STABILITE DE CONSTRUCTIONS STAB 2 CLASS 5 & 6

Limit States Design and Factor of Safety

Learning outcomes at the end of this class:
1. To understand permissible stress design, limit state design and load factor method.
2. To be able to distinguish between Ultimate Limit states and Serviceability Limit
States; its application.
3. To recognise characteristic and design values as the basis for design

Basis of design
As far as the design of structures for safety is concerned, it is seen as the process of ensuring that
stresses due to loading at all critical points in a structure have a very low chance of exceeding the
strength of materials used at these critical points.

Figure 1.2 illustrates this in statistical terms.

In design there exist within the structure a number of critical points (e.g. beam mid-spans) where the
design process is concentrated. The normal distribution curve on the left of Fig. 1.2 represents the
actual maximum material stresses at these critical points due to the loading. Because loading varies
according to occupancy and environmental conditions, and because design is an imperfect process,
the material stresses will vary about a modal value – the peak of the curve. Similarly, the normal
distribution curve on the right represents material strengths at these critical points, which are also not
constant due to the variability of manufacturing conditions. The overlap between the two curves
represents a possibility that failure may take place at one of the critical points, as stress due to loading
exceeds the strength of the material. In order for the structure to be safe the overlapping area must
be kept to a minimum. The degree of overlap between the two curves can be minimized by using one
of three distinct design philosophies, namely:

1. permissible stress design

2. load factor method

3. limit state design.

PERMISSIBLE STRESS DESIGN
In permissible stress design, sometimes referred to as modular ratio or elastic design, the stresses in
the structure at working loads are not allowed to exceed a certain proportion of the yield stress of the
construction material, i.e. the stress levels are limited to the elastic range. By assuming that the stress–
strain relationship over this range is linear, it is possible to calculate the actual stresses in the material
concerned. However, although it modelled real building performance under actual conditions, this
philosophy had two major drawbacks. Firstly, permissible design methods sometimes tended to
overcomplicate the design process and also led to conservative solutions.

Secondly, as the quality of materials increased and the safety margins decreased, the assumption that
stress and strain are directly proportional became unjustifiable for materials such as concrete, making
it impossible to estimate the true factors of safety.

LOAD FACTOR DESIGN

Load factor or plastic design was developed to take account of the behaviour of the structure once
the yield point of the construction material had been reached. This approach involved calculating the
collapse load of the structure. The working load was derived by dividing the collapse load by a load
factor. This approach simplified methods of analysis and allowed actual factors of safety to be
calculated.

LIMIT STATE DESIGN

Limit state design can perhaps be seen as a compromise between the permissible and load factor
methods. It is in fact a more comprehensive approach which takes into account both methods
inappropriate ways. Most modern structural codes of practice are now based on the limit state
approach. BS 8110 for concrete, BS 5950 for structural steelwork, BS 5400 for bridges and BS 5628 for
masonry are all limit state codes. The principal exceptions are the code of practice for design in timber,
BS 5268, and the old (but still current) structural steelwork code, BS 449, both of which are permissible
stress codes. It should be noted, however, that the Eurocode for timber (EC5), which has replaced BS
5268 around 2010, is based on limit state principles.

As limit state philosophy forms the basis of the design methods in most modern codes of practice for
structural design, it is essential that the design methodology is fully understood.

Ultimate and serviceability limit states

The aim of limit state design is to achieve acceptable probabilities that a structure will not become
unfit for its intended use during its design life, that is, the structure will not reach a limit state. There
are many ways in which a structure could become unfit for use, including excessive conditions of
bending, shear, compression, deflection and cracking (Fig. 1.3). Each of these mechanisms is a limit
state whose effect on the structure must be individually assessed. Some of the above limit states, e.g.
deflection and cracking, principally affect the appearance of the structure. Others, e.g. bending, shear
and compression, may lead to partial or complete collapse of the structure. Those limit states which
can cause failure of the structure are termed ultimate limit states. The others are categorized as
serviceability limit states. The ultimate limit states enable the designer to calculate the strength of
the structure.
Serviceability limit states model the behaviour of the structure at working loads. In addition, there
may be other limit states which may adversely affect the performance of the structure, e.g. durability
and fire resistance, and which must therefore also be considered in design.

It is a matter of experience to be able to judge which limit states should be considered in the design
of particular structures. Nevertheless, once this has been done, it is normal practice to base the design
on the most critical limit state and then check for the remaining limit states. For example, for
reinforced concrete beams the ultimate limit states of bending and shear are used to size the beam.
The design is then checked for the remaining limit states, e.g. deflection and cracking. On the other
hand, the serviceability limit state of deflection is normally critical in the design of concrete slabs.
Again, once the designer has determined a suitable depth of slab, he/she must then make sure that
the design satisfies the limit states of bending, shear and cracking.

In assessing the effect of a particular limit state on the structure, the designer will need to assume
certain values for the loading on the structure and the strength of the materials composing the
structure. This requires an understanding of the concepts of characteristic and design values which
are discussed below.

Characteristic and design values

As stated at the outset, when checking whether a particular member is safe, the designer cannot be
certain about either the strength of the material composing the member or, indeed, the load which
the member must carry. The material strength may be less than intended (a) because of its variable
composition, and (b) because of the variability of manufacturing conditions during construction, and
other effects such as corrosion.

Similarly, the load in the member may be greater than anticipated (a) because of the variability of the
occupancy or environmental loading, and (b) because of unforeseen circumstances which may lead to
an increase in the general level of loading, errors in the analysis, errors during construction, etc.

In each case, item (a) is allowed for by using a characteristic value. The characteristic strength is the
value below which the strength lies in only a small number of cases. Similarly, the characteristic load
is the value above which the load lies in only a small percentage of cases. In the case of strength, the
characteristic value is determined from test results using statistical principles, and is normally defined
as the value below which not more than 5% of the test results fall. However, at this stage there are
insufficient data available to apply statistical principles to loads. Therefore, the characteristic loads
are normally taken to be the design loads from other codes of practice, e.g. BS 648 and BS 6399.

The overall effect of items under (b) is allowed for using a partial safety factor: γm for strength and γf
for load. The design strength is obtained by dividing the characteristic strength by the partial safety
factor for strength:

The design load is obtained by multiplying the characteristic load by the partial safety factor for

load:

Design load = characteristic load × γf (1.2)

The value of γm will depend upon the properties of the actual construction material being used. Values
for γf depend on other factors. In general, once a preliminary assessment of the design loads has been
made it is then possible to calculate the maximum bending moments, shear forces and deflections in
the structure.

The construction material must be capable of withstanding these forces otherwise failure of the
structure may occur, i.e.

Design strength ≥ design load (1.3)

Simplified procedures for calculating the moment, shear and axial load capacities of structural
elements together with acceptable deflection limits are described in the appropriate codes of practice.
These allow the designer to rapidly assess the suitability of the proposed design.

Summary
In this class, we have examined the bases of three philosophies of structural design: permissible stress,
load factor and limit state. Emphasisis had been laid on limit state design since it forms the basis of
the design methods given in the codes of practice for concrete (BS8110), structural steel work (BS
5950) and masonry (BS 5628). The aim of limit state design is to ensure that a structure will not
become unfit for intended use, that is, it will not reach a limit state during its design life. Two
categories of limit states are examined in design; ultimate and serviceability.

The former is concerned with overall stability and determining the collapse load of the structure; the
latter examines its behaviour under working loads. Structural design principally involves ensuring that
the loads acting on the structure do not exceed its strength and the first step in the design process
then is to estimate the loads acting on the structure.
Worked Example
Solution

Questions
1. Explain the difference between conceptual design and detailed design.

2. What is a code of practice and what is its purpose in structural design?

3. List the principal sources of uncertainty in structural design and discuss how these uncertainties are
rationally allowed for in design.