Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]


[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
> From: =?iso-8859-1?B?SnVhbiBKb3PpIFRyZWZmIERlIGxhIE1vcmE=?=
> <jjtreff(--nospam--at)>

> Can anyone tell me what is the "normal" or a common practice for the maximum
> web to thickness ratio for AISC (prismatic) and for MBMA (tapered)?
> Maybe MBMA doesn't have a standard for this but since some of you design for
> the metal building industry, maybe you can recommend a maximum ratio.

Metal building manufacturers in the US use the AISC, and therefore the
AISC element ratios, for tapered sections as well.

Per ASD 9 clause B5/Table B5.1: Webs in flexural compression

Compact d/t <= 640/sqrt(Fy) (about 90 at 50 ksi)
(reduction in combination with axial loads to d/t <= 257/sqrt(Fy))

Non-compact h/t <= 760/sqrt(Fb) (about 137 at 50 ksi)

"Plate girders" 970/sqrt(Fy) <= h/t <= 14000/sqrt(Fy(Fy+16.5))
                137 <= h/t <= 242 at 50 ksi

Typically, metal building manufacturers will provide h/t = 150+/-25 just
because the design will work out that way to avoid using transverse
stiffeners, but higher/lower ratios are common. Labour for fitting
stiffeners is expensive relative to steel cost in the US.

The MBMA manual does not identify h/t ratios since it is not a
specification for structural steel design. It directs the reader to the
AISC specs or similar.

Paul Ransom, P. Eng.
Burlington, Ontario, Canada
<mailto:ad026(--nospam--at)> <>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********