31Steel Design Guide

Castellated and Cellular

Beam Design

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
 31Steel Design Guide

Castellated and Cellular

Beam Design

Sameer S. Fares, P.E., S.E., P. Eng

New Millenium Building Systems
Hope, AR

John Coulson, P.E.

Integrity Structural Corporation
Houston, TX

David W. Dinehart, Ph.D.

Villanova University
Villanova, PA

A M ERICAN INST I T UT E OF S T E E L CONS T RUC TI O N

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
000-iv_DG31.indd 3 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 AISC © 2016

by

American Institute of Steel Construction

All rights reserved. This book or any part thereof

must not be reproduced in any form without the
written permission of the publisher.

The AISC logo is a registered trademark of AISC.

The information presented in this publication has been prepared following recognized principles
of design and construction. While it is believed to be accurate, this information should not be
used or relied upon for any specific application without competent professional examination and
verification of its accuracy, suitability and applicability by a licensed engineer or architect. The
publication of this information is not a representation or warranty on the part of the American
Institute of Steel Construction, its officers, agents, employees or committee members, or of any
other person named herein, that this information is suitable for any general or particular use, or
of freedom from infringement of any patent or patents. All representations or warranties, express
or implied, other than as stated above, are specifically disclaimed. Anyone making use of the
information presented in this publication assumes all liability arising from such use.

Caution must be exercised when relying upon standards and guidelines developed by other bodies
and incorporated by reference herein since such material may be modified or amended from time
to time subsequent to the printing of this edition. The American Institute of Steel Construction
bears no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and incorporate it by reference at
the time of the initial publication of this edition.

Printed in the United States of America

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
000-iv_DG31.indd 4 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Authors
Sameer S. Fares, P.E., S.E., P. Eng is an engineer at New Millenium Building Systems, Hope, AR.

John Coulson, P.E., is a Principal and Vice President at Integrity Structural Corporation, Houston, TX.

David W. Dinehart, Ph.D., is a Professor at Villanova University, Villanova, PA.

Acknowledgments
The authors have been actively engaged in the design, research, and/or advancement of castellated and cellular beams for more
than 10 years. Over that time frame, there have been many peers who have assisted the authors in bettering their understanding of
the behavior of castellated and cellular beams. The support of Tim Bradshaw, Shawn Gross, Rebecca Hoffman, Billy Milligan,
Serge Parent, Joe Pote, John Robins and Joseph Robert Yost has been invaluable and is greatly appreciated. Many thanks go to
the graduate and undergraduate students who have conducted the experimental and analytical research at Villanova University
sponsored by Commercial Metals Company, Inc.: Nicole Aloi (Hennessey), Dominic Borda, Michelle Dionisio (Callow), Jason
Hennessey, Matthew Reiter, Jason Reither, Ryan Smoke and James Sutton. The authors are grateful to the reviewers of this docu-
ment who provided insightful commentary:

Allen Adams Steven Hofmeister

Leigh Arber Larry Kloiber
Reidar Bjorhovde Roberto Leon
Jason Caldwell Tom Murray
Charles Churches Roger O’Hara
John Cross Davis Parsons
David Darwin Daryll Radcliffe
Tom Faraone Richard Redmond
Pat Fortney David Ruby
Ted Galambos Bill Scott
Ed Garvin Robert Shaw
Louis Geschwindner Victor Shneur
Scott Goodrich Derek Tordoff
Jay Harris Chia-Ming Uang
Tony Hazel

Finally, and most importantly, the authors thank their spouses and families for their support during the writing of this document.

Preface
This Design Guide provides guidance for the design of castellated and cellular beams based on structural principles and adhering
to the 2016 AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings and the 14th Edition AISC Steel Construction Manual. Both load
and resistance factor design and allowable strength design methods are employed in the design examples.

i
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
000-iv_DG31.indd 1 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 ii
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
000-iv_DG31.indd 2 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 3.3 VIERENDEEL BENDING IN COMPOSITE
BEAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.1 HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3.3.1 Calculation of Axial Force
1.2 MANUFACTURING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
and Vierendeel Moment at
1.3 NOMENCLATURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Each Opening . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
1.4 INTRODUCTION OF DESIGN GUIDE . . . . . . 3
3.3.2 Calculation of Vierendeel Bending
Moment of the Upper and
CHAPTER 2 USE OF CASTELLATED AND
Lower Tees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
CELLULAR BEAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3.3 Calculation of Available Axial and
2.1 GENERAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Flexural Strength of Top and
2.2 APPLICATIONS AND ADVANTAGES . . . . . . . 5 Bottom Tees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2.1 Parking Structures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.4 WEB POST BUCKLING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2.2 Industrial Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4.1 Web Post Buckling in
2.2.3 Service/HVAC Integration . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Castellated Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2.2.4 Construction Efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.4.2 Web Post Buckling in
2.2.5 Vibration Resistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Cellular Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2.6 Asymmetric Sections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.5 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SHEAR . . . . 22
2.2.7 Aesthetics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 3.5.1 Calculation of Available Horizontal
2.3 WEB OPENING SIZE AND SPACING Shear Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
AND TYPICAL CONNECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.5.2 Calculation of Available Vertical
2.3.1 End Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Shear Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2.3.2 Infilling of Openings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.6 LATERAL-TORSIONAL BUCKLING . . . . . . 23
2.3.3 Large Copes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.7 DEFLECTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.4 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 3.8 CONCENTRATED LOADING . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.4.1 Concentrated Loads . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.4.2 Depth-Sensitive Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 CHAPTER 4 DESIGN EXAMPLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.4.3 Erection Stability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
4.1 NONCOMPOSITE CASTELLATED
2.4.4 Fireproofing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
BEAM DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.4.5 Coating Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.2 NONCOMPOSITE CELLULAR
BEAM DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
CHAPTER 3 DESIGN PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3 COMPOSITE CASTELLATED
3.1 INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 BEAM DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
3.2 VIERENDEEL BENDING IN 4.4 COMPOSITE CELLULAR
NONCOMPOSITE BEAMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 BEAM DESIGN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
3.2.1 Calculation of Axial Force and
Vierendeel Moment at Each Opening . . . 11 SYMBOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101
3.2.2 Calcuation of Available Axial (Tensile/
Compressive) and Flexural Strength of REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103
Top and Bottom Tees . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3.2.3 Check of Top and Bottom Tees FURTHER READING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Subjected to Combined Flexural and
Axial Forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

iii
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
000-iv_DG31.indd 3 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 iv
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
000-iv_DG31.indd 4 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 HISTORY manufacturing a castellated beam is presented in Figure 1-1.
Once the section has been cut in the appropriate pattern (a),
The idea of creating single web openings in wide-flange
the two halves are offset (b). The waste at the ends of the
steel beams in order to pass service lines through the beam
beam is removed (c), and the two sections are welded back
stems back to the early use of steel sections. The design
together to form the castellated section (d). A full or partial
of beams with web openings is addressed in AISC Design
penetration butt weld is then typically made from one side of
Guide 2, Design of Steel and Composite Beams with Web
the web, without prior beveling of the edges if the web thick-
Openings, which explicitly notes that the design provisions
ness is relatively small. A photograph of the manufacturing
do not apply to castellated beams—beams with expanded
process of a castellated beam is shown in Figure 1-2.
web sections that included repeating openings (Darwin,
Cellular beams are fabricated in a similar manner using a
1990). In this document, castellated beams are defined as
nested semicircular cutting pattern. In order to achieve the
steel beams with expanded sections containing hexagonal
repeating circular pattern, two cutting passes are required,
openings. Cellular beams are defined as expanded steel sec-
as shown in Figure  1-3. The two cutting passes increase
tions with circular openings.
the handling of the steel during the manufacturing process;
Beams with expanded web sections with repeating web
consequently, the time to produce a cellular beam is slightly
openings were first used in 1910 by the Chicago Bridge and
greater than that of a castellated beam. The cuts are made in
Iron Works (Das and Srimani, 1984). This idea was also
a circular pattern instead of the zigzag used for the castel-
developed independently by G.M. Boyd in Argentina in 1935
lated beams. The circular cutting produces additional waste
and was later patented in the United Kingdom (Knowles,
as compared to castellated beams, as shown in Figure 1-3(b).
1991). In the 1940s, the use of castellated and cellular beams
Once the two cuts have been made, the two halves that have
increased substantially, in part due to the limited number
been created are offset and welded back together to form a
of structural sections that the steel mills could fabricate in
cellular beam. A photograph of the manufacturing process of
Europe. Steel mills could efficiently produce a number of
a cellular beam is presented in Figure 1-4.
larger section sizes by manually expanding beams because of
low labor-to-material cost ratios. However, steel mills in the
United States did not experience the same section limitations
and low labor costs as the mills in Europe; consequently, the
fabrication of such beams was not economically efficient. As
a result, the use of castellated and cellular beams diminished
until automated manufacturing techniques became avail-
able. The improved automation in fabrication, coupled with
the need for architects and structural engineers to search for
more efficient and less costly ways to design steel structures,
has resulted in the use of castellated and cellular beams in
the United States. An increase in use of expanded sections
has occurred around the world and contributed to the forma-
tion of the International Institute of Cellular Beam Manufac-
turers in 1994 to develop, establish and maintain standards
for the design and manufacturing of castellated and cellular
beams worldwide.

1.2 MANUFACTURING
Castellated and cellular beams are custom designed for a
specific location on a specific project. The process by which
castellated and cellular beams are fabricated is similar, but
not identical. Castellated beams are fabricated by using a
computer operated cutting torch to cut a zigzag pattern along
the web of a wide-flange section. The step-by-step process of Fig. 1-1.  Manufacturing of a castellated beam.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 1

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 1 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 1.3 NOMENCLATURE
Typical nomenclature for a steel section indicates the shape
type, the approximate depth, and the approximate weight of
the shape per linear foot. For example, a W8×10 represents
a wide-flange section with a depth of approximately 8 in.
and a nominal weight of 10 lb/ft. A similar nomenclature is
used for castellated and cellular beams. Castellated beams
are represented by CB, while cellular beams are noted as
LB. The number representations are identical to those of
standard steel sections. For example a castellated and cel-
lular beam constructed from a W8×10 root beam is called
out as a CB12×10 and LB12×10, respectively, as the depth
is approximately one and half times that of the root beam
and the weight is the same as the root beam. Under certain
conditions, it is beneficial to produce an asymmetric section.
In this case, the nomenclature for these sections is based on
the two different root beams used to make the castellated
or cellular section. For example, if the root beam for the
top tee of the castellated or cellular beam is a W21×44 and
the root beam for the bottom is a W21×57, then the cas-
tellated and cellular beam call outs would be CB30×44/57
and LB30×44/57, respectively. The first number presents the
Fig. 1-2.  Cutting of a castellated pattern. approximate depth and the second pair of numbers provides

Fig. 1-3.  Manufacturing of a cellular beam. Fig. 1-4.  Second cutting of a cellular pattern.

2 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 2 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 the nominal weight of the root beam used for the top of the and composite applications. Chapter 2 presents information
section followed by a forward slash and the nominal weight pertaining to appropriate applications for castellated and cel-
of the root beam used for the bottom of the section. The lular beams, including advantages, efficiencies, and limita-
weight per foot of the resulting asymmetric beam is the aver- tions of use. The differences between designing traditional
age of the two numbers. The use of asymmetric sections is beams versus those with web openings are identified in
discussed in further detail in Section 2.2.6. Chapter 3, along with the detailed procedures for designing
castellated and cellular beams in accordance with the 2016
1.4 INTRODUCTION OF DESIGN GUIDE AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, here­after
referred to as the AISC Specification (AISC, 2016). The
Although the use of castellated and cellular beams around
procedures presented include both noncomposite and com-
the world is becoming more commonplace and there is a
posite design for both castellated and cellular beams. Chap-
growing body of literature on the topic, there are very few
ter  4 presents detailed design examples conforming to the
publications that include comprehensive design recommen-
procedures presented in Chapter 3. A detailed listing of the
dations. This Design Guide presents the state of the prac-
symbols used throughout the Design Guide is supplied at the
tice for the design of castellated and cellular beams in the
end of the document, as is a complete list of references cited
United States. The Guide provides a unified approach to the
in the Design Guide and a bibliography of publications for
design of castellated and cellular beams for noncomposite
further reading.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 3

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 3 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 4 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 4 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Chapter 2
Use of Castellated and Cellular Beams
2.1 GENERAL substantial direct material costs savings and will also reduce
the overall mass of the structure, resulting in reduced lat-
In comparison to their root beams, castellated and cellular
eral design forces and reduced foundation loads. Open-web
beams offer many design and construction advantages. As a
sections allow light transmission through the web openings,
result of expanding the web and introducing web openings,
brightening the building interior. For parking garages with
these members have an increased depth-to-weight ratio, an
low interstory heights, the brighter interior gives the appear-
increased section modulus, Sx, and increased strong-axis
ance of being more spacious than similar structures with
moment of inertia, Ix. These increases not only make longer
solid-web beams (Churches et al., 2004). Figures  2-1 and
spans possible, but their increased efficiency also provides
2-2 show examples of parking structures utilizing cellular
the potential for significant cost savings when used in long
beams.
spans. These advantages come at the expense of a more com-
It should be noted that when utilizing steel sections for a
plex analysis. This chapter presents ideal applications for the
parking structure, the choice of the coating system should
use of castellated and cellular beams, discusses some of the
be carefully considered. It is recommended that either a
advantages and limitations of their use, and highlights some
hot-dipped galvanized coating or a high-performance epoxy
special considerations for designers.
paint system be applied to the steel. For more information
on this topic, refer to Section 2.4.5 and AISC Design Guide
2.2 APPLICATIONS AND ADVANTAGES
18, Steel-Framed Open-Deck Parking Structures (Churches
The primary use for castellated and cellular beams is in span- et al., 2004).
ning long distances utilizing a lighter weight section. In gen-
eral, they are practical for spans greater than 30 ft and prove
to be a very economical alternative for spans greater than 40
ft (Estrada et al., 2006). Utilizing the long span capability of
castellated and cellular beams can provide a more open floor
plan. This allows the end-user of the building more flexibility
in space planning, which can be an advantage to the build-
ing owner in the event of future tenant changes. Advantages
of castellated and cellular beams include the ability to use
fewer columns and footings to support the longer-spanning
sections, thereby creating additional column-free space and
floor space flexibility. The ability to use longer, lighter spans
makes fewer members necessary for a given system, sav-
ing erection costs for the structure. Castellated and cellular
beams are ideal for structures with long open space require-
ments, such as parking garages, industrial and warehouse
facilities, office buildings, schools, and hospitals.

2.2.1 Parking Structures

The use of castellated and cellular beams in parking struc-
tures has increased dramatically in the past 15 years. Parking
structures have spans that are typically in the 60-ft range,
and serviceability often controls the design over strength.
For typical garage loading requirements, a 30-in.-deep
castellated or cellular beam that weighs approximately
60 lb/ft used in composite construction will meet or exceed
the strength and serviceability requirements. Compared to a
W30×90, which is the lightest 30-in.-deep wide-flange beam
available, the use of a castellated or cellular beam will net
a weight savings of approximately 33%. This will provide Fig. 2-1.  Exterior of parking garage utilizing cellular beams.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 5

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 5 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 2.2.2 Industrial Facilities The integration of conduits within the beam depth is also
advantageous in medical buildings where gas lines, data
Industrial facilities often utilize mezzanines to provide addi-
lines and other services are often installed or relocated after
tional square footage for things such as overhead conveyors,
the building construction is complete. Additionally, when all
air handling equipment, process equipment, and even office
utilities are housed within the depth of the beam, the ceil-
space. The long-span capabilities of castellated and cellu-
ing can be directly affixed to the structure, as shown in Fig-
lar beams perform very well for this application. They help
ure 2-6. Power generating facilities and other structures with
to minimize the number of columns supporting the mezza-
significant piping could also benefit from the use of castel-
nine and have excellent vibration characteristics, which are
lated and cellular beams for service integration.
addressed in Section 2.2.5. An industrial facility is shown in
Figure 2-3.
2.2.4 Construction Efficiency
2.2.3 Service/HVAC Integration There are potentially many construction efficiencies that can
be directly and indirectly realized by using castellated and
One of the greatest advantages of castellated and cellular
cellular beams. Long-span construction minimizes the num-
beams is the ability to run utilities directly through the web
ber of columns required and results in a reduced number of
openings. Figure 2-4 illustrates that several inches of height
foundations, which is a direct cost savings. Additionally, the
per floor of the structure can be saved by using open web
number of pieces to be erected in the field can be greatly
sections. The openings in the beams may be utilized for the
reduced, thereby saving fabrication and erection costs. Indi-
installation of conduit, HVAC and sprinkler piping, and any
rect cost savings in general conditions and financing result-
other utility system, as shown in Figure 2-5. Use of castel-
ing from a shorter construction schedule can also be realized
lated and cellular beams in office buildings provides the
owner and future tenants the flexibility to install additional
wiring for telephones, computers, or other office equipment.

Fig. 2-2.  Parking structure during the day. Fig. 2-3.  Industrial facility with mezzanine.

Fig. 2-4.  14-in.-diameter HVAC duct.

6 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 6 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 if the steel erection is on the critical path of the construction the root beam into two sections. Provided that the opening
schedule. Finally, and perhaps more importantly, a shorter spacing is identical, the halves of two different root beams
construction schedule can allow for earlier revenue recogni- can be welded together to create an asymmetric shape. This
tion by the owner. is especially advantageous for composite applications where
the top tee works in conjunction with the concrete slab. For
2.2.5 Vibration Resistance composite design, it is typically cost effective to specify an
asymmetric section, using a smaller root beam for the top tee
Castellated and cellular beams are approximately 1.5 times
and a larger one for the bottom tee. Examples 4.3 and 4.4 use
deeper than the equivalent-weight wide-flange beams.
asymmetric sections for the design of a composite castel-
Consequently, castellated and cellular beams have excel-
lated and composite cellular beam, respectively.
lent vibration resistance in comparison to their root beams.
Increasing stiffness will decrease the effects of vibration on
2.2.7 Aesthetics
a floor or roof system. AISC Design Guide 11, Vibrations
of Steel-Framed Structural Systems Due to Human Activity, The process of fabricating a castellated or cellular beam pro-
covers the vibrations of steel floor systems (Murray et al., vides the designer great flexibility in creating architectur-
2016). Full-scale testing was conducted on composite cas- ally significant structural elements. The beams can be easily
tellated beams and it was verified that Design Guide 11 can cambered. Unlike traditional wide-flange beams that are
be used for castellated flooring systems. It is reasonable to cambered through mechanical methods or by applying heat,
extrapolate that the document could be used for composite camber is built in to castellated and cellular beams during
and noncomposite cellular beams as well. the fabrication process. This process also allows beams to be
curved as shown in Figure 2-7 and Figure 2-8, by curving the
2.2.6 Asymmetric Sections tees prior to welding the top and bottom halves of the beam
together. Additionally, exposed tapered elements can be uti-
As described in Section 1.2, the manufacturing process used
lized as well, as highlighted in Figure 2-9. A tapered beam
to fabricate castellated and cellular beams involves cutting

Fig. 2-7.  Curved cellular beam.

Fig. 2-5.  Openings utilized for conduit and HVAC routing.

Fig. 2-6.  Service integration with ceiling attached to structure. Fig. 2-8.  Curved cellular beam roof structure.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 7

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 7 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 is formed by sloping the cutting pattern along the length of the beam. Any opening size or spacing that meets these
the web and rotating one half of the beam 180° prior to com- guidelines is acceptable for applying the strength calcula-
pleting the web post welds. Castellated and cellular beams tions described in Chapter 3. Due to the fabrication process
are generally considered aesthetically pleasing structural of staggering the halves and aligning web posts, the opening
elements, providing an architectural advantage in structures size and spacing chosen must be consistent throughout the
where the beams are exposed. length of the beam.

2.3 WEB OPENING SIZE AND SPACING AND 2.3.1 End Connections
TYPICAL CONNECTIONS
The types of end connections used for castellated and cel-
There are geometric limits on web opening size and spacing lular beams are no different than those used for wide-flange
described in Section 3.3. These limits can be used to select beams. Typical connections used are shear tabs, double
a preliminary web opening size and spacing. The opening angles and single angles. It is standard practice to adjust the
size and spacing will define the geometry of the web post, opening pattern when possible to allow for a full web post
the web material between two openings, and the depth of width at the end of each beam. In cases where this cannot
be achieved, a partial or complete opening fill will be shop
installed by the castellated beam supplier to allow the end
connection to be made.

2.3.2 Infilling of Openings

The most economical opening pattern is one that provides a
full web post width at each end of the beam without the need
for infills. An infill, also referred to as a partial or complete
opening fill, is a piece of plate that is the same grade and
thickness as the beam web that is cut to the shape of the
opening and welded into the opening to allow a connection
to be made. Typical types of infills are shown in Figure 2-10.
In cases where other beams frame to a cellular or castellated
beam web, the preferred connection type would be a shear
tab. If the connection does not fall at a web post, then a par-
tial or complete opening fill must be shop installed by the
beam supplier to allow the end connection to be made. A
photograph of this detail is shown in Figure  2-11. During
the design process, opening spacing should be optimized
Fig. 2-9.  Tapered roof support beams.

Fig. 2-10.  Typical infill patterns for cellular (top) and castellated beams (bottom).

8 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 8 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 to avoid infills when possible, to minimize the costs of the partial infills be used. Since the hole spacing and end condi-
added material and labor. tions can be controlled in design, this e ′ consideration does
not typically control the design.
2.3.3 Large Copes
2.4 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS
At the location of the opening nearest the end connection
is an area of special consideration for castellated and cel- 2.4.1 Concentrated Loads
lular beams. The minimum diagonal distance from the cor- Although cellular and castellated beams are typically used
ner of the cope to the side of the first opening is designated for uniform load applications, they may also be used to sup-
as e ′. This dimension is shown in Figure  2-12. In atypical port concentrated loads or in a combined case with uniform
instances when large copes are required in the beam, the and concentrated loads. Guidance for this loading condition
dimension e ′ can become quite small. Experimental testing is presented in Section 3.8.
and analytical modeling have demonstrated that large reduc-
tions in the e ′ dimension are required before large reduction 2.4.2 Depth-Sensitive Projects
in strength occurs. As compared to a state with no cope, a
reduction in the e ′ distance of 50% for noncomposite sec- The overall depth of the castellated or cellular beam is
tions results in a reduction of maximum strength of 7% for dependent on the depth of the root beam, the opening diam-
castellated beams and 3% for cellular beams (Hoffman et eter, and the opening spacing The use of castellated or cellu-
al., 2005). It is recommended for beams with e ′ values 40% lar beams provides the designer with the flexibility to adjust
or less than the diagonal distance from the corner of the the opening size and spacing to achieve a beam of virtually
beam in an uncoped state to the side of the first opening, that any depth with an upper limit of 66 in. For example, if the
design engineer has a special situation that requires a cas-
tellated beam that is exactly 36-in. deep, they can specify
that depth on the design documents. In contrast, for sizes
commonly used for beams, the actual depth of a W36 rolled
beam ranges from 352 in. to 37a in. (not including over-
and under-rolling), and the size that is exactly 36 in. may not
be adequate. Hence it is often difficult, if not impossible, to
select rolled shapes with exactly the depth desired as com-
monly used for beams. Furthermore, the castellation process
allows the fabricator to build a beam to nonstandard depths
such as 34 in., or any other depth for custom applications.

2.4.3 Erection Stability

During the transportation, lifting and handling procedures,
laterally unbraced castellated and cellular beams may exhibit
instability under the relatively light loading of structure self-
weight combined with the weight of an erector.  Caution
Fig. 2-11.  Infill of cellular beam to must be exercised during the installation process. There-
accommodate a secondary beam. fore, it is recommended that erection bracing be used for the

Fig. 2-12.  Minimum distance between the end cope and the first opening, e′

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 9

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 9 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 installation of cellular and castellated beams. The bracing The key to calculating steel fire-resistance protection is
requirements vary depending on span and depth and are typi- understanding the weight-to-heated-perimeter ratio, com-
cally determined by the beam manufacturer. Typical erection monly referred to as the W/ D ratio. It is not currently recom-
bracing is shown in Figure 2-13. mended that W/ D ratios be used to reduce the thickness of
The failure of a castellated beam by lateral-torsional buck- the spray-on fireproofing for cellular and castellated beams.
ling is similar to that of the equivalent solid-webbed beams The W/ D ratio for a steel shape is determined by dividing
with the holes having little influence (Bradley, 2003). Provi- the weight per linear foot, W, by the exposed surface area
sions for determining the lateral-torsional buckling strength of the steel member, D. The higher the ratio, the greater the
of plain-webbed beams can be used for castellated and cel- member’s fire resistance, thus requiring less protection when
lular beams if the cross-sectional properties are calculated calculating ratings for the various types of fire protection.
at the gross section of the beam. When analyzing deep cas- Additional testing is under way to determine if W/ D ratios,
tellated beams, the gross cross-sectional properties should as applied to wide-flange beams, are also applicable to cas-
be used when considering lateral-torsional buckling beam tellated and cellular beams.
stability due to erection loading (Bradley, 2003). The classi- Intumescent paint is another option that has been used to
cal lateral-torsional buckling solution presented in the AISC fireproof castellated and cellular beams. The thickness of the
Specification (AISC, 2016), with the addition of the effective intumescent coating required varies per manufacturer and
length factors, should be used to assure a safe and efficient rating requirements and must be handled on a case-by-case
design when checking for lateral-torsional buckling. The basis.
lateral-torsional buckling check is presented in Section 3.2.2.
2.4.5 Coating Systems
2.4.4 Fireproofing
The coating systems used to protect castellated and cellular
There are three UL fire-rated assemblies for use of castel- beams are no different than those used to protect conven-
lated and cellular beams. UL assemblies N784 and N831 are tional structural steel. The system used should be deter-
fire-rated assemblies for a slab on deck system using com- mined based on the type of exposure the steel will be subject
posite cellular or castellated beams. These assemblies are to and the desired maintenance schedule. However, in the
beam-only assemblies and can be used to achieve up to a case of parking structures, or any other structure exposed to
4-hour rating and utilize spray-on fireproofing. According to weather, it is recommended that an epoxy-based paint sys-
AISC Design Guide 19, Fire Resistance of Structural Steel tem be applied or the steel should be hot dip galvanized. For
Framing, Section VII.11, the fact that they are beam-only hot-dipped galvanized structures, the sharp corners around
assemblies allows them to be substituted into other assem- the openings in the castellated shapes could be notch ris-
blies with an equivalent or better heat dissipating slab above ers and initiate cracking. Cellular profiles with their smooth
(Ruddy et al., 2003). The third assembly, UL P225, is for use transitions are therefore preferred  in galvanized applica-
in a roof assembly. tions. The use of an alkyd-based system is not recommended
for structures exposed to weather.

Fig. 2-13.  Typical erection bracing for cellular beams (similar bracing used for castellated beams).

10 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 10 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Chapter 3
Design Procedures
3.1 INTRODUCTION These forces will be referred to as global forces. The global
forces will be used to compute localized forces in the top
Due to the presence of the significant number of web open-
and bottom tees, the web posts, and the gross section. The
ings, castellated and cellular beams cannot be treated as
components (tees and web posts) of the beams will then be
solid-web members or members with web openings. These
examined for failure under the localized forces.
structural members are highly indeterminate elements,
which do not lend themselves to a simple method of analysis.
3.2 VIERENDEEL BENDING IN
The presence of web openings introduces many additional
NONCOMPOSITE BEAMS
failure modes not present in solid web members (Kerdal
and Nethercot, 1984). Design checks on the web posts and Vierendeel bending is caused by the transfer of shear force
tee-sections that form the opening are required. Addition- across the openings in order to be consistent with the rate
ally, shear deformations with the top and bottom tees in the of change of bending moment along the beam. Vierendeel
beams can be significant, thereby increasing the difficulty of failure occurs by the formation of plastic hinges at four loca-
deflection analysis. The re-entrant corners at the openings tions around the opening in the regions of high shear.
of castellated beams provide a location of stress concentra- The global shear force passing through the opening cre-
tion that may limit their use in applications where dynamic ates a localized bending moment in the top and bottom
effects are significant (Dougherty, 1993). tees, known as the Vierendeel moment. The global bend-
Localized forces develop in open web beams both around ing moment and shear forces change along the length of the
the openings and at the web posts; consequently, additional beam; consequently, it is necessary to examine the inter-
modes of failure must be investigated beyond those which action of the global shear and moment at each web open-
are normal for solid web flexural members. Research has ing along the entire length of the beam. By examining the
shown that castellated and cellular beams behave similar to interaction of the global moment and shear at each open-
Vierendeel trusses. The design theory for castellated beams ing, a critical opening can be identified. The global shear
is based largely on Design of Welded Structures (Blodgett, and moment interact to produce an overall stress; therefore,
1966), and additional research focused on web post buck- the most efficient use of the beam is in a situation where the
ling (Aglan and Redwood, 1974; Redwood and Shrivas- maximum global shear and moment occur away from each
tava, 1980). The design theory for cellular beams has been other such as a simply supported beam with a uniform load.
developed by the Steel Construction Institute of the United There are three steps in examining Vierendeel bending:
Kingdom (Ward, 1990). The design procedures have many 1. Calculate axial forces due to the global moment and
similarities, but because the procedures were developed by Vierendeel moment due to the global shear in top and
different parties, there are areas where slightly different bottom tees at each opening that result from external
approaches are used, such as investigation of horizontal and loads.
vertical shear.
2. Calculate the available axial and flexural strength of
The following limit states should be investigated when
the top and bottom tees using Chapters D, E and F of
designing castellated or cellular beams:
the AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings
1. Compactness and local buckling (AISC, 2016).
2. Overall beam flexural strength 3. Check the interaction of the axial force and Vierend-
3. Vierendeel bending of tees eel moment using the equations in Chapter H of the
4. Web post buckling AISC Specification.
5. Axial tension/compression
3.2.1 Calculation of Axial Force and Vierendeel
6. Horizontal shear Moment at Each Opening
7. Vertical shear 3.2.1.1 Calculation of Axial Forces in Beam
8. Lateral-torsional buckling The axial (tensile/compressive) force is a function of the
The first step in designing both castellated and cellular global bending moment in the beam. It is similar to a chord
beams is to calculate the overall bending moment and shear force in a truss. The axial force is calculated by dividing
force at each opening and web post caused by external loads. the global moment in the beam by the distance between the

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 11

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 11 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 centroids of the top and bottom tees, deffec. The axial force is where
assumed to act uniformly over the cross section. See Figure Anet = combined area of top and bottom tees, in.2 (mm2 )
3-1 for terminology and variables used to calculate the axial Atee = area of tee section, in.2 (mm2 )
forces. Do = opening diameter, in. (mm)
Required axial compressive strength: Vr = required shear strength, kips (N)
e =  length of solid-web section along centerline,
Mr
Pr = (3-1) in. (mm)
deffec 
The axial forces (compression or tension) and the flexural
where forces act concurrently on the top and bottom tees. In the
Mr = required flexural strength, kip-in. (N-mm) case of a positive global moment, the top tee is in compres-
deffec = distance between centroids of top and bottom tees, sion and the bottom tee is in tension. Both tees undergo flex-
in. (mm) ure from the global shear forces in the beam.

3.2.1.2 Calculation of Vierendeel Moment in Beam 3.2.2 Calculation of Axial (Tensile/Compressive) and
Flexural Strength of Top and Bottom Tees
The Vierendeel moment is calculated by dividing the global
shear force in the beam between the top and bottom tees and The available axial strength of the top and bottom tees can
multiplying that shear force by a moment arm. If the top be calculated using AISC Specification Chapters D and E,
and bottom tees are identical, then the shear can be divided and the available flexural strength can be calculated using
equally between the top and bottom tees. If the top and bot- AISC Specification Chapter F (AISC, 2016). Chapter H can
tom tees are not identical (as is the case in asymmetric sec- then be used to check the interaction of the two forces act-
tions), the shear force should be proportioned between the ing concurrently. For simplicity, it is acceptable (and slightly
top and bottom tees based on the areas of the tees relative conservative) to treat the tension force on the bottom tee
to each other. For castellated sections, the moment arm for as a compression force, thereby reducing the number of
calculating the Vierendeel moment is one-half the width of calculations.
the top of the opening, e/ 2. For cellular beams, the moment
arm should be taken as Do /4 (Bjorhovde, 2000). 3.2.2.1 Calculation of Nominal Axial Strength
Vierendeel required flexural strength, Mvr of Top and Bottom Tees

⎛A ⎞ e The nominal compressive strength, Pn , is the lowest value

Castellated Beams: M vr = Vr ⎜ tee ⎟ ⎛ ⎞ (3-2) obtained based on the applicable limit states of flexural
⎝ Anet ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 
buckling and flexural-torsional buckling.
⎛ Atee ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
Cellular Beams: M vr = Vr ⎜ (3-3)
⎝ Anet ⎟⎠ ⎝ 4 ⎠  Design Assumptions
1. Kx = 0.65 (assumes rotation and translation are fixed
at the ends of the tee section)

e Do
a b e Wo 2 a Do e 2
ytee-top

ytee-top

ENA of top tee ENA of top tee

Ptop Ptop
dt

dt

θ Global Global
deffec
deffec

Do
dg
ho

dg

Moment, M Moment, M

Pbot Pbot
dt

dt

ENA of bottom tee ENA of bottom tee

ytee-bot

ytee-bot

  
Castellated beam Cellular beam

Fig. 3-1.  Terminology used for calculating axial forces in noncomposite beams.

12 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 12 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 2. Ky = 1.0 the limit state of flexural-torsional buckling as follows:
3. E = 29,000 ksi (200 000 MPa)
Pn = Fcr Ag(Spec. Eq. E4-1)
4. L = laterally unbraced length of the member,
in. (mm) ϕc = 0.90 (LRFD) Ω c = 1.67 (ASD)
= e for castellated beams The critical stress, Fcr , is determined according to Equa-
= Do / 2 for cellular beams tion E3-2 or E3-3, using the torsional or flexural-torsional
elastic buckling stress, Fe, determined from:
5. Lc = KL = effective length, in. (mm)
6. Lc = Kx L ⎛ Fey + Fez ⎞ ⎡ 4 Fey Fez H ⎤
Fe = ⎜ 1− 1−
= Ky L ⎝ 2 H ⎟⎠ ⎢⎢ ⎥
( Fey + Fez )2 ⎥⎦
⎣ 
7. G = 11,200 ksi (77 200 MPa) (Spec. Eq. E4-3)
where
Compressive Strength for Flexural Buckling—AISC Cw = warping constant, in.6 (mm6)
Specification Section E3
π2 E
Fey = (Spec. Eq. E4-6)
For members without slender elements, the nominal com- ⎛ Lcy ⎞
2
pressive strength for flexural buckling is calculated using ⎜⎝ ry ⎟⎠
AISC Specification Section E3, 
⎡ π 2 ECw ⎤ 1
Fez =⎢ + GJ ⎥ (Spec. Eq. E4-7)
Pn = Fcr Ag(Spec. Eq. E3-1) ⎢⎣ ( Lcz ) 2 ⎥ Ag ro2
⎦ 
ϕc = 0.90 (LRFD) Ω c = 1.67 (ASD)
G = shear modulus of elasticity of steel = 11,200 ksi
where (77 200 MPa)
Ag = Atee x o2 + yo2
H = 1− (Spec. Eq. E4-8)
The critical stress, Fcr, is determined as follows: ro2 
Ix, Iy = moment of inertia about the principal axes, in.4
Lc E ⎛ Fy ⎞ (mm4)
(a) When ≤ 4.71 or ≤ 2.25⎟
r Fy ⎜⎝ Fe ⎠ J = torsional constant, in.4 (mm4)
Kx = effective length factor for flexural buckling about
⎛ Fy
⎞ x-axis
Fcr = ⎜ 0.658 Fe ⎟ Fy (Spec. Eq. E3-2)
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠ Ky = effective length factor for flexural buckling about
 y-axis
Lc E ⎛ Fy ⎞ Kz = effective length factor for flexural buckling about
(b) When > 4.71 or > 2.25⎟
r Fy ⎜⎝ Fe ⎠ the longitudinal axis
Lcx = effective length of member for buckling about
Fcr = 0.877Fe(Spec. Eq. E3-3) x-axis, in. (mm)
where = Kx Lx
r = minimum of rx and ry of the tee section, in. Lcy = effective length of member for buckling about
y-axis, in. (mm)
The elastic buckling stress, Fe, is determined as follows: = Ky Ly
Lcz = effective length of member for buckling about the
π2 E longitudinal axis, in. (mm)
Fe = (Spec. Eq. E3-4)
⎛ Lc ⎞
2
= Kz Lz
⎝ r ⎠  ro = polar radius of gyration about the shear center,

in. (mm)
If the tees include slender compression elements, AISC Ix + Iy
Specification Section E7 is used to calculate Fcr. ro2 = xo2 + yo2 + (Spec. Eq. E4-9)
Ag 
rx = radius of gyration about x-axis, in. (mm)
Compressive Strength for Flexural-Torsional Buckling— ry = radius of gyration about y-axis, in. (mm)
AISC Specification Section E4 xo, yo = coordinates of the shear center with respect to the
The nominal compressive strength is determined based on centroid, in. (mm)

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 13

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 13 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Tensile Strength—AISC Specification Section D2 Mp = My(Spec. Eq. F9-4)
The nominal tensile strength is determined based on the where
limit state of tensile yielding in the gross section: My = Fy Sx-tee
= y ield moment about the axis of bending, kip-in.
Pn = Fy Ag (Spec. Eq. D2-1) (N-mm)
ϕ c = 0.90 (LRFD) Ω c = 1.67 (ASD) Sx-tee = elastic section modulus of tee about the x-axis, in.3

(mm3)
Note: Because the stem will be in compression, Mp is lim-
3.2.2.2 Calculation of Nominal Flexural Strength, Mn
ited to the minimum section modulus of the tee, Sx-tee, multi-
The flexural strength of the top and bottom tee sections plied by the yield strength of the steel.
must be determined and compared to the required flexural
strength to support the Vierendeel design moment, with an Lateral-Torsional Buckling—AISC Specification Section
unbraced length equal to the length of the tee section (refer- F9.2
ence Figure 3-2).
When Lb ≤ Lp the limit state of lateral-torsional buckling
does not apply.
Design Assumptions
1. E = 29,000 ksi (200 000 MPa) When Lp < Lb ≤ Lr
2. Lb = e for castellated beams ⎛ Lb − L p ⎞
= Do / 2 for cellular beams Mn = Mp − ( M p − My ) ⎜
⎝ Lr − L p ⎟⎠ 
3. G = 11,200 ksi (77 200 MPa) (Spec. Eq. F9-6)
The nominal flexural strength is the lowest value obtained when Lb > Lr
according to the limit states of yielding (plastic moment),
lateral–torsional buckling, flange local buckling, and local Mn = Mc(Spec. Eq. 9-7)
buckling of tee stems.
where
Nominal Flexural Strength for Yielding—AISC Specification E
Lp = 1.76ry (Spec. Eq. F9-8)
Section F9.1 Fy

The nominal flexural strength for yielding, Mn, is determined ⎛ E ⎞ IyJ

Lr = 1.95 ⎜ ⎟ ⎛ Fy ⎞ dS x
as follows: 2.36 ⎜ ⎟ +1
⎝ Fy ⎠ S x ⎝ E⎠ J

Mn = Mp(Spec. Eq. F9-1) (Spec. Eq. F9-9)

e Do
a b e Wo 2 2
ytee-top

a Do e
ytee-top

ENA of top tee ENA of top tee

PNA of top tee PNA of top tee
Global shear - V
V top

Global shear - V
V top
dt

dt

θ
deffec
dg
ho

Do
dg
V bot
dt

V bot
dt

ENA of bottom tee ENA of bottom tee

PNA of bottom tee
ytee-bot

PNA of bottom tee

ytee-bot

Castellated Beams Cellular Beams

Fig. 3-2.  Terminology used for calculating Vierendeel moment in noncomposite beams.

14 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 14 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 ( )
1.95E compression, Mn, is determined as follows:
Mcr = I y J B + 1 + B2 (Spec. Eq. F9-10)
Lb 
M n = Fcr S x (Spec. Eq. F9-16)
⎛ d ⎞ Iy
B = 2.3 ⎜ ⎟ (Spec. Eq. F9-11)
⎝ Lb ⎠ J  where
d = depth of tee in tension, in. (mm) Sx = elastic section modulus about the x-axis, in.3 (mm3)
For stems in compression anywhere along the unbraced The critical stress, Fcr, is determined as follows:
length, Mcr is given by Equation F9-10 with
d E
(a) When ≤ 0.84
⎛ d⎞ Iy tw Fy
B = −2.3 ⎜ ⎟ (Spec. Eq. F9-12)
⎝ Lb ⎠ J

where Fcr = Fy (Spec. Eq. F9-17)

d = depth of tee in compression, in. (mm)
For tee stems E d E
(b) When 0.84 < ≤ 1.52
Fy t w Fy
Mn = Mcr ≤ My (Spec. Eq. F9-13)

⎛ d Fy ⎞
Flange Local Buckling of Tees—AISC Specification Section Fcr = ⎜1.43 − 0.515 Fy
F9.3 ⎝ t w E ⎟⎠ 
(a) For sections with a compact flange in flexural com- (Spec. Eq. F9-18)
pression, the limit state of flange local buckling does
not apply. d E
(c) When > 1.52
(b) For sections with a noncompact flange in flexural tw Fy
compression

⎡ 1.52 E
⎛ λ − λ pf ⎞ ⎤ Fcr = (Spec. Eq. F9-19)
M n = ⎢Mp − ( Mp − 0.7Fy S xc ) ⎜ ⎥ ≤ 1.6 My 2
⎢⎣ ⎝ λ rf − λ pf ⎟⎠ ⎥⎦ ⎛d⎞
⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠

w 
(Spec. Eq. F9-14)

(c) For sections with a slender flange in flexural where

compression d = dt

3.2.3 Check of Top and Bottom Tees Subjected to

0.7 ES xc
Mn = 2 (Spec. Eq. F9-15) Combined Flexural and Axial Forces
⎛ bf ⎞
⎜⎝ 2t f ⎟⎠ The interaction of flexure and axial forces in top and bot-
 tom tees constrained to bend about a geometric axis (x and/
where or y) is limited by AISC Specification Equations H1-1a and
Sxc = elastic selection modulus referred to the compres- H1-1b.
sions flange, in.3 (mm3) For combined flexure and compression:
bf
λ = Pr
2t f (a) For ≥ 0.2
Pc
λpf = λp, the limiting slenderness for a compact flange,
AISC Specification Table B4.1b Pr 8 ⎛ M rx Mry ⎞
+ + ≤ 1.0
λrf = λr, the limiting slenderness for a noncompact flange,
Pc 9 ⎜⎝ M cx M cy ⎟⎠ 
AISC Specification Table B4.1b
(Spec. Eq. H1-1a)
Local Buckling of Tee Stems in Flexural Compression—
AISC Specification Section F9.4
The nominal flexural strength for local buckling in flexural

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 15

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 15 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Pr less strength because of the limited number of studs between
(b) For < 0.2 the end of the beam and the opening being investigated. As
Pc
a result, less force is carried by the concrete and more force
Pr ⎛ M rx M ry ⎞ is carried by the steel tee. The contribution of the composite
+ + ≤ 1.0
2 Pc ⎜⎝ M cx M cy ⎟⎠ 
section must consider the actual available studs between the
beam end and the opening. An additional benefit of compos-
(Spec. Eq. H1-1b)
ite construction is that concrete helps resist the global shear
forces, thereby reducing the Vierendeel moment in the tees.
where
There are five steps to checking Vierendeel bending in
Pc = available axial strength, kips (N)
composite beams:
Pr = required axial strength, kips (N)
Mc = available flexural strength, kip-in. (N-mm) 1. Calculate the shear strength of the concrete deck—
Mr = required flexural strength, kip-in. (N-mm) this will be subtracted from the global shear to calcu-
x = subscript relating symbol to major axis bending late the net shear, which will be used to compute the
y = subscript relating symbol to minor axis bending Vierendeel moment in the top and bottom tees.
2. Calculate the net shear and moment at each.
A check for combined flexure and tension can be made
using the same equations; however the available compres- 3. Calculate the axial forces and Vierendeel moments in
sive strength will always be less than the available tensile the top and bottom tees.
strength and therefore the available compressive strength 4. Calculate the available axial compressive and flexural
may be used to simplify the calculations. This may not be strength of the top and bottom tees using Chapters E
true in asymmetric sections, in which case the available ten- and F of the AISC Specification.
sile strength may need to be investigated as well.
5. Check the interaction of the available axial compres-
sive and flexural strength using the equations in Chap-
3.3 VIERENDEEL BENDING IN COMPOSITE
ter H of the AISC Specification.
BEAMS
Vierendeel bending in composite beams is similar to that in
3.3.1 Calculation of Axial Force and Vierendeel
noncomposite beams. The shear force resisted by the con-
Moment at Each Opening
crete slab is first deducted from the applied shear force.
The net shear is apportioned between the tees. It cannot be 3.3.1.1 Calculation of Axial Forces in Beam
assumed that the highest internal forces occur at the mid- It is assumed that a sufficient number of steel anchors exist
span of the beam; each opening along the length of the beam to develop enough of the concrete such that all of the com-
must be examined for shear and flexural interaction. pression force is resisted by the concrete section and that
Composite action results in smaller forces in the tees, the bottom tee resists all the tension force. Therefore, when
resulting in a more favorable design. However, at web open- the beam at this section is fully composite, To shown in
ings near the ends of the beams, composite action provides Figure  3-3 is zero, and C1 = T1. The compression/tension
y tee-bot

Castellated Beams Cellular Beams

Fig. 3-3.  Terminology used for calculating axial forces in composite beams.

16 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 16 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 couple force is produced by the global moment. After this where
initial assumption it is necessary to recalculate Yc , which fc′ = compressive strength of concrete, ksi (MPa)
is the thickness of concrete that will be used to resist the
The term Yc is similar to “a,” which represents the depth of
global moment. In the iterative calculations, the term Yc will
the stress block in concrete design. It will be used to replace
replace tc in the equations that follow. Figure  3-3 presents
the term tc in the calculation of deffec in subsequent calcula-
the dimensions and forces used to calculate the axial forces
tion iterations. This process may take several iterations to
in the composite beam.
converge. Note that this process occurs at every opening.
Using AISC Specification Section I.2d.1, calculate the
3.3.1.2 Effective Width
total horizontal shear force, V ′, between the point of maxi-
The effective width, beffec, of the concrete slab is not to mum positive moment and the point of zero moment. V ′ is
exceed: taken as the lowest value according to the limit states of con-
1. For an interior beam, crete crushing or tensile yielding of the steel section.
beam span
beffec ≤ (3-4a) V ′ = 0.85 fc′Ac (Spec. Eq. I3-1a)
4 
beffec ≤ beam spacing (for equal beam spacing)
 (3-4b) V ′ = Fy As (Spec. Eq. I3-1b)
2. For an exterior beam,
beam span where
beffec ≤ +distance from beam center to Ac = area of concrete slab within effective width, in.2
8  edge of slab (3-5) (mm2)
beam spacing As = area of steel cross section, in.2 (mm2)
beffec ≤ + distance from beam center to
= Anet
2  edge of slab (3-6)
The distance from the end of the beam to the center of
The net area, Anet , is the opening being investigated is defined as Xi and the total
number of studs across the beam is defined as Ns.
Anet = Atee -top + Atee-bot (3-7) The shear stud density, q, is defined as:

The effective depth of the composite section, deffec-comp, is ⎛ N s Qn ⎞
q=⎜ (3-11)
⎝ Span ⎟⎠ 
deffec-comp = dg − ytee-bot + hr + 0.5tc (3-8)
where
where Qn = nominal shear strength of one steel stud, kips (N)
dg = depth of the expanded beam, in. (mm) The total number of studs between the end of the beam
hr = height of deck ribs, in. (mm) and the opening under consideration is defined as N1, and
tc =thickness of concrete above the deck ribs, the total stud strength between the end of the beam and the
in. (mm) opening under consideration is determined by multiplying
y tee-bot = distance from the bottom fiber to the centroid of the shear stud density, q, by Xi .
the bottom tee, in. (mm) If T1 at the opening being investigated exceeds the total
Calculate the axial force in the bottom tee, T1, and the axial stud strength provided by the studs up to that opening, then
force in the concrete, C1, assuming full composite action: partial composite action exists; if not, then the section is
fully composite, and the assumption that the concrete can
Mr resist all the compressive force is valid. In other words, if
T1 = C1 = (3-9) there are not enough studs to develop the force T1, then the
deffec-comp 
section must be considered partially composite. If the sec-
Calculate the depth of concrete used to resist the global tion is partially composite, calculate the force To that acts on
moment, Yc: the top tee and bottom tee. To represents the additional axial
force that must be resisted by the steel beam tees due to lack
T1 of composite action.
Yc = (3-10)
0.85 fc′ beffec  If the composite beam section at the web opening is par-
tially composite, calculate To, T1-new and C1-new as shown in
Figure 3-4.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 17

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 17 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 If the web opening is partially composite, calculate To and The available concrete shear strength, Vc , can then be
revise T1. determined as:
The axial force in the top tee, To, is calculated as follows:
Vc = ϕ cvVnc (LRFD)(3-15a)
⎡ ( q )( Xi ) ⎤
1− Vc = Vnc Ω cv (ASD)(3-15b)
To = M r ⎢ T1 ⎥ (3-12)
⎢ ⎥
ϕcv = 0.75 Ω cv = 2.00
⎣⎢ deffec ⎥⎦
Determine the net shear force as:
The axial force in the bottom tee, T1-new, is then calculated
as:
Vr-net = Vr − Vc (3-16)
T1-new = qX i + To (3-13)
= C 1-new + To Vierendeel Required Flexural Strength
For castellated beams, the Vierendeel required flexural
3.3.2 Calculation of Vierendeel Bending Moment of strength is determined as follows:
the Upper and Lower Tees
⎛ Atee ⎞ ⎛ e ⎞
M vr = Vr -net ⎜ (3-17)
The Vierendeel moments in the top and bottom tees are cal-
⎝ An ⎟⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠ 
culated in composite beams in the same manner as noncom-
posite sections. Many times in composite sections it makes And for cellular beams:
sense to use asymmetric sections (a larger bottom than top
section) since the top tee usually does not carry significant ⎛ Atee-crit ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
M vr = Vr -net ⎜ (3-18)
axial tensile forces. If asymmetric sections are used, the
⎝ Acrit ⎟⎠ ⎝ 4 ⎠ 
global shear force should be divided between the top and
bottom tees based on the area of the tees relative to each
where
other. Also, for composite sections allow the concrete deck
Acrit = sum of the top and bottom areas of the critical
to take some of the global shear force to reduce the Vierend-
section, in.2 (mm2)
eel bending moment. The nominal strength of the concrete
Atee = a rea of the tee section, in.2 (mm2)
deck is Vc. Figure  3-5 presents the dimensions and forces
Atee-crit = 
area of the critical section which is located
used to calculate the Vierendeel moments in the beam.
0.225Do away from center of the opening, in.2
Calculate the concrete deck punching shear strength, Vnc:
(mm2)

(
Vnc = 3 ( h r +tc )( tc ) 4 fc′ )(3-14)

1-new 1-new

1-new 1-new
y tee-bot

Castellated Beams Cellular Beams

Fig. 3-4.  Terminology used for calculating axial forces in partially composite beams.

18 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 18 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 3.3.3 Calculation of Available Axial and Flexural developed for θ = 45°(±2°) and another set for θ = 60°(±2°).
Strength of Top and Bottom Tees It is not permissible to use these equations for θ < 43° or for
θ > 62°. It is, however, acceptable to design beams with web
The nominal strength of the top and bottom tees should be
posts having an angle, θ, between 45° and 60° by interpo-
calculated as in noncomposite sections. The only difference
lating between the two equation sets, and applying a larger
is that the bottom tee should be examined as a member sub-
factor of safety to the allowable web post bending moment.
ject to true tension (axial stress) and Vierendeel moment
Also, the equations are only applicable for 10 ≤ e/tw ≤ 30 and
(bending stress) rather than assuming that the axial force is
2h/e ≤ 8. It is typically most efficient to maintain an angle, θ,
compressive, as is done in noncomposite sections for sim-
of between 58° and 62°.
plicity. If the To force does exist, the top tee should be exam-
For cellular beams, a similar set of equations was devel-
ined as a compression member. Also, as in noncomposite
oped through destructive testing by the Steel Construction
sections, the combined forces should be checked in accor-
Institute of the United Kingdom (Ward, 1990). There are
dance with AISC Specification Chapter H.
three values (C1, C2 and C3), which are functions of the
properties of the web post that are used to calculate the buck-
3.4 WEB POST BUCKLING
ling capacity of the web post as a function of the web post
Web post buckling is caused by the horizontal shear force elastic capacity at a critical section 0.9R. These equations
passing through the web post. The ultimate strength of the are the result of detailed nonlinear finite element studies, and
web post is governed by one of two modes: only applicable for 1.08 ≤ S/Do ≤ 1.50 and 1.25 ≤ dg/Do ≤
1. Flexural failure caused by the development of a plas- 1.75.
tic hinge in the web post. Although the methods for calculating the web post buck-
ling strength are different for castellated and cellular beams,
2. Buckling failure of the web post.
the results are generally comparable. Figure 3-6 presents the
The mode of failure is dependent on the geometry and the terminology used to calculate web post buckling for castel-
thickness of the web post. Separate checks are made for the lated and cellular beams.
top and bottom tees, which may have different thicknesses
and available strengths. 3.4.1 Web Post Buckling in Castellated Beams
For castellated beams, the buckling capacity of the web
posts is calculated using equations that have been developed 3.4.1.1 Calculation of Horizontal Shear and Resulting
through destructive testing (Aglan and Redwood, 1974). Moment on Web Post
This set of equations defines the buckling capacity of the
web post as a percentage of its plastic bending moment, Mp , Horizontal Shear, Vrh — Noncomposite
which is a function of e, b, tw and Fy. The buckling capac-
Treat a segment of the beam as a free body acted upon by the
ity, as a percentage of Mp, is a function of 2h/e; the value of
global bending moment force. The difference in this axial
2h/e need not be taken as more than 2. The destructive test-
force from one end of the segment to the other is transferred
ing that was completed was for beams with the angle of the
out as horizontal shear along the web post. See Figure 3-7.
hexagonal cut, θ = 45° and 60°; i.e., one set of equations was

Castellated Beams Cellular Beams

Fig. 3-5.  Terminology used for calculating Vierendeel moments in composite beams.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 19

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 19 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Calculate the horizontal shear, Vrh: Bottom tee:

M r (i +1) − M r (i ) Mrh = Vrh hbot (3-21)

Vrh = = Tr (i ) − Tr (i +1) (3-19)
deffec  For symmetrical sections (most noncomposite sections),
the design moment on the top and bottom web posts will be
Horizontal Shear, Vrh — Composite the same.

Consider a segment of composite castellated beam as shown 3.4.1.2 Calculation of Available Flexural Strength of
in Figure 3-6(c). Web Post
The horizontal shear of a composite section, Vrh , is calcu-
lated from Equation 3-19: Calculate the plastic bending moment, Mp

Vrh = Tr (i ) − Tr (i +1)  Mp = 0.25tw ( e + 2b )2 Fy (3-22)

Calculate Mocr/Mp, where Mocr is the critical moment for
Required flexural strength in the web post web post lateral buckling.

Top tee:

M rh = Vrh htop (3-20)

  
(a)  Noncomposite castellated beams (b)  Noncomposite cellular beams

  
(c)  Composite castellated beams (d)  Composite cellular beams

Fig. 3-6.  Terminology used for calculating web post buckling.

20 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 20 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 For θ = 45°, where θ is the angle of the hexagonal cut: Note: The value of Mocr/Mp is limited to 0.493, which is
Mocr/Mp at e/tw = 10 with 2h/e = 2. Interpolate between equa-
e/tw = 10
tions 1 through 3 based on actual e/tw for Mocr/Mp at θ = 60°.
M ocr 2h 2h 2 Resistance factor (ϕ)—LRFD
= 0.351 − 0.051⎛ ⎞ + 0.0026 ⎛ ⎞ ≤ 0.26 θ = 43° to 47° ϕb = 0.90
Mp ⎝ e ⎠ ⎝ e ⎠ 
θ = 52.5° ϕb = 0.60
(3-23)
θ = 58° to 62° ϕb = 0.90
e/tw = 20
Note: The value of ϕb decreases linearly from 0.90 (at θ =
58° to 62°) to 0.60 at θ = 52.5°. Linear interpolation should
M ocr 2h 2h 2 2h 3
= 3.276 − 1.208 ⎛ ⎞ + 0.154 ⎛ ⎞ − 0.0067 ⎛ ⎞ be used based on actual angle of the hexagonal cut, θ. See
Mp ⎝ e ⎠ ⎝ e ⎠ ⎝ e ⎠
Figure 3-8.
(3-24)
Factor of safety (Ω)—ASD
e/tw = 30 θ = 43° to 47° Ωb = 1.67
θ = 52.5° Ωb = 2.50
Mocr 2h 2h 2 2h 3 θ = 58° to 62° Ωb = 1.67
= 0.952 − 0.30 ⎛ ⎞ + 0.0319 ⎛ ⎞ − 0.0011⎛ ⎞
Mp ⎝ e ⎠ ⎝ e ⎠ ⎝ e ⎠
Note: The value of Ωb increases linearly from 1.67 (at θ =
(3-25) 58° to 62°) to 2.5 at θ = 52.5°. Linear interpolation should be
used based on actual angle of the hexagonal cut, θ.
Note: The value of Mocr/Mp is limited to 0.26, which is
The available flexural strength of the web post is calcu-
Mocr/Mp at e/tw =10 with 2h/e =2. Interpolate between equa-
lated from Equations 3-29a and 3-29b:
tions 1 through 3 based on actual e/tw for Mocr/Mp at θ = 45°.
Calculate Mocr/Mp ⎛ M ocr ⎞
ϕMn = ϕb ⎜ Mp (LRFD)(3-29a)
For θ = 60°: ⎝ M p ⎟⎠

e/tw = 10
Mn ⎛ Mocr ⎞ ⎛ Mp ⎞
= (ASD)(3-29b)
Ω b ⎜⎝ Mp ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ Ω b ⎟⎠
2h
M ocr e
= 0.587 ( 0.917 ) ≤ 0.493 (3-26)
Mp 
e/tw = 20 3.4.2 Web Post Buckling in Cellular Beams

2h
Calculate the horizontal shear, Vrh
M ocr e
= 1.96 ( 0.699 ) (3-27)
Vrh = Tr (i ) − Tr (i +1)  (3-30)
Mp 

e/tw = 30 The required flexural strength in the web post can then be
determined by:
Mocr 2h
= 2.55 ( 0.574 ) e (3-28) Do
Mp  M rh = 0.90 Vrh (3-31)
2 
The elastic bending moment Me, at 0.9R is then:
e
Global Moment Mr(i+1)

t w ( S − Do + 0.564 Do )2
Global Moment Mr(i)

Me = Fy (3-32)
V r(i+1)-top
Vr(i)-top

6 
T r(i) T r(i+1)
V rh
Calculate C1, C2 and C3
deffec

V r(i+1) bot

T r(i) V rh T r(i+1)
V r(i)-bot

2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C1 = 5.097 + 0.1464 ⎜ ⎟ − 0.00174 ⎜ (3-33)
⎝ tw ⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠ 

Fig. 3-7.  Terminology used for calculating web post

horizontal shear in noncomposite castellated beam.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 21

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 21 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 2 3.5.1 Calculation of Available Horizontal Shear
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C 2 = 1.441 + 0.0625 ⎜ − 0.000683 ⎜ (3-34) Strength
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠ 
The available horizontal shear strength of the web post is
2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞ calculated based on AISC Specification Section J4.2. For
C 3 = 3.645 + 0.0853 ⎜ − 0.00108 ⎜ (3-35)
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠  castellated and cellular beams, a practical limit is reached
well before the code limits would be approached that require
Calculate Mallow/Me further calculations.
Calcuate the nominal shear strength, Vn
2
Mallow ⎛ S ⎞ ⎛ S ⎞
= C1⎜ ⎟ − C2⎜ − C3 (3-36)
Me ⎝ Do ⎠ ⎝ Do ⎟⎠  Vn = 0.6 Fy Aw (Spec. Eq. J4-3)

The available flexural strength of the web post is: where

Aw = etw , in.2 (mm 2 )
⎛ M allow ⎞
ϕM n = ϕb ⎜ Me (LRFD)(3-37a)
⎝ M e ⎟⎠ The available horizontal shear strength is then:

M n ⎛ M allow ⎞ ⎛ M e ⎞ Vc = ϕ vVn (LRFD)

= (ASD)(3-37b)
Ω b ⎜⎝ M e ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ Ω b ⎟⎠ Vn
Vc = (ASD)
ϕb = 0.90 (LRFD) Ω b = 1.67 (ASD) Ωv

ϕ v = 1.00 Ω v = 1.50
3.5 HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SHEAR
As in all flexural members, horizontal and vertical shear 3.5.2 Calculation of Available Vertical Shear Strength
forces are resisted by the web of castellated and cellular The available vertical shear strength must be calculated at
beams. In open web beams, the shear becomes more critical the net section as well as the gross section. In both cases,
for two reasons. First, the vertical shear must be resisted by AISC Specification Section G2 should be used. At the net
the net section of the member. Second, horizontal shear that section, the shear force should be proportioned between the
passes down the midline of the beam web becomes mag- top and bottom tees based on the areas of the tees relative to
nified at each web post due to the adjacent web openings. each other. For the gross section, h/tw should be calculated
Vertical shear should be checked using the global shear force using the clear distance between flanges less the fillet, and dt
calculated at each opening and resisted by the net section at used for the net section. The term kv should be taken as 5.34
web openings, or the gross section at web posts. The hori- for the gross section and as 1.2 for the stem of the tee shape
zontal shear force, Vrh, from the web post buckling calcula- at the net section.
tion can be used to check horizontal shear.

1
0.9
0.8
ϕb

0.7
0.6
0.5
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
θ

Fig. 3-8.  Resistance factor by hexagonal cut angle.

22 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 22 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 At the gross section: Gross section
h d g − ktop − kbot Vn = 0.6 Fy d g t wCv1
=
tw tw (from Spec. Eq. G2-1)
Calculate Cv1:
The available vertical shear strength is:
h k E
When ≤ 1.10 v
tw Fy Vc = ϕ vVn (LRFD)

Cv1 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-3) Vn

Vc = (ASD)
Ωv
h kv E
When >1.10
tw Fy
3.6 LATERAL-TORSIONAL BUCKLING
1.10 k v E Fy Lateral-torsional buckling, flange local buckling, and ten-
C v1 = (Spec. Eq. G2-4) sion flange yielding should be checked in castellated and cel-
h tw 
lular beams in accordance with AISC Specification Chapter
At the net section: F, Sections F2 through F5, similar to ordinary wide-flange
h dt beams. The gross section properties can be used when check-
= ing for lateral-torsional buckling. For composite sections, it
tw tw
may be assumed that the deck stabilizes the top flange.
Calculate Cv2:
h kv E 3.7 DEFLECTION
When ≤ 1.10
tw Fy
Castellated and cellular beams typically have higher span-
to-depth ratios than ordinary wide-flange sections; conse-
Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)
quently, deflection typically does not govern the design. In
kv E h kv E most cases, castellated and cellular beams behave like pris-
When 1.10 < ≤ 1.37 matic sections as it relates to deflection. However, additional
Fy tw Fy
deflection due to shear deformation around the openings
does occur. The magnitude of this deflection is usually only
1.10 k v E Fy
C v2 = (Spec. Eq. G2-10) significant in very short spans or when heavy concentrated
h tw  loads are present. For most applications, it is not necessary
to do any rigorous deflection calculations beyond what is
h kv E
When >1.37 typically done for prismatic sections. The deflection for both
tw Fy composite and noncomposite castellated and cellular beams
can be approximated by using 90% of the moment of inertia
1.51k v E at the net section and treating it as a prismatic section. Trans-
Cv 2 = (Spec. Eq. G2-11)
( h tw )2Fy  formed section properties, at a section cut through an open-
ing, may be used for deflection calculations in the composite
For the gross and net sections, determine ϕv and Ωv: condition. More complex methods of predicting deflection
h E have also been developed (Hosain et al., 1974; Altfillisch
For ≤ 2.24 ϕv = 1.00 and Ωv = 1.50 et al., 1957).
tw Fy
h E 3.8 CONCENTRATED LOADING
For > 2.24 ϕv = 0.90 and Ωv = 1.67
tw Fy Castellated and cellular beams with concentrated loads
For a castellated beam, the nominal shear strength, Vn, is: applied normal to one flange are to have a flange and web
Net section, top tee proportioned to satisfy the flange local bending, web local
yielding, web local crippling, and sidesway web buckling
Vn = 0.6 Fy (dt -top + dt -bot )twCv 2 criteria listed in AISC Specification Section J10. When the
(from Spec. Eq. G3-1) required strength exceeds the available strength as deter-
mined for the limit states listed in this section, stiffeners and/
or doublers should be provided.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 23

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 23 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 24 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
001-024_DG31.indd 24 3/13/17 11:24 AM
 Chapter 4
Design Examples
This chapter contains four examples; a noncomposite castellated roof beam, a noncomposite cellular roof beam, a composite
castellated floor beam, and composite cellular floor beam. All examples are presented using LRFD and ASD.

Example 4.1—Noncomposite Castellated Beam Design

Given:
A 40-ft-long roof beam with simple supports, as shown in Figure 4-1, will be evaluated as a noncomposite castellated section
subject to uniform loading.
Beam span: 40 ft
Beam spacing: 5 ft
Trial beam: W12×14 → CB18×14
Loading: Live load = 20 psf
Dead load = 25 psf (not including beam self-weight)
Total load = 100 lb/ft + 125 lb/ft + 14 lb/ft
= 239 lb/ft
Deflection limits: L/ 240 live load, L/180 total load
Bracing: Beam is fully braced by roof deck, Lb = 0 in.
Material: ASTM A992
Connections: Assume that connections exist on either end to provide stability during construction (prior to deck being
attached) and that the connections are sufficiently rigid to prevent web post buckling at the first web post on
each end.

Solution:
From the AISC Steel Construction Manual (AISC, 2011), hereafter referred to as the AISC Manual, Table 2-4, the material
properties are as follows:

CL

S
bf
e b e b
dt

1 40'-0" 2

θ tw
ho/2

CB18×14, typ.
d

A
tf

W12×14
dt
@ 5'-0"=40'-0"

S
8 Spaces

W24×68

bf
W30×90

Waste
e b e b
ho dt
dg

tw
tf

CB18×14
dt

Fig. 4-1.  Structural framing layout and castellated beam nomenclature for Example 4.1.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 25

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 25 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 ASTM A992
Fy = 50 ksi
Fu = 65 ksi
From AISC Manual Table 1-1, the geometric properties are as follows:
Beam:
W12×14
A = 4.16 in.2 d = 11.9 in. tw = 0.200 in. bf = 3.97 in. tf = 0.225 in.
Sx = 14.9 in.3 Zx = 17.4 in.3 Ix = 88.6 in.4

Calculate section properties of tee and beam

Resultant shape section properties for the CB18×14 are determined as follows:
The values of e, b and dt are designated based on the depth of the root beam section and a trial opening size.
e = 3.00 in.
b = 3.50 in.
d t = 3.00 in.
h = d − 2dt (4-1)
= 11.9 in. − 2 ( 3.00 in.)
= 5.90 in. 
ho = 2h (4-2)
= 2 ( 5.90 in.)
= 11.8 in. 
d g = ho + 2dt (4-3)
= 11.8 in. + 2 ( 3.00 in.)
= 17.8 in. 
h
θ = tan −1 ⎛ ⎞ (4-4)
⎝ b⎠
5.90 in. ⎞
= tan −1 ⎛
⎝ 3.50 in. ⎠
= 59.3° 
S = 2e + 2b (4-5)
= 2 ( 3.00 in.) + 2 ( 3.50 in.)
= 13.0 in. 
Figure 4-2 and Table 4-1 present relevant cross-sectional dimensions and properties.

Beam net section properties

Anet = 2 Atee (4-6)
(
= 2 1.45 in.2 )
= 2.90 in. 
y =x (4-7)
dg
=
2
17.8 in.
=
2
= 8.90 in.

26 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 26 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-1.  Top and Bottom Tee Section Properties at Center of Opening
Atee = 1.45 in.2 x = 2.82 in. rx = 0.883 in. ry = 0.901 in.
3 3
ytee = 2.32 in. Sx-top = 1.64 in. Sx-bot = 0.489 in. Zx = 0.863 in.3
Ix = 1.13 in.4 Iy = 1.18 in.4 J = 0.022 in.4 yo = 2.20 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

deffec = d g − 2 ( dt − ytee ) (4-8)

= 17.8 in. − 2 ( 3.00 in. − 2.32 in.)
= 16.4 in. 
2
⎛ deffec ⎞ (4-9)
I x-net = 2 Ix-tee + 2 Atee ⎜
⎝ 2 ⎟⎠
16.4 in. ⎞ 2
( )
= 2 1.13 in.4 + 2 (1.45 in.) ⎛
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 197 in.4 
I x -net
S x -net = (4-10)
⎛ dg ⎞
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠
2
197 in.4
=
⎛ 17.8 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 22.1 in.3 

⎛ deffec ⎞
Z x-net = 2 Atee ⎜ (4-11)
⎝ 2 ⎟⎠

(
= 2 1.45 in.2 ⎛ )
16.4 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 23.8 in.3 
0.667"

CL CL
3.00"

CL

3.97" 3.97" 3.97"

PNA
ENA
2.82"
3.00"
2.32"

ENA of tee
ENA of section ENA of section
0.225"

17.8"
11.8"
16.5"

17.8"

0.200" 0.200"
3.00"
0.667"

Tee Section Net Section Gross Section

Fig. 4-2.  Tee, net and gross sections of castellated beam for Example 4.1.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 27

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 27 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Beam gross section properties
Agross = Anet + ho t w (4-12)
= 2.90 in. + 11.8 in. ( 0.200 in.)
2

= 5.26 in.2
⎛ t w ho3 ⎞
I x -gross = I x -net + ⎜ (4-13)
⎝ 12 ⎟⎠
⎡ ( 0.200 in.) (11.8 in.)3 ⎤
= 197 in.4 + ⎢ ⎥
⎣ 12 ⎦
= 224 in.4
I x -gross
S x -gross = (4-14)
⎛ dg ⎞
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠
2
224 in.4
=
⎛ 17.8 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 25.2 in.3
h
Z x -gross = Z x -net + 2t w h ⎛ ⎞ (4-15)
⎝ 2⎠
5.90 in. ⎞
= 23.8 in.3 + 2 ( 0.200 in.)( 5.90 in.) ⎛
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 30.8 in.3

Check Vierendeel bending

The governing load cases are:

LRFD ASD
Load case 1: w=D+L
= 139 lb/ft + 100 lb/ft
w = 1.4D
= 239 lb/ft
= 1.4(139 lb/ft)
= 195 lb/ft
Load case 2:
w = 1.2D + 1.6L
= 1.2(139 lb/ft) + 1.6(100lb/ft)
= 327 lb/ft   governs

Calculate global shear and moment at each opening to be used to calculate local internal forces (axial and flexural) at each open-
ing. The results are presented in Table 4-2.
Calculate the axial force and Vierendeel moment in the top and bottom tees resulting from the global shear and global moment
respectively. The results are shown in Table 4-3.
Local axial force:
Mr
Pr = (3-1)
deffec

28 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 28 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-2.  Global Shear and Moment at Each Opening
Global Shear Global Moment
Vr , Mr ,
Opening Xi , D, L, kips D, L, kip-ft
No. ft kips kips ASD LRFD kip-ft kip-ft ASD LRFD
End 0.000 2.78 2.00 4.78 6.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.667 2.69 1.93 4.62 6.32 1.82 1.31 3.13 4.29
2 1.75 2.54 1.83 4.36 5.96 4.65 3.35 8.00 10.9
3 2.83 2.39 1.72 4.10 5.61 7.32 5.27 12.6 17.2
4 3.92 2.24 1.61 3.84 5.26 9.82 7.07 16.9 23.1
5 5.00 2.09 1.50 3.59 4.90 12.2 8.75 20.9 28.6
6 6.08 1.93 1.39 3.33 4.55 14.3 10.3 24.7 33.7
7 7.17 1.78 1.28 3.07 4.19 16.4 11.8 28.1 38.4
8 8.25 1.63 1.18 2.81 3.84 18.2 13.1 31.3 42.8
9 9.33 1.48 1.07 2.55 3.49 19.9 14.3 34.2 46.8
10 10.4 1.33 0.958 2.29 3.13 21.4 15.4 36.8 50.4
11 11.5 1.18 0.850 2.03 2.78 22.8 16.4 39.2 53.6
12 12.6 1.03 0.742 1.77 2.42 24.0 17.3 41.2 56.4
13 13.7 0.880 0.633 1.51 2.07 25.0 18.0 43.0 58.8
14 14.8 0.730 0.525 1.26 1.72 25.9 18.6 44.5 60.9
15 15.8 0.579 0.417 0.996 1.36 26.6 19.1 45.7 62.5
16 16.9 0.429 0.308 0.737 1.01 27.1 19.5 46.7 63.8
17 18.0 0.278 0.200 0.478 0.654 27.5 19.8 47.3 64.7
18 19.1 0.127 0.092 0.219 0.300 27.7 20.0 47.7 65.2
Bm. CL 20.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.8 20.0 47.8 65.4

Local Vierendeel moment:

Vr  e 
M vr = (3-2)
2  2 

Calculate the available shear and flexural strength of top and bottom tees
Determine the limiting flange width-to-thickness ratio from AISC Specification Table B4.1b, Case 10:
E
λ p = 0.38
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.38
50 ksi
= 9.15
b
λ =
t
bf
=
2t f
3.97 in.
=
2 ( 0.225 in.)
= 8.82 < 9.15

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 29

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 29 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-3.  Local Axial Force and Vierendeel Moment at Each Opening
Axial Forces Vierendeel Moments
Local Vierendeel
Global Moment Local Axial Force Global Shear Moment
Mr , Pr , Vr , Mvr ,
Opening Xi , kip-ft kips kips kip-in.
No. ft ASD LRFD ASD LRFD ASD LRFD ASD LRFD
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.78 6.54 3.59 4.91
1 0.667 3.13 4.29 2.29 3.13 4.62 6.32 3.47 4.74
2 1.75 8.00 10.9 5.84 7.99 4.36 5.96 3.27 4.47
3 2.83 12.6 17.2 9.19 12.6 4.10 5.61 3.08 4.21
4 3.92 16.9 23.1 12.3 16.9 3.84 5.26 2.88 3.94
5 5.00 20.9 28.6 15.3 20.9 3.59 4.90 2.69 3.68
6 6.08 24.7 33.7 18.0 24.6 3.33 4.55 2.50 3.41
7 7.17 28.1 38.4 20.5 28.1 3.07 4.19 2.30 3.15
8 8.25 31.3 42.8 22.9 31.3 2.81 3.84 2.11 2.88
9 9.33 34.2 46.8 25.0 34.2 2.55 3.49 1.91 2.61
10 10.4 36.8 50.4 26.9 36.8 2.29 3.13 1.72 2.35
11 11.5 39.2 53.6 28.6 39.1 2.03 2.78 1.52 2.08
12 12.6 41.2 56.4 30.1 41.2 1.77 2.42 1.33 1.82
13 13.7 43.0 58.8 31.4 43.0 1.51 2.07 1.14 1.55
14 14.8 44.5 60.9 32.5 44.5 1.26 1.72 0.941 1.29
15 15.8 45.7 62.5 33.4 45.7 0.996 1.36 0.747 1.02
16 16.9 46.7 63.8 34.1 46.6 0.737 1.01 0.553 0.756
17 18.0 47.3 64.7 34.6 47.3 0.478 0.654 0.359 0.490
18 19.1 47.7 65.2 34.8 47.7 0.219 0.300 0.164 0.225
Bm. CL 20.0 47.8 65.4 34.9 47.8 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Because λ < λp, the flanges of the tee are compact; therefore, it is not necessary to check flange local buckling when calculating
the available flexural strength.
Determine the limiting stem width-to-thickness ratio, λr , from AISC Specification Table B4.1a, Case 4:
E
λ r = 0.75
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.75
50 ksi
= 18.1
dt
λ =
tw
3.00 in.
=
0.200 in.
= 15.0 < 18.1

Because λ < λr , the tee stem is nonslender; therefore, it is not necessary to consider AISC Specification Section E7 when calculat-
ing the available compressive strength.

30 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 30 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Calculate available axial (compression) strength of tee
Flexural buckling
Determine which Lc/r ratio controls:
From Section 3.2.2.1, L = e for castellated beams.
Lc K x e
=
rx rx
0.65 ( 3.00 in.)
=
0.883 in.
= 2.21
Lc K y e
=
ry ry
1.0 ( 3.00 in.)
=
0.901 in.
= 3.33 governs

Using AISC Specification Section E3, calculate the elastic buckling stress, Fe:
π2 E
Fe = 2
(Spec. Eq E3-4)
⎛ Lc ⎞
⎝ r ⎠
π 2 ( 29,000 ksi )
=
( 3.33)2
= 25,800 ksi 
From AISC Specification Section E3:
E 29,000 ksi
4.71 = 4.71
Fy 50 ksi
= 113
L
Because c = 3.33 < 113, AISC Specification Equation E3-2 is used to calculate Fcr :
r
Fy
⎛ ⎞
Fcr = ⎜ 0.658 Fe ⎟ Fy (Spec. Eq. E3-2)
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠

⎛ 50 ksi
⎞
= ⎜ 0.658 25,800 ksi ⎟ ( 50 ksi )
⎝ ⎠
= 50.0 ksi 
Pn = Fcr Atee (from Spec. Eq. E3-1)
(
= ( 50.0 ksi ) 1.45 in. 2
)
= 72.5 kips 

Flexural-torsional buckling
The nominal compressive strength is determined based on the limit state of flexural-torsional buckling using AISC Specification
Equation E4-1:
Pn = Fcr A tee (from Spec. Eq. E4-1)

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 31 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The critical stress, Fcr , is determined according to Equation E3-2, using the torsional or flexural-torsional elastic buckling stress,
Fe, determined from:

⎛ Fey + Fez ⎞ ⎡ 4 Fey Fez H ⎤

Fe = ⎜ 1− 1− (Spec. Eq. E4-3)
⎝ 2 H ⎟⎠ ⎢⎢ ( Fey + Fez )2
⎥
⎥⎦
⎣
π2 E
Fey = 2 (Spec. Eq. E4-6)
⎛ Lcy ⎞
⎜⎝ ry ⎟⎠

π ( 29,000 ksi )
2
= 2
⎛ 3.00 in. ⎞
⎝ 0.901 in. ⎠
= 25,800 ksi

⎡ π 2 ECw ⎤ 1
Fez = ⎢ + GJ ⎥ (from Spec. Eq. E4-7)
⎢⎣ ( Lcz )
2 2
⎥⎦ Atee ro 

From the User Note in AISC Specification Section E4, for tees, Cw is omitted when calculating Fez and xo is taken as 0.
Ix + Iy
ro2 = xo2 + yo2 + (Spec. Eq. E4-9)
Ag 
I x + I y
= yo2 +
Atee
1.13 in.4 + 1.18 in.4
= ( 2.20 in.)2 +
1.45 in.2
= 6.43 in.2

⎡ π 2 ( 29,000 ksi ) ⎤
Fez = ⎢ (
+ (11,200 ksi ) 0.022 in.4 ⎥ ) 1
⎣ ( 3.00 in. ) 2 2
( )(
⎦ 1.45 in. 6.43 in.
2
)
= 3,440 ksi

x o2 + yo2
H = 1− (Spec. Eq. E4-8)
ro2 
( 2.20 in.)2
= 1−
( 6.43 in.)2
= 0.880
⎡ 25,800 ksi + 3,440 ksi ⎤ ⎡ 4 ( 25,800 ksi )( 3,440 ksi )( 0.880 ) ⎤
Fe = ⎢ ⎥ ⎢1 − 1 − ⎥
⎣ 2 ( 0.880) ⎦⎣ (25,800 ksi + 3,440 ksi)2 ⎦
= 3,880 ksi
Fy
⎛ ⎞
Fcr = ⎜ 0.658 Fe ⎟ Fy (Spec. Eq. E3-2)
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠

⎛ 50 ksi
⎞
= ⎜ 0.658 3,880 ksi ⎟ ( 50 ksi )
⎝ ⎠
= 49.7 ksi 

32 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 32 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Pn = Fcr Atee
(
= ( 49.7 ksi ) 1.45 in.2 )
= 72.1 kips

The available compressive strength of the tee is:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-3, From Table 4-3,
Pr = 47.8 kips Pr = 34.9 kips
Pu = ϕc Pn Pn
Pa =
= 0.90 ( 72.1 kips ) Ωc
= 64.9 kips > 47.8 kips o.k. 72.1 kips
=
1.67
= 43.2 kips > 34.9 kips o.k.

Calculate available flexural strength of tee

Yielding
Yielding of the tee with the stem in compression is calculated using AISC Specification Section F9.1
Mp = M y (Spec. Eq. F9-4)
M y = Fy S x-bot (from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
(
= ( 50 ksi ) 0.489 in.3 )
= 24.5 kip-in. 

Lateral-torsional buckling
For lateral torsional buckling of the tee:
Because Lb = 0, the limit state of lateral-torsional buckling does not apply.

Flange local buckling

Per AISC Specification Section F9.3(a), the limit state of flange local buckling does not apply because the flange is compact.
Local buckling of tee stems
The nominal flexural strength for local buckling of the tee stem in flexural compression, Mn , is determined using AISC Specifica-
tion Section F9.4:
M n = Fcr S x -bot (from Spec. Eq. F9-16)
E
Because d t w < 0.84 , the critical stress, Fcr, is determined using AISC Specification Equation F9-17:
Fy
Fcr = Fy (Spec. Eq. F9-17)
And thus,
(
M n = ( 50 ksi ) 0.489 in.3 )
= 24.5 kip-in.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 33

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 33 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-4.  LRFD Interaction Check
Local Forces on Tee LRFD Interaction Check
Opening Xi , Pr , Mvr , Spec. Eq. Spec. Eq.
No. ft kips kip-in. /
Pr Pc H1-1a H1-1b  Interaction*
End 0.000 0.000 4.90 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 0.667 3.12 4.74 0.048 0.238 0.238 0.238
2 1.75 7.96 4.47 0.123 0.302 0.263 0.263
3 2.83 12.5 4.21 0.192 0.361 0.286 0.286
4 3.92 16.8 3.94 0.257 0.416 0.307 0.416
5 5.00 20.8 3.68 0.318 0.466 0.326 0.466
6 6.08 24.5 3.41 0.375 0.513 0.342 0.513
7 7.17 28.0 3.15 0.428 0.555 0.356 0.555
8 8.25 31.1 2.88 0.477 0.593 0.369 0.593
9 9.33 34.0 2.61 0.521 0.626 0.379 0.626
10 10.4 36.6 2.35 0.561 0.655 0.387 0.655
11 11.5 39.0 2.08 0.596 0.680 0.392 0.680
12 12.6 41.0 1.82 0.628 0.701 0.396 0.701
13 13.7 42.8 1.55 0.655 0.717 0.398 0.717
14 14.8 44.3 1.29 0.678 0.730 0.397 0.730
15 15.8 45.5 1.02 0.696 0.737 0.394 0.737
16 16.9 46.4 0.756 0.711 0.741 0.390 0.741
17 18.0 47.0 0.490 0.721 0.740 0.383 0.740
18 19.1 47.4 0.225 0.726 0.735 0.373 0.735
Bm. CL 20.0 47.5 0.000 0.728 0.728 0.364 0.728
*  Reflects bold face value of controlling interaction equation. Imax: 0.741

The available flexural strength of the tee is:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-3, From Table 4-3,
M r = 4.74 kip-in. M r = 3.47 kip-in.
M u = ϕb M n Mn
Ma =
= 0.90 ( 24.5 kip-in.) Ωb
= 22.1 kip-in. > 4.74 kip-in. o.k. 24.5 kip-in.
=
1.67
= 14.7 kip-in. > 3.47 kip-in. o.k.

Check tees for combined axial and flexural loads

LRFD results are presented in Table 4-4, and ASD results are presented in Table 4-5.
From Tables 4-4 and 4-5, the Vierendeel bending is summarized as follows:

LRFD ASD
Imax = 0.741 < 1.0   o.k. Imax = 0.815 < 1.0   o.k.

34 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 34 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-5.  ASD Interaction Check
Local Forces on Tee ASD Interaction Check
Opening Xi, Pr, Mvr, Spec. Eq. Spec. Eq.
No. ft kips kip-in. /
Pr Pc  H1-1a H1-1b  Interaction*
End 0.000 0.000 3.59 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 0.667 2.28 3.47 0.053 0.262 0.262 0.262
2 1.75 5.82 3.27 0.135 0.332 0.290 0.290
3 2.83 9.15 3.08 0.212 0.397 0.315 0.397
4 3.92 12.3 2.88 0.283 0.457 0.338 0.457
5 5.00 15.2 2.69 0.350 0.513 0.358 0.513
6 6.08 17.9 2.50 0.413 0.564 0.376 0.564
7 7.17 20.5 2.30 0.471 0.610 0.392 0.610
8 8.25 22.8 2.11 0.525 0.652 0.406 0.652
9 9.33 24.9 1.91 0.573 0.689 0.417 0.689
10 10.4 26.8 1.72 0.617 0.721 0.425 0.721
11 11.5 28.5 1.52 0.656 0.748 0.432 0.748
12 12.6 30.0 1.33 0.691 0.771 0.436 0.771
13 13.7 31.3 1.14 0.721 0.789 0.438 0.789
14 14.8 32.4 0.941 0.746 0.803 0.437 0.803
15 15.8 33.3 0.747 0.766 0.811 0.434 0.811
16 16.9 33.9 0.553 0.782 0.815 0.429 0.815
17 18.0 34.4 0.359 0.793 0.815 0.421 0.815
18 19.1 34.7 0.164 0.799 0.809 0.411 0.809
Bm. CL 20.0 34.8 0.000 0.801 0.801 0.401 0.801
*  Reflects bold face value of controlling interaction equation. Imax: 0.815

Check web post buckling

From Section 3.4.1, use Equation 3-19 to calculate the horizontal shear, Vrh:
Vrh = Tr (i ) − Tr (i +1)  (3-19)

Table 4-6 presents the horizontal shear and resultant moment at each gross section for web post buckling.

Calculate web post buckling flexural strength

From Section 3.4.1, use Equation 3-20 to calculate the required flexural strength in the web post:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-6, From Table 4-6,
Vuh = 4.86 kips Vah = 3.56 kips
Mu = Vuh h (from Eq. 3-20) Ma = Vah h  (from Eq. 3-20)
= ( 4.86 kips) ( 5.90 in.) = (3.56 kips ) ( 5.90 in.)
= 28.7 kip-in. = 21.0 kip-in.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 35

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 35 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-6.  ASD and LRFD Web Post Buckling Check
ASD LRFD
Opening Xi, Mr(i), Mr(i+1), ΔMr, Vah, Mr(i), Mr(i+1), ΔMr, Vuh,
No. ft kip-ft kip-ft kip-ft kips kip-ft kip-ft kip-ft kips
End 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 0.667 3.13 8.00 4.87 3.56 4.29 10.9 6.65 4.86
2 1.75 8.00 12.6 4.59 3.35 10.9 17.2 6.27 4.58
3 2.83 12.6 16.9 4.31 3.15 17.2 23.1 5.89 4.30
4 3.92 16.9 20.9 4.02 2.94 23.1 28.6 5.50 4.02
5 5.00 20.9 24.7 3.74 2.74 28.6 33.7 5.12 3.74
6 6.08 24.7 28.1 3.46 2.53 33.7 38.4 4.74 3.46
7 7.17 28.1 31.3 3.18 2.33 38.4 42.8 4.35 3.18
8 8.25 31.3 34.2 2.90 2.12 42.8 46.8 3.97 2.90
9 9.33 34.2 36.8 2.62 1.92 46.8 50.4 3.58 2.62
10 10.4 36.8 39.2 2.34 1.71 50.4 53.6 3.20 2.34
11 11.5 39.2 41.2 2.06 1.51 53.6 56.4 2.82 2.06
12 12.6 41.2 43.0 1.78 1.30 56.4 58.8 2.43 1.78
13 13.7 43.0 44.5 1.50 1.10 58.8 60.9 2.05 1.50
14 14.8 44.5 45.7 1.22 0.891 60.9 62.5 1.67 1.22
15 15.8 45.7 46.7 0.939 0.686 62.5 63.8 1.28 0.938
16 16.9 46.7 47.3 0.658 0.481 63.8 64.7 0.900 0.657
17 18.0 47.3 47.7 0.378 0.276 64.7 65.2 0.516 0.377
18 19.1 47.7 47.8 0.100 0.073 65.2 65.4 0.137 0.100
Bm. CL 20.0 47.8 65.4
Max 3.56 Max 4.86

Calculate available flexural strength of web post

From Section 3.4.1b, use Equation 3-22 to calculate the plastic moment, Mp
Mp = 0.25t w ( e + 2b )2 Fy (3-22)
2
= 0.25 ( 0.200 in.) ⎡⎣3.00 in. + 2 ( 3.50 in. )⎤⎦ ( 50 ksi )
= 250 kip-in. 
2h 2 ( 5.90 in.)
=
e 3.00 in.
= 3.93
e 3.00 in.
=
tw 0.200 in.
= 15.0

For e/tw = 10
M ocr 2h
= 0.587 ( 0.917 ) e (3-26)
Mp
= 0.587 ( 0.917 )3.93
= 0.418 

36 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 36 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 For e/tw = 20
M ocr 2h
= 1.96 ( 0.699 ) e (3-27)
Mp
= 1.96 ( 0.699 )3.93
= 0.480 > 0.418 

Interpolate for e/tw = 15

M ocr
= 0.418
Mp

The available flexural strength is:

LRFD ASD
⎛ M ocr ⎞ Mn 1 ⎛ Mocr ⎞
ϕb M n = ϕb ⎜ Mp (3-29a) = Mp (3-29b)
⎝ Mp ⎟⎠ Ω b Ω b ⎜⎝ M p ⎟⎠
= 0.90 ( 0.418 ) ( 250 kip-in.) 1
= ( 0.418 ) ( 250 kip-in. )
= 94.1 kip-in. > M u =28.7 kip-in. o.k. 1.67
= 62.6 kip-in. > Ma = 21.0 kip-in. o.k.

Check horizontal and vertical shear

The available horizontal shear strength is calculated using AISC Specification Section J4.2.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-6, From Table 4-6,
Vuh = 4.86 kips Vah = 3.56 kips
From Spec. Eq. J4-3, From Spec. Eq. J4-3,
ϕ vVn-horiz = ϕ v 0.6 Fy ( et w ) (from Spec. Eq. J4-3) Vn-horiz 0.6 Fy ( et w ) (from Spec. Eq. J4-3)
=
= 0.6 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣( 3.00 in.) (0.200 in.)⎤⎦ Ωv Ωv

= 18.0 kips > 4.86 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣(3.00 in.) ( 0.200 in.)⎤⎦
=
1.50
= 12.0 kips > 3.56 kips o.k.

Check vertical shear at beam net section

From AISC Specification Section G3,
h dt
=
tw tw
3.00 in.
=
0.200 in.
= 15.0
kv E 1.2 ( 29,000 ksi )
1.10 = 1.10
Fy 50 ksi
= 29.0

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 37

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 37 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Because h t w < 1.10 k v E Fy
Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)
The available vertical shear strength at the net section is calculated using AISC Specification Equation G3-1.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-2, From Table 4-2,
Vu = 6.32 kips Va = 4.62 kips
From Spec. Eq. G3-1, From Spec. Eq. G3-1,
ϕvVn-net = ϕ 0.6Fy ( 2dt t w ) Cv 2 Vn-net 0.6 Fy ( 2dt t w ) Cv 2
=
= 1.00 ( 0.6) ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣ 2 ( 3.00 in.)(0.200 in. )⎤⎦ (1.0 ) Ωv Ωv

= 36.0 kips > 6.32 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣ 2 ( 3.00 in.)( 0.200 in.) ⎤⎦ (1.0 )
=
1.50
= 24.0 kips > 4.62 kips o.k.

Check vertical shear at beam gross section

From AISC Specification Section G2.1(b)(1)
h 17.8 in. − 2 ( 0.525 in.)
=
tw 0.200 in.
= 83.8

kv E 5.34 ( 29,000 ksi )

1.10 = 1.10
Fy 50 ksi
= 61.2

Because h t w > 61.2,

1.10 k v E Fy
C v1 = (Spec. Eq. G2-4)
h tw
1.10 5.34 ( 29,000 ksi ) ( 50 ksi )
=
83.8
= 0.731 
From AISC Specification Section G1, because h t w > 2.24 E Fy = 53.9,
ϕv = 0.90 (LRFD)   Ωv = 1.67 (ASD)

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-2, From Table 4-2,
Vu = 6.54 kips Va = 4.78 kips
From Spec. Eq. G2-1, From Spec. Eq. G2-1,
ϕ vVn-grosss = ϕ v 0.6 Fy ( d g t w ) Cv1 Vn-gross 0.6 Fy ( d g t w ) C v1
=
= 0.90 ( 0.6 )( 50 ksi )(17.8 in.) (0.200 in. ) ( 0.731) Ωv Ωv
= 70.3 kips > 6.54 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi )(17.8 in.) ( 0.200 in.) ( 0.731)
=
1.67
= 46.7 kips > 4.78 kips o.k.

38 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 38 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The following is a summary of the beam shear strengths:

LRFD ASD
Horizontal shear Horizontal shear
Vuh ϕ vVn-horiz = 4.86 kips 18.0 kips Vah Ω v Vn-horiz = 3.56 kips 12.0 kips
= 0.270 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.297 < 1.0 o.k.

Vertical shear—net section Vertical shear—net section

Vu ϕ vVn-net = 6.32 kips 36.0 kips Va Ω v Vn-net = 4.62 kips 24.0 kips
= 0.176 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.193 < 1.0 o.k.

Vertical shear—gross section Vertical shear—gross section

Vu ϕ vVn-gross = 6.54 kips 70.3 kips Va Ω v Vn-gross = 4.78 kips 46.7 kips
= 0.093 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.102 < 1.0 o.k.

Check Deflection
Deflections are calculated using 90% of the moment of inertia per Section 3.7.
From AISC Manual Table 3-23, Case 1, the live load and dead load deflections are:
5wL4
Δ LL =
384 EI x-net ( 0.90 )
5 ( 0.1 kip/ft ) ( 1 ft 12 in.) ⎡⎣( 40 ft ) ( 12 in./ft ) ⎤⎦
4

=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 197 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 1.12 in.
L L
= < o.k.
430 240
5wL4
Δ DL =
384 EI x-net ( 0.90 )
5 ( 0.139 kip/ft ) ( 1 ft 12 in.) ⎡⎣( 40 ft ) ( 12 in./ft ) ⎤⎦
4

=
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) (197 in.4 ) ( 0.90 )
= 1.56 in.

Total load deflection is:

Δ TL = Δ LL + Δ DL
= 1.12 in. + 1.56 in.
= 2.68 in.
L L
= ≤ o.k.
180 180

Because ΔDL = 1.56 in., a 12-in. camber is used.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 39

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 39 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Example 4.2—Noncomposite Cellular Beam Design

Given:
This example presents the evaluation of a cellular beam for the same design presented in Example 4.1. For cellular beams, there is
no obvious lever arm to calculate the Vierendeel moment as in castellated sections (e/ 2). Therefore, assume that there is a critical
section at which Vierendeel bending is examined. The critical section is located 0.225Do away from the center of the opening.
The distance from the center of the circle to the horizontal line passing through the point at 0.225Do is defined as “y”. Addition-
ally, it is assumed that the effective length for investigating column buckling on the tee sections is two times the moment arm
length. Figure 4-3 presents the nomenclature of the cellular beam.

Solution:
From AISC Manual Table 2-4, the material properties are as follows:
ASTM A992
Fy = 50 ksi
Fu = 65 ksi
From AISC Manual Table 1-1, the geometric properties are as follows:
Beam
W12×14
A = 4.16 in.2 d = 11.9 in. tw = 0.200 in. bf = 3.97 in. tf = 0.225 in.
Sx = 14.9 in.3 Zx = 17.4 in.3 Ix = 88.6 in.4
Resultant shape section properties for the LB18×14 are as follows:
The values of Do and S are designated based on the depth of the original beam section and a trial opening size.
Do = 12.3 in.
S = 16.8 in.
e = S − Do (4-16)
= 16.8 in. − 12.3 in.
= 4.50 in. 

CL

S
bf
e Do
dt

1 40'-0" 2
tw
Do/2

LB18 ×14, typ.

d

A
tf
loss

W12×14
dt
@ 5'-0"=40'-0"

Waste S bf
8 Spaces

W30×90
W24×68

dt

e Do
tf

tw
Do
dg

LB18×14
dt

Fig. 4-3.  Structural framing layout and cellular beam nomenclature for Example 4.2.

40 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 40 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Do Do ⎞ 2 ⎛ S − Do ⎞ 2
loss = − ⎛ − (4-17)
2 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠

12.3 in. 12.3 in. ⎞ 2 ⎛ 16.8 in. − 12.3 in. ⎞ 2

= − ⎛ −
2 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
= 0.426 in. 
Do
dg =d+ − loss (4-18)
2
12.3 in.
= 11.9 in. + − 0.426 in.
2
= 17.6 in. 
d g − Do
dt -net = (4-19)
2
17.6 in. − 12.3 in.
=
2
= 2.65 in. 
y = ( 0.5 Do )2 − ( 0.225 Do )2 (4-20)

= [ 0.5 (12.3 in.)]2 − [ 0.225 (12.3 in.)]2

= 5.49 in. 
Do
dt -crit = − y + dt -net (4-21)
2
12.3 in.
= − 5.49 in. + 2.65 in.
2
= 3.31 in. 

Check limits of applicability

According to Section 3.4, the design procedures for web post buckling are only applicable if the following conditions concerning
the cutting pattern are met: 1.08 < S/ Do < 1.5 and 1.25 < dg / Do < 1.75.
S 16.8 in.
=
Do 12.3 in.
= 1.37 o.k.
d g 17.6 in.
=
Do 12.3 in.
= 1.43 o.k.

Calculate section properties of tee and beam

Relevant cross sections of the cellular beam are presented in Figure 4-4 and the corresponding section properties for center of
opening and critical section are provided in Tables 4-7 and 4-8, respectively.

Beam net section properties

Anet = 2 Atee -net (from Eq. 4-6)

(
= 2 1.38 in. 2
)
2
= 2.76 in. 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 41

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 41 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-7.  Top and Bottom Tee Section Properties at Center of Opening
Atee-net = 1.38 in.2 x = 2.50 in. rx = 0.767 in. ry = 0.922 in.
3 3
ytee-net = 2.09 in. Sx-top = 1.39 in. Sx-bot = 0.39 in. Zx = 0.690 in.3
Ix-tee-net = 0.814 in.4 Iy = 1.18 in.4 J = 0.021 in.4 yo = 1.97 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

Table 4-8. Top and Bottom Tee Section Properties at Critical Section
2
Atee-crit = 1.51 in. x = 3.14 in. rx = 1.00 in. ry = 0.881 in.
3 3
ytee-crit = 2.53 in. Sx-top = 1.91 in. Sx-bot = 0.598 in. Zx = 1.06 in.3
Ix-tee-crit = 1.52 in.4 Iy = 1.18 in.4 J = 0.023 in.4 yo = 2.42 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

y =x (4-7)
dg
=
2
17.6 in.
=
2
= 8.80 in. 

deffec-net = d g − 2 ( dt -net − ytee-net ) (4-22)

= 17.6 in. − 2 ( 2.65 in. − 2.09 in.)
= 16.5 in.4 
2
d
⎛ effec-net ⎞ (from Eq. 4-9)
I x -net = 2I x -tee-net + 2 Atee-net ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 2 ⎠
2
( ) (
= 2 0.814 in.4 + 2 1.38 in.2 ⎛
16.5 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠ )
= 190 in.4 

CL CL CL CL CL
0.585"
2.67"

0.795"
3.33"

PNA PNA
ENA 3.97" ENA 3.97" 3.97" 3.97" 3.97"
2.67"

2.50"

3.33"
2.09"

3.14"

ENA of Tee
2.53"

ENA of Tee
ENA of Section ENA of Section
0.200" 0.200"
0.225"

17.6"
12.3"
16.4"
0.225"

17.6"
10.9"
16.0"

17.6"

0.200" 0.200" 0.200"

0.585"

0.795"
2.67"

3.33"

Net Tee Section Critical Net Section Net Section Critical Net Section Gross Section

Fig. 4-4.  Tee, net and gross sections of cellular beam for Example 4.2.

42 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 42 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 I x -net
S x -net = (4-10)
⎛ dg ⎞
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠
2
190 in.4
=
⎛ 17.6 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 21.6 in.3 

⎛ deffec-net ⎞
Z x -net = 2 Atee-net ⎜ ⎟ (from Eq. 4-11)
⎝ 2 ⎠
16.5 in. ⎞
= 2 (1.38 in.) ⎛
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 22.8 in.3 

Beam critical net section properties

Acrit = 2 Atee-crit (from Eq. 4-6)

(
= 2 1.51 in. 2
)
2
= 3.02 in. 
y =x (4-7)
dg
=
2
17.6 in.
=
2
= 8.80 in. 

deffec-crit = d g − 2 ( dt -crit − ytee-net ) (from Eq. 4-22)

= 17.6 in. − 2 ( 3.31 in. − 2.53 in.)
= 16.0 in. 
2
⎛ deffec-crit ⎞
I x -crit = 2 I x -tee -crit + 2 Atee-crit ⎜ ⎟ (from Eq. 4-9)
⎝ 2 ⎠
2
( ) (
= 2 1.52 in.4 + 2 1.51 in.2 ⎛
16.0 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠ )
= 196 in.4 
I x -crit
S x -crit = (from Eq. 4-10)
⎛ dg ⎞
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠
2
196 in.4
=
⎛ 17.6 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 22.3 in.3 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 43

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 43 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 deffec-crit
Z x -net = 2 Atee-crit (from Eq. 4-11)
2

(
= 2 1.51 in.2 ⎛ )
16.0 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 24.2 in.3 

Beam gross section properties

Agross = Anet + Do tw (4-23)
= 2.76 in. + (12.3 in.) ( 0.200 in.)
2

= 5.22 in.2 
t w Do3
I x -gross = I x-net + (4-24)
12
( 0.200 in. ) (12.3 in.)3
= 189 in.3 +
12
4
= 220 in. 

I x -gross
S x -gross = (4-14)
⎛ dg ⎞
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠
2
220 in.4
=
⎛ 17.6 in. ⎞
⎝ 2 ⎠
= 25.0 in.3 

Check Vierendeel bending

The governing load cases are:

LRFD ASD
Load case 1: w=D+L
w = 1.4D = 139 lb/ft + 100 lb/ft
= 1.4(139 lb/ft) = 239 lb/ft
= 195 lb/ft
Load case 2:
w = 1.2D + 1.6L
= 1.2(139 lb/ft) + 1.6(100 lb/ft)
= 327 lb/ft   governs

Calculate global shear and moment at each opening to be used to calculate local internal forces (axial and flexural) at each open-
ing. The results are presented in Table 4-9.
Calculate the axial force and Vierendeel moment in the top and bottom tees resulting from the global shear and global moment,
respectively. The results are shown in Table 4-10.
Local axial force:
Mr
Pr = (from Eq. 3-1)
d effec-crit

44 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 44 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-9.  Global Shear and Moment at Each Opening
Global Shear Global Moment
Vr, Mr,
Opening Xi, D, L, kips D, L, kip-ft
No. ft kips kips ASD LRFD kip-ft kip-ft ASD LRFD
End 0.00 2.78 2.00 4.78 6.54 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
1 0.885 2.66 1.91 4.57 6.25 2.41 1.73 4.14 5.66
2 2.28 2.46 1.77 4.24 5.79 5.98 4.30 10.3 14.1
3 3.68 2.27 1.63 3.90 5.33 9.28 6.68 16.0 21.8
4 5.07 2.08 1.49 3.57 4.88 12.3 8.86 21.2 29.0
5 6.47 1.88 1.35 3.23 4.42 15.1 10.8 25.9 35.4
6 7.87 1.69 1.21 2.90 3.97 17.6 12.6 30.2 41.3
7 9.26 1.49 1.07 2.57 3.51 19.8 14.2 34.0 46.5
8 10.7 1.30 0.934 2.23 3.05 21.7 15.6 37.4 51.1
9 12.1 1.11 0.795 1.90 2.60 23.4 16.8 40.3 55.0
10 13.4 0.911 0.655 1.57 2.14 24.8 17.9 42.7 58.3
11 14.8 0.717 0.516 1.23 1.69 26.0 18.7 44.6 61.0
12 16.2 0.523 0.376 0.899 1.23 26.8 19.3 46.1 63.0
13 17.6 0.329 0.236 0.565 0.773 27.4 19.7 47.1 64.4
14 19.0 0.135 0.097 0.232 0.317 27.7 20.0 47.7 65.2
Bm. CL 20.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 27.8 20.0 47.8 65.4

Local Vierendeel moment:

Vr ⎛ Do ⎞
M vr = (from Eq. 3-3)
2 ⎝ 4 ⎠

Calculate the available shear and flexural strength of top and bottom tees at critical section
Determine the limiting flange width-to-thickness ratio from AISC Specification Table B4.1b, Case 10:
E
λ p = 0.38
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.75
50 ksi
= 9.15
b
λ=
t
bf
=
2t f
3.97 in.
=
2 ( 0.225 in.)
= 8.82 < 9.15

Because λ < λp, the flanges of the tee are compact; therefore, it is not necessary to check flange local buckling when calculating
the available flexural strength.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 45

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 45 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-10.  Local Axial Force and Vierendeel Moment at Each Opening
Axial Forces Vierendeel Moments
Global Moment Local Axial Force Global Shear Local Vierendeel Moment
Mr, Pr, Vr, Mvr,
Opening Xi, kip-ft kips kips kip-in.
No. ft ASD LRFD ASD LRFD ASD LRFD ASD LRFD
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 4.78 6.54 7.35 10.1
1 0.885 4.14 5.66 3.10 4.24 4.57 6.25 7.00 9.57
2 2.28 10.3 14.1 7.71 10.5 4.24 5.79 6.49 8.87
3 3.68 16.0 21.8 12.0 16.4 3.90 5.33 5.97 8.17
4 5.07 21.2 29.0 15.9 21.7 3.57 4.88 5.46 7.47
5 6.47 25.9 35.4 19.4 26.6 3.23 4.42 4.95 6.77
6 7.87 30.2 41.3 22.6 31.0 2.90 3.97 4.44 6.07
7 9.26 34.0 46.5 25.5 34.9 2.57 3.51 3.93 5.37
8 10.7 37.4 51.1 28.0 38.3 2.23 3.05 3.42 4.68
9 12.1 40.3 55.0 30.2 41.3 1.90 2.60 2.91 3.98
10 13.4 42.7 58.3 32.0 43.7 1.57 2.14 2.40 3.28
11 14.8 44.6 61.0 33.5 45.7 1.23 1.69 1.89 2.58
12 16.2 46.1 63.0 34.6 47.3 0.899 1.23 1.38 1.88
13 17.6 47.1 64.4 35.3 48.3 0.565 0.773 0.865 1.18
14 19.0 47.7 65.2 35.8 48.9 0.232 0.317 0.355 0.485
Bm. CL 20.0 47.8 65.4 35.8 49.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Determine the limiting stem width-to-thickness ratio, λr, from AISC Specification Table B4.1a, Case 4:
E
λ r = 0.75
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.75
50 ksi
= 18.1
d t-crit
λ=
tw
3.31 in.
=
0.200 in.
= 16.6 < 18.1

Because λ < λr the tee stem is nonslender; therefore, it is not necessary to consider AISC Specification Section E7 when calculat-
ing the available compressive strength.

Calculate available axial (compression) strength of tee

Flexural buckling
Determine which Lc/ r ratio controls
From Section 3.2.2.1, L = Do/ 2 for cellular beams.

46 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 46 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 L c K x ( Do 2 )
=
rx rx
0.65 ( 6.15 in.)
=
1.00 in.
= 4.00

Lc K y ( Do 2 )
=
ry ry
1.0 ( 6.15 in.)
=
0.881 in.
= 6.98 governs

Calculate the elastic buckling stress, Fe, from AISC Specification Section E3:
π2 E
Fe = 2 (Spec. Eq. E3-4)
⎛ Lc ⎞
⎝ r ⎠
π 2 (29,000 ksi)
=
( 6.98 )2
= 5,870 ksi 
From AISC Specification Section E3:

E 29,000 ksi
4.71 = 4.71
Fy 50 ksi
= 113
Lc
Because, = 6.98 < 113, AISC Specification Equation E3-2 is used to calculate Fcr:
r
Fy
⎛ ⎞
Fcr = ⎜ 0.658 Fe ⎟ Fy (Spec. Eq. E3-2)
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠

⎡ ⎛ 50 ksi ⎞ ⎤
⎢ ⎜ ⎟⎥
= ⎣ 0.658⎝ 5,870 ksi ⎠ ⎦ 50 ksi
= 49.8 ksi 
P n = Fcr Atee-crit(from Spec. Eq. E3-1)
= (49.8 ksi)(1.51 in.2)
= 75.2 kips

Flexural-torsional buckling
The nominal compressive strength is determined based on the limit state of flexural-torsional buckling using AISC Specification
Equation E4-1:
Pn = Fcr Atee-crit (from Spec. Eq. E4-1)

The critical stress, Fcr , is determined according to AISC Specification Equation E3-2, using the torsional or flexural-torsional
elastic buckling stress, Fe, determined from:

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 47

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 47 3/13/17 1:00 PM
  Fey + Fez   4 Fey Fez H 
Fe =   1− 1−  (Spec. Eq. E4-3)
 2H   ( Fey + Fez )2 

π2 E
Fey = 2 (Spec. Eq. E4-6)
 Lcy 
 ry 

π 2 ( 29,000 ksi )
= 2
⎛ 6.15 in. ⎞
⎝ 0.881 in. ⎠
= 5,870 ksi

⎡ π 2 ECw ⎤ 1
Fez = ⎢ + GJ ⎥ (from Spec. Eq. E4-7)
⎢⎣ ( Lcz )2
⎥⎦ Atee-crit ro2

From the User Note in AISC Specification Section E4, for tees, Cw, is omitted when calculating Fez and xo is taken as 0.
Ix + Iy
ro2 = x o2 + yo2 + (Spec. Eq. E4-9)
Ag 
I x -tee -crit + I y
= yo2 +
Atee -crit
1.52 in.4 + 1.18 in.4
= ( 2.42 in.) +
2
1.51 in.2
= 7.64 in.2

⎡ π 2 ( 29,000 ksi ) 4 ⎤ 1
Fez = ⎢ + (11,200 ksi )( 0.023 in. )⎥
⎣ ( 6.15 in.)
2 2
(2
⎦ 1.51 in. 7.64 in. )( )
= 678 ksi
x o2 + yo2
H = 1− (Spec. Eq. E4-8)
ro2 
2
( 2.42 in.)
= 1−
7.65 in.2
= 0.233
⎡ 5,870 ksi + 678 ksi ⎤ ⎡ 4 ( 5,870 ksi ) ( 678 ksi ) (0.233) ⎤
Fe = ⎢ ⎥⎦ ⎢1 − 1 − ⎥
⎣ 2 (0.233) ⎢⎣ (5,870 ksi + 678 ksi) 2 ⎥⎦
= 622 ksi
Fy
⎛ ⎞
Fcr = ⎜ 0.658 Fe ⎟ Fy (Spec. Eq. E3-2)
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠

⎛ 50 ksi
⎞
= ⎜ 0.658 ksi ⎟ ( 50 ksi )
622
⎝ ⎠
= 48.3 ksi 
Pn = Fcr Atee-crit
= (48.3 ksi )(1.51 in.2 )
= 72.9 kips

48 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 48 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The available compressive strength of the tee is:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-10, From Table 4-10,
Pr = 49.0 kips Pr = 35.8 kips
Pu = ϕc Pn Pn
Pa =
= 0.90 ( 72.9 kips ) Ωc
= 65.6 kips > 49.0 kips o.k. 72.9 kips
=
1.67
= 43.7 kips > 35.8 kips o.k.

Calculate available flexural strength of tee

Yielding
Yielding of the tee with the stem in compression is calculated using AISC Specification Section F9.1
Mp = My (Spec. Eq. F9-4)
M y = Fy Sx-bot (from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
(
= ( 50 ksi ) 0.598 in.3 )
= 29.9 kip-in. 

Lateral-torsional buckling
Because Lb = 0, the limit state of lateral-torsional buckling does not apply.

Flange local buckling

Per AISC Specification Section F9.3(a), the limit state of flange local buckling does not apply because the flange is compact.

Local buckling of tee stems

The nominal flexural strength for local buckling of the tee stem in flexural compression , Mn, is determined using AISC Specifica-
tion Section F9.4:
Mn = FcrSx(Spec. Eq. F9-16)
E
Because d t w < 0.84 , the critical stress, Fcr, is determined using AISC Specification Equation F9-17:
Fy
Fcr = Fy

And thus,

(
M n = ( 50 ksi ) 0.598 in.3 )
= 29.9 kip-in.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 49

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 49 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The available flexural strength of the tee is:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-10, From Table 4-10,
M vr = 8.17 kip-in. M vr = 5.97 kip-in.
M u = ϕb M n Mn
Ma =
= 0.90 ( 29.9 kip-in.) Ωb
= 26.9 kip-in. > 8.17 kip-in. o.k. 29.9 kip-in.
=
1.67
= 17.9 kip-in. > 5.97 kip-in. o.k.

Check tees for combined axial and flexural loads

LRFD results are presented in Table 4-11, and the ASD results are presented in Table 4-12.
From Tables 4-11 and 4-12, the Vierendeel bending is summarized as follows:

LRFD ASD
Imax = 0.759 < 1.0   o.k. Imax = 0.835 < 1.0   o.k.

Check web post buckling

From Section 3.4.2, use Equation 3-30 to calculate the horizontal shear, Vrh:
Vrh = Tr (i ) − Tr (i +1)  (3-30)

Table 4-13 presents the horizontal shear at each gross section for web post buckling.

Calculate web post buckling flexural strength

From Section 3.4.2, use Equation 3-31 to calculate the required flexural strength in the web post.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-13, From Table 4-13,
Vuh = 6.26 kips Vah = 4.61 kips
Do Do
M u = 0.90 Vuh (3-31) Ma = 0.90 Vah (3-31)
2 2
12.3 in. ⎞ 12.3 in. ⎞
= 0.90 ⎛ ( 6.26 kips) = 0.90 ⎛ ( 4.61 kips)
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
= 34.6 kip-in.  = 25.5 kip-in. 

Calculate available flexural strength of web post

From Section 3.4.2, use Equation 3-32 to calculate the elastic moment, Me:
t w ( S − Do + 0.564 Do )2
Me = Fy (3-32)
6
( 0.200 in.) [16.8 in. − 12.3 in. + 0.564 (12.3 in.)]2
= ( 50 ksi )
6
= 218 kip-in. 

50 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 50 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-11.  LRFD Interaction Check
Local Forces on Tee LRFD Interaction Check
Opening Xi, Pr, Mvr, Spec. Eq. Spec. Eq.
No. ft kips kip-in. /
Pr Pc H1-1a  H1-1b  Interaction*
End 0.000 0.000 10.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 0.885 4.24 9.57 0.062 0.378 0.387 0.387
2 2.28 10.5 8.87 0.155 0.448 0.407 0.407
3 3.68 16.4 8.17 0.241 0.511 0.424 0.511
4 5.07 21.7 7.47 0.320 0.566 0.437 0.566
5 6.47 26.6 6.77 0.391 0.615 0.447 0.615
6 7.87 31.0 6.07 0.456 0.657 0.454 0.657
7 9.26 34.9 5.37 0.514 0.691 0.457 0.691
8 10.7 38.3 4.68 0.564 0.719 0.456 0.719
9 12.1 41.3 3.98 0.608 0.739 0.452 0.739
10 13.4 43.7 3.28 0.644 0.753 0.444 0.753
11 14.8 45.7 2.58 0.674 0.759 0.433 0.759
12 16.2 47.3 1.88 0.696 0.758 0.418 0.758
13 17.6 48.3 1.18 0.712 0.751 0.400 0.751
14 19.0 48.9 0.485 0.720 0.736 0.378 0.736
Bm. CL 20.0 49.0 0.000 0.722 0.722 0.361 0.722
Imax: 0.759
*  Reflects bold face value of controlling interaction equation.

Table 4-12.  ASD Interaction Check

Local Forces on Tee ASD Interaction Check
Opening Xi, Pr , Mvr, Spec. Eq. Spec. Eq.
No. ft kips kip-in /
Pr Pc H1-1a  H1-1b  Interaction*
End 0.000 0.000 7.35 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 0.885 3.10 7.02 0.069 0.417 0.427 0.427
2 2.28 7.71 6.51 0.171 0.494 0.449 0.449
3 3.68 12.0 6.00 0.265 0.563 0.468 0.563
4 5.07 15.9 5.49 0.351 0.624 0.482 0.624
5 6.47 19.4 4.97 0.430 0.677 0.493 0.677
6 7.87 22.6 4.46 0.502 0.723 0.500 0.723
7 9.26 25.5 3.95 0.565 0.761 0.503 0.761
8 10.7 28.0 3.42 0.622 0.792 0.502 0.792
9 12.1 30.2 2.90 0.670 0.814 0.497 0.814
10 13.4 32.0 2.43 0.707 0.828 0.489 0.828
11 14.8 33.5 1.91 0.740 0.835 0.477 0.835
12 16.2 34.6 1.40 0.765 0.834 0.461 0.834
13 17.6 35.3 0.882 0.782 0.826 0.440 0.826
14 19.0 35.8 0.367 0.792 0.810 0.416 0.810
Bm. CL 20.0 35.8 0.000 0.794 0.794 0.397 0.794
Imax: 0.835
*  Reflects bold face value of controlling interaction equation.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 51

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 51 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-13.  ASD and LRFD Web Post Buckling Check
ASD LRFD
Post Xi, Tr(i), Tr(i+1), Vah, Tr(i), Tr(i+1), Vuh,
No. ft kips kips kips kips kips kips
1 1.58 3.10 7.71 4.61 10.5 4.24 6.26
2 2.98 7.71 12.0 4.29 16.4 10.5 5.90
3 4.38 12.0 15.9 3.90 21.7 16.4 5.30
4 5.77 15.9 19.4 3.50 26.6 21.7 4.90
5 7.17 19.4 22.6 3.30 31.0 26.6 4.40
6 8.56 22.6 25.5 2.80 34.9 31.0 3.90
7 9.96 25.5 28.0 2.50 38.3 34.9 3.40
8 11.4 28.0 30.2 2.20 41.3 38.3 3.00
9 12.8 30.2 32.0 1.60 43.7 41.3 2.40
10 14.1 32.0 33.5 1.50 45.7 43.7 2.00
11 15.5 33.5 34.6 1.20 47.3 45.7 1.60
12 16.9 34.6 35.3 0.700 48.3 47.3 1.00
13 18.3 35.3 35.8 0.500 48.9 48.3 0.600
14 19.7 35.8 35.8 0.000 49.0 48.9 0.100
Maximum 4.61 Maximum 6.26

2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C1 = 5.097 + 0.1464 ⎜ ⎟ − 0.00174 ⎜ (3-33)
⎝ tw ⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠
12.3 in. ⎞ 12.3 in. ⎞ 2
= 5.097 + 0.1464 ⎛ − 0.00174 ⎛
⎝ 0.200 in. ⎠ ⎝ 0.200 in. ⎠
= 7.54 
2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C 2 = 1.441 + 0.0625 ⎜ − 0.000683 ⎜ (3-34)
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠
12.3 in. ⎞ 12.3 in. ⎞ 2
= 1.441 + 0.0625 ⎛ − 0.000683 ⎛
⎝ 0.200 in.⎠ ⎝ 0.200 in. ⎠
= 2.70 
2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C 3 = 3.645 + 0.0853 ⎜ − 0.00108 ⎜ (3-35)
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎝ tw ⎟⎠
12.3 in. ⎞ 12.3 in. ⎞ 2
= 3.645 + 0.0853 ⎛ − 0.00108 ⎛
⎝ 0.200 in. ⎠ ⎝ 0.200 in. ⎠
= 4.81 
2
M allow ⎛ S ⎞ ⎛ S ⎞
= C1⎜ ⎟ − C2⎜ − C3 (3-36)
Me ⎝ Do ⎠ ⎝ Do ⎟⎠
2
⎛ 16.8 in. ⎞ ⎛ 16.8 in. ⎞
= 7.54 ⎜
⎝ 12.3 in. ⎟⎠
− 2.70 ⎜⎝ ⎟ − 4.81
12.3 in. ⎠
= 0.450 

52 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 52 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The available flexural strength is:

LRFD ASD
From Equation 3-37a, From Equation 3-37b,
⎛ M allow ⎞ M allow ⎛ M e ⎞ 218 kip-in. ⎞
ϕb ⎜ M e = 0.90 ( 0.450 ) ( 218 kip-in.) = 0.450 ⎛
⎝ M e ⎟⎠ M e ⎜⎝ Ω b ⎟⎠ ⎝ 1.67 ⎠
= 88.3 kip-in. > M u = 34.6 kip-in. o.k. = 58.7 kip-in. > Ma = 25.5 kip-in. o.k.

Check horizontal and vertical shear

The available horizontal shear strength is calculated using AISC Specification Section J4.2.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-13, From Table 4-13,
Vuh = 6.26 kips Vah = 4.61 kips
ϕ v Vn-horiz = ϕ v 0.6Fy ( et w) (from Spec. Eq. J4-3) Vn-horiz 0.6 Fy ( et w)
= (from Spec. Eq. J4-3)
= 0.6 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣(4.50 in.) ( 0.200 in.) ⎤⎦ Ωv Ωv

= 27.0 kips > 6.26 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣ (4.50 in.) ( 0.200in.)⎤⎦
=
1.50
= 18.0 kips > 4.61 kips o.k.

Check vertical shear at beam net section

From AISC Specification Section G3:
h dt-net
=
tw tw
2.65 in.
=
0.200 in.
= 13.3
kv E 1.2 ( 29,000 ksi )
1.10 = 1.10
Fy 50 ksi
= 29.0
Because h t w < 1.10 k v E Fy
Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)
The available vertical shear strength at the net section is calculated using AISC Specification Equation G2-3.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-10, From Table 4-10,
Vu = 6.25 kips Va = 4.57 kips

From Spec. Eq. G2-3, From Spec. Eq. G2-3,

ϕVn-net = ϕ0.6 Fy ( 2d t-net tw ) Cv2 Vn-net 0.6 Fy ( 2dt-net tw) Cv 2
=
= 1.00 ( 0.6 )( 50 ksi )( 2 )( 2.65 in.)( 0.200 in.)(1.0 ) Ωv Ωv
= 31.8 kips > 6.25 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi )( 2 )( 2.65 in.)( 0.200 in. )(1.0 )
=
1.50
= 21.2 kips > 4.57 kips o.k.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 53

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 53 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Check vertical shear at beam gross section
From AISC Specification Section G2.1(b)(1)
h 17.6 in. − 2 ( 0.525 in.)
=
tw 0.200 in.
= 82.8
kv E 5.34 ( 29,000 ksi )
1.10 = 1.10
Fy 50 ksi
= 61.2
Because h t w > 61.2,

1.10 k v E Fy
C v1 = (Spec. Eq. G2-4)
h tw
1.10 5.34 ( 29,000 ksi ) 50 ksi
=
82.8
= 0.739 
From AISC Specification Section G1, because h t w > 2.24 E Fy = 53.9

ϕv = 0.90 (LRFD)   Ωv = 1.67 (ASD)

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-10, From Table 4-10,
Vu = 6.54 kips Va = 4.78 kips

From Spec. Eq. G2-1, From Spec. Eq. G2-1,

ϕ vVn-gross = ϕ v 0.6 Fy ( dg tw ) Cv1 Vn-gross 0.6 Fy ( d g tw ) Cv1
=
= 0.90 ( 0.6 )( 50 ksi )(17.6 in.)( 0.200 in.)( 0.739 ) Ωv Ωv
= 70.2 kips > 6.54 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi )(17.6 in.)( 0.200 in. )( 0.739 )
=
1.67
= 46.7 kips > 4.78 kips o.k.

The following is a summary of the beam shear strengths:

LRFD ASD
Horizontal shear Horizontal shear
Vuh ϕ vVn-horiz = 6.26 kips 27.0 kips Vah Ω v Vn-horiz = 4.61 kips 18.0 kips
= 0.232 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.256 < 1.0 o.k.
Vertical shear—net section Vertical shear—net section
Vu ϕ vVn-net = 6.25 kips 31.8 kips Va Ω v Vn-net = 4.57 kips 21.2 kips
= 0.197 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.216 < 1.0 o.k.

54 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 54 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 LRFD ASD
Vertical shear—gross section Vertical shear—gross section
Vu ϕ vVn-gross = 6.54 kips 70.2 kips Va Ω v Vn-gross = 4.78 kips 46.7 kips
= 0.093 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.102 < 1.0 o.k.

Check Deflection
Deflections are calculated using 90% of the moment of inertia as discussed in Section 3.7.
From AISC Manual Table 3-23, Case 1, the live load and dead load deflections are:
5wl 4
Δ LL =
384 EI x-net ( 0.90 )
5 ( 0.1 kip/ft ) (1 ft/12 in.)[( 40 ft ) (12 in./ft )]
4
=
384 ( 29,000 ksi )(190 in.4 )( 0.90 )
= 1.16 in.
L L
= < o.k.
410 240

5wl 4
Δ DL =
384 EI x-net ( 0.90 )
5 ( 0.139 kip/ft )(1 ft/12 in.)[( 40 ft ) (12 in./ft )]
4
=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 190 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 1.61 in.

Because ∆DL = 1.61 in., a 12-in. camber is required.

Total load deflection is:
Δ TL = Δ LL + ΔDL
= 1.16 in. + 1.61 in.
= 2.77 in.
L L
= > n.g.
172 180

This beam does not meet the deflection criteria. Either a larger section (LB18×16) should be considered, or the cutting pattern
could be modified to increase the stiffness of the section.

Example 4.3—Composite Castellated Beam Design

Given:
A 50-ft-long floor beam with simple supports, shown in Figure 4-5, will be evaluated as a composite castellated section subject
to uniform loading.
Beam span: 50 ft
Beam spacing: 8 ft
Trial beam: Asymmetric Section: W21×44 (top) + W21×57 (bottom) → CB30×44/57

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 55

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 55 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Loading: Live load = 100 psf
Dead load = 75 psf (not including beam self-weight)
Metal deck and concrete weight = 55 psf
Total load = 800 lb/ft + 600 lb/ft + 51 lb/ft
= 1,450 lb/ft
Deflection limits: L / 360 live load, L / 240 total load
Bracing: Beam is fully braced by concrete deck, Lb =0
Material: ASTM A992
Metal deck: depth = 2 in., rib width = 6 in., flutes perpendicular to beam
Studs: diameter = w in., height = 4 in., Fu = 65 ksi
Concrete: ƒ′c  = 3,000 psi, wc = 145 lb/ft3, tc = 3 in. (5 in. total deck thickness)
Connections: Assume that connections exist on either end to provide stability during construction (prior to deck being
attached) and that the connections are sufficiently rigid to prevent web post buckling at the first web post
on each end. Assume that the beam has been checked in its pre-composite stage for the wet concrete weight
and construction loads.

Solution:
From AISC Manual Table 2-4, the material properties are as follows:
ASTM A992
Fy = 50 ksi
Fu = 65 ksi
From AISC Manual Table 1-1, the geometric properties are as follows:
Top Root Beam:
W21×44
A = 13.0 in.2 dtop = 20.7 in. tw = 0.350 in. bf = 6.50 in. tf = 0.450 in.
Sx = 81.6 in.3 Zx = 95.4 in.3 Ix = 843 in.4
Bottom Root Beam:
W21×57
A = 16.7 in.2 dbot = 21.1 in. tw = 0.405 in. bf = 6.56 in. tf = 0.650 in.
Sx = 111 in.3 Zx = 129 in.3 Ix = 1,170 in.4

CL

S bf-top
e b e b
tf

1 2
dt

50'-0"
tw
h
d

CB30×44/57, typ.
A
dt

W21×44 (top) + W21 ×57 (bot.)

4 Spaces at 8'-0" = 32'-0"

S beffec
e b e b bf-top
W27×102
W24×55

htop dt-top hr tc

tf-top

θtop tw-top
Waste
dg

bf-bot
dt-bot hbot

B
θbot
tw-bot
2" metal deck with
3" concrete topping
tf-bot

CB30×44/57
(wc=145 pcf, f c'=3,000 psi)

Fig. 4-5.  Structural framing layout and composite castellated beam nomenclature for Example 4.3.

56 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 56 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Resultant shape section properties for the CB30×44/57 are determined as follows:
The values of e, b and dt are designated based on the depth of the root beam section and a trial opening size.
e = 8.00 in.
b = 5.50 in.
dt = 5.50 in.
htop = dtop − 2dt (from Eq. 4-1)
= 20.7 in. − 2 ( 5.50 in.)
= 9.70 in. 
hbot = d bot − 2dt (from Eq. 4-1)
= 21.1 in. − 2 ( 5.50 in.)
= 10.1 in. 
ho = htop + hbot (from Eq. 4-2)
= 9.70 in. + 10.1 in.
= 19.8 in. 
dg = ho + 2dt (4-3)
= 19.8 in. + 2 ( 5.50 in.)
= 30.8 in. 
⎛ htop ⎞
θtop = tan −1 ⎜ (from Eq. 4-4)
⎝ b ⎟⎠
9.70 in. ⎞
= tan −1 ⎛
⎝ 5.50 in. ⎠
= 60.4° 
−1 ⎛ hbot ⎞
θbot = tan (from Eq. 4-4)
⎝ b ⎠
10.1 in. ⎞
= tan −1 ⎛
⎝ 5.50 in. ⎠
= 61.4° 
S = 2 e + 2b (4-5)
= 2 (8.00 in.) + 2 ( 5.50 in.)
= 27.0 in. 

Calculate section properties of top and bottom tee and beam

Relevant cross sections are provided in Figure  4-6, and the section properties for the top and bottom tees are reported in
Tables 4-14 and 4-15, respectively.

Beam net section properties

Anet = A tee-top + A tee-bot (3-7)
= 4.70 in.2 + 6.22 in.2
= 10.9 in.2 
Atee-top ( dt + ho + y tee-top ) + Atee-bot ytee-bot
ybs = (4-25)
Anet
4.70 in.2 ( 5.50 in. + 19.8 in. + 4.24 in.) + ( 6.22 in.2 ) (1.19 in.)
=
10.9 in.2
= 13.4 in. 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 57

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 57 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-14.  Top Tee Section Properties at Center of Opening
Atee-top = 4.70 in.2 x = 5.14 in. rx = 1.61 in. ry = 1.48 in.
3 3
ytee-top = 4.24 in. Sx-top = 9.63 in. Sx-bot = 2.86 in. Zx = 5.07 in.3
Ix-tee-top = 12.1 in.4 Iy = 10.3 in.4 J = 0.266 in.4 yo = 4.01 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

Table 4-15.  Bottom Tee Section Properties at Center of Opening

2
Atee-bot = 6.22 in. x = 0.475 in. rx = 1.51 in. ry = 1.57 in.
3 3
ytee-bot = 1.19 in. Sx-top = 3.29 in. Sx-bot = 11.9 in. Zx = 5.95 in.3
Ix-tee-bot = 14.2 in.4 Iy = 15.3 in.4 J = 0.685 in.4 yo = 0.870 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

yts = d g − ybs (4-26)

= 30.8 in. − 13.4 in.
= 17.4 in. 
deffec = d g − ⎡⎣( dt − ytee -top ) + ytee -bot ⎤⎦ (4-27)
= 30.8 in. − [( 5.50 in. − 4.24 in.) + 1.19 in.]
= 28.4 in. 
+ Atee-top ⎡⎣ yts − ( dt − ytee -top )⎤⎦ + I x -tee -bot + Atee-bot ( ybs − ytee-bot )
2 2
I x -net = Ix-tee-top (4-28)

= 12.1 in.4 + ( 4.70 in.2 ) [17.4 in. − ( 5.50 in. − 4.24 in.)] + 14.2 in.4 + ( 6.22 in.2 ) (13.4 in. − 1.19 in.)2
2

= 2,180 in.4 

CL
CL
ENA of
composite section
96"
5.50"
1.26"

2" 3"

ENA of tee

CL CL
0.650"

PNA 0.405"
ENA 6.50"
17.4"

30.8"
4.31"
5.14"

28.1"
30.8"
5.50"

19.8"
4.24"

5.03"
5.50"

28.9"

ENA
0.450"

0.350" 6.56"
13.4"
13.3"

PNA
Top Tee-W21 ×44 Bottom Tee-W21 ×57
Top and Bottom Tee Sections
ENA of section
ENA of steel section
1.46"
5.50"

Net Section Composite Section

Fig. 4-6.  Tee, net and composite sections for castellated beam for Example 4.3.

58 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 58 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 I x -net
S x -net -top = (4-29)
yts
2,180 in.4
=
17.4 in.
= 125 in.3 
I x -net
S x -net -bot = (4-30)
ybs
2,180 in.4
=
13.4 in.
= 163 in.3 

Composite section properties in accordance with The Structural Engineer’s Handbook (Gaylord and Gaylord, 1992)
Es
n =
Ec (4-31)
29,000,000 psi
=
33 (145 pcf )
1.5
3,000 psi
= 9.19

beffec = min { Span /4, Spacing } (3-4)

= min
4{
50 ft 8 ft + 8 ft
,
2
(12 in./ft ) }
= 96.0 in. 
Ac = beffec tc (4-32)
= (96.0 in.) ( 3.00 in.)
= 288 in.2 
Ac
Actr = (4-33)
n
288 in.2
=
9.19
= 31.3 in.2
A ctr
Kc = (4-34)
Actr + A net
31.3 in.2
=
31.3 in.2 + 10.9 in.2
= 0.741 
tc
ec = hr + (4-35)
2
3.00 in.
= 2.00 in. +
2
= 3.50 in. 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 59

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 59 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Assuming that the neutral axis is in the concrete.
⎛ Anet tc ⎞ ⎡ 2 Actr ⎛ tc ⎤
ycc =⎜ ⎢ 1+ yts + ec + ⎞ − 1 ⎥
⎝ Actr ⎟⎠ ⎣ A net tc ⎝ 2 ⎠
⎦ (4-36)

=⎢
( )
⎡ 10.9 in.2 ( 3.00 in.)⎤ ⎡
⎢
⎥ 1+
2 31.3 in.2 ( ) ⎤
⎛ 17.4 in. + 3.50 in. + 3.00 in. ⎞ − 1⎥
⎣ 31.3 in.2 ⎦ ⎢
⎣
(
10.9 in.2 ( 3.00 in.) ⎝ ) 2 ⎠ ⎥
⎦
= 5.87 in.

tc + hr = 3.00 in. + 2.00 in.

= 5.00 in. < 5.87 in. 
Because tc + hr < ycc, the neutral axis is in the steel.
yc = ( yts + ec ) K c (4-37)
= (17.4 in. + 3.50 in.) 0.741
= 15.5 in. 
Actr tc2
I x -comp = ( yts + ec ) yc Anet + I x -net + (4-38)
12
(31.3 in.2 )(3.50 in.) 2

(
= (17.4 in. + 3.50 in.)(15.5 in.) 10.9 in.2 + 2,180 in.4 +) 12
= 5,740 in.4 
I x -comp
S x -comp-conc = (4-39)
yts − yc + ec + 0.5tc
5,740 in.4
=
17.4 in. − 15.5 in. + 3.50 in. + 0.5 ( 3.00 in.)
= 832 in.3 
I x -comp
S x -comp-steel = (4-40)
ybs + yc
5,740 in.4
=
13.4 in. + 15.5 in.
= 199 in.3 
For the first iteration,
deffec-comp = d g − ytee -bot + hr + 0.5tc (3-8)
= 30.8 in. − 1.19 in. + 2.00 in. + 0.5 ( 3.00 in.)
= 33.1 in. 

Check Vierendeel bending

The governing load cases are:

60 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 60 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-16.  Global Shear and Moment at Each Opening
Global Net Shear Global Moment
Vr-net, Mr,
Opening Xi, D, L, kips D, L, kip-ft
No. ft kips kips ASD LRFD kips kips ASD LRFD
End 0.000 16.3 20.0 31.3 44.1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 1.46 15.3 18.8 29.2 41.1 23.0 28.3 51.3 72.9
2 3.71 13.9 17.0 26.0 36.5 55.8 68.7 125 177
3 5.96 12.4 15.2 22.7 31.8 85.4 105 190 270
4 8.21 10.9 13.4 19.4 27.2 112 137 249 353
5 10.5 9.46 11.6 16.2 22.6 135 165 300 426
6 12.7 8.00 9.83 12.9 17.9 154 190 344 488
7 15.0 6.53 8.03 9.64 13.3 170 210 380 540
8 17.2 5.07 6.23 6.38 8.66 184 226 409 581
9 19.5 3.61 4.43 3.11 4.03 193 238 431 612
10 21.7 2.14 2.63 0.000 0.000 200 246 445 633
11 24.0 0.678 0.833 0.000 0.000 203 250 452 643
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 203 250 453 644
Note: The shear force shown is the net shear force; i.e., the shear strength of the concrete has been subtracted from the global shear force on the beam.

LRFD ASD
Load case 1:
w = 1.4D w=D+L
= 1.4(651 lb/ft) = 651 lb/ft + 800 lb/ft
= 911 lb/ft = 1,450 lb/ft

Load case 2:
w = 1.2D + 1.6L
= 1.2(651 lb/ft) + 1.6(800 lb/ft)
= 2,060 lb/ft   governs

Calculate the available shear strength of the concrete deck:

LRFD ASD
Vc = ϕcvVnc (3-15a) Vnc (3-15b)
Vc =
Vnc = 4 fc′ ( 3) ( hr + tc ) tc (3-14) Ω cv (3-14)
4 3,000 psi ( 3)( 2.00 in. + 3.00 in.)( 3.00 in.) Vnc = 4 fc′ ( 3) ( hr + tc ) tc
=
1,000 lb/kip 4 3,000 psi ( 3)( 2.00 in. + 3.00 in.)( 3.00 in.)
=
= 9.85 kips 1,000 lb/kip
Vc = 0.75 ( 9.85 kips ) = 9.85 kips
= 7.39 kips 9.85 kips
Vc =
2.00
= 4.93 kips

Calculate the global shear and moment at each opening to be used to calculate local internal forces (axial and flexural) at each
opening. These values are presented in Table 4-16.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 61

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 61 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-17.  Local Axial Force at Each Opening
ASD
Opening Xi , Mr , T1(i), Xc(i+1), T1(i+1), T1(i)/ Xc(i+2), T1(i+2), /
T1(i+1)
Number ft kip-ft kips in. kips T1(i+1) in. kips T1(i+2)
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 1.46 51.3 18.6 0.076 17.8 1.05 0.073 17.8 1.00
2 3.71 125 45.2 0.184 43.2 1.04 0.177 43.2 1.00
3 5.96 190 69.0 0.282 66.2 1.04 0.270 66.2 1.00
4 8.21 249 88.2 0.369 86.6 1.04 0.354 86.6 1.00
5 10.5 300 109 0.444 105 1.04 0.427 105 1.00
6 12.7 344 125 0.509 120 1.04 0.490 120 1.00
7 15.0 380 138 0.563 133 1.04 0.543 133 1.00
8 17.2 409 148 0.606 143 1.04 0.585 143 1.00
9 19.5 431 156 0.639 151 1.04 0.616 151 1.00
10 21.7 445 162 0.660 156 1.04 0.637 156 1.00
12 24.0 452 164 0.670 158 1.04 0.647 158 1.00
Bm. CL 25.0 453 164 0.672 159 1.04 0.649 159 1.00
LRFD
Opening Xi , Mr , T1(i), Xc(i+1), T1(i+1), T1(i)/ Xc(i+2), T1(i+2), /
T1(i+1)
Number ft kip-ft kips in. kips T1(i+1) in. kips T1(i+2)
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 1.46 72.9 26.5 0.108 25.3 1.05 0.103 25.3 1.00
2 3.71 177 64.1 0.262 61.4 1.04 0.251 61.4 1.00
3 5.96 270 98.0 0.401 94.1 1.04 0.384 94.1 1.00
4 8.21 353 128 0.524 123 1.04 0.504 123 1.00
5 10.5 426 155 0.631 149 1.04 0.608 149 1.00
6 12.7 488 177 0.723 171 1.04 0.698 171 1.00
7 15.0 540 196 0.800 189 1.04 0.773 189 1.00
8 17.2 581 211 0.861 204 1.03 0.833 204 1.00
9 19.5 612 222 0.907 215 1.03 0.878 215 1.00
10 21.7 633 230 0.937 222 1.03 0.908 222 1.00
12 24.0 643 233 0.952 226 1.03 0.923 226 1.00
Bm. CL 25.0 644 234 0.954 226 1.03 0.925 226 1.00

Calculate the local axial force in the top and bottom tees resulting from the global moment. These values are shown in Table 4-17.
In the calculations for composite beams, assume that the concrete flange takes all the compression and that the bottom tee takes
all the tension force. This is a valid assumption, assuming that sufficient studs exist at a given opening to have developed the
concrete flange. This assumption must be checked as part of the design.
Local axial force:
For the first iteration, recalculate deffec-comp each time,
M r (i )
T1(i ) = (3-9)
deffec-comp 

62 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 62 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Recalculate effective concrete depth,
T1(i )
Xc = (3-10)
0.85 fc′beffec 

Recalculate deffec-comp
Xc
deffec -comp = d g − ytee -bot + tc + hr − (from Eq. 3-8)
2

Recalculate until the difference ≤ 1%

M r (i +1)
T1(i +1) = (3-9)
deffec -comp 

The next step is to calculate the number of studs for full composite action and shear stud density along the length of the beam.
This will be used to calculate composite percentage at each web opening. If sufficient studs are not present to resist the compres-
sion force in the concrete (T1(i+2) in Table 4-17), an additional force, To, will be resisted by the top tee section.
From AISC Specification Section I.2d.1, consider the limit states of concrete crushing and tensile yielding of the steel section to
determine the number of studs for full composite action.
Concrete crushing:
V ′ = 0.85 fc′Ac (Spec. Eq. I3-1a)
(
= 0.85 ( 3 ksi ) 288 in.2 )
= 734 kips 
Tensile yielding of the steel section:
V ′ = Fy Anet (from Spec. Eq. I3-1b)
(
= (50 ksi) 10.9 in.2 )
= 545 kips controls

From AISC Manual Table 3-21 for a w-in.-diameter shear stud,

Qn = 21.0 kips/stud
V′
N =
Q
545 kips
=
21.0 kips/stud
= 26 studs 
Between the point of maximum moment and the end of the beam, 26 studs need to be provided. Because the point of maximum
moment is at the center of the beam, 52 studs are required over the length of the beam. The flutes of the deck are 12 in. on center;
therefore, one additional stud will be placed in the first flute of the deck at each end. When two studs per rib are present, Qn =
18.3 kips. Investigate if providing an additional stud in the first flute provides adequate shear resistance.
Vprovided = (1 stud )( 2 studs/rib) Qn + ( 24 studs )(1 stud/ rib ) Qn
= (1)( 2 )(18.3 kips ) + ( 24 )(1) ( 21.0 kips )
= 541 kips < 545 kips n.g. 
Double the number of studs in the second flute from each end.
Vprovided = ( 2 studs )( 2 studs/rib ) Qn + ( 23 studs )(1 stud/rib) Q n
= ( 2 ) ( 2 ) (18.3 kips) + ( 23)(1) ( 21.0 kips )
= 556 kips > 545 kips o.k. 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 63

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 63 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Therefore, 54 studs are required over the entire length of the beam.
Next, calculate an average stud density over the length of the beam, q , and use this value to determine the amount of concrete
that has been developed at the web opening that is being examined for Vierendeel bending.
(2)Vprovided
q=
Beam span
(2) (556 kips)
=
50 ft
= 22.2 kips/ft 

The next step is to calculate the amount of concrete that has been developed by the studs between the end of the beam and the
opening under consideration and to then determine if the stud strength is greater than the force T1(i+2) noted in Table 4-17. If the
force T1(i+2) is less than the amount of concrete developed, consider the beam fully composite at that opening—i.e., the concrete
has the strength to resist the chord force T1(i+2) and the previous assumption is valid. If this is not the case, take the difference
between Ti+2 and NQn as a force, To, in the top tee of the castellated section and recalculate the force on the bottom tee as T1-new
to account for the fact that the section is not acting fully composite.
The compression force to be resisted by the top tee at its centroid is then
⎡ q ( Xi ) ⎤
⎢ 1− ⎥
To = M r T1(i + 2) (3-12)
⎢ ⎥
⎢⎣ deffec ⎥⎦

The revised tension force to be resisted by bottom tee at its centroid is then
T1-new = qX i + To (3-13)

The revised local axial forces at each opening are reported in Table 4-18. In this case, all the web openings were fully composite
because enough concrete was developed at each opening to fully resist the global moment. The assumption that the concrete takes
all the compression and the bottom tee resists all the tension is valid; therefore, use the forces T1(i) from Table 4-17.
If fewer than 54 studs had been used, the results would have been different. In the case of 30 studs, the shear stud density, q, is
12.6 kip/ft. The results would require that the first seven holes be considered as partially composite and the revised top and bot-
tom tee forces be accounted for. These results are shown in Table 4-19 but will not be used in the rest of the example.
Calculate the local moment on the top and bottom tees resulting from the net shear force passing through the web opening. The
local moments at each opening are presented in Table 4-20.
Top tee local Vierendeel moment:
Atee-top  e 
M vr -top = Vnet (from Eq. 3-2)
Anet  2  

Bottom tee local Vierendeel moment:

Atee-bot  e 
M vr -bot = Vnet (from Eq. 3-2)
Anet  2  

Calculate the available shear and flexural strength of top and bottom tees
Determine the limiting flange width-to-thickness ratio from AISC Specification Table B4.1b, Case 10:
E
λ p = 0.38
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.38
50 ksi
= 9.15

64 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 64 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-18.  Revised Local Axial Force at Each Opening (LRFD)
Opening Xi, T1 = T1(i+2), qXi, Composite To, T1-new,
Number ft kips kips Status kips kips
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A N/A N/A
1 1.46 25.3 32.4 Full 0.000 25.3
2 3.71 61.4 82.4 Full 0.000 61.4
3 5.96 94.1 132 Full 0.000 94.1
4 8.21 123 182 Full 0.000 123
5 10.5 149 233 Full 0.000 149
6 12.7 171 282 Full 0.000 171
7 15.0 189 333 Full 0.000 189
8 17.2 204 382 Full 0.000 204
9 19.5 215 433 Full 0.000 215
10 21.7 222 482 Full 0.000 222
11 24.0 226 533 Full 0.000 226
Bm. CL 25.0 226 555 Full 0.000 226

Table 4-19.  Local Axial Force at Each Opening for 30 Studs (LRFD)
Opening Xi, T1, qXi , Composite To, T1-new,
Number ft kips kips Status kips kips
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A 0.000 0.000
1 1.46 25.3 18.4 Partial 8.43 26.8
2 3.71 61.4 46.7 Partial 17.9 64.6
3 5.96 94.1 75.1 Partial 23.1 98.2
4 8.21 123 103 Partial 24.0 127
5 10.5 149 132 Partial 20.7 152
6 12.7 171 160 Partial 13.0 173
7 15.0 189 189 Partial 0.885 189
8 17.2 204 217 Full 0.000 204
9 19.5 215 246 Full 0.000 215
10 21.7 222 273 Full 0.000 222
11 24.0 226 302 Full 0.000 226
Bm. CL 25.0 226 315 Full 0.000 226

The width-to-thickness ratio for the top flange is:

b
λ=
t
bf
=
2 tf
6.50 in.
=
2 ( 0.450 in.)
= 7.22 < 9.15

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 65

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 65 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-20.  Local Vierendeel Moment at Each Opening
ASD LRFD
Opening Xi, Va, Mva-top, Mva-bot, Vu, Mvu-top, Mvu-bot,
Number ft kips kip-in. kip-in. kips kip-in. kip-in.
End 0.000 31.3 54.0 71.4 44.1 76.1 101
1 1.46 29.2 50.3 66.6 41.1 70.7 93.7
2 3.71 26.0 44.6 59.2 36.5 62.7 83.2
3 5.96 22.7 39.0 51.7 31.8 54.8 72.6
4 8.21 19.4 33.4 44.3 27.2 46.8 62.0
5 10.5 16.2 27.8 36.9 22.6 38.8 51.5
6 12.7 12.9 22.2 29.4 17.9 30.8 40.9
7 15.0 9.64 16.6 22.0 13.3 22.9 30.3
8 17.2 6.38 11.0 14.5 8.66 14.9 19.7
9 19.5 3.11 5.35 7.10 4.03 6.92 9.18
10 21.7 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
11 24.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

The width-to-thickness ratio for the bottom flange is:

b
λ=
t
bf
=
2 tf
6.56 in.
=
2 ( 0.650 in.)
= 5.05 < 9.15

Because λ < λ p , the flanges of both the top and bottom tees are compact; therefore, it is not necessary to check flange local buck-
ling when calculating the available flexural strength.
Determine the limiting stem width-to-thickness ratio, λr , from AISC Specification Table B4.1a, Case 4:
E
λ r = 0.75
Fy

29,000 ksi
= 0.75
50 ksi
= 18.1 
The width-to-thickness ratio for the top stem is:
dt
λ=
tw
5.50 in.
=
0.350 in.
= 15.7 < 18.1

66 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 66 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The width-to-thickness ratio for the bottom stem is:
dt
λ=
tw
5.50 in.
=
0.405 in.
= 13.6 < 18.1

Because λ < λr, both top and bottom tee stems are nonslender, therefore, it is not necessary to consider AISC Specification Sec-
tion E7 when calculating the available compressive strength.
It is not necessary to calculate the available compressive strength of the top or bottom tee in this example because all openings
are fully composite, and therefore, all compression is taken by the concrete flange. If compression did exist in the top or bottom
tee, the available compressive strength would be calculated as shown in Example 4.1.

Calculate available tensile strength of bottom tee

Pn = Fy Atee-bot(from Spec. Eq. D2-1)
= (50 ksi)(6.22 in.2)
= 311 kips

Calculate available flexural strength of tee

Yielding
For tee stems in compression:
Mp-top = My (from Spec. Eq. F9-4)
My = Fy Sx-bot(from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
= (50 ksi)(2.86 in.3)
= 143 kip-in.
Mp-bot = My (from Spec. Eq. F9-4)
My = Fy Sx-top(from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
= (50 ksi)(3.29 in.3)
= 165 kip-in.
In both cases, the stem is assumed to be in compression; this will be conservative for the bottom tee. It is possible to take advan-
tage of this to calculate a higher value for the available flexural strength of the bottom tee because the stem is in tension.

Lateral-torsional buckling
For lateral-torsional buckling of the top tee:
⎛ d ⎞ Iy
Btop = − 2.3 ⎜ ⎟ (Spec. Eq. F9-12)
⎝ Lb ⎠ J

5.50 in. ⎞ 10.3 in.4

= − 2.3 ⎛
⎝ 8.00 in. ⎠ 0.266 in.4
= − 9.84 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 67

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 67 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 1.95E
M cr -top = I y J ⎡ B + 1 + B2 ⎤
Lb ⎣ ⎦ (Spec. Eq. F9-10)
1.95 ( 29,000 ksi )
=
8.00 in.
(10.3 in.4 )( 0.266 in.4 ) ⎡⎢⎣−9.84 + 1 + ( −9.84 )2 ⎤⎥
⎦
= 596 kip-in. 
For lateral-torsional buckling of the bottom tee:
⎛ d ⎞ Iy
Bbot = −2.3 ⎜ ⎟ (Spec. Eq. F9-12)
⎝ Lb ⎠ J

5.50 in. ⎞ 15.3 in.4

= −2.3 ⎛
⎝ 8.00 in. ⎠ 0.685 in.4
= −7.47 
1.95E
M cr -bot = I y J ⎡ B + 1 + B2 ⎤
Lb ⎣ ⎦ (Spec. Eq. F9-10)
1.95 ( 29,000 ksi )
=
8.00 in.
(15.3 in.4 )( 0.685 in.4 ) ⎡⎣⎢−7.47 + 1 + ( −7.47 )2 ⎤⎥
⎦
= 1,550 kip-in. 

Flange local buckling

Per AISC Specification Section F9.3(a), the limit state of flange local buckling does not apply because the flanges are compact.

Local buckling of tee stems

The nominal flexural strength for local buckling of the tee stem in flexural compression, Mn, is determined using AISC Specifica-
tion Section F9.4:
Mn = Fcr Sx(Spec. Eq. F9-16)
E
Because d t w < 0.84 , the critical stress, Fcr , is determined using AISC Specification Equation F9-17:
Fy
Fcr = Fy (Spec. Eq. F9-17)
And thus,
For the top tee:
Mn-top = Fy Sx-bot
= (50 ksi)(2.86 in.3 )
= 143 kip-in.
For the bottom tee:
Mn-bot = Fy Sx-top
= (50 ksi)(3.29 in.3 )
= 165 kip-in.

68 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 68 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The available tensile and flexural strengths of the tee are:

LRFD ASD
Available tensile strength—bottom tee Available tensile strength—bottom tee
Pu = ϕc Pn Pn
Pa =
= 0.90 ( 311 kips ) Ωc
= 280 kips 311 kips
=
1.67
= 186 kips

Available flexural strength—top tee Available flexural strength—top tee

Mu = ϕb Mp-top Mp-top
Ma =
= 0.90 ( 143 kip-in.) Ωb
= 129 kip-in. 143 kip-in.
=
1.67
= 85.6 kip-in.

Available flexural strength—bottom tee Available flexural strength—bottom tee

Mu = ϕb Mp-bot Mp-bot
Ma =
= 0.90 ( 165 kip-in.) Ωb
= 149 kip-in. 165 kip-in.
=
1.67
= 98.8 kip-in.

Check tees for combined axial and flexural loads

The interaction values for each opening are presented in Table 4-21.
From Table 4-21, the composite Vierendeel bending is summarized as follows:

LRFD ASD
Top tee Top tee
Imax = 0.549 < 1.0   o.k. Imax = 0.586 < 1.0   o.k.

Bottom tee Bottom tee

Imax = 0.858 < 1.0   o.k. Imax = 0.911 < 1.0   o.k..

Check web post buckling

It is necessary to check both the top and bottom web posts for buckling in this case. Although the top web post is thinner and is
therefore more likely to buckle first, the value of 2h/e is different for the top and bottom web posts, and it is therefore necessary
to investigate both web posts.

Calculate vertical and horizontal shear and resultant moment at each gross section for web post buckling check
Table 4-22 presents the vertical shear force at each opening, and Table 4-23 presents the horizontal shear force at each web post.
From Section 3.4.1a, calculate the horizontal shear, Vrh , using Equation 3-19:
Vrh = Tr (i ) − Tr (i +1)  (3-19)

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 69

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 69 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-21.  Interaction Values at Each Opening for LRFD and ASD
LRFD
Top Tee Bottom Tee
Spec. Spec.
Mvr Pr
Opening Xi , Pr , Mvr-top, Pr, Mvr-bot, Eq. Eq.
Number ft kips kip-in. Mc kips kip-in. Pc H1-1a H1-1b Interaction*
End 0.000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 1.46 0.000 70.7 0.549 25.3 93.7 0.09 0.653 0.678 0.678
2 3.71 0.000 62.7 0.487 61.6 83.2 0.220 0.719 0.672 0.719
3 5.96 0.000 54.8 0.425 94.3 72.6 0.336 0.772 0.659 0.772
4 8.21 0.000 46.8 0.363 123 62.0 0.440 0.813 0.639 0.813
5 10.5 0.000 38.8 0.301 149 51.5 0.532 0.841 0.613 0.841
6 12.7 0.000 30.8 0.239 171 40.9 0.610 0.856 0.581 0.856
7 15.0 0.000 22.9 0.178 189 30.3 0.676 0.858 0.543 0.858
8 17.2 0.000 14.9 0.116 204 19.7 0.728 0.847 0.497 0.847
9 19.5 0.000 6.92 0.054 215 9.18 0.767 0.822 0.446 0.822
10 21.7 0.000 0.000 0.000 222 0.000 0.793 0.793 0.397 0.793
11 24.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 226 0.000 0.806 0.806 0.403 0.806
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 226 0.000 0.807 0.807 0.404 0.807
Imax: 0.549 Imax: 0.858
ASD
Top Tee Bottom Tee
Spec. Spec.
Mvr Pr
Opening Xi , Pr , Mvr-top, Pr, Mvr-bot, Eq. Eq.
Number ft kips kip-in. Mc kips kip-in. Pc H1-1a H1-1b Interaction*
End 0.000 N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 1.46 0.000 50.3 0.586 17.8 66.6 0.096 0.697 0.724 0.724
2 3.71 0.000 44.6 0.521 43.3 59.2 0.232 0.766 0.717 0.766
3 5.96 0.000 39.0 0.455 66.2 51.7 0.355 0.822 0.703 0.822
4 8.21 0.000 33.4 0.390 86.7 44.3 0.465 0.865 0.682 0.865
5 10.5 0.000 27.8 0.324 105 36.9 0.561 0.894 0.655 0.894
6 12.7 0.000 22.2 0.259 120 29.4 0.644 0.909 0.621 0.909
7 15.0 0.000 16.6 0.193 133 22.0 0.712 0.911 0.579 0.911
8 17.2 0.000 11.0 0.128 143 14.5 0.767 0.899 0.531 0.899
9 19.5 0.000 5.35 0.062 151 7.10 0.809 0.873 0.476 0.873
10 21.7 0.000 0.000 0.000 156 0.000 0.836 0.836 0.418 0.836
11 24.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 158 0.000 0.849 0.849 0.425 0.849
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 159 0.000 0.851 0.851 0.425 0.851
Imax: 0.586 Imax: 0.911
*  Reflects bold face value of controlling interaction equation.

70 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 70 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-22.  Vertical Shear Force at Each Opening
ASD LRFD
Post Xi, Vr (i−1), V r (i+1), Vr(i), Vr (i−1), Vr(i+1), Vr(i),
Number ft kips kips kips kips kips kips
1 2.58 29.2 26.0 21.5 41.1 36.5 38.8
2 4.83 26.0 22.7 19.2 36.5 31.8 34.2
3 7.08 22.7 19.4 16.8 31.8 27.2 29.5
4 9.33 19.4 16.2 14.4 27.2 22.6 24.9
5 11.6 16.2 12.9 12.1 22.6 17.9 20.3
6 13.8 12.9 9.64 9.72 17.9 13.3 15.6
7 16.1 9.64 6.38 7.35 13.3 8.66 11.0
8 18.3 6.38 3.11 4.99 8.66 4.03 6.34
9 20.6 3.11 0.000 2.63 4.03 0.000 2.01
10 22.8 0.000 0.000 0.339 0.000 0.000 0.000
11 24.5 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
Maximum: 29.2 Maximum: 41.1 Maximum: 38.8

Table 4-23. Horizontal Shear Force at Each Web Post

ASD LRFD
Opening X i, Tr(i), Tr(i+1), Vah = ΔTr , Tr(i), Tr(i+1), Vuh = ΔTr ,
Number ft kips kips kips kips kips kips
End 0.000 0.000
1 1.46 17.8 43.3 25.5 25.3 61.6 36.3
2 3.71 43.3 66.2 22.9 61.6 94.3 32.7
3 5.96 66.2 86.7 20.5 94.3 123 28.7
4 8.21 86.7 105 18.3 123 149 26.0
5 10.5 105 120 15.0 149 171 22.0
6 12.7 120 133 13.0 171 189 18.0
7 15.0 133 143 10.0 189 204 15.0
8 17.2 143 151 8.00 204 215 11.0
9 19.5 151 156 5.00 215 222 7.00
10 21.7 156 158 2.00 222 226 4.00
11 24.0 158.4 158.7 0.300 225.9 226.3 0.400
Bm. CL 25.0 159 226

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 71

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 71 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Calculate web post buckling flexural strength

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-23, From Table 4-23,
Vuh = 36.3 kips Vah = 25.5 kips
Mu-top = Vuhhtop (from Eq. 3-20) Ma-top = Vahhtop (from Eq. 3-20)
= (36.3 kips)(9.70 in.) = (25.5 kips)(9.70 in.)
= 352 kip-in. = 247 kip-in.
Mu-bot = Vuh hbot (from Eq. 3-21) Ma-bot = Vahhbot (from Eq. 3-21)
= (36.3 kips)(10.1 in.) = (25.5 kips)(10.1 in.)
= 367 kip-in. = 258 kip-in.

Calculate available flexural strength of web post

Top web post

Mp = 0.25t w ( e + 2b )2 Fy (3-22)

= 0.25 ( 0.350 in.) ⎡⎣8.00 in. + 2 ( 5.50 in.) ⎤⎦ ( 50 ksi )

2

= 1,580 kip-in.
2htop 2 ( 9.70 in.)
=
e 8.00 in.
= 2.43
e 8.00 in.
=
tw 0.350 in.
= 22.9 

For θ = 60˚

For e/tw = 10
2 htop
Mocr
= 0.587 ( 0.917 )
e
(3-26)
Mp
= 0.587 ( 0.917 )2.43
= 0.476 < 0.493 
For e/tw = 20
2 htop
Mocr
= 1.96 ( 0.699 )
e
(3-27)
Mp
= 1.96 ( 0.699 )2.43
= 0.821 > 0.493 

For e/tw = 30
2 htop
Mocr
= 2.55 ( 0.574 )
e
(3-28)
Mp
= 2.55 ( 0.574 )2.43
= 0.662 > 0.493 

72 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 72 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 For e/tw = 22.9, use
Mocr
= 0.476
Mp

Bottom web post

Mp = 0.25 tw( e + 2b )2 Fy (3-22)

= 0.25 ( 0.405 in.) ⎡⎣8.00 in. + 2 ( 5.50 in.) ⎤⎦ ( 50 ksi )

2

= 1,830 kip-in.

2hbot 2 (10.1 in.)

=
e 8.00 in.
= 2.53
e 8.00 in.
=
tw 0.405 in.
= 19.8 
For e/tw = 10
2 htop
Mocr
= 0.587 ( 0.917 )
e
(3-26)
Mp
= 0.587 ( 0.917 )2.53
= 0.471 < 0.493 
For e/tw = 20
2 htop
Mocr
= 1.96 ( 0.699 )
e
(3-27)
Mp
= 1.96 ( 0.699 )2.53
= 0.792 > 0.493 

For e/tw = 30
2 htop
Mocr
= 2.55 ( 0.574 )
e
(3-28)
Mp
= 2.55 ( 0.574 )2.53
= 0.626 > 0.493 

For e/tw = 19.8, use

Mocr
= 0.471
Mp

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 73

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 73 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 From Equation 3-29a and 3-29b, the available flexural strength is

LRFD ASD
Top web post Top web post
⎛ M ocr ⎞ 1 ⎛ Mocr ⎞ 1
ϕb ⎜ M p-top = 0.90 ( 0.476 )(1,580 kip-in.) Mp-top = ( 0.476 )(1,580 kip-in.)
⎝ M p ⎟⎠ ⎜ ⎟
Ω b ⎝ Mp ⎠ 1.67
= 677 kip-in. = 450 kip-in.
352 kip-in. 247 kip-in.
I max -top = I max =
677 kip-in. 450 kip-in.
= 0.520 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.549 < 1.0 o.k.

Bottom web post Bottom web post

⎛ M ocr ⎞ 1 ⎛ Mocr ⎞ 1
ϕb ⎜ Mp-bot = 0.90 ( 0.471)(1,830 kip-in. ) Mp-bot = ( 0.471)(1,830 kip-in.)
⎝ M p ⎟⎠ Ω b ⎜⎝ Mp ⎟⎠ 1.67
= 776 kip-in. = 516 kip-in.
366 kip-in. 257 kip-in.
I max -bot = I max =
776 kip-in. 516 kip-in.
= 0.472 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.498 < 1.0 o.k.

Check horizontal shear

The available horizontal shear strength is calculated using AISC Specification Section J4.2. By inspection, the top section will
control because the web is thinner.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-23, From Table 4-23,
Vu = 36.3 kips Va = 25.5 kips
From Spec. Eq. J4-3, From Spec. Eq. J4-3,
ϕ vVn -horiz = ϕ v 0.6 Fy ( et w ) Vn -horiz 0.6 Fy ( et w)
=
= 1.00 ( 0.6 ) ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣(8.00 in.) (0.350 in. )⎤⎦ Ωv Ωv

= 84.0 kips > 36.3 kips o.k. 0.6 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣(8.00 in.) ( 0.350 in. )⎤⎦
=
1.50
= 56.0 kips > 25.5 kips o.k.

Check vertical shear

The concrete shear strength will be disregarded when checking vertical shear for the net and gross sections. The concrete shear
strength will be added to the net shear force.

74 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 74 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Check vertical shear at the beam net section:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-16, From Table 4-16,
Vu-net = 41.1 kips Va-net = 29.2 kips
Vu -global = Vu -net + concrete shear strength Va -global = Va -net + concrete shear strength
= 41.1 kips + 7.39 kips = 29.2 kips + 4.93 kips
= 48.5 kips = 34.1 kips

The shear force between the top and bottom tees will be divided based on their relative areas.

LRFD ASD
⎛ A tee-top ⎞ ⎛ Atee-top ⎞
Vu -top = Vu-global ⎜ Va -top = Va -global ⎜
⎝ Anet ⎟⎠ ⎝ Anet ⎟⎠
⎛ 4.70 in.2 ⎞ ⎛ 4.70 in.2 ⎞
= ( 48.5 kips ) ⎜ = ( 34.1 kips ) ⎜
⎝ 10.9 in.2 ⎟⎠ ⎝ 10.9 in.2 ⎟⎠
= 20.9 kips = 14.7 kips
⎛ Atee-bot ⎞ ⎛ Atee-bot ⎞
Vu -bot = Vu-global ⎜ Va -bot = Va -global ⎜
⎝ Anet ⎟⎠ ⎝ Anet ⎟⎠
⎛ 6.22 in.2 ⎞ ⎛ 6.22 in.2 ⎞
= ( 48.5 kips ) ⎜ = ( 34.1 kips ) ⎜
⎝ 10.9 in.2 ⎟⎠ ⎝ 10.9 in.2 ⎟⎠
= 27.7 kips = 19.5 kips

Check vertical shear at top and bottom tees

From AISC Specification Section G3,
Top tee:
h dt -top
=
t w t w -top
5.50 in.
=
0.350 in.
1.2 ( 29,000 ksi )
= 15.7 < 1.10 = 29.0
50 ksi
Because h t w < 1.10 k v E Fy ,
Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)
Vn -top = 0.60 Fy ( dt -top tw-top )Cv 2 (from Spec. Eq. G3-1)
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi )( 5.50 in.)( 0.350 in.)(1.0 )
= 57.8 kips 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 75

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 75 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Bottom tee:
h dt -bot
=
t w t w -bot
5.50 in.
=
0.405 in.
1.2 ( 29,000 ksi )
= 13.6 < 1.10 = 29.0
50 ksi

Because h t w < 1.10 k v E Fy ,

Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)
Vn -bot = 0.60 Fy ( dt -bot t w -bot ) Cv 2 (from Spec. Eq. G3-1)
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi )( 5.50 in.)( 0.405 in.)(1.0 )
= 66.8 kips 

Available vertical shear strength at top and bottom tees

LRFD ASD
ϕ vVn -top = 1.00 ( 57.8 kips ) Vn -top 57.8 kips
=
= 57.8 kips Ωv 1.50
= 38.5 kips
ϕ vVn -bot = 1.00 ( 66.8 kips )
Vn -bot 66.8 kips
= 66.8 kips =
Ωv 1.50
= 44.5 kips

Check vertical shear at beam gross section

LRFD ASD
Vu-net = 44.1 kips ( see Table 4-16 ) Va-net = 31.3 kips ( see Table 4-16 )
Vu -global = Vu -net + concrete shear strength Va -global = Va -net + concrete shear strength
= 44.1 kips + 7.39 kips = 31.3 kips + 4.93 kips
= 51.5 kips = 36.2 kips

From AISC Specification Section G2.1(b)(1):

h 30.8 in. − (0.950 in. + 1.15 in.)
=
tw-min 0.350 in.
= 82.0

1.10 k v E Fy
C v1 = (Spec. Eq. G2-4)
h tw
1.10 5.34 ( 29,000 ksi ) (50 ksi)
=
82.0
= 0.747 
Vn -gross = 0.60 Fy ( d g tw - min ) Cv1 (from Spec. Eq. G2-1)
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi )( 30.8 in.)( 0.350 in.)( 0.747 )
= 242 kips 
76 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 76 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 From AISC Specification Section G1:
h 29,000 ksi
= 82.0 > 2.24 = 53.9
tw 50 ksi

Therefore, ϕv = 0.90 and Ωv = 1.67.

Available vertical shear strength at gross section

LRFD ASD
φ vVn -gross = 0.90 ( 242 kips ) Vn -gross 242 kips
=
= 218 kips Ωv 1.67
= 145 kips

The following is a summary of the beam shear strengths:

LRFD ASD
Horizontal shear Horizontal shear
Vu ϕ vVn -horiz = 36.3 kips 84.0 kips Va Ω v Vn -horiz = 25.5 kips 56.0 kips
= 0.432 o.k. = 0.455 o.k.

Vertical shear–top tee Vertical shear–top tee

Vu -top ϕ vVn -top = 20.9 kips 57.8 kips Va-top Ω v Vn-top = 14.7 kips 38.5 kips
= 0.362 o.k. = 0.382 o.k.

Vertical shear–bottom tee Vertical shear–bottom tee

Vu -bot ϕ vVn -bot = 27.7 kips 66.8 kips Va -bot Ω v Vn -bot = 19.5 kips 44.5 kips
= 0.415 o.k. = 0.438 o.k.

Vertical shear–gross section Vertical shear–gross section

Vu -global ϕ vVn -gross = 51.5 kips 218 kips Va -global Ω v Vn -gross = 36.2 kips 145 kips
= 0.236 o.k. = 0.250 o.k.

Check deflection
Deflections are calculated using 90% of the moment of inertia per Section 3.7.
The pre-composite dead load deflection is:
5wL4
Δ PDL =
384 EI x -net (0.90)
0.44 kip/ft ⎞
5⎛ ⎡(50 ft )(12 in. /ft)⎤⎦ 4
⎝ 12 in./ft ⎠ ⎣
=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 2,180 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 1.09 in.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 77

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 77 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Live load deflection is:
5wL4
Δ LL =
384 EI x -comp (0.90)
⎛ 0.8 kip / ft ⎞
5⎜ ⎡(50 ft )(12 in./ft)⎤⎦ 4
⎝ 12 in. /ft ⎟⎠ ⎣
=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 5,740 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 0.749 in.
L
=
800

Dead load deflection is:

5wL4
Δ DL =
384 EI x-comp ϕ
⎛ 0.16 kip /ft ⎞
5⎜ ⎡⎣(50 ft )(12 in./ft)⎤⎦ 4
⎝ 12 in. /ft ⎟⎠
=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 5,740 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 0.150 in.
L
=
4,000

Total load deflection is:

Δ TL = Δ LL + Δ DL
= 0.749 in. + 0.150 in.
= 0.899 in.
L
=
667

Deflection summary
Δ PDL = 1.09 in.; therefore, camber 1 in.
L
Δ LL ≤ o.k.
360
L
Δ TL ≤ o.k.
240

Example 4.4—Composite Cellular Beam Design

Given:
Evaluate the same beam from Example 4.3 using a cellular beam instead of a castellated beam, as shown in Figure 4-7. As in the
noncomposite cellular beam, a rectangular opening will be approximated for Vierendeel bending.

Solution:
From AISC Manual Table 2-4, the material properties are as follows:
ASTM A992
Fy = 50 ksi
Fu = 65 ksi

78 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 78 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 From AISC Manual Table 1–1, the geometric properties are as follows:
Top root beam
W21×44
A = 13.0 in.2 dtop = 20.7 in. tw = 0.350 in. bf = 6.50 in. tf = 0.450 in. Ix = 843 in.4
Sx = 81.6 in.3 Zx = 95.4 in.3
Bottom root beam
W21×57
A = 16.7 in.2 dbot = 21.1 in. tw = 0.405 in. bf = 6.56 in. tf = 0.650 in. Ix = 1,170 in.4
Sx = 111 in.3 Zx = 129 in.3
Resultant shape properties for the LB30×44/57 are determined as follows:
The values of Do and S are designated based on the depth of the original beam section and a trial opening size.
Do = 20.8 in.
S = 28.8 in.
e = S − Do (4-16)
= 8.00 in.
Do Do ⎞ 2 ⎛ S − Do ⎞ 2
loss = − ⎛ − (4-17)
2 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠

20.8 in. 20.8 in. ⎞ 2 ⎛ 28.8 in. − 20.8 in. ⎞ 2

= − ⎛ −
2 ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
= 0.802 in. 
1⎡ Do ⎤
dt -top-net = dtop − ⎛ + loss ⎞ ⎥ (4-41)
2 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦
1⎡ 20.8 in. ⎤
= ⎢ 20.7 in. − ⎛ + 0.802 in.⎞ ⎥
2⎣ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎦
= 4.75 in. 

CL

S
e Do bf
tf

1 2
50'-0"
dt Do/2 dt

tw
loss
d

LB30×44/57,typ.
A

W21×44 (top) + W21 ×57 (bot.)

4 Spaces at 8'-0" = 32'-0"

S beffec
e Do bf-top
W27×102
W24×55

dt-top hr tc

tf-top

tw-top
dg
Do

Waste bf-bot
B tw-bot
2" metal deck with
3" concrete topping
dt-bot

tf-bot

(wc=145 pcf, f c'=3,000 psi) LB30×44/57

Fig. 4-7.  Structural framing layout and composite cellular beam nomenclature for Example 4.4.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 79

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 79 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 1⎡ Do ⎤
dt -bot -net = d bot − ⎛ + loss ⎞ ⎥ (4-42)
2 ⎢⎣ ⎝ 2 ⎠⎦
1⎡ 20.8 in. ⎤
= ⎢ 21.1 in. − ⎛ + 0.802 in.⎞ ⎥
2⎣ ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎦
= 4.95 in. 
dg = d t -top-net + Do + dt -bot -net (4-43)
= 4.75 in. + 20.8 in. + 4.95 in.
= 30.5 in. 
y = ( 0.5 Do ) − ( 0.225 Do )
2 2
(4-20)

= [( 0.5)( 20.8 in.)]2 − [( 0.225)( 20.8 in.)]2

= 9.29 in. 
Do (from Eq. 4-21)
dt -top-crit = − y + dt -top-net
2
20.8 in.
= − 9.29 in. + 4.75 in.
2
= 5.86 in. 
Do
dt -bot -crit = − y + dt -bot -net (from Eq. 4-21)
2
( 20.8 in.)
= − 9.29 in. + 4.95 in.
2
= 6.06 in. 

Check limits of applicability

According to Section 3.4, the design procedures for web post buckling are only applicable if the following conditions concerning
the cutting pattern are met: 1.08 < S/Do < 1.5 and 1.25 < dg/Do < 1.75.
S 28.8 in.
=
Do 20.8 in.
= 1.38 < 1.5 o.k.
dg 30.5 in.
=
Do 20.8 in.
= 1.47 < 1.75 o.k.

Calculate section properties of top and bottom tees and beam

Relevant cross sections are provided in Figure  4-8, and the section properties for the top and bottom tees are reported in
Tables 4-24 through 4-27.

Beam net section properties at center of opening

Anet = Atee-top + Atee-bot(3-7)
= 444 in.2 + 6.01 in.2
= 10.5 in.2

ybs =
Atee-top
- ( d g − ytee-top ) + Atee-bot ytee-bot (from Eq. 4-25)
Anet

=
( 2
) ( )
4.44 in. ( 30.5 in. − 3.73 in.) + 6.01 in. 2 (1.05 in.)
2
10.5 in.
= 11.9 in. 

80 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 80 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 0.650"
CL CL

PNA 0.405"
6.50"
ENA
4.76"

4.50"
4.42"

3.92"
ENA
3.73"

4.96"
0.450"

0.350" 6.56" PNA

At Net Section At Net Section
CL

PNA 6.50" 0.650"

CL
ENA 0.405"
5.87"

5.50"
4.49"

4.71"
5.58"
6.07"

ENA
0.350"
0.450"

6.56" PNA

At Critical Section At Critical Section

Top Tee-W21 ×44 Bottom Tee-W21 ×57
CL
Top and Bottom Tee Sections
96"
4.76"

1.36"
1.04"

2" 3"

CL CL
ENA of tee
5.90"

ENA of tee
17.4"

ENA of composite section

27.7"
30.5"

30.5"
18.5"
20.8"
30.5"

16.4"

28.5"
13.2"

13.3"
13.1"

6.07"

ENA of section
ENA of section ENA of steel section
1.38"
1.05"
4.96"

Composite Section at
At Net Section At Critical Section Critical Steel Section

Net Section Composite Section

Fig. 4-8.  Tee, net and composite section for cellular beam for Example 4.4.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 81

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 81 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-24.  Top Tee Section Properties at Center of Opening
Atee-top = 4.44 in.2 x = 4.42 in. rx = 1.35 in. ry = 1.53 in.
3 3
ytee-top = 3.73 in. Sx-top = 7.76 in. Sx-bot = 2.16 in. Zx = 3.83 in.3
Ix-tee-top = 8.03 in.4 Iy = 10.3 in.4 J = 0.255 in.4 yo = 3.50 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

Table 4-25.  Bottom Tee Section Properties at Center of Opening

2
Atee-bot = 6.01 in. x = 0.458 in. rx = 1.32 in. ry = 1.60 in.
ytee-bot = 1.05 in. Sx-top = 2.68 in.3 Sx-bot = 10.0 in.3 Zx = 4.91 in.3
Ix-tee-bot = 10.5 in.4 Iy = 15.3 in.4 J = 0.673 in.4 yo = 0.72 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

Table 4-26.  Top Tee Section Properties at Critical Section

2
Acrit-top = 4.82 in. x = 5.50 in. y = 4.49 in. ycrit-top = 1.38 in.
3 3 3
Sx-top = 10.6 in. Sx-bot = 3.25 in. Zx = 5.76 in. J = 0.271 in.4
4 4
Ix-crit-top = 14.6 in. Iy = 10.3 in. rx = 1.74 in. ry = 1.46 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

Table 4-27.  Bottom Tee Section Properties at Critical Section

Acrit-bot = 6.46 in.2 x = 0.492 in. y = 4.71 in. ycrit-bot = 1.36 in.
3 3
Sx-top = 4.01 in. Sx-bot = 13.9 in. Zx = 7.17 in.3 J = 0.698 in.4
Ix-crit-bot = 18.9 in.4 Iy = 15.3 in.4 rx = 1.71 in. ry = 1.54 in.
Note:  The fillet radius is assumed to be zero in the section properties calculations.

yts = d g − ybs (4-26)

= 30.5 in. − 11.9 in.
= 18.6 in. 
deffec = d g − ( ytee -top + ytee -bot ) (from Eq. 4-27)
= 30.5 in. − ( 3.73 in. + 1.05 in.)
= 25.7 in. 

I x -net = I x -tee-top + Atee-top ( dg − ybs − ycrit -top ) + I x -tee -bot + Atee -bot ( ybs − ytee -bot )
2 2
(from Eq. 4-28)
= 8.03 in.4 + ( 4.44 in.2 ) ( 30.5 in. − 11.9 in. − 3.73 in.)2 + 10.5 in.4 + ( 6.01 in. 2 ) (11.9 in. − 1.05 in.)2
= 1,710 in.4 
I x -net
S x -net -top = (4-29)
yts
1,710 in.4
=
18.6 in.
= 91.9 in.3 

82 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 82 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 I x -net
S x -net -bot = (4-30)
ybs
1,710 in.4
=
11.9 in.
= 144 in.3 

Beam critical net section properties at center of opening

Anet-crit = Acrit-top + Acrit-bot (from Eq. 4-6)
= 4.83 in.2 + 6.46 in.2
= 11.3 in.2
Acrit-top ( d g − ycrit-top ) + Acrit-bot ycrit-bot
ybs = (from Eq. 4-25)
Anet

=
( 4.83 in.2 ) ( 30.5 in. − 1.38 in.) + ( 6.46 in. 2 ) (1.36 in.)
11.3 in.2
= 13.2 in. 
yts = d g − ybs (4-26)
= 30.5 in. − 13.2 in.
= 17.3 in. 
deffec = d g − ( ycrit -top + ycrit -bot ) (from Eq. 4-27)
= 30.5 in. − (1.38 in. + 1.36 in.)
= 27.8 in. 
I x -net -crit = I x -crit -top + Acrit -top ( d g − ybs − ycrit -top ) + I x -crit -bot + Acrit -bot ( ybs − ycrit -bot )
2 2
(4-46)
= 14.6 in.4 + ( 4.82 in.2 ) ( 30.5 in. − 13.2 in. − 1.38 in.) + 18.9 in.4 + ( 6.46 in. ) (13.2 in. − 1.36 in.)
2 2 2

= 2,160 in.4 
I x -net -crit
S x -crit -top = (from Eq. 4-29)
yts
2,160 in.4
=
17.3 in.
= 125 in.3 
I x -net -crit
S x -crit -bot = (from Eq. 4-30)
ybs
2,160 in.4
=
13.2 in.
= 163 in.3 

Composite section properties at critical section in accordance with The Structural Engineer’s Handbook
Es
n= (4-31)
Ec
29,000,000 psi
=
33 (145 pcf )
1.5
3,000 ksi
= 9.19 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 83

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 83 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 beffec = min { Span /4, Spacing} (3-4)

= min
4 {
50 ft 8 ft + 8 ft
,
2 }
(12 in. ft )
= 96.0 in. 
Ac = beffec tc (4-32)
= ( 96.0 in.)( 3.00 in.)
= 288 in.2 
Ac (4-33)
Actr =
n
288 in.2
=
9.19
= 31.3 in.2
Actr
Kc = (from Eq. 4-34)
Actr + A net-crit
31.3 in.2
=
31.3 in.2 + 11.3 in.2
= 0.735 
tc
ec = hr + (4-35)
2
3.00 in.
= 2.00 in. +
2
= 3.50 in. 
Assuming that the neutral axis is in the concrete,
⎛ Anet -crit tc ⎞ ⎡ 2 Actr ⎛ tc ⎤
ycc = ⎜ ⎢ 1+ yts + ec + ⎞ − 1⎥ (from Eq. 4-36)
⎝ Actr ⎟⎠ ⎣ A net-crit tc ⎝ 2⎠ ⎦

=⎢
( )
⎡ 11.3 in.2 ( 3.00 in.) ⎤ ⎡
⎥⎢ 1 +
2 31.3 in. 2 ( ) ⎤
⎛ 17.3 in. + 3.50 in. + 3.00 in. ⎞ − 1⎥
⎢⎣ 31.3 in.2 ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ (
11.3 in. 2 ( 3.00 in.) ⎝ ) 2 ⎠ ⎥
⎦
= 5.94 in. 
Because tc + hr = 5.00 in. < ycc, the neutral axis is in the steel.
yc = ( yts + ec ) K c (4-37)
= (17.3 in. + 3.50 in.)( 0.735)
= 15.3 in. 
Actr tc2 (from Eq. 4-38)
I x -comp-crit = ( yts + ec ) yc Anet-crit + I x- net -crit +
12
= (17.3 in. + 3.50 in.)(15.3 in.) 11.3 in. ( 2
) + 2,160 in. 4
+
(31.3 in. 2 ) ( 3.50 in.)2
12
4
= 5,790 in. 
I x -comp-crit
S x -comp-conc = (from Eq. 4-39)
yts − yc + ec + 0.5tc
5,790 in.4
=
17.3 in. − 15.3 in. + 3.50 in. + 0.5 ( 3.00 in.)
= 827 in.3 

84 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 84 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 I x -comp-crit
S x -comp-steel = (from Eq. 4-40)
ybs + yc
5,790 in.4
=
13.2 in. + 15.3 in.
= 203 in.3 
For the first iteration,
deffec-comp = d g − ycrit -bot + hr + 0.5tc (Eq. 3-8)
= 30.5 in. − 1.36 in. + 2.00 in. + 0.5 ( 3.00 in.)
= 32.6 in. 

Composite section properties at net section per the Structural Engineer’s Handbook
⎛ Anet tc ⎞ ⎡ 2 Actr ⎛ tc ⎤
ycc = ⎜ ⎟ ⎢ 1+ yts + ec + ⎞ − 1⎥ (from Eq. 4-36)
⎝ Actr ⎠ ⎣ A net tc ⎝ 2⎠ ⎦

=⎢
( )
⎡ 10.5 in.2 ( 3.00 in.) ⎤ ⎡
⎥ ⎢ 1+
2 31.3 in.2( ) ⎤
⎛ 17.4 in. + 3.50 in. + 3.00 in. ⎞ − 1⎥
⎢⎣ 31.3 in.2 ⎥⎦ ⎢
⎣
( )
10.5 in.2 ( 3.00 in.) ⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎥
⎦
= 5.76 in.

tc + hr = 3.00 in. + 2.00 in.

= 5.00 in. < 5.76 in. 
yc = ( yts + ec ) K c (4-37)
= (17.4 in. + 3.50 in.)( 0.735)
= 15.3 in. 
Actr tc2
I x -comp = ( yts + ec ) yc Anet + I x -net + (4-38)
12
( 31.3 in.2 ) ( 3.50 in.)2
(
= (17.4 in. + 3.50 in.)(15.3 in.) 10.5 in. + 1,710 in.2
) 4
+
12
= 5,100 in.4 

Check Vierendeel bending

The governing load cases are:

LRFD ASD
Load case 1: w = D + L
w = 1.4D = 651 lb/ft + 800 lb/ft
= 1.4(651 lb/ft) = 1,450 lb/ft  governs
= 911 lb/ft
Load case 2:
w = 1.2D + 1.6L
= 1.2(651 lb/ft) + 1.6(800 lb/ft)
= 2,060 lb/ft   governs

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 85

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 85 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-28.  Global Shear and Moment at Each Opening
Global Shear Global Moment
Vr-net, Mr ,
Opening Xi, D, L, kips D, L, Kip-ft
No. ft kips kips ASD LRFD kips kips ASD LRFD
End 0.000 16.3 20.0 31.3 44.1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 1.53 15.3 18.8 29.1 41.0 24.1 29.7 53.8 76.5
2 3.93 13.7 16.9 25.6 36.0 58.8 72.4 131 186
3 6.32 12.1 14.9 22.2 31.1 89.8 110 200 285
4 8.72 10.6 13.0 18.7 26.2 117 144 261 371
5 11.1 9.03 11.1 15.2 21.2 141 173 313 445
6 13.5 7.47 9.19 11.7 16.3 160 197 358 508
7 15.9 5.92 7.28 8.26 11.3 176 217 393 559
8 18.3 4.36 5.36 4.79 6.41 189 232 421 598
9 20.7 2.80 3.44 1.31 1.47 197 243 440 625
10 23.1 1.24 1.53 0.000 0.000 202 249 451 640
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 203 250 453 644
Note: The shear force shown is the net shear force; i.e., the shear strength of the concrete has been subtracted from the global shear force on the beam.

Calculate the available shear strength of the concrete deck:

LRFD ASD
Vc = φcvVnc (3-15a) Vnc
Vc = (3-15b)
Vnc = 4 fc′ ( 3) ( hr + tc ) tc (3-14) Ω cv
Vnc = 4 fc′ ( 3) ( hr + tc ) tc (3-14)
4 3,000 psi ( 3)( 2.00 in. + 3.00 in.)( 3.00 in.)
=
1,000 lb/kip 4 3,000 psi ( 3)( 2.00 in. + 3.00 in.)( 3.00 in.)
=
= 9.85 kips 1,000 lb/kip
Vc = 0.75 ( 9.85 kips ) = 9.85 kips
= 7.39 kips 9.85 kips
Vc =
2.00
= 4.93 kips

Calculate the global shear and moment at each opening to be used to calculate local internal forces (axial and flexural) at each
opening. These results are presented in Table 4-28.
Calculate the local axial force in the top and bottom tees resulting from the global moment. These values are presented in
Table 4-29.
As in castellated composite beams, assume that the concrete flange takes all the compression and that the bottom tee takes all the
tension force. Once again, this is a valid assumption assuming that sufficient studs exist at a given opening to have developed the
concrete flange. It is necessary to check the validity of this assumption.
Local axial force:
For the first iteration, recalculate deffec-comp each time
M r (i )
T1(i ) = (3-9)
deffec -comp 

86 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 86 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-29.  Local Axial Force at Each Opening
ASD
T1( i ) T1(i )
Opening Xi, Mr, T1(i), Xc(i+1), T1(i+1), Xc(i+2), T1(i+2),
T1( i +1) T1( i + 2)
Number ft kip-ft kips in. kips in. kips
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 1.53 53.8 19.8 0.081 18.9 1.05 0.077 18.9 1.00
2 3.93 131 48.4 0.198 46.3 1.05 0.189 46.3 1.00
3 6.32 200 73.7 0.301 70.6 1.04 0.289 70.6 1.00
4 8.72 261 96.1 0.393 92.3 1.04 0.377 92.2 1.00
5 11.1 313 115 0.471 111 1.04 0.453 111 1.00
6 13.5 358 132 0.538 127 1.04 0.517 127 1.00
7 15.9 393 145 0.591 139 1.04 0.570 139 1.00
8 18.3 421 155 0.633 149 1.04 0.610 149 1.00
9 20.7 440 162 0.662 156 1.04 0.638 156 1.00
10 23.1 451 166 0.678 160 1.04 0.654 160 1.00
Bm. CL 25.0 453 167 0.682 161 1.04 0.658 161 1.00
LRFD
T1( i ) T1( i )
Opening Xi, Mr, T1(i), Xc(i+1), T1(i+1), Xc(i+2), T1(i+2),
T1( i +1) T1(i + 2)
Number ft kip-ft kips in. kips in. kips
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
1 1.53 76.5 28.1 0.115 26.9 1.05 0.110 26.9 1.00
2 3.93 186 68.7 0.281 65.7 1.05 0.269 65.7 1.00
3 6.32 285 105 0.428 100 1.05 0.410 100 1.00
4 8.72 371 137 0.558 131 1.05 0.536 131 1.00
5 11.1 445 164 0.669 158 1.04 0.645 158 1.00
6 13.5 508 187 0.764 180 1.04 0.737 180 1.00
7 15.9 559 206 0.840 199 1.04 0.812 199 1.00
8 18.3 598 220 0.899 213 1.03 0.870 213 1.00
9 20.7 625 230 0.940 223 1.03 0.910 223 1.00
10 23.1 640 236 0.963 228 1.03 0.933 228 1.00
Bm. CL 25.0 644 237 0.969 230 1.03 0.939 230 1.00

Recalculate the effective concrete depth

T1(i )
Xc = (3-10)
0.85 fc′ beffec 

Recalculate deffec-comp
Xc
deffec-comp = d g − ytee-bot-crit + tc + hr − (from Eq. 3-8)
2

Recalculate until the difference ≤ 1%

M r (i +1)
T1(i +1) = (3-9)
deffec -comp 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 87

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 87 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-30.  Revised Local Axial Force at Each Opening (LRFD)
Opening Xi, T1 = T1(i+2), (q)(Xi), Composite To, T1-new,
Number ft kips kips Status kips kips
End 0.000 0.000 0.000 N/A N/A N/A
1 1.53 26.9 34.1 Full 0.000 26.9
2 3.93 65.8 87.4 Full 0.000 65.8
3 6.32 101 141 Full 0.000 101
4 8.72 131 194 Full 0.000 131
5 11.1 158 247 Full 0.000 158
6 13.5 181 301 Full 0.000 181
7 15.9 199 354 Full 0.000 199
8 18.3 213 407 Full 0.000 213
9 20.7 223 461 Full 0.000 223
10 23.1 228 514 Full 0.000 228
CL 25.0 230 556 Full 0.000 230

The same number of studs as those used in Example 4.3 has been selected; therefore, the same number of studs and stud density
is applicable. The number of studs for full composite action is 54 across the length of the beam and the shear stud density =
22.3 kip/ft. Also, as in Example 4.3, the next step is to calculate the amount of concrete that has been developed by the studs
between the end of the beam and the opening under consideration and determine whether or not that section of the beam is fully
or partially composite. If it is determined to be partially composite, calculate the added force that the steel section is required to
resist, To, and T1-new (refer to Example 4.3 for further explanation). Table 4-30 shows the axial force at each opening.
The compression force to be resisted by the top tee at its centroid is:
⎡ ( q ) ( Xi ) ⎤
⎢1 − T ⎥
1(i + 2)
To = M r ⎢ ⎥ (3-12)
⎢⎣ deffec ⎥⎦

The revised tensile force to be resisted by the bottom tee at its centroid is then:
T1-new = qXi + To(3-13)
Calculate the local moment on the top and bottom tees resulting from the net shear force passing through the web opening. These
results are presented in Table 4-31.
Top tee local Vierendeel moment:
⎛ Acrit-top ⎞ Do
M vr -top = Vnet ⎜ (from Eq. 3-2)
⎝ Anet-crit ⎟⎠ 4 
Bottom tee local Vierendeel moment:
⎛ Acrit-bot ⎞ Do
M vr -bot = Vnet ⎜ (from Eq. 3-3)
⎝ Anet-crit ⎟⎠ 4 

88 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 88 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-31.  Local Vierendeel Moment at Each Opening
ASD LRFD
Opening Xi, Va, Mva-top, Mva-bot, Vu, Mvu-top, Mvu-bot,
Number ft kips kip-in. kip-in. kips kip-in. kip-in.
End 0.000 31.3 69.4 93.0 44.1 97.8 131
1 1.53 29.1 65.7 87.0 41.0 92.4 122
2 3.93 25.6 57.9 76.6 36.0 81.3 108
3 6.32 22.2 50.0 66.2 31.1 70.2 92.9
4 8.72 18.7 42.2 55.8 26.2 59.0 78.2
5 11.1 15.2 34.3 45.5 21.2 47.9 63.4
6 13.5 11.7 26.5 35.1 16.3 36.7 48.6
7 15.9 8.26 18.6 24.7 11.3 25.6 33.9
8 18.3 4.79 10.8 14.3 6.41 14.5 19.1
9 20.7 1.31 2.97 3.93 1.47 3.32 4.40
10 23.1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000

Calculate the available shear and flexural strength of top and bottom tees at the critical section
Determine the limiting flange width-to-thickness ratio from AISC Specification Table B4.1b, Case 10:
E
λ p = 0.38
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.38
50 ksi
= 9.15

The width-to-thickness ratio for the top flange is:

b
λ=
t
bf
=
2 tf
6.50 in.
=
2 ( 0.450 in.)
= 7.22 < 9.15

The width-to-thickness ratio for the bottom flange is:

b
λ=
t
bf
=
2t f
6.56 in.
=
2 ( 0.650 in.)
= 5.05 < 9.15

Because λ < λp, the flanges of both the top and bottom tees are compact; therefore, it is not necessary to check flange local buck-
ling when calculating the available flexural strength.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 89

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 89 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Determine the limiting stem width-to-thickness ratio, λr , from AISC Specification Table B4.1a, Case 4:
E
λ r = 0.75
Fy
29,000 ksi
= 0.75
50 ksi
= 18.1

The width-to-thickness ratio for the top stem is:

dttop-crit
λ=
tw
5.87 in.
=
0.35 in.
= 16.8 < 18.1

The width-to-thickness ratio for the bottom stem is:

dtbot -crit
λ=
tw
6.07 in.
=
0.405 in.
= 15.0 < 18.1

Because λ < λr, both top and bottom tee stems are nonslender; therefore, it is not necessary to consider AISC Specification Sec-
tion E7 when calculating the available compressive strength.
It is not necessary to calculate the available compressive strength of top or bottom tee in this example because all openings are
fully composite, and therefore, all compression is taken by the concrete flange. If compression did exist in top or bottom tee, the
available compressive strength would be calculated as shown in Example 4.2.

Calculate available tensile strength of bottom tee

Pn = Fy Acrit-bot (from Spec. Eq. D2-1)

(
= ( 50 ksi ) 6.46 in.2 )
= 323 kips 

Calculate available flexural strength of tee

Yielding
For tee stems in compression:
Mp-top = My(from Spec. Eq. F9-4)
My = Fy Sx-bot(from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
= (50 ksi)(3.25 in.3)
= 163 kip-in.
Mp-bot = My (from Spec. Eq. F9-4)
My = Fy Sx-top (from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
= (50 ksi)(4.01 in.3)
= 201 kip-in.
In both cases the stem is assumed to be in compression, this will be conservative for the bottom tee. It is possible to take advan-
tage of this to calculate a higher value for the available flexural strength of the bottom tee because the stem is in tension.

90 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 90 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Lateral-Torsional Buckling
For lateral-torsional buckling of the top tee:
⎛ d ⎞ Iy (Spec. Eq. F9-12)
Btop = −2.3 ⎜ ⎟
⎝ Lb ⎠ J
5.86 in. ⎞ 10.3 in.4
= −2.3 ⎛
⎝ 10.4 in. ⎠ 0.255 in.4
= −8.24 
1.95E
M cr -top = I y J ⎛ B + 1 + B2 ⎞ (Spec. Eq. F9-10)
Lb ⎝ ⎠
1.95 ( 29,000 ksi )
=
10.4 in.
( )( ⎣ )
10.3 in.4 0.255 in.4 ⎡⎢ −8.24 + 1 + ( −8.24 )2 ⎤⎥
⎦
= 534 kip-in. 
For lateral-torsional buckling of the bottom tee:
⎛ d ⎞ Iy
Bbot = −2.3 ⎜ ⎟ (Spec. Eq. F9-12)
⎝ Lb ⎠ J
6.06 in. ⎞ 15.3 in.4
= −2.3 ⎛
⎝ 10.4 in. ⎠ 0.673 in.4
= −6.39 
1.95E
M cr -bot = I y J ⎛ B + 1 + B2 ⎞ (Spec. Eq. F9-10)
Lb ⎝ ⎠
1.95 ( 29,000 ksi )
=
10.4 in.
( )( ⎣ )
15.3 in.4 0.673 in.4 ⎡⎢ −6.39 + 1 + ( −6.39 )2 ⎤⎥
⎦
= 1,350 kip-in. 

Flange local buckling

According to AISC Specification Section F9.3(a), the limit state of flange local buckling does not apply because the flanges are
compact.

Local buckling of tee stems

The nominal flexural strength for local buckling of the tee stem in flexural compression, Mn, is determined using AISC Specifica-
tion Section F9.4:
Mn = Fcr Sx(Spec. Eq. F9-16)
E
Because d t w < 0.84 , the critical stress, Fcr, is determined using AISC Specification Equation F9-17:
Fy

Fcr = Fy (Spec. Eq. F9-17)

And thus:
For the top tee:
M n -top = Fy S x -bot

(
= ( 50 ksi ) 3.25 in.3 )
= 163 kip-in.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 91

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 91 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 For the bottom tee:
M n -bot = Fy S x -top

(
= ( 50 ksi ) 4.01 in.3 )
= 201 kip-in.

The available tensile and flexural strengths of the tee are:

LRFD ASD
Available tensile strength—bottom tee Available tensile strength—bottom tee
Pc = ϕc Pn Pn
Pc =
= 0.90 ( 323 kips ) Ωc
= 291 kips 323 kips
=
1.67
= 193 kips

Available flexural strength—top tee Available flexural strength—top tee

Mc = ϕb Mn Mn
Mc =
= 0.90 (163 kip-in.) Ωb
= 147 kip-in. 163 kip-in.
=
1.67
= 97.6 kip-in.

Available flexural strength—bottom tee Available flexural strength—bottom tee

M c = ϕb M n Mn
Mc =
= 0.90 ( 201 kip-in.) Ωb
= 181 kip-in. 201 kip-in.
=
1.67
= 120 kip-in.

Check tees for combined axial and flexural loads

The interaction values for each opening are presented in Table 4-32.
From Table 4-32, the composite Vierendeel bending is summarized as follows:

LRFD ASD
Top tee Top tee
Imax = 0.631 < 1.0   o.k. Imax = 0.674 < 1.0   o.k.

Bottom tee Bottom tee

Imax = 0.861 < 1.0   o.k. Imax = 0.911 < 1.0   o.k.

Check web post buckling

Calculate horizontal shear and resultant moment at each gross section for web post buckling
Table 4-33 presents the horizontal shear force at each opening.

92 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 92 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-32.  Interaction Values at Each Opening for LRFD and ASD
LRFD
Top Tee Bottom Tee
Spec. Spec.
Mvr Pr
Opening Xi, Pr , Mvr-top, Pr , Mvr-bot, Eq. Eq.
Number ft kips kip-in. Mc kips kip-in. Pc H1-1a H1-1b Interaction*
End 0.000 N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 1.53 0.000 92.4 0.631 26.9 122 0.093 0.696 0.726 0.726
2 3.93 0.000 81.3 0.555 65.8 108 0.226 0.757 0.711 0.757
3 6.32 0.000 70.2 0.479 101 92.9 0.346 0.805 0.689 0.805
4 8.72 0.000 59.0 0.403 131 78.2 0.452 0.838 0.660 0.838
5 11.1 0.000 47.9 0.327 158 63.4 0.544 0.857 0.624 0.857
6 13.5 0.000 36.7 0.251 181 48.6 0.621 0.861 0.581 0.861
7 15.9 0.000 25.6 0.175 199 33.9 0.684 0.851 0.530 0.851
8 18.3 0.000 14.5 0.099 213 19.1 0.733 0.827 0.473 0.827
9 20.7 0.000 3.32 0.023 223 4.40 0.766 0.788 0.408 0.788
10 23.1 0.000 0.000 0.000 228 0.000 0.785 0.785 0.393 0.785
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 230 0.000 0.790 0.790 0.395 0.790
Imax: 0.631 Imax: 0.861
ASD
Top Tee Bottom Tee
Spec. Spec.
Mvr Pr
Opening Xi, Pr , Mvr-top, Pr , Mvr-bot, Eq. Eq.
Number ft kips kip-in. Mc kips kip-in. Pc H1-1a H1-1b Interaction*
End 0.00 N/A N/A NA N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
1 1.53 0.000 65.7 0.674 19.0 87.0 0.098 0.743 0.775 0.775
2 3.93 0.000 57.9 0.594 46.3 76.6 0.239 0.807 0.759 0.807
3 6.32 0.000 50.0 0.513 70.8 66.2 0.366 0.857 0.735 0.857
4 8.72 0.000 42.2 0.433 92.3 55.8 0.477 0.891 0.704 0.891
5 11.1 0.000 34.3 0.352 111 45.5 0.574 0.911 0.666 0.911
6 13.5 0.000 26.5 0.272 127 35.1 0.655 0.915 0.620 0.915
7 15.9 0.000 18.6 0.191 140 24.7 0.721 0.904 0.567 0.904
8 18.3 0.000 10.8 0.111 149 14.3 0.772 0.878 0.505 0.878
9 20.7 0.000 2.97 0.03 156 3.93 0.807 0.837 0.436 0.837
10 23.1 0.000 0.000 0.000 160 0.000 0.827 0.780 0.360 0.780
Bm. CL 25.0 0.000 0.000 0.000 161 0.000 0.832 0.723 0.293 0.723
Imax: 0.674 Imax: 0.915
*  Reflects bold face value of controlling interaction equation.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 93

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 93 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Table 4-33.  Horizontal Shear Force at Each Opening
ASD LRFD
Post Xi , Tr (i), Tr (i+1) , Vah = ∆Tr , Tr (i), Tr(i+1) , Vuh = ∆Tr ,
Number ft kips kips kips kips kips kips
1.00 2.73 19.0 46.3 27.3 26.9 65.8 38.9
2.00 5.13 46.3 70.8 24.5 65.8 101 35.2
3.00 7.52 70.8 92.3 21.5 101 131 30.0
4.00 9.92 92.3 111 18.7 131 158 27.0
5.00 12.3 111 127 16.0 158 181 23.0
6.00 14.7 127 140 13.0 181 199 18.0
7.00 17.1 140 149 9.00 199 213 14.0
8.00 19.5 149 156 7.00 213 223 10.0
9.00 21.9 156 160 4.00 223 228 5.00
Maximum: 27.3 Maximum: 38.9

Calculate web post buckling flexural strength

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-33, From Table 4-33,
Vuh = 38.9 kips Vah = 27.3 kips
Do Do
M u = 0.90 Vuh  (from Eq. 3-31) Ma = 0.90 Vah  (from Eq. 3-31)
2 2
20.8 in. ⎞ 20.8 in. ⎞
= 0.90 ⎛ (38.9 kips) = 0.90 ⎛ ( 27.3 kips)
⎝ 2 ⎠ ⎝ 2 ⎠
= 363 kip-in. = 255 kip-in.

Calculate available flexural strength of web post

By inspection the top web post will control because the diameter of the web opening is the same as the bottom web post, but the
web is thinner.
t w ( S − Do + 0.564 Do )2
S x -webpost -top = (3-32)
6
( 0.350 in.) [ 28.8 in. − 20.8 in. + 0.564 ( 20.8 in.)]2
=
6
3
= 22.6 in. 
M e = S x -webpost -top Fy (from Spec. Eq. F9-3)
( )
= 22.6 in.3 ( 50 ksi )
= 1,130 kip-in. 
2
⎛ o⎞
D ⎛ Do ⎞
C1 = 5.097 + 0.1464 ⎜ − 0.00174 (3-33)
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎜⎝ t ⎟⎠
w

20.8 in. ⎞ 20.8 in. ⎞ 2

= 5.097 + 0.1464 ⎛ − 0.00174 ⎛
⎝ 0.350 in. ⎠ ⎝ 0.350 in. ⎠
= 7.68 

94 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 94 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C 2 = 1.441 + 0.0625 ⎜ − 0.000683 ⎜ (3-34)
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠
20.8 in. ⎞ 20.8 in. ⎞ 2
= 1.44 + 0.0625 ⎛ − 0.000683 ⎛
⎝ 0.350 in. ⎠ ⎝ 0.350 in. ⎠
= 2.75 
2
⎛ Do ⎞ ⎛ Do ⎞
C 3 = 3.645 + 0.0853 ⎜ − 0.00108 ⎜ (3-35)
⎝ t w ⎟⎠ ⎝ t w ⎟⎠
20.8 in. ⎞ 20.8 in. ⎞ 2
= 3.645 + 0.0853 ⎛ − 0.00108 ⎛
⎝ 0.350 in. ⎠ ⎝ 0.350 in. ⎠
= 4.91 
2
M allow ⎛ S ⎞ ⎛ S ⎞
= C1⎜ − C2⎜ − C3 (3-36)
Me ⎝ Do ⎟⎠ ⎝ Do ⎟⎠
28.8 in. ⎞ 28.8 in. ⎞ 2
= 7.68 ⎛ − 2.75 ⎛ − 4.91
⎝ 20.8 in. ⎠ ⎝ 20.8 in. ⎠
= 0.466 

The available flexural strength is:

LRFD ASD
From Equation 3-37a, From Equation 3-37b,
⎛ M allow ⎞ ⎛ M allow ⎞ Me ⎛ 1,130 kip-in. ⎞
ϕb ⎜ Me = 0.90 ( 0.466 )(1,130 kip-in.) ⎜⎝ M ⎟⎠ Ω = 0.466 ⎝
⎝ M e ⎟⎠ e b 1.67 ⎠
= 474 kip-in. = 315 kip-in.

Web Post Buckling Summary

LRFD ASD
Mu 363 kip-in. Ma 255 kip-in.
= =
⎛ allow ⎞
M 474 kip-in. ⎛ allow ⎞ e
M M 315 kip-in.
ϕb ⎜ ⎟ Me ⎜⎝ M ⎟⎠ Ω
⎝ Me ⎠ e b
= 0.766 < 1.0 o.k. = 0.810 < 1.0 o.k.

Check horizontal and vertical shear

The available horizontal shear strength is calculated using AISC Specification Section J4.2. By inspection, the top section will
control because the web is thinner.

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-33, From Table 4-33,
Vuh = 38.9 kips Vah = 27.3 kips
From Spec. Eq. J4-3, From Spec. Eq. J4-3,
ϕ vVn -horiz = ϕ v 0.60 Fy ( et w ) Vn - horiz 0.60 Fy ( et w )
=
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣(8.00 in.)(0.350 in.)⎤⎦ Ωv Ωv

= 84.0 kips > 38.9 kips o.k. 0.60 ( 50 ksi ) ⎡⎣(8.00 in.) (0.350 in.)⎤⎦
=
1.50
= 50.3 kips > 27.3 kips o.k.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 95

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 95 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Check vertical shear
The concrete shear strength will be disregarded when checking vertical shear for the net and gross sections. The concrete shear
strength will be added to the net shear force.
Check vertical shear at the beam net section:

LRFD ASD
From Table 4-31, From Table 4-31,
Vu-net = 41.0 kips Va-net = 29.1 kips
Vu-global = Vu-net + concrete shear strength Va-global = Va-net + concrete shear strength
= 41.0 kips + 7.39 kips = 29.1 kips + 4.93 kips
= 48.4 kips = 34.0 kips

The shear force between the top and bottom tees will be divided based on their relative areas.

LRFD ASD
⎛ Atee-top ⎞ ⎛ Atee-top ⎞
Vu -top = Vu -global ⎜ Va -top = Va -global ⎜
⎝ Anet ⎟⎠ ⎝ Anet ⎟⎠
⎛ 4.44 in.2 ⎞ ⎛ 4.44 in.2 ⎞
= ( 48.4 kips ) ⎜ = ( 34.0 kips ) ⎜
⎝ 10.5 in.2 ⎟⎠ ⎝ 10.5 in.2 ⎟⎠
= 20.5 kips = 14.4 kips

⎛ Atee -bot ⎞ ⎛ Atee -bot ⎞

Vu -bot = Vu -global ⎜ Va -bot = Va -global ⎜
⎝ Anet ⎟⎠ ⎝ A net ⎟⎠
⎛ 6.01 in.2 ⎞ ⎛ 6.01 in.2 ⎞
= ( 48.4 kips ) ⎜ = ( 34.0 kips ) ⎜
⎝ 10.5 in.2 ⎟⎠ ⎝ 10.5 in.2 ⎟⎠
= 27.7 kips = 19.5 kips

From AISC Specification Section G3:

Top tee:
h d t -top-net
=
tw t w -top
4.75 in.
=
0.350 in.
1.2 ( 29,000 ksi )
= 13.6 < 1.10 = 29.0
50 ksi
Because h t w < 1.10 k v E Fy ,
Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)
Vn -top = 0.60 Fy ( dt -top-net t w -top ) Cv 2 (from Spec. Eq. G3-1)
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi )( 4.75 in.)( 0.350 in.)(1.0 )
= 49.9 kips 

96 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 96 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 Bottom tee:
h d t -bot -net
=
tw tw -bot
4.95 in.
=
0.405 in.
1.2 ( 29,000 ksi )
= 12.2 < 1.10 = 29.0
50 ksi
Because h t w < 1.10 k v E Fy ,

Cv2 = 1.0 (Spec. Eq. G2-9)

Vn -bot = 0.60 Fy ( dt -bot -net t w -bot ) Cv 2 (from Spec. Eq. G3-1)
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi )( 4.95 in.)( 0.405 in.)(1.0 )
= 60.1 kips 

Available vertical shear strength at top and bottom tees

LRFD ASD
ϕ vVn -top = 1.00 ( 49.9 kips ) Vn -top 49.9 kips
=
= 49.9 kips Ωv 1.50
= 33.3 kips
ϕ vVn -bot = 1.00 ( 60.1 kips )
Vn -bot 60.1 kips
= 60.1 kips =
Ωv 1.50
= 40.1 kips

Check vertical shear at beam gross section

LRFD ASD
Vu = 44.1 kips (see Table 4-28) Va = 31.3 kips (see Table 4-28)

From AISC Specification Section G2.1(b)(1):

h 30.5 in. − (0.950 in. + 1.15 in.)
=
t w-min 0.350 in.
5.34 ( 29,000 ksi )
= 81.1 > 1.10 = 61.2
50 ksi
1.10 k v E Fy
C v1 = (Spec. Eq. G2-4)
h tw
5.34(29,000 ksi)
1.10
50 ksi
=
81.1
= 0.755 
Vn -gross = 0.60 Fy ( d g t w - min ) Cv1 (Spec. Eq. G2-1)
= 0.60 ( 50 ksi )( 30.5 in.)( 0.350 in.)( 0.755)
= 242 kips 

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 97

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 97 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 LRFD ASD
From Table 4-28, From Table 4-28,
Vu-net = 44.1 kips Va-net = 31.3 kips
Vu -global = Vu -net + concrete shear strength Va -global = Va -net + concrete shear strength
= 44.1 kips + 7.39 kips = 31.3 kips + 4.93 kips
= 51.5 kips = 36.2 kips

From AISC Specification Section G1:

h 29,000 ksi
= 81.1 > 2.24 = 53.9
tw 50 ksi
Therefore, ϕv = 0.90 and Ω v = 1.67.

Available vertical shear strength at gross section

LRFD ASD
ϕ vVn -gross = 0.90 ( 242 kips ) Vn -gross 242 kips
=
= 218 kips Ωv 1.67
= 145 kips

The following is a summary of the beam shear strengths:

LRFD ASD
Horizontal shear Horizontal shear
Vu ϕ vVn -horiz = 38.9 kips 84.0 kips Va Ω v Vn -horiz = 27.3 kips 50.3 kips
= 0.463 o.k. = 0.543 o.k.

Vertical shear–top tee Vertical shear–top tee

Vu -top ϕ vVn -top = 20.5 kips 49.9 kips Va -top Ω v Vn -top = 14.4 kips 33.3 kips
= 0.411 o.k. = 0.432 o.k.

Vertical shear–bottom tee Vertical shear–bottom tee

Vu -bot ϕ vVn -bot = 27.7 kips 60.1 kips Va -bot Ω v Vn -bot = 19.5 kips 40.1 kips
= 0.461 o.k. = 0.486 o.k.

Vertical shear–gross section Vertical shear–gross section

Vu ϕ vVn -gross = 44.1 kips 218 kips Va Ω v Vn -gross = 33.3 kips 145 kips
= 0.202 o.k. = 0.230 o.k.

Check deflection
Deflections are calculated using 90% of the moment of inertia per Section 3.7.

98 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 98 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 The pre-composite dead load deflection is:
5wL4
Δ PDL =
384 EI x -net ( 0.90 )
0.44 kip/ft ⎞
5⎛
4
⎡( 50 ft ) (12 in./ft)⎤⎦
⎝ 12 in./ft ⎠ ⎣
=
(
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 1,710 in.4 ( 0.90 ) )
= 1.39 in.

Live load deflection is:

5wL4
Δ LL =
384 EI x -comp ( 0.90 )
⎛ 0.8 kip/ft ⎞ 4
5⎜ ⎟ ⎡⎣( 50 ft ) (12 in./ft)⎤⎦
⎝ 12 in. /ft ⎠
=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 5,100 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 0.845 in.
L
=
710

Dead load deflection is:

5wL4
Δ DL =
384 EI x -comp ( 0.90 )
⎛ 0.16 kip/ft ⎞ 4
5⎜ ⎡⎣( 50 ft ) (12 in./ft)⎤⎦
⎝ 12 in. /ft ⎟⎠
=
( )
384 ( 29,000 ksi ) 5,100 in.4 ( 0.90 )
= 0.169 in.
L
=
3,550

Total load deflection is:

Δ TL = Δ LL + Δ DL
= 0.845 in. + 0.169 in.
= 1.01 in.
L
=
590

Deflection summary
Δ PDL = 1.39 in.; therefore, camber 1 in.
L
Δ LL < o.k.
360
L
Δ TL < o.k.
240

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 99

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 99 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 100 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
025-100_DG31.indd 100 3/13/17 1:00 PM
 SYMBOLS

A Cross-sectional area, in.2 (mm2) Mocr Critical moment for lateral buckling, kip-in.
Ac 2
Area of concrete in compression, in. (mm ) 2 (N-mm)

Anet Combined area of top and bottom tees, in.2 Mp Plastic bending moment, kip-in. (N-mm)
(mm2) Mr Required flexural strength using load combina-
Atee 2
Area of tee section, in. (mm )2 tions, kip-in. (N-mm)

B Factor for lateral-torsional buckling in tee Mvr Required flexural strength in tee, kip-in. (N-mm)

Cv Web shear coefficient N Number of shear studs between the point of

maximum moment and end of beam
C1 Axial force in concrete of a composite section,
kips (N) Ns Total number of studs across the length of the
beam
Do Opening diameter, in. (mm)
Pc Allowable axial compressive strength (ASD),
E Modulus of elasticity of steel = 29,000 ksi kips (N)
(200 000 MPa)
Pc Design axial compressive strength (LRFD), kips
ENA Elastic neutral axis (N)
G Shear modulus of elasticity of steel = 11,200 ksi Pn Nominal axial compressive strength (LRFD),
(77 200 MPa) kips (N)
Fcr Critical stress, ksi (MPa) PNA Plastic neutral axis
Fcry Critical stress about the minor axis, ksi (MPa) Pr Required axial strength of tee using load combi-
Fcrz Critical torsional buckling stress, ksi (MPa) nations, kips (N)
Fe Elastic critical buckling stress, ksi (MPa) Qn Nominal strength of one stud shear connector,
H Flexural constant kips (N)

Ix Moment of inertia about x-axis, in.4 (mm4) R Radius of cellular opening, in. (mm)

Iy Moment of inertia about y-axis, in.4 (mm4) S Spacing of openings, in. (mm)
J Torsional constant, in.4 (mm4) Sx Elastic section modulus about x-axis, in.3 (mm3)
Kx Effective length factor with respect to x-axis Sx-tee Section modulus of tee about x-axis, in.3 (mm3)

Ky Effective length factor with respect to y-axis Ti Axial force at centerline of opening (i), kips (N)

L Length of compression member, in. (mm) Ti+1 Axial force at centerline of opening (i + 1), kips
(N)
Lb Distance between lateral braces, in. (mm)
Tr(i) Required axial force in tee at opening (i), kips
Mc Allowable flexural strength (ASD), kip-in. (N)
(N-mm)
Tr(i+1) Required axial force in tee at opening (i + 1),
Mc Design flexural strength (LRFD), kip-in. (N-mm) kips (N)
Mcr Nominal flexural strength based on lateral- To Axial force in top tee, kips (N)
torsional buckling limit state, kip-in. (N-mm)
T1 Axial force in bottom tee, kips (N)
Me Elastic bending moment of web post, kip-in.
(N-mm) T1-new Axial force in bottom tee for partial composite
action, kips (N)
Mm Nominal flexural strength based on flange local
buckling limit state, kip-in. (N-mm) Tu(i) Axial force in tee at opening (i) (LRFD), kips
(N)
Mn Nominal flexural strength, kip-in. (N-mm)
Tu(i+1) Axial force in tee at opening (i + 1) (LRFD), kips
(N)

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 101

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 101 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 V Global shear, kips (N) dt Depth of tee, in. (mm)
V′ Total horizontal shear force between point of e Length of tee section, also length of solid web
max positive moment and the point of zero mo- section along centerline, in. (mm)
ment, kips (N) e′ Minimum diagonal distance from the corner of
Vallow Allowable horizontal shear strength (ASD), kips the cope to the first opening, in. (mm)
(N) ƒ′c Compressive strength of concrete, ksi (MPa)
Va-global Service shear force (ASD), kips (N) h Half height of castellated opening, in. (mm)
Va-global Required global shear strength (ASD), kips (N) ho Height of opening of castellated beam, in. (mm)
Va-net Net service shear force resisted by beam (ASD), hr Height of deck ribs, in. (mm)
kips (N)
i Reference number for castellated or cellular
Vc Shear strength of concrete deck, kips (N) opening
Vh Horizontal shear force at neutral axis, kips (N) kv Web plate buckling coefficient
Vha Required horizontal shear force at neutral axis q Shear stud density, kip/ft (N/mm)
(ASD), kips (N)
rmin Minimum radius of gyration of tee, in. (mm)
Vhu Required horizontal shear force at neutral axis
(LRFD), kips (N) ro Polar radius of gyration about the shear center,
in. (mm)
Vi Global shear force at opening (i), kips (N)
rx Radius of gyration about x-axis, in. (mm)
Vi+1 Global shear force at opening (i + 1), kips (N)
ry Radius of gyration about y-axis, in. (mm)
Vn Nominal shear strength, kips (N)
tc Thickness of concrete above deck ribs, in. (mm)
Vnet Net shear force resisted by beam, kips (N)
tf Flange thickness, in. (mm)
Vu-global Ultimate shear force (LRFD), kips (N)
yc Distance from top of concrete to centroid of
Vu-global Required global shear strength (LRFD), kips (N) compression block, in. (mm)
Vu-net Net ultimate shear force (LRFD), kips (N) ytee-bot Distance from bottom fiber to centroid of bottom
Vu(i) Required shear strength at opening (i), kips (N) tee, in. (mm)
Vu(i+1) Required shear strength at opening (i + 1), kips ytee-top Distance from top fiber to centroid of top tee, in.
(N) (mm)
Xi Distance from end of beam to center of the open- wo e + 2b, in. (mm)
ing being analyzed, in. (mm) ΔDL Dead load deflection
Yc Depth of concrete used to resist global moment, ΔLL Live load deflection
in. (mm)
ΔPDL Pre-dead load deflection
Zx Plastic section modulus about x-axis, in.3 (mm3)
ΔTL Total load deflection
a Length of end web post, in. (mm)
ϕb Resistance factor for flexure
b Horizontal length = 0.5ho/ tan θ, in. (mm)
ϕc Resistance factor for compression
beffec Effective width of concrete slab, in. (mm)
ϕt Resistance factor for tension
b f Flange width, in. (mm)
ϕv Resistance factor for shear
d Full nominal depth of tee, in. (mm)
Ωb Safety factor for flexure
deffec Distance between centroids of top and bottom
tees, in. (mm) Ωv Safety factor for shear

deffect-comp Effective depth of composite section, in. (mm) θ Angle of hexagonal cut, degrees

dg Depth of expanded beam, in. (mm)

102 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 102 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 REFERENCES

Aglan, A. and Redwood, R. (1974), “Web Buckling in Cas- Estrada, H., Jimenez, J.J. and Aguiñiga, F. (2006), “Cost
tellated Beams,” Proceedings of the Department of Civil Analysis in the Design of Open-Web Castellated Beams,”
Engineering and Applied Mechanics, McGill University, Proceedings of the Architectural Engineering National
Montreal, Canada. Conference, Omaha, NE, ASCE.
AISC (2016), Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, Gaylord, E.H and Gaylord, C.N. (1992), Structural Engi-
ANSI/AISC 360-16, American Institute of Steel Con- neering Handbook, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
struction, Chicago, IL. Hoffman, R.M., Dinehart, D.W., Gross, S.P., Yost, J.R. and
AISC (2011), Steel Construction Manual, 14th Ed., Ameri- Hennessey, J.M. (2005), “Effects of Cope Geometry on
can Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL. the Strength of Cellular and Castellated Beams,” Engi-
Altfillisch, M.D., Cooke, B.R. and Toprac, A.A. (1957), “An neering Journal, AISC, Vol. 42, No. 4, pp. 261–272.
Investigation of Welded Open-Web Expanded Beams,” Hosain, M.U., Cheng, W.K. and Neis, V.V. (1974), “Deflec-
Welding Research—Supplement to The Welding Journal, tion Analysis of Expanded Open-Web Steel Beams,”
AWS, Vol. 22, No. 2, February. Computers and Structures, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp. 327–336.
Bjorhovde, R. (2000), “Design Outline for Vierendeel Bend- Kerdal, D. and Nethercot, D.A. (1984), “Failure Modes
ing of Cellular Beams,” University of Arizona, Tucson, for Castellated Beams,” Journal of Constructional Steel
AZ. Research, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 295–315.
Blodgett, O. (1966), Design of Welded Structures, Lincoln Knowles, P.R. (1991), “Castellated Beams,” Proceed-
Arc Welding Foundation, Cleveland, OH. ings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Vol. 90, No. 3,
Bradley, T.P. (2003), “Stability of Castellated Beams Dur- pp. 521–536.
ing Erection,” M.S. Thesis, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Murray, T.M., Allen, D.E. and Unger, E.E. and Davis, D.B.
Civil Engineering Department, Blacksburg, VA. (2016), Vibrations of Steel-Framed Structural Systems
Churches, C.H., Troup, E.W.J. and Angeloff, C. (2004), Due to Human Activity, Design Guide 11, 2nd Ed., AISC,
Steel-Framed Open-Deck Parking Structures, Design Chicago, IL.
Guide 18, AISC, Chicago, IL. Redwood, R.G. and Shrivastava, S.C. (1980), “Design
Darwin, D. (1990), Design of Steel and Composite Beams Recommendations for Steel Beams with Web Holes,”
with Web Openings, Design Guide 2, AISC, Chicago, IL. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol.  7, No.  4,
pp. 642–650.
Das, P.K. and Srimani, S.L. (1984), Handbook for the Design
of Castellated Beams, Central Mechanical Engineering Ruddy, J.L., Marlo, J.P., Ioannides, S.A. and Alfawakhiri,
Research Institute, Oxford & IBH Publishing Company, F. (2003), Fire Resistance of Structural Steel Framing,
New Delhi, Delhi, India. Design Guide 19, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Dougherty, B.K. (1993), “Castellated Beams: A State of the Ward, J.K. (1990), “Design of Composite and Non-Compos-
Art Report,” Journal of the South African Institution of ite Cellular Beams,” SCI, Silwood Park, Ascot, UK.
Civil Engineers, Vol. 35, No. 2.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 103

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 103 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 104 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 104 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 FURTHER READING

Adams, A. (1999), Composite Design of Castellated Beams, Bitar, D., Demarco, T. and Martin, P.-O. (2005), “Steel
RAM International LLC., Naperville, IL. and Composite Cellular Beams—Novel Approach for
Adams, A. (2000), Castellated Beam Design Procedure— Design Based on Experimental Studies and Numerical
ASD, RAM International LLC., Naperville, IL. Investigations,” Eurosteel 2005—Proceedings of the 4th
European Conference on Steel and Composite Struc-
Aloi, N.M., Reiter, M.T., Gross, S.P., Dinehart, D.W. and
tures, Volume B, Maastricht, The Netherlands, June 8–10,
Yost, J.R. (2002), “Experimental Testing of Singly- and
pp. 1.10-1–1.10-8.
Doubly-Symmetric Non-Composite Castellated Beams,”
Research Report to SMI Steel Products, Villanova Univer- Bolton, G. (2001), “The Smart Answer,” Modern Steel Con-
sity, Villanova, PA. struction, AISC, April.
ASCE (1999), Specification for Structural Steel Beams with Borda, D., Dinehart, D.W., Hoffman, R.M., Yost, J.R.
Web Openings, ASCE/SEI 23-97, American Society of and Gross, S.P. (2007), “Web Post Buckling of Non-
Civil Engineers, Reston, VA. Composite Uncoped Castellated and Cellular Beams,”
Research Report to Commercial Metals Company, Inc.,
ASCE Task Committee on Design Criteria for Composite
Villanova University, Villanova, PA.
Structures in Steel and Concrete (1992), “Commentary
on Proposed Specifications for Structural Steel Beams Bower, J. (1966), “Experimental Stresses in Wide-Flange
with Web Openings,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Beams with Holes,” Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, Vol. 118, No. 12, December, pp. 3,325–3,348. ASCE, Vol. 92, No. 5, pp. 167–186.
ASCE Task Committee on Design Criteria for Composite Bower, J. (1967), “Design of Beams with Web Openings,”
Structures in Steel and Concrete (1992), “Proposed Speci- Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, Issue
fications for Structural Beams with Web Openings,” Jour- 3, pp. 783–808.
nal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.  118, No.  12, Bower, J. (1968), “Ultimate Strength of Beams with Rectan-
December, pp. 3,315–3,324. gular Holes,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE,
ASTM (2004), Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing Vol. 94, Issue 6, pp. 1,315–1,338.
of Metallic Materials, ASTM E8-04, ASTM International, Boyer, J.P. (1964), “Castellated Beams—New Develop-
West Conshohocken, PA. ments,” Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol.  1, No.  3, 3rd
Bailey, C. (2004), “Indicative Fire Tests to Investigate the Quarter, pp. 104–108.
Behavior of Cellular Beams Protected with Intumes- BSI (1990), Structural Use of Steelwork in Buildings, Part
cent Coatings,” Fire Safety Journal, Vol.  39, Issue 8, 3, Section 3.1: Code of Practice for Design of Composite
pp. 689–709. Beams, BS 5950, British Standards Institute, London, UK.
Barbarito, F. (1963), “Photoelastic Analysis of Circularly BSI (1994), Eurocode 4: Design of Composite Steel and
Perforated Beams in Pure Bending,” M.S. Thesis, Poly- Concrete Structures, Part 1.1: General Rules and Rules
technic Institute of Brooklyn, Brooklyn, NY. for Buildings, BS EN 1994-1-1, British Standards Insti-
Barnoff, R. (1972), “A Study of Composite Hybrid Castel- tute, London, UK.
lated Steel Beams,” Structural Research Report, Pennsyl- CEN (1998), Eurocode 3: Design of Steel Structures,
vania State University, State College, PA. Art 1.1 General Rules and Rules for Buildings, 1992,
Bazile, A. and Texier, J. (1968), “Essais des Poutres Ajou- and Amendment A2 of Eurocode 3: Annex N, Openings
rées,” Construction Métallique, No. 3, pp. 12–25. in webs, P1993-1-3, Comite Européen de Normalisation,
Brussels, Belgium.
Bellace, T.A. and Coulson, J.L. (2002), “Smart Thinking,”
Modern Steel Construction, AISC, March. Chan, P. and Redwood, R.G. (1974), “Stresses in Beams with
Eccentric Web Holes,” Journal of the Structural Division,
Benitez, M.A., Darwin, D. and Donahey, R.C. (1998),
ASCE, Vol. 100, No. 1, pp. 231–248.
“Deflections of Composite Beams with Web Openings,”
Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.  124, Chen, Y. and Xie, B. (1997), “Nonlinear Analysis of Castel-
No. 10, pp. 1,139–1,147. lated Beams,” Journal of Harbin University of Civil Engi-
neering and Architecture, Vol. 30, No. 4, pp. 34–38.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 105

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 105 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 Cheng, J.J. (1993), “Design of Steel Beams with End Copes,” Demirdjian, S. (1999), “Stability of Castellated Beam
Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 25, No. 1, Webs,” Ph.D. Dissertation, McGill University, Depart-
pp. 3–22. ment of Civil Engineering, Montreal, Canada.
Chung, K.F., Liu, C.H. and Ko, A.C.H. (2003), “Steel Beams Dinehart, D.W., Hoffman, R.H., Gross, S.P. and Yost, J.R.
with Large Web Openings of Various Shapes and Sizes: An (2005), “End Connection Effects on the Strength and
Empirical Design Method Using a Generalised Moment- Behavior of Smartbeams,” Proceedings of the Interna-
Shear Interaction Curve,” Journal of Constructional Steel tional Institute of Cell Beam Manufacturers (IICBM)
Research, Vol. 59, No. 9, pp. 1,177–1,200. Annual Meeting, Germany, June.
Chung, K.F., Liu, T.C.H. and Ko, A.C.H. (2001), “Inves- Dionisio, M.C., Hoffman, R.M., Yost, J.R., Dinehart, D.W.
tigation on Vierendeel Mechanism in Steel Beams with and Gross, S.P. (2004), “Determination of Critical Loca-
Circular Web Openings,” Journal of Constructional Steel tion for Service Load Bending Stresses in Non-Composite
Research, Vol. 57, No. 5, pp. 467–490. Cellular Beams,” Proceedings of the 18th ASCE Confer-
Chung, K.F. and Lawson, R.M. (2001), “Simplified Design ence of Engineering Mechanics Division, Newark, DE,
of Composite Beams with Large Web Openings to June.
Eurocode 4,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Dionisio, M.C., Yost, J.Y., Hoffman, R.M., Dinehart, D.W.
Vol. 57, No. 2, pp. 135–164. and Gross, S.P. (2004), “Determination of Critical Loca-
Clawson, W. (1982), “Tests of Composite Beams with Web tion for Service Load Bending Stresses in Non-Composite
Openings,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Cellular Beams,” Research Report to SMI Steel Products,
Vol. 108, No. 1, pp. 145–162. Villanova University, Villanova, PA.
Congdon, J.G. and Redwood, R.G. (1970), “Plastic Behavior Donoghue, C.M. and Donoghue, P. (1982), “Composite
of Beams with Reinforced Holes,” Journal of the Struc- Beams with Web Openings: Design,” Journal of the Struc-
tural Division, ASCE, Vol. 96, No. 9, pp. 1,933–1,956. tural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. 12, pp. 2,652–2,667.
Cooper, P.B., Knostman, H.D. and Snel, R.R. (1977), “Fail- Dougherty, B.K. (1987), “Some Effects of Web Openings on
ure Tests on Beams with Eccentric Web Holes,” Jour- the Buckling of Steel I-Beams,” International Journal of
nal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.  103, Issue 9, Structures, Vol. 1, No. 1.
pp. 1,731–1,738. Douty, R., and Baldwin, J. W. (1966), “Measured and Com-
Cooper, P.B. and Snell, R.R. (1972), “Tests on Beams with puted Stresses in Three Castellated Beams,” Engineering
Reinforced Web Openings,” Journal of the Structural Journal, AISC, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 15–18.
Division, ASCE, Vol. 98, No. 3, pp. 611–632. Ellifritt, D.S., Wine, G., Sputo, T. and Samuel, S. (1992),
Coulson, J. (1999), “Cellular Beam Design Calculations,” “Flexural Strength of WT Sections,” Engineering Jour-
SMI Steel Products. nal, AISC, Vol. 29, No. 2, pp. 67–74.
Dabaon, M.A. (2003), “Experimental and Theoretical Study Franssen, J.M., Talamona, D., Kruppa, J. and Cajot, L.G.
of Curved Rolled and Castellated Composite Beams,” (1998), “Stability of Steel Columns in Case of Fire:
Alexandria Engineering Journal, Vol. 42, No. 2. Experimental Evaluation,” Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 2, pp. 158–163.
Dellaire, E. (1971), “Cellular Steel Floors Mature,” Civil
Engineering, Vol. 41, No. 7, July. Galambos, A.R., Hosain, M.U. and Speirs, W.G. (1975),
“Optimum Expansion Ratio of Castellated Steel Beams,”
Darwin, D. and Donahey, R.C. (1988), “LRFD Compos-
Engineering Optimization, Vol. 1, No. 4, pp. 213–225.
ite Beams with Unreinforced Web Openings,” Jour-
nal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.  114, No.  3, Gibson, J.E. and Jenkins, W.M. (1957), “Investigation of
pp. 535–552. the Stresses and Deflections in Castellated Beams,” The
Structural Engineer, IStructE, Vol. 35, Issue 12.
Darwin, D. and Lucas, W.K. (1990), “LRFD for Steel
and Composite Beams with Web Openings,” Jour- Giriyappa, J. and Baldwin, J.W. (1966), “Behavior of Com-
nal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.  116, No.  6, posite Castellated Hybrid Beams,” University of Missouri,
pp. 1,579–1,593. University of Missouri Engineering Experiment Station,
Columbia, MO.
Degrauwe, D. and De Roeck, G. (2004), “Experimental
and Numerical Modal Analysis of a Lightweight Steel- Gotoh, K. (1975), “Stress Analysis of Castellated Beams,”
Concrete Composite Slab Supported by Cellular Beams,” Proceedings of the Japan Society of Civil Engineers,
Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference of No. 239, pp. 1–13.
Noise and Vibration Engineering, Leuven, Belgium, Halleux, P. (1967), “Limit Analysis of Castellated Steel
ISMA. Beams,” Acier-Stahl-Steel.

106 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 106 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 Hechler, O. (2006), “Investigations on Beams with Multiple Lawson, R.M. (2005), “Developments in Composite Con-
Regular Web Openings,” Proceedings of the 5th Interna- struction and Cellular Beams,” Steel and Composite
tional Conference on Composite Construction in Steel Structures, Vol. 5, Nos. 2–3.
and Concrete, Mpumalanga, South Africa, ASCE. Lawson, R.M., Lim, J., Hicks, S.J. and Simms, W. (2006),
Hennessey, J., Hoffman, R.M., Dinehart, D.W., Gross, S.P. “Design of Composite Asymmetric Cellular Beams and
and Yost, J.R. (2004), “Effect of Cope Geometry on the Beams with Large Web Openings,” Journal of Construc-
Strength and Failure Behavior of Open Web Expanded tional Steel Research, Vol. 62, No. 6, pp. 614–629.
Beams,” Proceedings of the 18th ASCE Conference of Lawson, R.M. (1995), “Developments in Steel Framed
Engineering Mechanics Division, Newark, DE, ASCE. Commercial Buildings in the UK,” The Structural Engi-
Hennessey, J.M., Dinehart, D.W., Hoffman, R.M, Gross, S.P. neer, Vol. 73, No. 11.
and Yost, J.R. (2004) “Effect of Cope Geometry on the Liu, T.C H. and Chung, K.F. (2003), “Steel Beams with
Strength and Failure Behavior of Open Web Expanded Large Web Openings of Various Shapes and Sizes: Finite
Beams,” Research Report to SMI Steel Products, Villa- Element Investigation,” Journal of Constructional Steel
nova University, Villanova, PA. Research, Vol. 59, No. 9, pp. 1,159–1,176.
Hoffman, R.M., Dinehart, D.W., Gross, S.P. and Yost, J.R. Maalek, S. and Burdekin, F.M. (1991), “Weld Quality
(2006), “Analysis of Stress Distribution and Failure Requirements for Castellated Beams,” The Structural
Behavior of Cellular Beams,” Proceedings of the Interna- Engineer, Vol. 69, No. 13.
tional ANSYS Conference, Pittsburgh, PA.
Mandel, J.A., Brennan, P.J., Wasil, B.A. and Antoni, C.A.
Hope, B. B and Sheikh, M. A. (1969), “The Design of Cas- (1971), “Stress Distribution in Castellated Beams,” Jour-
tellated Beams,” Transactions of the Engineering Institute nal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.  97, No. 7,
of Canada, Vol. 52. pp. 1,947–1,967.
Hosain, M.U. and Speirs, W.G. (1973), “Experiments on Mateesco, D. (1981), “New Type of Castellated Beam,”
Castellated Steel Beams,” Welding Research—Supplement Construction Metallique, Vol. 18, No. 3.
to The Welding Journal, AWS, Vol. 52, No. 8, August.
Milligan, B. (2001), “The ‘Smart’ Solution,” Modern Steel
Jia, L., Xu, X. and Kang, X. (2005), “Finite Element Analy- Construction, AISC, May.
sis of Castellated Beams Maximum Moment Capacity,”
Mississippi Valley Structural Steel Company (1962), Design
Journal of Shenyang Jianzhu University Natural Science,
Guide for Castellated Beams, Chicago, IL.
Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 196–199.
Mohebkhah, A. (2004), “The Moment-Gradient Fac-
Jia, L , Zhang, L and Li, N.(2006)., “Finite Element Analysis
tor in Lateral-Torsional Buckling on Inelastic Castel-
of Torsional-Flexural Castellated Beams Buckling Under
lated Beams,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research,
Pure Bending,” Journal of Shenyang Jianzhu University
Vol. 60, No. 10, pp. 1,481–1,494.
Natural Science, Vol. 22, No. 1, pp. 49–52.
Narayanan, R. and Der-Avanessian, N.G. (1985), “Design
Knowles, P.R. (1985), Design of Castellated Beams: For
of Slender Webs Having Rectangular Holes,” Journal of
Use with BS 5950 and BS 449, The Steel Construction
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.  111, Issue 4, April,
Institute, Ascot, UK.
pp. 777–787.
Kolosowski, J. (1964), “Stresses and Deflexions in Castel-
Narayanan, R. and Vernideravanessian, N. (1986), “Analy-
lated Beams,” The Structural Engineer, Vol. 42, No. 1.
sis of Plate Girders with Perforated Webs,” Thin-Walled
Korzenowski, T. and Barnoff, R.M. (1971), “A Stress and Structures, Vol. 4, No. 5, pp. 363–380.
Load Deflection Study of Hybrid Castellated Steel
Nethercot, D.A. (1983), “Buckling of Laterally Unsupported
Beams,” Pennsylvania State University Structural
Castellated Beams,” Structural Stability Research Council
Research Report, Pennsylvania State University, State
Proceedings, 3rd International Colloquium, pp. 151–171.
College, PA.
Okubo, T and Nethercot, D.A. (1985)., “Web Post Strength
LaBoube, R.A. (1998), “Spacing of Connections in Com-
in Castellated Steel Beams,” Proceedings of the Institu-
pression Flanges of Built-Up Cold-Formed Steel Beams,”
tion of Civil Engineers (London), Vol. 79, pp. 533–557.
14th International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed
Steel Structures, St. Louis, MO. O’Neil, R. (1972), “Composite Action Without Shear Con-
nection,” M.S. Thesis, Pennsylvania State University,
Larnach, W.J. (1964), “The Behavior Under Load of Six
College of Engineering, State College, PA.
Castellated Composite T-Beams,” Civil Engineering and
Public Works Review, Vol. 59.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 107

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 107 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 Pang, A. (1993), “Strength of Double Hull Ship Cellular Redwood, R. and Aglan, A. (1974), “Web Buckling in
Components Under Axial and Lateral Loads,” Proceed- Castellated Beams,” Proceedings Department of Civil
ings of the Third International Offshore and Polar Engi- Engineering and Applied Mechanics, McGill University,
neering Conference, Singapore, June. Montreal.
Parent, S., Hoffman, R.M., Dinehart, D.W., Gross, S.P. and Reiter, M.T., Aloi, N.M., Dinehart, D.W., Gross, S.P. Yost,
Yost, J. R. (2006), “State of the Art in Cellular and Castel- J.R. (2003), “Experimental Testing of Non-Composite
lated Beam Design,” Canadian Society of Civil Engineer- Cellular Beams,” Research Report to SMI Steel Products,
ing 1st International Structural Specialty Conference, Villanova University, Villanova, PA.
ISSC-1, Calgary, May. Reither, J.M., Sutton, J.P., Hoffman, R.M., Dinehart, D.W.,
Park, J. (2003), “Experimental Investigation of Reduced Gross, S.P. and Yost, J.R. (2005), “End Connection Effects
Beam Section Connections by Use of Web Openings,” on the Strength and Behavior of Cellular and Castellated
Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 40, No. 2, pp. 77–88. Beams,” Proceedings of the North American Steel Con-
Pattanayak, U.C. and Chesson, E. (1974), “Lateral Instabil- struction Conference, Montreal, Canada, AISC, April.
ity of Castellated Beams,” Engineering Journal, AISC, Reither, J.M., Dinehart, D.W., Hoffman, R.H., Gross, S.P.
Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 73–79. and Yost, J.R. (2005), “Effect of Single Angle End Con-
Ramamurthy, L. N. (1980), “Study and Finite Element Anal- nection on the Strength and Failure Behavior of Castel-
ysis of Reinforced Castellated Steel Beam,” Journal of the lated and Cellular Beams with End Copes,” Research
Institution of Engineers (India), Vol. 60. Report to SMI Steel Products, Villanova University, Vil-
lanova, PA.
Redwood, R. and Demirdjian, S. (1998), “Castellated Beam
Web Buckling in Shear,” Journal of Structural Engineer- Robinson, H. (1974), “Ultimate Strength Design of Com-
ing, ASCE, Vol. 124, No. 10, pp. 1,202–1,207. posite Beams with Cellular Metal Floor,” Photogramme-
tria Des in Cold Formed Steel.
Redwood, R.G. and McCutcheon, J.O. (1968), “Beam Tests
with Unreinforced Web Openings,” Journal of the Struc- Rutter, G. (2005), “Cellular Steel Beam Design,” The Struc-
tural Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. 1, pp. 1–18. tural Engineer, Vol. 83, No.13.
Redwood, R. (1968), “Plastic Behavior and Design of Beams Shanmugam, M. (1979), “Composite Castellated Beams,”
with Web Openings,” Proceedings of the First Canadian Journal of the Institution of Engineers (India), Vol. 60.
Structural Engineering Conference, Toronto, February. Sherbourne, A. (1966), “The Plastic Behavior of Castellated
Redwood, R. (1969), “Strength of Steel Beams with Unre- Beams,” Proceedings of the 2nd Commonwealth Welding
inforced Holes,” Civil Engineering and Public Works Conference, Institute of Welding, London.
Review, Vol. 64. Shanmugam, N.E. (1983), “Effects of Web Openings on the
Redwood, R.G. and Uenoya, M. (1979), “Critical Loads for Collapse Behavior of Steel Box Girder Models,” Interna-
Webs with Holes,” Journal of the Structural Division, tional Conference on Bulk Materials Storage, Handling
ASCE, Vol. 105, No. 10, pp. 2,053–2,067. and Transportation, Newcastle, Australia, Institution of
Engineers, Publication No. 83.
Redwood, R. (1971), “Simplified Plastic Analysis for Rein-
forced Web Holes,” Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol.  8, Shanmugam, N.E. and Evans, H.R. (1985), “Structural
No. 4, pp. 128–131. Response and Ultimate Strength of Cellular Structures
with Perforated Webs,” Thin-Walled Structures, Vol.  3,
Redwood, R.G. and Poumbouras, G. (1984), “Analy-
No. 3, pp. 255–271.
sis of Composite Beams with Web Openings,” Jour-
nal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol.  110, No.  9, Srimani, S.L. (1980), “Development of Design Load Table
pp. 1,949–1,958. for Castellated Beams,” Indian Journal of Technology,
Vol. 18, No. 12.
Redwood, R. (1983), “Design of I-Beams with Web Perfora-
tions,” Beams and Beam Columns: Stability and Strength, Srimani, S.L. (1977), “Deflection Estimation of Castellated
CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL. Beams Made from IS-Rolled Section,” Mechanical Engi-
neering Bulletin, Vol. 8, Nos. 1–2.
Redwood, R.G., Daly, M.J. and Baranda, H. (1978), “Tests
of Thin-Webbed Beams with Unreinforced Holes,” Jour- Srimani, S.L. (1981), “Investigation on Deflection of Castel-
nal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.  104, No. 3, lated Beams with Octagonal Shaped Holes,” Journal of
pp. 577–595. the Institution of Engineers (India), Vol. 62.
Srimani, S.L. (1978), “Finite Analysis of Castellated
Beams,” Computers and Structures, Vol. 9, No. 2.

108 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 108 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 Srimani, S.L. (1983), “Study of Optimum Expansion Ratio Yam, M.C.H., Lam, A.C.C., Iu, V.P., and Cheng, J.J.R.
of Castellated Beams,” Journal of the Institution of Engi- (2003), “Local Web Buckling Strength of Coped Steel
neers (India), Vol. 63. I-Beams,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE,
Srimani, S.L. (1977), “An Investigation of Deflections in Vol. 129, No. 1, pp. 3–11.
Castellated Beams,” Journal of the Institution of Engi- Yam, M. (2000), “Experimental Investigation of the Local
neers (India), Vol. 58. Web Buckling Strength of Coped Steel I-Beam,” Pro-
Subcommittee on Beams with Web Openings of the Task ceedings of the Third Structural Specialty Conference
Committee on Flexural Members of the Sructural Divi- of the Canadian Society for Civil Engineering, London,
sion (1971), “Suggested Design Guides for Beams with Ontario, June.
Web Holes,” Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Yost, J.R., Hoffman, R.H., Dinehart, D.W., Gross, S.P. and
Vol. 97, No. 11, pp. 2,707–2,728. Dionisio, M. (2012), “Experimental and Analytical Deter-
Sutton, J.P., Reither, J.M., Dinehart, D.W., Hoffman, R.H., mination of Service Load Stresses in Cellular Beams,”
Gross, S.P. and Yost, J.R. (2005), “Experimental Verifi- Journal of Engineering Mechanics, Vol. 138, No. 8.
cation of Castellated and Cellular Beam Capacity with Yost, J.R., Hoffman, R.H., Dinehart, D.W. and Gross,
Single Angle Connections,” Research Report to SMI Steel S.P. (2005), “Service Load Stress Distribution in Non-
Products, Villanova University, Villanova, PA. composite Cellular Beams,” Proceedings of the Inter-
Surtees, J.O. and Liu, Z. (1995), “Report of Loading Tests national Institute of Cell Beam Manufacturers (IICBM)
on Cellform Beams,” Department of Civil Engineering at Annual Meeting, Germany, June.
University of Leeds, Leeds, UK. Yura, J.A., Birkemoe, P.C. and Rickles, J.M. (1982), “Beam
Thomasson, P.O. (1991), “Swedish Solution for Residential Web Shear Connections: An Experimental Study,” Jour-
Buildings,” Modern Steel Construction, AISC, October. nal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.  108, No. 2,
pp. 311–325.
Toprac, A. and Cooke, B.R. (1959), “An Experimental Inves-
tigation of Open-Web Beams,” Welding Research Council Zaarour, W. and Redwood, R.G. (1996), “Web Buckling in
Bulletin Series, No. 47. Thin Webbed Castellated Beams,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 122, No. 8, pp. 860–866.
Wang, T., Cooper, P.B. and Snell, R.R. (1975), “Strength
of Beams and Eccentric Reinforced Holes,” Jour- Zirakian, T. and Showkati, H. (2006), “Distortional Buck-
nal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol.  101, No. 9, ling of Castellated Beams,” Journal of Constructional
pp. 1,783–1,800. Steel Research, Vol. 62, No. 9, pp. 863–871.
Warren, J. (2001), “Ultimate Load and Deflection Behavior Zou, J. H. (2005), “Reduced Calculation and its Experimen-
of Cellular Beams,” M.S. Thesis, University of KwaZulu- tal Comparison for Castellated Beams,” Journal of South
Natal, School of Civil Engineering, Department of Sur- China University of Technology (Natural Science Edi-
veying and Construction, South Africa. tion), Vol. 33, No. 1.
Weiss, S. (1987), “Estimating the Stability of Castellated
Steel Beams,” Archivwum Inzynierii Ladowej, Vol.  33,
No. 4.

AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / 109

@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 109 2/16/17 3:40 PM
 110 / CASTELLATED AND CELLULAR BEAM DESIGN / AISC DESIGN GUIDE 31
@Seismicisolation
@Seismicisolation
101-110_DG31.indd 110 2/16/17 3:40 PM