AISC Design Guide 1 - 2nd Edition 1

[WillisV]

A heads up that AISC has just released the second edition of Design Guide 1: Column Base Plates. This guide has been completely re-written in the same format as the new 13th edition manual (combined LRFD/ASD) and is also revamped to include ACI Appendix D type anchor calculations and the latest research etc.

Free for members...

http://www.aisc.org

 

[JAE]

Thanks, WillisV!

 

[miecz]

I'm trying to follow Ex 4.7 in this design guide. Under Item 3 on sheet 39, f seems to have changed from 8.5 in. to 9.5 in. Did I miss something here?

 

[mrMikee]

WillisV and jmiec,

Now that there is a design guide written in the combined format, I am curious which of the two, LRFD or ASD, that you prefer to work with. I have avoided LRFD for a long time and am patently waitng for the release of the first text based on the combined spec, hoping that I might like the new ASD better. I understand that there is not much difference between the presentation of the two however.

I noticed recently that Amazon.com is taking prerelease orders for the new 5th Edition of the Salmon and Johnson text (now with Faris Malhas.) In the past this has been my favorite text.

Regards,
-Mike

 

[WillisV]

jmiec...in the example you are referring to the initial trial baseplate dimensions used are 19"x19" with a calculated f of 8.0 - this was found to be unsatisfactory hence the increase to a 20x20 baseplate which provides a f of 8.5.

 

[WillisV]

mrMikee,

Recently I have worked with mainly with LRFD due to the fact that all of the current research and updates to the manual have been aimed at that method of design, and I wanted to stay current with the latest train of thought and design developments.

The presentation of ASD and LRFD in the new manual is essentially identical. There are no overriding advantages of doing it either way in my mind. Both have load combinations - just ASD at service level and LRFD at ultimate. Both have safety factors - just ASD has them explicitly with an "omega" factor in the denominator of design capacity and LRFD has them implicitly in the load side with load factors and the capacity side with phi factors. It boils down to the exact same formulation.

 

[miecz]

MrMikee,

I've resisted LRFD (and SI) for years. But half of the work I do these days is DOT related. Our DOT requires new work to be LRFD. So, like it or not, I'm stuck learning it. Very time consuming. I'll be lucky to make the transition without getting fired.

WillisV,

Okey, I see where f changes from 8.0 to 8.5 inches. But it seems to again change to 9.5 inches...for instance, under item 4 on sheet 39.

Jim

 

[WillisV]

Jmiec - ok I see where you are coming from. Looks like an error (they seem to have jumped to a 22x22 baseplate mid-calc).

 

[miecz]

WillisV,

But they still show N and B as 20 inches under item 5.

 

[WillisV]

I agree..thats why I said it looks like an error =)

 

[mrMikee]

Thanks WillisV and jmiec for your views on the new spec. I will probably use the ASD version so that I can continue to use some of my existing programs and spreadsheets, at least during the transition period.

Regards,
-Mike