Steel Construction Manual 9th Edition Pdf

[Nella Mcnairy]

TheSteel Construction Manual, the premier reference for structural steel design and construction in the United States, has been in print since 1927. Since the early 2000s, the Manual has been updated and reissued as a new edition every five to six years to keep up with developments in structural steel codes and standards and to incorporate new materials.

This manual is the 15th Edition, 2ND PRINTING of the AISC Steel Construction Manual, which was first published in 1927. It replaces the 14th Edition Manual originally published in 2011. The following specifications, codes and standards are printed in Part 16 of this Manual: 2016 AISC Specifications for Structural Steel Buildings 2014 RCSC Specification for Structural Joints Using High-Strength Bolts 2016 AISC Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges The following major changes and improvements have been made to this revision: All tabular information and discussions are updates to comply with the 2016 Specification for Structural Buildings, and the standards and other documents referenced therein. Shape information is updated to ASTM A6/A6M-14 throughout this manual. Larger pipe, HSS and angle sizes have also been incorporated into the dimensions and properties tables in Part 1. The available compressive strength tables are expanded to include 65- and 70-ksi steel for a limited number of shapes. In Part 6, a new design aid is included that provides the width-to-thickness slenderness limits for various steel strengths. In Part 6, a new design aid is included that provides the available flexural strength, available shear strength, available compressive strength, and available tensile strength for W-shapes in one table. In Part 9, a new interaction equation is provided for connection design based on a plastic strength approach. in Part 9, a new approach to designing coped beams is presented based on recent studied In addition, many other improvements have been made throughout this manual.

The American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) is a not-for-profit technical institute and trade association for the use of structural steel in the construction industry of the United States.

In 1911 two civil engineering organizations, the Bridge Builders Society and the Structural Steel Society began cooperating to form broad codes of ethics and practices within the profession.[1] In 1917, during World War I, the two groups merged into the War Service Committee which helped procure fabricated structural steel and coordinate industry efforts.[1] However, by 1919 the Committee was disbanded but some steel fabricators insisted on creating a new association to promote the structural steel industry nationally, founding the National Steel Fabricators Association, which was renamed in 1922 to become the American Institute of Steel Construction, however, the Institute lists 1921 as their foundation year, as that was the year a uniform telegraphic code for the entire industry was created by the National Steel Fabricators Association which triggered the group's transformation from a group of steel manufacturers to the industry standard professional society.[1]

According to the AISC, the Steel Construction Manual is the "premier reference for structural steel design and construction in the United States" having been published since 1927. Editions are usually made every five to six years to keep up with developments in structural steel codes and standards and to incorporate new materials.[2][non-primary source needed]

The existing structure was assessed based on the original 1966 drawings prepared by Lev Zetlin and Associates (see Appendix A). The current roof structure consists of a 6 in. reinforced concrete slab supported by steel trusses that span 84 ft across the Great Hall. The trusses are made up of teeshaped chord members and double-angle web members. Secondary wide flange beams spaced at approximately 21 ft span between the trusses and create two-way action in the slab. Analyses conducted during Phase 1 of this Feasibility Study showed that the secondary components (roof slab and beams) do not have sufficient capacity to support the added load of the photovoltaic array. Consequently, support systems were conceptualized that would deliver the new loads directly to the trusses. Analyses conducted during Phase 2 therefore focused on the roof trusses.

Loads and stresses on the trusses were determined using the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 7-10 design loads and typical material weights. Taking into consideration the dead loads (truss members, roofing materials, concrete slab, catwalks, and ceilings) and snow loads, the total load on the roof structure is estimated to be 130 lbs per sq. ft (see table below). With a distance of 21 ft-4 in. between trusses, this equates to approximately 2,800 lbs per lineal foot applied to the truss.

Using structural analysis software and hand calculations, it was determined that the members of the existing roof trusses labeled T-3 in the original drawings do not meet the current structural steel code for compression capacity under these load conditions. At the time of original construction, the members met requirements called for by the applicable code, the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) 6th Edition Steel Construction Manual. The AISC Steel Construction Manual has since been updated to account for torsional and flexural-torsional buckling and strength limitations of slender elements within members.

The trusses were also analyzed for the addition of the PV cells and accompanying concrete knee walls. The weights of these materials and associated snow drifting loads would apply an additional 30 lbs per sq. ft (see table below), or approximately 665 lbs per lin. ft to the T-3 trusses at the locations of the new walls.

These loads would introduce an additional sixty thousand pounds (approximate) into each of the steel chord members, causing four additional chord members to be stressed beyond code-prescribed limitations

Not only are they aesthetically pleasing and favored by architects, but they are also efficient structural members. With their lack of a weak axis, they are superior in compression. Their closed shape makes them preferred when torsionally loaded. When designing connections to round HSS, there are fewer limit states to consider due to the geometric nature of the section. And they can also be filled with concrete to increase compression capacity and provide fire resistance.

Round sections should be specified as A500. Historically, the belief was that A53 was the most available round section and, therefore, the most cost-efficient. This is not the case. A53 is the standard specification for steel, black lacquer coated, welded, and seamless steel pipe. It is intended for use in mechanical and pressure applications as well as for use in ordinary steam, water, and air lines. ASTM A500 is the standard specification for cold-formed, welded, and seamless carbon steel structural tubing. Available in four grades, A through D, it is intended for use in construction and structural applications. Unlike A53 piping, which is only round, A500 is available in more shape options, most commonly round, square, and rectangular.

When selecting section sizes for structural design, you can be assured of not only the desired cross-sectional dimensions but also the necessary straightness with A500, as producers must also adhere to a straightness tolerance specified in A500. With A53, there is no specification in the standard for how straight the pipe must be.

The availability of these sections should be a concern when considering specifying them. ASTM A500 is limited to sizes with peripheries less than or equal to 88 in. Anything larger than a 28-in.-OD round section cannot be specified as A500. However, rounds even that large are not produced to the A500 specification domestically. Currently, the largest A500 sections made in the U.S. are 20-in.-OD. It is worth noting that, by the end of 2021, there will be a new domestic mill producing sections up to 28-in. OD. In addition to the periphery limits, A500 also has a limit on the wall thickness. The maximum thickness of an A500 member is 1 in.

If a project requires members that exceed what is currently produced in A500, there is piping produced for other industries that can be used in structural applications, with caution. Most commonly, products that meet specifications like ASTM A252: Standard Specification for Welded and Seamless Steel Pipe Piles, which is used for pipe pile foundations, or API 5L, for the oil and gas industries, can be procured in diameters up to 80 in.

ASTM A252 is a material specification for steel pipe piles for foundations, where the steel either acts as the permanent load-carrying member or as the form for cast-in-place concrete piles. STI does not recommend the substitution of ASTM A252 for ASTM A500 unless extreme care is taken. A few items of note follow:

When considering the total cost of a structure, the fabrication is a significant portion of the steel package cost. The handling of the material during fabrication is a contributor to the overall fabrication cost. It should be noted that round HSS can be more challenging to handle in the shop as they have a tendency to roll. Marking and adding pieces to quadrants at 90 to each other on a round piece is not quite as easy as it is on a rectangular section. Additionally, when connecting a round section to another round section, like in the truss shown in Figure 1, the cut necessary to connect the branch member to the chord is complex. This fabrication step has been simplified with the implementation of lasers into fabrication shops. However, without lasers, it can be quite complicated. While round sections are often the most efficient per weight, it may be more cost-effective to use a square or rectangular section to aid in the fabrication costs.

All of the materials mentioned in this article have different tolerances innate to their specifications (Table 3). As noted above, it is vital to ensure that assumptions made about the material in the development of the code meet or exceed what is provided in the actual member to be used. Additionally, there are other requirements, such as straightness, that may be worth investigating if an alternate material is sourced for a project.

3a8082e126