Software Verification Examples

Software Verification Examples

For ETABS 2015

ISO ETA082914M5 Rev. 0

Proudly developed in the United States of America

December 2014

Copyright
Copyright Computers & Structures, Inc., 1978-2014
All rights reserved.
The CSI Logo and ETABSare registered trademarks of Computers & Structures, Inc.
The computer program ETABS and all associated documentation are proprietary and
copyrighted products. Worldwide rights of ownership rest with Computers & Structures, Inc.
Unlicensed use of these programs or reproduction of documentation in any form, without
prior written authorization from Computers & Structures, Inc., is explicitly prohibited.
No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or
stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior explicit written permission of the
publisher.
Further information and copies of this documentation may be obtained from:
Computers & Structures, Inc.
www.csiamerica.com
info@csiamerica.com (for general information)
support@csiamerica.com (for technical support)

DISCLAIMER
CONSIDERABLE TIME, EFFORT AND EXPENSE HAVE GONE INTO THE DEVELOPMENT
AND DOCUMENTATION OF THIS SOFTWARE. HOWEVER, THE USER ACCEPTS AND
UNDERSTANDS THAT NO WARRANTY IS EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED BY THE
DEVELOPERS OR THE DISTRIBUTORS ON THE ACCURACY OR THE RELIABILITY OF
THIS PRODUCT.
THIS PRODUCT IS A PRACTICAL AND POWERFUL TOOL FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN.
HOWEVER, THE USER MUST EXPLICITLY UNDERSTAND THE BASIC ASSUMPTIONS OF
THE SOFTWARE MODELING, ANALYSIS, AND DESIGN ALGORITHMS AND
COMPENSATE FOR THE ASPECTS THAT ARE NOT ADDRESSED.

THE INFORMATION PRODUCED BY THE SOFTWARE MUST BE CHECKED BY A

QUALIFIED AND EXPERIENCED ENGINEER. THE ENGINEER MUST
INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY THE RESULTS AND TAKE PROFESSIONAL
RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE INFORMATION THAT IS USED.

Contents

Introduction
Methodology
Conclusions
Problems
Analysis Problems
1

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads, Static Gravity Load Analysis

Three-Story Plane Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specific Static Lateral Load Analysis

Single Story Three-Dimensional Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum

Analysis

Three-Story Three-Dimensional Braced Frame, Dynamic Response

Spectrum Analysis

Nine-Story Ten-Bay Plane Frame, Eigenvalue Analysis

Seven-Story Plane Frame, Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

Two-Story Three-Dimensional Frame, Dynamic Response Spectrum

Analysis

Two-Story Three-Dimensional Unsymmetrical Building Frame, Dynamic

Response Spectrum Analysis

10

Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements, Nonlinear Time History

Analysis

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

11

Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements, Nonlinear Time

History Analysis

12

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

13

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

14

Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame, Nonlinear Time History

Analysis

15

Wall Object Behavior, Static Lateral Loads Analysis

Design Examples
Steel Frame
AISC 360-05 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC 360-05 Example 002

Build-up Wide Flange Member Under

Compression

AISC 360-10 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC 360-10 Example 002

Build-up Wide Flange Member Under

Compression

AISC ASD-89 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC ASD-89 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Compression

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Combined

Compression & Biaxial Bending

AS 4100-1998 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Compression

AS 4100-1998 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

AS 4100-1998 Example 003

Wide Flange Member Under Combined

Compression & Bending

BS 5950-2000 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

BS 5950-2000 Example 002

Square Tube Member Under Compression &

Bending

CSA S16-09 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Compression &

Bending

ii

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

CSA S16-09 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Compression &

Bending

CSA S16-14 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Compression &

Bending

CSA S16-14 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Compression &

Bending

EC 3-2005 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Combined

Compression & Bending

EN 3-2005 Example 002

Wide Flange Section Under Bending

EN 3-2005 Example 003

Wide Flange Section Under Combined

Compression & Bending

IS 800-2007 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Compression

IS 800-2007 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

IS 800-2007 Example 003

Wide Flange Member Under Combined

Compression & Biaxial Bending

KBC 2009 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

KBC 2009 Example 002

Build-up Wide Flange Member Under

Compression

NTC 2008 Example 001

Wide Flange Section Under Combined

Compression & Bending

NTC 2008 Example 002

Wide Flange Section Under Combined

Compression & Bending

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001

Wide Flange Member Under Compression

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002

Wide Flange Member Under Bending

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003

Wide Flange Member Under Combined

Compression & Bending

Concrete Frame
ACI 318-08 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

ACI 318-08 Example 002

ACI 318-11 Example 001

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

ACI 318-11 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

iii

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

ACI 318-14 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

ACI 318-14 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

AS 3600-2009 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

AS 3600-2009 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

BS 8110-1997 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

BS 8110-1997 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

CSA A23.3-14 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

CSA A23.3-14 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

EN 2-2004 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

EN 2-2004 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

HK CP-2004 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

HK CP-2004 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

IS 456-2000 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

IS 456-2000 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

NTC 2008 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

NTC 2008 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

KBC 2009 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

KBC 2009 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

KCI 1999 Example 001

Beam Moment Strength Using Equivalent

Rectangular Stress Distribution

KCI 1999 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

RCDF 2004 Example 001

Beam Moment Strength Using Equivalent

Rectangular Stress Distribution

RCDF 2004 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

iv

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

TS 500-2000 Example 001

Beam Shear & Flexural Reinforcing

TS 500-2000 Example 002

P-M Interaction Check for Rectangular Column

Shear Wall
ACI 318-08 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 318-08 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 318-11 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 318-11 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 318-14 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 318-14 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 530-11 MasonryWALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

ACI 530-11 MasonryWALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

AS 360-09 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

AS 360-09 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

BS 8110-97 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

BS 8110-97 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

CSA A23.3-04 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

CSA A23.3-04 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

CSA A23.3-14 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

CSA A23.3-14 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

EC 2-2004 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

EC 2-2004 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

Hong Kong CP-04 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Hong Kong CP-04 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Indian IS 456-2000 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Indian IS 456-2000 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

KBC 2009 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

KBC 2009 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for Wall

Mexican RCDF-04 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Mexican RCDF-04 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

NZS-3103-2006 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

NZS-3103-2006 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Singapore CP65-99-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Singapore CP65-99-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Turkish TS 500-2000 WALL-001

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Turkish TS 500-2000 WALL-002

P-M Interaction Check for a Wall

Composite Beam
AISC 360-05 Example 001

Composite Girder Design

AISC 360-10 Example 001

Composite Girder Design

AISC 360-10 Example 002

Composite Girder Design

BS 5950-90 Example 001

Steel Designers Manual Sixth Edition Design of

Simply Supported Composite Beam

CSA S16-09 Example 001

Handbook of Steel Construction Tenth Edition

Composite Beam

EC 4-2004 Example 001

Steel Designers Manual Seventh Edition

Design of Simply Supported Composite Beam

Composite Column
AISC 360-10 Example 001

Composite Column Design

vi

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

AISC 360-10 Example 002

Composite Column Design

AISC 360-10 Example 003

Composite Column Design

ETABS
4

References

vii

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

ETABS Software Verification Log

Revision
Number

Date

19 Apr 2013

Description
Initial release of ETABS, Version 13.0.0

9 July 2013

11 Apr 2014

Minor documentation errors in the Verification manuals have

been corrected
Minor improvements have been made to some of the
examples, and some example file names have been changed
for consistency. The design results produced and reported by
ETABS are correct. The reported results are not changed
except where the model has been changed.
Three new examples have been added for steel frame design.
Analysis model EX8.EDB - The response-spectrum function
damping was incorrect and did not match the responsespectrum load case damping, hence the results produced did
not match the documented value. After correction, the example
produces the expected and documented results. No change was
made to the Verification manual.
Analysis Example 03 - The name of code IBC2000 was
changed to ASCE 7-02, as actually used in ETABS (IBC2000
was used in v9.7.4). In addition, the Verification manual was
corrected for the actual values produced by ETABS. These
values have not changed since v13.0.0. The documented
values were for ETABS v9.7.4 and some changed in v13.0.0
due to the use of a different solver. The change has no
engineering significance.
Analysis Example 06 and Example 07 - The Verification
manual was corrected for the actual values produced by
ETABS. These values have not changed since v13.0.0. The
documented values were for ETABS v9.7.4 and some changed
in v13.0.0 due to the use of a different solver. The change has
no engineering significance.
Analysis Example 15 - The Verification manual was corrected
for the actual values produced by ETABS. These values have
not changed since v13.0.0. The documented values were for
ETABS v9.7.4 and some changed in v13.0.0 due to the use of
a different solver, and due to the difference in how wall
elements are connected to beams. The change due to the solver
has no engineering significance. The change for wall elements
was an enhancement.

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

ETABS Software Verification Log

Revision
Number

Date

3 Nov 2014

Description
Concrete Frame Design EN 2-2004 Example 001, Concrete
Frame Design NTC 2008 Example 002 - The values produced
by ETABS 2014 were updated in the Verification manual for a
change in v13.1.3 under Incident 59154 (Ticket 23901) where
the coefficients Alpha_CC and Alpha_LCC were not taken
into account in certain cases.
Concrete Frame Design AS 3600-2009 Example 002, Shear
Wall Design AS 3600-2009 WALL-002 - The values produced
by ETABS were updated in the Verification manual for a
change in v13.1.4 under Incident 59973 where the phi factor
was incorrectly computed.
Analysis Example 14 Minor changes have been made to the
results as the result of an enhancement made under Incident
67283 to improve the convergence behavior of nonlinear static
and nonlinear direct-integration time history analysis.
Composite Beam Design AISC-360-05 Example 001 was
updated to reflect the fact that, under Incident 59912 it is now
possible to specify that the shear stud strength is to be
computed assuming the weak stud position. A typo in the
version number of the referenced Design Guide example was
corrected. A slight error in the hand-calculation for the partial
composite action Mn was corrected, resulting in perfect
agreement with the value produced by ETABS.
Composite Beam Design AISC-360-10 Example 001 was
updated to reflect the fact that, under Incident 59912 it is
possible to specify that the shear stud strength is to be
computed assuming the weak stud position. The handcalculation for the partial composite action Mn was revised
to account for a lower percentage of composite action caused
by an increase in the number of shear studs per deck rib in
places, and a corresponding decrease in shear stud strength.
Composite Beam Design BS-5950-90 Example 001- The
hand-calculations in the Verification manual were updated to
reflect the actual section area of a UKB457x191x167, which
differs from the value in the reference example, and to reflect
that the maximum number of shear studs that can be placed on
the beam is 78 studs and not the 80 the reference example calls
for. Also the value of the live load deflection produced by
ETABS was updated for a change in v13.2.0 under Incident
ii

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

ETABS Software Verification Log

Revision
Number

Date

Description

56782.
Composite Beam Design CSA-S16-09 Example 001. The
values produced by ETABS for the shear stud capacity were
updated in the Verification manual for a change in v13.2.0
under Incident 71303. This change in turn affects the value of
the partial composite moment capacity Mc but has no
engineering significance. A typo affecting the value of precomposite deflection in the Results Comparison table was
corrected.
Composite Beam Design EC-4-2004 Example 001. The handcalculation of the construction moment capacity, Ma,pl,Rd was
updated to reflect a more accurate value of the section Wpl and
typos affecting the pre-composite deflection and beam camber
were corrected. None of the values computed by ETABS
changed.
Initial release of ETABS 2015, Version 15.0.0

7 Jan 2015

Shear Wall Design example Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 has

been updated due to changes previously reported under
Incident #56569.
Shear Wall Design example AS 3600-09 Wall-001 has been
updated due to changes previously reported under Incident
#56113.
Shear Wall Design example CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 has
been updated due to changes previously reported under
Incident #71922.
Concrete Frame Design example CSA A23.3-04 Example 002
has been updated due to changes previously reported under
Incident #71922.
New steel frame design examples have been added for CSA
S16-14 and KBC 2009.
New concrete frame design examples have been added for
ACI 318-14, CSA A23.3-14, and KBC 2009.
New shear wall design examples have been added for ACI
318-14, CSA A23.3-14, and KBC 2009.

iii

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

INTRODUCTION
This manual provides example problems used to test various features and capabilities of
the ETABS program. Users should supplement these examples as necessary for verifying
their particular application of the software.

METHODOLOGY
A series of test problems, or examples, designed to test the various elements and analysis
features of the program were created. For each example, this manual contains a short
description of the problem; a list of significant ETABS options tested; and a comparison of
key results with theoretical results or results from other computer programs. The
comparison of the ETABS results with results obtained from independent sources is
provided in tabular form as part of each example.
To validate and verify ETABS results, the test problems were run on a PC platform that
was a Dell machine with a Pentium III processor and 512 MB of RAM operating on a
Windows XP operating system.

Acceptance Criteria
The comparison of the ETABS validation and verification example results with
independent results is typically characterized in one of the following three ways.
Exact: There is no difference between the ETABS results and the independent results
within the larger of the accuracy of the typical ETABS output and the accuracy of the
independent result.
Acceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the
ETABS results and the independent results does not exceed five percent (5%). For internal
force and stress values, the difference between the ETABS results and the independent
results does not exceed ten percent (10%). For experimental values, the difference between
the ETABS results and the independent results does not exceed twenty five percent (25%).
Unacceptable: For force, moment and displacement values, the difference between the
ETABS results and the independent results exceeds five percent (5%). For internal force
and stress values, the difference between the ETABS results and the independent results
exceeds ten percent (10%). For experimental values, the difference between the ETABS
results and the independent results exceeds twenty five percent (25%).
The percentage difference between results is typically calculated using the following
formula:
ETABS 2013 Result
=
Percent Difference 100
1
Independent Result

INTRODUCTION

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

Summary of Examples
The example problems addressed plane frame, three-dimensional, and wall structures as
well as shear wall and floor objects. The analyses completed included dynamic response
spectrum, eigenvalue, nonlinear time history, and static gravity and lateral load.
Other program features tested include treatment of automatic generation of seismic and
wind loads, automatic story mass calculation, biaxial friction pendulum and biaxial
hysteretic elements, brace and column members with no bending stiffness, column pinned
end connections, multiple diaphragms, non rigid joint offsets on beams and columns, panel
zones, point assignments, rigid joint offsets, section properties automatically recovered
from the database, uniaxial damper element, uniaxial gap elements, vertical beam span
loading and user specified lateral loads and section properties.
Analysis: Of the fifteen Analysis problems, eight showed exact agreement while the
remaining seven showed acceptable agreement between ETABS and the cited independent
sources.
Design Steel Frame: All 30 Steel Frame Design problems showed acceptable agreement
between ETABS and the cited independent sources.
Design Concrete Frame: All 34 Concrete Frame Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS and the cited independent sources.
Design Shear Wall: All 32 of the Shear Wall Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS and the cited independent sources.
Design Composite Beam: The 6 Composite Beam Design problems showed acceptable
agreement between ETABS and the cited independent sources.
Design Composite Column: The 3 Composite Column Design problems showed
acceptable agreement between ETABS and cited independent sources.

Summary of Examples

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

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

CONCLUSIONS

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 1
Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis
Problem Description
This is a one-story, two-dimensional frame subjected to vertical static loading.
To be able to compare ETABS results with theoretical results using prismatic members and
elementary beam theory, rigid joint offsets on columns and beams are not modeled, and axial
and shear deformations are neglected. Thus, the automatic property generation feature of
ETABS is not used; instead, the axial area and moment of inertia for each member are explicitly input.

Geometry, Properties and Loading

The frame is a three-column line, two-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are used. The
modulus of elasticity is 3000 ksi. All columns are 12"x24"; all beams are 12"x30".
The frame geometry and loading patterns are shown in Figure 1-1.
50k

Eq.

100k

Eq.

100k

Eq.

100k

Eq.

50k

Case 1
Case 2

10k/ft

Pinned
Connection
10

Origin
Figure 1-1 Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis

1-1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Vertical beam span loading
No rigid joint offsets on beams and columns
Column pinned end connections

Results Comparison
The theoretical results for bending moments and shear forces on beams B1 and B2 are easily
obtained from tabulated values for propped cantilevers (American Institute of Steel Construction 1989). These values for beam B1 are compared with ETABS results in Table 1-1.
Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case 1
Load Case I
(Concentrated Load)
Quantity
Bending Moments

Shear Forces

Location
End I
Point
point
point
End J
End I
Point
point
point
End J

ETABS
0.00
1,687.50
3,375.00
-337.50
-4,050.00
-31.25
-31.25
68.75
68.75
68.75

Theoretical
0.00
1,687.50
3,375.00
-337.50
-4,050.00
-31.25
-31.25
68.75
68.75
68.75

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case II

Load Case II
(Uniformly Distributed Load)
Quantity
Bending Moments

Location

ETABS

Theoretical

End I
Point
point
point

0.00
2,430.00
2,430.00
0.00

0.00
2,430.00
2,430.00
0.00

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis

1-2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Table 1-1 Comparison of Results for Beam B1 Case II

Load Case II
(Uniformly Distributed Load)
Quantity
Shear Forces

Location
End J
End I
Point
point
point
End J

ETABS
-4,860.00
-67.50
-22.50
22.50
67.50
112.50

Theoretical
-4,860.00
-67.50
-22.50
22.50
67.50
112.50

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX1.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
installation.

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

Plane Frame with Beam Span Loads - Static Gravity Load Analysis

1-3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 2
Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis
Problem Description
This is a three-story plane frame subjected to the El Centro 1940 seismic response spectra, N-S
component, 5 percent damping.
Assuming the beams to be rigid and a rigid offset at the column top ends of 24 inches (i.e.,
equal to the depth of the beams), and neglecting both shear deformations and axial deformations, the story lateral stiffness for this example can be calculated (Przemieniecki 1968).
The example then reduces to a three-spring, three-mass system with equal stiffnesses and
masses. This can be analyzed using any exact method (Paz 1985) to obtain the three natural
periods and mass normalized mode shapes of the system.
The spectral accelerations at the three natural periods can then be linearly interpolated from
the response spectrum used.
The spectral accelerations can in turn be used with the mode shapes and story mass information to obtain the modal responses (Paz 1985). The modal responses for story displacements and column moments can then be combined using the complete quadratic combination
procedure (Wilson, et al. 1981).

Geometry, Properties and Loading

The frame is modeled as a two-column line, single bay system. Kip-inch-second units are
used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:
All columns are W14X90
All beams are infinitely rigid and 24" deep
Modulus of elasticity

= 29500 ksi

Typical story mass

= 0.4 kip-sec2/in

The column is modeled to have infinite axial area, so that axial deformation is neglected. Also, zero column shear area is input to trigger the ETABS option of neglecting shear deformations. These deformations are neglected to be consistent with the hand-calculated model
with which the results are compared.
The frame geometry is shown in Figure 2-1.

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

2-1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Figure 2-1 Three-Story Plane Frame

Technical Features in ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Rigid joint offsets on beams and columns automatically calculated
Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
The three theoretical natural periods and mass normalized mode shapes are compared in Table 2-1 with ETABS results.
Table 2-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes
Mode

Period, secs.

Mode Shape
Roof Level

0.4414

0.1575

ETABS

Theoretical

1.165

1.165

nd

0.934

0.934

st

1 Level

0.519

0.519

Roof Level

0.934

0.934

2nd Level

-0.519

-0.519

1st Level

-1.165

-1.165

2 Level

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

2-2

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Table 2-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes

Mode

Period, secs.

Mode Shape
Roof Level

0.1090

ETABS

Theoretical

0.519

0.519

2 Level

-1.165

-1.165

1st Level

0.934

0.934

nd

The story displacements and column moments thus obtained are compared in Table 2-2 with
ETABS results. The results are identical.
Table 2-2 Comparison of Displacements and Column Moments
Quantity
Displacement at
Roof
2nd
1st
Moment, Column C1, at Base

ETABS

Theoretical

2.139
1.716
0.955
11,730

2.139
1.716
0.955
11,730

Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX2.EDB. The response spectrum file is ELCN-RS1.
These files are provided as part of the ETABS installation.

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

Three-Story Plane Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

2-3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

EXAMPLE 3
Three-Story Plane Frame, Code-Specified Static Lateral Load Analysis
Problem Description
The frame is modeled as a two-column line, single bay system. This three-story plane frame
is subjected to the following three code-specified lateral load cases:
UBC 1997 specified seismic loads (International Conference of Building Officials 1997)
ASCE 7-02 specified seismic loads (American Society of Civil Engineers 2002)
UBC 1997 specified wind loads (International Conference of Building Officials 1997)

Geometry, Properties and Loads

Kip-inch-second units are used. Other parameters associated with the structure are as follows:
All columns are W14X90
All beams are infinitely rigid and 24" deep
Modulus of elasticity
= 29500 ksi
Poisson's ratio
= 0.3
Typical story mass
= 0.4 kip-sec2/in
The frame geometry is shown in Figure 3-1.

Figure 3-1 Three-Story Plane Frame

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

3-1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

For the UBC97 seismic load analysis, the code parameters associated with the analysis are as
follows:
UBC Seismic zone factor, Z
UBC Soil Profile Type
UBC Importance factor, I
UBC Overstrength Factor
UBC coefficient Ct
UBC Seismic Source Type
Distance to Source

= 0.40
= SC
= 1.25
= 8.5
= 0.035
=B
= 15 km

For the ASCE 7-02 seismic load analysis, the code parameters associated with the analysis
are as follows:
Site Class
Response Accel, Ss
Response Accel, S1
Response Modification, R
Coefficient Ct
Seismic Group

=C
=1
= 0.4
=8
= 0.035
=I

For the UBC97 wind load analysis, the exposure and code parameters associated with the
analysis are as follows:
Width of structure supported by frame
UBC Basic wind speed
UBC Exposure type
UBC Importance factor, I
UBC Windward coefficient, Cq
UBC Leeward coefficient, Cq

= 20 ft
= 100 mph
=B
=1
= 0.8
= 0.5

Technical Features in ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Section properties automatically recovered from AISC database
Automatic generation of UBC 1997 seismic loads
Automatic generation of ASCE 7-02 seismic loads

Automatic generation of UBC 1997 wind loads

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

3-2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Results Comparison
For each of the static lateral load analyses, the story shears can be computed using the
formulae given in the applicable references. For the seismic loads, the fundamental period
computed by ETABS can be used in the formulae. From ETABS results, this fundamental
period is 0.5204 second. (Note the difference between the calculated fundamental period for
this example and Example 2, which neglects shear and axial deformations.)
Hand-calculated story shears are compared with story shears produced by the ETABS
program in Table 3-1 for UBC seismic loads, Table 3-2 for ASCE 7-02 seismic loads and
Table 3-3 for UBC wind loads.
Table 3-1 Comparison of Results for Story Shears - UBC 1997 Seismic
ETABS (kips)

Theoretical (kips)

Roof

34.07

34.09

2nd

56.78

56.82

st

68.13

68.19

Level

Table 3-2 Comparison of Results for Story Shears - ASCE 7-02 Seismic
ETABS (kips)

Theoretical (kips)

Roof

19.37

19.38

nd

32.23

32.25

38.61

38.64

Level

1st

Table 3-3 Comparison of Results for Story Shears - UBC 1997 Wind
ETABS (kips)

Theoretical (kips)

Roof

3.30

3.30

nd

9.49

9.49

st

15.21

15.21

Level

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX3.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
installation.

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

3-3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

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

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

3-4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The frame geometry is shown in Figure 4-1.

Figure 4-1 Single-Story Three-Dimensional Frame

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

Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

4 -1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Columns on lines C1 and C2: 24" x 24"

Columns on lines C3 and C4: 18" x 18"
All beams infinitely rigid and 36" deep
Modulus of elasticity = 3000 ksi
Story weight
= 150 psf

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Three-dimensional frame analysis
Automatic story mass calculation
Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
From the stiffness and mass matrices of the system, the three natural periods and mass normalized mode shapes of the system can be obtained (Paz 1985). These are compared in Table
4-1 with ETABS results.
Table 4-1 Comparison of Results for Periods and Mode Shapes
Mode
1

Quantity

ETABS

Theoretical

Period, sec.
Mode Shape
X-translation
Y-translation
Z-rotation
Period, sec.
Mode Shape
X-translation
Y-translation
Z-rotation
Period,sec.
Mode Shape
X-translation
Y-translation
Z-rotation

0.1389

0.1389

-1.6244
0.0000
0.0032
0.1254

-1.6244
0.000
0.0032
0.1254

0.000
1.6918
0.000
0.0702

0.000
1.6918
0.000
0.070

0.4728
0.000
0.0111

0.4728
0.000
0.0111

Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

4 -2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Computer File
The input data file for this example is EX4.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS
installation.

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

Single-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

4 -3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 5
Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis
Problem Description
This is an L-shaped building structure with four identical braced frames. All members (columns and braces) carry only axial loads.
The structure is subject to the El Centro 1940 N-S component seismic response spectrum in
the X-direction. The structural damping is 5 percent. The structure is modeled by appropriately placing four identical planar frames. Each frame is modeled using three column lines. Kipinch-second units are used.

Geometry, Properties and Loading

The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29500 ksi and the typical member axial area as 6 in2. A
story mass of 1.242 kip-sec2/in and a mass moment of inertia of 174,907.4 kip-sec2-in are
used.
The geometry of the structure and a typical frame are shown in Figure 5-1.

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Three-dimensional structure analysis using planar frames
Brace (diagonal) and column members with no bending stiffness
Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
This example has been solved in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Peterson (1981). A
comparison of ETABS results for natural periods and key member forces for one frame
with these references is given in Table 5-1.

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

5 -1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

D4

D1

D2

D3

D1

D2

D3

D4

D1

D2

D3

D4

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

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

5 -2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Table 5-1 Comparison of Results

ETABS

Wilson and
Habibullah

Peterson

Period, Mode 1

0.32686

0.32689

0.32689

Period, Mode 2

0.32061

0.32064

0.32064

Axial Force
Column C1, Story 1

279.39

279.47

279.48

Axial Force
Brace D1, Story 1

194.44

194.51

194.50

Axial Force
Brace D3, Story 1

120.49

120.53

120.52

Quantity

Computer File
The input data file is EX5.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS installation.

Conclusions
The results comparison reflects acceptable agreement between the ETABS results and reference data.

Three-Story, Three-Dimensional Braced Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

5 -3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

EXAMPLE 6
Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis
Problem Description
An eigenvalue analysis is completed.

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The frame is modeled with eleven column lines and ten bays. Kip-ft-second units are used. A
modulus of elasticity of 432,000 ksf is used. A typical member axial area of 3ft2 and moment
of inertia of 1ft4 are used. A mass of 3kip-sec2/ft/ft of member length is converted to story
mass using tributary lengths and used for the analysis.
This is a nine-story, ten-bay plane frame, as shown in Figure 6-1.

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

Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis

6 -1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Eigenvalue analysis

Results Comparison
This example is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Bathe and Wilson
(1972). There are two differences between the ETABS analysis and the analyses of the
references. The models of the references assign vertical and horizontal mass degrees of
freedom to each joint in the structure. However, the ETABS model only assigns horizontal
masses and additionally, only one horizontal mass is assigned for all the joints associated
with any one floor level.
The eigenvalues obtained from ETABS are compared in Table 6-1 with results from Wilson
and Habibullah (1992) and Bathe and Wilson (1972).
Table 6-1 Comparison of Results for Eigenvalues
Quantity

ETABS

Wilson and
Habibullah

Bathe and
Wilson

0.58965

0.58954

0.58954

5.53196

5.52696

5.52695

16.5962

16.5879

16.5878

Computer File
The input data filename for this example is EX6.EDB. This file is provided as part of the
ETABS installation.

Conclusions
Considering the differences in modeling enumerated herein, the results comparison between
ETABS and the references is acceptable.

Nine-Story, Ten-Bay Plane Frame - Eigenvalue Analysis

6 -2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

EXAMPLE 7
Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis
Problem Description
This is a seven-story plane frame. The frame is modeled with three column lines and two
bays. Kip-inch-second units are used. Because the wide flange members used in the frame
are older sections, their properties are not available in the AISC section property database
included with the ETABS program, and the required properties therefore need to be explicitly provided in the input data.
The example frame is analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) for gravity loads, static
lateral loads and dynamic response spectrum loads. DYNAMIC/EASE2 analyzes the example frame under static lateral loads and dynamic response spectrum and time history
loads. A comparison of key ETABS results with Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and DYNAMIC/EASE2 results is presented in Tables 7-1, 7-2, 7-3 and 7-4. Note the difference in
modal combination techniques between ETABS and Wilson and Habibullah, which uses
complete quadratic combination (CQC), and DYNAMIC/EASE2, which uses square root
of the sum of the squares combination (SRSS).

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The gravity loads and the geometry of the frame are shown in Figure 7-1.
The frame is subjected to the following lateral loads:
Static lateral loads, shown in Figure 7-1
Lateral loads resulting from the El Centro 1940 N-S component seismic response spectra, 5 percent damping
Lateral loads resulting from the El Centro 1940 N-S component acceleration time history

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

7 -1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Vertical Loading,
typical for all
levels

Global Reference Point

All columns are W14s
All beams are W24s
Member weights are indicated
Typical story mass = 0.49 kip-sec 2/in
Figure 7-1 Seven-Story Plane Frame

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

7 -2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
User-specified section properties
User-specified lateral loads
Dynamic response spectrum analysis
Dynamic time history analysis

Results Comparison
The comparison of the results for all three analyses is excellent.
Table 7-1 Comparison of Results for Static Lateral Loads
ETABS

Wilson and
Habibullah

DYNAMIC/EASE2

Lateral Displacement
at Roof

1.4508

1.4508

1.4508

Axial Force
Column C1, at ground

69.99

69.99

69.99

Moment
Column C1, at ground

2324.68

2324.68

2324.68

Quantity

Table 7-2 Comparison of Results for Periods of Vibration

Mode

ETABS

Wilson and
Habibullah

DYNAMIC/EASE2

1.27321

1.27321

1.27321

0.43128

0.43128

0.43128

0.24205

0.24204

0.24204

0.16018

0.16018

0.16018

0.11899

0.11899

0.11899

0.09506

0.09506

0.09506

0.07952

0.07951

0.07951

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

7 -3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Table 7-3 Comparison of Results for Response Spectrum Analysis

Wilson and
ETABS
Habibullah
DYNAMIC/EASE2
CQC
SRSS
CQC
Quantity
Combination
Combination
Combination
Lateral Displacement
at Roof

5.4314

5.4314

5.4378

Axial Force
Column C1 at ground

261.52

261.50

261.76

Moment
Column C1 at ground

9916.12

9916.11

9868.25

Table 7-4 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis

ETABS

Wilson and
Habibullah

Maximum Roof Displacement

5.49

5.48

Maximum Base Shear

285

284

Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at ground

263

258

Maximum Moment, Column C1 at ground

9104

8740

Quantity

Computer Files
The input data file is EX7.EDB. The input history is ELCN-THU. Time history results are
obtained for the first eight seconds of the excitation. This is consistent with DYNAMIC/EASE2, with which the results are compared. These computer files are provided as part
of the ETABS installation.

Conclusions
Noting the difference in modal combination techniques between ETABS and Wilson and
Habibullah, which uses complete quadratic combination (CQC), and DYNAMIC/EASE2,
which uses square root of the sum of the squares combination (SRSS), the results of the
testing are acceptable.

Seven-Story, Plane Frame - Gravity and Lateral Loads Analysis

7 -4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 8-1.

B5

B6
B10

B8

B12

B3

13'

B4

B7
B9

B1

B2

B11
13'
C8

C7

C4

Z
C1

C5

C9

C6

25'

Y
C3

C2

X
35'

GLOBAL
AND FRAME
REFERENCE POINT

25'

35'

STORY 1 CENTER OF MASS AT (38,27,13)

STORY 2 CENTER OF MASS AT (38,27,26)
TYPICAL STORY MASS = 6.212 kip-sec 2 /ft

Figure 8-1 Two-Story Three-Dimensional Frame

Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

8-1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

A response spectrum with a constant value of 0.4g is used. Other parameters associated
with the structure are as follows:
Columns
4 ft2
1.25 ft4
1.25 ft4
350000 ksf

Axial area
Minor moment of inertia
Major moment of inertia
Modulus of elasticity

Beams
5 ft2
1.67 ft4
2.61 ft4
500000 ksf

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Three-dimensional frame analysis
User-specified section properties
Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Comparison of Results
This example is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992) and Peterson (1981). A
comparison of the key ETABS results with Wilson and Habibullah (Reference 1) and Peterson (Reference 2) is shown in Table 8-1.
Table 8-1 Comparison of Results
Quantity

ETABS

Reference 1

Reference 2

Period, Mode 1

0.22708

0.22706

0.22706

Period, Mode 2

0.21565

0.21563

0.21563

Period, Mode 3

0.07335

0.07335

0.07335

Period, Mode 4

0.07201

0.07201

0.07201

X-Displacement
Center of mass, 2nd Story

0.0201

0.0201

0.0201

Computer File
The input data file is EX8.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS installation.

Conclusion
The results comparison shows acceptable agreement between ETABS and the references.

Two-Story, Three-Dimensional Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

8-2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 9
Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum
Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story three-dimensional unsymmetrical building frame. The structure is subjected to a seismic response spectrum along two horizontal axes that are at a 30-degree angle to the building axes. The seismic excitation is identical to the one used in Wilson and
Habibullah (1992).

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 9-1. The three-dimensional structure is
modeled as a single frame with six column lines and five bays. Kip-foot-second units are
used. Typical columns are 18"x18" and beams are 12"x24". The modulus of elasticity is
taken as 432,000 ksf.

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

Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

9 -1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Three-dimensional frame analysis
Dynamic response spectrum analysis

Results Comparison
The structure is also analyzed in Wilson and Habibullah (1992). Key ETABS results are
compared in Table 9-1.
Table 9-1 Comparison of Results
ETABS

Wilson and
Habibullah

Period, Mode 1

0.4146

0.4146

Period, Mode 2

0.3753

0.3753

Period, Mode 3

0.2436

0.2436

Period, Mode 4

0.1148

0.1148

Period, Mode 5

0.1103

0.1103

Period, Mode 6

0.0729

0.0729

Seismic at 30 to X

0.1062

0.1062

Seismic at 120 to X

0.0617

0.0617

Quantity

X- Displacement
Center of Mass at 2nd Story for:

Computer File
The input data file is EX9.EDB. This file is provided as part of the ETABS installation.

Conclusions
The results comparison shows exact agreement between ETABS and the reference material.

Two-Story, 3D Unsymmetrical Building Frame - Dynamic Response Spectrum Analysis

9 -2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 10
Three-Story Plane Frame with ADAS Elements - Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
This is a single bay three-story plane frame subjected to ground motion, as shown in Figure
10-1. The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis. Three
elements that absorb energy through hysteresis (ADAS elements as described in Scholl 1993
and Tsai, et al. 1993) are used to connect the chevron braces to the frame. Two models are
investigated. In the first model, the ADAS elements are intended to produce about 5% damping in the fundamental mode. In the second model, damping is increased to 25%. The manufacturer supplied the properties of the ADAS elements.
The ADAS elements are modeled in ETABS by assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the chevrons intersect the beams at each story.
The link properties use the uniaxial hysteretic spring property (PLASTIC1) and provide
beam-brace connectivity with nonlinear behavior in the U2 (shear in the 1-2 plane) direction.
Under this arrangement, displacements are transferred between the chevrons and the frame
via the link elements undergoing shear deformation.

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The frame is modeled as a two-column line, one-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are used.
The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29000 ksi. Column, beam and brace section properties
are user-defined.
A single rigid diaphragm is allocated to each story level and connects all three point objects
(two column points and one mid-span point) at each story. Because of the rigid diaphragms,
no axial force will occur in the beam members. All members are assigned a rigid zone factor
of 1.
In both models the value of post yield stiffness ratio is taken as 5% and the time increment
for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second.

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

10 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

D1

D2

D1

D2

D1

D2

Figure 10-1 Planar Frame with ADAS Elements

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Panel zones
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Ritz vectors

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

10 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Results Comparison
Sample results are compared in Table 10-1 with results from the nonlinear analysis program
DRAIN-2DX (Prakash, et al. 1993) for both 5% and 25% damping cases.
Table 10-1 Results Comparison
5% Damping
Level

ETABS

DRAIN-2DX

25% Damping
ETABS

DRAIN-2DX

Comparison of Maximum Story Deflections

3rd

4.57

4.57

2.10

1.92

2nd

3.48

3.51

1.68

1.55

1st

1.82

1.82

0.92

0.86

Comparison of Maximum Link Shear Force

3rd
2

nd

1st

7.29

7.31

17.75

17.40

13.97

13.92

36.70

36.20

17.98

18.00

47.79

47.10

Comparison of Maximum Brace Axial Force

3rd

5.16

5.17

12.55

12.30

nd

9.88

9.84

25.95

25.60

st

12.71

12.70

33.79

33.28

Computer Files
The input data files for this example are EX10A.EDB (5% damping) and EX10B.EDB (25%
damping). The time history file is ELCN-THE. These files are provided as part of the ETABS
installation.

Conclusions
The results comparison show acceptable to exact agreement between ETABS and DRAIN2DX.

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

10 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Example 11
Three-Story Plane Frame with Viscous Damper Elements - Nonlinear Time History
Analysis
Problem Description
The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis. Three viscous
damper elements of the type described in Hanson (1993) are used to connect the chevron
braces to the frame. Two models are investigated. In the first model, the damper elements are
intended to produce about 5% damping in the fundamental mode. In the second model, damping is increased to 25%.
The ETABS viscous damper element (DAMPER) is a uniaxial damping device with a linear
or nonlinear force-velocity relationship given by F = CV.
The damper elements are modeled in ETABS by assigning a panel zone with a nonlinear link
property to the mid-span point object where the chevrons intersect the beams at each story.
The link properties use the uniaxial damper property (DAMPER) and provide beam-brace
connectivity with nonlinear behavior in the U2 (shear in the 1-2 plane) direction. Under this
arrangement, displacements are transferred between the chevrons and the frame via the link
elements (dampers) undergoing shear deformation.
The time increment for output sampling is specified as 0.02 second.

Geometry, Properties and Loads

This is a single-bay, three-story plane frame subjected to ground motion, as shown in Figure
11-1. The frame is modeled as a two-column line, one-bay system. Kip-inch-second units are
used. The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29000 ksi. Column, beam and brace section properties are user defined.
A single rigid diaphragm is allocated to each story level and connects all three point objects
(two column points and one mid-span point) at each story. Because of the rigid diaphragms,
no axial force will occur in the beam members. All members are assigned a rigid zone factor
of 1.

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

11 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Figure 11-1 Planar Frame with Damper Elements

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Use of panel zones
Use of uniaxial damper elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Ritz vectors

Results Comparison
Sample results for = 1 are compared in Table 11-1 with results from the nonlinear analysis program DRAIN-2DX (Prakash, et al. 1993) for both 5% and 25% damping cases.

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

11 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Table 11-1 Results Comparison

5% Damping
Level

ETABS

25% Damping

DRAIN-2DX

ETABS

DRAIN-2DX

Comparison of Maximum Story Deflections

3rd

4.09

4.11

2.26

2.24

2nd

3.13

3.14

1.75

1.71

1st

1.63

1.63

0.89

0.87

Comparison of Maximum Link Shear Force

3rd

6.16

5.98

14.75

14.75

nd

10.79

10.80

32.82

32.84

1st

15.15

15.02

44.90

44.97

Comparison of Maximum Brace Axial Force

3rd

4.36

4.23

10.43

10.43

nd

7.63

7.63

23.21

23.22

st

10.71

10.62

31.75

31.80

Computer File
The input data files for this example are EX11A.EDB (5% damping) and EX11B.EDB
(25% damping). The time history file is ELCN-THE. These files are provided as part of
the ETABS installation.

Conclusions
The comparison of results shows acceptable agreement between ETABS and DRAIN-2DX.

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

11 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 12
Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
A two-bay, seven-story plane frame is linked to a one-bay four-story plane frame using
ETABS GAP elements. The structure experiences pounding because of ground motion.
The El Centro 1940 (N-S) record is used in the nonlinear time history analysis.
This example illustrates the use of gap elements to model pounding between buildings.

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 12-1.
The combined structure is modeled as a single frame with five column lines and three beam
bays. Kip-inch-second units are used. The modulus of elasticity is taken as 29500 ksi. Column and beam section properties are user defined.
Through the joint assignment option, Column lines 4 and 5 are connected to Diaphragm 2.
Column lines 1 to 3 remain connected to Diaphragm 1 by default. This arrangement physically divides the structure into two parts. The interaction is provided via the gap elements,
which are used as links spanning Column lines 3 and 4. The local axis 1 of the links is in
the global X-direction.

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Two-dimensional frame analysis
Use of uniaxial gap elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis
Use of multiple diaphragms

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Computers
and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified independently). A
comparison of key ETABS results with SAP2000 is presented in Table 12-1.

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

12 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Figure 12-1 Planar Frame with Gap Elements

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

12 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Table 12-1 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis

Quantity

ETABS

SAP2000

Maximum Lateral Displacement at Roof

5.5521

5.5521

Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at ground

266.89

266.88

A typical output produced by the program is shown in Figure 12-2. It shows the variations
of the displacement of Column lines 3 and 4 and the link force at Story 4. It is clearly evident that the link force is generated whenever the two column lines move in phase and their
separation is less than the specified initial opening or if they move towards each other out
of phase. For display purposes, the link forces are scaled down by a factor of 0.01.

Figure 12-2 Variations of Displacement of Column Lines 3 and 4

and Link Force at Story 4

Computer Files
The input data for this example is EX12.EDB. The time history file is ELCN-THU. Both of
the files are provided as part of the ETABS installation.

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

12 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Conclusions
The results comparison shows essentially exact agreement between ETABS and SAP2000.

Pounding of Two Planar Frames, Nonlinear Time History Analysis

12 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE 13
Base-Isolated, Two-Story, 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional frame with base isolation. The structure is subjected
to earthquake motion in two perpendicular directions using the Loma Prieta acceleration
records.
Hysteretic base isolators of the type described in Nagarajaiah et al. (1991) are modeled using the ETABS ISOLATOR1 elements, which show biaxial hysteretic characteristics.

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The structure is modeled as a single reinforced concrete frame with nine column lines and
twelve bays. The floor slab is taken to be 8 inches thick, covering all of the specified floor
bays at the base and the 1st story level. At the second story level the corner column as well
as the two edge beams are eliminated, together with the floor slab, to render this particular
level unsymmetric, as depicted in Figure 13-1.
A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi is used. The self-weight of concrete is taken as 150 pcf.
Kip-inch-second units are used.
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 13-1.

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Three-dimensional frame analysis
Use of area (floor) objects
Use of biaxial hysteretic elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis using ritz vectors

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

13 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Figure 13-1 Base-Isolated Three-Dimensional Frame

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Computers
and Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified independently). A
comparison of key ETABS results with SAP200 is presented in Table 13-1.

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

13 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Table 13-1 Comparison of Results for Time History Analysis

Quantity

ETABS

SAP2000

Maximum Uy Displacement, Column C9 at 2nd Floor

3.4735

3.4736

Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at base

13.56

13.55

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

Figure 13-2 Load Deformation Diagram

Computer Files
The input data file for this example is EX13.EDB. The time history files are LP-TH0 and
LP-TH90. All of these files are provided as part of the ETABS installation.

Conclusion
The results comparison shows essentially exact agreement between ETABS and SAP2000.

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

13 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

EXAMPLE 14
Friction Pendulum Base-Isolated 3D Frame - Nonlinear Time History Analysis
Problem Description
This is a two-story, three-dimensional frame with base isolation using friction pendulum
base isolators. The structure is subjected to earthquake motion in two perpendicular directions using the Loma Prieta acceleration records.
Friction pendulum type base isolators of the type described in Zayas and Low (1990) are
modeled using the ETABS ISOLATOR2 elements.
It is important for these isolator elements that the axial load from other loads be modeled
before starting the nonlinear analysis. This is achieved by using a factor of unity on the
dead load (self weight) on the structure in the nonlinear analysis initial conditions data.

Geometry, Properties and Loads

The structure is modeled as a single reinforced concrete frame with nine column lines and
twelve bays. The floor slab is taken to be 8 inches thick, covering all of the specified floor
bays at the base and the 1st story level. At the second story level, the corner column and the
two edge beams are eliminated, together with the floor slab, to render this particular level
anti-symmetric, as depicted in Figure 14-1.
The isolator properties are defined as follows:
Stiffness in direction 1
Stiffness in directions 2 and 3
Coefficient of friction at fast speed
Coefficient of friction at slow speed
Parameter determining the variation
of the coefficient of friction with velocity
Radius of contact surface in directions 2 and 3

1E3
1E2
.04
.03
20
60

A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi is used. The self-weight of concrete is taken as 150 pcf.
Kip-inch-second units are used.
The geometry of the structure is shown in Figure 14-1.

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

14 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Figure 14-1 Base-Isolated Three-Dimensional Frame

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Three-dimensional frame analysis
Use of area (floor) objects
Use of biaxial friction pendulum elements
Point assignments
Nonlinear time history analysis using ritz vectors

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

14 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Results Comparison
The example frame analyzed using ETABS is also analyzed using SAP2000 (Computers and
Structures 2002) for time history loads (SAP2000 has been verified independently). A comparison of key ETABS results with SAP2000 is presented in Table 14-1.
Table 14-1 Comparison of Result for Time History Analysis
Quantity

ETABS

SAP2000

Maximum Uy Displacement, Column C9 at 2nd Floor

4.2039

4.2069

Maximum Axial Force, Column C1 at base

37.54

38.25

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

Figure 14-2 Variation of Displacement

Computer Files
The input data file for this example is Example 14.EDB. The time history files are LP-TH0
and LP-TH90. All of the files are provided as part of the ETABS installation.

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

14 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Conclusion
The results comparison shows acceptable agreement between ETABS and SAP2000.

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

14 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

EXAMPLE 15
Wall Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis
Problem Description
This example analyzes a series of wall configurations to evaluate the behavior of the
ETABS shell object with wall section assignments. All walls are subjected to a static lateral
load applied at the top of the wall.
The following walls are included:
Planar shear wall, shown in Figure 15-1
Wall supported on columns, shown in Figure 15-2
Wall-spandrel system, shown in Figure 15-3
C-shaped wall section, shown in Figure 15-4
Wall with edges thickened, shown in Figure 15-5
E-shaped wall section, shown in Figure 15-6

Geometry, Properties and Loads

A modulus of elasticity of 3000 ksi and a Poisson's ratio of 0.2 are used for all walls. Kipinch-second units are used throughout. The following sections describe the models for the
different walls.
Planar Shear Wall , Example 15a
This shear wall is modeled with one panel per story. Three different wall lengths of 120",
360" and 720" are analyzed. Also, one-story and three-story walls are analyzed, together
with the six-story wall shown in Figure 15-1. A wall thickness of 12" is used.

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Figure 15-1 Planar Shear Wall, Example 15a

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

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

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

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Wall-Spandrel System, Example 15c

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

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

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Shaped Wall Section, Example 15d

This wall is modeled with six column lines and five shell objects per story, to model the
shape of the wall. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story wall, as
shown in Figure 15-4. A wall thickness of 6" is used.
POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION

TH

TH

TH

RD

ND

ST

ELEVATION
GLOBAL
REFERENCE
POINT

100k
X

C3

C2

C4

C5
C6

C1
80

100k

120

80
40

80

PLAN

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

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Wall with Edges Thickened, Example 15e

This wall is modeled with two column lines and one shell object, with end piers, per story
as shown in Figure 15-5. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story
wall shown in Figure 15-5.
TH

TH

TH

RD

ND

ST

30

30

C1

C2
210

18

X
Global
Reference
Point

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

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

E-Shaped Wall Section, Example 15f

This wall is modeled with six column lines and five shell objects per story to model the
shape of the wall. A three-story wall was also analyzed together with the six-story wall, as
shown in Figure 15-6. A wall thickness of 6" is used.
POINT OF LOAD
APPLICATION
6TH
120

5 TH
120

4 TH
120

3 RD
120

2 ND
120

ST

120

BASELINE
ELEVATION
GLOBAL
REFERENCE
POINT

100k

100k C3

C1
C2

X
120

C4

C5

C6
120

120
PLAN

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

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Technical Features of ETABS Tested

Use

of area objects

Two-dimensional
Static

and three-dimensional shear wall systems

lateral loads analysis

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

Figure 15-7 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15a

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Figure 15-8 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15b

Figure 15-9 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15c

Wall Area Object Behavior - Static Lateral Loads Analysis

15 - 9

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Figure 15-10 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15d

Figure 15-11 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15e

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

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Figure 15-12 SAP2000 Mesh, Example 15f

The lateral displacements from the ETABS and SAP2000 analyses are compared in Tables
15-1, 15-2, 15-3, 15-4, 15-5 and 15-6 for the various walls.
Table 15-1 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches), Example 15a
Number
Wall Height
Wall Length
of Stories
(inches)
(inches)
ETABS
SAP2000
6
720
120
2.3921
2.4287
360
0.0986
0.1031
720
0.0172
0.0186
3
360
120
0.3071
0.3205
360
0.0170
0.0187
720
0.0046
0.0052
1
120
120
0.0145
0.0185
360
0.0025
0.0029
720
0.0011
0.0013
Table 15-2 Results Comparison for Displacements (Inches), Example 15b
Location
ETABS
SAP2000
Story 3
0.0691
0.0671
Story 2
0.0524
0.0530
Story 1
0.0390
0.0412

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

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Table 15-3 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (inches)

Example 15c (1-4)
Number of Stories
Beam Length (inches)
ETABS
60
0.0844
6
240
0.1456
60
0.0188
3
240
0.0313

ETABS
2

SAP2000
0.0869
0.1505
0.0200
0.0332

Table 15-4 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches) at Load

Application Point, Example 15d (1-2)
Number of
Load
Displacement
Stories
Direction
Direction
ETABS
SAP2000
X
X
0.8637
0.8936
6
X
Z-Rotation
0.0185
0.0191
Y
Y
1.1447
1.1882
X
X
0.1249
0.1337
3
X
Z-Rotation
0.0024
0.0025
Y
Y
0.1623
0.1733
Table 15-5 Results Comparison for Top Displacements (Inches),
Example 15e(1-2)
Number of Stories
ETABS
6
0.2822
3
0.0464

SAP2000
0.2899
0.0480

Table 15-6 Results Comparison for Displacements at Load Application,

Example 15f (1-2)
Number of
Load
Displacement
Stories
Direction
Direction
ETABS
SAP2000
X
X
0.3707
0.3655
6
X
Z-Rotation
0.0042
0.0039
Y
Y
0.7295
0.7490
X
X
0.0602
0.0628
3
X
Z-Rotation
0.0005
0.0005
Y
Y
0.0993
0.1058

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

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Computer Files
The input data files for the planar shear walls are included as files EX15A1.EDB through
EX15A9.EDB. These and the following input data files are provided as part of the ETABS
installation.
The input data for the wall supported on columns is EX15B.EDB.
The input data files for the wall-spandrel system are 15C1.EDB through 15C4.EDB.
The input data files for the shaped wall section are included as files EX15D1.EDB and
EX15D2.EDB.
The input data for the wall with thickened edges are included as files EX15E1.EDB and
EX15E2.EDB.
The input data for the E-shaped wall section are included as files EX15F1.EDB and
EX15F2.EDB.

Conclusion
The results comparison show acceptable agreement between ETABS and SAP2000. In
general, the comparisons become better as the number of stories increases.

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

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC 360-05 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with a uniform load of 0.45 klf (D) and 0.75 klf (L). The flexural
moment capacity is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 5 ft, 11.667 ft and 35 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W18X50
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

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

Geometry
Span, L = 35 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section Compactness Check (Bending)
Member Bending Capacities
Unsupported length factors

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

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

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0.00%

Cb ( Lb =5ft)

1.004

1.002

0.20%

378.750

378.750

0.00%

1.015

1.014

0.10%

307.124

306.657

0.15%

Cb ( Lb =35ft)

1.138

1.136

0.18%

b M n ( Lb =35ft) (k-ft)

94.377

94.218

0.17%

Output Parameter

b M n ( Lb =5ft) (k-ft)
Cb ( Lb =11.67ft)

b M n ( Lb =11.67ft) (k-ft)

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-05 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W18x50
bf = 7.5 in, tf = 0.57 in, d = 18 in, tw = 0.355 in

h = d 2t f = 18 2 0.57 = 16.86 in
h0 = d t f =18 0.57 =17.43 in
S33 = 88.9 in3, Z33 = 101 in3
Iy =40.1 in4, ry = 1.652 in, Cw = 3045.644 in6, J = 1.240 in4
rts
=

40.1 3045.644
= 1.98 in
88.889

I y Cw
=
S33

Rm = 1.0 for doubly-symmetric sections

Other:
c = 1.0
L = 35 ft
Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(0.45) + 1.6(0.75) = 1.74 k/ft

wu L2
= 1.74 352/8 = 266.4375 k-ft
Mu =
8
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:

bf
2t f

7.50
= 6.579
2 0.57

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

p = 0.38

ETABS
0

E
29000
= 0.38
= 9.152
Fy
50

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:
=

h 16.86
=
= 47.49
tw 0.355

p = 3.76

29000
E
= 3.76
= 90.553
50
Fy

< p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Bending Capacity:

M p =Fy Z 33 =50 101 =5050 k in

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:

Critical Lengths:
E
29000
Lp =
1.76 ry
=
1.76 1.652
=
70.022 in =
5.835 ft
Fy
50
E
=
Lr 1.95rts
0.7 Fy
Lr = 1.95 1.98

0.7 Fy S33 ho
Jc
1 + 1 + 6.76

S33 ho
Jc
E

29000 1.240 1.0

0.7 50 88.9 17.43
1 + 1 + 6.76

0.7 50 88.9 17.43

29000 1.240 1.0

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Lr = 16.966 ft

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:

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

Cb =

2.5M max

12.5M max
Rm 3.0
+ 3M A + 4 M B + 3M C

Eqn. 1

Where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-span

moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum mid-span
moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:

1 L
M A = MC = 1 b
4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 5 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1 L
1 5
MA =
MC =
1 b =
1 =
0.995
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.995 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.995 )

Cb = 1.002

Lb < L p , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

M
=
M
=
5050 k in
n
p

b M=
0.9 5050 /12
n
=
b M n 378.75 k ft

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1L
1 11.667
1 b =
1
0.972
MA =
MC =
=
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.972 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.972 )

Cb = 1.014

L p < Lb < Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb L p
M p
M n = C b M p (M p 0.7 Fy S 33 )

L
L

p
r

11.667 5.835
=
M n 1.014 5050 ( 5050 0.7 50 88.889 )
=
4088.733 k in
16.966 5.835

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

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
B
max
2

1 L
1 35
MA =
MC =
1 b =
1 =
0.750 .
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.750 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.750 )

(1.00 )

Cb = 1.136
Lb > Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Fcr =

Cb 2 E
Lb

rts

Jc
1 + 0.078
S 33 ho

L
b
rts

1.136 2 29000
1.24 1 420
Fcr =
1 + 0.078
14.133 ksi

=
2
88.889 17.4 1.983
420

1.983
2

M n = Fcr S 33 M p
M n= 14.133 88.9= 1256.245 k in

b M=
0.9 1256.245 /12
n
=
b M n 94.218 k ft

AISC 360-05 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC 360-05 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
column shown below. An axial load of 70 kips (D) and 210 kips (L) is applied to
a simply supported column with a height of 15 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

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

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

Output Parameter
Compactness
cPn (kips)

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Slender

Slender

0.00%

506.1

506.1

0.00 %

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-05 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: Built-Up Wide Flange
d = 17.0 in, bf = 8.00 in, tf = 1.00 in, h = 15.0 in, tw = 0.250 in.
Ignoring fillet welds:
A = 2(8.00)(1.00) + (15.0)(0.250) = 19.75 in2
2(1.0)(8.0)3 (15.0)(0.25)3
+
=85.35 in 3
Iy =
12
12
Iy
85.4
=
ry =
= 2.08 in.
A
19.8
I x = Ad 2 + I x

(0.250)(15.0)3 2(8.0)(1.0)3
+
= 1095.65 in 4
12
12
t +t
1+1
d ' =
d 1 2 =
=
17
16 in
2
2
Iy d '2 (85.35)(16.0) 2
Cw =
=
= 5462.583 in 4
4
4
bt 3 2(8.0)(1.0)3 + (15.0)(0.250)3
=
J
=
= 5.41 in 4
3
3
Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L = 15 ft
I x = 2(8.0)(8.0) 2 +

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

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification Section E7
Localized Buckling for Flange:

b 4.0
=
= 4.0
t 1.0
E
29000
=
= 0.38 = 9.152
p 0.38
Fy
50

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:
h 15.0
=
= 60.0 ,
t 0.250
E
29000
=
= 1.49 = 35.9
r 1.49
Fy
50

> r , Localized web buckling

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

Fe =

1.0(15 12 )
= 86.6
2.08

2E
KL

2 29000

(86.6)2

= 38.18 ksi

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress

Note: Torsional buckling will not govern if KLy > KLz, however, the check is included
here to illustrate the calculation.
2 EC w
1
Fe =
+
GJ

2
(K z L )
Ix + Iy
2 29000 5462.4

1
= 91.8 ksi > 38.18 ksi
=
+

11200
5.41
Fe

1100 + 85.4
(180 )
Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.
Fe = 38.18 ksi
Section Reduction Factors
Since the flange is not slender,
Qs = 1.0
Since the web is slender,
For equation E7-17, take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0
4.71

KLy
E
29000
=4.71
=113 >
=86.6
QFy
ry
1.0 ( 50 )

So
QFy
1.0( 50 )

f = Fcr = Q 0.658 Fe Fy = 1.0 0.658 38.2 50 = 28.9 ksi

0.34 E
1
b, where b = h
b
t
f
(
)

29000
0.34
29000
be = 1.92 ( 0.250 )
1
15.0in
28.9 (15.0 0.250 ) 28.9
=
be 12.5in 15.0in
be = 1.92t

E
f

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.

Aeff =
betw + 2b f t f =
(12.5)( 0.250 ) + 2 ( 8.0 )(1.0 ) =19.1 in 2
where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.
Aeff
19.1
=
= 0.968
A 19.75
=
Q Q=
=
(1.00 )( 0.968
) 0.968
s Qa
=
Qa

Critical Buckling Stress

Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies
4.71

KLy
E
29000
= 4.71
= 115.4 >
= 86.6
QFy
ry
0.966 ( 50 )

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

When 4.71

E
KL

QFy
r

QFy
1.0( 50 )

Fe
38.18
Fy 0.966 0.658
=
Fcr Q 0.658
=
=
50 28.47 ksi

Nominal Compressive Strength

Pn =Fcr Ag =28.5 19.75 =562.3kips

c =0.90

c P=
Fcr Ag= 0.90 ( 562.3=) 506.1kips > 420 kips
n
c Pn =
506.1kips

AISC 360-05 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC 360-10 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with a uniform load of 0.45 klf (D) and 0.75 klf (L). The flexural
moment capacity is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 5 ft, 11.667 ft and 35 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W18X50
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

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

Geometry
Span, L = 35 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacities
Unsupported length factors

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compact

Compact

0.00%

1.004

1.002

0.20%

378.750

378.750

0.00%

1.015

1.014

0.10%

307.124

306.657

0.15%

Cb ( Lb =35ft)

1.138

1.136

0.18%

b M n ( Lb =35ft) (k-ft)

94.377

94.218

0.17%

Output Parameter
Compactness
Cb ( Lb =5ft)
b M n ( Lb =5ft) (k-ft)
Cb ( Lb =11.67ft)
b M n ( Lb =11.67ft) (k-ft)

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-10 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W18x50
bf = 7.5 in, tf = 0.57 in, d = 18 in, tw = 0.355 in

h = d 2t f = 18 2 0.57 = 16.86 in
h0 = d t f =18 0.57 =17.43 in
S33 = 88.9 in3, Z33 = 101 in3
Iy =40.1 in4, ry = 1.652 in, Cw = 3045.644 in6, J = 1.240 in4
=
rts

40.1 3045.644
= 1.98in
88.889

I y Cw
=
S33

Rm = 1.0 for doubly-symmetric sections

Other:
c = 1.0
L = 35 ft
Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(0.45) + 1.6(0.75) = 1.74 k/ft
Mu =

wu L2
= 1.74 352/8 = 266.4375 k-ft
8

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:

bf
2t f

7.50
= 6.579
2 0.57

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

p = 0.38

ETABS
0

E
29000
= 0.38
= 9.152
Fy
50

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:

h 16.86
=
= 47.49
tw 0.355

p = 3.76

29000
E
= 3.76
= 90.553
50
Fy

< p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Bending Capacity:

M p =Fy Z 33 =50 101 =5050 k-in

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:

Critical Lengths:
E
29000
Lp =
1.76 ry
=
1.76 1.652
=
70.022 in =
5.835ft
Fy
50
E
=
Lr 1.95rts
0.7 Fy
Lr = 1.95 1.98

0.7 Fy S33 ho
Jc
1 + 1 + 6.76

S33 ho
Jc
E

29000 1.240 1.0

0.7 50 88.9 17.43
1 + 1 + 6.76

0.7 50 88.9 17.43

29000 1.240 1.0

Lr = 16.966 ft

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:

For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification
factor is calculated using the following equation:
Cb =

2.5M max

12.5M max
Rm 3.0
+ 3M A + 4 M B + 3M C

Eqn. 1

where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarterspan moment.

The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum
mid-span moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:

1 L
M A = MC = 1 b
4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 5 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1 L
1 5
MA =
MC =
1 b =
1 =
0.995
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.995 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.995 )

Cb = 1.002

Lb < L p , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

M
M
=
=
5050 k-in
n
p
b M n =0.9 5050 /12
b M n =
378.75 k-ft

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1 L
1 11.667
MA =
MC =
1 b =
1
0.972
=
4 L
4 35

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Cb =

ETABS
0

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.972 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.972 )

Cb = 1.014
L p < Lb < Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb L p
M p
M n = C b M p (M p 0.7 Fy S 33 )

L
L

p
r

11.667 5.835
=
M n 1.014 5050 ( 5050 0.7 50 88.889 )
=
4088.733 k-in
16.966 5.835

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

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1 L
1 35
MA =
MC =
1 b =
1 =
0.750 .
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.750 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.750 )

(1.00 )

Cb = 1.136
Lb > Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Fcr =

Cb 2 E
Lb
r
ts

Jc
1 + 0.078
S 33 ho

Lb

rts

1.136 2 29000
1.24 1 420
1 + 0.078
14.133ksi
Fcr =

=
2
88.889 17.4 1.983
420

1.983
2

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

M n = Fcr S 33 M p

M n= 14.133 88.9= 1256.245 k-in

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

AISC 360-10 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC 360-10 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
column shown below. An axial load of 70 kips (D) and 210 kips (L) is applied to
a simply supported column with a height of 15 ft.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

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

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

Output Parameter
Compactness
cPn (kips)

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Slender

Slender

0.00%

506.1

506.1

0.00 %

COMPUTER FILE: AISC 360-10 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: Built-Up Wide Flange
d = 17.0 in, bf = 8.00 in, tf = 1.00 in, h = 15.0 in, tw = 0.250 in.
Ignoring fillet welds:
A = 2(8.00)(1.00) + (15.0)(0.250) = 19.75 in2
2(1.0)(8.0)3 (15.0)(0.25)3
Iy =
+
=85.35 in3
12
12
Iy
85.4
=
= 2.08 in.
ry =
A
19.8
I x = Ad 2 + I x
(0.250)(15.0)3 2(8.0)(1.0)3
+
= 1095.65 in 4
12
12
t1 + t2
1+1
d ' =
d
=
17
=
16 in
2
2
Iy d '2 (85.35)(16.0) 2
Cw =
=
= 5462.583 in 4
4
4
3
bt
2(8.0)(1.0) 3 + (15.0)(0.250) 3
J =
=
= 5.41 in 4
3
3
Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L = 15 ft
I x = 2(8.0)(8.0) 2 +

Loadings:
Pu = 1.2(70.0) + 1.6(210) = 420 kips
Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification Section E7

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Localized Buckling for Flange:

b 4.0
=
= 4.0
t 1.0
E
29000
=
= 0.38 = 9.152
p 0.38
Fy
50

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:
h 15.0
=
= 60.0 ,
t 0.250
E
29000
=
= 1.49 = 35.9
r 1.49
Fy
50

> r , Localized web buckling

Web is Slender.
Section is Slender
Member Compression Capacity:
Elastic Flexural Buckling Stress
Since the unbraced length is the same for both axes, the y-y axis will govern by
inspection.
KL y
ry
=
Fe

1.0(15 12 )
= 86.6
2.08

2 E
2 29000
= 38.18 ksi
=
2
2
(86.6 )
KL

Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress

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

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2 EC
1
w
=
+ GJ
Fe
2
( K z L )
I x + I y

2 29000 5462.4

1
= 91.8 ksi > 38.18 ksi
Fe
=
+ 11200 5.41
2

1100 + 85.4
(180 )
Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.
Fe = 38.18 ksi
Section Reduction Factors
Since the flange is not slender,
Qs = 1.0
Since the web is slender,
For equation E7-17, take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0
4.71

KLy
E
29000
=4.71
=113 >
=86.6
QFy
ry
1.0 ( 50 )

So
QFy
1.0( 50 )

Fe
f = Fcr = Q 0.658 Fy = 1.0 0.658 38.2 50 = 28.9 ksi

0.34 E
1
b, where b = h
(b t ) f
29000
0.34
29000
be = 1.92 ( 0.250 )
1
15.0in
28.9 (15.0 0.250 ) 28.9
=
be 12.5in 15.0in
be = 1.92t

E
f

therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.

Aeff =
betw + 2b f t f =
(12.5)( 0.250 ) + 2 (8.0 )(1.0 ) =19.1 in 2
where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Aeff
19.1
=
= 0.968
A 19.75
=
Q Q=
=
(1.00 )( 0.968
) 0.968
s Qa
=
Qa

Critical Buckling Stress

Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies
4.71

KLy
E
29000
= 4.71
= 115.4 >
= 86.6
QFy
ry
0.966 ( 50 )

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

When 4.71

E
KL

QFy
r

QFy
1.0( 50 )

Fe
38.18
Fy 0.966 0.658
=
Fcr Q 0.658
=
=
50 28.47 ksi

Nominal Compressive Strength

Pn =Fcr Ag =28.5 19.75 =562.3kips
c =0.90

c P=
Fcr Ag= 0.90 ( 562.3=) 506.1kips > 420 kips
n
c Pn =
506.1kips

AISC 360-10 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC ASD-89 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The beam below is subjected to a bending moment of 20 kip-ft. The compression
flange is braced at 3.0 ft intervals. The selected member is non-compact due to
flange criteria.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W6X12, M10X9,
W8X10
E = 29000 ksi

Loading
w = 1.0 klf

Geometry
Span, L = 12.65 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Non-Compact

Non-Compact

0.00%

Design Bending Stress, fb

(ksi)

30.74

30.74

0.00%

Allowable Bending Stress,

Fb (ksi)

32.70

32.70

0.00 %

Output Parameter
Compactness

COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact match with the independent results.

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Section: W8x10
bf = 3.94 in, tf = 0.205 in, d = 7.98 in, tw = 0.17 in

h = h 2t f = 7.89 2 0.205 = 7.48 in

Member:
L = 12.65 ft
lb = 3 ft
Loadings:
w = 1.0 k/ft
M=

wL2
= 1.0 12.652/8 = 20.0 k-ft
8

Design Bending Stress

f=
M / S33= 20 12 / 7.8074
b
fb = 30.74 ksi

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
=

bf
3.94
=
= 9.610
2t f 2 0.205

=
p

r =

65
=
Fy
95
Fy

65
= 9.192
50
=

95
50

= 13.435

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

> p , Localized flange buckling is present.

< r ,
Flange is Non-Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:

d 7.89
=
= 46.412
tw 0.17
f
P
= 0 and a = 0 0.16,so
A
Fy

No axial force is present, so f a=

=
p

640
Fy

f 640
0
1 3.74 a =

1 3.74 =
90.510
F
50
50

< p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.

Section is Non-Compact.

Section Bending Capacity

Allowable Bending Stress
Since section is Non-Compact

bf
=
Fb 33 0.79 0.002

2t f

Fb 33 =

Fy Fy

( 0.79 0.002 9.61

50 50

Fb 33 = 32.70 ksi

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 3.0 ft:

Critical Length, lc:

76b f 20,000 A f
l c = min
,
dFy
Fy

76 3.94 20, 000 3.94 0.205

,
lc = min

7.89 50
50

lc = min {42.347, 40.948}

lc = 40.948 in
l22 =lb =3 12 =36 in
l 22 < l c , section capacity is as follows:
Fb 33 = 32.70 ksi

AISC ASD-89 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC ASD-89 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The column design features for the AISC ASD-89 code are checked for the frame
shown below. This frame is presented in the Allowable Stress Design Manual of
Steel Construction, Ninth Edition, 1989, Example 3, Pages 3-6 and 3-7. The
column K factors were overwritten to a value of 2.13 to match the example. The
transverse direction was assumed to be continuously supported. Two point loads
of 560 kips are applied at the tops of each column. The ratio of allow axial stress,
Fa, to the actual, fa, was checked and compared to the referenced design code.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression)
Member compression capacity

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compact

Compact

0.00%

Design Axial Stress, fa (ksi)

15.86

15.86

0.00%

Allowable Axial Stress,

16.47

16.47

0.00%

Output Parameter
Compactness

Fa (ksi)
COMPUTER FILE: AISC ASD-89 EX002
CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: A36 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 36 ksi
Section: W12x120:
bf = 12.32 in, tf = 1.105 in, d =13.12 in, tw=0.71 in
A = 35.3 in2
rx=5.5056 in
Member:
K = 2.13
L = 15 ft
Loadings:
P = 560 kips
Design Axial Stress:

f=
a

P 560
=
A 35.3

f a = 15.86 ksi

Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
=

=
p

bf
12.32
=
= 5.575
2t f 2 1.105
65
=
Fy

65
= 10.83
36

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Localized Buckling for Web:

f a 15.86
=
= 0.44
36
Fy

d 13.12
=
= 18.48
tw 0.71

fa
Since =
0.44 > 0.16
Fy

=
p

257 257
= = 42.83
Fy
36

< p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.
Member Compression Capacity
KL x 2.13 (15 12 )
=
= 69.638
rx
5.5056
=
Cc

22 E
=
Fy

22 29000
= 126.099
36

KL x
rx
69.638
=
= 0.552
126.099
Cc
KL x
< Cc
rx

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Fa =

1 KL x rx
1.0
2 Cc

5 3 KL x rx
+
3 8 C c

ETABS
0

Fy

1 KL x rx

8 Cc

2
1.0 (0.552 ) 36
2

Fa =
1
5 3
3
+ (0.552 ) (0.552 )
8
3 8

Fa = 16.47 ksi

AISC ASD-89 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001

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

Member Properties
W18X40
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

Loading
wu = 1.6 klf

Geometry
Span, L = 35 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending)
Member bending capacity
Unsupported length factors

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are comparing with the results of Example 5.1 in the 2nd
Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, pages 5-12 to 5-15.

Output Parameter
Compactness

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compact

Compact

0.00%

1.003

1.002

0.10%

294.000

294.000

0.00%

1.015

1.014

0.10%

213.0319

212.703

0.15%

1.138

1.136

0.18%

50.6845

50.599

0.17%

Cb ( Lb =4.375ft)
b M n ( Lb =4.375 ft) (k-ft)
Cb ( Lb =11.67 ft)
b M n ( Lb = 11.67ft) (k-ft)
Cb ( Lb = 35ft)
b M n ( Lb = 35ft) (k-ft)

COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-93 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi
Fr = 10 ksi (for rolled shapes)

FL = Fy Fr = 50 10 = 40 ksi
Section: W18x40
bf = 6.02 in, tf = 0.525 in, d = 17.9 in, tw = 0.315 in
hc = d 2t f = 17.9 2 0.525 = 16.85 in
A = 11.8 in2
S33 = 68.3799 in3, Z33 = 78.4 in3
Iy = 19.1 in4, ry = 1.2723 in
Cw = 1441.528 in6, J = 0.81 in4
Other:
L = 35 ft
b = 0.9
Loadings:
wu = 1.6 k/ft
Mu =

wu L2
= 1.6 352/8 = 245.0 k-ft
8

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
=

=
p

bf
6.02
=
= 5.733
2t f 2 0.525

65
=
Fy

65
= 9.192
50

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:
=

=
p

hc 16.85
=
= 53.492
tw 0.315

640 640
= = 90.510
Fy
50

< p , No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Bending Capacity

Mp =
Fy Z 33 =
50 78.4 =
3920 k-in

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:

Critical Lengths:

=
X1

EGJA

29000 11153.85 0.81 11.8

=
= 1806 ksi
S33
2
68.3799
2
2

Cw S33
1441.528
68.3799

=
=
4
0.0173in 4
X 2 4=

19.1 11153.85 0.81

I 22 GJ

=
Lp

300 r22 300 1.2723

=
= 53.979in
= 4.498ft
Fy
50

=
Lr r22

=
Lr

X1
1 + 1 + X 2 FL 2
FL

1.27 1810
2
1 + 1 + 0.0172 40
=
144.8in
= 12.069 ft
40

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:

For the lateral-torsional buckling limit state, the non-uniform moment magnification
factor is calculated using the following equation:
Cb =

2.5M max

12.5M max
Rm 3.0
+ 3M A + 4 M B + 3M C

Eqn. 1

where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarterspan moment.

The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum
mid-span moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:

1 L
M A = MC = 1 b
4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4.375 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1L
1 4.375
1 b =
1
0.996
MA =
MC =
=
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.996 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.996 )

Cb = 1.002

Lb < L p , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

M n = M p = Fy Z 33 = 50 78.4 = 3920 < 1.5S33 Fy = 1.5 68.3799 50 = 5128.493k-in

b M n =0.9 3920 /12

b M n =
294.0 k-ft

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 11.667 ft:

M=
M
=
1.00
max
B
2

1L
1 11.667
1 b =
1
0.972
MA =
MC =
=
4 L
4 35
Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.972 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.972 )

Cb = 1.014

L p < Lb < Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb Lp

M=
C
M
M
F
S

)
(
n
b
p
p
L 33
Lr L p

M p

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

b M n =0.9 2836.042 /12

b M n =
212.7031 k-ft

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 35 ft:

=
M=
M
1.00
B
max
2

1L
1 35
1 b =
1 =
0.750 .
MA =
MC =
4 L
4 35

Cb =

12.5 (1.00 )

2.5 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.750 ) + 4 (1.00 ) + 3 ( 0.750 )

(1.00 )

Cb = 1.136
Lb > Lr , Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:
M n = Fcr S 33 M p

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

E
Cb
=
M cr
EI 22GJ +
I 22CW
Lb
Lb

1.136
29000
=
29000 19.1 11153.85 0.81 +
M cr
19.1 1441.528
35 12
35 12
2

M
=
M
=
674.655 k-in
n
cr
b M n =0.9 674.655 /12
b M n =
50.599 k-ft

AISC LRFD-93 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002

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

Member Properties
W14X176
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

Loading
Pu = 1,400 kips
Mux = 200 kip-ft
Muy = 70 kip-ft

Geometry
H = 14.0 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity
Demand/capacity ratio, D/C
AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
Example 6.2 in the 3rd Edition, LRFD Manual of Steel Construction, pages 6-6 to
6-8.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0.00%

c Pn (kips)

1937.84

1937.84

0.00%

b M nx (k-ft)

1200

1200

0.00%

b M ny (k-ft)

600.478

600.478

0.00%

0.974

0.974

0.00%

Output Parameter

D/C
COMPUTER FILE: AISC LRFD-93 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: ASTM A992 Grade 50 Steel
Fy = 50 ksi, E = 29,000 ksi
Section: W14x176
A = 51.8 in2,
bf = 15.7 in, tf = 1.31 in, d = 15.2 in, tw = 0.83 in
hc = d 2t f = 15.2 2 1.31 = 12.58 in
Ix = 2,140 in4, Iy = 838 in4, rx = 6.4275 in, ry = 4.0221 in
Sx = 281.579 in3, Sy = 106.7516 in3, Zx = 320.0 in3, Zy = 163.0 in3.
Member:
Kx = Ky = 1.0
L = Lb = 14 ft
Other
c =0.85
b =0.9
Loadings:
Pu = 1400 kips
Mux = 200 k-ft
Muy = 70 k-ft
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
/ 2)
( b=
(15.7
f / 2)
=

= 5.99
tf
1.31

=
p

65
=
Fy

65
= 9.19
50

< p , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Localized Buckling for Web:

h 12.58
= c=
= 15.16
tw 0.83
b Py =
b Ag Fy =
0.9 51.8 50 =
2331 kips
Pu
1400
=
= 0.601
b Py 2331
Pu
Since =
0.601 > 0.125
b Py
=
p

191
Fy

P
2.33 u
b Py

253

Fy

191
253
=
( 2.33 0.601
) 46.714 = 35.780
50
50
< p , No localized web buckling

=
p

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.
Member Compression Capacity:
For braced frames, K = 1.0 and KxLx = KyLy = 14.0 ft, From AISC Table 4-2,
c Pn =
1940 kips
Or by hand,
=
c

K y L Fy 1.0 14 12
50
=
= 0.552
ry E
4.022 29000

Since c < 1.5,

Fcr =
Fy 0.658c

50 0.658
)=

0.5522

=
44.012 ksi

c Pn =
c Fcr Ag =
0.85 44.012 51.8

c Pn =
1937.84 kips

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

From LRFD Specification Section H1.2,

Pu
1400
=
= 0.722 > 0.2
c Pn 1937.84
Therefore, LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a governs.
Section Bending Capacity
50 310
=
= 1333.333 k-ft
M
F=
px
yZx
12
M py = Fy Z y
Zy
163
However,=
= 1.527 > 1.5,
S y 106.7516
So
Zy =
1.5 S y =
1.5 106.7516 =
160.1274in 3
=
M py

50 160.1274
= 667.198 k-ft
12

Member Bending Capacity

From LRFD Specification Equation F1-4,
L p = 1.76ry

E
Fyf

L=
1.76 4.02
p

29000 1
= 14.2 ft > L=
14 ft
b
12
50

b M nx =
b M px

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

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

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending

From LRFD Specification section C1.2, for a braced frame, Mlt = 0.
M ux = B1x M ntx , where M ntx = 200 kip-ft; and
M uy = B1 y M nty , where M nty = 70 kip-ft
B1 =

Cm

P
1 u
Pe1

For reverse curvature bending and equal end moments:

M1
= +1.0
M2

M
C m = 0.6 0.4 1
M2
C m = 0.6 0.4(1.0 ) = 0.2
pe1 =

=
pe1x

2 EI

( KL )

2 29000 2140
=
21, 702 kips
2
(14.0 12 )

2 29000 838
=
8, 498
pe1 y =
2
(14.0 12 )
B1x =

C mx

Pu
1

Pe1x
0.2
=
B1x
= 0.214 1
1400

21702

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

B1x = 1
C my

P
u

1
P
e1 y

0.2
=
B1 y
= 0.239 1
1400
1

8498
B1 y = 1
B1 y =

M ux = 1.0 200 = 200 kip-ft;

and
M uy = 1.0 70 = 70 kip-ft
From LRFD Specification Equation H1-1a,
1400 8 200
70
+
+
0.974 < 1.0 , OK
=
1940 9 1200 600.478
D
= 0.974
C

AISC LRFD-93 Example 002 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

AS 4100-1998 Example 001

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

L
A

Section A-A
L=6m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Loading
N =

200 kN

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression)
Section compression capacity
Member compression capacity

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
also available through the program Help menu.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0.00%

6275

6275

0.00%

4385

4385

0.00%

Section Axial Capacity,

Ns (kN)
Member Axial Capacity,
Nc (kN)
COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
r33 = 139.15 mm, r22 = 89.264 mm
Member:
le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
N * 200 kN

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
e

(b f t w )

fy

2tf

250

350 20

250

2 28

250

5.89

Flange is under uniform compression, so:

ep 9, ey 16, ew 90
e 5 .8 9 ep 9 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:
e

fy

tw

250

331

250

20

250

16.55

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

Web is under uniform compression, so:

ep 30, ey 45, ew 180
e 16.55 ep 30 , No localized web buckling

Web is compact.
Section is Compact.

Section Compression Capacity:

Section is not Slender, so Kf = 1.0
N s K f An f y 1 25,100 250 / 10

N s 6275kN

Member Weak-Axis Compression Capacity:

Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 22 k e 33 1
le 22

r2 2

6000

67.216 and

le 33

89.264

r3 3

6000

43.119

139.15

Buckling will occur on the 22-axis.

n 22

a 22

l e 22

K f fy

r22

250

6000

89.264

2 1 0 0 ( n 2 2 1 3 .5)
n 2 2 1 5 .3 n 2 2 2 0 5 0
2

1 250

67.216

250
2 0 .3 6 3

b 22 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

22 n 22 a 22 b 22 67.216 20.363 0.5 77.398
22 0.00326( 22 13.5) 0.2083 0

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

22

22

1 22
90

c 22 22

c 22

2 22
90

ETABS 2013
0

77.398

1 0.2083
90
77.398
2

90

1.317

90
1

2 2 2 2

1.317 1

90

1.317 77.398

0.6988

N c 22 c 22 N s N s
N c 22 0.6988 6275 4385 kN

AS 4100-1998 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

AS 4100-1998 Example 002

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

Mx

L
A

Section A-A
L=6m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Loading
Mx =

1000 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Member bending capacity

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
also available through the program Help menu.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0.00%

837.5

837.5

0.00%

837.5

837.5

0.00%

Section Bending Capacity,

Ms,major (kN-m)
Member Bending Capacity,
Mb (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
Z33 = 2,936,555.891 mm2
S33 = 3,350,000 mm2
J

= 5,750,000 mm4

Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6
Member:
le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
M m * 1000 kN -m

This leads to:

M 2 * 250 kN -m
M 3 * 500 kN -m

M 4 * 750 kN -m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
e

(b f t w )

fy

2tf

250

350 20

250

2 28

250

5.89

Flange is under uniform compression, so:

ep 9, ey 16, ew 90

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

e 5.89 ep 9 ,

ETABS 2013
0

No localized flange buckling

Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:
e

fy

tw

250

331

250

20

250

16.55

Web is under bending, so:

ep 82, ey 115, ew 180
e 16.55 ep 30 ,

No localized web buckling

Web is compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Bending Capacity:
Z e Z c min( S ,1.5 Z ) for compact sections
Z e 33 Z c 33 3, 350, 000 m m

M s 33 M s ,m ajor f y Z e 33 250 3, 350, 000 / 1000

M s 33 M s ,m ajor 837.5 kN -m

Member Bending Capacity:

kt = 1 (Program default)
kl = 1.4 (Program default)
kr = 1 (Program default)
lLTB = le22 = 6000 mm
l e k t k l k r l L T B 1 1.4 1 6000 8400 m m

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

2
2 EI
EIw
22
G
J

2
2
le

le

M oa M o

M oa M o

ETABS 2013
0

2
5
12
2 2 10 5 2 10 8
2 10 4.59 10
76,
923.08

5,
750,
000

2
2
8, 400
8, 400

M oa M o 1786.938 kN -m

s 0.6

M 2

Ms
s

M oa
M oa

0.6

837.5 2

837.5

1786.938
1786.938

s 0.7954
m

1.7 M m *

M 2 * M 3 * M 4 *
2

1.7 1000

250

500 750
2

2.5
2

1.817 2.5
2

M b m s M s 0.7954 1.817 837.5 M s

M b 1210.64 kN -m 837.5 kN -m

AS 4100-1998 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

AS 4100-1998 Example 003

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

Mx
N

L
A

Section A-A
L=6m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Loading
N =
Mx =

200 kN
1000 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending, compression)
Section bending capacity with compression reduction
Member bending capacity with in-plane compression reduction
Member bending capacity with out-of-plane compression reduction
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-AS-4100-1998.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0.00%

837.5

837.5

0.00%

823.1

823.1

0.00%

837.5

837.5

0.00%

Reduced Section Bending Capacity,

Mr33 (kN-m)
Reduced In-Plane Member Bending
Capacity,
Mi33 (kN-m)
Reduced Out-of-Plane Member
Bending Capacity, Mo (kN-m)
COMPUTER FILE: AS 4100-1998 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
I33 = 486,000,000 mm4
J

= 5,750,000 mm4

Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6
Member:
lz=le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
=0.9

Loadings:
N * 200 kN
M m * 1000 kN m

Section Compactness:
From example SFD IN-01-1, section is Compact in Compression
From example SFD IN-01-2, section is Compact in Bending
Section Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, N s 6275kN
Member Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, N c 22 4385 kN
Section Bending Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-2, M s 33 M s , m ajor 837.5 kN -m

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

Section Interaction: Bending & Compression Capacity:

N*
200

M r 33 1.18 M s 33 1
1.18 837.5 1
M s 33 837.5
N s
0.9 6275

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

Member Strong-Axis Compression Capacity:

Strong-axis buckling strength needs to be calculated:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 33 1
le 3 3

r3 3

6000

43.119

139.15

n 33
a 33

l e 33

K f fy

r33

250

6000

139.15

2100( n 3 3 13.5)
n 3 3 15.3 n 3 3 2050
2

1 250

43.119

250
19.141

b 33 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

33 n 33 a 33 b 33 43.119 19.141 0.5 52.690

33 0.00326( 33 13.5) 0.1278 0

2

33

33

1 33
90

2 33
90

52.690

1 0.1278
90
52.690
2

90

2.145

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

c 33

33 1

c 33

2.145 1

ETABS 2013
0

90
1

33 33

90

1
0.8474

2.145 50.690

N c 33 c 33 N s N s
N c 33 0.8474 6275
N c 33 5318 kN

Member Interaction: In-Plane Bending and Compression Capacity:

m

M m in
M m ax

1000

Since the section is compact,

3
3

N*
N*
1 m
1 m
M i M s 33 1
1.18
1
1

N c 33
N c 33
2
2

3
3

200
200
1 0

1 0
M i 837.5 1
1

1.18

0.9 5318
0.9 5318
2
2

M i 823.11 kN -m

Member Interaction: Out-of-Plane Bending and Compression Capacity:

bc

1
1
N *
1 m
m

0
.4

0
.2
3

2
N c 2 2
2

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

bc

ETABS 2013
0

1
1 0 1 0
200

0.4 0.23

2
0.9 4385
2

bc 4.120
EIw
2

N oz G J

lz

2 10 4.59 10
2

76923.08 5.75 10
6

I 33 I 22
Ag

N oz 4.423 10

11

12

6000
4.86 2 10 8
25100

kN

M b 33 o m s M sx w/ an assumed uniform moment such that m =1.0

M b 33 o 1.0 0.7954 837.5 666.145 kN -m

N *
N*
M o 33 bc M b 33 o 1
1
M r 33

N
c 22
oz

200
200

M o 33 4.12 666.145 1
2674 837.5
1
11
0.9 4385
0.9 4.423 10

M o 33 837.5 kN -m

AS 4100-1998 Example 003 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

BS 5950-2000 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example.
A simply supported beam is laterally restrained along its full length and is
subjected to a uniform factored load of 69 kN/m and a factored point load at the
mid-span of 136 kN. This example was tested using the BS 5950-2000 steel
frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L=6.5 m
Material Properties
E = 205000 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 78846.15 MPa

Loading
W = 69 kN/m
P = 136 kN

Design Properties
Ys = 275 MPa
Section: UB533x210x92

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Section shear capacity

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Class 1

Class 1

0.00%

Design Moment,
M33 (kN-m)

585.4

585.4

0.00%

Design Shear, Fv (kN)

292.25

292.25

0.00%

Moment Capacity,
Mc (kN-m)

649.0

649

0.00%

Shear Capacity, Pv (kN)

888.4

888.4

0.00%

Output Parameter
Compactness

COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-2000 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
E = 205000 MPa
Ys = 275 MPa

y = 1.0 Ys = 275 MPa

Section: UB533x210x92
Ag = 11,700 mm2
D = 533.1 mm, b = 104.65 mm
t = 10.1 mm, T = 15.6 mm
d = D 2t = 533.1 2 10.1 = 501.9 mm
Z33 = 2,072,031.5 mm3
S33 = 2,360,000 mm3
Loadings:
Paxial = 0
wu = (1.4wd + 1.6wl) = 1.4(15) + 1.6(30) = 69 kN/m
Pu = (1.4Pd + 1.6Pl) = 1.4(40) + 1.6(50) = 136 kN
wu l 2 Pu l 69 6.52 136 6.5
Mu =
+
=
+
8
4
8
4
M u = 585.4 kN-m
=
Fv

wu l + Pu 69 6.5 + 136
=
2
2

Fv = 292.25 kN

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
=
r1

P
= 0 (since there is no axial force)
dt y

=
r2

P
= 0 (since there is no axial force)
Ag y

275
=
y

275
= 1
275

Localized Buckling for Flange:

=

b 104.65
=
= 6.71
T
15.6

ep = 9 = 9
=
6.71 < =
p 9 , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Class 1.
Localized Buckling for Web:
=

d 501.9
=
= 49.69
10.1
t

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

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

Section is Class 1.

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Shear Capacity:

Av 2 =Dt =533.1 10.1 =5,384.31mm 2

Pv 2 = 0.6 y Av 2 = 0.6 275 5384.31
Pv 2 = 888.4 kN

Section Bending Capacity:

With Shear Reduction:
0.6 P
=
533 kN > =
Fv 292.3kN
v2
So no shear reduction is needed in calculating the bending capacity.

M c = y S33 1.2 y Z 33 = 275 2,360, 000 1.2 275 2, 072, 031.5

=
M c 649 kN-m 683.77 kN-m
M c = 649 kN-m

BS 5950-2000 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

BS 5950-2000 Example 002

SQUARE TUBE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N = 640 kN;
Mx = 10.5 kN-m; My = 0.66 kN-m. The moment on the column is caused by
eccentric beam connections. This example was tested using the BS 5950-2000
steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent
hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

N
Mx
My
H
A

Section A-A
H=5m
Material Properties
E = 205000 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 78846.15 MPa

Loading
N =
Mx =
My =

640 kN
10.5 kN-m
0.66 kN-m

Design Properties
Ys = 355 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Section bending capacity

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 1

Class 1

0.00%

773.2

773.2

0.00%

68.3

68.3

0.00%

Axial Capacity,
Nc (kN)
Bending Capacity,
Mc (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: BS 5950-2000 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
E = 205000 MPa
G = 78846.15 MPa
Ys = 355 MPa

y = 1.0 Ys = 355 MPa

Section: RHS 150x150x6.3:
Ag = 3580 mm2
D = B = 150 mm, T=t = 6.3 mm
b = B 3 t = d = D 3 T = 150 2 6.3 = 131.1mm
r33 = 58.4483 mm
Z33 = 163,066.7 mm3
S33 = 192,301.5 mm3
Loadings:
N = 640 kN
Mx = 10.5 kN-m
My = 0.66 kN-m
Fv33 = Mx/H = 10.5 / 5 = 2.1 kN
Section Compactness:
=
r1
=

P
640
=
= 0.002183
dt y 131 6.3 355
275
=

275
= 0.880
355

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Localized Buckling for Flange:

b 131.1
=
= 20.81
T
6.3

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

=
24.6 < 49.6
p
=
20.81 <=
p 24.6 , No localized flange buckling
Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:
=

=
p

d 131.1
=
= 20.81 :
t
6.3

64
64 0.88
< 40
=

< 40 0.88
= 56.3 > 35.2
1 + 0.6r1
1 + 0.6 0.002183

So p =
35.2
=
20.81 <=
p 35.2 , No localized web buckling
Web is compact.
Section is Compact.
Member Compression Capacity:

l
K l
1.0 5000
22 = 33 =e 33 = 33 33 =
=
85.546
58.4483
r33
r33
=
max { 22 , =
85.546
33 }

2 E
2 205000
=
o 0.2= 0.2
= 15.1
y
355
Robertson Constant: a = 2.0 (from Table VIII-3 for Rolled Box Section in CSI
code documentation)
Perry Factor:
=
0.001a ( =
0 ) 0.001 2 ( 85.546 15.1
=
) 0.141

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2 E 2 205000
Euler Strength: =
=
= 276.5 MPa
E
2
85.5462

=
c

y + ( + 1) E 355 + ( 0.141 + 1) 276.5

=
= 355.215 MPa
2
2
E y
276.5 355
=
= 215.967 MPa
+ 2 E y 335.215 + 335.2152 276.5 355

=
N c A=
3580 215.967
g c
N c = 773.2 kN
Section Shear Capacity:

y = 1.0 Ys = 275 MPa

D
150
Av =
Ag
3580
1790 mm 2
=
=
+
+
D
B
150
150

Pv = 0.6 y Av 2 = 0.6 355 1790

Pv = 381.3kN
Section Bending Capacity:
With Shear Reduction
0.6=
Pv 228.8 kN=
> Fv 2.1kN
So no shear reduction is needed in calculating the bending capacity.

Mc =
y S33 1.2 y Z 33 =
355 192,301.5 1.2 355 163, 066.7
=
M c 68.3kN-m 69.5 kN-m
M c = 68.3kN-m
With LTB Reduction
Not considered since the section is square.

BS 5950-2000 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

CSA S16-09 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example.
A simply supported beam is (a) laterally restrained along its full length, (b)
laterally restrained along its quarter points, at mid-span, and at the ends (c)
laterally restrained along mid-span, and is subjected to a uniform factored load of
DL = 7 kN/m and LL = 15 kN/m. This example was tested using the CSA S1609 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
Handbook of Steel construction (9th Edition) results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L = 8.0 m
Material Properties
E=
Fy =

2x108 kN/m2
350 kN/m2

Loading
WD =
WL =

Design Properties
7 kN/m
15 kN/m

ASTM A992
CSA G40.21 350W
W410X46
W410X60

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

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

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULT COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from Examples 1, 2 and 3 on pages 5-84 and 5-85
of the Hand Book of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by Canadian
Institute of Steel Construction.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Class 1

Class 1

0.00%

250.0

250.0

0.00%

(a) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of

W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 0 m

278.775

278.775

0.00%

(b) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of

W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 2 m

268.97

268.83

0.05%

(c) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of

W410X60 (kN-m) w/ lb = 4 m

292.10

292.05

0.02%

Output Parameter
Compactness
Design Moment, Mf (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-09 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: CSA G40.21 Grade 350W
fy = 350 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923 MPa
Section: W410x46
bf = 140 mm, tf = 11.2 mm, d = 404 mm, tw = 7 mm

h = d 2t f = 404 2 11.2 = 381.6 mm

Ag = 5890 mm2
I22 = 5,140,000 mm4
Z33 = 885,000 mm3
J

= 192,000 mm4

=
Cw 1.976 1011 mm 6
Section: W410x60
bf = 178 mm, tf = 12.8 mm, d = 408 mm, tw = 7.7 mm

h = d 2t f = 408 2 12.8 = 382.4 mm

Ag = 7580 mm2
I22 = 12,000,000 mm4
Z33= 1,190,000 mm3
J

= 328,000 mm4

=
Cw 4.698 1011 mm 6
Member:
L=8m
= 0.9

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Loadings:
wf = (1.25wd + 1.5wl) = 1.25(7) + 1.5(15) = 31.25 kN/m

=
Mf

w f L2 31.25 82
=
8
8

M f = 250 kN-m
Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
=
Cl .1

145
=
Fy

145
= 7.75
350

W410x46

bf
140
=
= 6.25
2t f 2 11.2

< Cl .1 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Class 1.
W410x60
=

bf
178
=
= 6.95
2t f 2 12.8

< Cl .1 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Class 1.
Localized Buckling for Web:
Cf
1100
1 0.39
Cy
Fy

Cl .1 =

1100
0

=
1 0.39
=58.8
5890 350
350

W410x46

h 381.6
=
= 54.51
tw
7

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

< Cl .1 , No localized web buckling

Web is Class 1.
Section is Class 1

W410x60

h 382.4
=
= 49.66
tw
7.7

< Cl .1 , No localized web buckling

Web is Class 1.
Section is Class 1
Calculation of 2:
2 is calculated from the moment profile so is independent of cross section and is
calculated as:

2 =

4 M max
M max 2 + 4 M a 2 + 7 M b 2 + 4 M c 2

where: Mmax = maximum moment

Ma = moment at unrestrained span
Mb = moment at unrestrained span
Mc = moment at unrestrained span
Section Bending Capacity for W410x46:
M p = Fy Z 33 = 350 885,000 / 10 6 = 309.75 kN-m

M p = 0.9 309.75 = 278.775 kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 0 mm (Fully Restrained):

Lb = 0, so Mmax = Ma = Mb = Mc = Mu = 250 kN-m and 2 = 1.000

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2
E
=
Mu
EI 22GJ +
I 22Cw as L 0
L
L
2

M p 33

M r=
1.15M p 33 1 0.28
M p 33
33
Mu

0.28

M p 33
Mu

0 as M u

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

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 2000 mm:

M a @ x=
a
Ma =

L Lb Lb 8 2 2
+ =
+ = 3.5 m
2
4
2
4

f Lxa
2

f xa 2
2

31.25 8 3.5 31.25 3.52

=

= 246.094 kN-m
2
2

Ma = Mc = 246.094 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm

Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm

4 250
= 1.008
2
250 + 4 246.0942 + 7 2502 + 4 246.0942

2 = 1.008

2
E
EI 22GJ +
I 22Cw
L
L
2

Mu
=

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

( 2 10 ) ( 5.14 10 ) 76923 (192 10 )

( 2 10 )
( 5.14 10 )(197.6 10 )
+
2000
5

Mu =

1.008
2000

ETABS
0

=
M u 537.82 106 N-mm = 537.82 kN-m
0.67 M p = 0.67 309.75 = 208 < M u = 537.82 kN-m, so
M p 33

M r=
1.15M p 33 1 0.28
M p 33
33
Mu

309.75

M r 33 = 1.15 0.9 309.75 1 0.28

= 268.89 kN-m < 278.775 kN-m
537.82

M r 33 = 268.89 kN-m

Section Capacity for W410x60:

M p = Fy Z 33 = 350 1190,000 / 10 6 = 416.5 kN-m

M p = 0.9 416.5 = 374.85 kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4000 m:

M a @ x=
a
Ma =

L Lb Lb 8 4 4
+ =
+ = 3m
2
4
2
4

f Lxa
2

f xa 2
2

31.25 8 3 31.25 32
=

= 234.375 kN-m
2
2

Ma = Mc = 234.375 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm

Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm
2

4 250
= 1.032
2
250 + 4 234.3752 + 7 2502 + 4 234.3752

2 = 1.032

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2
E
=
Mu
EI 22GJ +
I 22Cw
Ly
L
2

( 2 10 ) (12 10 ) 76923 ( 328 10 )

( 2 10 )
(12 10 )( 469.8 10 )
+
4000
5

Mu =

1.032
4000

=
M u 362.06 106 N-mm = 362.06 kN-m
0.67 M p = 0.67 309.75 = 279 < M u = 362.06 kN-m, so
M p 33

M r=
M
1.15

0.28

M p 33
33
p 33
Mu

416.5

M r 33 = 1.15 0.9 416.5 1 0.28

362.06

M r 33 = 292.23kN-m

CSA S16-09 Example 001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

CSA S16-09 Example 002

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

3.7 m

W310x118
Mxf = 300 kN-m
Material Properties
E=
=
G=

200,000 MPa
0.3
76,923.08 MPa

Section A-A

Loading

Design Properties

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

fy = 345 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity with no mid-span loading

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from Example 1 on page 4-114 of the Hand Book
of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by the Canadian Institute of Steel
Construction.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 2

Class 2

0.00%

Axial Capacity, Cr (kN)

3849.5

3849.5

0.00%

Bending Capacity, Mr33

(kN-m)

605.5

605.5

0.00%

Output Parameter

COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-09 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
fy = 345 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923.08 MPa
Section: W310x118
Ag = 15000 mm2
r33 = 135.4006 mm, r22 = 77.5457 mm
I22 = 90,200,000 mm4
Z33 = 1,950,000 mm3
J = 1,600,000 mm4

=
Cw 1.966 1012 mm 6
ro 2 = xo 2 + yo 2 + r22 2 + r332 = 02 + 02 + 77.5457 2 + 135.40062

ro 2 = 24346.658 mm 2
Member:
lz= le33 = le22 = 3700 mm (unbraced length)
kz=k33 = k22 =1.0

=0.9

Loadings:
C f = 2000 kN
=
Ma M
=
200 kN-m
xf ,top

=
Mb M
=
300 kN-m
xf ,bottom

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
Cl .1=

145
=
Fy

145
= 7.81
345

Cl .2=

170
=
Fy

170
= 9.15
345

bf
307
=
= 8.21
2t f 2 18.7

Cl .1 < < Cl .2 ,
Flange is Class 2.
Localized Buckling for Web:
=
C y f=
y Ag
=
Cl .1
=

345 15000
= 5175 kN
1000

C f 1100
1100
2000
=
1 0.39 =

1 0.39
50.30
Cy
5175
Fy
345

h 276.6
=
= 23.24
tw 11.9

< Cl .1 ,
Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 2

Member Compression Capacity:

Flexural Buckling
n = 1.34 (wide flange section)

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

= max( 22 , 33 ) = 22 =

Cr = Ag Fy 1 +

2n

1
n

k22l22
r22

fy
E

ETABS
0

1.0 3700
345
= 0.6308
77.5457 200000

= 0.9 15000 345 1 + 0.6308

21.34

1
1.34

Cr = 3489.5 kN

Torsional & Lateral-Torsional Buckling

Fex
=

2 E
2 2 105
2643MPa
=
=
2
2
k33l33
1 3700

135.4006
r33

2 E
2 2 105
=
Fey =
=
867 MPa
2
2
k22l22
1 3700

77.5457
r22
2 EC
1
w
=
Fez
+ GJ
2
(k l )
Ag ro 2
zz

2 2 105 1.966 1012

1
Fez
=
+ 76923.08 1.6 106
2

15000 24347
(1 3700 )

FeZ = 1113.222 MPa

F
=
min ( Fex , Fey , Fez=
867 MPa
) F=
e
ey

Cr = Ag Fe 1 + 2 n

1
n

= 0.9 15000 867 1 + 0.630821.34

1
1.34

Cr = 9674.5 kN (does not govern)

Section Bending Capacity:

M p 33= Z 33 Fy = 1,950, 000 345= 672.75 kN-m

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity:

2

M
M
=
1.75 + 1.05 a + 0.3 a 2.5
2
Mb
Mb
2

200
200
=
1.75 + 1.05
2
+ 0.3
= 2.583 2.5
300
300
So 2 =2.5
2

E
2
=
Mu
EI 22GJ +
I 22Cw
l22
l22
Mu
=

2.5
3700

2 105
7
12
2 105 9.02 107 76923.08 1.6 106 +
9.02 10 1.966 10
3700

M u = 3163.117 kN-m
Since M u > 0.67 M p 33
M p 33

M r=
1.15M p 33 1 0.28
M p 33
33
Mu

672.75

M r 33 = 1.15 0.9 672.75 1 0.28

0.9 672.75
3163.117

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

CSA S16-09 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

CSA S16-14 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object moment and shear strength is tested in this example.
A simply supported beam is (a) laterally restrained along its full length, (b)
laterally restrained along its quarter points, at mid-span, and at the ends (c)
laterally restrained along mid-span, and is subjected to a uniform factored load of
DL = 7 kN/m and LL = 15 kN/m. This example was tested using the CSA S1614 steel frame design code. The moment and shear strengths are compared with
Handbook of Steel construction (9th Edition) results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L = 8.0 m
Material Properties
E=
Fy =

2x108 kN/m2
350 kN/m2

Design Properties

Loading
WD =
WL =

7 kN/m
15 kN/m

ASTM A992
CSA G40.21 350W
W410X46
W410X60

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

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

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULT COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from Examples 1, 2 and 3 on pages 5-84 and 5-85
of the Hand Book of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by Canadian
Institute of Steel Construction.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Class 1

Class 1

0.00%

250.0

250.0

0.00%

(a) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of

W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 0 m

278.775

278.775

0.00%

(b) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of

W410X46 (kN-m) w/ lb = 2 m

268.97

268.83

0.05%

(c) Moment Capacity, Mr33 of

W410X60 (kN-m) w/ lb = 4 m

292.10

292.05

0.02%

Output Parameter
Compactness
Design Moment, Mf (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-14 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

Ag = 5890 mm2
I22 = 5,140,000 mm4
Z33 = 885,000 mm3
J

= 192,000 mm4

=
Cw 1.976 1011 mm 6

Section: W410x60
bf = 178 mm, tf = 12.8 mm, d = 408 mm, tw = 7.7 mm
h = d 2t f = 408 2 12.8 = 382.4 mm

Ag = 7580 mm2
I22 = 12,000,000 mm4
Z33= 1,190,000 mm3
J

= 328,000 mm4

=
Cw 4.698 1011 mm 6

Member:
L=8m
= 0.9

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Loadings:
wf = (1.25wd + 1.5wl) = 1.25(7) + 1.5(15) = 31.25 kN/m
Mf
=

w f L2 31.25 82
=
8
8

M f = 250 kN-m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:

Cl .1
=

145
=
Fy

145
= 7.75
350

W410x46
=

bf
140
=
= 6.25
2t f 2 11.2

< Cl .1 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Class 1.
W410x60
=

bf
178
=
= 6.95
2t f 2 12.8

< Cl .1 , No localized flange buckling

Flange is Class 1.
Localized Buckling for Web:
Cf
1100
1 0.39
Cy
Fy

Cl .1 =

1100
0

=
1 0.39
=58.8
5890
350

350

W410x46

h 381.6
=
= 54.51
tw
7

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

< Cl .1 , No localized web buckling

Web is Class 1.
Section is Class 1

W410x60

h 382.4
=
= 49.66
tw
7.7

< Cl .1 , No localized web buckling

Web is Class 1.
Section is Class 1
Calculation of 2:
2 is calculated from the moment profile so is independent of cross section and is
calculated as:

2 =

4 M max
M max 2 + 4 M a 2 + 7 M b 2 + 4 M c 2

where: Mmax = maximum moment

Ma = moment at unrestrained span
Mb = moment at unrestrained span
Mc = moment at unrestrained span
Section Bending Capacity for W410x46:

M p = Fy Z 33 = 350 885,000 / 10 6 = 309.75 kN-m

M p = 0.9 309.75 = 278.775 kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 0 mm (Fully Restrained):

Lb = 0, so Mmax = Ma = Mb = Mc = Mu = 250 kN-m and 2 = 1.000

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2
E
Mu
EI 22GJ +
=
I 22Cw as L 0
L
L
2

M p 33

M r=
1.15M p 33 1 0.28
M p 33
33
Mu

0.28

M p 33
Mu

0 as M u

leading to M =
1.15 M p 33 > M p 33
r 33

So
278.775 kN-m
M r 33 =
M p 33 =

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 2000 mm:

M a @ x=
a

Ma =

L Lb Lb 8 2 2
+ =
+ = 3.5 m
2
4
2
4

f Lxa
2

f xa 2
2

31.25 8 3.5 31.25 3.52

=

= 246.094 kN-m
2
2

Ma = Mc = 246.094 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm

Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm

4 250
= 1.008
2
250 + 4 246.0942 + 7 2502 + 4 246.0942

2 = 1.008

2
E
EI 22GJ +
I 22Cw
L
L
2

Mu
=

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

( 2 10 ) ( 5.14 10 ) 76923 (192 10 )

( 2 10 )
( 5.14 10 )(197.6 10 )
+
2000
5

Mu =

1.008
2000

ETABS
0

=
M u 537.82 106 N-mm = 537.82 kN-m

0.67 M p = 0.67 309.75 = 208 < M u = 537.82 kN-m, so

M p 33

M r=
1.15M p 33 1 0.28
M p 33
33
Mu

309.75

M r 33 = 1.15 0.9 309.75 1 0.28

= 268.89 kN-m < 278.775 kN-m
537.82

M r 33 = 268.89 kN-m

Section Capacity for W410x60:

M p = Fy Z 33 = 350 1190,000 / 10 6 = 416.5 kN-m

M p = 0.9 416.5 = 374.85 kN-m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4000 m:

M a @ x=
a

Ma =

L Lb Lb 8 4 4
+ =
+ = 3m
2
4
2
4

f Lxa
2

f xa 2
2

31.25 8 3 31.25 32
=

= 234.375 kN-m
2
2

Ma = Mc = 234.375 kN-m @ 3500 mm and 4500 mm

Mmax = Mb = 250 kN-m @ 4000 mm

4 250
= 1.032
2
250 + 4 234.3752 + 7 2502 + 4 234.3752

2 = 1.032

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2
E
Mu
EI 22GJ +
=
I 22Cw
Ly
L
2

( 2 10 ) (12 10 ) 76923 ( 328 10 )

( 2 10 )
(12 10 )( 469.8 10 )
+
4000
5

Mu =

1.032
4000

=
M u 362.06 106 N-mm = 362.06 kN-m
0.67 M p = 0.67 309.75 = 279 < M u = 362.06 kN-m, so

M p 33

M r=
M
1.15

0.28
M p 33
p 33
33
Mu

416.5

M r 33 = 1.15 0.9 416.5 1 0.28

362.06

M r 33 = 292.23kN-m

CSA S16-14 Example 001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

CSA S16-14 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial and moment strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments Cf = 2000 kN;
Mfx-top= 200 kN-m; Mfx-bottom= 300 kN-m. This example was tested using the CSA
S16-14 steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with
Handbook of Steel Construction (9th Edition) results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2000 kN
Mxf = 200 kN-m

3.7 m

W310x118
Mxf = 300 kN-m
Material Properties
E=
=
G=

200,000 MPa
0.3
76,923.08 MPa

Section A-A

Loading

Design Properties

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

fy = 345 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression & bending)
Member compression capacity
Member bending capacity with no mid-span loading

CSA S16-14 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from Example 1 on page 4-114 of the Hand Book
of Steel Construction to CSA S16-01 published by the Canadian Institute of Steel
Construction.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 2

Class 2

0.00%

Axial Capacity, Cr (kN)

3849.5

3849.5

0.00%

Bending Capacity, Mr33

(kN-m)

605.5

605.5

0.00%

Output Parameter

COMPUTER FILE: CSA S16-14 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

CSA S16-14 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
fy = 345 MPa
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76923.08 MPa
Section: W310x118
Ag = 15000 mm2
r33 = 135.4006 mm, r22 = 77.5457 mm
I22 = 90,200,000 mm4
Z33 = 1,950,000 mm3
J = 1,600,000 mm4
=
Cw 1.966 1012 mm 6
ro 2 = xo 2 + yo 2 + r22 2 + r332 = 02 + 02 + 77.5457 2 + 135.40062

ro 2 = 24346.658 mm 2
Member:
lz= le33 = le22 = 3700 mm (unbraced length)
kz=k33 = k22 =1.0
=0.9

Loadings:
C f = 2000 kN

=
Ma M
=
200 kN-m
xf ,top
=
Mb M
=
300 kN-m
xf ,bottom

CSA S16-14 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
Cl .1=

145
=
Fy

145
= 7.81
345

Cl .2=

170
=
Fy

170
= 9.15
345

bf
307
=
= 8.21
2t f 2 18.7

Cl .1 < < Cl .2 ,
Flange is Class 2.
Localized Buckling for Web:
=
C y f=
y Ag

=
Cl .1
=

345 15000
= 5175 kN
1000

C f 1100
1100
2000
=
1 0.39 =

1 0.39
50.30
Cy
5175
Fy
345

h 276.6
=
= 23.24
tw 11.9

< Cl .1 ,

Web is Class 1.

Section is Class 2

Member Compression Capacity:

Flexural Buckling
n = 1.34 (wide flange section)

CSA S16-14 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

= max( 22 , 33 ) = 22 =

Cr = Ag Fy 1 +

2n

1
n

k22l22
r22

fy
E

ETABS
0

1.0 3700
345
= 0.6308
77.5457 200000

= 0.9 15000 345 1 + 0.6308

21.34

1
1.34

Cr = 3489.5 kN

Torsional & Lateral-Torsional Buckling

=
Fex

2 E
2 2 105
=
=
2643MPa
2
2
k33l33
1 3700

135.4006
r33

2 E
2 2 105
=
Fey =
=
867 MPa
2
2
k22l22
1 3700

77.5457
r22

2 EC
1
w
=
+ GJ
Fez
2

A r2
( k z lz )
go
2 2 105 1.966 1012

1
=
+ 76923.08 1.6 106
Fez
2

15000 24347
(1 3700 )

FeZ = 1113.222 MPa

F
=
min ( Fex , Fey , Fez=
867 MPa
) F=
e
ey

Cr = Ag Fe 1 + 2 n

1
n

= 0.9 15000 867 1 + 0.630821.34

1
1.34

Cr = 9674.5 kN (does not govern)

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

CSA S16-14 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity:

2

M
M
=
1.75 + 1.05 a + 0.3 a 2.5
2
Mb
Mb
2

200
200
=
1.75 + 1.05
2
+ 0.3
= 2.583 2.5
300
300

So 2 =2.5
2

E
2
=
Mu
EI 22GJ +
I 22Cw
l22
l22
=
Mu

2.5
3700

2 105
7
12
2 105 9.02 107 76923.08 1.6 106 +
9.02 10 1.966 10
3700

M u = 3163.117 kN-m
Since M u > 0.67 M p 33

M p 33

M r=
1.15M p 33 1 0.28
M p 33
33
Mu

672.75

0.9 672.75
M r 33 = 1.15 0.9 672.75 1 0.28
3163.117

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

CSA S16-14 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EN 3-2005 Example 001

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

NEd
My,Ed

L
A

Section A-A
L = 3.5 m
Material Properties
E = 210x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 80770 MPa

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

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
Section: IPE 200

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (beam-column)
Member interaction capacities, D/C, Method 1

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. This example was taken from "New
design rules in EN 1993-1-1 for member stability," Worked example 1 in section
5.2.1, page 151.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 1

Class 1

0.00%

D/CAxial

0.334

0.334

0.00%

D/CBending

0.649

0.646

0.46%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: S235
fy = 235 MPa
E = 210,000 MPa
G = 80,770 MPa
Section: IPE 200
A = 2848 mm2
h = 200 mm, bf = 100 mm, tf = 8.5 mm, tw = 5.6 mm, r = 12 mm

hw = h 2t f = 200 2 85 = 183mm
=
c
Iyy

b f tw 2r 100 5.6 2 12
=
= 35.2 mm
2
2
= 19,430,000 mm4

Wel,y = 194,300 mm3

Wpl,y = 220,600 mm3
Member:
Lyy = Lzz = 3,500 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 =
1
M1 =
1
y = 0.21
Loadings:
N Ed = 210, 000 N
M Ed , y ,Left = 0 N-m
M Ed , y ,Right = 43000 N-m

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
235
=
fy

1 =

235
= 1
235

N Ed
1
1
2 2htw f y

1
210, 000

=
1
0.6737
2 2 200 5.6 235

Localized Buckling for Flange:

For the tip in compression under combined bending and compression

cl .1 =
e =

9
9 1
=
= 13.36
0.6737
c 35.2
=
= 4.14
tf
8.5

=
e 4.14 < =
13.36
cl .1
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression
Localized Buckling for Web:

> 0.5, so
=
cl .1
e =

396
396 1
=
= 51.05 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 0.6737 1
d 183
=
= 28.39
tw 5.6

=
e 32.68 < =
cl .1 51.05
So Web is Class 1 in combined bending and compression
Since Flange and Web are Class 1, Section is Class 1.

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compression Capacity:

N c , Rk = Af y = 2.848 103 235 106 = 669 kN

Member Compression Capacity:

=
N cr ,22

2 EI 22 2 210000 106 19.43 106

=
= 3287 kN
3.52
L2

Section Bending Capacity:

M pl , y , Rk= W pl , y f y= 220.6 106 235 106= 51.8 kN-m

Interaction Capacities - Method 1:

Member Bending & Compression Capacity with Buckling
Compression Buckling Factors
=
y

Af y
=
N cr , y

2.858 103 235 106

= 0.451
3287 103

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

1
1
=
y
=
= 0.939 1
+ 2 2 0.628 + 0.6282 0.4512
y
y

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

=
wy

W pl , y 220.6 106
=
= 1.135 1.5
Wel , y 194.3 106

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Cmo Factor

=
y

M Ed , y ,right
0
0
=
=
M Ed , y ,left 43 103

Cmy=
0.79 + 0.21 y + 0.36 ( y 0.33)
,0

N Ed
N cr , y
210
0.79 + 0.21 0 + 0.36 ( 0 0.33)
Cmy =
= 0.782
,0
3287
0.782 because no LTB is likely to occur.
=
Cmy C=
my ,0
Elastic-Plastic Bending Resistance
Because LTB is prevented, bLT = 0 so aLT = 0

1.6

N
1.6
1 + ( wy 1) 2
C yy =
Cmy 2 22
Cmy 2 y 2 Ed bLT
N c , Rk
wy
wy

M1

1.6
1.6
210 10
0.7822 0.451
0.7822 0.4512

1 + (1.135 1) 2
0
C yy =

3
1.135
669 10
1.135

1.0

C yy = 1.061

D
=
/ CAxial

Wel , y
W pl , y

N Ed
=
N c , Rk

M1

194.3 106
= 0.881
220.6 106

210 103
669 103
0.939
1

D / CAxial = 0.334

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

D / CBending

Cmy M Ed , y ,right

=
y

1 N Ed C M pl , y , Rk
N cr , y yy M 1

ETABS
0

3
0.782 43 10

=
0.996

3
3

210 10
51.8 10

1.061
1

3
3287 10
1

D / CBending = 0.646
D / CTotal = 0.980

EN 3-2005 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EN 3-2005 Example 002

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

NEd
A

L/2

L/2

Section A-A

L = 1.4 m
Material Properties
E = 210x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 80770 MPa

Loading
N =

1050 kN

Design Properties
fy = 275 MPa
Section: 406x178x74 UB

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness (beam)
Section shear capacity
Section bending capacity with shear reduction

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.5 on pp. 53-55 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 1

Class 1

0.00%

689.2

689.2

0.00%

412.8

412.8

0.00%

386.8

386.8

0.00%

Section Shear Resistance,

Vpl,Rd (kN)
Section Bending Resistance,
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Shear-Reduced Bending
Resistance, Mv,y,Rd (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
fy = 275 MPa
E = 210000 MPa
Section: 406x178x74 UB
A = 9450 mm2
b = 179.5 mm, tf = 16 mm, h = 412.8 mm, tw = 9.5 mm, r = 10.2 mm

hw = h 2t f = 412.8 2 16 = 380.8 mm
d = h 2 ( t f + r ) = 412.8 2 (16 + 10.2 ) = 360.4 mm

=
c

b tw 2r 179.5 9.5 2 10.2

=
= 74.8 mm
2
2

Wpl,y = 501,000 mm3

Other:

M 0 = 1.0

= 1.2
Loadings:
N Ed = 0 kN
N = 1050 kN @ mid-span

Results in the following internal forces:

VEd = 525 kN
M Ed = 367.5 kN-m

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
=

235
=
fy

235
= 0.924
275

Localized Buckling for Flange:

cl .1 = 9 = 9 0.924 = 8.32 for pure compression
e =

c 74.8
=
= 4.68
tf
16

=
e 4.68 < =
8.32
cl .1
So Flange is Class 1 in pure compression
Localized Buckling for Web:
cl .1= 72= 72 0.924= 66.56 for pure bending

e =

d 360.4
=
= 37.94
9.5
tw

=
e 37.94 < =
cl .1 66.56
So Web is Class 1 in pure bending
Since Flange & Web are Class 1, Section is Class 1.
Section Shear Capacity
Av min = h wtw = 1.2 380.8 9.5 = 4341mm 2

Av = A 2bt f + (tw + 2r )t f = 9450 2 179.5 16 + ( 9.5 + 2 10.2 ) 16

=
Av 4021.2 mm 2 < Av min

So Av = 4341mm 2

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

=
V pl , Rd

ETABS
0

Av f y 4341 275
=
= 689, 245 N

M 0 3 1.0 3

V pl , Rd = 689.2 kN

Section Bending Capacity

M
=
c , y , Rd

W pl , y f y 1501, 000 275

=
= 412, 775, 000 N-mm
M0
1

M c , y , Rd = 412.8 kN-m

With Shear Reduction:

2

2VEd
2 525 2
=

1=
1= 0.27
V pl , Rd
689.2

Aw = hwtw = 380.8 9.5 = 3617.6 mm 2

=
M v , y , Rd

fy
Aw 2 275
0.27 3617.62

1,501,
000
W

4 9.5
M 0 pl , y 4tw 1.0

M v , y , Rd = 386,829, 246 N-mm

M v , y , Rd = 386.8 kN-m

EN 3-2005 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EN 3-2005 Example 003

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

M
P

Section A-A

L = 0.4 m
Material Properties
E = 210x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 80769 MPa

Loading

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
P = 1400 kN
Section: 457x191x98 UB
M = 200 kN-m

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

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

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-EC-3-2005.pdf, which is also
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 2

Class 2

0.00%

2937.5

2937.5

0.00%

524.1

524.5

-0.08%

341.9

342.2

Section Compression Resistance,

Npl,Rd (kN)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
Mpl,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Reduced Bending Resistance,
Mn,y,Rd (kN-m)

-0.09%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 3-2005 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210000 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 10.2 mm

hw = h 2t f = 467.2 2 19.6 = 428 mm

d = h 2 ( t f + r ) = 467.2 2 (19.6 + 10.2 ) = 407.6 mm

=
c

b tw 2r 192.8 11.4 2 10.2

=
= 80.5 mm
2
2

Wpl,y = 2,232,000 mm3

Other:
M 0 =
1.0

Loadings:

P = 1400 kN axial load

Results in the following internal forces:
N Ed = 1400 kN
M = 200 kN-m
Section Compactness:
=

235
=
fy

235
= 1
235

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

1 =
=

N Ed
1
1
2 2htw f y

ETABS
0

1
1, 400, 000

=
1
2.7818 > 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235

=1.0
Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
cl .1 =
e =

9 9 1
=
= 9

1
c 80.5
=
= 4.11
t f 19.6

=
e 4.11 < =
9
cl .1
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression
Localized Buckling for Web:
> 0.5, so
=
cl .1

e =

396
396 1
=
= 33.00 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 1 1

d 407.6
=
= 35.75
tw 11.4

=
e 35.75 > =
cl .1 33.00
=
cl .2

456
456 1
=
= 38.00
13 1 13 1 1

=
e 35.75 <
=
38.00
cl .2

So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Section Compression Capacity
N pl=
, Rd

Af y 12,500 235
=
M 0
1

N pl , Rd = 2937.5 kN

Section Bending Capacity

M=
pl , y , Rd

W pl , y f y 2, 232, 000 235

=
M 0
1

M pl , y , Rd = 524.5 kN-m

Axial Reduction

N Ed =
1400kN > 0.25 N pl , Rd =
0.25 2937.5 =
734.4 kN
N Ed =
1400kN > 0.5

hwtw f y
M 0

428 11.4 235

=
0.5
=
573.3kN
1

So moment resistance must be reduced.

=
n

N Ed
1400
=
= 0.48
N pl , Rd 2937.5

A 2bt f 12,500 2 192.8 19.6

=
= 0.40
12,500
A
1 n
1 0.48
M N=
M pl , y , Rd
= 524.5
, y , Rd
1 0.5a
1 0.5 0.4

=
a

M N , y , Rd = 342.2 kN-m

EN 3-2005 Example 003 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

IS 800-2007 Example 001

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

NEd

L
A

Section A-A
L = 3m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923 MPa

Loading
N = 1 kN

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
fu = 410 MPa
Section: ISMB 350

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (column)
Member compression capacity

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 9.2 on pp. 765-766 in Design of Steel Structures by N. Subramanian.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Plastic

Plastic

0.00%

Design Axial Strength, Ncrd

733.85

734.07

-0.03%

Output Parameter

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: Fe 250
E = 200,000 MPa
fy = 250 MPa
Section: ISMB 350
A = 6670 mm2
b = 140 mm, tf = 14.2 mm, d = 350 mm, tw = 8.1 mm, r = 1.8 mm

h =d 2 ( t f + r ) =350 2 (14.2 + 1.8 ) =318 mm

ry = 28.4 mm, rz = 143 mm
Member:
KLy = KLz = 3,000 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 =
1.1

Loadings:
N Ed = 1 kN

Section Compactness:
=

250
=
fy

250
= 1
250

Localized Buckling for Flange:

=
8.4= 8.4 =
1 8.4
p

e =

b
70
=
= 4.93
t f 14.2

=
e 4.93 <
=
8.40
p

So Flange is Plastic in compression

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Localized Buckling for Web:

p= N / A & s= 42= 42 for compression

e =

d 318
=
= 39.26
tw 8.1

=
e 39.26 < =
s 42
So Web is Plastic in compression
Since Flange & Web are Plastic, Section is Plastic.
Member Compression Capacity:
Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
h 350
=
= 2.5 > 1.2
b f 140

and

=
t f 14.2 mm < 40 mm
So we should use the Buckling Curve a for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve b
for the y-y axis (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7).
Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve a, =0.21 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
Euler Buckling Stress:
=
f cc

=
z

fy
=
f cc

2 E
2 200, 000
=
=
4485 MPa
2
2
K z Lz
3, 000

143
rz

250
= 0.2361
4485

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

=
0.5 1 + ( 0.2 ) + =
2 0.5 1 + 0.21( 0.2361 0.2 ) + 0.23612
=0.532
Stress Reduction
Factor:
=

1
1
=
= 0.9920
2
2
+
0.532 + 0.5322 0.23612

fy
250
f cd , z =

=
0.992
=
255.5 MPa
M 0
1.1
Y-Y Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, =0.34 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
Euler Buckling Stress:
=
f cc

=
y

fy
=
f cc

2 E
2 200, 000
=
=
177 MPa
2
2
K z Lz
3, 000

28.4
rz

250
= 1.189
177

=
0.5 1 + ( 0.2 ) + =
2 0.5 1 + 0.34 (1.189 0.2 ) + 1.1892

=1.375
Stress Reduction
Factor:
=

1
1
=
= 0.4842
2
2
+
1.375 + 1.3752 1.1892

fy
250
f cd , y =

=
=
0.4842
110.1MPa Governs
M 0
1.1
=
Pd Af=
6670 110.1
cd , y

Pd = 734.07 kN

IS 800-2007 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

IS 800-2007 Example 002

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

Section A-A
L1

L2

L3

A
L1 = 4.9 m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923 MPa

L2 = 6 m
Loading
w = 48.74 kN/m

L3 = 4.9 m
Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: ISLB 500

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (beam)
Section shear capacity
Member bending capacity
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 10.8 on pp. 897-901 in Design of Steel Structures by N. Subramanian.
The torsional constant, It, is calculated by the program as a slightly different
value, which accounts for the percent different in section bending resistance.

Output Parameter
Compactness
Section Bending Resistance,
Md(LTB) (kN-m)
Section Shear Resistance,
Vd (kN)

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Plastic

Plastic

0.00%

157.70

157.93

0.14%

603.59

603.59

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: Fe 250
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76,923 MPa
fy = 250 MPa
Section: ISLB 500
(Note: In ETABS, the section is not available with original example properties,
including fillet properties. A similar cross-section with fillet r = 0 was used, with
similar results, shown below.)
A = 9550 mm2
h = 500 mm, bf = 180 mm, tf = 14.1 mm, tw = 9.2 mm
=
b

b f 180
=
= 90 mm
2
2

d =h 2 ( t f + r ) =500 2 (14.1 + 0 ) =471.8 mm

Iz = 385,790,000 mm4, Iy = 10,639,000.2 mm4
Zez = 1,543,160 mm3, Zpz = 1,543,200 mm3
ry = 33.4 mm
Member:
Lleft = 4.9 m
Lcenter = 6 m (governs)
Lright = 4.9 m
KLy = KLz = 6,000 mm (unbraced length)
M 0 =
1.1

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Loadings:
N Ed = 0 kN

= 48.75 kN/m

Section Compactness:
=

250
=
fy

250
= 1
250

r1 = 0 since there is no axial force

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

b
90
=
= 6.38
t f 14.1

=
e 6.38 <
=
9.40
p
So Flange is Plastic in pure bending
Localized Buckling for Web:

=
p
e =

84
84 1
=
= 84
(1 + r1 ) (1 + 0)
d 471.8
=
= 51.28
tw
9.2

=
e 51.28 <=
p 84.00

So Web is Plastic in pure bending

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

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Shear Capacity:

Vd=

fy
M 0 3

htw=

250
500 9.2
1.1 3

Vd = 603.59 kN

Member Bending Capacity

h f =h t f =500 14.1 =485.9
3
bi ti 3 2b f t f
d t 3 2 180 14.13 485.9 9.23
I t =
=
+ iw =
+
=4.63 105 mm 4
3
3
3
3
3

From Roark & Young, 5th Ed., 1975, Table 21, Item 7, pg.302

t1= t2= t f and b1= b2= b f

for symmetric sections

h f 2t1t2b13b23
485.92 14.1 14.1 1803 1803
=
Iw
=
=
8.089 1011 mm 6
3
3
3
3
12 t1b1 + t2b2
12 14.2 180 + 14.2 180

C1 = 1.0 (Assumed in example and specified in ETABS)

2 EI y
2 EI w

GI
+
t
2
2
( KL )
( KL )

=
M cr C1

M cr 1.0
=

2 200, 000 10, 639, 000.2

2 200, 000 8.089 1011

76,923
462,508

+
2
2

( 6, 000 )
( 6, 000 )

M cr = 215,936,919.3 N-mm
LT =
0.21
b =
1.0
=
LT

b Z pz f y
=
M cr

1 1,543, 200 250

= 1.337
215,936,919.3

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

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

LT =
1.5127
=
LT
LT
=
=
fbd

1
LT + LT 2 LT 2

1.0

= 0.450 1.0
1.5127 + 1.5127 2 1.337 2
LT f y 0.450 250
=
= 102.3MPa
M 0
1.1

M d , LTB
= Z pz fbd= 1543.2 103 102.3
= 157,925, 037.7 N-mm

M d , LTB = 157.93kN-m

IS 800-2007 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

IS 800-2007 Example 003

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

Z-Axis

Y-Y

My,top
Mz,top

Z-Z
L

N
A

A
Mz,bot
My,bot

Section A-A

L=4m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Loading
N = 2500 kN
Mz,top = 350 kN-m
Mz,bot = -350 kN-m
My,top = 100 kN-m
My,bot = 0

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: W310x310x226

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section Compactness Check (Beam-Column)
Section Compression Capacity
Section Shear Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Section Bending Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Member Compression Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Member Bending Capacity for Major & Minor Axes
Interaction Capacity, D/C, for Major & Minor Axes
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-IS-800-2007.pdf, which is also
available through the program Help menu. The example was taken from
Example 13.2 on pp. 1101-1106 in Design of Steel Structures by N.
Subramanian.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Plastic

Plastic

0.00%

6520

6520

0.00%

6511

6511

0.00%

Compactness
Plastic Compression Resistance,
Nd (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
Pdz (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
Pdy (kN)
Section Bending Resistance,
Mdz (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance,
Mdy (kN-m)
Buckling Resistance in Bending,
MdLTB (kN-m)
Section Shear Resistance,
Vdy (kN)
Section Shear Resistance,
Vdz (kN)

5295

5295

0.00%

897.46

897.46

0.00%

325.65

325.65

0.00%

886.84

886.84

0.00%

1009.2

1009.2

0.00%

2961.6

2961.6

0.00%

Interaction Capacity, D/C

1.050

1.050

0.00%

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

COMPUTER FILE: IS 800-2007 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: Fe 410
E = 200,000 MPa
G = 76,923.08 MPa
fy = 250 MPa
Section: W310x310x226
A = 28,687.7 mm2
bf = 317 mm, tf = 35.6 mm, h = 348 mm, tw = 22.1 mm, r = 0 mm
=
b

b f 317
=
= 158.5 mm ,
2
2

d =h 2 ( t f + r ) =348 2 ( 35.6 + 0 ) =276.8 mm

Iz = 592,124,221 mm4, Iy = 189,255,388.9 mm4
rz = 143.668 mm, ry = 81.222 mm
Zez = 3,403,012. 8 mm3, Zey = 1,194,040.3 mm3
Zpz = 3,948,812.3 mm3, Zpy = 1,822,502.2 mm3
It = 10,658,941.4 mm6, Iw = 4.611 1012 mm6
Member:
Ly = Lz = 4,000 mm (unbraced length)

M 0 = 1.1
Loadings:
P = 2500 kN

Vz = 25 kN
Vy = 175 kN

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

=
M z 1 350 kN m
M z 2 =
350 kN m

=
M y 1 100 kN m
M=
0 kN m
y 2

Section Compactness:
=

r1
=

fy
=
250

250
= 1
250

P
2,500, 000
=
= 2.01676
fy
2.5
246.8 22.1
dtw
1.1
mo

Localized Buckling for Flange:

p= 9.4= 9.4 1= 9.4

=
e

b 158.5
=
= 4.45
tf
35.6

e = 4.45 < p = 9.40

So Flange is Plastic in pure bending
Localized Buckling for Web:
=
p

=
e

84
84 1
=
= 27.84
(1 + r1 ) (1 + 2.01676)

d 246.8
=
= 11.20
tw
22.1

e= 11.20 < p= 27.84

So Web is Plastic in bending & compression
Section is Plastic.

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compression Capacity:

Ag f y 28687.7 250
=
1.1
M0

Nd
=

N d = 6520 kN

Section Shear Capacity:

For major z-z axis

Avz =htw =348 22.1 =7690.8 mm 2

VPz
=

fy

M0

250
Avz
=
7690.8
3
1.1 3

VPz = 1009.2 kN

For minor y-y axis

Avy =
2b f t f =
2 317 35.6 =
22,570.4 mm 2
=
VPy

fy

M0

250
=
Avy
22570.4
3
1.1 3

VPy = 2961.6 kN

Section Bending Capacity:

For major z-z axis
M dz =

b Z pz f y 1 3,948,812.3 250 1.2Z ez f y 1.2 3, 403, 012.8 250

=

=
M0
1.1
M0
1.1

=
M dz 897.46 kN m 933.54 kN m
=
M dz 897.46 kN m

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 6

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

For minor y-y axis

b Z py f y 1 1,822,502.2 250 1.2 Z ey f y 1.2 1,194, 040.3 250

=

=
1.1
1.1
M0
M0
=
M dy 414.21 kN m 325.65 kN m
M dy =

=
M dy 325.65 kN m

With Shear Reduction:

For major z-z axis
Vz =
25 kN < 0.6VPz =
0.6 1009.2 =
605.5 kN No shear reduction is needed.

For minor y-y axis

Vy =
175 kN < 0.6VPy =
0.6 2961.6 =
1777 kN No shear reduction is needed.

With Compression Reduction:

=
n

P 2500
=
= 0.383
N d 6520

For major z-z axis

M ndz = 1.11M dz (1 n ) = 1.11 897.46 (1 0.383) M dz
=
M ndz 614.2 kN m < 897.46 kN m
For minor y-y axis, since n > 0.2
M ndy = 1.56 M dy (1 n )( n + 0.6 ) = 1.56 325.65 (1 0.383)( 0.383 + 0.6 )

=
M ndy 308.0 kN m

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Compression Capacity:

Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
h 348
=
= 1.1 < 1.2
b f 317

and

=
t f 35.6 mm < 40 mm
So we should use the Buckling Curve b for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve c for the
y-y axis (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7).
Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, = 0.34 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
K z = 0.65
K z Lz =0.65 4000 =2600 mm,
Euler Buckling Stress:
=
f cr , z

=
z

fy
=
f cr , z

K z Lz
2600
=
=18.097
rz
143.668

2E
2 200, 000
=
=
6027 MPa
2
2
K z Lz
(18.097 )

rz

250
= 0.2037
6022

z = 0.5 1 + z ( z 0.2 ) + z 2 = 0.5 1 + 0.34 ( 0.2037 0.2 ) + 0.2037 2

z = 0.5214
Stress Reduction
Factor: z
=

f cd , z=

fy

M0

= 0.9987

1
1
=
= 0.9987
2
2
z + z z
0.5214 + 0.52142 0.2037 2

250
= 226.978 MPa
1.1

=
Pdz f=
226.978 28, 687.7
cd , z Ag

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 8

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Pdz = 6511 kN

Y-Y Axis Parameters:

For buckling curve c, = 0.49 (IS 7.1.1, 7.1.2.1, Table 7)
K y = 1.00

K y Ly =
1 4000 =
4000 mm,

Euler Buckling Stress:

=
f cr , y

=
y

fy
=
f cr , y

K y Ly
ry

4000
=
=
49.25
81.222

2E
2 200, 000
=
=
813.88 MPa
2
2
49.25
K y Ly
(
)

ry

250
= 0.5542
813.88

y = 0.5 1 + y ( y 0.2 ) + y 2 = 0.5 1 + 0.49 ( 0.5542 0.2 ) + 0.55422

y = 0.7404
Stress Reduction
Factor: y
=

f cd , y=

fy

M0

= 0.8122

1
1
=
= 0.8122
2
2
0.7404 + 0.74042 0.55422
y + y y

250
= 184.584 MPa
1.1

=
Pdy f=
184.584 28, 687.7
cd , y Ag
Pdy = 5295 kN

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 9

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity:

C1 = 2.7 (Program Calculation from AISC equation, where C1 < 2.7 )

2 EI y

2 EI w

+
GI
t
2
2
( KL )
( KL )

=
M cr C1
M cr 2.7
=

2 200, 000 189,300, 000

( 4, 000 )

76,923.08 10, 658,941.4 +

2 200, 000 4.611 1012

( 4, 000 )

=
M cr 15,374, 789,309 N mm

LT = 0.21
b = 1.0
LT
=

b Z pz f y
=
M cr

1 3,948,812.3 250
= 0.2534
15,374, 789,309

LT = 0.5 1 + LT ( LT 0.2 ) + LT 2 = 0.5 1 + 0.21 ( 0.2534 0.2 ) + 0.25342

LT = 0.5377
LT
=

LT + LT 2 + LT 2

1.0

=
LT

= 0.9882 1.0
0.5377 + 0.5377 2 + 0.25342

=
fbd

LT f y 0.9882 250
=
= 224.58 MPa
M0
1.1

M dLTB = Z pz fbd = 3,948,812.3 224.58 = 886,839, 489 N mm

=
M dLTB 886.84 kN m

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 10

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending

Member Bending & Compression Capacity with Buckling
Z-Z Axis

=
nz

P 2500
=
= 0.3839
Pdz 6511

K z = 1 + ( z 0.2 ) nz = 1 + ( 0.2037 0.2 ) 0.3839 1 + 0.8nz = 1 + 0.8 ( 0.3839 )

=
K z 1.0014 1.3072 so K z = 1.0014

z =

M 2 350
=
= 1
350
M1

Cmz
= 0.6 + 0.4
= 0.6 + 0.4 =
1 0.2 > 0.4 so Cmz
= 0.4

Y-Y Axis
=
ny

P 2500
=
= 0.4721
Pdy 5295

K y = 1 + ( y 0.2 ) n y = 1 + ( 0.554 0.2 ) 0.4721 1 + 0.8n y = 1 + 0.8 ( 0.4721)

=
K y 1.167 1.378 so K y = 1.167

=
y

M2
0
= = 0
M 1 100

Cmy = 0.6 + 0.4 = 0.6 + 0.4 0= 0.6 > 0.4 so Cmy = 0.6

Lateral-Torsional Buckling
CmLT = 0.4
K LT = 1

0.1LT n y
CmLT 0.25

0.1n y
CmLT 0.25

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 11

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

K LT = 1

ETABS
0

0.1 0.2534 0.4721

0.1 0.4721
= 0.920 1
= 0.831
0.4 0.25
0.4 0.25

K LT = 0.920

Formula IS 9.3.2.2 (a)

D P K y Cmy M y K LT M z 2500 1.167 0.6 100 0.920 350
=+
+
= +
+
C Pdy
M dy
M dLTB
5295
325.65
886.84

D
= 0.472 + 0.215 + 0.363
C
D
= 1.050 (Governs)
C

Formula IS 9.3.2.2 (b)

D P 0.6 K y Cmy M y K z Cmz M z 2500 0.6 1.167 0.6 100 1.0014 0.4 350
=
+
+
=+
+
C Pdz
M dy
M dLTB
6511
325.65
886.84

D
= 0.384 + 0.129 + 0.158
C
D
= 0.671
C

IS 800-2007 Example 003 - 12

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

KBC 2009 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design flexural strengths are checked for the beam shown below. The beam
is loaded with a uniform load of 6.5 kN/m (D) and 11 kN/m (L). The flexural
moment capacity is checked for three unsupported lengths in the weak direction,
Lb = 1.75 m, 6 m and 12 m.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W460x74
E = 205,000 MPa
Fy = 345 MPa

Loading
w = 6.5 kN/m (D)
w = 11.0 kN/m (L)

Geometry
Span, L = 12m

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section Compactness Check (Bending)
Member Bending Capacities
Unsupported length factors

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are comparing with the results of ETABS.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compact

Compact

0.00%

1.004

1.002

0.20%

515.43

515.43

0.00%

Cb ( L b =4m)

1.015

1.014

0.10%

b M

394.8

394.2

0.15%

1.136

1.136

0.00%

113.47

113.45

0.17%

Output Parameter
Compactness
Cb ( L b =1.75m)
b M

( L b =1.75m) (kN-m)

( L b =4m) (kN-m)

Cb ( L b =12m)
b M

( L b =12m) (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: KBC 2009 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
E = 205,000 MPa, Fy = 345 MPa
Section: W460x74
bf = 191 mm, tf = 14.5 mm, d = 457 mm, tw = 9 mm
h d 2 t f 4 5 7 2 1 4 .5 4 2 8 m m
h 0 d t f 4 5 7 1 4 .5 4 4 2 .5 m m

S33 = 1457.3 cm3, Z33 = 1660 cm3

Iy =1670 cm4, ry = 42 mm, Cw = 824296.4 cm6, J = 51.6 cm4
I yC w

rts

1 6 7 0 8 2 4 2 9 6 .4

S 33

R m 1 .0

5 0 .4 5 m m

1 4 5 7 .3

for doubly-symmetric sections

Other:
c = 1.0
L = 12 m
Loadings:
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 1.2(6.5) + 1.6(11) = 25.4 kN/m
M

wu L

= 25.4 122/8 = 457.2 kN-m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:

bf
2t f

191
2 1 4 .5

6 .5 8 6

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

p 0 .3 8
p

0 .3 8

2 0 5, 0 0 0

Fy

ETABS
0

9 .2 6 3

345

, No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:

428

tw

p 3 .7 6
p

4 7 .5 6

3 .7 6

2 0 5, 0 0 0

Fy

9 1 .6 5 4

345

, No localized web buckling

Web is Compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Bending Capacity:
M

F y Z 3 3 3 4 5 1 6 6 0 5 7 2 .7 k N -m

Lateral-Torsional Buckling Parameters:

Critical Lengths:
L p 1 .7 6 r y

L r 1 .9 5 rts

2 0 5, 0 0 0

1 .7 6 4 2

Fy

Jc

0 .7 F y

S 33 ho

L r 1 .9 5 5 0 .4 5

1 8 0 1 .9 m m 1 .8 m

345

0 .7 F y S 3 3 h o
1 6 .7 6

Jc
E

2 0 5, 0 0 0

5 1 .6 1

0 .7 3 4 5

1 4 5 7 .3 4 4 .2 5

0 .7 3 4 5 1 4 5 7 .3 4 4 .8
1 6 .7 6

5 1 .6 1
2 0 5, 0 0 0

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

L r 5 .2 5 m

Non-Uniform Moment Magnification Factor:

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

12 . 5 M

Cb

2 .5 M

max

3M

R m 3 .0

max

4M

3M

Eqn. 1

Where MA = first quarter-span moment, MB = mid-span moment, MC = second quarter-span

moment.
The required moments for Eqn. 1 can be calculated as a percentage of the maximum mid-span
moment. Since the loading is uniform and the resulting moment is symmetric:
M

1 Lb

4 L

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 1.75 m:

M

m ax

1 .0 0
2

1 Lb
1 1 .7 5
1
0 .9 9 5
1
4 L
4 12

1 2 .5 1 .0 0

Cb

2 .5 1 .0 0 3 0 .9 9 5 4 1 .0 0 3 0 .9 9 5

C b 1 .0 0 2
Lb L p ,

Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

5 7 2 .7 k N -m

b M

0 .9 5 7 2 .7

b M

5 1 5 .4 3 k N -m

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 4 m:

m ax

1 .0 0
2

1 Lb
1 4
0 .9 7 2

1
4 L
4 12
1 2 .5 1 .0 0

Cb

2 .5 1 .0 0 3 0 .9 7 2 4 1 .0 0 3 0 .9 7 2

C b 1 .0 1 4

L p Lb Lr

C b M

, Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

Lb L p
0 . 7 F y S 33
L L
p
r

4 .0 0 1 .8 0
1 .0 1 4 5 7 2 .7 5 7 2 .7 0 .7 0 .3 4 5 1 4 5 7 .3
5 .2 5 1 .8 0

b M

0 .9 4 3 7 .9 7

b M

3 9 4 .2 k N -m

4 3 7 .9 7 k N -m

Member Bending Capacity for Lb = 12 m:

M

m ax

1 .0 0
2

Cb

1 Lb
1 12
1
0 .7 5 0
1
4 L
4 12

1 2 .5 1 .0 0
2 .5 1 .0 0 3 0 .7 5 0 4 1 .0 0 3 0 .7 5 0

1 .0 0

C b 1 .1 3 6
Lb Lr ,

Lateral-Torsional buckling capacity is as follows:

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Lb
1 0 .0 7 8

S 3 3 h o rts

C b E
2

Fcr

Fcr

Lb

rts

Jc

1 .1 3 6

ETABS
0

2 0 5, 0 0 0

12000

5 0 .4 5

1 0 .0 7 8

F cr S 33 M

8 6 .5 1 4 5 7 .3 1 2 6 .0 5 6 k N -m

5 1 .6 1

12000

1 4 5 7 .3 4 4 .2 5 5 0 .4 5

8 6 .5 M P a

b M

0 .9 1 2 6 .0 5 6

b M

1 1 3 .4 5 k N -m

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

KBC 2009 Example 002

BUILT UP WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A demand capacity ratio is calculated for the built-up, ASTM A572 grade 50,
column shown below. An axial load of 300 kips (D) and 900 kips (L) is applied to
a simply supported column with a height of 5m.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

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

KBC 2009 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with the results from
ETABS.

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Slender

Slender

0.00%

cPn (kN)

2056.7

2056.7

0.00 %

Output Parameter

COMPUTER FILE: KBC 2009 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

KBC 2009 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
E = 205,000 MPa, Fy =345 MPa
Section: Built-Up Wide Flange
d = 432 mm, bf = 203 mm, tf = 25 mm, h = 382 mm, tw = 7 in.
Ignoring fillet welds:
A = 2(203)(25) + (382)(7) = 128.24 cm2
Iy

2 ( 2 5 )( 2 0 3)

Iy

3 4 .8 6 7 E 0 6

3 4 .8 6 7 E 0 6 m m

12

5 2 .1 m m .

12824

Ad

Ix

C w 1 4 4 3 4 6 3 .1 c m
J

(3 8 2 )(7 )

12

ry

Ix

bt

2 1 6 .1 c m

Member:
K = 1.0 for a pinned-pinned condition
L=5m
Loadings:
Pu = 1.2(300) + 1.6(700) = 1800 kN

Section Compactness:
Check for slender elements using Specification KBC 2009:

-3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Localized Buckling for Flange:

1 0 1 .5

4 .0 6

25

p 0 .3 8
p

2 0 5, 0 0 0

0 .3 8

Fy

9 .2 6 3

345

, No localized flange buckling

Flange is Compact.
Localized Buckling for Web:

382

5 4 .5 7

r 1 .4 9

1 .4 9

2 0 5, 0 0 0

Fy

3 6 .3 2

345

, Localized web buckling

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

1 .0 5 0 0 0

ry

E
2

Fe

9 5 .9 7

5 2 .1

KL

2 0 5, 0 0 0

9 5 .9 7

= 219.68 MPa

Elastic Critical Torsional Buckling Stress

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

-4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

2 EC w

1
Fe
GJ
2
K z L
Ix I

Fe

ETABS
0

2 0 5 , 0 0 0 1 4 4 3 4 6 3 .1 E 0 6

5000
= 588 MPa > 288.84 MPa
2

1
7 8 8 4 6 .1 5 2 1 6 .1 E 0 4
4 5 3 3 8 3 4 8 6 .7 E 0 4

Therefore, the flexural buckling limit state controls.

Fe = 220 MPa
Section Reduction Factors
Since the flange is not slender,
Qs = 1.0
Since the web is slender,
Take f as Fcr with Q = 1.0
E

4 .7 1

4 .7 1

Q Fy

2 0 5, 0 0 0
1 .0 3 4 5

1 1 4 .8

KLy

9 5 .9 7

ry

So
f Fcr

Q 0 .6 5 8

b e 1 .9 2 t

QFy
Fe

F y 1 .0

E
0 .3 4
1
f
b t

b e 1 .9 2 7

1 .0 3 4 5

220
0 .6 5 8

3 4 5 1 7 8 .9 8 M P a

E
b , w h e re b h
f

2 0 5, 0 0 0
0 .3 4
1
1 7 8 .9 8
382 7

2 0 5, 0 0 0
3 5 9 .1 2 m m
1 7 8 .9 8

b e 3 5 9 .1 2 m m 3 8 2 m m

therefore compute Aeff with reduced effective web width.

2
A e ff b e t w 2 b f t f 3 5 9 .1 2 7 2 2 0 3 2 5 1 2 6 6 3 .8 4 m m
where Aeff is effective area based on the reduced effective width of the web, be.

-5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Qa

A e ff

1 2 6 6 3 .8 4

ETABS
0

0 .9 8 7 5

12824

Q Q s Q a 1 .0 0 0 .9 8 7 5 0 .9 8 7 5

Critical Buckling Stress

Determine whether Specification Equation E7-2 or E7-3 applies

4 .7 1

4 .7 1

Q Fy

2 0 5, 0 0 0
0 .9 8 7 5 3 4 5

1 3 8 .4 7

KLy

9 5 .9 7

ry

Therefore, Specification Equation E7-2 applies.

When

4 .7 1

E
Q Fy

Fcr

KL
r

Q 0 .6 5 8

Q Fy
Fe

0 .9 8 7 5 3 4 5

220
F y 0 .9 8 7 5 0 .6 5 8
3 4 5 1 7 8 .2 M P a

Nominal Compressive Strength

Pn F c r A g 1 2 8 2 4 1 7 8 .2 2 2 8 5 2 3 6 .8 N

c 0 .9 0
c Pn F c r A g 0 .9 0 2 2 8 5 .2 4 2 0 5 6 .7 k N

> 1800 kN

-6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

NTC 2008 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE SECTION UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In this example a continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P =
1400 kN and major-axis bending moment M = 200 kN-m. The beam is
continuously braced to avoid any buckling effects. This example was tested using
the Italian NTC-2008 steel frame design code. The design capacities are
compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

M
P

Section A-A

L = 0.4 m
Material Properties
E = 210x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 80769 MPa

Loading
P = 1400 kN
M = 200 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section shear capacity
Section bending capacity with compression & shear reductions
Interaction capacity, D/C

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NTC-2008.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 2

Class 2

0.00%

2797.6

2797.6

0.00%

667.5

667.5

0.00%

499.1

499.1

0.00%

310.8

310.8

0.00%

470.1

470.1

0.00%

0.644

0.644

0.00%

Section Compression Resistance,

Nc,Rd (kN)
Section Shear Resistance,
Vc,Rd,y (kN)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Axially
Reduced,
MN,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Shear
Reduced,
MV,y,Rd (kN-m)
Interaction Capacity, D/C

COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210000 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 0 mm

hw = h 2t f = 467.2 2 19.6 = 428 mm

d = h 2 ( t f + r ) = 467.2 2 (19.6 + 0 ) = 428 mm

=
c

b tw 2r 192.8 11.4 2 0
=
= 90.7 mm
2
2

Wpl,y = 2,230,000 mm3

Other:
M 0 =
1.05

Loadings:

P = 1400 kN axial load

M y = 200 kN-m bending load at one end
Results in the following internal forces:
N Ed = 1400 kN
VEd = 500 kN
M y , Ed = 200 kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Section Compactness:
235
=
fy

1 =

235
= 1
235

N Ed
1
1
2 2htw f y

1
1, 400, 000

=
1
2.7818 > 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235

=1.0
Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
cl .1 =
e =

9 9 1
=
= 9

1
c 90.7
=
= 4.63
t f 19.6

=
e 4.63 < =
9
cl .1
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression
Localized Buckling for Web:
> 0.5, so

=
cl .1

e =

396
396 1
=
= 33.00 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 1 1

d 428
=
= 37.54
tw 11.4

=
e 37.54 > =
cl .1 33.00
=
cl .2

456
456 1
=
= 38.00
13 1 13 1 1

=
e 37.54 <
=
38.00
cl .2

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.

Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.
Section Compression Capacity
N=
N pl=
, Rd
c , Rd

Af y 12,500 235
=
M 0
1.05

N c , Rd = 2797.6 kN

Section Shear Capacity

AV , y = A 2bt f + t f ( tw + 2r ) = 12,500 2 192.8 19.6 + 19.6 (11.4 + 2 0 )

AV , y = 5,165.7 mm 2
=
Vc , Rd , y

fy
235
=
Avy
5,165.7
M 0 3
1.05 3

Vc , Rd , y = 667.5 kN
=1.0
hw 428
72 235 72 235
37.5 <
72
==
=
=
1.0 235
tw 11.4

fy
So no shear buckling needs to be checked.
Section Bending Capacity
M
=
M=
c , y , Rd
pl , y , Rd

W pl , y f y 2, 230, 000 235

=
M 0
1.05

M c , y , Rd = 499.1kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

with Shear Reduction

V=
500 kN > 0.5 Vc ,=
333.7 kN Shear Reduction is needed
Ed
Rd
Av =htw =467.2 11.4 =4,879.2 mm 2
2

2V
2 500 2

= Ed 1=
1= 0.2482
V
667.5

,
c
Rd

Av 2
0.2482 4879.22
W

2,
230,
000
pl , y
yk
235
4tw
4 11.4

=
M y ,c , Rd
M y ,V , Rd =
M 0
1.05

M V ,r , Rd = 470.1kN-m
with Compression Reduction
=
n

N Ed
1400
=
= 0.50
N pl , Rd 2797.6

A 2bt f 12,500 2 192.8 19.6

=
= 0.40 0.5
A
12,500
1 n
1 0.5
M N=
M pl , y , Rd
= 499.1
, y , Rd
1 0.5a
1 0.5 0.4

=
a

M N , y , Rd = 310.8 kN-m

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending

Section Bending & Compression Capacity
Formula NTC 4.2.39
2

D
=
C

5n

2
M y , Ed M z , Ed
M y , Ed
200
0
0.414
+
=
+
=

= 0.644

310.8
M N , y , Rd
M N , y , Rd M N , z , Rd

D
= 0.644 (Governs)
C

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

NTC 2008 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In this example a continuous beam-column is subjected to factored axial load P =
1400 kN, major-axis bending moment My = 200 kN-m, and a minor axis bending
moment of Mz = 100 kN-m. This example was tested using the Italian NTC-2008
steel frame design code. The design capacities are compared with independent
hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Y-Axis

Z-Axis

Y-Y

My,top
Mz,top

Z-Z
L

P
A

A
Mz,bot
My,bot

Section A-A

L = 0.4 m
Material Properties
E = 210x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 80769 MPa

Loading
P = 1400 kN
Mz,top = 100 kN-m
Mz,bot = -100 kN-m
My,top = 200 kN-m
My,bot = 0

Design Properties
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (beam-column)
Section compression capacity
Section shear capacity for major & minor axes
Section bending capacity for major & minor axes
Member compression capacity for major & minor axes
Member bending capacity
Interaction capacity, D/C, for major & minor axes
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NTC-2008.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu. Examples were taken from Example
6.6 on pp. 57-59 from the book Designers Guide to EN1993-1-1 by R.S.
Narayanan & A. Beeby.

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Class 2

Class 2

0.00%

2,797.6

2,797.6

0.00%

2,797.6

2,797.6

0.00%

2,797.6

2,797.6

0.00%

499.1

499.1

0.00%

84.8

84.8

0.00%

470.1

470.1

0.00%

310.8

310.8

0.00%

82.26

82.26

0.00%

499.095

499.095

0.00%

667.5

667.5

0.00%

984.7

984.7

0.00%

2.044

2.044

0.00%

Section Compression Resistance,

Nc,Rd (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
Nbyy,Rd (kN)
Buckling Resistance in Compression,
Nbzz,Rd (kN)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
Mc,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Plastic Bending Resistance,
Mc,z,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Shear Reduced,
MV,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Axially Reduced,
MN,y,Rd (kN-m)
Section Bending Resistance Axially Reduced,
MN,z,Rd (kN-m)
Member Bending Resistance,
Mb,Rd (kN-m)
Section Shear Resistance,
Vc,y,Rd (kN)
Section Shear Resistance,
Vc,z,Rd (kN)
Interaction Capacity, D/C
COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material: S275 Steel
E = 210,000 MPa
G = 80,769 MPa
fy = 235 MPa
Section: 457x191x98 UB
A = 12,500 mm2
b = 192.8 mm, tf = 19.6 mm, h = 467.2 mm, tw = 11.4 mm, r = 0 mm

hw = h 2t f = 467.2 2 19.6 = 428 mm

d = h 2 ( t f + r ) = 467.2 2 (19.6 + 0 ) = 428 mm

=
c

b tw 2r 192.8 11.4 2 0
=
= 90.7 mm
2
2

Wpl,y = 2,230,000 mm3

Wpl,z = 379,000 mm3
ryy = 191.3 mm
rzz = 43.3331 mm
Izz = 23,469,998 mm4

=
I w 1.176 1012 mm 6
IT = 1,210,000 mm4
Member:
L = Lb = Lunbraced = 400 mm
Kyy = 1.0, Kzz = 1.0
Other:
M 0 =
1.05
M1 =
1.05

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Loadings:

P = 1400 kN axial load

M z 1 = 100 kN-m
M z 2 = 100 kN-m
M y 1 = 200 kN-m
M y 2 = 0 kN-m
Results in the following internal forces:
N Ed = 1400 kN

M y , Ed = 200 kN-m
M z , Ed = 100 kN-m
Vy , Ed = 500 kN-m

Vz , Ed = 0 kN-m

Section Compactness:
=

235
=
fy

1 =

235
= 1
235

N Ed
1
1
2 2htw f y

1
1, 400, 000

=
1
2.7818 > 1, so
2 2 467.2 11.4 235

=1.0
Localized Buckling for Flange:
For the tip in compression under combined bending & compression
cl .1 =

9 9 1
=
= 9

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

e =

ETABS
0

c 90.7
=
= 4.63
t f 19.6

=
e 4.63 < =
9
cl .1
So Flange is Class 1 in combined bending and compression
Localized Buckling for Web:

> 0.5, so
=
cl .1
e =

396
396 1
=
= 33.00 for combined bending & compression
13 1 13 1 1
d 428
=
= 37.54
tw 11.4

=
e 37.54 > =
cl .1 33.00

=
cl .2

456
456 1
=
= 38.00
13 1 13 1 1

=
e 37.54 <
=
38.00
cl .2
So Web is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.
Since Web is Class 2, Section is Class 2 in combined bending & compression.
Section Compression Capacity
N=
N pl=
, Rd
c , Rd

Af y 12,500 235
=
M 0
1.05

N c , Rd = 2, 797.6 kN

Section Shear Capacity

For major y-y axis
AV , y = A 2bt f + t f ( tw + 2r ) = 12,500 2 192.8 19.6 + 19.6 (11.4 + 2 0 )

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AV , y = 5,165.7 mm 2

=
Vc , y , Rd

fy
235
=
5,165.7
Avy
M 0 3
1.05 3

Vc , y , Rd = 667.5 kN

For minor z-z axis

AV , z =A hwtw =
12,500 428 11.4 =
7, 620.8 mm 2
=
Vc , z , Rd

fy
235
=
7, 620.8
Avy
M 0 3
1.05 3

Vc , z , Rd = 984.7 kN
=1.0
hw 428
72 235 72 235
==
=
=
37.5 <
72
tw 11.4

fy
1.0 235
So no shear buckling needs to be checked.
Section Bending Capacity
For major y-y axis
M
=
M=
c , y , Rd
pl , y , Rd

W pl , y f y 2, 230, 000 235

=
M 0
1.05

M c , y , Rd = 499.1kN-m

For minor z-z axis

M
=
M=
c , z , Rd
pl , z , Rd

W pl , z f y 379, 000 235

=
M 0
1.05

M c , z , Rd = 84.8 kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

With Shear Reduction

For major y-y axis

Vy ,=
500 kN > 0.5 Vc , y ,=
333.7 kN Shear Reduction is needed
Ed
Rd
Av =htw =467.2 11.4 =4,879.2 mm 2
2

2VEd
2 500 2

=
1=
1= 0.2482
V
667.5

,
c
Rd

Av 2
0.1525 4879.22

W
f

2,
230,
000
pl , y
yk
235
4tw
4 11.4

=
M y ,c , Rd
M y ,V , Rd =
M 0
1.05

M V ,r , Rd = 470.1kN-m

For minor z-z axis

Vz , Ed = 0 kN < 0.5 Vc , z , Rd No shear Reduction is needed

With Compression Reduction
=
n

=
a

N Ed
1400
=
= 0.50
N pl , Rd 2797.6

A 2bt f 12,500 2 192.8 19.6

=
= 0.40 0.5
A
12,500

For major y-y axis

1 n
1 0.5
= 499.1
1 0.5a
1 0.5 0.4
= 310.8 kN-m

M N=
M pl , y , Rd
, y , Rd
M N , y , Rd

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

For minor z-z axis

n<a

n a 2
0.5 0.4 2
M N , z , Rd= M pl , z , Rd 1
= 84.8 1

1 a
1 0.4
M N , z , Rd = 82.26 kN-m

Member Compression Capacity:

Non-Dimensional Slenderness Ratio:
Steel is S235
h 467.2
=
= 2.4 > 1.2
b f 192.8
and
=
t f 19.6 mm < 40 mm
So we should use the Buckling Curve a for the z-z axis and Buckling Curve b
for the y-y axis (NTC 2008, Table 4.2.VI).
Y-Y Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve a, =0.21 (NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VI)

K y = 1.00
Lcr , y =
K y Ly =
1 400 =
400 mm,
=
N cr , y

=
y

Lcr , y
ry

400
=
=
2.091
191.3

2 E
2 210, 000
=
=
5,925, 691kN
2
2
K y Ly 12,500 ( 2.091)
A
ry

Af y
=
N cr , y

12,500 235
= 0.022
5,925, 691

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 9

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2
0.5 1 + 0.21( 0.022 0.2 ) + 0.0222
=
y 0.5 1 + y y 0.2 + =
y

y =0.482
=
Stress Reduction
Factor: y

1
1
=
= 1.0388
2
2
2
+
0.0222
0.482
0.482
y + y y

=
y 1.0388 > 1.0, so=
y 1.0
N=
byy , Rd

y Af y 1.0 12,500 235

=
M1
1.05

N byy , Rd = 2, 797.6 kN
Z-Z Axis Parameters:
For buckling curve b, =0.34 (NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VI)
K z = 1.00
1 400 =
400 mm,
Lcr , z =
K z Lz =

=
N cr , z

=
z

Lcr , z
rz

400
9.231
=
=
43.33

2 E
2 210, 000
=
=
304, 052 kN
2
2
K z Lz 12,500 ( 9.231)
A

rz

12,500 235
= 0.098
304, 052

Af y
=
N cr , z

2
0.5 1 + 0.34 ( 0.098 0.2 ) + 0.0982
=
z 0.5 1 + z z 0.2 + =
z

z =0.488
Stress Reduction
Factor: z
=

1
1
=
= 1.0362
2
2
2
0.488
0.488
+
0.0982
z + z z

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 10

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

=
z 1.0362 > 1.0, so=
z 1.0
N=
bzz , Rd

z Af y 1.0 12,500 235

=
M1
1.05

N bzz , Rd = 2, 797.6 kN

Member Bending Capacity:

h 467.2
=
= 2.4 > 2
b f 192.8
So we should use the Buckling Curve c for lateral-torsional buckling (NTC
2008, Table 4.2.VII).
LT =
0.49
for rolled section)
LT ,0 =(default
0.4
=0.75 (default for rolled section)
=
M B M=
MA M
=
0, =
200 kN-m
y 2
y 1
2

M
M
0
0
=
1.75 1.05 B + 0.3 B =
+ 0.3
=
1.75 1.05
1.75
200
MA
200
MA
2

Corrective Factor is determined from NTC 2008, Table 4.2 VIII

=
kc

1
1
=
= 1.329
1.33 0.33 1.33 0.33 1.75

2 EI z I w ( Lcr , z ) GIT
M cr =

+
2

I
2 EI z
L
( cr , z ) z
2

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 11

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

2 210, 000 23, 469,998 1.176 1012 4002 80, 769 1, 210, 000
1.75
M cr =
+ 2

4002
23, 469,998 210, 000 23, 469,998

M cr = 119, 477, 445,900 N-mm

=
LT

2, 230, 000 235

= 0.066
119, 477, 445,900

W pl , y f y
=
M cr

2
0.5 1 + 0.49 ( 0.066 0.4 ) + 0.75 0.0662
=
LT 0.5 1 + LT LT LT ,0 + =
LT

LT =
0.420

2
2
f =
1 0.5 (1 kc ) 1 2 LT 0.8 =
1 0.5 (1 1.329 ) 1 2 ( 0.066 0.8 ) =
0.987

=
LT

LT

1
1
1 1
1.0 or

2
f LT + LT 2 + LT 2
LT f

1
1
1
1

1.0 or

2
0.066 0.987
0.987 0.420 + 0.4202 + 0.75 0.0662

=
1.2118 (1.0 or 230.9 )
LT
so
LT =
1.0

fy
235
M b , Rd =
LT W pl , y
=
1.0 2, 230, 000
M1
1.05
M b , Rd = 499.095 kN-m

Interaction Capacity: Compression & Bending

Section Bending & Compression Capacity

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 12

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Formula NTC 4.2.39

2

D M y , Ed M z , Ed
=

C M N , y , Rd M N , z , Rd

5n

200 100
=
310.8 + 82.3

50.5

=
0.414 + 1.630

D
= 2.044 (Governs)
C

Member Bending & Compression Capacity: Method B

k factors used are taken from the software, and determined from Method 2 in
Annex B of Eurocode 3.
k yy = 0.547

k yz = 0.479
k zy = 0.698
k zz = 0.798

Formula NTC 4.2.37

M y , Ed
M z , Ed
N Ed
D
=
+ k yy
+ k yz
W f
W pl , z f yk
C y Af yk
LT pl , y yk
M1
M1
M1

D
C

1, 400
200
100
+ 0.547
+ 0.479
112,500 235
2, 230, 000 235
379, 000 235
1
1.05
1.05
1.05

D
=0.5 + 0.22 + 0.56
C
D
= 1.284
C

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 13

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Formula NTC 4.2.38

M y , Ed
M z , Ed
N Ed
D
=
+ k zy
+ k zz
W f
W pl , z f yk
C z Af yk
LT pl , y yk
M1
M1
M1
D
1, 400
200
100
=
+ 0.698
+ 0.798
2, 230, 000 235
379, 000 235
C 112,500 235
1
1.05
1.05
1.05
D
=0.5 + 0.28 + 0.941
C
D
= 1.721
C

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 14

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMPRESSION
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object axial strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored load N = 200 kN. This example
was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame design code. The design
capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

L
A

Section A-A
L=6m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Loading
N

= 200 kN

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression)
Section compression capacity
Member compression capacity

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0.00%

Section Axial Capacity, Ns (kN)

6275

6275

0.00%

Member Axial Capacity, Nc (kN)

4385

4385

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX001

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
r33 = 139.15 mm, r22 = 89.264 mm
Member:
le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
N * 200 kN

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
e

(b f t w )

fy

2tf

250

350 20

250

2 28

250

5.89

Flange is under uniform compression, so:

ep 9, ey 16, ew 90
e 5.89 ep 9 ,

No localized flange buckling

Flange is compact

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

Localized Buckling for Web:

e

fy

tw

250

331

250

20

250

16.55

Web is under uniform compression, so:

ep 30, ey 45, ew 180
e 16.55 ep 30 ,

No localized web buckling

Web is compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Compression Capacity:
Section is not Slender, so Kf = 1.0
N s K f An f y 1 25,100 250 / 10

N s 6275kN

Member Weak-Axis Compression Capacity:

Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 22 k e 33 1
le 22

r2 2

6000

67.216 and

le 33

89.264

r3 3

6000

43.119

139.15

Buckling will occur on the 22-axis.

n 22

a 22

l e 22

K f fy

r22

250

6000

89.264

2 1 0 0 ( n 2 2 1 3 .5)
n 2 2 1 5 .3 n 2 2 2 0 5 0
2

1 250

67.216

250
2 0 .3 6 3

b 22 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

22 n 22 a 22 b 22 67.216 20.363 0.5 77.398

22 0.00326( 22 13.5) 0.2083 0

2

22

22

1 22
90

2 22
90

c 22 22

c 22

77.398

1 0.2083
90
77.398
2

90

1.317

90
1

22 22

1.317 1

90

1.317 77.398

0.6988

N c 22 c 22 N s N s
N c 22 0.6988 6275 4385 kN

NZS 3404-1997 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
1

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object bending strengths are tested in this example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored moment Mx = 1000 kN-m. This
example was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame design code. The
design capacities are compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx

L
A

Section A-A
L=6m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Loading
Mx = 1000 kN-m

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (bending)
Section bending capacity
Member bending capacity

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
1

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness

Compact

Compact

0%

837.5

837.5

0%

837.5

837.5

0%

Section Bending Capacity,

Ms,major (kN-m)
Member Bending Capacity,
Mb (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX002

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
1

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Material:
fy = 250 MPa
Section: 350WC197
bf = 350 mm, tf = 28 mm, h = 331 mm, tw = 20 mm
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
Z33 = 2,936,555.891 mm2
S33 = 3,350,000 mm2
J = 5,750,000 mm4
Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6
Member:
le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
Loadings:
M m * 1000 kN -m

This leads to:

M 2 * 250 kN -m
M 3 * 500 kN -m
M 4 * 750 kN -m

Section Compactness:
Localized Buckling for Flange:
e

(b f t w )

fy

2tf

250

350 20

250

2 28

250

5.89

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
1

Flange is under uniform compression, so:

ep 9, ey 16, ew 90
e 5.89 ep 9 ,

No localized flange buckling

Flange is compact
Localized Buckling for Web:
e

fy

tw

250

331

250

20

250

16.55

Web is under bending, so:

ep 82, ey 115, ew 180
e 16.55 ep 30 ,

No localized web buckling

Web is compact.
Section is Compact.
Section Bending Capacity:
Z e Z c min( S ,1.5 Z ) for compact sections
Z e 33 Z c 33 3, 350, 000 m m

M s 33 M s , m ajor f y Z e 33 250 3, 350, 000 / 1000

M s 33 M

s , m ajor

837.5 kN -m

Member Bending Capacity:

kt = 1 (Program default)
kl = 1.4 (Program default)
kr = 1 (Program default)
lLTB = le22 = 6000 mm

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

l e k t k l k r l L T B 1 1.4 1 6000 8400 m m

2
2 EI
EIw
22
G
J

2
2
le

le

M oa M o

M oa M o

ETABS 2013
1

2
5
12
2 2 10 5 2 10 8
2 10 4.59 10
76,
923.08

5,
750,
000

2
2
8, 400
8, 400

M oa M o 1786.938 kN -m

s 0.6

M 2

Ms
s

M oa
M oa

0.6

837.5 2

837.5

1786.938
1786.938

s 0.7954
m

1.7 M m *

M 2 *

M 3 * M 4 *
2

1.7 1000

250

500 750
2

2.5
2

1.817 2.5
2

M b m s M s 0.7954 1.817 837.5 M s

M b 1210.64 kN -m 837.5 kN -m

NZS 3404-1997 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003

WIDE FLANGE MEMBER UNDER COMBINED COMPRESSION & BENDING
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The frame object interacting axial and bending strengths are tested in this
example.
A continuous column is subjected to factored loads and moments N= 200 kN;
Mx= 1000 kN-m. This example was tested using the NZS 3404-1997 steel frame
design code. The design capacities are compared with independent hand
calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Mx
N

L
A

Section A-A
L=6m
Material Properties
E = 200x103 MPa
v = 0.3
G = 76923.08 MPa

Design Properties
fy = 250 MPa
N = 200 kN
Section: 350WC197
Mx = 1000 kN-m

Loading

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Section compactness check (compression & bending)

Section bending capacity with compression reduction
Member in-plane bending capacity with compression reduction
Member out-of-plane bending capacity with compression reduction

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are taken from hand calculations based on the CSI steel
design documentation contained in the file SFD-NZS-3404-1997.pdf, which is
available through the program Help menu.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Compactness`

Compact

Compact

0.00%

837.5

837.5

0.00%

823.1

823.1

0.00%

837.5

837.5

0.00%

Reduced Section Bending Capacity,

Mrx (kN-m)
Reduced In-Plane Member Bending
Capacity,
Mix (kN-m)
Reduced Out-of-Plane Member
Bending Capacity, Mo (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3404-1997 EX003

CONCLUSION
The results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Section: 350WC197
Ag = An = 25100 mm2
I22 = 200,000,000 mm4
I33 = 486,000,000 mm4
J = 5,750,000 mm4
Iw = 4,590,000,000,000 mm6
Member:
lz=le33 = le22 = 6000 mm (unbraced length)
Considered to be a braced frame
=0.9

Loadings:
N * 200 kN
M m * 1000 kN -m

Section Compactness:
From example SFD IN-01-1, section is Compact in Compression
From example SFD IN-01-2, section is Compact in Bending
Section Compression Capacity:
From example SFD IN-01-1, N s 6275kN

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

Member Compression Capacity:

From example SFD IN-01-1, N c 22 4385 kN

Section Bending Capacity:

From example SFD IN-01-2, M s 33 M s , m ajor 837.5 kN -m

Section Interaction: Bending & Compression Capacity:

N*
200

M r 33 1.18 M s 33 1
1.18 837.5 1
M s 33 837.5
N s
0.9 6275

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

Member Strong-Axis Compression Capacity:

Strong-axis buckling strength needs to be calculated:
Frame is considered a braced frame in both directions, so k e 33 1
le 3 3

r3 3

n 33

a 33

6000

43.119

139.15

l e 33

K f fy

r33

250

6000

139.15

2100( n 3 3 13.5)
n 3 3 15.3 n 3 3 2050
2

1 250

43.119

250
19.141

b 33 0.5 since cross-section is not a UB or UC section

33 n 33 a 33 b 33 43.119 19.141 0.5 52.690

33 0.00326( 33 13.5) 0.1278 0

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

33

33

1 33
90

2 33
90

c 33

33 1

c 33

2.145 1

ETABS 2013
0

52.690

1 0.1278
90
52.690
2

90

2.145

90
1

33 33

90

0.8474

2.145

50.690

N c 33 c 33 N s N s
N c 33 0.8474 6275
N c 33 5318 kN

Member Interaction: In-Plane Bending & Compression Capacity:

m

M m in
M m ax

1000

Since the section is compact,

3
3

N*
N*
1 m
1 m
M i M s 33 1
1
1
1.18

N c 33
N c 33
2
2

3
3

200
200
1 0

1 0
M i 837.5 1
1

1.18
1

0.9 5318
0.9 5318
2
2

M i 823.11 kN -m

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS 2013
0

Member Interaction: Out-of-Plane Bending & Compression Capacity:

bc

bc

1
1
N *
1 m
m

0
.4

0
.2
3

2
N c 2 2
2

1
3

1 0 1 0 3
200

0.4 0.23
2
0.9 4385
2

bc 4.120
EIw
2

N oz G J

lz

2 10 4.59 10
2

76923.08 5.75 10
6

I 33 I 22
Ag

N oz 4.423 10

11

12

6000
4.86 2 10 8
25100

kN

M b 33 o m s M sx w/ an assumed uniform moment such that m =1.0

M b 33 o 1.0 0.7954 837.5 666.145 kN -m

N *
N*
M o 33 bc M b 33 o 1
1
M r 33

N
c 22
oz

200
200

M o 33 4.12 666.145 1
2674 837.5
1
11
0.9 4385
0.9 4.423 10

M o 33 837.5 kN -m

NZS 3404-1997 Example 003 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

ACI 318-08 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.
This example is tested using the ACI 318-08 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

10"

13.5"

2.5"
A

Section A-A

10' = 120"
Material Properties
E=
3600 k/in2
=
0.2
G=
1500 k/in2

Section Properties
d = 13.5 in
b = 10.0 in
I = 3,413 in4

Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-08 Building Code.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (k-in)

1460.4

1460.4

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (in2)

2.37

2.37

0.00%

Design Shear Force, Vu

37.73

37.73

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (in2/in)

0.041

0.041

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
As,min =

200
bw d = 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
fy

3 f c'
fy

bw d = 0.427 sq-in
f c 4000
0.85
=
1000

1 =
0.85 0.05

0.003
=
d 5.0625 in
0.003 + 0.005

=
cmax

amax = 1cmax = 4.303 in

Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft
Mu =

wu l 2
= 9.736 102/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a = d d2

2Mu
0.85 f c'b

= 4.183 in (a < amax)

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

Mu
1460.4
=
a
0.9 60 (13.5 4.183 / 2 )

fy d
2

As

As

= 2.37 sq-in

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:

0.75
f c :

Check the limit of

f c = 63.246 psi < 100 psi

The concrete shear capacity is given by:

Vc =

f c bd

= 12.807 k

The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vs =

f c bd = 51.229 k

The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:

( Vc/2)

= 6.4035 k

Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu (Vc/2),
Av
= 0,
s

else if (Vc/2) < Vu Vmax

Av
(V Vc ) Av
= u

s
f ys d
s min

where:
b
Av
w
=
max
50

f
s min
yt

bw
,
f
yt

f c

else if Vu > Vmax,

a failure condition is declared.

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Combo1

Vu = 9.736 (5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k

=
(Vc =
Vu 37.727 k V
/ 2 ) 6.4035 k =
64.036 k
max
10 10 3

Av
4, 000
,
= max 50

s min
60, 000 60, 000 4

in 2
Av
=
=
max
0.0083,
0.0079
0.0083
{
}

in
s min
Av
=
s

(Vu Vc )
in 2
in 2
= 0.041
= 0.492
in
ft
f ys d

ACI 318-08 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

ACI 318-08 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and
moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Pu=398.4 kips
22"

Muy=332k-ft
A

14"

2.5"

10
Section A-A

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

14 in
19.5 in

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.000

1.00

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fc = 4 ksi
b = 14 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips

fy = 60 ksi
d = 19.5 inch
Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

87
87
dt =
(19.5) = 11.54 inch
87 + f y
87 + 60

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = 0.85 f c' ab = 0.85 4 14a = 47.6a

Cs = As' f y - 0.85 f c' = 4 ( 60 - 0.85 4 ) = 226.4 kips

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = As f s = 4 f s f s < f y

(Eqn. 1)

Pn = 47.6a + 226.4 - 4 f s
3) Taking moments about As:

a
'
Cc d - 2 + Cs d - d

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 8.5 inch
e' = e + d " = 10 + 8.5 = 18.5 inch.

1
a

Pn =
47.6a 19.5 - + 226.4 (19.5 - 2.5 )

18.5
2

Pn =

1
e'

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Pn = 50.17 a - 1.29a 2 + 208

ETABS
0

(Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

a = 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
Pn = 50.17 11.43 - 1.29 (11.43) + 208 = 612.9 kips
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.
19.5 -13.45
fs =
87 = 39.13 ksi
13.45
s = t = f s Es = 0.00135
6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:
Pn2 = 47.6 (11.43) + 226.4 - 4 ( 39.13) = 613.9 kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
M n = Pn e = 612.9 = 510.8 kips-ft
12
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
13.45 - 2.5
s' =
( 0.003) = 0.00244 > y = 0.00207 ksi
13.45
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Calculate ,
dt = d = 19.5 inch,

c = 13.45 inch

19.45 -13.45
t (at the tension reinforcement level) = 0.003
= 0.00135
13.45

Since t < 0.002 , then = 0.65

Pn = 0.65 ( 612.9 ) = 398.4 kips

M n = 0.65 ( 510.8 ) = 332 k-ft.

ACI 318-08 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

ACI 318-11 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.
This example is tested using the ACI 318-11 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

10"

13.5"

2.5"
A

Section A-A

10' = 120"
Material Properties
E=
3600 k/in2
=
0.2
G=
1500 k/in2

Section Properties
d = 13.5 in
b = 10.0 in
I = 3,413 in4

Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-11 Building Code.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (k-in)

1460.4

1460.4

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (in2)

2.37

2.37

0.00%

Design Shear Force, Vu

37.73

37.73

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (in2/in)

0.041

0.041

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
As,min =

200
bw d = 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
fy

3 f c'
fy

bw d = 0.427 sq-in
f c 4000
0.85
=
1000

1 =
0.85 0.05

0.003
=
d 5.0625 in
0.003 + 0.005

=
cmax

amax = 1cmax = 4.303 in

Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft
Mu =

wu l 2
= 9.736 102/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a = d d2

2Mu
0.85 f c'b

= 4.183 in (a < amax)

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

Mu
1460.4
=
a
0.9 60 (13.5 4.183 / 2 )

fy d
2

As

As

= 2.37 sq-in

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:

0.75
f c :

Check the limit of

f c = 63.246 psi < 100 psi

The concrete shear capacity is given by:

Vc =

f c bd

= 12.807 k

The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vs =

f c bd = 51.229 k

The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:

( Vc/2)

= 6.4035 k

( Vc + 50 bd)

= 11.466 k

Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu (Vc/2),
Av
= 0,
s

else if (Vc/2) < Vu Vmax

Av
(V Vc ) Av
= u

s
f ys d
s min

where:
b
Av
w
=
max
50

s
f
min
yt

bw
,
f
yt

f c

else if Vu > Vmax,

a failure condition is declared.

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Combo1

Vu = 9.736 (5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k

=
(Vc =
Vu 37.727 k V
/ 2 ) 6.4035 k =
64.036 k
max
10 10 3

Av
4, 000
,
= max 50

s min
60, 000 60, 000 4

in 2
Av
=
=
max
0.0083,
0.0079
0.0083
{
}

in
s min
Av
=
s

(Vu Vc )
in 2
in 2
= 0.041
= 0.492
in
ft
f ys d

ACI 318-11 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

ACI 318-11 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and
moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Pu=398.4 kips
22"

Muy=332k-ft
A

14"

2.5"

10
Section A-A

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

14 in
19.5 in

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.000

1.00

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fc = 4 ksi
b = 14 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips

fy = 60 ksi
d = 19.5 inch
Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

87
87
dt =
(19.5) = 11.54 inch
87 + f y
87 + 60

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = 0.85 f c' ab = 0.85 4 14a = 47.6a

Cs = As' f y - 0.85 f c' = 4 ( 60 - 0.85 4 ) = 226.4 kips

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = As f s = 4 f s f s < f y

(Eqn. 1)

Pn = 47.6a + 226.4 - 4 f s
3) Taking moments about As:

a
'
Cc d - 2 + Cs d - d

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 8.5 inch
e' = e + d " = 10 + 8.5 = 18.5 inch.

1
a

Pn =
47.6a 19.5 - + 226.4 (19.5 - 2.5 )

18.5
2

Pn =

1
e'

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Pn = 50.17 a - 1.29a 2 + 208

ETABS
0

(Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

a = 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
Pn = 50.17 11.43 - 1.29 (11.43) + 208 = 612.9 kips
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.
19.5 -13.45
fs =
87 = 39.13 ksi
13.45
s = t = f s Es = 0.00135
6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:
Pn2 = 47.6 (11.43) + 226.4 - 4 ( 39.13) = 613.9 kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
M n = Pn e = 612.9 = 510.8 kips-ft
12
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
13.45 - 2.5
s' =
( 0.003) = 0.00244 > y = 0.00207 ksi
13.45
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Calculate ,
dt = d = 19.5 inch,

c = 13.45 inch

19.45 -13.45
t (at the tension reinforcement level) = 0.003
= 0.00135
13.45

Since t < 0.002 , then = 0.65

Pn = 0.65 ( 612.9 ) = 398.4 kips

M n = 0.65 ( 510.8 ) = 332 k-ft.

ACI 318-11 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

ACI 318-14 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear design of a rectangular concrete beam is calculated in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to an ultimate uniform load of 9.736 k/ft.
This example is tested using the ACI 318-14 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent hand calculated
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

10"

13.5"

2.5"
A

Section A-A

10' = 120"
Material Properties
E=
3600 k/in2
=
0.2
G=
1500 k/in2

Section Properties
d = 13.5 in
b = 10.0 in
I = 3,413 in4

Design Properties
fc = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

ACI 318-14 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 6.1 in Notes on ACI 318-14 Building Code.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (k-in)

1460.4

1460.4

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (in2)

2.37

2.37

0.00%

Design Shear Force, Vu

37.73

37.73

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (in2/in)

0.041

0.041

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-14 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

ACI 318-14 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.9, Ag = 160 sq-in
As,min =

200
bw d = 0.450 sq-in (Govern)
fy
3 f c'
fy

bw d = 0.427 sq-in
f c 4000
0.85
=
1000

1 =
0.85 0.05

0.003
=
d 5.0625 in
0.003 + 0.005

=
cmax

amax = 1cmax = 4.303 in

Combo1
wu = (1.2wd + 1.6wl) = 9.736 k/ft
Mu =

wu l 2
= 9.736 102/8 = 121.7 k-ft = 1460.4 k-in
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a = d d2

2Mu
0.85 f c'b

= 4.183 in (a < amax)

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

Mu
1460.4
=
a
0.9 60 (13.5 4.183 / 2 )

fy d
2

As

As

= 2.37 sq-in

ACI 318-14 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:

0.75
f c :

Check the limit of

f c = 63.246 psi < 100 psi

The concrete shear capacity is given by:

Vc =

f c bd

= 12.807 k

The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vs =

f c bd = 51.229 k

The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:

( Vc/2)

= 6.4035 k

( Vc + 50 bd)

= 11.466 k

Vmax = Vc + Vs = 64.036 k
Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu (Vc/2),
Av
= 0,
s

else if (Vc/2) < Vu Vmax

Av
(V Vc ) Av

= u
f ys d
s
s min

where:
b
Av
w
= max 50
s min
f yt

bw
,
f yt

f c

else if Vu > Vmax,

a failure condition is declared.

ACI 318-14 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Combo1

Vu = 9.736 (5-13.5/12) = 37.727 k

(Vc =
/ 2 ) 6.4035 k =
Vu 37.727 k V
=
64.036 k
max
10 10 3

Av
4, 000
,
= max 50

s min
60, 000 60, 000 4

in 2
Av
=
=
max
0.0083,
0.0079
0.0083
}
{

in
s min
Av
=
s

(Vu Vc )
in 2
in 2
= 0.041
= 0.492
f ys d
in
ft

ACI 318-14 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

ACI 318-14 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 398.4 k and
moments Muy = 332 k-ft. This column is reinforced with 4 #9 bars. The total area
of reinforcement is 8.00 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and result is compared.

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Pu=398.4 kips
22"

Muy=332k-ft
A

14"

2.5"

10
Section A-A

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

14 in
19.5 in

ACI 318-14 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Demand/Capacity Ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.000

1.00

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-14 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

ACI 318-14 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fc = 4 ksi
b = 14 inch
Pu = 398.4 kips

fy = 60 ksi
d = 19.5 inch
Mu = 332 k-ft

1) Because e = 10 inch < (2/3)d = 13 inch., assume compression failure. This assumption will be
checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

87
87
dt =
(19.5) = 11.54 inch
87 + f y
87 + 60

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = 0.85 f c' ab = 0.85 4 14a = 47.6a

Cs = As' f y - 0.85 f c' = 4 ( 60 - 0.85 4 ) = 226.4 kips

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = As f s = 4 f s f s < f y

(Eqn. 1)

Pn = 47.6a + 226.4 - 4 f s

3) Taking moments about As:

a
'
Cc d - 2 + Cs d - d

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 8.5 inch
e' = e + d " = 10 + 8.5 = 18.5 inch.

1
a

Pn =
47.6a 19.5 - + 226.4 (19.5 - 2.5 )

18.5
2

Pn =

1
e'

ACI 318-14 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Pn = 50.17 a - 1.29a 2 + 208

ETABS
0

(Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 13.45 inch, which exceed cb (11.54 inch).

a = 0.85 13.45 = 11.43 inch

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pn = 50.17 11.43 - 1.29 (11.43) + 208 = 612.9 kips
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 13.45 inch.

19.5 -13.45
fs =
87 = 39.13 ksi
13.45
s = t = f s Es = 0.00135

6) Substitute a = 13.45 inch and fs = 39.13 ksi in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pn2:

Pn2 = 47.6 (11.43) + 226.4 - 4 ( 39.13) = 613.9 kips
Which is very close to the calculated Pn2 of 612.9 kips (less than 1% difference)
10
M n = Pn e = 612.9 = 510.8 kips-ft
12
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
13.45 - 2.5
s' =
( 0.003) = 0.00244 > y = 0.00207 ksi
13.45
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Calculate ,
dt = d = 19.5 inch,

c = 13.45 inch
19.45 -13.45
= 0.00135
13.45

t (at the tension reinforcement level) = 0.003

Since t < 0.002 , then = 0.65

Pn = 0.65 ( 612.9 ) = 398.4 kips

M n = 0.65 ( 510.8 ) = 332 k-ft.

ACI 318-14 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AS 3600-2009 Example 001

Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced T-Beam
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify slab flexural design. The load level is
adjusted for the case corresponding to the following conditions:

The stress-block extends below the flange but remains within the balanced
condition permitted by AS 3600-09.

The average shear stress in the beam is below the maximum shear stress
allowed by AS 3600-09, requiring design shear reinforcement.

A simple-span, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 500-mm-deep T-beam with a

flange 100 mm thick and 600 mm wide is considered. The beam is shown in
Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite element mesh of frame elements
automatically generated. The maximum element size has been specified to be
500 mm. The beam is supported by columns without rotational stiffnesses and
with very large vertical stiffness (1 1020 kN/m).
The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL30) and one live load case (LL130), with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 30, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combinations (COMB130) is defined using the AS 3600-09 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead load and 1.5 for live load. The model is analyzed for both
of these load cases and the load combination.
The beam moment and shear force are computed analytically. Table 1 shows the
comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2 shows the
comparison of the design shear reinforcements.

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0
600 mm
75 mm

100 mm

500 mm

75 mm
300 mm

Beam Section

2000 mm

2000 mm

2000 mm

Shear Force

Bending Moment
Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Clear span,
Overall depth,
Flange thickness,
Width of web,
Width of flange,
Depth of tensile reinf.,

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 2

L
h
Ds
bw
bf
dsc

=
=
=
=
=
=

6000
500
100
300
600
75

mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
mm

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Effective depth,
Depth of comp. reinf.,

d
d'

=
=

425
75

Concrete strength,
Yield strength of steel,
Concrete unit weight,
Modulus of elasticity,
Modulus of elasticity,
Poissons ratio,

fc
fy
wc
Ec
Es
v

=
=
=
=
=
=

30
460
0
25x105
2x108
0.2

Dead load,
Live load,

Pd
Pl

=
=

30
130

ETABS
0

mm
mm
MPa
MPa
kN/m3
MPa
MPa

kN
kN

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement
RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip.
They match exactly for this problem. Table 1 also shows the design
reinforcement comparison.
Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements
Reinforcement Area (sq-cm)
Method

Moment (kN-m)

As+

ETABS

462

33.512

Calculated

462

33.512

A +s ,min = 3.00 sq-cm

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0
Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements
Reinforcement Area,

Av
s

(sq-cm/m)
Shear Force (kN)

ETABS

Calculated

231

12.05

12.05

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-2009 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match for the flexural and the shear
reinforcing.

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

= 0.8 for bending

0.67 2 0.85, where 2 = 1.0 0.003f c ' = 0.91 , use 2 = 0.85

0.67 0.85, where 2= 1.05 0.007f c =' 0.84 , use = 0.84
ku 0.36
=
amax =
ku d 0.840.36=
425 128.52 mm
2
D f ct , f
Ast .min = b
bw d
d f sy

where for L- and T-Sections with the web in tension:

D= h= 500 mm
1/4

bf

bf
D

1 0.4 s 0.18 0.20

D

bw

bw

b = 0.20 +

= 0.2378

=
f 'ct , f 0.5=
f 'c 0.5
=
30 3.3 MPa
f sy
= f=
460 MPa 500 MPa
y
Ast .min

2
D f ct , f
= 0.2378
bd
d f sy

= 0.2378 (500/425)2 3.3/460 300425

= 299.9 mm2
COMB130
V* = (1.2Pd + 1.5Pl) = 231kN
V *L
= 462 kN-m
M =
3
*

The depth of the compression block is given by:

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0
a =
d
d2

2M *
= 100.755 mm (a > Ds), so design as a T-beam.
2 f 'c b f

The compressive force developed in the concrete alone is given by the following
methodology:
The first part of the calculation is for balancing the compressive force from the
flange, Cf, and the second part of the calculation is for balancing the compressive
force from the web, Cw. Cf is given by:
Cf =
2 f c ( b f bw )min ( Ds , amax ) =
765 kN
Therefore,

A=
s1

C f 765
= = 1663.043 mm 2
f sy 460

and the portion of M* that is resisted by the flange is given by:

min ( Ds , amax )

Muf =
C f d
= 229.5 kN-m
2

Again, the value for is 0.80 by default. Therefore, the balance of the
moment, M* to be carried by the web is:
M=
M * Muf = 462 229.5 = 232.5
uw

The web is a rectangular section of dimensions bw and d, for which the design
depth of the compression block is recalculated as:
a1 =
d
d2

2 M uw
= 101.5118 mm
2 f c bw

a1 amax , so no compression reinforcement is needed, and the area of tension

reinforcement is then given by:

As 2 =

M uw
= 1688.186 mm2
a

f sy d 1
2

Ast = As1 + As 2 = 3351.23 sq-mm = 33.512 sq-cm

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
= 0.7 for shear
Calculated at the end of the beam, so M=0 and Ast = 0.
The shear force carried by the concrete, Vuc, is calculated as:
13

A
Vuc = 123bv d o f cv st
bv d o

= 0 kN

where,

f cv = ( f c) = 3.107 N/mm2 4MPa

1/3

=
1 1.11.6 o 1.1 =1.2925,
1000

2 = 1 since no significant axial load is present

3 = 1
bv = bw = 300mm as there are no grouted ducts
do = d = 425 mm
The shear force is limited to a maximum of:
Vu .max = 0.2 f c bd o = 765 kN
And the beam must have a minimum shear force capacity of:

Vu .min =
Vuc + 0.6bw d o =
0 + 0.6300425 =
77 kN
=
V * 231 kN > V=
0 , so reinforcement is needed.
uc / 2
=
V * 231 kN V=
535.5 kN , so concrete crushing does not occur.
u .max

f 'c bv
bw
mm 2
Asv
=
=
max
0.35
,
0.06
max
228.26,
214.33
{
}

f sy
f sy
m
s min

mm
Asv

= 228.26
m
s min

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0
COMB130
Since V
=
53.55 kN=
< V * 231 kN V=
535.5 kN
u .min
u .max

V * Vuc
Asv
A
=
sv
f sy d o cot v s min
s

v = the angle between the axis of the concrete compression strut and the
longitudinal axis of the member, which varies linearly from 30
degrees when V*=Vu,min to 45 degrees when V*=Vu,max = 35.52
degrees
v = 35.52 degrees

( 213 0 )
Asv
mm 2 Asv
=
=

1205.04
s
m
s
0.7460425cot 35.52o

Asv
cm 2
= 12.05
s
m

AS 3600-2009 Example 001 - 8

mm 2

=
228.26

m
min

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

AS 3600-2009 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 1733 kN and moment My = 433 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1733 kN
My= 433 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.089

1.00

8.9%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-2009 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm
d = 490 mm
1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

600
600
dt =
( 490 ) = 277.4 mm
600 + f y
600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where

=
Cc =
0.85 30 =
350a 8925a
2 fc ab

Cs = As ( f y 2 fc) = 2500 ( 460 0.85 30 ) = 1, 086, 250 N

Assume compression steel yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = As f = 2500 f s = 2500 f s f s < f y

N1 =
8925a + 1.086, 250 2500 fs

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

=
N2

1
a
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm

e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm
=
N

1
a

8925a 490 + 1, 086, 250 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N = 9404.8a 9.597 a 2 + 1, 004, 489

(Eqn. 2)

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

4) Assume c = 333.9 mm, which exceeds cb (296 mm).

=
a 0.84
=
333.9 280.5 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N 2 = 8925 280.5 9.597 ( 280.5 ) + 1, 004, 489= 2,888, 240 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 333.9
=
fs =
600 280.5 MPa
333.9
s =t =fs Es = 0.0014
6) Substitute a = 280.5 mm and fs = 280.5 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
N1= 8925 ( 280.5 ) + 1, 086, 250 2500 ( 280.5 )= 2,887,373 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,888,240 (less than 1% difference)
250
= Ne
= 2888
=
M
722 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,

333.9 60
=
s
=
> y 0.0023
) 0.0025=
( 0.003
333.9
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 2888 =
1733 kN
e
250
M = 2888 = 0.60 2888 = 433 kN-m
1000
1000

AS 3600-2009 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

BS 8110-1997 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
Example Description
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 36.67 kN/m. This example was tested using the BS 8110-97 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

230mm

550 mm

60 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 490 mm
W = 36.67 kN/m

Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 7.2 on page 149 of Reinforced Concrete
Design by W. H. Mosley, J. H. Bungey & R. Hulse.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kN-m)

165.02

165.02

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

964.1

964.1

0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kN)

92.04

92.04

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asv/sv (mm2/mm)

0.231

0.231

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-1997 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

m, steel

= 1.15

=
As ,min 0.0013
=
bw h 0.0013=
230550 164.45 mm 2

Design Combo COMB1

wu = =36.67 kN/m
Mu =

wu l 2
= 165 kN-m
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

K=

M
= 0.0996 < 0.156
f cu b d 2

If K 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete

beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:

K
z = d 0.5 + 0.25
0.95d = 427.90 mm
0.9

The ultimate resistance moment is given by:

As =

M
= 964.1 sq-mm
( f y 1.15) z

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Shear Design
L2

V=
U d=
92.04 kN at distance, d, from support
U
2

v=

VU
= 0.8167 MPa
bd

vmax = min(0.8 fcu , 5 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa

v vmax , so no concrete crushing
The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:
1

0.79k1k 2 100 As 3 400 4

vc =

= 0.415 MPa
m bd d
k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,
and is conservatively taken as 1 .
1

f 3
k2 = cu = 1.06266, 1 k2
25

40

25

m, concrete = 1.25
0.15

100 As
3
bd

100 As 100266
=
= 0.2359
bd
230490
1

400 4
400
=
0.95 1, so

d
d

is taken as 1.

fcu 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v vmax
Asv (v vc )bw
=
sv
0.87 f yv

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Asv
=
sv

v vc ) bw ( 0.8167 0.4150 )
(=
0.87 f yv

0.87 460

ETABS
0

= 0.231 sq-mm/mm

BS 8110-1997 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

BS 8110-1997 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 1971 kN and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN
My= 493 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.994

1.00

0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-1997 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
( 490 ) 312 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where

0.67
=
fcu ab 0.67 1.5 =
30 350a 4667 a

As
2500
Cs =
f y 0.4467 fcu ) = ( 460 0.4467 30 ) =
971, 014 N
(
s
1.15
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).
As fs 2500 fs
=
T =
= 2174 fs ( fs < f y )
s
1.15

=
Cc

N1 =4, 667 a + 971, 014 2174 fs

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

=
N

1
a
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm

e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm
=
N

1
a

4, 667 a 490 + 971, 014 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N = 4917.9a 5.018a 2 + 897,926

(Eqn. 2)

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

=
a 0.9
=
364 327.6 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
=
N 2 4917.9 327.6 5.018 ( 327.6 ) + 897,926
= 1,970,500 N
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.
490 364
=
fs =
700 242.3 MPa
364
=
=
fs Es = 0.0012
s
t
6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
=
=
N1 4, 667 ( 327.6 ) + 971, 014 2174 ( 242.3
) 1,973,163 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = Ne = 1971
= 493 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

365 60
=
s
=
=
> y 0.0023
) 0.00292
( 0.0035
365
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, the section capacity is

N = 1971 kN
M = 493 kN-m

BS 8110-1997 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 92.222 kN/m. This example is tested using the CSA A23.3-04 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

400mm

600 mm

54 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 546 mm
W = 92.222 kN/m

Design Properties
fc = 40 MPa
fy = 400 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 2.2 on page 2-12 in Part II on Concrete Design
Handbook of Cement Association of Canada.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mf (kN-m)

415.00

415.00

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

2466

2466

0.00%

Design Shear, Vf (kN)

226.31

226.31

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm2/mm)

0.379

0.379

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

c = 0.65 for concrete

s = 0.85 for reinforcement
As,min =

0.2 f c
b h = 758.95 mm2
fy

1 = 0.85 0.0015f'c 0.67 = 0.79

1 = 0.97 0.0025f'c 0.67 = 0.87
cb =

700
d = 347.45 mm
700 + f y

ab = 1cb = 302.285 mm

COMB1
Mf =

wu l 2
= 415 kN-m
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a = d d2

2M f

1 f 'c c b

= 102.048 mm

If a ab, the area of tension reinforcement is then given by:

As =

Mf

a
2

= 2466 mm2

s f y d

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

4
4
2
=
=
=
As ,min min
As ,min , As ,required min
758.95, 2466 758.95 mm
3
3

Shear Design
The basic shear strength for rectangular section is computed as,
c = 0.65 for shear

= {1.00, for normal density concrete

d v is the effective shear depth. It is taken as the greater of

0.72h = 432 mm or 0.9d = 491.4 mm (governing).

= 0.18 since minimum transverse reinforcement is provided

V f = 92.222 (3 - 0.546) = 226.31 kN

Vc = c f c bw dv = 145.45 kN

Vr ,max = 0.25c f 'c bw d = 1419.60 kN

= 35 since f y 400 MPa and f 'c 60 MPa

Av (V f Vc ) tan
= 0.339 mm2/mm
=
s f yt d v
s
fc
Av
b = 0.379 mm2/mm (Govern)
= 0.06
fy
s min
'

CSA A23.3-04 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
4

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 2098 kN and moment My = 525 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2098 kN
My= 525 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
4

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.9869

1.00

-1.31%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
ETABS
4

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

700
700
dt =
( 490) = 296 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pr = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = c 1 f c' ab = 0.65 0.805 30 350a = 5494.1a

Cs = s As' f y - 0.805 f c' = 0.85 2500 ( 460 - 0.805 30 ) = 926,181 N

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = s As f s = 0.85 2500 f s =
2125 f s ( f s < f y )
Pr = 5, 494.1a + 926,181 - 2125 f s

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

a
'
Cc d - 2 + C s d - d

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e' = e + d " = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

1
a

Pr =
5, 494.1a 490 - + 926,181 ( 490 - 60 )

465
2

2
Pr = 5789.5a - 5.91a + 856, 468.5
Pr =

1
e'

(Eqn. 2)

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

4) Assume c = 355 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.895 355 = 317.7 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pr = 5789.5 317.7 - 5.91 ( 317.7 ) + 856, 468.5 = 2,099,327.8 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 350 mm.

490 - 355
fs =
700 = 266.2 MPa
355
s = t = f s Es = 0.0013
6) Substitute a = 317.7 mm and fs = 266.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pr2:
Pr2 = 5, 494.1 ( 317.7 ) + 926,181 - 2125 ( 266.2 ) = 2,106,124.9 N
Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,012,589.8 (less than 1% difference)
250
M r = Pr e = 2100
= 525 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
355 - 60
s' =
( 0.0035) = 0.00291 > y = 0.0023
355
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
Pr = 2098 kN
M r = 525 kN-m

CSA A23.3-04 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

CSA A23.3-14 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 92.222 kN/m. This example is tested using the CSA A23.3-14 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

400mm

600 mm

54 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 546 mm
W = 92.222 kN/m

Design Properties
fc = 40 MPa
fy = 400 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

CSA A23.3-14 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 2.2 on page 2-12 in Part II on Concrete Design
Handbook of Cement Association of Canada.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mf (kN-m)

415.00

415.00

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

2466

2466

0.00%

Design Shear, Vf (kN)

226.31

226.31

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm2/mm)

0.379

0.379

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-14 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

CSA A23.3-14 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

c = 0.65 for concrete

s = 0.85 for reinforcement
As,min =

0.2 f c
b h = 758.95 mm2
fy

1 = 0.85 0.0015f'c 0.67 = 0.79

1 = 0.97 0.0025f'c 0.67 = 0.87
cb =

700
d = 347.45 mm
700 + f y

ab = 1cb = 302.285 mm

COMB1
wu l 2
= 415 kN-m
Mf =
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
a = d d2

2M f

1 f 'c c b

= 102.048 mm

If a ab, the area of tension reinforcement is then given by:

As =

Mf
a

s f y d
2

= 2466 mm2

CSA A23.3-14 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

4
4
2
=
=
=
As ,min min
As ,min , As ,required min
758.95, 2466 758.95 mm
3
3

Shear Design
The basic shear strength for rectangular section is computed as,
c = 0.65 for shear
= {1.00, for normal density concrete
d v is the effective shear depth. It is taken as the greater of

0.72h = 432 mm or 0.9d = 491.4 mm (governing).

= 0.18 since minimum transverse reinforcement is provided

V f = 92.222 (3 - 0.546) = 226.31 kN

Vc = c f c bw dv = 145.45 kN

Vr ,max = 0.25c f 'c bw d = 1419.60 kN

= 35 since f y 400 MPa and f 'c 60 MPa

Av (V f Vc ) tan
= 0.339 mm2/mm
=
s f yt d v
s

fc
Av
b = 0.379 mm2/mm (Govern)
= 0.06
fy
s min
'

CSA A23.3-14 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

CSA A23.3-14 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 2098 kN and moment My = 525 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2098 kN
My= 525 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

CSA A23.3-14 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.9869

1.00

-1.31%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-14 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

CSA A23.3-14 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

700
700
dt =
( 490) = 296 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pr = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = c 1 f c' ab = 0.65 0.805 30 350a = 5494.1a

Cs = s As' f y - 0.805 f c' = 0.85 2500 ( 460 - 0.805 30 ) = 926,181 N

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = s As f s = 0.85 2500 f s =
2125 f s ( f s < f y )
Pr = 5, 494.1a + 926,181 - 2125 f s

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

a
'
Cc d - 2 + C s d - d

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e' = e + d " = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

1
a

Pr =
5, 494.1a 490 - + 926,181 ( 490 - 60 )

465
2

2
Pr = 5789.5a - 5.91a + 856, 468.5
Pr =

1
e'

(Eqn. 2)

CSA A23.3-14 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 355 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.895 355 = 317.7 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pr = 5789.5 317.7 - 5.91 ( 317.7 ) + 856, 468.5 = 2,099,327.8 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 350 mm.

490 - 355
fs =
700 = 266.2 MPa
355
s = t = f s Es = 0.0013
6) Substitute a = 317.7 mm and fs = 266.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pr2:
Pr2 = 5, 494.1 ( 317.7 ) + 926,181 - 2125 ( 266.2 ) = 2,106,124.9 N
Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,012,589.8 (less than 1% difference)
250
M r = Pr e = 2100
= 525 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
355 - 60
s' =
( 0.0035) = 0.00291 > y = 0.0023
355
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
Pr = 2098 kN
M r = 525 kN-m

CSA A23.3-14 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
2

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

EN 2-2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 36.67 kN/m. This example is tested using the Eurocode concrete design code.
The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

230mm

550 mm

60 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 490 mm
b = 230 mm

Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa
fyk = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution.

Country

cc

k1

k2

k3

k4

CEN Default, Slovenia, Sweden, Portugal

1.5

1.15

1.0

0.44

1.25

0.54

1.25

UK

1.5

1.15

0.85

0.40

1.25

0.40

1.25

Norway

1.5

1.15

0.85

0.44

1.25

0.54

1.25

Singapore

1.5

1.15

0.85

0.40

1.25

0.54

1.25

Finland

1.5

1.15

0.85

0.44

1.10

0.54

1.25

Denmark

1.45

1.2

1.0

0.44

1.25

0.54

1.25

Germany

1.5

1.15

0.85

0.64

0.80

0.72

0.80

Poland

1.4

1.15

1.0

0.44

1.25

0.54

1.25

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Country

Design
Moment,
MEd (kN-m)

Tension
Reinforcing,
As+ (sq-mm)

Design Shear,
VEd
(kN)

ETABS
2

Shear
Reinforcing,
Asw/s (sqmm/m)

% diff.

Method

ETABS

Hand

ETABS

Hand

ETABS

Hand

ETABS

Hand

0.00%

CEN Default,
Slovenia,
Sweden, Portugal

165

165

916

916

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

UK

165

165

933

933

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

Norway

165

165

933

933

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

Singapore

165

165

933

933

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

Finland

165

165

933

933

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

Denmark

165

165

950

950

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

Germany

165

165

933

933

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

Poland

165

165

925

925

110

110

249.5

249.5

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for both of the load combinations:

m, steel

= 1.15

m, concrete = 1.50
cc = 1.0
k1 = 0.44

k2 =
k4 =
1.25 ( 0.6 + 0.0014 / cu 2 ) =
1.25 k3 = 0.54

f cd = cc f ck / c = 1.0(30)/1.5 = 20 MPa

=
f yd f yk / s = 460/1.15 = 400 Mpa
f=
f yk / s = 460/1.15 = 400 Mpa
ywd

= 1.0 for fck 50 MPa

= 0.8 for fck 50 MPa
As ,min = 0.26

f ctm
bd = 184.5 sq-mm,
f yk
2/3
= 0.3(30)2/3 = 2.896 N/sq-mm
where f ctm = 0.3 f cwk

As,min = 0.0013bh = 164.5 sq-mm

COMB1
The factored design load and moment are given as,
wu = 36.67 kN/m

wu l 2
= 36.67 62/8 = 165.0 kN-m
M =
8

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

The limiting value of the ratio of the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state
to the effective depth, ( x / d )lim , is given as,

k1
x
for fck 50 MPa ,
=
k2
d lim
where = 1 , assuming no moment redistribution
k1
x
=
=

k2
d lim

(1 0.44
)
=
1.25

0.448

The normalized section capacity as a singly reinforced beam is given as,

x x
mlim = 1 = 0.29417
d lim 2 d lim
The limiting normalized steel ratio is given as,
x
= 1 1 2mlim = 0.3584
d lim

lim =

The normalized moment, m, is given as,

165 106
=
=0.1494 < mlim so a singly reinforced
m= 2
bd f cd
230 4902 1.0 20
beam will be adequate.

= 1 1 2m = 0.16263 < lim

f bd
1.0 20 230 490
As = cd = 0.1626
=916 sq-mm
400

f yd

Shear Design
The shear force demand is given as,
=
VEd =
L / 2 110.01 kN
The shear force that can be carried without requiring design shear reinforcement,

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

1/3
=
VRd ,c CRd ,c k (100 1 f ck ) + k1 cp bw d

1/3
VRd ,c= 0.12 1.6389 (100 0.0 30 ) + 0.0 230 490= 0 kN

with a minimum of:

vmin + k1 cp bd = [ 0.4022 + 0.0] 230 490 =
V=
45.3 kN
Rd , c
where,
k=
1+
=
1

200
2.0 = 1.6389
d

AS
0
=
= 0.0 0.02
bd 230490

As = 0 for l at the end of a simply-supported beam as it taken as the tensile

reinforcement at the location offset by d+ldb beyond the point considered.
(EN 1992-1-1:2004 6.2.2(1) Figure 6.3)

=
cp

N Ed
= 0.0
Ac

CRd ,c = 0.18 / c =0.12

=
vmin 0.035
=
k 3/2 fck 1/2 0.4022

The maximum design shear force that can be carried without crushing of the
notional concrete compressive struts,
=
VRd ,max cwbzv1 f cd / ( cot + tan )
where,

cw = 1.0
=
z 0.9
=
d 441.0 mm

v1 = 0.6 1 ck = 0.528
250

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

vEd
1
=
0.5sin
=
5.33
0.2 f ck (1 f ck / 250 )

where,

=
vEd

VEd
= 0.9761
bw d

21.8 45 , therefore use = 21.8

=
=
+ tan ) 369 kN
VRd ,max cwbzv1 f cd / ( cot

VRd ,max > VEd , so there is no concrete crushing.

The required shear reinforcing is,
Asw
VEd
110.01 1e6
=
=
= 249.5 sq-mm/m
s
zf ywd cot 441 460 2.5
1.15

EN 2-2004 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EN 2-2004 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 2374 kN and moment My = 593 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25 bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result
is compared with computed results. The column is designed as a short, non-sway
member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2374 kN
My= 593 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fck = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.009

1.00

0.90%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fck = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm
d = 490 mm
1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

700
700
dt =
( 490 ) = 312 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 / 1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
f
30
1.0
350a =
7000a
Cc =
cc ck ab =
1.5
c
=
Cs

As
fck 2500
30
f y cc=

460 1.0 =
956,521.7 N
1.5
s
c 1.15

Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).

As fs 2500 fs
=
= 2174 fs ( fs < f y )
s
1.15
N1 =
7, 000a + 956,521.7 2174 fs

=
T

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
=
N2
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm

e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm
=
N2

1
a

7, 000a 490 + 956,521.7 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N 2 = 7376.3a - 7.527a 2 + 884,525.5

(Eqn. 2)

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 356 mm, which exceed cb (312 mm).

=
a 0.8
=
356 284.8 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N=
7376.3 284.8 7.527 ( 284.8 ) + 884,525.5
= 2,374,173 N
2
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 356 mm.

490 356
=
fs =
700 263.4 MPa
356
s =t =fs Es = 0.00114
6) Substitute a = 284.8 mm and fs = 263.4 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
=
=
N1 7, 000 ( 284.8 ) + 956,522 2174 ( 263.5
) 2,377, 273 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,374,173 (less than 1% difference)
250
M
= Ne
= 2374
=
593.5 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

356 60
=
s
=
> y 0.0023
) 0.0029=
( 0.0035
356
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
N = 2,374 kN
M = 593 kN-m

EN 2-2004 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

HK CP-2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load of 36.67 kN/m.
This example is tested using the HK CP 2004 concrete design code. The flexural
and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

230mm

550 mm

60 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 490 mm
w = 36.67 kN/m

Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

CONCLUSION
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution based on section 6.1 of Hong Kong Code of Practice for Structural
Use of Concrete 2004.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, M (kN-m)

165.02

165.02

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

964

964

0.00%

Design Shear, V (kN)

92.04

92.04

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Av/s (mm2/mm)

0.231

0.231

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: HK CP-2004 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

m, steel

= 1.15

As ,min = 0.0013bh
= 164.5 sq-mm

Design Combo COMB1

wu = =36.67 kN/m
Mu =

wu l 2
= 165 kN-m
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

K=

M
= 0.0996 < 0.156
f cu b d 2

If K 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete

beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:

K
z = d 0.5 + 0.25
0.95d = 427.900 mm
0.9

The ultimate resistance moment is given by:

As =

M
= 964 sq-mm
( f y 1.15) z

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Shear Design
Vu = =92.04 kN at a distance, d, from support

v=

V
= 0.8167 MPa
bd

vmax = min(0.8 fcu , 7 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa

v vmax , so no concrete crushing
The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:
1

0.79k1k 2 100 As 3 400 4

vc =

= 0.4150 MPa
m bd d
k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,
and is conservatively taken as 1 .
1

f 3
k2 = cu = 1.06266, 1 k2
25

40

25

m, concrete = 1.25
0.15

100 As
3
bd

100 As 100266
= = 0.2359 0.15
bd
230490
1

400 4
400
=
0.95 1, so

d
d

is taken as 1.

fcu 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v vmax
Asv (v vc )bw
=
sv
0.87 f yv
Asv (v vc )bw
= 0.231 sq-mm/mm
=
sv
0.87 f yv

HK CP-2004 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HK CP-2004 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load
N = 1971 kN and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five
25M bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the
result is compared with the computed results. The column is designed as a short,
non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN
My= 493 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.994

1.00

0.60%

COMPUTER FILE: HK CP-2004 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa
b = 350 mm
d = 490 mm
1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
( 490 ) 312 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where

0.67
=
fcu ab 0.67 1.5 =
30 350a 4667 a

As
2500
Cs =
f y 0.4467 fcu ) = ( 460 0.4467 30 ) =
971, 014 N
(
s
1.15
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
As fs 2500 fs
=
T =
= 2174 fs ( fs < f y )
s
1.15
N1 =4, 667 a + 971, 014 2174 fs

=
Cc

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

=
N

1
a
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm

e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm
=
N

1
a

4, 667 a 490 + 971, 014 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N = 4917.9a 5.018a 2 + 897,926

(Eqn. 2)

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceed cb (312 mm).

=
a 0.9
=
364 327.6 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
=
N 2 4917.9 327.6 5.018 ( 327.6 ) + 897,926
= 1,970,500 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 364
=
fs =
700 242.3 MPa
364
s =t =fs Es = 0.0012
6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
=
N1 4, 667 ( 327.6 ) + 971, 014 2174 ( 242.3
=
) 1,973,163 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = Ne = 1971
= 493 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,

365 60
=
s
=
=
> y 0.0023
) 0.00292
( 0.0035
365
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, the section capacity is
N = 1971 kN
M = 493 kN-m

HK CP-2004 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

IS 456-2000 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 37.778 kN/m. This example is tested using the IS 456-2000 concrete design
code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent
results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

300mm

600 mm

37.5 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
19.365x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
8068715.3kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 562.5 mm
w = 37.778 kN/m

Design Properties
fck = 15 MPa
fy = 415 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
The example problem is same as Example-1 given in SP-16 Design Aids for
Reinforced Concrete published by Bureau of Indian Standards. For this example
a direct comparison for flexural steel only is possible as corresponding data for
shear steel reinforcement is not available in the reference for this problem.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kN-m)

170.00

170.00

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

1006

1006

0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kN)

113.33

113.33

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asv/s (mm2/mm)

0.333

0.333

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 456-2000 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

m, steel

= 1.15

m, concrete = 1.50
= 0.36
= 0.42
As ,min

0.85
bd = 345.63 sq-mm
fy

COMB1
Mu = 170 kN-m
Vu = 113.33 kN-m

xu ,max
d

Xu , max
d

0.53

0.53 0.05 f y 250

165
=
0.48 0.02 f y 415

85

0.46

if

f y 250 MPa

if 250 < f y 415 MPa

if 415 < f y 500 MPa
if

f y 500 MPa

= 0.48

The normalized design moment, m, is given by

m=

Mu
= 0.33166
bw d 2 f ck

Mw,single = fckbwd2

x u,max
x u,max
= 196.436 kN-m > Mu
1
d
d

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

So no compression reinforcement is needed

= 0.3983
xu 1 1 4 m
=
d
2
x

z = d 1 u = 562.5{1 0.42 0.3983}= 468.406

d

u
= 1006 sq-mm
As =
( fy s ) z

Shear Design
v =

Vu
= 0.67161
bd

max = 2.5 for M15 concrete

k = 1.0
=
1
0.15

if Pu 0 , Under Tension
100 As
3
bd

100 As
= 0.596
bd

c = 0.49 From Table 19 of IS 456:2000 code, interpolating between rows.

cd = kc = 0.49
The required shear reinforcement is calculated as follows:
Since v > cd

Asv
0.4b ( v cd ) b
0.4 300 ( 0.67161 0.49 ) 300
,
,
= max
=

max

s
( 415 1.15)
( 415 1.15 )

( f y ) ( f y ) y
Asv
mm 2
=
max
=
{0.333,0.150} 0.333
s
mm

IS 456-2000 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

IS 456-2000 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 1913 kN and moment My= 478 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 25M
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1913 kN
My= 478 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.997

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: IS 456-2000 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results. The larger variation is due to equivalent rectangular compression block
assumption.

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

700
700
dt =
( 490) = 296 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
0.36
Cc =
f ck ab = 0.4286 30 350a = 4500a
0.84
A'
2500
Cs = s f y - 0.4286 f ck =
( 460 - 0.4286 30 ) = 972, 048 N
1.15
s
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
Af
2500 f s
T= s s=
= 2174 f s ( f s < f y )
s
1.15
(Eqn. 1)
N1 = 4500a + 972, 048 - 2174 f s

3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
N 2 = ' Cc d - + Cs d - d '
e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e' = e + d " = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

1
a

N2 =
4500a 490 - + 972, 048 ( 490 - 60 )

465
2

2
N 2 = 4742a - 4.839a + 898,883

(Eqn. 2)

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 374 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.84 374 = 314.2 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 = 4742 314.2 - 4.039 ( 314.2 ) + 898,883 = 1,911, 037 N
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.
490 - 374
fs =
700 = 217.11 MPa
374
s = t = f s Es = 0.0011
6) Substitute a = 314.2 mm and fs = 217.11 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
N1 = 4500 ( 314.2 ) + 972, 048 - 2174 ( 217.4 ) = 1,913, 765 N
Which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,911,037 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = Ne = 1913
= 478 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
374 - 60
s' =
( 0.0035 ) = 0.0029 > y = 0.0023
374
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 1913 kN
M = 478 kN-m

IS 456-2000 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

NTC 2008 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 36.67 kN/m. This example is tested using the Italian NTC 2008 concrete
design code. The flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with
independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

230mm

550 mm

60 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
G=
10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties
d = 490 mm
b = 230 mm

Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa
fyk = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, MEd (kNm)

165.00

165.00

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

933

933

0.00%

Design Shear, VEd (kN)

110.0

110.0

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asw/s (mm2/m)

345.0

345.0

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NTC 2008 Ex001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for both of the load combinations:

c, concrete = 1.50
cc = 0.85
k1 = 0.44

k2 =
k4 =
1.25 ( 0.6 + 0.0014 / cu 2 ) =
1.25 k3 = 0.54

f cd = cc f ck / c = 0.85(30)/1.5 = 17 MPa

f yd =

f y 460
= 400 Mpa
s 1.15

= 1.0 for fck 50 MPa

= 0.8 for fck 50 MPa
As ,min = 0.26

f ctm
bd = 184.5 sq-mm,
f yk
2/3
where f ctm = 0.3 f cwk
= 0.3(30)2/3 = 2.896 N/sq-mm

As,min = 0.0013bh = 164.5 sq-mm

COMB1
The factored design load and moment are given as,
wu = 36.67 kN/m

wu l 2
= 36.67 62/8 = 165.0 kN-m
M =
8
The limiting value of the ratio of the neutral axis depth at the ultimate limit state
to the effective depth, ( x / d )lim , is given as,

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

k1
x
for fck 50 MPa ,
=
k2
d lim
where = 1 , assuming no moment redistribution

k1
x
=
=

k2
d lim

(1 0.44
)
=
1.25

0.448

The normalized section capacity as a singly reinforced beam is given as,

x x
mlim = 1 = 0.29417
d lim 2 d lim

The limiting normalized steel ratio is given as,

x
= 1 1 2mlim = 0.3584
d lim

lim =

The normalized moment, m, is given as,

165 106
M
=
=0.1758 < mlim so a singly reinforced beam
m= 2
230 4902 17
bd f cd
will be adequate.

= 1 1 2m = 0.1947 < lim

f bd
17 230 490
As = cd = 0.1947
=933 sq-mm
400

f yd

Shear Design
The shear force demand is given as,
=
VEd =
L / 2 110.0 kN
The shear force that can be carried without requiring design shear reinforcement,
1/3
=
VRd ,c CRd ,c k (100 1 f ck ) + k1 cp bw d

1/3
VRd ,c= 0.12 1.6389 (100 0.0 30 ) + 0.0 230 490= 0 kN

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

with a minimum of:

vmin + k1 cp bd = [ 0.4022 + 0.0] 230 x 490 =

V=
45.3 kN
Rd , c
where,
k=
1+

=
1

200
2.0 = 1.6389
d

AS
0
=
= 0.0 0.02
bd 230490

As = 0 for l at the end of a simply-supported beam as it taken as the tensile

reinforcement at the location offset by d+ldb beyond the point considered.
(EN 1992-1-1:2004 6.2.2(1) Figure 6.3)
=
cp

N Ed
= 0.0
Ac

CRd ,c = 0.18 / c =0.12

=
vmin 0.035
=
k 3/2 fck 1/2 0.4022
The maximum design shear force that can be carried without crushing of the
notional concrete compressive struts,
cot + cot
VRd ,max zb
=
=
c f 'cd
297 kN
2
1 + cot
where,

=
z 0.9
=
d 441.0 mm

c = 1.0 since there is no axial compression

f 'cd = 0.5 f cd

= 900 for vertical stirrups

vEd
1
5.33
=
0.5sin
=
0.2 f ck (1 f ck / 250 )
where,

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

=
vEd

ETABS
0

VEd
= 0.9761
bw d

21.8 45 , therefore use = 21.8

The required shear reinforcing is,
Asw VEd
mm 2
1
110.0106
=
= = 249.4
s
zf ywd ( cot + cot ) sin 441460 2.5
m
1.15
The minimum required shear reinforcing is,
mm 2
Asw
(controls)
=
1.5
=
b
1.5

230
=
345.0

m
s min

NTC 2008 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

NTC 2008 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N
= 2174 kN and moment My = 544 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5-25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2174 kN
My= 544 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fck = 25 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.092

1.00

9.20%

COMPUTER FILE: EN 2-2004 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 25 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3) d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

700
700
dt =
( 490) = 296 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
f ck
0.85 30
Cc =
ab =
350a = 5950a
1.5
c
As'
f ck 2500
0.85 30
Cs =
460 = 963, 043 N
fy =

1.5
s
c 1.15
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
Af
2500 f s
= 2174 f s ( f s < f y )
T= s s=
s
1.15
(Eqn. 1)
N1 = 5,950a + 963, 043 - 2174 f s
3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
N 2 = ' Cc d - + Cs d - d '
e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e' = e + d " = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

1
a

N2 =
5950a 490 - + 963, 043 ( 490 - 60 )

465
2

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

N 2 = 6270a - 6.3978a 2 + 890,556

ETABS
2

(Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 365 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.8 365 = 292 mm

Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N 2 = 6270 292 - 6.3978 ( 292 ) + 890,556 = 2,175,893 N
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 356 mm.
490 - 365
fs =
700 = 240.0 MPa
365
s = t = f s Es = 0.0012
6) Substitute a = 284.8 mm and fs = 263.4 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
N1 = 5950 ( 292 ) + 963, 043 - 2174 ( 240.0 ) = 2,178, 683 N
Which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,175,893 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = Ne = 2175
= 544 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
365 - 60

s' =
( 0.0035 ) = 0.0029 > y = 0.0023
365
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 2,174 kN
M = 544 kN-m

NTC 2008 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

KBC 2009 Example 001

Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify the flexural and shear design. A simplespan, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 560-mm-deep beam is modeled. The beam is
shown in Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite element mesh of frame
elements, automatically generated. The maximum element size has been
specified to be 200 mm. The beam is supported by joint restraints that have no
rotational stiffness. One end of the beam has no longitudinal stiffness.
The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL50) and one live load case (LL130) with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 50, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combination (COMB130) is defined using the KBC 2009 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead loads and 1.5 for live loads. The model is analyzed for
both of those load cases and the load combinations.
Table 1 shows the comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2
shows the comparison of the design shear reinforcements.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Clear span,
L
=
Overall depth,
h
=
Width of beam,
b
=
Effective depth,
d
=
Depth of comp. reinf.,
d'
=
Concrete strength,
fck =
Yield strength of steel,
fy
=
Concrete unit weight,
wc =
Modulus of elasticity,
Ec =
Modulus of elasticity,
Es =
Poissons ratio,
v
=
Dead load,
Live load,

Pd
Pl

=
=

6000
560
300
500
60
30
460
0
25x105
2x105
0.2
50
130

mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
MPa
MPa
kN/m3
MPa
MPa

kN
kN

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement
RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip
with the moments obtained using the analytical method. They match exactly for
this problem. Table 1 also shows the comparison of design reinforcements.
Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements
Reinforcement Area (sq-mm)
Method

Moment
(kN-m)

As+

As-

ETABS

360

2109

Calculated

360

2109

Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements

Reinforcement Area,

Av
s

(sq-mm/m)
Shear Force (kN)

ETABS

Calculated

180

515.3

515.4

COMPUTER FILE: KBC 2009 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
b = 0.85

=
1 0.85 .007(30 28)
= 0.836 for =
f ck 30MPa,
cmax =

c
c + f y Es

d = 187.5 mm

amax = 1cmax= 156.75 mm

=
Ac b=
d 150, 000 mm 2

As ,min

0.25 f ck
Ac = 446.5

fy

mm2
= max
1.4 Ac = 456.5

fy

= 456.5 mm2
COMB130
Vu = (1.0Pd + 1.0Pl) = 180 kN Loads were Ultimate
Mu =

Vu L
= 360 kN-m
3

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a =
d
d2

2 Mu
0.85 f ck bb

= 26.81 mm ; a < amax

Since a < amax , compression reinforcing is NOT required.

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

The required tension reinforcing is:

Mu
=
2108.9 mm 2
a

f y d b
2

=
As

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:

0.75

The concrete limit is:

f ck = 5.48 MPa < 8.4 MPa

The concrete shear capacity is given by:

Vc =

1/6 f ck bd

= 102.69 kN

The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vs= 0.25 f ck bd = 154.05 kN
The following limits are required in the determination of the reinforcement:
Vc/2

= 51.35 kN

Vmax = Vc + Vs

= 256.75 kN

Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length for
any load combination is calculated as follows:
If Vu (Vc/2),
Av
= 0,
s

else if (Vc/2) < Vu Vmax

Av
(V Vc ) Av
= u

f ys d
s
s min

where:
b
Av
w
= max 3.5
s min
f y

bw
,
fy

0.2 f ck

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

else if Vu > Vmax,

a failure condition is declared.
Combo1
Vu = 180 kN

(Vc /=
Vu 180 kN Vmax
= 256.75 kN
2 ) 51.35 kN =
300 0.2 30

Av

=
max
3.5
,
300

s min
420 420

mm 2
Av
=
max
=
2.5,
0.78
0.0083
{
}

mm
s min
Av
(Vu Vc )
mm 2
mm 2
= = 0.5154
= 515.4
mm
m
f yd
s

KBC 2009 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

KBC 2009 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu
= 1879 kN and moment Mu = 470 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1879 kN
My= 470 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fck = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

KBC 2009 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.003

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: KBC 2009 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

KBC 2009 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fck = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cmax =

0.003
0.003
d=
( 490 ) = 183.75 mm
0.003 + 0.005
0.003 + 0.005

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pu = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = 0.85 f ck ab = 0.85 30 350a = 8925a

Cs = As' f y - 0.85 f ck = 2500 ( 460 - 0.85 30 ) = 1, 086, 250 N

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
T = As f s = 2500 f s ( f s < f y )
Pu = 8,925a +1, 086, 250 - 2500 f s

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
C d - + Cs d - d '
' c
e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e' = e + d " = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

a
1

Pu =
8,925a 490 - + 1, 086, 250 ( 490 - 60 )

465
2

2
Pu = 9, 404.8a - 9.6a +1, 004, 489.2
Pu =

(Eqn. 2)

KBC 2009 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 335 mm, which exceed cmax (183.75 mm).

=
1 0.85 .007(30 28)
= 0.836 for =
f ck 30MPa,
a = 0.836 335 = 280 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
Pu = 9, 404.8 280 - 9.6 ( 280 ) +1, 004, 489.2 = 2,885,193.2 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 335 mm.

490 - 335
fs =
600 = 277.8 MPa
335
s = t = f s Es = 0.00138

6) Substitute a = 280 mm and fs = 277.7 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate Pu2 :

Pu2 = 8,925 ( 280 ) +1, 086, 250 - 2500 ( 277.8 ) = 2,890, 750 N
Which is very close to the calculated Pu1 of 2,885,193.2 (less than 1% difference)
250
M u = Pu e = 2890
= 722.5 kN-m
1000

7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,

335 - 60
s' =
( 0.003) = 0.00263 > y = 0.0023
335
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
Pu = 0.65 2890 = 21879 kN
M u = 0.65 722.5 = 470 kN-m

KBC 2009 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

KCI 1999 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

30 cm

A
6.0 cm
A

6.0 m
Material Properties
E=
3.37E105 kgf/sq-cm
=
0.2
G=
1.40E105 kgf/sq-cm

Section Properties
h = 55.0 cm
b = 30.0 cm
d = 49.0 cm

49 cm

Section A-A
Design Properties
fc = 305.9 kgf/sq-cm
fy = 4690.69 kgf/sq-cm

Uniform factored load

u = 74.4082 kgf/cm (D+L)

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Design moment calculation, Mu.
Minimum tension reinforcement, As
Design Shear , Vu
Area of shear reinforcement, Av

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULT COMPARISON
The independent results are hand calculated based on the Korean KCI-99 code.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kgf-m)

33484

33484

0.00%

As (cm2)

19.46

19.46

0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kgf)

22322.5

22322.5

0.00%

Av/s (cm2/cm)

0.0621

0.0621

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: KCI 1999 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:
= 0.85,
0.80 f 'c
14
As,min = max
bd , bd = 4.39 sq-cm
fy
f y

f c 280
0.8319
=
10

1 =
0.85 0.007

6000
=
d 27.50 cm
6000 + f y

=
cmax

amax = 1cmax = 22.88 cm

Comb1
u = 74.4082 kgf/cm
Mu =

wu l 2
= 74.4082 6002/8 = 3,348,400 kgf-cm = 33,484 kgf-m
8

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a = d d2

2Mu
0.85 f c'b

= 11.70 cm (a < amax)

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:

Mu
3,348, 400
=
a
0.85 4690.69 ( 49 11.70 / 2 )

fy d
2

As

As

= 19.46 sq-cm

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
The following quantities are computed for all of the load combinations:

0.80

The shear demand, Vu , is given as,

2
=
Vu =
22,323 kgf
u ( L / 2)

The concrete shear capacity is given by:

Vc = 0.53 f 'c bd = 13, 626 kgf
The maximum shear that can be carried by reinforcement is given by:

Vmax = Vc + 2.12 f 'c bd = 68,132 kgf

Given Vu, Vc and Vmax, the required shear reinforcement in area/unit length is
calculated as follows:
If Vu Vc,
Av
= 0,
s

else if Vc < Vu Vmax,

Av
(V V ) ,
= u
s
f ys d

A
0.2 f 'c 3.5
but at least, v max
=
=
b,
b 0.0224 sq-cm/cm

s
f y
f y
else if Vu > Vmax,
a failure condition is declared.

Comb1
Vu = 22,323 kgf
Av
=
s

(Vu Vc )
= 0.0621 sq-cm/cm
f ys d

KCI 1999 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

KCI 1999 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 2020kN and
moment My = 505kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the calculated result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN
My = 493 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design
KCI 1999 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.980

1.00

2.04%

COMPUTER FILE: KCI 1999 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

600
600
dt =
( 490 ) = 277 mm
600 + f y
600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
f 'c ab 0.85 =
30 350a 8925a

Cs =
As ( f y 0.85 f 'c ) =
2500 ( 460 0.85 30 ) =
1, 086, 250 N

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

=
T A=
2500 fs ( fs < f y )
s fs
N1 =
8925a + 1, 086, 250 2500 fs

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
=
N
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm
=
N

a
1

8925a 490 + 1, 086, 250 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N2 =
9405a 9.5968a 2 + 1, 004, 489

(Eqn. 2)

4) Assume c = 335 mm, which exceed cb (277 mm).

a = 0.836 335 = 280 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
N 2 = 9405 280 9.5968 ( 280 ) + 1, 004, 489 = 2,885,500 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 335
=
fs =
600 277.6 MPa
335
s =t =fs Es = 0.0014
6) Substitute a = 280 mm and fs = 277.6 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
N1 = 8925 ( 280 ) + 1, 086, 250 2500 ( 277.6 ) = 2,891, 250 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,885,500 (less than 1% difference)
250
M
= Ne
= 2884
=
721 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
335 60
=
s
=
> y 0.0023
) 0.0025=
( 0.003
335
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
2020 kN
N = ( 2885 ) =
505 kN-m
M = ( 721) =

KCI 1999 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RCDF 2004 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
In the example a simple supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load
of 6.58 Ton/m (64.528 kN/m). This example was tested using the Mexican
RCDF 2004 concrete design code. The computed moment and shear strengths are
compared with independent hand calculated results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
CL

W Ton/m

b
h
r

A
L

L=6m
Material Properties
E=
=
G=

1979899 kg/cm2
0.2
824958 kg/cm2

Section Properties
h
r
b
W

= 0.65 m
= 0.05 m
= 0.30 m
= 6.58 Ton/m
(64.528 kN/m)

Design Properties
fc = 200 kg/cm2 (19.6133 MPa)
fy = 4200 kg/cm2 (411.88 MPa)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
ETABS
0

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Design moment calculation, M and factored moment resistance, Mu.
Minimum reinforcement calculation, As
Design Shear Strength, V, and factored shear strength, Vu
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated based on the equivalent rectangular stress
distribution described in Example 5.2 on page 92 of Aspectos Fundamentales
del Concreto Reforzado Fourth Edition by scar M. Gonzlez Cuevas and
Francisco Robles Fernndez-Villegas.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment (kN-m)

290.38

290.38

0%

As (mm2)

1498

1498

0%

Design Shear (kN)

154.9

154.9

0%

Av/s (mm2/m)

563

563

0%

COMPUTER FILE: RCDF 2004 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results for bending and an acceptable-conservative comparison for shear.

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

GEOMETRY AND PROPERTIES

Clear span,
Overall depth,
Width of beam,
Effective depth,
Concrete strength,
Yield strength of steel,
Concrete unit weight,
Modulus of elasticity,
Modulus of elasticity,
Poissons ratio,

L
h
b
d
fc
fy
wc
Ec
Es
v

=
6
=
650
=
300
=
600
=
19.61
= 411.88
=
0
= 20.6x103
= 20.0x104
=
0.2

ETABS
0

m
mm
mm
mm
N/ mm2
N/ mm2
kN/m3
N/ mm2
N/ mm2

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:

=
f c*
cb =

f 'c 19.61
=
= 15.69 MPa
1.25 1.25

c Es
c Es + f yd

d = 355.8 mm

amax = 1cb = 302.4 mm

where,
=
As ,min

f*
=
1 1.05 c , 0.65 1 0.85
140

0.22 f 'c
=
bd 425.8 mm 2
fy

COMB1
u = 6.58 ton/cm (64.528kN/m)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Mu =

u l 2
8

ETABS
0

= 64.528 6.02/8 = 290.376 kN-m

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a =
d
d2

2 Mu
0.85 f c* FR b

(RCDF-NTC 2.1, 1.5.1.2)

= 154.2 mm

where FR = 0.9
Compression steel not required since a < amax.
The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As

Mu
290376000
=
= 1498 mm 2
a
0.9(411.88)
600

154.2
/
2

(
)
FR f y d
2

Shear Design
The shear demand is computed as:
=
Vu ( L / 2 d ) =15.79 ton (154.9 kN) at distance, d, from support for
this example
The shear force is limited to a maximum of,

= VcR + 0.8 f c* Acv

Vmax
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
=
VcR 0.3FRv ( 0.2 + 20 ) f c* Acv = 0.3 0.8 ( 0.3665 ) 15.69 300 600
=43.553 kN

where FRv = 0.8

The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:

0.1 f c '
mm 2
Av
=
=
b
289

fy
m
s min

(RCDF-NTC 2.5.2.3, Eqn 2.22)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Av
=
s

Vu FRvVcR )
(=
FRv f ys d

ETABS
0

154.9 0.8 43.553

mm 2
= 563
0.8 411.88 600
m
(RCDF-NTC 2.5.2.3, Eqn 2.23)

RCDF 2004 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RCDF 2004 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1794 kN
and moment My = 448 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with a computed result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1794 kN
My= 448 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.999

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: RCDF 2004 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:

=
cb

600
600
=
dt
=
( 490 ) 277 mm
600 + f y
600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
f *c ab 0.85 0.8 =
30 350a 7140a

2500 ( 460 0.85 0.8 30 ) =

1, 099, 000 N
Cs =
As ( f y 0.85 f *c ) =

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

=
T A=
2500 fs ( fs < f y )
s fs
N1 =
7140a + 1, 099, 000 2500 fs

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
=
N
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm

e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm

1
a

=
N
7140a 490 + 1, 099, 000 ( 490 60 )

465
2

2
N 2 =7542a 7.677 a + 1, 016, 280

(Eqn. 2)

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 347 mm, which exceeds cb (277 mm).

a = 1a = 0.836 347 = 290 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:

N 2 = 7542 290 7.677 ( 290 ) + 1, 016, 280 = 2,557,824 N

2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 347
=
fs =
600 247.3 MPa
347
s =t =fs Es = 0.0012
6) Substitute a = 290 mm and fs = 247.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
N1 = 7140 ( 290 ) + 1, 099, 000 2500 ( 247.3) = 2,551,350 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,557,824 (less than 1% difference)
250
= Ne
= 2552
=
M
638 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
347 - 60

s' =
( 0.003) = 0.0025 > y = 0.0023
347
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
N = FR ( 2551) = 1794 kN

M = FR ( 638 ) = 448 kN-m

RCDF 2004 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001

Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
The purpose of this example is to verify the flexural and shear design. The load
level is adjusted for the case corresponding to the following conditions:

The stress-block dimension, a, extends below, amax , which requires that

compression reinforcement be provided as permitted by NZS 3101-06.

The average shear stress in the beam is below the maximum shear stress
allowed by NZS 3101-06, requiring design shear reinforcement.

A simple-span, 6-m-long, 300-mm-wide, and 560-mm-deep beam is modeled.

The beam is shown in Figure 1. The computational model uses a finite
element mesh of frame elements, automatically generated. The maximum
element size has been specified to be 200 mm. The beam is supported by joint
restraints that have no rotational stiffness. One end of the beam has no
longitudinal stiffness.
The beam is loaded with symmetric third-point loading. One dead load case
(DL50) and one live load case (LL130) with only symmetric third-point loads of
magnitudes 50, and 130 kN, respectively, are defined in the model. One load
combination (COMB130) is defined using the NZS 3101-06 load combination
factors of 1.2 for dead loads and 1.5 for live loads. The model is analyzed for
both of those load cases and the load combinations.
Table 1 shows the comparison of the design longitudinal reinforcements. Table 2
shows the comparison of the design shear reinforcements.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Figure 1 The Model Beam for Flexural and Shear Design

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Clear span,
L
=
Overall depth,
h
=
Width of beam,
b
=
Effective depth,
d
=
Depth of comp. reinf.,
d'
=
Concrete strength,
fc =
Yield strength of steel,
fy
=
Concrete unit weight,
wc =
Modulus of elasticity,
Ec =
Modulus of elasticity,
Es =
Poissons ratio,
v
=
Dead load,
Live load,

Pd
Pl

=
=

6000
560
300
500
60
30
460
0
25x105
2x105
0.2
50
130

ETABS
0

mm
mm
mm
mm
mm
MPa
MPa
kN/m3
MPa
MPa

kN
kN

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement
RESULTS COMPARISON
Table 1 shows the comparison of the total factored moments in the design strip
with the moments obtained using the analytical method. They match exactly for
this problem. Table 1 also shows the comparison of design reinforcements.
Table 1 Comparison of Moments and Flexural Reinforcements
Reinforcement Area (sq-mm)
Method

Moment
(kN-m)

As+

As-

ETABS

510

3170

193

Calculated

510

3170

193

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Table 2 Comparison of Shear Reinforcements

Reinforcement Area,

Av
s

(sq-mm/m)
Shear Force (kN)

ETABS

Calculated

255

1192.5

1192.5

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-2006 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact comparison with the independent results.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:
b = 0.85
=
1 0.85 for f c 55MPa

=
1 0.85 for f c 30,
cb =

c
c + f y Es

d = 283.02 mm

amax = 0.751cb= 180.42 mm

=
Ac b=
d 150, 000 mm 2

As ,min

f c
Ac = 446.5

4 fy
= max
mm2
1.4 Ac = 456.5

fy

= 456.5 mm2

COMB130
V* = (1.2Pd + 1.5Pl) = 255 kN
M* =

V *L
= 510 kN-m
3

The depth of the compression block is given by:

a =
d
d
2

2 M*
1 fc'b b f

= 194.82 mm ; a > amax

Since a amax , compression reinforcing is required.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

The compressive force, C, developed in the concrete alone is given by:

=
C =
1,380.2 kN
1 f c bamax

The resisting moment by the concrete compression and tension reinforcement is:
a

M c* = C d max b = 480.8 kN-m

2

Therefore the moment required by concrete compression and tension

reinforcement is:

M s* = M * M c* = 29.2 kN m
The required compression reinforcing is given by:
=
As

M s*
=
193 mm 2 , where
f s 1 f 'c ( d d ) b

cb=
,max

amax
= 0.75=
cb 0.75283.02
= 212.26 mm

c
d '
f s c ,max Es b ,max
=
fy ;
cb ,max

212.26 60
=
f s 0.003200, 000
= 430 MPa =
f y 460 MPa
212.26
f s = 430 MPa

The required tension reinforcing for balancing the compression in the concrete is:
=
As1

M c*
= 3, 001 mm 2
a

f y d max b
2

And the tension required for balancing the compression reinforcement is given
by:
=
As 2

M s*
=
169.9 mm 2
f y ( d d ') b

Therefore, the total tension reinforcement, A

=
As1 + As 2 is given by:
s

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

As = As1 + As 2 = 3001 + 169.9 = 3170.5 mm 2

Shear Design
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
VC = vC ACV , where
vC = kd ka vb , and
kd = 1.0 since shear reinforcement provided will be equal
to or greater than the nominal amount required.
ka = 1.0 (Program default)
A

=
vb 0.07 + 10 s f 'C , except vb is neither less than
bd

0.08 f 'C nor greater than 0.2 f 'C and f 'C 50 MPa
vC = 0.4382
The average shear stress is limited to a maximum limit of,
vmax = min {0.2 f c , 8 MPa} = min{6, 8} = 6 MPa
For this example, the nominal shear strength provided by concrete is:
VC= vC ACV= 0.4382 300 500= 65.727 kN
*

V
=
= 1.7 MPa < vmax , so there is no concrete crushing.
v
bw d
*

If * > max, a failure condition is declared.

For this example the required shear reinforcing strength is:
s = 0.75
V=
S

V*
255
65.727 = 274.3 kN
VC =
S
0.75

The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:

Since h =
560 mm > max {300 mm, 0.5bw =
0.5300 =
150 mm}

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

sc = 0.328 MPa
smax = 4.5 MPa
So sc < * smax, and shear reinforcement is required and calculate as:
Av
=
s

VS
274.27 1E6
=
= 1192.5 mm 2
f yt d
460 500

NZS 3101-2006 Example 001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
In this example, a reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load N*
= 2445 kN and moment My = 611 kN-m. This column is reinforced with 5 T25
bars. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and computed
result is compared. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
2445 kN
My= 611 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fc = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied Reinforced Concrete Column Design

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.994

1.00

0.60%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-2006 Ex002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This assumption will
be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis fro a balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

600
600
dt =
( 490) = 277 mm
600 + f y
600 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N * = Cc + C s T
where
Cc = 0.85 f c'ab = 0.85 30 350a = 8925a

Cs = As' f y - 0.85 f c' = 2500 ( 460 - 0.85 30 ) = 1,086, 250 N

Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).

T = As f s = 2500 f s ( f s < f y )
N * = 8,925a + 1,086, 250 - 2500 f s

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

a
'
Cc d - 2 + C s d - d

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e' = e + d " = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

1
a

N* =
8,925a 490 - + 1,086, 250 ( 490 - 60 )

465
2

*
2
N = 9, 404.8a - 9.6a + 1,004, 489.2
N* =

1
e'

(Eqn. 2)

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 330 mm, which exceed cb (296 mm).

a = 0.85 330 = 280.5 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N * = 9, 404.8 280.5 - 9.6 ( 280.5) + 1,004, 489.2 = 2,887, 205.2 N
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 330 mm.

490 - 330
fs =
600 = 290.9 MPa
330
s = t = f s Es = 0.00145
6) Substitute a = 280.5 mm and fs = 290.9 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N*2:
N 2* = 8,925 ( 280.5) + 1,086, 250 - 2500 ( 290.9 ) = 2,862, 462.5 N
Which is very close to the calculated Pr1 of 2,887,205.2 (less than 1% difference)
250
M * = N * e = 2877
= 719 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steels yield. From strain diagram,
330 - 60
s' =
( 0.003) = 0.00245 > y = 0.0023
330
Compression steels yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is
N * = 0.85 2877 = 2445 kN
M * = 0.85 719 = 611 kN-m

NZS 3101-2006 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001

SHEAR AND FLEXURAL REINFORCEMENT DESIGN OF A SINGLY REINFORCED RECTANGLE
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform unfactored dead load and
imposed load of 25 and 19 kN/m respectively spanning 6m. This example is
tested using the Singapore CP65-99 concrete design code. The flexural and shear
reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
Dead Load=25kN/m
Live Load=19kN/m

CL

b=300mm

A
d=490 mm

300mm

300mm

6m

h=600 mm

Section A-A

Design Properties
fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa
fyv = 250 MPa
TECHNICAL FEATURES OF TESTED
Calculation of Flexural reinforcement, As
Enforcement of Minimum tension reinforcement, As,min
Calculation of Shear reinforcement, Av
Enforcement of Minimum shear reinforcing, Av,min

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
The detailed work-out of the example above can be obtained from Example 3.4
of Chanakya Arya (1994). Design of Structural Elements. E & FN Spon, 54-55

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Design Moment, Mu (kN-m)

294.30

294.30

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

1555

1555

0.00%

Design Shear, Vu (kN)

160.23

160.23

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asv/sv (mm2/mm)

0.730

0.730

0.00 %

COMPUTER FILE: SS CP 65-1999 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed flexural results show an exact match with the independent results.

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION

Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for all the load combinations:

m, steel

= 1.15

As ,min = 0.0013bh , where b=300mm, h=600mm

= 234.00 sq-mm

Design Combo COMB1

wu = =65.4 kN/m
wu l 2
= 294.3 kN-m
Mu =
8
Vu =

wu l
wu d = 160.23 kN
2

The depth of the compression block is given by:

K=

M
= 0.108 < 0.156
f cu b d 2

If K 0.156 (BS 3.4.4.4), the beam is designed as a singly reinforced concrete

beam.
Then the moment arm is computed as:

K
z = d 0.5 + 0.25
0.95d = 473.221 mm, where d=550 mm
0.9

The ultimate resistance moment is given by:

As =

M
= 1555 sq-mm
( f y 1.15) z

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
Vu = =160.23 kN at distance, d, from support
v=

V
= 0.9711 MPa
bw d

vmax = min(0.8 fcu , 5 MPa) = 4.38178 MPa

v vmax , so no concrete crushing
The shear stress carried by the concrete, vc, is calculated as:
1

0.84k1 k 2 100 As 3 400 4

vc =

= 0.4418 MPa
m bd d
k1 is the enhancement factor for support compression,
and is conservatively taken as 1 .
1

f 3
k2 = cu = 1.0, 1 k2
30

80

30

m = 1.25
0.15

100 As
3
bd

100 As 100 469

= 0.2842
=
bd
300 550
1

400 4
400
=
0.95 1, so

d
d

is taken as 1.

fcu 40 MPa (for calculation purposes only) and As is the area of tension
reinforcement.
If (vc + 0.4) < v vmax
Asv
=
sv

v vc ) bw ( 0.9711 0.4418 )
(=
0.87 f yv

0.87250

= 0.730 sq-mm/mm

SS CP 65-1999 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1971 kN
and moment My = 493 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the calculated result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1971 kN
My = 493 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fcu = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

350 m
490 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.994

1.00

0.60%

COMPUTER FILE: SS CP 65-1999 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an acceptable comparison with the independent
results.

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fcu = 30 MPa
b = 350 mm

fy = 460 MPa
d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 250 mm < (2/3)d = 327 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balanced condition:

=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
( 490 ) 296 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
0.67
=
Cc =
fcu ab 0.67 1.5 =
30 350a 4667 a

As
2500
Cs =
f y 0.4467 fcu ) = ( 460 0.4467 30 ) =
971, 014 N
(
s
1.15
Assume compression steel yields (this assumption will be checked later).
As fs 2500 fs
=
T =
= 2174 fs ( fs < f y )
s
1.15
N1 =4, 667 a + 971, 014 2174 fs

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

=
N

1
a
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 215 mm
e =e + d =250 + 215 =465 mm
=
N

1
a

4, 667 a 490 + 971, 014 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N = 4917.9a 5.018a 2 + 897,926

(Eqn. 2)

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 364 mm, which exceeds cb (296 mm).

a = 0.9 364 = 327.6 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
=
N 2 4917.9 327.6 5.018 ( 327.6 ) + 897,926
= 1,970,500 N
2

5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 365 mm.

490 364
=
fs =
700 242.3 MPa
364
s =t =fs Es = 0.0012
6) Substitute a = 327.6 mm and fs = 242.3 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
=
=
N1 4, 667 ( 327.6 ) + 971, 014 2174 ( 242.3
) 1,973,163 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 1,970,500 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = Ne = 1971
= 493 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,

364 60
=
s
=
> y 0.0023
) 0.0029=
( 0.0035
364
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 1971 kN
M = 493 kN-m

SS CP 65-1999 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TS 500-2000 Example 001

Shear and Flexural Reinforcement Design of a Singly Reinforced Rectangle
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The flexural and shear strength of a rectangular concrete beam is tested in this
example.
A simply supported beam is subjected to a uniform factored load of 36.67 kN/m.
This example is tested using the Turkish TS 500-2000 concrete design code. The
flexural and shear reinforcing computed is compared with independent results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
230mm

CL

550 mm

60 mm
A

Section A-A

6m
Material Properties
E=
25.000x106 kN/m2
=
0.2
Clear span,
Overall depth,
Width of beam,
Effective depth,
Concrete strength,
Yield strength of steel,
Concrete unit weight,
Modulus of elasticity,
Modulus of elasticity,
Poissons ratio,

Section Properties
d = 543.75 mm

L
h
b
d
fck
fyk
wc
Ec
Es
v

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

6000
550
230
490
30
420
0
25x103
2x105
0.2

Design Properties
fck = 30 MPa
fy = 420 MPa
mm
mm
mm
mm
MPa
MPa
kN/m3
MPa
MPa

-1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Calculation of flexural and shear reinforcement
Application of minimum flexural and shear reinforcement
RESULTS COMPARISON

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

165.02

165.02

0.00%

Tension Reinf, As (mm2)

1022

1022

0.00%

Design Shear, Vd (kN)

110.0

110.0

0.00%

Shear Reinf, Asw/s (mm2/mm)

0.2415

0.2415

0.00%

Output Parameter
Design Moment, Md (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: TS 500-2000 EX001

CONCLUSION
The computed results show an exact match with the independent results.

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Flexural Design
The following quantities are computed for the load combination:

f=
cd

f ck 30
= = 20
mc 1.5

=
f yd

f yk 420
= = 365
ms 1.15

cb =

cu Es
cu Es + f yd

d = 304.6 mm

amax = 0.85k1cb = 212.3 mm

k1 = 0.85 0.006 ( f ck 25 ) = 0.82 , 0.70 k1 0.85

where,

=
As ,min

0.8 f ctd
=
bd 315.5 mm 2
f yd
Where
=
f ctd

0.35 f cu 0.35 30
= = 1.278
mc
1.5

COMB1
d = 36.67 kN/m

d L2
Md =
= 36.67 62/8 = 165.02 kN-m
8
The depth of the compression block is given by:
a =
d
d2

2 Md
= 95.42 mm
0.85 fcd b

Compression steel not required since a < amax.

The area of tensile steel reinforcement is given by:
As =

Md
165E6
=
a
365 ( 490 95.41/ 2 )

f yd d
2

As = 1022 mm2
TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Shear Design
The shear demand is computed as:

Vd =

L
=110.0 kN at face of support for this example
2

The shear force is limited to a maximum of,

=
Vmax 0.22
=
fcd Aw 496 kN
The nominal shear strength provided by concrete is computed as:
N
=
Vcr 0.65 fctd bd 1 + d

Ag

=93.6 kN, where N d = 0

=
Vc 0.8
=
Vcr 74.9 kN
The shear reinforcement is computed as follows:
If Vd Vcr

f ctd
mm 2
Asw
=
=
b
0.3
0.2415
(min. controls)

f ywd
mm
s min

(TS 8.1.5, Eqn 8.6)

If Vcr Vd Vmax

Asw
=
s

Vd Vc )
(=
f ywd d

0.1962

mm 2
mm

(TS 8.1.4, Eqn 8.5)

TS 500-2000 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TS 500-2000 Example 002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR COMPRESSION-CONTROLLED RECTANGULAR COLUMN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load N = 1908 kN
and moment My = 477 kN-m. This column is reinforced with five 25M bars. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the result is compared
with the computed result. The column is designed as a short, non-sway member.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING
1908 kN
My = 477 kN-m
550mm

3m

350mm

60 mm

Section A-A

Material Properties
Ec = 25x106 kN/m2
= 0.2
G = 10416666.7kN/m2

Section Properties

Design Properties

b =
d =

fck = 25 MPa
fyk = 420 MPa

350 mm
550 mm

TECHNICAL FEATURES TESTED

Tied reinforced concrete column design

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.992

1.00

0.80%

COMPUTER FILE: TS 500-2000 EX002

CONCLUSION
The computed result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent
result.

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
fck = 25 MPa
b = 350 mm

fyk = 420 MPa

d = 490 mm

1) Because e = 167.46 mm < (2/3)d = 326.67 mm, assume compression failure. This
assumption will be checked later. Calculate the distance to the neutral axis for a
balanced condition, cb:
Position of neutral axis at balance condition:
cb =

0.003 2x105
600
dt =
( 490 ) = 305 mm
5
0.003 2x10 + f yk
600 + 420 / 1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

N = Cc + C s T
where
Cc = 0.85f ck ab = 0.85 25 / 1.5 350a = 4,958a
A
f 2500
Cs = s f yk 0.85 ck =
( 420 0.85 25 /1.5) =882, 246 N
s
c 1.15
Assume compression steels yields, (this assumption will be checked later).
A f
2500 f s
T= s s=
= 2174f s f s < f y
1.15
s
N1 =4,958a + 882, 246 2,174 fs

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As:

1
a
=
N
Cc d + C s ( d d )

e
2

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 215 mm

e = e + d = 250 + 215 = 465 mm

1
a

=
N
4,958a 490 + 882, 246 ( 490 60 )

465
2

N2 =
5525a 5.3312a 2 + 815,840

(Eqn. 2)

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Assume c = 358.3 mm, which exceed cb (305 mm).

a = 0.85 358 = 304.6 mm
Substitute in Eqn. 2:
2
N=
5525 304.6 5.3312 ( 304.6 ) + 815,840
= 1,907, 643 N
2
5) Calculate fs from the strain diagram when c = 359 mm.
490 358.3
=
f s =
600 220.2 > 420 MPa
358.3
s = t = f s Es = 0.0011
6) Substitute a = 304.6m and fs 221.2 MPa in Eqn. 1 to calculate N1:
=
N1 4,958 ( 304.6 ) + 882, 246 2174 ( 220.2
=
) 1,907, 601 N
which is very close to the calculated N2 of 2,002,751 (less than 1% difference)
250
M = Ne = 1908
= 477 kN-m
1000
7) Check if compression steel yields. From strain diagram,
358 60
=
s
=
> y 0.0021
) 0.0025=
( 0.003
358
Compression steel yields, as assumed.
8) Therefore, section capacity is

N = 1908 kN
M = 477 kN-m

TS 500-2000 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 735 k and
moments Muy = 1504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

Section Properties
tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5
= 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

Design Properties
f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.007

1.00

0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model. The values of M u and Pu were large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
fcab 0.85=
4 12a 40.8a

Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc' ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc' ) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

Pn1 = 40.8a + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fC ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +

A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

where=
; Csn An ( f sn 0.85 f c) ; Tsn = f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
Cs1 A1 ( f s1 0.85 f c)=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 28
inch
e =e + d =24.54 + 28 =52.55 inch.
4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),
a = 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 inch

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :

c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.0014

f s 2 = 40.75 ksi

= 0.0000

f s 3 = 00.29 ksi

= 0.0014

f s 4 = 40.20 ksi

= 0.0028

f s 5 = 60.00 ksi

Substitute in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal gives,
Pn1 = 1035 k
Pn2 = 1035 k

1035(24.54) /12 = 2116 k-ft

M=
P=
n
ne
6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.
t = 0.00244 , y = 0.0021
for y < t < 0.005 ; =

0.005 t
= 0.712
0.005 y

( t c )

7) Calculate ,
Pn = 0.711(1035 ) =
735 kips

M n = 0.711( 2115 ) =
1504 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 2384 k and moments Mu3 = 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.999

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-08 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending
1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu
were taken from the ETABS test model interaction diagram. The values of M u and
Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one.
The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn1 = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
=
Ccw 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 )

=
Ccf 0.85 fc ( 8 ( 98 40 ) )

Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 + As6 f s6

=
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 ) + 0.85 fc ( 8 ( 98 40 ) ) + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) + As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6
(Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) +
1 Ccf ( d - d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

Cs 2 ( 4s ) + Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

where=
, Csn An ( fsn 0.85 fc) , Tsn = f sn Asn , and the bar strains
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d =

98 8
2

= 45 inches
e= e + d = 46.78 + 45 = 91.78 inches
4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58
inches.
=
a 0.85
=
c 0.85 =
44.58 37.89 inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s = f y :
cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

c 2s d '
s3 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s6
d c
d c
s6 =

0.003
c

= 0.00273;=
f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.00152

fs2

= 44.07 ksi

= 0.00310

fs3

= 8.94 ksi

= 0.00090

fs4

= 26.2 ksi

= 0.00211

fs5

= 60.00 ksi

= 0.00333

fs6

= 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give
Pn1 = 3148 k
Pn2 = 3148 k
3148(46.78) /12 = 12,273 k-ft
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.

t = 0.00332 , y = 0.0021
for y < t < 0.005 ; =

0.005 t
= 0.757

0.005
y

( t c )

7) Calculate the capacity,

Pn = 0.757 ( 3148 ) =
2384 kips

M n = 0.757 (12, 273) =

9293 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-08 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 735 k and
moments Muy = 1,504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

Section Properties
tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5
= 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

ETABS
0

Design Properties
f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.007

1.00

0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model. The values of M u and Pu were large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
fcab 0.85=
4 12a 40.8a

Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

Pn1 =40.8a + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

where
; Csn An ( fsn 0.85 fc) ; Tsn = f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
=
Cs1 A ( f s1 0.85 f c)=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 28
inch
e =e + d =24.54 + 28 =52.55 inch.
4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),
a = 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 inches
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

87
c

ETABS
0

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.0014

f s 2 = 40.75 ksi

= 0.0000

f s 3 = 00.29 ksi

= 0.0014

f s 4 = 40.20 ksi

= 0.0028

f s 5 = 60.00 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 1035 k
Pn2 = 1035 k
M=
P=
1035(24.54) /12 = 2116 k-ft
n
ne
6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.
t = 0.00244 , y = 0.0021
for y < t < 0.005 ; =

0.005 t
= 0.712
0.005 y

( t c )

7) Calculate ,
Pn = 0.711(1035 ) =
735 kips

M n = 0.711( 2115 ) =
1504 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 2384 k and moments Mu3 = 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.999

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-11 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending
1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu
were taken from the ETABS test model interaction diagram. The values of M u and
Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one.
The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn1 = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
=
Ccw 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 )

Ccf 0.85 fc ( 8 ( 98 40 ) )
=
Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)
T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 + As6 f s6

=
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 ) + 0.85 fc ( 8 ( 98 40 ) ) + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) + As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6
3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

Cs 2 ( 4s ) + Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

(Eqn. 1)

(Eqn. 2)

where=
, Csn An ( f sn 0.85 f c) , Tsn = f sn Asn , and the bar
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
98 8
= 45 inches
=
2
e =e + d =46.78 + 45 =91.78 inches

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58

inches.
a = 0.85 c=0.85 44.58 = 37.89 inches
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain
then, f s = f y :

cd '
0.003
c
csd '
s2 =
0.003
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.003
c

d c 2s
s4 =
s6
d c
d cs
s5 =
s6
d c
d c
s6 =
0.003
c

s1 =

= 0.00273;=
f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.00152

f s 2 = 44.07 ksi

= 0.00310

f s 3 = 8.94 ksi

= 0.00090

f s 4 = 26.2 ksi

= 0.00211

f s 5 = 60.00 ksi

= 0.00333

f s 6 = 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give
Pn1 = 3148 k
Pn2 = 3148 k
M=
P=
3148(46.78) /12 = 12,273 k-ft
n
ne
6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.
t = 0.00332 , y = 0.0021
for y < t < 0.005 ; =

0.005 t
= 0.757
0.005

( t c )

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

7) Calculate the capacity,

Pn = 0.757 ( 3148 ) =
2384 kips

M n = 0.757 (12, 273) =

9, 293 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI318-11 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 735 k and
moments Muy = 1,504 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each end
and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

Section Properties
tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5
= 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

ETABS
0

Design Properties
f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.007

1.00

0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-14 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
COLUMN STRENGTH UNDER COMPRESSION CONTROL
1) A value of e = 24.58 inch was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model. The values of M u and Pu were large enough to
produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
fcab 0.85=
4 12a 40.8a

Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

Pn1 =40.8a + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

where
; Csn An ( fsn 0.85 fc) ; Tsn = f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
=
Cs1 A ( f s1 0.85 f c)=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 28
inch
e =e + d =24.54 + 28 =52.55 inch.
4) Using c = 30.1 inch (from iteration),
a = 0.85 30.1 = 25.58 inches
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 30.1 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

87
c

ETABS
0

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.0014

f s 2 = 40.75 ksi

= 0.0000

f s 3 = 00.29 ksi

= 0.0014

f s 4 = 40.20 ksi

= 0.0028

f s 5 = 60.00 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 1035 k
Pn2 = 1035 k
M=
P=
1035(24.54) /12 = 2116 k-ft
n
ne
6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.
t = 0.00244 , y = 0.0021

for y < t < 0.005 ; =

0.005 t
= 0.712
0.005 y

( t c )

7) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.711(1035 ) =
735 kips

M n = 0.711( 2115 ) =
1504 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 2384 k and moments Mu3 = 9293k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are compared
with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.999

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 318-14 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending
1) A value of e = 46.78 inches was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu
were taken from the ETABS test model interaction diagram. The values of M u and
Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one.
The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn1 = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
=
Ccw 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 )
=
Ccf 0.85 fc ( 8 ( 98 40 ) )

Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 + As6 f s6

=
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 ) + 0.85 fc ( 8 ( 98 40 ) ) + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) + As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6
3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

Cs 2 ( 4s ) + Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

(Eqn. 1)

(Eqn. 2)

Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=

where=
, Csn An ( f sn 0.85 f c) , Tsn = f sn Asn , and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
98 8
= 45 inches
=
2
e =e + d =46.78 + 45 =91.78 inches

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 44.58

inches.
a = 0.85 c=0.85 44.58 = 37.89 inches

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 44.58 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain
then, f s = f y :
cd '
0.003
c
csd '
s2 =
0.003
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.003
c

d c 2s
s4 =
s6
d c
d cs
s5 =
s6
d c
d c
s6 =
0.003
c

s1 =

= 0.00273;=
f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.00152

f s 2 = 44.07 ksi

= 0.00310

f s 3 = 8.94 ksi

= 0.00090

f s 4 = 26.2 ksi

= 0.00211

f s 5 = 60.00 ksi

= 0.00333

f s 6 = 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give
Pn1 = 3148 k
Pn2 = 3148 k
M=
P=
3148(46.78) /12 = 12,273 k-ft
n
ne

6) Determine if is tension controlled or compression controlled.

t = 0.00332 , y = 0.0021
for y < t < 0.005 ; =

0.005 t
= 0.757

0.005
y

( t c )

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

7) Calculate the capacity,

Pn = 0.757 ( 3148 ) =
2384 kips
9, 293 k-ft.
M n = 0.757 (12, 273) =

EXAMPLE ACI 318-14 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. A reinforced masonry wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 556
k and moments Muy = 1331 k-ft. This wall is reinforced with two #9 bars at each
end and #4 bars at 14.00 inches on center each of face module (The reinforcing is
not aligned with the conventional masonry block spacing for calculation
convenience. The same excel spreadsheet used in other concrete examples was
used here). The total area of reinforcement is 5.20 in2. The design capacity ratio
is checked by hand calculations and the results are compared with ETABS
program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

2250 k/in2
0.2
750 k/in2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 12 in
h = 60 in
As1= As5
= 2-#9 (2.00 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-#4 (0.40 in^2)

f m = 2.5 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.014

1.00

1.40%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 530-11 MASONRY WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Column Strength under compression control
1) A value of e = 28.722 inches was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu
were taken from the ETABS test model. The values of M u and Pu were large enough
to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral
axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and
2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc =
1 fm ab =
0.8 2.5 12a =
24.0a

Cs = A1 ( fs1 0.8 fm ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.8 fm ) + A3 ( fs 3 0.8 fm )

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

Pn1 =
24a + A1 ( fs1 0.8 fm ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.8 fm ) + A3 ( fs 3 0.8 fm ) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5
(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) Ts 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)
where=
; Csn An ( f sn 0.8 f m ) ; Tsn = f sn Asn ; and the bar strains
Cs1 A1 ( f s1 0.8 f m )=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 28
inch
e =e + d =28.722 + 28 =56.72 inch.
4) Using c = 32.04 inch (from iteration),
a = 0.80 332.04 = 25.64 inch

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0025 and c= 32.04 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
cd '
s1 =

0.0025
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.0025
c

c 2s d '
s3 =

0.0025
c

d cs
s 4 =

0.0025
c

d c
s5 =

0.0025
c

= 0.00207; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.00125

f s 2 = 36.30 ksi

= 0.00016

f s 3 = 4.62 ksi

= 0.00093

f s 4 = 27.10 ksi

= 0.00203

f s 5 = 58.70 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 618 k;
Pn2 = 618 k
618(28.72) /12 = 1479 k-ft
M=
P=
n
ne
6) Calculate ,
Pn = 0.9 ( 618 ) =
556 kips

M n = 0.9 (1479 ) =
1331 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 1496 k and moments Mu3 = 7387 k-ft. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results are
compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=
G=

3600 k/in2
0.2
1500 k/in2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 8 in
h = 98 in
As1= As6 = 2-#10,2#6 (5.96 in^2)
As2, As3, As4 and As5 = 2-#6 (0.88 in^2)

f c = 4 k/in2
fy = 60 k/in2

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Column Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.999

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: ACI 530-11 MASONRY WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength under compression and bending
1) A value of e = 59.24 inches was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu
were taken from the ETABS test model interaction diagram. The values of M u and
Pu were large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one.
The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration using an excel
spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn1 = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc =
1 fm ab =
0.8 2.5 12a =
24.0a

Cs = A1 ( fs1 0.8 fm ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.8 fm ) + A3 ( fs 3 0.8 fm )

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 + As6 f s6

Pn1 =
24a + A1 ( fs1 0.8 fm ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.8 fm ) +

(Eqn. 1)

A3 ( fs 3 0.8 fm ) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

1 Ccf ( d d ') + Ccw d

2
Pn 2 =

e
Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

+ Cs1 ( d d ') + Cs 2 ( 4s ) +

(Eqn. 2)

; Csn An ( f sn 0.8 f m ) ; Tsn = f sn Asn ; and the bar strains

where=
Cs1 A1 ( f s1 0.8 f m )=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 45
inch
e =e + d =59.24 + 45 =104.24 inch.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Iterating on a value of c until equations 1 and 2 are equal c is found to be c = 41.15

inches.
=
a 0.8
=
c 0.8 41.15
= 32.92 inches
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0025 and c = 41.15 inches, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s = f y :

cd '
0.0025
c
csd '
s2 =
0.0025
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.0025
c

d c 2s
s4 =
s6
d c
d cs
s5 =
s6
d c
d c
s6 =
0.0025
c

s1 =

= 0.00226;=
f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 60.00 ksi
= 0.00116

f s 2 = 33.74 ksi

= 0.00007

f s 3 = 2.03 ksi

= 0.00102

f s 4 = 29.7 ksi

= 0.00212

f s 5 = 60.00 ksi

= 0.00321

f s 6 = 60.00 ksi

Substituting the above values of the compression block depth, a, and the rebar
stresses into equations Eqn. 1 and Eqn. 2 give
Pn1 = 1662 k
Pn2 = 1662 k
M=
P=
1662(41.15) /12 = 8208 k-ft
n
ne
6) Calculate the capacity,
Pn = 0.9 (1622 ) =
1496 kips
M n = 0.9 ( 8208 ) =
7387 k-ft.

EXAMPLE ACI 530-11 Masonry Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3438 kN and
moments Muy = 2003 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
4

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.083

1.00

8.30%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-09 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 582.6 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
fcab 0.85 30
=
300a 7650a

Cs =
A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

7650a + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) +

Pn1 =

(Eqn. 1)

A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5
3) Taking moments about As5:
=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ') + Cs 2 ( 3s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

where=
; Cs 2 A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f c) ; Cs 3 ( f s 3 0.85 f c) ;
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=
Ts 4 = f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700mm
e =e + d =582.6 + 700 =1282.61 mm.

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

4) Using c = 821.7 mm (from iteration),

0.84
1.05 0.007( f=
a = c = 0.84 821.7=690.2 mm, where=
c)
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 30 inch, the steel stresses and
strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then f s = f y :
cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

2
d
c
s

=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.00 ksi
= 0.0015

f s 2 = 307.9 ksi

= 0.0003

f s 3 = 52.3 ksi

= 0.0010

f s 4 = 203.2 ksi

= 0.0023

f s 5 = 458.8 ksi

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 5289 kN
Pn2 = 5289 kN
M=
P=
5289(582.6) /1000000 = 3081 k-ft
n
ne
6) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.65 ( 5289 ) =
3438 kN
M n = 0.65 ( 3081) =
2003 kN-m

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
11175 kN and moments Muy = 12564 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.082

1.00

8.20%

COMPUTER FILE: AS 3600-09 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS result shows an acceptable comparison with the independent result.

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1124.3 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = 0.85 f c' ab = 0.85 30 300a = 7650a

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw 0.85 fc 200 ( a 200 )
=
Ccf = 0.85 fc ( 200 2500 )
Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6

=
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 ) + 0.85 fc ( 8 98 ) + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) + As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ') + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

Cs 2 ( 4s ) + Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

where=
, Csn An ( fsn 0.85 fc) , Tsn = fsn Asn , and the bar strains
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
2500 200
= 1150 mm
=
2
e =e + d =1124.3 + 1150 =2274.3 mm

(4) Using c = 1341.6 mm (from iteration)

a=
1c =
0.85 1341.6 =
1140.4 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1341.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s 6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s 6
d c
d c
s 6 =

0.003
c

= 0.00278; fs =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00199

f s 2 = 398.7 MPa

= 0.00121

f s 3 = 242.2 MPa

= 0.00080

f s 4 = 160.3 MPa

= 0.00158

f s 5 = 16.8 MPa

= 0.00237

f s 6 = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give,
Pn1 = 17192 kN
Pn2 = 17192 kN
17192(1124.3) /1000000 = 19329 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

6) Calculate ,
=
Pn 0.65=
(17192 ) 11175 kN

=
M n 0.65 =
(19329 ) 12564 kN-m

EXAMPLE AS 3600-09 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3246 kN and
moments Muy = 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural Demand/Capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.997

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-97 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
(1450 ) 922.7 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

=
Cc

0.67
0.67
=
=
30 300a 4020a
fcu ab
m
1.5

As1
0.67 As2
0.67 As3
0.67
fc +
fc +
fc
fs1
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
m
s
s

As 4
A
=
T
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
s
s
Cs =

As1
0.67 As2
0.67
fc +
fc +
fs1
fs 2
s
m
m
s

As3
A
0.67 As 4
fc
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
fs 3
s
m
s
s

Pn1 =
4709a +

(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As5:

Pn 2
=

a
1
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

As1
As 2
As 3
0.67
0.67
0.67
; Cs 2
f c=
f c=
f c ;
f s1
fs2
; Cs 3
fs3
s
m
s
m
s
m

As 4
0.67
=
Ts 4
f c and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
fs4
s
m

where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm

e =e + d =606.5 + 700 =1306.5 mm.
4) Using c = 875.2 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (722.7mm).
a=
1c =
0.9 875.2 =
787.7 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.00330; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
= 0.00190

f s 2 = 380.1 MPa

= 0.00050

f s 3 = 100.1 MPa

= 0.00090

f s 4 = 179.8 MPa

= 0.00230

f s 5 = 459.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3246 kN
Pn2 = 3246 kN
3246(606.5) /1000 = 1969 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
8368 kN and moments Muy = 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.001

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: BS 8110-97 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.67
Ccw
fcu 200 ( a 200 )
=
m
0.67
Ccf =
fcu ( 200 2500 )
m
As1
0.67 As2
0.67 As3
0.67
fc +
fc +
fc
fs1
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
m
s
s

A
A
A
T = s4 f s4 + s5 f s5 + s6 f s6
s
s
s
Cs =

Pn1
=

A
0.67
0.67
0.67
fcu 200 ( a 200 ) +
fcu ( 200 2500 ) + s1 fs1
fc
m
m
s
m

(Eqn. 1)
As2
As 5
As 6
0.67 As3
0.67 As 4
fc +
fc
fs 4 +
fs 5 +
fs 6
+
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
s
s
s
s

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

tf
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

e
+Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2 s ) Ts 5 ( s )

+ Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4 s )

(Eqn. 2)

As1
Asn
Asn
0.67
0.67
0.67
f c=
f c=
f c
f s1
; Csn
f sn
; Tsn
f sn
s
m
s
m
s
m

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 1150 mm

e =e + d =1430 + 1150 =2580 mm.
4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.9 1160 =
1044 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :

cd '
s1 =

0.0035
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.0035
c

c 2s d '
s3 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s6
d c
d c
s6 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00320; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
= 0.00181

f s 2 = 362.0 MPa

= 0.00042

f s 3 = 84.4 MPa

= 0.00097

f s 4 = 193.2 MPa

= 0.00235

f s 5 = 460.00 MPa

= 0.00374

f s 6 = 460.00 MPa

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 8368 kN
Pn2 = 8368 kN
8368(1430) /1000 = 11,967 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE BS 8110-97 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3870 kN
and moments Muy = 2109 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at
each end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
4

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.986

1.00

-1.40%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-04 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 545 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
(1450 ) 875 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T

where
Cc = c 1 fcab = 0.65 0.805 30 300a = 4709a

Cs = s As1 ( fs1 1 fc) + s As2 ( fs 2 1 fc' ) + s As3 ( fs 3 1 fc)

T = s As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5
=
Pn1 4709a + A1 ( fs1 0.805 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.805 fc) As 3 fs 3 As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 (Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about As5:
=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

where Cs1 = s As1 ( fs1 1 fc) ; Cs 2 = s As2 ( f s 2 1 f c) ; Cs 3 = s As3 ( f s 3 1 f c) ;

Ts 4 = s f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700 mm
e =e + d =545 + 700 =1245 inch.

4) Using c = 894.5 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (875mm).

a = 1c = 0.895 894.5 = 800.6 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00330; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00193

f s 2 = 387.0 MPa

= 0.00057

f s 3 = 113.1 MPa

= 0.00080

f s 4 = 160.8 MPa

= 0.00217

f s 5 = 434.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3870 kN
Pn2 = 3870 kN
M=
P=
3870(545) / 1000 = 2109 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
10687 kN and moments Muy = 13159 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.994

1.00

0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA-A23.3-04 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 1231.3 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc = c 1 f cab = 0.65 0.805 30 300a = 4709a

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw = c 1 f c200 ( a - 200 )
Ccf = c 1 f c ( 2002500 )

Cs = s As1 ( fs1 1c fc) + s As2 ( fs 2 1c fc) + s As3 ( fs 3 1c fc)

T = s As 4 fs 4 + s As 5 fs 5 + s As 6 fs 6
Pn1 = c 1 fc 200 ( a 200 ) + c 1 fc ( 200 2500 ) + s As1 ( fs1 1c fc) +
s As2 ( fs 2 1c fc) + s As3 ( fs 3 1c fc) s As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4 s ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
(Eqn. 2)
Pn 2 =

Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2 s ) Ts 5 ( s )

where Cs1 = s As1 ( fs1 1c fc) ; Csn = s Asn ( fsn 1c fc) ; Ts 4 = s fsn Asn and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
d = 700 mm
e =e + d =1231.3 + 1050 =2381.3 inch.
4) Using c = 1293.6 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.895 1293.6 =
1157.8 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0030 and c = 1293.6 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s = f y :

c d
s1 =

0.0035
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.0035
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s 6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s 6
d c
d c
s5 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00323; fs =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00198

f s 2 = 397.0 MPa

= 0.00074

f s 3 = 148.1 MPa

= 0.00175

f s 4 = 100.9 MPa

= 0.00299

f s 5 = 349.8 MPa

= 0.00230

f s 6 = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 10687 kN
Pn2 = 10687 kN
M=
P=
10687(1231.3) /1000000 = 13159 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-04 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3870 kN
and moments Muy = 2109 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at
each end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Flexural Demand/Capacity ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.986

1.00

-1.40%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-14 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 545 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:

=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
(1450 ) 875 mm
700 + f y
700 + 460

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T

where
Cc = c 1 fcab = 0.65 0.805 30 300a = 4709a

Cs = s As1 ( fs1 1 fc) + s As2 ( fs 2 1 fc' ) + s As3 ( fs 3 1 fc)

T = s As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5
=
Pn1 4709a + A1 ( fs1 0.805 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.805 fc) As 3 fs 3 As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 (Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about As5:
=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

where Cs1 = s As1 ( fs1 1 fc) ; Cs 2 = s As2 ( f s 2 1 f c) ; Cs 3 = s As3 ( f s 3 1 f c) ;

Ts 4 = s f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700 mm
e =e + d =545 + 700 =1245 inch.

4) Using c = 894.5 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (875mm).

a = 1c = 0.895 894.5 = 800.6 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 643.6 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
cd '
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00330; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00193

f s 2 = 387.0 MPa

= 0.00057

f s 3 = 113.1 MPa

= 0.00080

f s 4 = 160.8 MPa

= 0.00217

f s 5 = 434.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3870 kN
Pn2 = 3870 kN
M=
P=
3870(545) / 1000 = 2109 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
10687 kN and moments Muy = 13159 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.994

1.00

0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: CSA A23.3-14 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 1231.3 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc = c 1 f cab = 0.65 0.805 30 300a = 4709a

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
Ccw = c 1 f c200 ( a - 200 )
Ccf = c 1 f c ( 2002500 )

Cs = s As1 ( fs1 1c fc) + s As2 ( fs 2 1c fc) + s As3 ( fs 3 1c fc)

T = s As 4 fs 4 + s As 5 fs 5 + s As 6 fs 6
Pn1 = c 1 fc 200 ( a 200 ) + c 1 fc ( 200 2500 ) + s As1 ( fs1 1c fc) +
s As2 ( fs 2 1c fc) + s As3 ( fs 3 1c fc) s As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6

(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4 s ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
(Eqn. 2)
Pn 2 =

Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2 s ) Ts 5 ( s )

where Cs1 = s As1 ( fs1 1c fc) ; Csn = s Asn ( fsn 1c fc) ; Ts 4 = s fsn Asn and the bar
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and
d = 700 mm
e =e + d =1231.3 + 1050 =2381.3 inch.
4) Using c = 1293.6 mm (from iteration),
1c =
a=
0.895 1293.6 =
1157.8 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0030 and c = 1293.6 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.0035
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.0035
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s 6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s 6
d c
d c
s5 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00323; fs =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00198

f s 2 = 397.0 MPa

= 0.00074

f s 3 = 148.1 MPa

= 0.00175

f s 4 = 100.9 MPa

= 0.00299

f s 5 = 349.8 MPa

= 0.00230

f s 6 = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 10687 kN
Pn2 = 10687 kN
M=
P=
10687(1231.3) /1000000 = 13159 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE CSA A23.3-14 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 4340 kN and
moments Muy = 2503 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d=
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.993

1.00

0.70%

COMPUTER FILE: EUROCODE 2-2004 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 576.3 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
(1450 ) 922.7 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
cc fck
1.0 30
=
Cc =
ab
=
300a 6000a
m
1.5
cc fck
As1
fs1
s
m
As 4
A
=
T
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
s
s
Cs =

Pn1 =6000a +

As 2
cc fck
+
fs 2
m
s

As1
cc fck
fs1
s
m

As 3
cc fck
fs 3
s
m

As 3
cc fck
+
fs 3

m
s

As 2
cc fck
+
fs 2
m
s

As 4
A
fs 4 s 5 fs 5

s
s

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Pn 2
=

a
1
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

where
Cs1
=

Ts 4 =

ETABS
0

(Eqn. 2)

As 2
cc f ck
As1
As 3
cc f ck
cc fck
=
=
fs3
;
fs2
; Cs 3
fs1
; Cs 2
s
m
s
m
s
m

As 4
( f s 4 ) and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm

e =e + d =576.73 + 700 =1276.73 mm.
4) Using c = 885.33 mm (from iteration), which is more than cb (922.7mm).
a = 1c = 0.80 885.33=708.3 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 885.33 mm, the steel
stresses and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain,
then f s = f y :
c d
s1 =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa

0.0035 = 0.00330; f s =
c
c s d
s 2 =
f s 2 = 383.7 MPa

0.0035 = 0.00192
c

d c 2s
=
s3
f s 3 = 107.0 MPa
s 5 = 0.00054
d c
d cs
= 0.00085
f s 4 = 169.7 MPa
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =
= 0.00223
f s 5 = 446.5 MPa

0.0035
c
Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 4340 kN
Pn2 = 4340 kN
M=
P=
4340(708.3) /1000 = 2503 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu =
11605 kN and moments Muy = 15342 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.011

1.00

1.10%

COMPUTER FILE: EUROCODE 2-2004 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1322 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
Where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
cc fck
0.85 30
200 ( a 200 )=
200 ( a 200 )= 3400(a 200)
Ccw=
m
1.5
cc fck
0.85(30)
=
200 ( 2500
=
1000 ) )
1000 ) ) 5,100, 000
Ccf
(
( 200 ( 2500=
m
1.5

f
f
Cs =A1 fs1 cc ck + A2 fs 2 cc ck
m
m

f
f
f
T = As 4 s 4 + As 5 s 4 + As 6 s 4
s
s
s

Pn1= 3400(a 200) + 5,100, 000 +

+

cc fck
As 3
fs 3
s
m

cc fck
+ A3 fs 3

As1
cc fck
fs1
s
m

As 2
cc fck
+
fs 2

m
s

As 4
A
A
fs 4 s 5 fs 5 s 6 fs 6

s
s
s
(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

tf + Cs1 ( d - d' ) +
1 Ccf ( d - d' ) + Ccw d 2
Pn2 =

e
Cs2 ( 4s ) + Cs3 ( 3s ) Ts4 ( 2s ) Ts5 ( s )

=
Cs1
where
Ts 4 =

(Eqn. 2)

cc f ck
As1
cc f ck
As 2
As 3
cc f ck
=
=
fs2
; Cs 3
fs3
f s1
; Cs 2
s
m
s
m
s
m

As 4
( f s 4 ) and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm

e =e + d =1322 + 700 =2472 mm.
4) Using c = 1299 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.895 1299 =
1163 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 1299 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.0035
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.0035
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s6
d c
d c
s6 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00323; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
= 0.00199

f s 2 = 398.2 MPa

= 0.00075

f s 3 = 150.3 MPa

= 0.00049

f s 4 = 97.5 MPa

= 0.00173

f s 5 = 345.4 MPa

= 0.00297

f s 6 = 460.00 MPa

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 11605 kN
Pn2 = 11605 kN
M=
P=
11605(1322) /1000 = 15342 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE Eurocode 2-2004 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 3246 kN and
moments Muy = 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.997

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: HONG KONG CP-04 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
=
cb

700
700
=
dt
=
(1450 ) 922.7 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =

0.67
0.67
f cu ab =
30 300a = 4020a
1.5
m

As1
0.67 As2
0.67 As3
0.67
fc +
fc +
fc
fs1
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
m
s
s

A
A
T = s4 f s4 + s5 f s5
s
s
Cs =

As1
0.67 As2
0.67 '
fc +
fc +
fs1
fs 2
s
m
m
s

As3
A
0.67 As 4
fc
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
fs 3
s
m
s
s

Pn1 =4709a +

(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

3) Taking moments about As5:

Pn 2
=

a
1
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

As1
As 2
As 3
0.67
0.67
0.67
; Cs 2
f c=
f c=
f ;
f s1
fs2
; Cs 3
fs3
s
m
s
m
s
m c

As 4
0.67
=
Ts 4
f and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
fs4
s
m c

where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm

e =e + d =606.5 + 700 =1306.5 mm.
4) Using c = 875.2 mm (from iteration), which is slightly more than cb (922.7 mm).
a = 1c = 0.9 875.2=787.68 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 875.2 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.0035
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.0035
c

=0.00330; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
=0.00190

f s 2 = 380.1 MPa

=0.00050

f s 3 = 100.1 MPa

=0.00090

f s 4 = 179.8 MPa

=0.00230

f s 5 = 459.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3246 kN
Pn2 = 3246 kN
3246(606.5) /1000 = 1969 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
8368 kN and moments Muy = 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.001

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: HONG KONG CP-04 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.67
=
Ccw
fcu 200 ( a 200 )
m
0.67
Ccf =
fcu ( 200 2500 )
m
As1
0.67 As2
0.67 As3
0.67
fc +
fc +
fc
fs1
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
m
s
s

A
A
A
T = s 4 fs 4 + s 5 fs 5 + s 6 fs 6
s
s
s

Cs =

=
Pn1

A
0.67
0.67
0.67
fcu 200 ( a 200 ) +
fcu ( 200 2500 ) + s1 fs1
fc +
m
m
s
m

(Eqn. 1)
As2
As 5
As 6
0.67 As3
0.67 As 4
fc +
fc
fs 4 +
fs 5 +
fs 6
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
s
s
s
s

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

tf
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

e
Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2 s ) Ts 5 ( s )

+ Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4 s ) +

(Eqn. 2)

As1
Asn
Asn
0.67
0.67
0.67
; Tsn
f c=
f c=
f c
f s1
; Csn
f sn
f sn
s
m
s
m
s
m

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 1150 mm
e =e + d =1430 + 1150 =2580 mm.
4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.9 1160 =
1044 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :

c d
s1 =

0.0035
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.0035
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s6
d c
d c
s6 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00320; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
= 0.00181

f s 2 = 362.0 MPa

= 0.00042

f s 3 = 84.4 MPa

= 0.00097

f s 4 = 193.2 MPa

= 0.00235

f s 5 = 460.00 MPa

= 0.00374

f s 6 = 460.00 MPa

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 8368 kN
Pn2 = 8368 kN
8368(1430) /1000 = 11,967 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Hong Kong CP-04 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3146 kN and
moments Muy = 1875 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.035

1.00

3.50%

COMPUTER FILE: INDIAN IS 456-2000 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
F c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 596 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
0.36
f ck ab = 0.4286 30 300a = 3857 a , where a = 0.84 xu
0.84
A
A
A
Cs =s1 ( fs1 0.4286 fc) + s 2 ( fs 2 0.4286 fc) + s 3 ( fs 3 0.4286 fc)
s
s
s
A
A
T = s4 f s4 + s5 f s5
Cc =

3857 a +
Pn1 =

As1
A
( fs1 0.4286 fc) + s 2 ( fs 2 0.4286 fc) +
s
s

As3
A
A
fs 3 0.4286 fc' ) s 4 fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
(
s
s
s

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

As1
As 2
) ; C s 2
( f s1 0.4286 f c=
( f s 2 0.4286 f c) ;
s
s
A
As 3
=
Cs 3
( f s 3 0.4286 f c) ; Ts 4 = s 4 ( f s 4 ) and the bar strains and stresses are
s
s
determined below.
where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 700 mm
e =e + d =596 + 700 =1296 mm.
4) Using c = 917.3 mm (from iteration)
a=
1c =
0.84 917.3 =
770.5 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 917.3 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :

cd '
= 0.00331;=
f s s E Fy ;
0.0035
c
csd '
s2 =
0.0035 = 0.00197
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.0035 = 0.00064
c

d cs
= 0.00070
s4 =
s5
d c
d c
= 0.00203
s5 =
0.0035
c

s1 =

f s1 = 460 MPa
f s 2 = 394.8 MPa
f s 3 = 127.7 MPa
f s 4 = 139.4 MPa
f s 5 = 406.5 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3146 kN
Pn2 = 3146 kN

3146(596) /1000 = 1875 kN-m

M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002

FRAME P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu= 8426
kN and moments Muy= 11670 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted below.
The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared with ETABS program.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.003

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: INDIAN IS 456-2000 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show a very close match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
WALL STRENGTH DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS:
1) A value of e = 1385 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were taken
from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values for M u and
Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a flexural D/C ratio
very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was determined by iteration
using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.36
Ccw =
f ck 200 ( a - 200 ) , where a = 0.84x u
0.84
0.36
Ccf =
f ck 200 ( 2500-1000 )
0.84
A'
0.36 As2'
0.36 As3'
0.36
Cs = s1 f s1 f ck +
f
f ck +
f s3 f ck
s2

0.84 s
0.84 s
0.84
s
A
A
A
T = s4 f s4 + s5 f s5 + s6 f s6

As1'
0.36
0.36
0.36 As2'
0.36
Pn1 =
f ck 200 ( a - 200 ) +
f ck 200 ( 2500-1000 ) +
f s1 f ck +
f s2 f ck

0.84
0.84
0.84 s
0.84
s
+

As3'
A
A
0.36 As4
f s3 f ck f s4 s5 f s5 s6 f s6

0.84 s
s
s
s
(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As6:

Pn2 =

a tf

Ccf ( d - d' ) + Ccw d - 2 tf + Cs1 ( d - d' ) + Cs2 ( 4s ) + Cs3 ( 3s ) Ts4 ( 2s ) Ts5 ( s )

(Eqn. 2)
A'
A'
A
0.36
0.36
Where Cs1 = s1 f s1 f ck ; Ts 4 = sn ( f sn ) and the bar
f ck ; Cs 2 = sn f sn 0.84
s
s
0.84
s
strains and stresses are determined below.

1
e'

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d " = 1150 mm
e' = e + d " = 1138 +1150 = 2535 mm.

4) Using c = 1298.1 mm (from iteration)

a = 1c = 0.84 1298.1=1090.4 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1298.1 mm, the steel stresses and
strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then, f s = f y :

cd '
0.003
c
csd '
s2 =
0.0035
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.0035
c

d c 2s
s4 =
s5
d c
d cs
s5 =
s5
d c
d c
s6 =
0.0035
c

s1 =

=0.00323;=
f s s E Fy ;

f s1 = 460 MPa

=0.00199

f s 2 = 398.0 MPa

=0.00075

f s 3 = 150.0 MPa

=0.00049

f s 4 = 98.1 MPa

=0.00173

f s 5 = 346.1 MPa

=0.00297

f s 6 = 460.0 MPa

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Substitute in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the two equations
are equal gives,
Pn1 = 8426 kN
Pn2 = 8426 kN
8426(1385) /1000 = 11670 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Indian IS 456-2000 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 4549 kN and
moments Muy = 2622 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
t = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d=
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm2)

f ck = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.002

1.00

0.2%

COMPUTER FILE: KBC 2009 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 576.2 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
f ck ab 0.85 30
=
300a 7650a

Cs =
A1 ( f s1 0.85 f ck ) + A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f ck ) + A3 ( f s 3 0.85 f ck )

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5
Pn1 =
7650a + A1 ( f s1 0.85 f ck ) + A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f ck ) +

(Eqn. 1)

A3 ( f s 3 0.85 f ck ) As 4 f s 4 As 5 f s 5
3) Taking moments about As5:
=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

where=
; Cs 2 A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f ck ) ; Cs 3 ( f s 3 0.85 f ck ) ;
Cs1 A1 ( f s1 0.85 f ck )=
Ts 4 = f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700mm
e =e + d =576.2 + 700 =1276.4 mm.

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Using c = 833.27 mm (from iteration),

a = 1c = 0.836 833.27=696.61 mm,
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 833.27 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

c 2s d '
s3 =

0.003
c

d cs
s 4 =

0.003
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ;

f s1 = 460.00 MPa

= 0.0016

f s 2 = 312.0 MPa

= 0.0003

f s 3 = 60.0 MPa

= 0.00103

f s 4 = 259.5 MPa

= 0.0022

f s 5 = 444.1 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 5340 kN
Pn2 = 5340 kN
M=
P=
5340(576.4) /1000 = 3078 kN-m
n
ne
6) Calculate ,

Pn = 0.65 ( 5340 ) =
3471 kN
M n = 0.65 ( 3078 ) =
2000.7 kN-m

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
11256 kN and moments Muy = 1498 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
t = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm2)

f ck = 30 MPa
fy = 420 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.007

1.00

0.7%

COMPUTER FILE: KBC 2009 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS result shows a very close match with the independent result.

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1199.2 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
=
Ccw 0.85 f ck 200 ( a 200 )
Ccf = 0.85 f ck ( 200 1500 )
Cs =A1 ( f s1 0.85 f ck ) + A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f ck ) + A3 ( f s 3 0.85 f ck )
T = As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6

=
Pn1 0.85 f ck 200 ( a 200 ) + 0.85 f ck ( 200 1500 ) + A1 ( f s1 0.85 f ck ) +
A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f ck ) + A3 ( f s 3 0.85 f ck ) + As 4 f s 4 + As 5 f s 5 + As 6 f s 6
(Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4s ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

(Eqn. 2)
e

Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

where=
, Csn An ( f sn 0.85 f ck ) , Tsn = fsn Asn , and the bar
Cs1 A1 ( f s1 0.85 f ck )=
strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
2500 200
= 1150 mm
=
2
e =e + d =1199.2 + 1150 =2349.2 mm
4) Using c = 1480 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.836 1480 =
1237.28 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1480 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s 6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s 6
d c
d c
s 6 =

0.003
c

= 0.0028; fs =
s E Fy ;

f s1 = 420.0 MPa

= 0.00186

f s 2 = 373.0 MPa

= 0.00093

f s 3 = 186.5 MPa

= 0.0000

f s 4 = 0.0 MPa

= 0.00093

f s 5 = 186.5 MPa

= 0.00272

f s 6 = 373.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
axial force from two equations are less than 1%
Pn1 = 13232 kN
Pn2 = 13250 kN , use average Pn = 13242 kN
M=
P=
13242(1199.2) /1000 = 15879.8 kN-m
n
ne

6) Calculate ,
=
Pn 0.85=
(13242 ) 11256 kN

=
M n 0.85 (=
15879.8 ) 13498 kN-m

EXAMPLE KBC 2009 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete column is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3545 kN and
moments Muy = 1817 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d=
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.016

1.00

1.60%

COMPUTER FILE: MEXICAN RCDF-04 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 512.5 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
=
=
Cc 0.85
fc*ab 0.85 0.8 30
300a 6120a

Cs =
A1 ( fs1 0.85 0.8 fc* ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc* ) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc* )

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

Pn1 =+
6120a A1 ( fs1 0.85 0.8 fc* ) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc* ) +
A3 ( fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc* ) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

where=
; Cs 2 A2 ( f s 2 0.85 0.8 f c* ) ;
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 0.8 fc* )=

Cs 3 ( f s 3 0.85 0.8 f c* ) ; Ts 4 = f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The

plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700mm

e =e + d =512.5 + 700 =1212.5 mm.
4) Using c = 936.2 mm (from iteration)
a =c =0.85 916.2 =805 mm,
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 936.2 inch, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :

c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ;

f s1 = 460.00 MPa

= 0.0017

f s 2 = 343.6 MPa

= 0.0005

f s 3 = 119.3 MPa

= 0.0060

f s 4 = 105.4 MPa

= 0.0175

f s 5 = 329.3 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 5064 kN
Pn2 = 5064 kN

5064(512.5) /1000000 = 2595 kN-m

M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

7) Calculate Pn and, M n ,
Pn = 0.70 ( 5064 ) =
3545 kips

M n = 0.70 ( 2595 ) =
1817 k-ft.

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-04 Wall-001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial loading and moment is tested in this
example. The wall is reinforced as shown below. The concrete core wall is
loaded with a factored axial load Pu = 10165 kN and moments Mu3 = 11430 kNm. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and results are
compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.000

1.00

0.000%

COMPUTER FILE: MEXICAN RCDF-04 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1124.4 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
=
Ccw 0.85 0.8 fc 200 ( a 200 )
Ccf = 0.85 0.8 fc ( 200 1500 )
Cs =
A1 ( fs1 0.85 0.8 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5 + As6 f s6

=
Pn1 0.85 0.8 fc 200 ( a 200 ) + 0.85 0.8 fc ( 200 1500 ) + A1 ( fs1 0.85 0.8 fc)
+ A2 ( fs 2 0.85 0.8 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 0.8 fc) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5 As 6 fs 6
(Eqn. 1)
3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

Cs 2 ( 4s ) + Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

where
, Csn An ( f sn 0.85 0.8 f c) , Tsn = f sn Asn , and the
=
Cs1 A1 ( f s1 0.85 0.8 f c)=
bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section,
2500 200
= 1150 mm
d =
2
e' = e + d " = 1124.4 +1150 = 2274.4 mm
4) Using c = 1413 mm (from iteration)
a = 0.85c = 0.85 1413=1201 mm

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1413 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
cd '
0.003
c
csd '
s2 =
0.003
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.003
c

d c 2s
s4 =
s6
d c
d cs
s5 =
s6
d c
d c
s6 =
0.003
c

s1 =

= 0.00279;=
f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00181

f s 2 = 362.2 MPa

= 0.00083

f s 2 = 166.8 MPa

= 0.00014

f s 3 = 28.6 MPa

= 0.00112

f s 4 = 223.9 MPa

= 0.00210

f s 5 = 419.3 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 14522 kN
Pn2 = 14522 kN
14522(1124.4) /1000000 = 16328 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne
6) Calculate Pn and M n ,

=
Pn 0.70=
(14522 ) 10165 kN

=
M n 0.70 (=
16382 ) 11430 kN-m

EXAMPLE Mexican RCDF-2004 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 4549 kN and
moments Muy = 2622 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d=
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Flexural Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.000

1.00

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-06 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 576.2 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
fcab 0.85 30
=
300a 7650a

Cs =
A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As4 f s4 + As5 f s5

Pn1 =
7650a + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) +
A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) As 4 fs 4 As 5 fs 5

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

=
Pn 2

1
a
Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 3s ) + Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

e
2

(Eqn. 2)

where=
; Cs 2 A2 ( f s 2 0.85 f c) ; Cs 3 ( f s 3 0.85 f c) ;
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=
Ts 4 = f s 4 As 4 and the bar strains are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the
center of the section and d = 700mm
e =e + d =576.2 + 700 =1276.4 mm.

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

4) Using c = 821.7 mm (from iteration),

a = c = 0.85 821.7=698.46 mm,

5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c= 821.7 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

d
c
s

=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.0028; f s =
s E Fy ;

f s1 = 460.00 MPa

= 0.0015

f s 2 = 307.9 MPa

= 0.0003

f s 3 = 52.3 MPa

= 0.0010

f s 4 = 203.2 MPa

= 0.0023

f s 5 = 458.8 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 5352 kN
Pn2 = 5352 kN
5352(576.4) /1000000 = 3085 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

6) Calculate ,
Pn = 0.85 ( 5352 ) =
4549 kN

M n = 0.85 ( 3085 ) =
2622 kN-m

EXAMPLE NZS-3101-2006 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
13625 kN and moments Muy = 16339 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Demand/Capacity Ratio for a General Reinforcing pier section.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.000

1.00

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: NZS 3101-06 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS result shows a very close match with the independent result.

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1199.2 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
=
Cc 0.85
=
fcab 0.85 30
=
300a 7650a

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
=
Ccw 0.85 fc 200 ( a 200 )
Ccf = 0.85 fc ( 200 2500 )

Cs =A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) + A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc)

T = As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6

=
Pn1 0.85 fc 8 ( a 8 ) + 0.85 fc ( 8 98 ) + A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc) +
A2 ( fs 2 0.85 fc) + A3 ( fs 3 0.85 fc) + As 4 fs 4 + As 5 fs 5 + As 6 fs 6

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

C
d

d
+
C
d

t
+
C
d

d
+
C
4
s
+
(
)
(
)
(
)

1 cf
cw
f
s1
s2
2
Pn 2 =

(Eqn. 2)
e

Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

where=
, Csn An ( fsn 0.85 fc) , Tsn = fsn Asn , and the bar strains
Cs1 A1 ( fs1 0.85 fc)=
are determined below. The plastic centroid is at the center of the section, d
2500 200
= 1150 mm
=
2
e =e + d =1199.2 + 1150 =2349.2 mm
4) Using c = 1259.8 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.85 1259.8 =
1070.83 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1259.8 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s 4
s 6
d c
d cs
=
s5
s 6
d c
d c
s 6 =

0.003
c

= 0.00276; fs =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460.0 MPa
= 0.00167

f s 2 = 333.3 MPa

= 0.00057

f s 3 = 114.2 MPa

= 0.00052

f s 4 = 104.9 MPa

= 0.00167

f s 5 = 324.0 MPa

= 0.00272

f s 6 = 460.0 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 16029 kN
Pn2 = 16029 kN
16029(1199.2) /1000000 = 19222 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne
6) Calculate ,
=
Pn 0.85=
(16029 ) 13625 kN
=
M n 0.85 (=
19222 ) 16339 kN-m

EXAMPLE NZS 3101-06 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3246 kN and
moments Muy = 1969 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d =
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.997

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: SINGAPORE CP65-99 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
f c = 30MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 460 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 606.5 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
The distance to the neutral axis for a balanced condition, cb:
cb =

700
700
dt =
(1450 ) = 922.7 mm
700 + f y / s
700 + 460 /1.15

2) From the equation of equilibrium:

Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

=
Cc

0.67
0.67
=
30 300a 4020a
=
fcu ab
1.5
m

As1
0.67 As2
0.67 As3
0.67
fc +
fc +
fc
fs1
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
m
s
s

As 4
A
=
T
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
s
s
Cs =

As1
0.67 As2
0.67
fc +
fc +
fs1
fs 2
s
m

s
m

As3
A
0.67 As 4
fc
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
fs 3
s
m
s
s

Pn1 =
4709a +

3) Taking moments about As5:

a
1 Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) +
2
Pn 2 =

e
Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

(Eqn. 1)

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

As1
As 2
0.67
0.67
; Cs 2
f c=
f c ;
f s1
fs2
s
m
s
m

As 3
As 4
0.67
0.67

Cs 3
f=
=
f c and the bar strains and
fs3
fs4
c ; Ts 4
s
m
s
m

stresses are determined below.

where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm

e =e + d =606.5 + 700 =1306.5 mm.
4) Using c = 887.5 mm (from iteration), which is slightly more than cb (922.7mm).
a=
1c =
0.90 875.2 =
787.6 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c = 875.2 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.0035
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.0035
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.0035
c

= 0.00330; f s =
s E Fy ; f s1 = 460 MPa
= 0.00190

f s 2 = 380.1 MPa

= 0.00050

f s 3 = 100.1 MPa

= 0.00090

f s 4 = 179.8 MPa

= 0.00230

f s 5 = 459.7 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3246 kN
Pn2 = 3246 kN
3246(606.5) /1000 = 1969 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to a factored axial load Pu =
8368 kN and moments Muy = 11967 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted
below. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results
are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 30 MPa
fy = 460 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

1.001

1.00

0.10%

COMPUTER FILE: SINGAPORE CP65-99 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1430 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
0.67
=
Ccw
fcu 200 ( a 200 )
m
0.67
Ccf =
f cu ( 2002500 )
m
As1
0.67 As2
0.67 As3
0.67
fc +
fc +
fc
fs1
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
m
s
s

A
A
A
T = s 4 fs 4 + s 5 fs 5 + s 6 fs 6
s
s
s
Cs =

=
Pn1

A
0.67
0.67
0.67
fcu 200 ( a - 200 ) +
fcu ( 200 2500 ) + s1 fs1
fc +
m
m
s
m

(Eqn. 1)
As2
As 5
As 6
0.67 As3
0.67 As 4
fc +
fc
fs 4 +
fs 5 +
fs 6
fs 2
fs 3
s
m
m
s
s
s
s

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4 s ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2 s ) Ts 5 ( s )

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME: ETABS
REVISION NO.:

As1
Asn
Asn
0.67
0.67
0.67
f c=
f c=
f c
f s1
; Csn
f sn
; Tsn
f sn
s
m
s
m
s
m

and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.

where
=
Cs1

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 1150 mm

e =e + d =1430 + 1150 =2580 mm.
4) Using c = 1160 mm (from iteration),
a=
1c =
0.9 1160 =
1044 mm
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0035 and c= 1160 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :

c d
= 0.00320; f s =
s1 =
s E Fy ;

0.0035
c
csd
= 0.00181
s 2 =

0.0035
c

c 2s d
s3 =

0.0035 = 0.00042
c

d c 2s
= 0.00097
=
s 4
s6
d c
d cs
= 0.00235
=
s5
s6
d c
d c
s6 =
= 0.00374

0.0035
c

f s1 = 460 MPa
f s 2 = 362.0 MPa
f s 3 = 84.4 MPa
f s 4 = 193.2 MPa
f s 5 = 460.00 MPa
f s 6 = 460.00 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 8368 kN
Pn2 = 8368 kN
M=
P=
8368(1430) /1000 = 11,967 kN-m
n
ne

EXAMPLE Singapore CP65-99 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example.
A reinforced concrete wall is subjected factored axial load Pu = 3132 kN and
moments Muy = 1956 kN-m. This wall is reinforced with two 30M bars at each
end and 15M bars at 350 mm on center of each face. The total area of
reinforcement is 4000 mm2. The design capacity ratio is checked by hand
calculations and the results are compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 300 mm
h = 1500 mm
d=
50 mm
s=
350 mm
As1= As5 = 2-30M (1400 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4 = 2-15M (400 mm^2)

f c = 25 MPa
fy = 420 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Wall flexural demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.997

1.00

0.30%

COMPUTER FILE: TURKISH TS 500-2000 WALL-001

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
fc = 25 MPa
b = 300mm

fy = 420 MPa
h = 1500 mm

1) A value of e = 715 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were

taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for pier P1. Values for
M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where
fck
0.67
=
=
Cc 0.85
ab
=
25 300a 3350a
c
1.5
A
0.85 As2
0.85 As3
0.85
Cs = s1 fs1
fck +
fck +
fck
fs 2
fs 3
s
c
c
c
s
s

As 4
A
=
T
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
s
s
As1
0.85 As2
0.85
fck +
fck +
fs1
fs 2
s
c
c
s

As3
A
0.85 As 4
fck
fs 4 + s 5 fs 5
fs 3
s
c
s
s

Pn1 =
3350a +

(Eqn. 1)

3) Taking moments about As5:

a
1 Cc d + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( d d s ) +
2
Pn 2 =

e
Cs 3 ( 2s ) Ts 4 ( s )

(Eqn. 2)

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

As1
As 2
0.85
0.85
f ck=
f ck ;
f s1
; Cs 2
fs2
s
c
s
c

As 4
As 3
0.85
0.85
f ck and the bar strains and stresses
=
Cs 3
f ck=
fs4
fs3
; Ts 4
s
c
s
c

are determined below.

where
Cs1
=

The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 700 mm

e =e + d =715 + 700 =1415 mm.
4) Using c = 853.4 mm (from iteration),
=
a k=
0.85 853.4
= 725.4 mm
1c
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.0030 and c = 853.4 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain then,
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
c s d
s 2 =

0.003
c

d c 2s
=
s3
s5
d c
d cs
=
s 4
s5
d c
d c
s5 =

0.003
c

= 0.00282; f s =
s E Fy ;

f s1 = 420.0 MPa

= 0.00159

f s 2 = 318.8 MPa

= 0.00036

f s 3 = 72.7 MPa

= 0.00087

f s 4 = 173.4 MPa

= 0.00210

f s 5 = 419.5 MPa

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 3132 kN
Pn2 = 3132 kN
3132(624.4) /1000 = 1956 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002

P-M INTERACTION CHECK FOR A WALL
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The Demand/Capacity ratio for a given axial load and moment are tested in this
example. A reinforced concrete wall is subjected to factored axial load Pu = 9134
kN and moments Muy = 11952 kN-m. This wall is reinforced as noted below. The
design capacity ratio is checked by hand calculations and the results are
compared with ETABS program results.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Material Properties
E=
=

25000 MPa
0.2

ETABS
0

Design Properties

Section Properties
tb = 200 mm
H = 2500 mm
d=
2400 mm
s=
460 mm
As1= As5 = 4-35M+2-20M (4600 mm^2)
As2, As3, As4, As5 = 2-20M (600 mm^2)

f c = 25 MPa
fy = 420 MPa

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Concrete wall demand/capacity ratio
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are hand calculated and compared with ETABS design
check.

Output Parameter

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Wall Demand/Capacity Ratio

0.996

1.00

0.40%

COMPUTER FILE: TURKISH TS 500-2000 WALL-002

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable match with the independent results.

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Wall Strength Determined as follows:
1) A value of e = 1308.6 mm was determined using e = M u / Pu where M u and Pu were
taken from the ETABS test model PMM interaction diagram for the pier, P1. Values
for M u and Pu were taken near the balanced condition and large enough to produce a
flexural D/C ratio very close to or equal to one. The depth to the neutral axis, c, was
determined by iteration using an excel spreadsheet so that equations 1 and 2 below
were equal.
2) From the equation of equilibrium:
Pn = Cc + Cs T
where

Cc =Ccw +Ccf , where Ccw and Ccf are the area of the concrete web and flange in
compression
f
0.85 30
200 ( a 200 )= 3400(a 200)
Ccw= ck 200 ( a 200 )=
1.5
c
f
0.85(30)
=
Ccf 0.85 ck ( 200 ( 2500
=
1000 ) )
=
1000 ) ) 5,100, 000
( 200 ( 2500
1.5
c

f
f
f
Cs =
A1 fs1 0.85 ck + A2 fs 2 0.85 ck + A3 fs 3 0.85 ck
c
c
c

f
f
f
T = As 4 s 4 + As 5 s 4 + As 6 s 4
s
s
s

Pn1= 3400(a 200) + 5,100, 000 +

+

As1
fck As 2
fck
fs1 0.85
+
fs 2 0.85

s
c s
c

As 3
fck As 4
A
A
fs 4 s 5 fs 5 s 6 fs 6
fs 3 0.85

s
c s
s
s
(Eqn. 1)

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

3) Taking moments about As6:

a tf

t f + Cs1 ( d d ) + Cs 2 ( 4s ) +
1 Ccf ( d d ) + Ccw d
2
Pn 2 =

(Eqn. 2)
e

Cs 3 ( 3s ) Ts 4 ( 2s ) Ts 5 ( s )

where
=
Cs1

As1
As 2
As 3
0.85
0.85
0.85
fck=
fck=
fck ;
fs1
; Cs 2
fs 2
; Cs 3
fs 3
s
c

s
c
s
c

As 4
and the bar strains and stresses are determined below.
s
The plastic centroid is at the center of the section and d = 1150 mm
e =e + d =1308.6 + 1150 =2458.6 mm.
Ts 4 =

4) Using c = 1327 mm (from iteration)

=
a k=
0.85 1327
= 1061.1 mm
1c
5) Assuming the extreme fiber strain equals 0.003 and c = 1327 mm, the steel stresses
and strains can be calculated. When the bar strain exceeds the yield strain, then
fs = f y :
c d
s1 =

0.003
c
csd '
s2 =
0.003
c

c 2s d '
s3 =
0.003
c

d c 2s
s4 =
s6
d c
d cs
s5 =
s6
d c
d c
s6 =
0.003
c

= 0.00277;=
f s s E Fy ; f s1 = 420.0 MPa
= 0.00173

f s 2 = 346.8 MPa

= 0.00069

f s 3 = 138.8 MPa

= 0.00035

f s 4 = 69.2 MPa

= 0.00139

f s 5 = 277.2 MPa

= 0.00243

f s 6 = 420.0 MPa

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Substituting in Eqn. 1 and 2 and iterating the value of the neutral axis depth until the
two equations are equal give
Pn1 = 9134 kN
Pn2 = 9134 kN
9134(1308.6) /1000 = 11952 kN-m
M=
P=
n
ne

EXAMPLE Turkish TS 500-2000 Wall-002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

AISC-360-05 Example 001

COMPOSITE GIRDER DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A series of 45-ft. span composite beams at 10 ft. o/c carry the loads shown
below. The beams are ASTM A992 and are unshored during construction. The
concrete has a specified compressive strength, fc = 4 ksi. Design a typical floor
beam with 3-in., 18-gage composite deck and 4 in. normal weight concrete
above the deck, for fire protection and mass. Select an appropriate beam and
determine the required number of in.-diameter shear studs.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W21x55
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

Loading
w = 830 plf (Dead Load)
w = 200 plf (Construction)
w = 100 plf (SDL)
w = 1000 plf (Live Load)

Geometry
Span, L = 45 ft

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.1 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 13.0.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Pre-composite Mu (k-ft)

333.15

333.15

0.00%

Pre-composite bMn (k-ft)

472.5

472.5

0.00%

2.3

2.3

0.00%

Required Strength Mu (k-ft)

687.5

687.5

0.00%

Full Composite bMn (k-ft)

1027.1

1027.1

0.00%

Partial Composite bMn (k-ft)

770.3

770.3

0.00 %

Shear Stud Capacity Qn

17.2

17.2

0.00 %

Shear Stud Distribution

35

34

2.9%

Live Load Deflection (in.)

1.35

1.30

3.70%

Required Strength Vu (kip)

61.1

61.1

0.00%

Vn (k)

234

234

0.00%

Output Parameter

Pre-composite Deflection (in.)

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-05 EXAMPLE 001.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The live load deflection differs due to a difference in methodology. In the AISC
example, the live load deflection is computed based on a lower bound value of
the beam moment of inertia, whereas in ETABS, it is computed based on the
approximate value of the beam moment of inertia derived from Equation (C-I3-6)
from the Commentary on the AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design
Specification Second Edition.

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi, wsteel = 490 pcf
4000 psi normal weight concrete
Ec = 3,644 ksi, fc = 4 ksi, wconcrete = 145 pcf
Section:
W21x55
d = 20.8 in, bf = 8.22 in, tf = 0.522 in, tw = 0.38 in, h = 18.75 in., rfillet = 0.5 in.
Asteel = 16.2 in2, Ssteel = 109.6 in3, Zsteel = 126 in3, Isteel = 1140 in4
Deck:
tc =4 in., hr = 3 in., sr =12 in., wr = 6 in.
Shear Connectors:
d = in, h =4 in, Fu = 65 ksi
Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:

wD =(10 77.5 + 55.125) 103 =0.830125 kip/ft

wL = 10 20 103 = 0.200 kip/ft
wu = 1.2 0.830125 + 1.6 0.200 = 1.31615 kip/ft

wu L2 1.31615 452
=
Mu =
= 333.15 kip-ft
8
8

Moment Capacity:

b M n = b Z s Fy =( 0.9 126 50 ) 12 =472.5 kip-ft

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Pre-Composite Deflection:

0.830
4
( 45 12 )
5wD L
12
=
nc
=
= 2.31 in.
384 EI 384 29, 000 1,140
4

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:

Required Flexural Strength:
wu = 1.2 0.830 + 1.2 0.100 + 1.6 1 = 2.71 kip/ft

wu L2 2.68 452
Mu =
=
= 687.5 kip-ft
8
8

Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Effective width of slab:

10.0
45.0 ft
beff =
2 sides =10.0 ft
=11.25 ft
2
8
Resistance of steel in tension:
C = Py = As Fy = 16.2 50 = 810 kips controls

Resistance of slab in compression:

Ac = beff tc =

(10 12 ) 4.5 =

540 in

C= 0.85 f 'c A=
= 1836 kips
0.85 4 540
c

Depth of compression block within slab:

=
a

C
810
=
= 1.99 in.
0.85 beff f 'c 0.85 (10 12 ) 4

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:

d1 = (tc + hr )

a
2.00
= (4.5 + 3)
= 6.51 in.
2
2

d
20.8 / 12

M n =
Py d1 + Py =
0.9 810 6.51 / 12 + 810
1027.1 kip-ft
=
2
2

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Assume 36.1% composite action:
0.361 810= 292.4 kips
C= 0.361 P=
y

Depth of compression block within concrete slab:

292.4
C
=
= 0.72 in.
0.85 beff f 'c 0.85 (10 12 ) 4

=
a

( tc + hr )

d1 =

a
=
2

( 4.5 + 3)

0.72
= 7.14 in.
2

Compression force within steel section:

(P

C ) 2 =( 810 292.4 ) 2 =258.8 kips

Tensile resistance of one flange:

Fflange = b f t f Fy = 8.22 0.522 50 = 214.5 kip
Tensile resistance of web:
Fweb = T tw Fy = 18.75 0.375 50 = 351.75 kips

Tensile resistance of one fillet area:

Ffillet=

(P 2 F
y

flange

Fweb ) 2=

(810 2 214.5 351.2 )

2= 14.6 kips

Compression force in web:

Cweb =( Py C ) / 2 Fflange Ffillet =258.8 214.5 14.6 =29.7 kips

Depth of compression block in web:
x=

Cweb
29.7
T=
18.76= 1.584 in.
351.75
Fweb

Location of centroid of steel compression force measured from top of steel section:
d2

0.5 t f Fflange + ( t f + 0.5 rfillet ) Ffillet + ( t f + rfillet + 0.5 x ) C web

=
( Py C ) / 2
0.5 0.522 214.5 + ( 0.522 + 0.5 0.5) 14.6 + ( 0.522 + 0.5 + 0.5 1.58) 29.7
= 0.467 in.
258.8

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Moment resistance of composite beam for partial composite action:

M n =
C ( d1 + d 2 ) + Py ( d 3 d 2 )

20.8

= 0.9 292.4 ( 7.14 + 0.467 ) + 810

0.467 =
12 770.3 kip-ft
2

Shear Stud Strength:

From AISC Manual Table 3.21 assuming one shear stud per rib placed in the
weak position, the strength of in.-diameter shear studs in normal weight
concrete with f c = 4 ksi and deck oriented perpendicular to the beam is:
Qn = 17.2 kips

Shear Stud Distribution:

n
=

Qn 292.4
=
= 17 from each end to mid-span, rounded up to 35 total
Qn
17.2

Live Load Deflection:

Modulus of elasticity ratio:
n E=
Ec 29, 000 3,=
=
644 8.0

Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:

Transformed
Area
A (in2)

Moment Arm
from
Centroid
y (in.)

Ay
(in.3)

Ay2
(in,4)

I0
(in.4)

Slab

67.9

15.65

1,062

16,620

115

W21x50

16.2

1,140

1,062

16,620

1,255

Element

84.1
I x =I 0 + Ay 2 =
1, 255 + 16,620 =
17,874 in.4

=
y

1, 062
= 12.6 in.
84.1
2

I tr = I x A y = 17,874 82.6 12.62 = 4, 458 in 4

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Effective moment inertia assuming partial composite action:

I equiv = I s + Qn Py ( I tr I s ) = 1,140 + 0.361 ( 4, 458 1,140 ) = 3,133 in 4

I eff = 0.75 I equiv = 0.75 3,133 = 2,350 in 4

5 (1 12 ) ( 30 12 )
5wL L4
=
LL
=
= 1.35 in.
384 EI eff 384 29, 000 2,350
4

Design for Shear Strength:

Required Shear Strength:
wu = 1.2 0.830 + 1.2 0.100 + 1.6 1 = 2.71 kip/ft

wu L 2.71 45
=
= 61.1 kip-ft
Vu =
2
2
Available Shear Strength:
1.0 0.6 20.8 0.375 50 =
234 kips
Vn =
0.6 d t w Fy =

AISC-360-05 Example 001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

AISC-360-10 Example 001

COMPOSITE GIRDER DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
A typical bay of a composite floor system is illustrated below. Select an
appropriate ASTM A992 W-shaped beam and determine the required number of
in.-diameter steel headed stud anchors. The beam will not be shored during
construction. To achieve a two-hour fire rating without the application of spray
applied fire protection material to the composite deck, 4 in. of normal weight
(145 lb/ft3) concrete will be placed above the top of the deck. The concrete has a
specified compressive strength, fc = 4 ksi.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W21x50
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

Loading
w = 800 plf (Dead Load)
w = 250 plf (Construction)
w = 100 plf (SDL)
w = 1000 plf (Live Load)

Geometry
Span, L = 45 ft

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.1 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Pre-composite Mu (k-ft)

344.2

344.2

0.00%

Pre-composite bMn (k-ft)

412.5

412.5

0.00%

2.6

2.6

0.00%

Required Strength Mu (k-ft)

678.3

678.4

0.01%

Full Composite bMn (k-ft)

937.1

937.1

0.00%

Partial Composite bMn (k-ft)

763.2

763.2

0.00%

Shear Stud Capacity Qn

17.2; 14.6

17.2; 14.6

0.00%

Shear Stud Distribution

46

46

0.00%

Live Load Deflection (in.)

1.34

1.26

6.0%

Required Strength Vu (kip)

60.3

60.3

0.00%

Vn (k)

237.1

237.1

0.00%

Output Parameter

Pre-composite Deflection (in.)

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 001.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The live load deflection differs due to a difference in methodology. In the AISC
example, the live load deflection is computed based on a lower bound value of
the beam moment of inertia, whereas in ETABS, it is computed based on the
approximate value of the beam moment of inertia derived from Equation (C-I3-6)
from the Commentary on the AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design
Specification Second Edition.

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi, wsteel = 490 pcf
4000 psi normal weight concrete
Ec = 3,644 ksi, f c = 4 ksi, wconcrete = 145 pcf
Section:
W21x50
d = 20.8 in, bf = 6.53 in, tf = 0.535 in, tw = 0.38 in, k = 1.04 in
Asteel = 14.7 in2, Ssteel = 94.6 in3, Zsteel = 110 in3, Isteel = 984 in4
Deck:
tc =4 in., hr = 3 in., sr =12 in., wr = 6 in.
Shear Connectors:
d = in, h =4 in, Fu = 65 ksi
Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
wD = (10 75 + 50) 103 = 0.800 kip/ft
wL = 10 25 103 = 0.250 kip/ft

wu = 1.2 0.800 + 1.6 0.250 = 1.36 kip/ft

Mu
=

wu L2 1.36 452
=
= 344.25 kip-ft
8
8

Moment Capacity:
b M n = b Z s Fy =(0.9 110 50) 12 =412.5 kip-ft

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Pre-Composite Deflection:
5wD L4
=
nc
=
384 EI

0.800
4
( 45 12 )
12
= 2.59 in.
384 29, 000 984

Camber
= 0.8 nc
= 0.8 2.59
= 2.07 in., which is rounded down to 2 in.
Design for Composite Flexural Strength:
Required Flexural Strength:

wu = 1.2 0.800 + 1.2 0.100 + 1.6 1 = 2.68 kip/ft

wu L2 2.68 452
=
= 678.38 kip-ft
Mu =
8
8

Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Effective width of slab:
10.0
45.0 ft
2 sides =10.0 ft
beff =
=11.25 ft
2
8

Resistance of steel in tension:

C = Py = As Fy = 14.7 50 = 735 kips controls

Resistance of slab in compression:

Ac = beff tc =

(10 12 ) 4.5 =

540 in

= 1836 kips
C= 0.85 f 'c A=
0.85 4 540
c
Depth of compression block within slab:

=
a

C
735
=
= 1.80 in.
0.85 beff f 'c 0.85 (10 12 ) 4

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:

a
1.80
d1 = ( tc + hr ) = ( 4.5 + 3)
= 6.60 in.
2
2
d
20.8 /12

M n =
Py d1 + Py =
0.9 735 6.60 /12 + 735
937.1 kip-ft
=
2
2

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Assume 50.9% composite action:
C= 0.509 P=
373.9 kips
y

Depth of compression block within concrete slab:

C
373.9
=
= 0.92 in.
0.85 beff f 'c 0.85 (10 12 ) 4

=
a

d =
1

(tc + hr ) a2 =

( 4.5 + 3)

0.92
= 7.04 in.
2

Compressive force in steel section:

Py C 735 373.9
=
= 180.6 kips
2
2

Steel section flange ultimate compressive force:

C flange = b f t f Fy = 6.53 0.535 50 = 174.7 kips

Steel section web (excluding fillet areas) ultimate compressive force:

Cweb = ( d 2 k ) tw Fy = (20.8 2 1.04) 0.38 50 = 355.7 kips
Steel section fillet ultimate compressive force:
=
C fillet

Py (2 C flange + Cweb ) 735 (2 174.7 + 355.7)

=
= 14.5 kips
2
2

Assuming a rectangular fillet area, the distance from the bottom of the top flange to
the neutral axis of the composite section is:
( P C ) / 2 C flange
x =(k t f ) y

C fillet

180.6 174.7
=(1.04 0.535)
=0.20 in.
14.98

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Distance from the centroid of the compressive force in the steel section to the top of
the steel section:

d2 =

C flange t f / 2 + ((Py C ) / 2 C flange ) (t f + x / 2)

( Py C ) / 2
174.7 0.535 / 2 + (180.6 174.7) (0.535 + 0.2 / 2)
= 0.279 in.
180.6

Moment resistance of composite beam for partial composite action:

M n =
C ( d1 + d 2 ) + Py ( d 3 d 2 )

20.8

= 0.9 373.9 ( 7.04 + 0.279 ) + 735

0.279 =
12 763.2 kip-ft
2

Shear Stud Strength:

From AISC Manual Table 3.21, assuming the shear studs are placed in the weak
position, the strength of in.-diameter shear studs in normal weight concrete with
f c = 4 ksi and deck oriented perpendicular to the beam is:

Qn = 17.2 kips for one shear stud per deck flute

Qn = 14.6 kips for two shear studs per deck flute
Shear Stud Distribution:
There are at most 22 deck flutes along each half of the clear span of the beam.
ETABS only counts the studs in the first 21 deck flutes as the 22nd flute is potentially
too close to the point of zero moment for any stud located in it to be effective. With
two shear studs in the first flute, 20 in the next in the next twenty flutes, and one
shear stud in the 22nd flute, in each half of the beam, there is a total of 46 shear studs
on the beam, and the total force provided by the shear studs in each half span is:

Qn =2 14.6 + 20 17.2 =373.9 kip

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Live Load Deflection:

Modulus of elasticity ratio:

644 8.0
n E=
Ec 29, 000 3,=
=

Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:

Transformed
Area
A (in2)

Moment Arm
from Centroid
y (in.)

Ay
(in.3)

Ay2
(in,4)

I0
(in.4)

Slab

67.9

15.65

1,062

16,620

115

W21x50

14.7

984

1,062

16,620

1,099

Element

82.6
Ix =
I 0 + Ay 2 =
1, 099 + 16, 620 =
17, 719 in.4
=
y

1, 062
= 12.9 in.
82.6
2

I tr = I x A y = 17, 719 82.6 12.92 = 4, 058 in 4

Effective moment inertia assuming partial composite action:

I equiv = I s + Qn / Py ( I tr I s ) = 984 + 0.51(4,058 984) = 3,176 in 4

I eff = 0.75 I equiv = 0.75 3,176 = 2,382 in 4
=
LL

5wL L4
5 (1 / 12) (30 12) 4
=
= 1.34 in.
384 EI eff
384 29, 000 2, 382

Design for Shear Strength:

Required Shear Strength:

wu = 1.2 0.800 + 1.2 0.100 + 1.6 1 = 2.68 kip/ft

=
Vu

wu L 2.68 45
=
= 60.3 kip-ft
2
2

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Available Shear Strength:

1.0 0.6 20.8 0.38 50 =
237.1 kips
Vn =
0.6 d tw Fy =

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 9

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

AISC-360-10 Example 002

COMPOSITE GIRDER DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
The design is checked for the composite girder shown below. The deck is 3 in.
deep with 4 normal weight (145 pcf) concrete cover with a compressive
strength of 4 ksi. The girder will not be shored during construction. The applied
loads are the weight of the structure, a 25 psf construction live load, a 10 psf
superimposed dead load and a 100 psf non-reducible service line load.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W24x76
E = 29000 ksi
Fy = 50 ksi

Loading
P = 36K (Dead Load)
P = 4.5K (SDL)
P = 45K (Live Load)

Geometry
Span, L = 45 ft

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.2 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Pre-composite Mu (k-ft)

622.3

622.3

0.00%

Pre-composite bMn (k-ft)

677.2

677.2

0.00%

1.0

1.0

0.00%

Required Strength Mu (k-ft)

1216.3

1216.3

0.00%

Full Composite bMn (k-ft)

1480.1

1480.1

0.00%

Partial Composite bMn (k-ft)

1267.3

1267.3

0.00%

Shear Stud Capacity Qn

21.54

21.54

0.00%

Shear Stud Distribution

26, 3, 26

26, 3, 26

0.00%

Live Load Deflection (in.)

0.63

0.55

12.7%

Required Strength Vu (kip)

122.0

122.0

0.00%

Vn (k)

315.5

315.5

0.00%

Output Parameter

Pre-composite Deflection (in.)

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 002.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The live load deflection differs more markedly because of a difference in
methodology. In the AISC example, the live load deflection is computed based
on a lower bound value of the beam moment of inertia, whereas in ETABS, it is
computed based on the approximate value of the beam moment of inertia derived
from Equation (C-I3-6) from the Commentary on the AISC Load and Resistance
Factor Design Specification Second Edition.

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A572 Grade 50 Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 50 ksi, wsteel = 490 pcf
4000 psi normal weight concrete
Ec = 3,644 ksi, f c = 4 ksi, wconcrete = 145 pcf
Section:
W24x76
d = 23.9 in, bf = 8.99 in, tf = 0.68 in, tw = 0.44 in
Asteel = 22.4 in2, Isteel = 2100 in4
Deck:
tc =4 in., hr = 3 in., sr =12 in., wr = 6 in.
Shear Connectors:
d = in, h =4 in, Fu = 65 ksi
Design for Pre-Composite Condition:
Construction Required Flexural Strength:
22.4

w A
=
w =
sq .ft . 490 pcf
= 76.2 plf
steel steel 144

PD =
36 kips
[(45 ft)(10 ft)(75 psf ) + (50 plf )(45 ft)] (0.001 kip / lb) =

PL

=
ft)(10 ft)(25 psf )] (0.001 kip/lb)
[(45

11.25 kips

1.2 wL2
L
+ (1.2 PD + 1.6 PL )
8
3
2
76.2 30
30
= 1.2
+ (1.2 36 +1.6 11.25
=
622.3 kip-ft
)
8
3
Mu =

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Moment Capacity:
Lb = 10 ft
Lp = 6.78 ft
Lr = 19.5 ft
bBF = 22.6 kips
bMpx = 750 kip-ft
Cb = 1.0
b M=
Cb b M px b BF ( Lb L p )
n
=
1.0 750 22.6 (10 6.78 )

=
677.2 kip-ft

Pre-Composite Deflection:

0.0762
3604
PD L
5wD L
36.0 360
12

=
+
=
+
= 1.0
nc
28 EI
384 EI 28 29, 000 2,100 384 29, 000 2,100
3

Camber
= 0.8 nc
= 0.8 in. which is rounded down to in.

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:

Required Flexural Strength:
P =
40.5 kips
[ (45 ft)(10 ft)(75 +10psf ) + (50 plf)(45 ft)] (0.001 kip/lb) =
D
P
L

=
ft)(10 ft)(100 psf ) ] (0.001 kip/lb)
[ (45

45 kips

1.2 wL2
L
+ (1.2 PD + 1.6 PL )
8
3
2
1.2 76.22 30
30
1216.3 kip-ft
=
+ (1.2 40.5 +1.6
=
45)
8
3
Mu =

Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Effective width of slab:
=
b
eff

30.0 ft
= 7.5
=
ft 90 in.
8

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Resistance of steel in tension:

C = Py = As Fy = 22.4 50 = 1,120 kips controls

Resistance of slab in compression

Ac = beff tc + (beff 2) hr = (7.5 12) 4.5 +

2
7.5 12
3= 540 in
2

C= 0.85 f 'c A=
0.85 4 540
= 1836 kips
c

Depth of compression block within slab:

=
a

C
1,120
=
= 3.66 in.
0.85 beff f 'c 0.85 (7.5 12) 4

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:

d1 = (tc + hr )

a
3.66
= (4.5 + 3)
= 5.67 in.
2
2

M =
C d + P
n
y
1
2

23.9 12

=
0.9 1,120 5.67 / 12 + 1,120
1480.1 kip-ft
=
2

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Assume 50% composite action:
C = 0.5 Py = 560 kips

Depth of compression block within slab

=
a

C
560
=
= 1.83 in.
0.85 beff f 'c 0.85 (7.5 12) 4

d1 = (tc + hr )

a
1.83
= (4.5 + 3)
= 6.58 in.
2
2

Depth of compression block within steel section flange

=
x

Py C
1,120 560
=
= 0.623 in.
2 b f Fy 2 8.99 50

=
d 2 x=
/ 2 0.311 in.

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

M n =C (d1 + d 2 ) + Py (d3 d 2 )

23.9

= 560 (6.58 + 0.312) + 1,120

0.312 12 =1, 408 kip-ft
2

M n = 0.9 M n = 0.9 1, 408 = 1, 267.3 kip-ft

Shear Stud Strength:

=
Qn 0.5 Asa

f 'c Ec Rg R p Asa Fu

d sa 2 4 =
(0.75) 2 4 =
0.442 in 2
Asa =
f c ' = 4 ksi
1.5
1.5
=
=
E w=
f c ' 145
4 3, 490 ksi
c

Rg = 1.0 Studs welded directly to the steel shape with the slab haunch
Rp = 0.75 Studs welded directly to the steel shape
Fu = 65 ksi
Qn = 0.5 0.4422 4 3, 490 1.0 0.75 0.4422 65
= 26.1 kips 21.54 kips controls

Shear Stud Distribution:

n=
=

Qn
Qn
560
= 26 studs from each end to nearest concentrated load point
21.54

Add 3 studs between load points to satisfy maximum stud spacing requirement.
Live Load Deflection:
Modulus of elasticity ratio:
=
n E=
/ Ec 29, 000 / 3,
=
644 8.0

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:

Transformed
Area
A (in2)

Moment Arm
from
Centroid
y (in.)

Ay
(in.3)

Ay2
(in,4)

I0
(in.4)

Slab

50.9

17.2

875

15,055

86

Deck ribs

17.0

13.45

228

3,069

13

W21x50

22.4

2,100

1,103

18,124

2,199

Element

89.5
I x =I 0 + Ay 2 =2,199 + 18,124 =20,323 in.4
=
y

1, 092
= 12.2 in.
89.5
2

I tr = I x A y = 20,323 90.3 12.22 = 6,831 in 4

Effective moment of inertia assuming partial composite action:

I equiv = I s + Qn Py ( I tr I s ) = 2,100 + 0.5 ( 6,831 2,100 ) = 5, 446 in 4

I eff = 0.75 I equiv = 0.75 5, 446 = 4, 084 in 4
=
LL

PL L3
45.0 (30 12)3
=
= 0.633 in.
28EI eff 28 29,000 4,084

Design for Shear Strength:

Required Shear Strength:
Pu = 1.2 PD + 1.6 PL = 1.2 40.5 + 1.6 45 = 120.6 kip
=
Vu

1.2 w L
1.2 0.076 30
=
+ Pu
+=
120.6 121.2 kip-ft
2
2

Available Shear Strength:

Vn =
0.6 d tw Fy =
1.0 0.6 23.9 0.44 50 =
315.5 kips

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

BS-5950-90 Example-001
STEEL DESIGNERS MANUAL SIXTH EDITION - DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED COMPOSITE
BEAM
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Design a composite floor with beams at 3-m centers spanning 12 m. The
composite slab is 130 mm deep. The floor is to resist an imposed load of 5.0
kN/m2, partition loading of 1.0 kN/m2 and a ceiling load of 0.5 kN/m2. The floor
is to be un-propped during construction.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
UKB457x191x67
E = 205,000 MPa
Fy = 355 MPa

Loading
w = 6.67kN/m (Dead Load)
w = 1.5kN/m (Construction)
w = 1.5kN/m (Superimposed Load)
w = 18.00kN/m (Live Load)

Geometry
Span, L = 12 m

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from the first example, Design of Simply
Supported Composite Beam, in Chapter 21 of the Steel Construction Institute
Steel Designers Manual, Sixth Edition.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

211.2

211.3

0.05%

Construction Ms (kN-m)

522.2

522.2

0.00%

Construction Deflection (mm)

29.9

29.9

0.00%

Design Moment (kN-m)

724.2

724.3

0.01%

Full Composite Mpc (kN-m)

968.9

968.9

0.00%

Partial Composite Mc (kN-m)

910.8

910.9

0.01%

Shear Stud Capacity Qn (kN)

57.6

57.6

0.00%

Live Load Deflection (mm)

33.2

33.2

0.00%

Applied Shear Force Fv (kN)

241.4

241.4

0.00%

Shear Resistance Pv (kN)

820.9

821.2

0.00%

Output Parameter
Construction Design
Moment (kN-m)

COMPUTER FILE: BS-5950-90 EXAMPLE 001.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an excellent comparison with the independent results.

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
S355 Steel:
E = 205,000 MPa, py = 355 MPa, s = 7850 kg/m3
Light-weight concrete:
E = 24,855 MPa, fcu = 30 MPa, c = 1800 kg/m3
Section:
UKB457x191x67
D = 453.6 mm, bf = 189.9 mm, tf = 12.7 mm, tw = 8.5 mm
Asteel = 8,550 mm2, Isteel = 29,380 cm4
Deck:
Ds =130 mm, Dp = 50 mm, sr = 300 mm, br = 150 mm
Shear Connectors:
d = 19 mm, h = 95 mm, Fu = 450 MPa
Loadings:
Self weight slab

= 2.0 kN/m2

Self weight beam

= 0.67 kN/m

Construction load

= 0.5 kN/m2

Ceiling

= 0.5 kN/m2

Partitions (live load)

= 1.0 kN/m2

Occupancy (live load)

= 5.0 kN/m2

Design for Pre-Composite Condition:

Construction Required Flexural Strength:

wult construction = 1.4 0.67 + (1.4 2.0 + 1.6 0.5 ) 3.0 = 11.74 kN/m

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

wult construction L2 11.74 122

=
=
= 211.3 kN-m
M ult construction
8
8
M s = S z Py = 1, 471 103 355 106 = 522.2 kN-m

Pre-Composite Deflection:
wconstruction = 2.0 3.0 + 0.67 = 6.67 kN/m

5 wconstruction L4
5 6.67 12, 0004
=

=
= 29.9 mm
384 E I
384 205, 000 29,380 104
Camber
= 0.8 =
24 mm, which is rounded down to 20 mm

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:

Required Flexural Strength:

wult = 1.4 0.67 + (1.4 2.0 + 1.6 1 + 1.6 5 ) 3.0 = 40.24 kN/m

wult L2 40.24 122

=
=
= 724.3 kN-m
M
ult
8
8
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
B=
e

L 12,000
=
= 3, 000 mm 3,000 mmm
4
4

Resistance of slab in compression:

Rc = 0.45 f cu Be ( Ds D p )= 0.45 30 3, 000 (130 50 ) 103= 3, 240 kN

Resistance of steel in tension:

Rs = Py = As p y = 8,550 355 103 = 3, 035 kN controls

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:

D
R ( Ds D p )
M=
Rs + Ds s
for Rs Rc
pc
Rc
2
2

3,035 80
453.6
= 3,035
+ 130
=
103 968.9 kN-m

3, 240 2
2

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Assume 72% composite action the 75% assumed in the example requires more
shear studs than can fit on the beam given its actual clear length.
Rq = 0.72 Rs = 2,189 kN

Tensile Resistance of web:

Rw = tw ( D 2 t f ) p y = 8.5 ( 453.6 2 12.7 ) 355 103 = 1, 292 kN

As Rq > Rw, the plastic axis is in the steel flange, and

Rq ( Ds D p ) ( Rs Rq ) 2 t f
D
M c =Rs + Rq Ds

2
2
4
Rc
Rf

( 3,035 2,189 ) 12.7 103

453.6
2,189 80

= 3,035
103 + 2,1899 130
103
2
3, 240 2
( 3,035 1, 292 ) 4

= 910.9 kN-m
Shear Stud Strength:
Characteristic resistance of 19 mm-diameter studs in normal weight 30 MPa
concrete:
Qk = 100 kN from BS 5950: Part 3 Table 5
Adjusting for light-weight concrete:
Qk = 90 kN

Reduction factor for profile shape with ribs perpendicular to the beam and two studs
per rib:

k = 0.6

br ( h D p )
150 ( 95 50 )

= 0.6

= 1.62 but k 0.8

50
50
Dp
Dp

Design strength:
Q p =k 0.8 Qk =0.8 0.8 90 =57.6 kN

Shear Stud Distribution:

The example places two rows of shear studs and computes the numbers of deck ribs
available for placing shear studs based on the beam center to center span and the
deck rib spacing: 12 m / 300 mm = 40

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

However, the number of deck ribs available for placing shear studs must be based on
the beam clear span, and since the clear beam span is somewhat less than the 12 m
center to center span there are only 39 deck ribs available.
ETABS selects 72% composite action, which is the highest achievable and sufficient
to meet the live load deflection criteria. ETABS satisfies this 72% composite action
by placing one stud per deck rib along the entire length of the beam, plus a second
stud per rib in all the deck ribs except the mid-span rib since this is the location of
the beam zero moment and a stud in that rib would not contribute anything to the
total resistance of the shear connectors. The total resistance of the shear connectors
is:

Rq =2 19 Q p =38 57.6 =2,189 kN

Live Load Deflection:
The second moment of area of the composite section, based on elastic properties, Ic
is given by:

=
Ic

Asteel ( D+ Ds + D p )

4 (1 + e r )

beff ( Ds D p )
12 e

+ I steel

Asteel
8,550
=
= 0.0356
beff ( Ds D p ) 3,000 (130 50 )

=
r

For light-weight concrete:

s =
10

l =25

Proportion of total loading which is long term:

=
l

wdl + wsdl + 0.33 wlive 6.67 + 1.5 + 0.33 18

=
= 0.541
wdl + wsdl + wlive
6.67 + 1.5 + 18

e = s + l ( l s ) = 10 + 0.541 ( 25 10 ) = 18.1

8,550 ( 453.4 + 130 + 50 ) 3,000 803

=
Ic
+
+ 294 106
4 (1 + 18.1 0.0356 )
12 18.1
2

( 521 + 7 + 294 ) 106=

822 106 mm 4

Live load deflection assuming full composite action:

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

5 18 (12,000 )
5 wlive L4
=
c
=
= 28.8 mm
384 E I c 384 205,000 822 106
4

Adjust for partial composite action:

5 18 (12, 000 )
5 wlive L4
=
s
=
384 E I c 384 205, 000 294 106
4

= 80.7 mm non-composite reference deflection

partial = c + 0.3 (1 K ) ( s c )
= 28.9 + 0.3 (1 0.72 ) ( 80.7 28.9 )= 33.2 mm

Design for Shear Strength:

Required Shear Strength:
=
Fv

wult L 40.24 12
=
= 241.4 kN
2
2

Shear Resistance of Steel Section:

P = 0.6 p y Ds tw = 0.6 355 453.4 8.5 103 = 820.9 kN
V

BS-5950-90 Example-001 - 7

Software Verification
ETABS
4

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

CSA-S16-09 Example-001
HANDBOOK OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, TENTH EDITION - COMPOSITE BEAM
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Design a simply supported composite beam to span 12 m and carry a uniformly
distributed specified load of 18 kN/m live load and 12 kN/m dead load. Beams
are spaced at 3 m on center and support a 75 mm steel deck (ribs perpendicular to
the beam) with a 65 mm cover slab of 25 MPa normal density concrete.
Calculations are based on Fy = 345 MPa. Live load deflections are limited to
L/300.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
W460x74
E = 205,000 MPa
Fy = 345 MPa

Loading
w = 8.0kN/m (Dead Load)
w = 2.5kN/m (Construction)
w = 4.0kN/m (Superimposed Load)
w = 18.00kN/m (Live Load)

Geometry
Span, L = 12 m

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from the design example on page 5-25 of the
Handbook of Steel Construction, Tenth Edition.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

247.4

247.5

0.04%

Construction Ms (kN-m)

512.3

512.3

0.00%

Construction Deflection (mm)

32.4

32.4

0.00%

Design Moment (kN-m)

755.8

756

0.02%

Full Composite Mrc (kN-m)

946.7

946.7

0.00%

Partial Composite Mrc (kN-m)

783.6

783.6

0.00%

Shear Stud Capacity Qn (kN)

68.7

68.7

0.00%

30

30

0.00%

Live Load Deflection (mm)

32.9

32.9

0.00%

Bottom Flange Tension (MPa)

267.2

267.1

0.04%

Design Shear Force Vf (kN)

251.9

251.9

0.00%

Shear Resistance Vr (kN)

842.9

842.9

0.00%

Output Parameter
Construction Design
Moment (kN-m)

Shear Stud Distribution

COMPUTER FILE: CSA-S16-09 EXAMPLE 001.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A992 Grade 50 Steel
E = 200,000 MPa, Fy = 345 MPa, s = 7850 kg/m3
Normal weight concrete
E = 23,400 MPa, fcu = 20 MPa, c = 2300 kg/m3
Section:
W460x74
d = 457 mm, bf = 190 mm, tf = 14.5 mm, tw = 9 mm, T = 395 mm, rfillet=16.5 mm
, Z s 1, 650 103 mm3 , =
As = 9,450 mm2=
I s 333 106 mm 4
Deck:
tc =65 mm, hr = 75 mm, sr = 300 mm, wr = 150 mm
Shear Connectors:
d = 19 mm, h = 115 mm, Fu = 450 MPa
Loadings:
Self weight slab

= 2.42 kN/m2

Self weight beam

= 0.73 kN/m

Construction load

= 0.83 kN/m2

Superimposed dead load

= 1.33 kN/m2

Live load

= 6.0 kN/m2

Design for Pre-Composite Condition:

Construction Required Flexural Strength:
w f construction = 1.25 0.73 + (1.25 2.42 + 1.5 0.83) 3.0 = 13.75 kN/m
w f construction L2 13.75 122
M f construction
=
=
= 247.5 kN-m
8
8

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

Moment Capacity:
M s = Z s 0.9 Fy =1, 650 103 0.9 345 106 = 512.3 kN-m

Pre-Composite Deflection:
wconstruction = 2.42 3.0 + 0.73 = 8.0 kN/m
=

5 wconstruction L4
5 8.0 12, 0004
=
= 32.4 mm
384 E I
384 200, 000 33, 300 104

Camber
= 0.8 =
25.9 mm, which is rounded down to 25 mm

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:

Required Flexural Strength:
w f = 1.25 0.73 + (1.25 2.42 + 1.25 1.33 + 1.5 6 ) 3.0= 42 kN/m

w f L2 42 122
=
Mf
=
= 756.0 kN-m
8
8
Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Effective width of slab:
b
=
l

L
12,000
=
= 3, 000 mm 3,000 mmm
4
4

Resistance of slab in compression:

=1 0.85 0.0015 =
f c 0.8125
C 'r = 1 c t b f f c = 0.8125 0.65 65 3,000 25 103 = 2,574 kN controls
Resistance of steel in tension:
3
As F=
0.9 9,450 345 10=
2,934 kN
y

Depth of compression block within steel section top flange:

=
x

( As Fy C ' r ) 2
=
Fy b f

2,547 ) 103 2
( 2,934
=
0.9 345 190

3.05 mm

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 4

Software Verification
ETABS
4

PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Moment resistance of composite beam for full composite action:

t x

d x
M rc= C 'r h r + c + + As Fy
2 2

2 2
65 3

457 3
3
= 2,574 75 + + 103 + 2,934
10=
946.7 kN-m
2 2
2

2
Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:
Assume 40.0% composite action:

Qr = 0.4 Rc = 0.4 2,574 = 1,031 kN

Depth of compression block within concrete slab:

Qr
1,031 103
=
= 26 mm
a =
1 c beff f c 0.8125 0.65 3,000 25
Compression force within steel section:
Cr =
( Py Qr ) 2 =
951.6 kN
( 2,934 1,031) 2 =

Tensile resistance of one flange:

F
= b t F = 0.9 190 14.5 345 103 = 855.4 kN
flange
y
f
f

Tensile resistance of web:

=
T t F =
F
0.9 395 9 345 103 =
1,103.8 kN
web
w y

Tensile resistance of one fillet area:

Ffillet=

(P 2 F
y

flange

Fweb ) 2=

( 2,934 2 855.4 1,103.8)

2= 59.8 kN

Compression force in web:

Cweb =
Cr Fflange Ffillet =
951.6 855.4 59.7 =
36.4 kN

Depth of compression block in web:

x=

Cweb
36.4
T=
395= 13 mm
Fweb
1,103.8

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

Location of centroid of compressive force within steel section measured from top of
steel section:
d2

0.5 t f Fflange + ( t f + 0.5 rfillet ) Ffillet + ( t f + rfillet + 0.5 x ) C web

=
Cr

0.5 14 855 + (14 + 0.5 16.5) 60 + (14 + 16.5 + 0.5 44 ) 36.4

= 9.4 mm
951.6

Moment resistance of composite beam for partial composite action:

M rc = Qr h r + tc + d 2 + Py d 2
2

26

457

3
783.6 kN-m
= 1,031 75 + 65 + 9.4 103 + 2,934
9.4 10=
2

Shear Stud Strength:

From CISC Handbook of Steel Construction Tenth Edition for 19-mm-diameter
studs,
hd = 75 mm, wd/hd = 2.0, 25 MPa, 2,3000 kg/m3 concrete:
qrr = 68.7 kN
2 Qr 2 1, 031
Total number of studs required ==
= 30
qrr
68.7

Live Load Deflection:

Modulus of elasticity ratio:

=
n E=
Ec 200, 000 23,=
400 8.55
Transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming full composite action:

Element

Transformed
Area
A (mn2)

Moment Arm
from Centroid
Ay
Ay2
I0
y (mm)
(103 mm3) (106 mm4) (106 mm4)

Slab

22,815

336

7,666

2,576

W460x74

9,450

333

7,666

2,576

341

32,265

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

I x =I 0 + Ay 2 =341 106 + 2,576 106 =2,917 106 mm 4

=
y

7, 666 106
= 238 mm
32, 265
2

I tr = I x A y = 2,917 106 32, 265 2382 = 1, 095 106 mm 4

Effective moment of inertia assuming partial composite action:
I eff =
I s + 0.85 p 0.25 ( I tr I s )
= 333 + 0.85 0.400.25 (1,095 333)
= 848 106 mm 4

5 18 (12,000 )
5wL L4
LL= 1.15
= 1.15
= 32.9 mm
384 EI eff
384 200,000 848 106
4

Bottom Flange Tension:

Stress in tension flange due to specified load acting on steel beam alone:

=
f1

M1
8 120002
=
= 98.6 MPa
S x 8 1460 103

Bottom section modulus based on transformed elastic moment of inertia assuming,

per the original example, full composite action:

=
St

1,095 106
I tr
=
= 1350 mm
d
(228.5
237.6)
+
( + y)
2

Stress in tension flange due to specified live and superimposed dead loads acting on
composite section:

M 2 (18 + 4) 120002
=
f2 =
= 168.5 MPa
St
8 2350 103
f1 + f 2 =
98.6 +168.5=267.1 MPa

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
4

Design for Shear Strength:

Required Shear Strength:

=
Vf

wfactored L 42 12
= = 252 kN
2
2

Shear Resistance of Steel Section:

Vr = Aw Fs =0.9 d tw 0.66 Fy =0.9 457 9 0.66 345 =842.9 kN

CSA-S16-09 Example-001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

EC-4-2004 Example-001
STEEL DESIGNERS MANUAL SEVENTH EDITION - DESIGN OF SIMPLY SUPPORTED COMPOSITE
BEAM
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Consider an internal secondary composite beam of 12-m span between columns
and subject to uniform loading. Choose a UKB457x191x74 in S 355 steel.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Member Properties
UKB457x191x74
E = 205,000 MPa
fy = 355 MPa

ETABS
3

Geometry
Loading
Span, L = 12 m
w = 8.43kN/m (Dead Load)
w = 2.25kN/m (Construction)
Beam spacing, b =3 m
w = 1.5kN/m (Superimposed Load)
w = 15.00kN/m (Live Load)

TECHNICAL FEATURES OF ETABS TESTED

Composite beam design, including:
Selection of steel section, camber and shear stud distribution
Member bending capacities, at construction and in service
Member deflections, at construction and in service
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from the first example, Design of Simply
Supported Composite Beam, in Chapter 22 of the Steel Construction Institute
Steel Designers Manual, Seventh Edition.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

250.4

250.4

0.00%

Construction Ma,pl,Rd (kN-m)

587

587

0.00%

Construction Deflection (mm)

32.5

32.5

0.00%

Design Moment (kN-m)

628.4

628.4

0.01%

Full Composite Mpc (kN-m)

1020

1020

0.00%

Partial Composite Mc (kN-m)

971.2

971.2

0.00%

Shear Stud Capacity PRd

Input

52.0

NA

Shear Stud Distribution

77

76

1.3%

19.3

19.1

1.03%

Output Parameter
Construction MEd (kN-m)

Live Load Deflection (mm)

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

Output Parameter
Required Strength VEd (kN)
Vpl,Rd (kN)

ETABS
3

ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

209.5

209.5

0.00%

843

843

0.00%

COMPUTER FILE: EC-4-2004 EXAMPLE 001.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.
The shear stud capacity Pr was entered as an overwrite, since it is controlled by
the deck profile geometry and the exact geometry of the example, which assumes
a deck profile with a rib depth of 60 mm, a depth above profile of 60 mm and a
total depth of 130 mm, cannot be modeled in ETABS, since in ETABS, only the
rib depth and depth above profile can be specified.

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
S 355 Steel:
E = 210,000 MPa, fy = 355 MPa, partial safety factor a = 1.0
Normal weight concrete class C25/30:
Ecm = 30,500 MPa, fcu = 30 MPa, density wc = 24 kN/m3
Section:
UKB457x191x74
ha = 457 mm, bf = 190.4 mm, tf = 14.5 mm, tw = 9 mm,
Aa = 9,460 mm2, Iay = 33,319 cm4, Wpl = 1,653 cm3
Deck:
Slab depth hs =130 mm, depth above profile hc = 60 mm,
Deck profile height hp = 60 mm, hd = hp + 10 mm for re-entrant stiffener,
sr = 300 mm, b0 = 150 mm
Shear Connectors:
d = 19 mm, h = 95 mm, Fu = 450 MPa
Loadings:
Self weight slab, decking, reinforcement

= 2.567 kN/m2

Self weight beam

= 0.73 kN/m

Construction load

= 0.75 kN/m2

Ceiling

= 0.5 kN/m2

Partitions (live load)

= 1.0 kN/m2

Occupancy (live load)

= 4.0 kN/m2

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Design for Pre-Composite Condition:

Construction Required Flexural Strength:
wfactored construction = 1.25 (2.567 3.0 + 0.73) + 1.5 0.75 3.0 = 13.91 kN/m

M
=
Ed

wfactored construction L2 13.91 122

=
= 250.4 kN-m
8
8

Moment Capacity:

M a , pl ,Rd = W pl f d = 1,653 103 355 106 = 587 kN-m

Pre-Composite Deflection:
wconstruction= 2.567 3.0 + 0.73= 8.43 kN/m

5 wconstruction L4
5 8.43 12,0004
=
= 32.5 mm
384 E I ay
384 210,000 33,319 104

Camber
= 0.8 =
26 mm, which is rounded down to 25 mm

Design for Composite Flexural Strength:

Required Flexural Strength:
wfactored = 1.25 0.73 + (1.25 2.567 + 1.25 0.5 + 1.5 1 + 1.5 4.0) 3.0 = 34.91 kN/m

M
=
Ed

wfactored L2 34.91 122

=
= 628.4 kN-m
8
8

Full Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Effective width of slab:
=
beff

2 L 2 12
= = 3m
8
8

Resistance of slab in compression:

Rc=

0.85 f ck
beff hc= 0.85 (25 /1.5) 3, 000 60 103= 2,550 kN controls
c

Resistance of steel section in tension:

Rs = f yd Aa = 355 9, 460 103 = 3,358 kN

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 5

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Depth of compression block within steel section flange:

=
x

3, 358 2, 250
Rs Rc
=
= 6 mm
2 b f f yd 2 190.4 355

d 2 x=
/ 2 0.273 in.
=

The plastic axis is in the steel flange and the moment resistance for full composite
action is:
h ( R Rc ) 2 t f
h
h

M a , pl ,RD =
Rs d 2 +R c hs c - s
2
4
Rf
2
2

453.6
60
(3,358 2,550) 2 14.5

103 + 2,550 130 103

103
2
2
980
4

= 1020.0 kN-m

= 3,358

Partial Composite Action Available Flexural Strength:

Assume 77.5% composite action:
R=
0.775 R=
0.775 3,358= 1,976 kN
q
s
Tensile Resistance of web:

Rw =
tw ( D 2 t f ) p y =
8.5 (453.6 2 12.7) 355 103 =
1, 292 kN
As Rq > Rw, the plastic axis is in the steel flange, and

M c =Rs

R h ( R Rq ) 2 t f

h
+ Rq hs q c s
2
Rc 2
Rf
4

= 3,358

453.6
1,976 60
(3,358 1,976) 2 14.5

103 + 1,976 130

103
103
2
2,
250
2
980
4

= 971.2 kN-m
Resistance of Shear Connector:
Resistance of shear connector in solid slab:

PRd= 0.29 d 2
0.29 d 2

d2
h 95
f ck Ecm v 0.8 fu v with =1.0 for =
>4
d 19
4

v 0.29 1.0 192 25 30,500 103 1.25

= 73 kN controls
f ck Ecm =

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 6

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

d2
19
0.8 fu v =0.8 450 1.25 =81.7 kN
4
4
Reduction factor for decking perpendicular to beam assuming two studs per rib:
0.7
( b0 hp ) ( hsc hp ) 1 0.75 per EN 1994-1-1 Table 6.2
nr

=
kt

0.7 150
( 95 60 ) 1= 0.72 0.75
2 60

PRd = 0.72 73= 52 kN

Total resistance with two studs per rib and 19 ribs from the support to the mid-span:
Rq =2 19 52 =1,976 kN

Live Load Deflection:

The second moment of area of the composite section, based on elastic properties, Ic
is given by:

Aa (h + 2 hp + hc ) 2

Ic
=

4 (1 + n r )

beff hc3
+
+ I ay
12 n

Aa
9, 460
=
= 0.052
beff hc 3, 000 60

=
r

n = modular ratio = 10 for normal weight concrete subject to variable loads

=
Ic

9, 460 (457 + 2 70 + 60) 2 3, 000 603

+
+ 33,320 104
4 (1 + 10 0.052)
12 10

= (6.69 + 0.05 + 3.33) 108 = 10.08 108 mm 4

=
live

5 wlive L4
5 15 (12, 000) 4
=
= 19.1 mm
384 E I c 384 210, 000 10.08 108

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 7

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
3

Design for Shear Strength:

Required Shear Strength:

=
VEd

wfactored L 34.91 12
= = 209.5 kN
2
2

Shear Resistance of Steel Section:

=
V pl , Rd

457 9.0 355

=
843 kN
3 103

EC-4-2004 Example-001 - 8

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC-360-10 Example 001

COMPOSITE COLUMN DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Determine if the 14-ft.-long filled composite member illustrated below is
adequate for the indicated dead and live loads. The composite member consists
of an ASTM A500 Grade B HSS with normal weight (145 lb/ft3) concrete fill
having a specified compressive strength, fc = 5 ksi.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
HSS10x6 x
E = 29,000 ksi
Fy = 46 ksi

Loading
PD = 32.0 kips
PL = 84.0 kips

Geometry
Height, L = 14 ft

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURE OF ETABS TESTED

Compression capacity of composite column design.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.4 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Required Strength Pu (kip)

172.8

172.8

0.00%

Available Strength Pn (kip)

342.93

354.78

3.34%

Output Parameter

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 001.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A500 Grade B Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 46 ksi, Fu = 58 ksi
5000 psi normal weight concrete
Ec = 3,900 ksi, f c = 5 ksi, wconcrete = 145 pcf
Section dimensions and properties:
HSS10x6x
H = 10.0 in, B= 6.00 in, t = 0.349 in
As = 10.4 in2, Isx = 137 in4, Isy = 61.8 in4
Concrete area

hi = H 2 t = 10 2 0.349 = 9.30 in.

bi = B 2 t = 6 2 0.349 = 5.30 in.

Ac= bi hi t 2 (4 )= 5.30 9.30 (0.349) 2 (4 )= 49.2 in.2

Moment of inertia for bending about the y-y axis:

( H 4 t ) bt3 t ( B 4 t )3 (92 64) t 4
B 4t 4t
=
+
+
+ t2

I cy

12
6
36
2
3

(10 4 0.349) 5.303 0.349 (6 4 0.349)3 (92 64) 0.3494

+
+
+
12
6
36
6 4 0.349 4 0.349 2
)
0.3492 (

2
3
= 114.3 in.4

Design for Compression:

Required Compressive Strength:

Pu = 1.2 PD + 1.6 PL = 1.2 32.0 + 1.6 84.0 = 172.8 kips

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Nominal Compressive Strength:

E
Pno = Pp = Fy As + C2 f c Ac + Asr s
Ec

where

C2 = 0.85 for rectangular sections

Asr = 0 when no reinforcing is present within the HSS

Pno = 46 10.4 + 0.85 5 (49.2 + 0.0) = 687.5 kips
Weak-axis Elastic Buckling Force:
As
0.6 + 2
C3 =
0.9
Ac + As
10.4
=
0.6 + 2
0.9
49.2 + 10.4
0.9 controls
= 0.949 > 0.9

EI eff = Es I sy + Es I sr + C3 Ec I cy
= 29, 000 62.1 + 0 + 0.9 3,900 114.3
= 2, 201, 000 kip-in 2
Pe = 2 ( EI eff ) ( KL) 2 where K = 1.0 for a pin-ended member
Pe
=

2 2, 201, 000
= 769.7 kips
1.0 (14.0 12) 2

Available Compressive Strength:

Pno
688
=
= 0.893 < 2.25
Pe 769.7

Therefore, use AISC Specification Equation I2-2:

Pno

Pn =
Pno 0.658 Pe =
0.75 687.5 (0.658)0.893 =
354.8 kips

AISC-360-10 Example 001 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC-360-10 Example 002

COMPOSITE COLUMN DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Determine if the 14-ft.-long filled composite member illustrated below is
adequate for the indicated dead load compression and wind load tension. The
entire load is applied to the steel section.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
HSS10x6 x
E = 29,000 ksi
Fy = 46 ksi

Loading
PD = -32.0 kips
PW = 100.0 kips

Geometry
Height, L = 14 ft

TECHNICAL FEATURE OF ETABS TESTED

Tension capacity of composite column design.

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.5 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

Required Strength, Pu (kip)

71.2

71.2

0.00%

Available Strength, Pn (kip)

430.5

430.0

0.12%

Output Parameter

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 002.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A500 Grade B Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 46 ksi, Fu = 58 ksi
5000 psi normal weight concrete
Ec = 3,900 ksi, f c = 5 ksi, wconcrete = 145 pcf
Steel section dimensions:
HSS10x6x
H = 10.0 in, B = 6.00 in, t = 0.349 in, As = 10.4 in2
Design for Tension:
Required Compressive Strength:
The required compressive strength is (taking compression as negative and tension as
positive):

Pu = 0.9 PD + 1.0 PW = 0.9 (32.0) + 1.0 100.0 = 71.2 kips

Available Tensile Strength:

Pn = ( As Fy + Asr Fysr ) =0.9(10.4 46 + 0 60) =430 kips

AISC-360-10 Example 002 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

AISC-360-10 Example 003

COMPOSITE COLUMN DESIGN
EXAMPLE DESCRIPTION
Determine if the 14-ft.-long filled composite member illustrated below is
adequate for the indicated axial forces, shears, and moments. The composite
member consists of an ASTM A500 Grade B HSS with normal weight (145
lb/ft3) concrete fill having a specified compressive strength, f c = 5 ksi.
GEOMETRY, PROPERTIES AND LOADING

Member Properties
HSS10x6 x
E = 29,000 ksi
Fy = 46 ksi

Loading
Pr = 129.0 kips
Mr = 120.0 kip-ft
Vr = 17.1 kips

Geometry
Height, L = 14 ft

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 1

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

TECHNICAL FEATURE OF ETABS TESTED

Tension capacity of composite column design.
RESULTS COMPARISON
Independent results are referenced from Example I.1 from the AISC Design
Examples, Version 14.0.
ETABS

Independent

Percent
Difference

129

129

0.00%

Available Strength, Pn (kip)

342.9

354.78

-3.35%

Required Strength, Mu (k-ft)

120

120

0.00%

130.58

130.5

0.06%

1.19

1.18

0.85%

Output Parameter
Required Strength, Fu (k)

Available Strength, bMn (k-ft)

Interaction Equation H1-1a

COMPUTER FILE: AISC-360-10 EXAMPLE 003.EDB

CONCLUSION
The ETABS results show an acceptable comparison with the independent results.

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 2

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

HAND CALCULATION
Properties:
Materials:
ASTM A500 Grade B Steel
E = 29,000 ksi, Fy = 46 ksi, Fu = 58 ksi
5000 psi normal weight concrete
Ec = 3,900 ksi, f c = 5 ksi, wconcrete = 145 pcf
Section dimensions and properties:
HSS10x6x
H = 10.0 in, B= 6.00 in, t = 0.349 in
As = 10.4 in2, Isx = 137 in4, Zsx=33.8 in3, Isy = 61.8 in4
Concrete area
ht = 9.30 in., bt = 5.30 in., Ac = 49.2 in.2, Icx = 353 in4, Icy = 115 in4
Compression capacity:
Nominal Compressive Strength:
cPn= 354.78 kips as computed in Example I.4
Bending capacity:
Maximum Nominal Bending Strength:
Zsx = 33.8 in3

bi hi 2
Zc =
0.192 ri 3 where ri = t
4
5.30 (9.30) 2
3
=
0.192 (0.349)
=
114.7 in.3
4
0.85 f c Zc
2
0.85 5 115 1, 798.5 kip-in.
=46 33.8 +
=
=149.9 kip-ft
2
12 in./ft

M D = Fy Z sx +

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 3

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
0

Available Bending Strength:

=
hn

0.85 f c Ac
h
i
2(0.85 f c bi + 4 t Fy ) 2

0.85 5 49.2
9.30

2(0.85 5 5.30 + 4 0.349 50)

2
= 1.205 4.65
=1.205 in.

Z sn = 2 t hn2 = 2 0.349 (1.205) 2 = 1.01 in.3

Z cn =bi hn2 =5.30 (1.205) 2 =7.70 in.3

0.85 f c Z cn
2
0.85 5 7.76 1, 740 kip-in.
= 1,800 46 1.02
=
= 144.63 kip-ft
2
12 in./ft

M nx = M D Fy Z sn

b M nx =0.9 144.63 =
130.16 kip-ft
Interaction Equation H1-1a:
Pu
8 Mu
+
c Pn 9 b M n

1.0

129
8 120
+
1.0
354.78 9 130.16

1.18 > 1.0 n.g.

AISC-360-10 Example 003 - 4

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

REFERENCES
American Institute of Steel Construction. 1989. Manual of Steel ConstructionAllowable Stress Design. Chicago, Illinois.
ASCE, 7-02. ASCE Standard Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other
Structures, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia.
Bathe, K.J. and E.L. Wilson. 1972. Large Eigenvalue Problems in Dynamic
Analysis. Journal of the Eng. Mech. Div. ASCE. Vol. 98, No. EM6, Proc.
Paper 9433. December.
Computers and Structures, Inc. 2012. Analysis Reference Manual. Computers and
Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California.
DYNAMIC/EASE2. Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multistory Frame Structures
Using. DYNAMIC/EASE2, Engineering Analysis Corporation and Computers
and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California.
Engineering Analysis Corporation and Computers and Structures, Inc.,
DYNAMIC/EASE2. Static and Dynamic Analysis of Multistory Frame
Structures Using. DYNAMIC/EASE2, Berkeley, California.
Hanson, R.D. 1993. Supplemental Damping for Improved Seismic Performance.
Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 9, Number 3, 319-334.
International Code Council, Inc. 2000. International Building Code. Falls Church,
Virginia.
International Conference of Building Officials. 1997. Uniform Building Code.
Whittier, California.
Nagarajaiah, S., A.M. Reinhorn and M.C. Constantinou. 1991. 3D-Basis: Nonlinear
Dynamic Analysis of Three-Dimensional Base Isolated Structures: Part II,
Technical Report NCEER-91-0005. National Center for Earthquake
Engineering Research. State University of New York at Buffalo. Buffalo,
New York.
Paz, M. 1985. Structural Dynamics, Theory and Computations. Van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Peterson, F.E. 1981. EASE2, Elastic Analysis for Structural Engineering - Example
Problem Manual. Engineering Analysis Corporation. Berkeley, California.

REFERENCES

Software Verification
PROGRAM NAME:
REVISION NO.:

ETABS
2

Prakash, V., G.A. Powell and S. Campbell. DRAIN-2DX. 1993. Base Program
Description and User Guide. Department of Civil Engineering. University of
California. Berkeley, California.
Prakash, V., G.A. Powell, and S. Campbell. 1993. DRAIN-2DX Base Program
Description and User Guide. Department of Civil Engineering. University of
California. Berkeley, California.
Przemieniecki, J.S. 1968. Theory of Matrix Structural Analysis. Mc-Graw-Hill.
Scholl, Roger E. 1993. Design Criteria for Yielding and Friction Energy
Dissipaters. Proceedings of ATC-17-1 Seminar on Seismic Isolation, Passive
Energy Dissipation, and Active Control. San Francisco, California. Vol. 2,
485-495. Applied Technology Council. Redwood City, California.
Tsai, K.H., H.W. Chen, C.P. Hong, and Y.F. Su. 1993. Design of Steel Triangular
Plate Energy Absorbers for Seismic-Resistant Construction. Earthquake
Spectra. Vol. 9, Number 3, 505-528.
Wilson, E.L. and A. Habibullah. 1992. SAP90, Sample Example and Verification
Manual, Computers and Structures, Inc. Berkeley, California.
Wilson, E.L., A.D. Kiureghian and E.P. Bayo. 1981. A Replacement for the SRSS
Method in Seismic Analysis. Earthquake Engineering and Structural
Dynamics, Vol. 9.
Zayas, V. and S. Low. 1990. A Simple Pendulum Technique for Achieving Seismic
Isolation. Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 6, No. 2. Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute. Oakland, California.

REFERENCES