c
s s s
s ck s s
s c s s
A A
P a f f f f
A A A
f f f f
| | | | ' '
= + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| | '
+
|

\ .
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about A
s5
:

( ) ( )
( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4
1
2
2
c s s
n
s s
a
C d C d d C d d s
P
e
C s T s
( | |
' ' + + +
| (
= \ .
(
'
(

(Eqn. 2)
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0


EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 4

where
1
1 1
0.85 | |
=
|

\ .
s
s s ck
s c
A
C f f ;
2
2 2
0.85 | |
=
|

\ .
s
s s ck
s c
A
C f f ;
3
3 3
0.85 | |
=
|

\ .
s
s s ck
s c
A
C f f ;
4
4 4
0.85 | |
=
|

\ .
s
s s ck
s c
A
T f f and the bar strains and stresses
are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 700 mm
715 700 1415 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm.

4) Using c = 853.4 mm (from iteration),

1
0.85853.4 725.4 a k c = = = mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0030 and c = 853.4 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
s y
f f = :
1
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c d
c
= 0.00282; = c s
s s y
f E F ;
1 s
f = 420.0 MPa
2
0.003
' | |
c =
|
\ .
s
c s d
c
= 0.00159
2 s
f = 318.8 MPa
3 5
2 | |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00036
3 s
f = 72.7 MPa
4 5
| |
c = c
|

\ .
s s
d c s
d c
= 0.00087
4 s
f = 173.4 MPa
5
0.003
s
d c
c
| |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00210
5 s
f = 419.5 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 3132 kN
=
n2
P 3132 kN

n n
M Pe = = 3132(624.4) / 1000 = 1956 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 1
EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load P
u
= 9134
kN and moments M
uy
= 11952 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted below. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results are
compared with ETABS 2013 program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 2









TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Concrete wall demand/capacity ratio

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS 2013 design
check.
Output Parameter
ETABS
2013 Independent
Percent
Difference
Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio 0.996

1.00 0.40%
COMPUTER FILE: TURKISH TS 500-2000 WALL-002
CONCLUSION
The ETABS 2013 results show an acceptable match with the independent results.
Material Properties
E = 25000 MPa

= 0.2
Section Properties Design Properties
f
c
= 25 MPa

f
y
= 420 MPa
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d = 2400 mm
s = 460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:

1) A value of e = 1308.6 mm was determined using /
u u
e M P = where
u
M and
u
P were
taken from the ETABS 2013 test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1.
Values for
u
M and
u
P were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

= +
n c s
P C C T

where

c
C = +
cw cf
C C , where
cw
C and
cf
C are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
( ) ( )
0.85 30
200 200 200 200 3400( 200)
1.5
ck
cw
c
f
C a a a = = =

( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
0.85(30)
0.85 200 2500 1000 200 2500 1000 5,100, 000
1.5
ck
cf
c
f
C = = =

1 1 2 2 3 3
0.85 0.85 0.85
ck ck ck
s s s s
c c c
f f f
C A f A f A f
| | | | | |
' ' ' = + +
| | |

\ . \ . \ .

4 4 4
4 5 6
s s s
s s s
s s s
f f f
T A A A = + +


1 2
1 1 2
3 4 5 6
3 4 5 6
3400( 200) 5,100, 000 0.85 0.85
0.85
s ck s ck
n s s
s c s c
s ck s s s
s s s s
s c s s s
A f A f
P a f f
A f A A A
f f f f
| | | |
= + + +
| |

\ . \ .
| |
+
|

\ .



(Eqn. 1)


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 4
3) Taking moments about A
s6
:
( ) ( ) ( )
( ) ( ) ( )
1 2
2
3 4 5
4
1
2
3 2
f
cf cw f s s
n
s s s
a t
C d d C d t C d d C s
P
e
C s T s T s
(
| |
' ' + + + +
( |
=
\ .
(
'
(


(Eqn. 2)

where
1
1 1
0.85
s
s s ck
s c
A
C f f
| |
=
|

\ .
;
2
2 2
0.85
s
s s ck
s c
A
C f f
| |
=
|

\ .
;
3
3 3
0.85
s
s s ck
s c
A
C f f
| |
=
|

\ .
;
4
4
s
s
s
A
T =

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d'' = 1150 mm
1308.6 1150 2458.6 e e d ' '' = + = + = mm.

4) Using c = 1327 mm (from iteration)

1
0.851327 1061.1 a k c = = = mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1327 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
s y
f f = :
1
0.003
s
c d
c
' | |
c =
|
\ .
= 0.00277;
s s y
f E F c = s ;
1 s
f = 420.0 MPa
2
'
0.003
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00173
2 s
f = 346.8 MPa
3
2 '
0.003
s
c s d
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00069
3 s
f = 138.8 MPa
4 6
2
s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00035
4 s
f = 69.2 MPa
5 6 s s
d c s
d c
c c
| |
=
|

\ .
= 0.00139
5 s
f = 277.2 MPa
6
0.003
s
d c
c
c
| |
=
|
\ .
= 0.00243
6 s
f = 420.0 MPa


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 5
Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give

=
n1
P 9134 kN
=
n2
P 9134 kN

n n
M Pe = = 9134(1308.6) / 1000 = 11952 kN-m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 1
AISC-360-05 Example 001

COMPOSITE GIRDER DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A series of 45-ft. span composite beams at 10 ft. o/c carry the loads shown
below. The beams are ASTM A992 and are unshored during construction. The
concrete has a specified compressive strength, 4 ksi.
c
f ' = Design a typical floor
beam with 3-in., 18-gage composite deck and 4 in. normal weight concrete
above the deck, for fire protection and mass. Select an appropriate beam and
determine the required number of in.-diameter shear studs.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING








Member Properties
W21x50
E = 29000 ksi

F
y
= 50 ksi
Loading
w = 830 plf (Dead Load)
w = 200 plf (Construction)
w = 100 plf (SDL)
w = 1000 plf (Live Load)
Geometry
Span, L = 45 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Composite beam design, including:

Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.1 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Pre-composite M
u
(k-ft) 333.2 333.1 0.03%
Pre-composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 472.5 472.5 0.00%
Pre-composite Deflection (in.) 2.3 2.3 0.00%
Required Strength M
u
(k-ft) 687.5 687.5 0.00%
Full Composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 1027.1 1027.1 0.00%
Partial Composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 770.3 766.2 0.53%
Shear Stud Capacity Q
n
Input 17.2 NA
Shear Stud Distribution 35 34 2.9%
Live Load Deflection (in.) 1.35 1.30 3.70%
Required Strength V
u
(kip) 61.1 61.1 0.00%
uV
n
(k) 234 234 0.00%
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 3

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-05 EXAMPLE 001.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The shear stud capacity was entered as an overwrite, due to different assumptions
on the placement of individual shear studs within the deck ribs. The AISC
example assumes shear studs are placed in the weak position, whereas ETABS,
in accordance with the documentation, assumes those are placed in the strong
position, which is more efficient. The live load deflection differs due to a
difference in methodology. In the AISC example, the live load deflection is
computed based on a lower bound value of the beam moment of inertia, whereas
in ETABS, it is computed based on the approximate value of the beam moment
of inertia derived from Equation (C-I3-6) from the Commentary on the AISC
Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification Second Edition.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 4
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, F
y
= 50 ksi, w
steel
= 490 pcf
4000 psi normal weight concrete
E
c
= 3,644 ksi, 4 ksi,
c
f ' = w
concrete
= 145 pcf
Section:
W21x55
d = 20.8 in, b
f
= 8.22 in, t
f
= 0.522 in, t
w
= 0.38 in, h = 18.75 in., r
fillet
= 0.5 in.
A
steel
= 16.2 in
2
, S
steel
= 109.6 in
3
, Z
steel
= 126 in
3
, I
steel
= 1140 in
4

Deck:
t
c
=4 in., h
r
= 3 in., s
r
=12 in., w
r
= 6 in.
Shear Connectors:
d =

in, h =4 in, F
u
= 65 ksi

Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
( )
3
10 83 50 10 0.830 kip/ft

= - + - =
D
w
3
10 20 10 0.200 kip/ft
L
w

= - - =
1.2 0.830 1.6 0.200 1.316 kip/ft = - + - =
u
w
2 2
1.316 45
333.1 kip-ft
8 8
- -
= = =
u
u
w L
M
Moment Capacity:
( ) 0.9 126 50 12 472.5 kip-ft u =u - - = - - =
b n b s y
M Z F
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 5
Pre-Composite Deflection:
( )
4
4
0.830
5 45 12
5
12
2.31 in.
384 384 29, 000 1,140
- - -
A = = =
- -
D
nc
w L
EI


Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:
1.2 0.830 1.2 0.100 1.6 1 2.71 kip/ft
u
w = - + - + - =
2 2
2.68 45
687.5 kip-ft
8 8
u
u
w L
M
- -
= = =
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
eff
10.0 45.0 f
2 sides 10.0 ft 11.25 ft
2 8
t
b = = s =
Resistance of steel in tension:
16.2 50 810 kips
y s y
C P A F = = - = - = controls
Resistance of slab in compression:
( )
2
eff
10 12 4.5 540 in = - = - - =
c c
A b t
0.85 ' 0.85 4 540 1836 kips
c c
C f A = - = - - =

Depth of compression block within slab:
( )
eff
810
1.99 in.
0.85 ' 0.85 10 12 4
= = =
- - - - -
c
C
a
b f

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:
1
2.00
( ) (4.5 3) 6.51 in.
2 2
c r
a
d t h = + = + =
1
20.8 / 12
0.9 810 6.51 / 12 810 1027.1 kip-ft
2 2
n y y
d
M P d P
| | | |
u = u + = + =
| |
\ . \ .

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 6
Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 36.1% composite action:
0.361 0.361 810 292.4 kips
y
C P = - = - =
Depth of compression block within concrete slab:
( )
eff
292.4
0.72 in.
0.85 ' 0.85 10 12 4
= = =
- - - - -
c
C
a
b f

( ) ( )
1
0.72
4.5 3 7.14 in.
2 2
= + = + =
c r
a
d t h
Compression force within steel section:
( ) ( ) 2 810 292.4 2 258.8 kips = = =
r y
C P C
Tensile resistance of one flange:
flange y
8.22 0.522 50 214.5 kip = - - = - - =
f f
F b t F
Tensile resistance of web:
web y
18.75 0.375 50 351.75 kips = - - = - - =
w
F T t F
Tensile resistance of one fillet area:
( ) ( )
fillet y flange web
2 2 810 2 214.5 351.2 2 14.6 kips = - = - = F P F F
Compression force in web:
web flange fillet
292.4 214.5 14.6 29.7 kips = = = C C F F
Depth of compression block in web:
web
web
29.7
18.375 1.81 in.
351.75
= - = - =
C
x T
F

Location of centroid of steel compression force measured from top of steel section:
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
flange fillet fillet fillet web
2
0.5 0.2 F 0.5 x C
0.5 0.522 214.5 0.522 0.2 0.5 14.6 0.522 0.5 0.5 1.81 29.7
0.573 in.
258.8
- - + + - - + + + - -
= =
- - + + - - + + + - -
= =
f f f
r
t F t r t r
d
C

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 7
Moment resistance of composite beam for partial composite action:
( ) ( )
( )
1 2 3 2
20.8
0.9 292.4 7.14 0.573 810 0.573 12 766.2 kip-ft
2
( u = u - + + -

( | |
= - + + - =
|
(
\ .
n y
M C d d P d d

Shear Stud Strength:
From AISC Manual Table 3.21 assuming one shear stud per rib placed in the
weak position, the strength of

in.-diameter shear studs in normal weight
concrete with and deck oriented perpendicular to the 4 ksi beam is: ' =
c
f
17.2 kips =
n
Q
Shear Stud Distribution:
292.4
17 from each end to mid-span, rounded up to 35 total
17.2
E
= = =
n
n
Q
n
Q

Live Load Deflection:
Modulus of elasticity ratio:
29, 000 3, 644 8.0 = = =
c
n E E
Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:
Element
Transformed
Area
A (in
2
)
Moment Arm
from
Centroid
y (in.)
Ay
(in.
3
)

Ay
2
(in,
4
)

I
0

(in.
4
)
Slab 67.9 15.65 1,062 16,620 115
W21x50 16.2 0 0 0 1,140
84.1 1,062 16,620 1,255

2 4
0
1, 255 16,620 17,874 in.
x
I I Ay = + = + =
1, 062
12.6 in.
84.1
= = y
2
2 4
17, 874 82.6 12.6 4, 458 in = - = - =
tr x
I I A y
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 8
Effective moment inertia assuming partial composite action:
( ) ( )
4
equiv
1,140 0.361 4, 458 1,140 3,133 in = + E = + =
s n y tr s
I I Q P I I
4
eff equiv
0.75 0.75 3,133 2, 350 in = - = - = I I
( ) ( )
4
4
eff
5 1 12 30 12
5
1.35 in.
384 384 29, 000 2, 350
L
LL
w L
EI
- - -
A = = =
- -

Design for Shear Strength:
Required Shear Strength:
1.2 0.830 1.2 0.100 1.6 1 2.71 kip/ft
u
w = - + - + - =
2.71 45
61.1 kip-ft
2 2
u
u
w L
V
- -
= = =
Available Shear Strength:
0.6 1.0 0.6 20.8 0.375 50 234 kips
n w y
V d t F u = u = =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 1
AISC-360-10 Example 001

COMPOSITE GIRDER DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A typical bay of a composite floor system is illustrated below. Select an
appropriate ASTM A992 W-shaped beam and determine the required number of
in.-diameter steel headed stud anchors. The beam will not be shored during
construction. To achieve a two-hour fire rating without the application of spray
applied fire protection material to the composite deck, 4 in. of normal weight
(145 lb/ft
3
) concrete will be placed above the top of the deck. The concrete has a
specified compressive strength, 4 ksi. '=
c
f
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING







Member Properties
W21x50
E = 29000 ksi

F
y
= 50 ksi
Loading
w = 800 plf (Dead Load)
w = 250 plf (Construction)
w = 100 plf (SDL)
w = 1000 plf (Live Load)
Geometry
Span, L = 45 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Composite beam design, including:

Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from Example I.1 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Pre-composite M
u
(k-ft) 344.2 344.2 0.00%
Pre-composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 412.5 412.5 0.00%
Pre-composite Deflection (in.) 2.6 2.6 0.00%
Required Strength M
u
(k-ft) 678.3 678.4 0.01%
Full Composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 937.1 937.1 0.00%
Partial Composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 765.7 765.7 0.00%
Shear Stud Capacity Q
n
Input 17.2 NA
Shear Stud Distribution 46 46 00.0%
Live Load Deflection (in.) 1.33 1.26 5.3%
Required Strength V
u
(kip) 60.3 60.3 0.00%
uV
n
(k) 237.1 237.1 0.00%
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 3

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 001.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The shear stud capacity was entered as an overwrite, due to different assumptions
on the placement of individual shear studs within the deck ribs. The AISC
example assumes shear studs are placed in the weak position, whereas ETABS,
in accordance with the documentation, assumes these are placed in the strong
position, which is more efficient. The live load deflection differs due to a
difference in methodology. In the AISC example, the live load deflection is
computed based on a lower bound value of the beam moment of inertia, whereas
in ETABS, it is computed based on the approximate value of the beam moment
of inertia derived from Equation (C-I3-6) from the Commentary on the AISC
Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification Second Edition.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 4
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, F
y
= 50 ksi, w
steel
= 490 pcf
4000 psi normal weight concrete
E
c
= 3,644 ksi, 4 ksi, ' =
c
f w
concrete
= 145 pcf
Section:
W21x50
d = 20.8 in, b
f
= 6.53 in, t
f
= 0.535 in, t
w
= 0.38 in
A
steel
= 14.7 in
2
, S
steel
= 94.6 in
3
, Z
steel
= 110 in
3
, I
steel
= 984 in
4

Deck:
t
c
=4 in., h
r
= 3 in., s
r
=12 in., w
r
= 6 in.
Shear Connectors:
d =

in, h =4 in, F
u
= 65 ksi

Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
3
(10 75 50) 10 0.800 kip/ft
D
w

= - + - =
3
10 25 10 0.250 kip/ft
L
w

= - - =
1.2 0.800 1.6 0.250 1.36 kip/ft
u
w = - + - =
2 2
1.36 45
344.25 kip-ft
8 8
u
u
w L
M
- -
= = =
Moment Capacity:
(0.9 110 50) 12 412.5 kip-ft u = u - - = - - =
b n b s y
M Z F
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 5
Pre-Composite Deflection:
( )
4
4
0.800
5 45 12
5
12
2.59 in.
384 384 29, 000 984
- - -
A = = =
- -
D
nc
w L
EI

Camber 0.8 0.8 2.59 2.07 in., = - A = - =
nc
which is rounded down to2 in.
Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:
1.2 0.800 1.2 0.100 1.6 1 2.68 kip/ft
u
w = - + - + - =
2 2
2.68 45
678.38 kip-ft
8 8
u
u
w L
M
- -
= = =
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
eff
10.0 45.0 ft
2 sides 10.0 ft 11.25 ft
2 8
b = = s =

Resistance of steel in tension:
14.7 50 735 kips
y s y
C P A F = = - = - = controls
Resistance of slab in compression:
( )
2
eff
10 12 4.5 540 in = - = - - =
c c
A b t
0.85 ' 0.85 4 540 1836 kips
c c
C f A = - = - - =

Depth of compression block within slab:
( )
eff
735
1.80 in.
0.85 ' 0.85 10 12 4
= = =
- - - - -
c
C
a
b f

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:
( ) ( )
1
1.80
4.5 3 6.60 in.
2 2
= + = + =
c r
a
d t h

1
20.8/12
0.9 735 6.60/12 735 937.1 kip-ft
2 2
n y y
d
M P d P
| | | |
u = u - + - = - + - =
| |
\ . \ .

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 6
Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 51.5% composite action:
0.515 378.4 kips
y
C P = - =
Depth of compression block within concrete slab:
( )
eff
378.4
0.93 in.
0.85 ' 0.85 10 12 4
= = =
- - - - -
c
C
a
b f

( )
( )
0.93
4.5 3 7.04 in.
1
2 2
a
d t h
c r
= + = + =

Depth of compression block within steel section flange:
735 378.4
0.546 in.
2 2 6.53 50
y
f y
P C
x
b F

= = =
- - - -

2
/ 2 0.273 in. d x = =
Moment resistance of composite beam for partial composite action:
( ) ( )
( )
1 2 3 2
20.8
0.9 378.4 7.04 0.273 735 0.273 12 765.7 kip-ft
2
( u = u - + + -

( | |
= - + + - =
|
(
\ .
n y
M C d d P d d

Shear Stud Strength:
From AISC Manual Table 3.21 assuming one shear stud per rib placed in the weak
position, the strength of

in.-diameter shear studs in normal weight concrete with
and deck oriented perpendicular to the 4 ksi beam is: ' =
c
f
17.2 kips
n
Q =
Shear Stud Distribution:
378.4
22, rounded up to 23 studs from each end to mid-span
17.2
E
= = =
n
n
Q
n
Q

Live Load Deflection:
Modulus of elasticity ratio:
29, 000 3, 644 8.0
c
n E E = = =

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 7
Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:
Element
Transformed
Area
A (in
2
)
Moment Arm
from Centroid
y (in.)
Ay
(in.
3
)

Ay
2
(in,
4
)

I
0

(in.
4
)
Slab 67.9 15.65 1,062 16,620 115
W21x50 14.7 0 0 0 984
82.6 1,062 16,620 1,099

2 4
0
1, 099 16, 620 17, 719 in.
x
I I Ay = + = + =
1, 062
12.9 in.
82.6
y = =

2
2 4
17, 719 82.6 12.9 4, 058 in
tr x
I I A y = - = - =
Effective moment inertia assuming partial composite action:
4
equiv
/ ( ) 984 0.515(4, 058 984) 3,189 in = + E = + =
s n y tr s
I I Q P I I
4
eff equiv
0.75 0.75 3,190 2, 932 in = - = - = I I
4 4
eff
5 5 (1/ 12) (30 12)
1.33 in.
384 384 29, 000 2, 932
- - -
A = = =
- -
L
LL
w L
EI

Design for Shear Strength:
Required Shear Strength:
1.2 0.800 1.2 0.100 1.6 1 2.68 kip/ft
u
w = - + - + - =
2.68 45
60.3 kip-ft
2 2
u
u
w L
V
- -
= = =
Available Shear Strength:
0.6 1.0 0.6 20.8 0.38 50 237.1 kips
n w y
V d t F u = u - - - - = - - - - =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 1
AISC-360-10 Example 002

COMPOSITE GIRDER DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design is checked for the composite girder shown below. The deck is 3 in.
deep with 4 normal weight (145 pcf) concrete cover with a compressive
strength of 4 ksi. The girder will not be shored during construction. The applied
loads are the weight of the structure, a 25 psf construction live load, a 10 psf
superimposed dead load and a 100 psf non-reducible service line load.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING







Member Properties
W24x76
E = 29000 ksi

F
y
= 50 ksi
Loading
P = 36K (Dead Load)
P = 4.5K (SDL)
P = 45K (Live Load)
Geometry
Span, L = 45 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from Example I.2 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Pre-composite M
u
(k-ft) 622.3 622.3 0.00%
Pre-composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 677.2 677.2 0.00%
Pre-composite Deflection (in.) 1.0 1.0 0.00%
Required Strength M
u
(k-ft) 1216.3 1216.3 0.00%
Full Composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 1480.1 1480.1 0.00%
Partial Composite u
b
M
n
(k-ft) 1267.3

1267.3 0.00%
Shear Stud Capacity Q
n
21.54 21.54 0.00%
Shear Stud Distribution 26, 3, 26 26, 3, 26 0.00%
Live Load Deflection (in.) 0.63 0.55 12.7%
Required Strength V
u
(kip) 122.0 122.0 0.00%
uV
n
(k) 315.5 315.5 0.00%
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 3
COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 002.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The live load deflection differs more markedly because of a difference in
methodology. In the AISC example, the live load deflection is computed based
on a lower bound value of the beam moment of inertia, whereas in ETABS, it is
computed based on the approximate value of the beam moment of inertia derived
from Equation (C-I3-6) from the Commentary on the AISC Load and Resistance
Factor Design Specification Second Edition.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 4
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, F
y
= 50 ksi, w
steel
= 490 pcf
4000 psi normal weight concrete
E
c
= 3,644 ksi, 4 ksi, ' =
c
f w
concrete
= 145 pcf
Section:
W24x76
d = 23.9 in, b
f
= 8.99 in, t
f
= 0.68 in, t
w
= 0.44 in
A
steel
= 22.4 in
2
, I
steel
= 2100 in
4

Deck:
t
c
=4 in., h
r
= 3 in., s
r
=12 in., w
r
= 6 in.
Shear Connectors:
d =

in, h =4 in, F
u
= 65 ksi

Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
22.4
sq . ft . 490 pcf 76.2 plf
steel steel
144
| |
= = - =
|
\ .
w A w

| | (45 ft)(10 ft)(75 psf ) (50 plf )(45 ft) (0.001 kip / lb) 36 kips
D
P = + =
| |
(45 ft)(10 ft)(25 psf ) (0.001 kip/lb) 11.25 kips
L
P = =
( )
( )
2
2
1.2
1.2 1.6
8 3
76.2 30 30
1.2 1.2 36 +1.6 11.25 622.3 kip-ft
8 3
= + +
-
= + - - =
u D L
wL L
M P P


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 5
Moment Capacity:
L
b
= 10 ft
L
p
= 6.78 ft
Lr = 19.5 ft
u
b
BF = 22.6 kips
u
b
M
px =
750 kip-ft
C
b
= 1.0
( )
( )
1.0 750 22.6 10 6.78 677.2 kip-ft
( u = u u

= = (

b n b b px b b p
M C M BF L L

Pre-Composite Deflection:
4
3 4 3
0.0762
5 360
5 36.0 360
12
1.0
28 384 28 29, 000 2,100 384 29, 000 2,100
D D
nc
P L w L
EI EI
- -
-
A = + = + =
- - - -

Camber 0.8 0.8 in.
nc
= - A = which is rounded down to in.

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:
| | (45 ft )(10 ft )(75 +10psf ) (50 plf)(45 ft) (0.001 kip/lb) 40.5 kips = + = P
D

| | (45 ft )(10 ft )(100 psf ) (0.001 kip/lb) 45 kips = = P
L

2
2
1.2
(1.2 1.6 )
8 3
1.2 76.22 30 30
(1.2 40.5 +1.6 45) 1216.3 kip-ft
8 3
u D L
wL L
M P P = + +
- -
= + - - =

Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
30.0 ft
7.5 ft 90 in.
eff
8
= = = b

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 6
Resistance of steel in tension:
22.4 50 1,120 kips
y s y
C P A F = = - = - = controls
Resistance of slab in compression
2
eff eff
7.5 12
( 2) (7.5 12) 4.5 3 540 in
2
-
= - + - = - - + - =
r
c c
A b t b h

0.85 ' 0.85 4 540 1836 kips
c c
C f A = - = - - =
Depth of compression block within slab:
1,120
3.66 in.
0.85 ' 0.85 (7.5 12) 4
eff c
C
a
b f
= = =
- - - - -

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:
1
3.66
( ) (4.5 3) 5.67 in.
2 2
c r
a
d t h = + = + =

1
2
23.9 12
0.9 1,120 5.67 / 12 1,120 1480.1 kip-ft
2
d
M C d P
n y
| |
u = u - + -
|
\ .
| |
= - - + - =
|
\ .

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 50% composite action:
0.5 560 kips
y
C P = - =
Depth of compression block within slab
560
1.83 in.
0.85 ' 0.85 (7.5 12) 4
eff c
C
a
b f
= = =
- - - - -

1
1.83
( ) (4.5 3) 6.58 in.
2 2
c r
a
d t h = + = + =
Depth of compression block within steel section flange
1,120 560
0.623 in.
2 2 8.99 50
y
f y
P C
x
b F

= = =
- - - -

2
/ 2 0.311 in. d x = =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 7
1 2 3 2
( ) ( )
23.9
560 (6.58 0.312) 1,120 0.312 12 1, 408 kip-ft
2
= - + + -
( | |
= - + + - =
|
(
\ .
n y
M C d d P d d

0.9 0.9 1, 408 1, 267.3 kip-ft
n n
M M u = = - =

Shear Stud Strength:
0.5 ' = s
n sa c c g p sa u
Q A f E R R A F
2 2 2
4 (0.75) 4 0.442 in = t = t =
sa sa
A d
' 4 ksi
c
f =
1.5 1.5
' 145 4 3, 490 ksi
c c
E w f = = =
R
g
= 1.0 Studs welded directly to the steel shape with the slab haunch
R
p
= 0.75 Studs welded directly to the steel shape
F
u
= 65 ksi
2 2
0.5 0.442 4 3, 490 1.0 0.75 0.442 65
26.1 kips 21.54 kips controls
n
Q = - - s - - -
= >

Shear Stud Distribution:
560
26 studs from each end to nearest concentrated load point
21.54
E
=
= =
n
n
Q
n
Q


Add 3 studs between load points to satisfy maximum stud spacing requirement.
Live Load Deflection:
Modulus of elasticity ratio:
/ 29, 000 / 3, 644 8.0 = = =
c
n E E


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 8
Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:
Element
Transformed
Area
A (in
2
)
Moment Arm
from
Centroid
y (in.)
Ay
(in.
3
)

Ay
2
(in,
4
)

I
0

(in.
4
)
Slab 50.9 17.2 875 15,055 86
Deck ribs 17.0 13.45 228 3,069 13
W21x50 22.4 0 0 0 2,100
89.5 1,103 18,124 2,199

2 4
0
2,199 18,124 20,323 in.
x
I I Ay = + = + =
1, 092
12.2 in.
89.5
y = =
2
2 4
20, 323 90.3 12.2 6, 831 in
tr x
I I A y = - = - =
Effective moment of inertia assuming partial composite action:
( ) ( )
4
equiv
2,100 0.5 6,831 2,100 5, 446 in = + E = + =
s n y tr s
I I Q P I I
4
eff equiv
0.75 0.75 5, 446 4, 084 in = - = - = I I
3 3
45.0 (30 12)
0.48 in.
28 28 29, 000 4, 084
L
LL
eff
P L
EI
- -
A = = =
- -


Design for Shear Strength:
Required Shear Strength:
1.2 1.6 1.2 40.5 1.6 45 120.6 kip
u D L
P P P = - + - = - + - =
1.2 1.2 0.076 30
120.6 121.2 kip-ft
2 2
u u
w L
V P
- - - -
= + = + =
Available Shear Strength:
0.6 1.0 0.6 23.9 0.44 50 315.5 kips
n w y
V d t F u = u - - - - = - - - - =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 1
BS-5950-90 Example-001

STEEL DESIGNERS MANUAL SIXTH EDITION - DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED COMPOSITE
BEAM
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Design a composite floor with beams at 3-m centers spanning 12 m. The
composite slab is 130 mm deep. The floor is to resist an imposed load of 5.0
kN/m
2
, partition loading of 1.0 kN/m
2
and a ceiling load of 0.5 kN/m
2
. The floor
is to be un-propped during construction.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING










TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED

Composite beam design, including:

Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service

Member Properties
UKB457x191x67
E = 205,000 MPa

F
y
= 355 MPa
Loading
w = 6.67kN/m (Dead Load)
w = 1.5kN/m (Construction)
w = 1.5kN/m (Superimposed Load)
w = 18.00kN/m (Live Load)
Geometry
Span, L = 12 m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from the first example, Design of Simply
Supported Composite Beam, in Chapter 21 of the Steel Construction Institute
Steel Designers Manual, Sixth Edition.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Construction Design
Moment (kN-m)
211.2 211.3 0.05%
Construction M
s
(kN-m) 522.2 521.9 0.06%
Construction Deflection (mm) 29.9 29.9 0.00%
Design Moment (kN-m) 724.2 724.3 0.01%
Full Composite M
pc
(kN-m) 968.9

968.3 0.06%
Partial Composite M
c
(kN-m) 919.0

919.6 0.06%
Shear Stud Capacity Q
n
(kN) 57.6 57.6 0.00%
Live Load Deflection (mm) 27.5 31.4 12.42%
Applied Shear Force F
v
(kN) 241.4 241.4 0.00%
Shear Resistance P
v
(kN) 820.9 821.2 0.03%
COMPUTER FILE: BS-5950-90 EXAMPLE 001.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
S355 Steel:
E = 205,000 MPa, p
y
= 355 MPa,
s
= 7850 kg/m
3
Light-weight concrete:

E = 24,855 MPa, f
cu
= 30 MPa,
c
= 1800 kg/m
3

Section:
UKB457x191x67
D = 453.6 mm, b
f
= 189.9 mm, t
f
= 12.7 mm, t
w
= 8.5 mm
A
steel
= 8,540 mm
2
, I
steel
= 29,380 cm
4
Deck:
D
s
=130 mm, D
p
= 50 mm, s
r
= 300 mm, b
r
= 150 mm
Shear Connectors:
d = 19 mm, h = 95 mm, F
u
= 450 MPa

Loadings:
Self weight slab = 2.0 kN/m
2

Self weight beam = 0.67 kN/m
Construction load = 0.5 kN/m
2

Ceiling = 0.5 kN/m
2

Partitions (live load) = 1.0 kN/m
2

Occupancy (live load) = 5.0 kN/m
2


Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
( )
construction
1.4 0.67 1.4 2.0 1.6 0.5 3.0 11.74 kN/m = - + - + - - =
ult
w
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 4
2 2
construction
construction
11.74 12
211.3 kN-m
8 8
- -
= = =
ult
ult
w L
M
3 6
1, 470 10 355 10 521.9 kN-m
s z y
M S P

= - = - - - =
Pre-Composite Deflection:
construction
2.0 3.0 0.67 6.67 kN/m = - + = w
4 4
construction
4
5 5 6.67 12, 000
29.9 mm
384 384 205, 000 29, 380 10
- - - -
o = = =
- - - - -
w L
E I

Camber 0.8 24 mm, which is rounded down to 20 mm = - o =

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:
( ) 1.4 0.67 1.4 2.0 1.6 1 1.6 5 3.0 40.24 kN/m = - + - + - + - - =
ult
w
2 2
40.24 12
724.3 kN-m
8 8
ult
ult
w L
M
- -
= = =
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
L 12,000
3, 000 mm 3,000 mmm
4 4
e
B = = = s
Resistance of slab in compression:
( )
3
0.45 ( ) 0.45 30 3, 000 130 50 10 3, 240 kN

= - - - = - - - - =
c cu e s p
R f B D D
Resistance of steel in tension:
3
8, 540 355 10 3, 032 kN
s y s y
R P A p

= = - = - - = controls
Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:
( )
s p
3
D D
for
2 2
453.6 3, 032 80
3, 032 130 10 968.2 kN-m
2 3, 240 2

(

= + s (
(

(
= + - - =
(

s
pc s s s c
c
R D
M R D R R
R

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 5
Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 76% composite action:
0.76 2, 304 kN
q s
R R = - =
Tensile Resistance of web:
( ) ( )
3
y
2 p 8.5 453.6 2 12.7 355 10 1, 292 kN

= - - - = - - - - =
w w f
R t D t
As R
q
> R
w
, the plastic axis is in the steel flange, and
( )
( )
( )
2
2
3 3 3
( )
2 2 4
3, 032 2, 304
453.6 2, 304 80 12.7
3, 032 10 2, 304 130 10 10
2 3, 240 2 3, 032 1, 292 4
919.6 kN-m

(

= + (
(

(
= - + - - -
(


=
s p q s q f
c s q s
c f
D D R R R t
D
M R R D
R R

Shear Stud Strength:
Characteristic resistance of 19 mm-diameter studs in normal weight 30 MPa
concrete:
Q
k
= 100 kN from BS 5950: Part 3 Table 5
Adjusting for light-weight concrete:
90 kN
k
Q =
Reduction factor for profile shape with ribs perpendicular to the beam and two studs
per rib:
( ) ( ) 95 50
150
0.6 0.6 1.62 but 0.8
50 50

= - - = - - = s
p
r
p p
h D
b
k k
D D

Design strength:
0.8 0.8 0.8 90 57.6 kN
p k
Q k Q = - - = - - =
Shear Stud Distribution:
2, 304
40 studs from each end to mid-span
64
= = =
q
p
R
n
Q

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 6
Live Load Deflection:
The second moment of area of the composite section, based on elastic properties, I
c

is given by:
( )
( )
( )
2 3
steel eff
steel
D
4 1 12
- + + -
= + +
- + o - -o
s p s p
c
e e
A D D b D D
I I
r

( )
steel
eff
8, 540
0.0356
( ) 3, 000 130 50
= = =
- -
s p
A
r
b D D

For light-weight concrete:
10 o =
s

25 o =
l

Proportion of total loading which is long term:
live
live
0.33 6.67 1.5 0.33 18
0.541
6.67 1.5 18
+ + - + + -
= = =
+ + + +
dl sdl
l
dl sdl
w w w
w w w

( ) ( ) 10 0.541 25 10 18.1 o = o + - o o = + - =
e s l l s

( )
( )
( )
2
3
6
6 6 4
8, 540 453.6 130 50
3, 000 80
294 10
4 1 18.1 0.0356 12 18.1
521 7 294 10 822 10 mm
- + +
-
= + + -
- + - -
= + + - = -
c
I

Live load deflection assuming full composite action:
( )
4
4
live
6
5 18 12, 000 5
28.9 mm
384 384 205, 000 822 10
- - - -
o = = =
- - - - -
c
c
w L
E I

Adjust for partial composite action:
( )
4
4
live
6
5 18 12, 000 5
384 384 205, 000 294 10
80.7 mm non-composite reference deflection
- - - -
o = =
- - - - -
=
s
c
w L
E I
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
partial
0.3 1
28.9 0.3 1 0.76 80.7 28.9 32.6 mm
o = o + - - o o
= + - - =
c s c
K

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 7
Design for Shear Strength:
Required Shear Strength:
40.24 12
241.4 kN
2 2
ult
v
w L
F
- -
= = =
Shear Resistance of Steel Section:
3
0.6 0.6 355 453.4 8.5 10 821.2 kN

= - - = - - - - = P p A
V y v

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 1
CSA-S16-90 Example-001

HANDBOOK OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION MANUAL TENTH EDITION - COMPOSITE BEAM
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Design a simply supported composite beam to span 12 m and carry a uniformly
distributed specified load of 18 kN/m live load and 12 kN/m dead load. Beams
are spaced at 3 m on center and support a 75 mm steel deck (ribs perpendicular to
the beam) with a 65 mm cover slab of 25 MPa normal density concrete.
Calculations are based on F
y
= 345 MPa. Live load deflections are limited to
L/300.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING








TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED

Composite beam design, including:

Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service

Member Properties
W460x74
E = 205,000 MPa

F
y
= 345 MPa
Loading
w = 8.0kN/m (Dead Load)
w = 2.5kN/m (Construction)
w = 4.0kN/m (Superimposed Load)
w = 18.00kN/m (Live Load)
Geometry
Span, L = 12 m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 2
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from the first example, Design of Simply
Supported Composite Beam, in Chapter 21 of the Steel Construction Institute
Steel Designers Manual, Sixth Edition.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Construction Design
Moment (kN-m)
247.4 247.5 0.04%
Construction M
s
(kN-m) 512.3 512.3 0.00%
Construction Deflection (mm) 29.9 29.9 0.00%
Design Moment (kN-m) 755.8 756 0.02%
Partial Composite M
c
(kN-m) 780.1

794.8 1.89%
Shear Stud Capacity Q
n
67.7 68.7 1.45%
Shear Stud Distribution 30 30 0.00%
Live Load Deflection (mm) 28.3 28.3 0.00%
Design Shear Force V
f
(kN) 251.9 251.9 0.00%
Shear Resistance V
r
(kN) 842.9 842.9 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: CSA-S16-09 EXAMPLE 001.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A992 Grade 50 Steel
E = 200,000 MPa, F
y
= 345 MPa,
s
= 7850 kg/m
3
Normal weight concrete

E = 23,400 MPa, f
cu
= 20 MPa,
c
= 2300 kg/m
3

Section:
W460x74
d = 457 mm, b
f
= 190 mm, t
f
= 14.5 mm, t
w
= 9 mm, T = 395 mm, r
fillet
=16.5 mm
A
s
= 9,450 mm
2
,
3 3
1, 650 10 mm
s
Z = -
,
6 4
333 10 mm
s
I = -

Deck:
t
c
=65 mm, h
r
= 75 mm, s
r
= 300 mm, w
r
= 150 mm
Shear Connectors:
d = 19 mm, h = 115 mm, F
u
= 450 MPa
Loadings:
Self weight slab = 2.42 kN/m
2

Self weight beam = 0.73 kN/m
Construction load = 0.83 kN/m
2

Superimposed dead load = 1.33 kN/m
2

Live load = 6.0 kN/m
2


Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
( )
construction
1.25 0.73 1.25 2.42 1.5 0.83 3.0 13.75 kN/m
f
w = - + - + - - =

2
2
construction
construction
13.75 12
247.5 kN-m
8 8
-
-
= = =
f
f
w L
M

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 4
Moment Capacity:
3 6
0.9 1, 650 10 0.9 345 10 512.3 kN-m
s s y
M Z F

= - - = - - - - =
Pre-Composite Deflection:
construction
2.42 3.0 0.73 8.0 kN/m = - + = w
4 4
construction
4
5 5 8.0 12, 000
32.4
384 384 200, 000 33, 300 10
o = = =
w L
mm
E I

Camber 0.8 25.9 mm, which is rounded down to 25 mm = - o =
Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:
( ) 1.25 0.73 1.25 2.42 1.25 1.33 1.5 6 3.0 42 kN/m = - + - + - + - - =
f
w
2
2
42 12
756.0kN-m
8 8
f
f
w L
M
-
-
= = =
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
L 12,000
3, 000 mm 3,000 mmm
4 4
l
b = = = s
Resistance of slab in compression:
1
0.85 0.0015 0.8125 ' o = - =
c
f
3
1
0.8125 0.65 65 3,000 25 10 2,574 kN

' =o -u - - - = - - - - - =
c c f c
R t b f controls
Resistance of steel in tension:
3
0.9 9, 450 345 10 2,934 kN
s y s y
R P A F

= =u- - = - - - =
Depth of compression block within steel section:
( )
3
( ) 2 2, 934 2, 547 10 2
3.05 mm
0.9 345 190
-
= = =
u - - - -
y c
y f
P R
x
F b

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 5
Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:
r
3 3
h
2 2 2 2
65 3 457 3
2, 574 75 10 2, 934 10 946.7 kN-m
2 2 2 2

| | | |
= - + + + -
| |
\ . \ .
| | | |
= - + + - + - - =
| |
\ . \ .
c
rc c y
t x d x
M R P

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 42.8% composite action:
0.428 0.4 2, 574 1,101 kN
r c
Q R = - = - =
Depth of compression block within concrete slab:
3
1 eff
1,101 10
27.8 mm
0.8125 0.65 3, 000 25
-
= = =
' o - u - - - - -
r
c
Q
a
c b f

Compression force within steel section:
( ) ( ) 2 2, 934 1,101 2 916.5 kN = = =
r y r
C P Q
Tensile resistance of one flange:
3
0.9 190 14.5 345 10 855 kN
flange y

= u - - - = - - - - = F b t F
f f

Tensile resistance of web:
3
0.9 395 9 345 10 1,104 kN
web y

= u- - - = - - - - = F T t F
w

Tensile resistance of one fillet area:
( ) ( )
fillet y flange web
2 2 2, 934 2 855 1,104 2 60 kN = - = - = F P F F
Compression force in web:
web flange fillet
916.5 855 60 1.5 kN = = =
r
C C F F
Depth of compression block in web:
web
web
1, 5
95 0.5 mm
1,104
= - = - =
C
x T
F

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 6
Location of centroid of compressive force within steel section measured from top of
steel section:
( ) ( )
( ) ( )
flange fillet fillet fillet web
2
0.5 0.2 F 0.5 x C
0.5 14 855 14 0.2 16.5 60 14 16.5 0.5 0.5 1.5
7.9 mm
916.5
- - + + - - + + + - -
= =
- - + + - - + + + - -
= =
f f f
r
t F t r t r
d
C

Moment resistance of composite beam for partial composite action:
r 2 2
3 3
h
2 2
27.8 457
1,101 75 65 7.9 10 2, 934 7.9 10 794.8 kN-m
2 2

| | | |
= - + + + -
| |
\ . \ .
| | | |
= - + + - + - - =
| |
\ . \ .
rc r c y
a d
M Q t d P d

Shear Stud Strength:
From CISC Handbook of Steel Construction Tenth Edition for 19-mm-diameter
studs,

h
d
= 75 mm, w
d
/h
d
= 2.0, 25 MPa, 2,3000 kg/m
3
concrete:
q
rr
= 68.7 kN
Number of studs required =
2 2 2, 574
30
68.7
r
rr
Q
q
- -
= =
Live Load Deflection:
Modulus of elasticity ratio:
200, 000 23, 400 8.55 = = =
c
n E E
Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:
Element
Transformed
Area
A (mn
2
)
Moment Arm
from Centroid
y (mm)
Ay
(10
3
mm
3
)
Ay
2
(10
6
mm
4
)

I
0

(10
6
mm
4
)
Slab 22,815 336 7,666 2,576 8
W460x74 9,450 0 0 0 333
32,265 7,666 2,576 341

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



CSA-S16-90 Example-001 - 7
2 6 6 6 4
0
341 10 2, 576 10 2, 917 10 mm
x
I I Ay = + = - + - = -
6
7, 666 10
238 mm
32, 265
y
-
= =
2
6 2 6 4
2, 917 10 32, 265 238 1, 095 10 mm
tr x
I I A y = - = - - = -
Effective moment of inertia assuming partial composite action:
( )
( )
0.25
eff
0.25
6 4
0.85
333 0.85 0.43 1, 095 333
857 10 mm
= +
= + - -
= -
s tr s
I I p I I

( )
4
4
6
eff
5 18 12, 000
5
28.3 mm
384 384 200, 000 1, 095 10
- -
A = = =
- - -
L
LL
w L
EI

Design for Shear Strength:
Required Shear Strength:
factored
42 12
252 kN
2 2
- -
= = =
f
w L
V
Shear Resistance of Steel Section:
0.9 0.66 0.9 457 9 0.66 345 842.9 kN = u - - = - - - - = - - - - =
r w s w y
V A F d t F
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 1
EC-4-2004 Example-001

STEEL DESIGNERS MANUAL SEVENTH EDITION - DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED COMPOSITE
BEAM
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Consider an internal secondary composite beam of 12-m span between columns
and subject to uniform loading. Choose a UKB457x191x74 in S 355 steel.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING



Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 2




TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS 2013 TESTED

Composite beam design, including:

Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from the first example, Design of Simply
Supported Composite Beam, in Chapter 21 of the Steel Construction Institute
Steel Designers Manual, Sixth Edition.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Construction M
Ed
(kN-m) 250.4 250.4 0.00%
Construction M
a,pl,Rd
(kN-m) 585 585 0.00%
Construction Deflection (mm) 33.3 33.3 0.00%
Design Moment (kN-m) 628.4 628.4 0.01%
Full Composite M
pc
(kN-m) 1020

1022 0.02%
Partial Composite M
c
(kN-m) 971.2

971.2 0.00%
Shear Stud Capacity P
r
Input 57.6 NA
Shear Stud Distribution 77 76 1.3%
Live Load Deflection (mm) 19.3 19.1 1.03%
Member Properties
UKB457x191x74
E = 205,000 MPa

f
y
= 355 MPa
Loading
w = 8.43kN/m (Dead Load)
w = 2.25kN/m (Construction)
w = 1.5kN/m (Superimposed Load)
w = 15.00kN/m (Live Load)
Geometry
Span, L = 12 m
Beam spacing, b =3 m
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 3
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Required Strength V
Ed
(kN) 209.5 209.5 0.00%
V
pl,Rd
(kN) 843 843 0.00%
COMPUTER FILE: EC-4-2004 EXAMPLE 001.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The shear stud capacity P
r
was entered as an overwrite, since it is controlled by
the deck profile geometry and the exact geometry of the example, which assumes
a deck profile with a rib depth of 60 mm, a depth above profile of 60 mm and a
total depth of 130 mm, cannot be modeled in ETABS, since in ETABS, only the
rib depth and depth above profile can be specified.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 4
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Materials:
S 355 Steel:
E = 210,000 MPa, f
y
= 355 MPa, partial safety factor
a
= 1.0

Normal weight concrete class C25/30:

E
cm
= 30,500 MPa, f
cu
= 30 MPa, density w
c
= 24 kN/m
3

Section:
UKB457x191x76
h = 457 mm, b
f
= 190.4 mm, t
f
= 14.5 mm, t
w
= 9 mm,
A
a
= 9,460 mm
2
, I
ay
= 33,319 cm
4
,

W
pl
= 1,650 cm
3
Deck:
Slab depth D
s
=130 mm, depth above profile h
c
= 60 mm,
Deck profile height h
p
=(60 mm + 10 mm for re-entrant stiffener), s
r
= 300 mm,
b
0
= 150 mm
Shear Connectors:
d = 19 mm, h = 95 mm, F
u
= 450 MPa
Loadings:
Self weight slab, decking, reinforcement = 2.567 kN/m
2

Self weight beam = 0.73 kN/m
Construction load = 0.75 kN/m
2

Ceiling = 0.5 kN/m
2

Partitions (live load) = 1.0 kN/m
2

Occupancy (live load) = 4.0 kN/m
2


Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
factored construction
1.25 (2.567 3.0 0.73) 1.5 0.75 3.0 13.91 kN/m = - - + + - - = w
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 5
2 2
factored construction
13.91 12
250.4 kN-m
8 8
- -
= = =
Ed
w L
M
Moment Capacity:
3 6
, ,
1, 650 10 355 10 585 kN-m
a pl Rd pl d
M W f

= - = - - - =
Pre-Composite Deflection:
construction
2.567 3.0 0.73 8.43 kN/m = - + = w
4 4
construction
4
5 5 8.43 12, 000
33.2 mm
384 384 210, 000 33, 319 10
- - - -
o = = =
- - - - -
ay
w L
E I

Camber 0.8 24 mm, which is rounded down to 20 mm = - o =

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:
factored
1.25 0.73 (1.25 2.567 1.25 0.5 1.5 1 1.5 4.0) 3.0 34.91 kN/m = - + - + - + - + - - = w
2 2
factored
34.91 12
628.4 kN-m
8 8
- -
= = =
Ed
w L
M
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
eff
2 L 2 12
3 m
8 8
- -
= = = b
Resistance of slab in compression:
3
eff
0.85
0.85 (25/ 1.5) 3, 000 60 10 2, 550 kN

-
= - - = - - - - =

ck
c c
c
f
R b h
Resistance of steel section in tension:
3
355 9, 460 10 3, 358 kN
s yd a
R f A

= - = - - = controls
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 6
Moment resistance for full composite action:
, , c
3
+R for
2 2
3, 358 (0.457 / 2) 2, 550 (30 70) 10 1022.3 kN-m
c
a pl RD s p s c
h h
M R h R R

(
= + s
(

= - + - + - =

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 77.5% composite action:
0.775 0.775 3, 358 1, 976 kN
q s
R R = - = - =
Tensile Resistance of web:
3
( 2 ) 8.5 (453.6 212.7) 35510 1, 292 kN

= = =
w w f y
R t D t p
As R
q
> R
w
, the plastic axis is in the steel flange, and
2
2
3 3 3
( )
2 2 4
453.6 1, 976 60 (3, 358 1, 976) 14.5
3, 358 10 1, 976 130 10 10
2 2, 250 2 (3, 358 1, 292) 4
971.2 kN-m
q s q f
c
c s q s
c f
R R R t
h h
M R R D
R R

(
= +
(

(
= - + - - -
(


=

Resistance of Shear Connector:
Resistance of shear connector in solid slab:
2
2
95
0.29 0.8 with =1.0 for 4
4 19
| |
= -o- - - s - - t o = >
|
\ .
Rd ck cm v u v
h d
P d f E f
d

2 2 3
0.29 0.29 1.0 19 25 30, 500 10 1.25 73 kN

- o - - = - - - - - =
ck cm v
d f E controls
2
19
0.8 =0.8 450 1.25 81.7 kN
4 4
| |
| |
- - t - - t =
| |
\ .
\ .
u v
d
f
Reduction factor for decking perpendicular to beam assuming two studs per rib:
( ) ( )
( )
0
0.7
1 0.75 per EN 1994-1-1 Table 6.2
0.7 150
95 60 1 0.72 0.75
60 2
(
= s

= = s (

t p sc p
r
k b h h h
n

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 7
0.72 73 52 kN
Rd
P = - =
Total resistance with two studs per rib and 19 ribs from the support to the mid-span:
2 19 52 1, 976 kN
q
R = - - =

Live Load Deflection:
The second moment of area of the composite section, based on elastic properties, I
c

is given by:
2
3
eff
( 2 )
4 (1 ) 12
- + - +
-
= + +
- + - -
a p c
c
c ay
A h h h
b h
I I
n r n

eff
9, 460
0.052
3, 000 60
= = =
- -
a
c
A
r
b h

n = modular ratio = 10 for normal weight concrete subject to variable loads
2 3
4
8 8 4
9, 460 (457 2 70 60) 3, 000 60
33, 320 10
4 (1 10 0.052) 12 10
(6.69 0.05 3.33) 10 10.08 10 mm
c
I
- + - + -
= + + -
- + - -
= + + - = -

4 4
live
live 8
5 5 15 (12, 000)
19.1 mm
384 384 210, 000 10.08 10
- - - -
o = = =
- - - - -
c
w L
E I


Design for Shear Strength:
Required Shear Strength:
factored
34.91 12
209.5 kN
2 2
- -
= = =
Ed
w L
V
Shear Resistance of Steel Section:
,
3
457 9.0 355
843 kN
3 10
pl Rd
V

- -
= =
-

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 1
AISC-360-10 Example 001

COMPOSITE COLUMN DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Determine if the 14-ft.-long filled composite member illustrated below is
adequate for the indicated dead and live loads. The composite member consists
of an ASTM A500 Grade B HSS with normal weight (145 lb/ft
3
) concrete fill
having a specified compressive strength, 5 ksi.
c
f' =
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING












Member Properties
HSS10x6 x
E = 29,000 ksi

F
y
= 46 ksi
Loading
P
D
= 32.0 kips
P
L
= 84.0 kips

Geometry
Height, L = 14 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 2
TECHNICAL FEATURE OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Compression capacity of composite column design.
RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from Example I.4 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Required Strength P
u
(kip) 172.8 172.8 0.00%
Available Strength uP
n
(kip) 342.93 354.78 3.34%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 001.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 3
HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A500 Grade B Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, F
y
= 46 ksi, F
u
= 58 ksi
5000 psi normal weight concrete
E
c
= 3,900 ksi, 5 ksi, ' =
c
f w
concrete
= 145 pcf
Section dimensions and properties:
HSS10x6x
H = 10.0 in, B= 6.00 in, t = 0.349 in
A
s
= 10.4 in
2
, I
sx
= 137 in
4
, I
sy
= 61.8 in
4
Concrete area
2 10 2 0.349 9.30 in.
i
h H t = - = - =
2 6 2 0.349 5.30 in.
i
b B t = - = - =
2 2 2
(4 ) 5.30 9.30 (0.349) (4 ) 49.2 in. = - - t = - - t =
c i i
A b h t
Moment of inertia for bending about the y-y axis:
2
3 3 2 4
2
3 3 2 4
2 2
4
( 4 ) ( 4 ) (9 64) 4 4
12 6 36 2 3
(10 4 0.349) 5.30 0.349 (6 4 0.349) (9 64) 0.349
12 6 36
6 4 0.349 4 0.349
0.349 ( )
2 3
114.3 in.
- - - - t - - - | |
= + + + t-
|
- t - t
\ .
- - - - t -
= + + +
- t
- -
t-
- t
=
t
cy
H t b t B t t B t t
I t

Design for Compression:
Required Compressive Strength:
1.2 1.6 1.2 32.0 1.6 84.0 172.8 kips
u D L
P P P = - + - = - + - =
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 4
Nominal Compressive Strength:
2
| |
' = = - + - +
|
\ .
s
no p y s c c sr
c
E
P P F A C f A A
E

where
2
0.85 for rectangular sections C =
0 when no reinforcing is present within the HSS
sr
A =
46 10.4 0.85 5 (49.2 0.0) 687.5 kips
no
P = - + - - + =
Weak-axis Elastic Buckling Force:
3
0.6 2 0.9
10.4
0.6 2 0.9
49.2 10.4
0.949 0.9 0.9 controls
| |
= + s
|
+
\ .
| |
= + s
|
+
\ .
= >
s
c s
A
C
A A

eff 3
2
29, 000 62.1 0 0.9 3, 900 114.3
2, 201, 000 kip-in
= - + - + - -
= - + + - -
=
s sy s sr c cy
EI E I E I C E I

2 2
eff
( ) ( ) = t
e
P EI KL where K = 1.0 for a pin-ended member
2
2
2, 201, 000
769.7 kips
1.0 (14.0 12)
t -
= =
- -
e
P
Available Compressive Strength:
688
0.893 2.25
769.7
no
e
P
P
= = <
Therefore, use AISC Specification Equation I2-2:
0.893
0.658 0.75 687.5 (0.658) 354.8 kips
no
e
P
P
n no
P P
(
u = u = - - = (
(


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 1
AISC-360-10 Example 002

COMPOSITE COLUMN DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Determine if the 14-ft.-long filled composite member illustrated below is
adequate for the indicated dead load compression and wind load tension. The
entire load is applied to the steel section.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING







TECHNICAL FEATURE OF ETABS 2013 TESTED

Tension capacity of composite column design.

Member Properties
HSS10x6 x
E = 29,000 ksi

F
y
= 46 ksi
Loading
P
D
= -32.0 kips
P
W
= 100.0 kips

Geometry
Height, L = 14 ft
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 2

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from Example I.5 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Required Strength, P
u
(kip) 71.2 71.2 0.00%
Available Strength, P
n
(kip) 430.5 430.0 0.12%
COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 002.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 3
HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A500 Grade B Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, F
y
= 46 ksi, F
u
= 58 ksi
5000 psi normal weight concrete
E
c
= 3,900 ksi, 5 ksi,
c
f w
concrete
= 145 pcf
Steel section dimensions:
HSS10x6x
H = 10.0 in, B = 6.00 in, t = 0.349 in, A
s
= 10.4 in
2

Design for Tension:
Required Compressive Strength:
The required compressive strength is (taking compression as negative and tension as
positive):
0.9 1.0 0.9 ( 32.0) 1.0 100.0 71.2 kips
u D W
P P P
Available Tensile Strength:
( ) 0.9(10.4 46 0 60) 430 kips
n s y sr ysr
P A F A F


Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



AISC-360-10 Example 003

COMPOSITE COLUMN DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Determine if the 14-ft.-long filled composite member illustrated below is
adequate for the indicated axial forces, shears, and moments. The composite
member consists of an ASTM A500 Grade B HSS with normal weight (145
lb/ft
3
) concrete fill having a specified compressive strength, 5 ksi. =
c
f
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING










Member Properties
HSS10x6 x
E =29,000 ksi

F
y
=46 ksi
Loading
P
r
=129.0 kips
M
r
=120.0 kip-ft
V
r
=17.1 kips

Geometry
Height, L =14 ft
AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 1
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



TECHNICAL FEATURE OF ETABS 2013 TESTED
Tension capacity of composite column design.

RESULTS COMPARISON

Independent results are referenced from Example I.1 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
Output Parameter ETABS Independent
Percent
Difference
Required Strength, F
u
(k) 129 129 0.00%
Available Strength, P
n
(kip) 342.9 354.78 -3.35%
Required Strength, M
u
(k-ft) 120 120 0.00%
Available Strength,
b
M
n
(k-ft) 130.58 130.5 0.06%
Interaction Equation H1-1a 1.19 1.18 0.85%

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 003.EDB
CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 2
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



HAND CALCULATION

Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A500 Grade B Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, F
y
= 46 ksi, F
u
=58 ksi
5000 psi normal weight concrete
E
c
= 3,900 ksi, 5 ksi, =
c
f w
concrete
= 145 pcf
Section dimensions and properties:
HSS10x6x
H =10.0 in, B= 6.00 in, t = 0.349 in
A
s
=10.4 in
2
, I
sx
=137 in
4
, Z
sx
=33.8 in
3
, I
sy
=61.8 in
4

Concrete area
h
t
=9.30 in., b
t
=5.30 in., A
c
=49.2 in.2, I
cx
=353 in
4
, I
cy
=115 in
4

Compression capacity:
Nominal Compressive Strength:

c
P
n
= 354.78 kips as computed in Example I.4
Bending capacity:
Maximum Nominal Bending Strength:
Z
sx
=33.8 in
3
2
3
2
3 3
0.192 where
4
5.30 (9.30)
0.192 (0.349) 114.7 in.
4
i i
c i i
b h
Z r r t

= =

= =

0.85
2
0.85 5 115 1,798.5 kip-in.
46 33.8 149.9 kip-ft
2 12 in./ft

= +

= + = =
c
D y sx
f Zc
M F Z

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 3
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.: 0



Available Bending Strength:
0.85
2(0.85 4 ) 2
0.85 5 49.2 9.30
2(0.85 5 5.30 4 0.349 50) 2
1.205 4.65
=1.205 in.

=
+

=
+
=
c c i
n
c i y
f A h
h
f b t F

2 2 3
2 2 0.349 (1.205) 1.01 in.
sn n
Z t h = = =
2 2 3
5.30 (1.205) 7.70 in.
cn i n
Z b h = = =
0.85
2
0.85 5 7.76 1,740 kip-in.
1,800 46 1.02 144.63 kip-ft
2 12 in./ft

=

= = =
c cn
nx D y sn
f Z
M M F Z

0.9 144.63 130.16 kip-ft
b nx
M = =
Interaction Equation H1-1a:
8
1.0
9

+



u u
c b n
P M
Pn M

129 8 120
1.0
354.78 9 130.16

+



1.18 >1.0 n.g.

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 4
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

REFERENCES 1
REFERENCES
American Institute of Steel Construction. 1989. Manual of Steel Construction-Allowable
Stress Design. Chicago, Illinois.
Bathe, K.J. and E.L. Wilson. 1972. Large Eigenvalue Problems in Dynamic
Analysis. Journal of the Eng. Mech. Div. ASCE. Vol. 98, No. EM6, Proc.
Paper 9433. December.
Computers and Structures, Inc. 2012. Analysis Reference Manual. Computers and
Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California.
DYNAMIC/EASE2. Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multistory Frame Structures
Using. DYNAMIC/EASE2, Engineering Analysis Corporation and Computers
and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California.
Engineering Analysis Corporation and Computers and Structures, Inc.,
DYNAMIC/EASE2. Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multistory Frame
Structures Using. DYNAMIC/EASE2, Berkeley, California.
Hanson, R.D. 1993. Supplemental Damping for Improved Seismic Performance.
Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 9, Number 3, 319-334.
International Code Council, Inc. 2000. International Building Code. Falls Church,
Virginia.
International Conference of Building Officials. 1997. Uniform Building Code.
Whittier, California.
Nagarajaiah, S., A.M. Reinhorn and M.C. Constantinou. 1991. 3D-Basis: Nonlinear
Dynamic Analysis of Three-Dimensional Base Isolated Structures: Part II,
Technical Report NCEER-91-0005. National Center for Earthquake
Engineering Research. State University of New York at Buffalo. Buffalo,
New York.
Paz, M. 1985. Structural Dynamics, Theory and Computations. Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Peterson, F.E. 1981. EASE2, Elastic Analysis for Structural Engineering - Example
Problem Manual. Engineering Analysis Corporation. Berkeley, California.
Prakash, V., G.A. Powell and S. Campbell. DRAIN-2DX. 1993. Base Program
Description and User Guide. Department of Civil Engineering. University of
California. Berkeley, California.
Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
ETABS 2013
REVISION NO.:
0

REFERENCES 2
Err
or!
Re
fer
en
ce
so
urc
e
not
fou
nd.

Prakash, V., G.A. Powell, and S. Campbell. 1993. DRAIN-2DX Base Program
Description and User Guide. Department of Civil Engineering. University of
California. Berkeley, California.
Przemieniecki, J.S. 1968. Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis. Mc-Graw-Hill.
Scholl, Roger E. 1993. Design Criteria for Yielding and Friction Energy
Dissipaters. Proceedings of ATC-17-1 Seminar on Seismic Isolation, Passive
Energy Dissipation, and Active Control. San Francisco, California. Vol. 2,
485-495. Applied Technology Council. Redwood City, California.
Tsai, K.H., H.W. Chen, C.P. Hong, and Y.F. Su. 1993. Design of Steel Triangular
Plate Energy Absorbers for Seismic-Resistant Construction. Earthquake
Spectra. Vol. 9, Number 3, 505-528.
Wilson, E.L. and A. Habibullah. 1992. SAP90, Sample Example and Verification
Manual, Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California.
Wilson, E.L., A.D. Kiureghian and E.P. Bayo. 1981. A Replacement for the SRSS
Method in Seismic Analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 9.
Zayas, V. and S. Low. 1990. A Simple Pendulum Technique for Achieving Seismic
Isolation. Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 6, No. 2. Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute. Oakland, California.