ASSIGNMENT 2

1. AISC Manual history (editions)

Established in 1921, the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) introduced its inaugural design standard,
the Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, in 1923. Despite its initial length of only 13 pages, this edition played a crucial
role in consolidating structural steel design practices in the United States. Over time, the document has undergone
substantial expansion, incorporating new research and industry practices. Its influence has extended beyond national
borders, serving as a prototype for comparable standards in numerous other countries.

In the 19th century, numerous small, family-owned companies were actively engaged in fabricating iron and steel.
However, a notable absence of universally accepted codes, standards, and practices prevailed, with each steel manual
containing proprietary information.

In 1911, two independent associations, the Bridge Builders Society, and the Structural Steel Society, independently
endeavored to establish comprehensive codes of ethics and practices.

By 1917, recognizing the need for a unified effort, these two organizations joined forces to create the War Service
Committee. This committee played a crucial role in procuring fabricated structural steel and coordinating industry
initiatives during wartime.

In November 1919, as the leaders of the two associations convened to disband the War Service Committee, some
steel fabricators insisted on establishing a new association dedicated to promoting the national interests of the structural
steel industry. This led to the formation of the National Steel Fabricators Association.

By 1922, recognizing the evolving scope and purpose of the association, the National Steel Fabricators Association
transformed into the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC).
 Steel Manual of Steel
Construction 1st Construction 5th
Edition Edition
(1927) (1962)

Manual of Steel Manual of

Construction 6th Steel
Edition Construction
(1978) 7th Edition
(1986)

Manual of Steel Manual of

Construction 8th Steel
Edition Construction
(1989) Allowable
Stress Design
9th Edition
(1994)

Manual of Steel Manual of Steel

Construction Construction
Load & Load & Resistance
Resistance Factor Design
Factor Design Volume 1
1st Edition (Structural
(2005) Members,
Specifications &
Codes)
 Volume 2 Steel Construction
(Connections) Manual 13th
2nd Edition Edition
(1994) (2005)

Steel Steel Construction

Construction Manual 15th Edition
Manual 14th (2017)
Edition
(2011)

Steel Construction Manual 16th Edition

(2022)
2. Parts of the AISC Steel Construction Manual

The AISC Steel Construction Manual serves as a detailed handbook for creating, assembling, and installing
structural steel buildings and similar structures. It's typically divided into various sections, each addressing
specific aspects of steel construction. As of my last knowledge update in January 2022, the manual generally
consists of the following components:
1. Sections and Characteristics: This segment furnishes tables and information on common structural steel
shapes, like wide-flange beams, channels, and angles. It encompasses details such as dimensions, weights,
cross-sectional areas, moment of inertia, and section modulus.
2. Design Criteria: This portion delineates the standards and criteria imperative to structural steel design,
encompassing safety factors, load combinations, permissible stresses, and additional design factors.
3. Specifications, Codes, and Standards: This segment furnishes details concerning pertinent industry
standards, building codes, and specifications governing the design, manufacturing, and erection of steel
structures. It might encompass references to codes like the AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
the AISC Seismic Provisions, among others.
4. Material Properties: This division presents the mechanical characteristics of structural steel, encompassing
parameters such as yield strength, tensile strength, modulus of elasticity, and other pertinent properties.
5. Design of Structural Members: This section delves into the design aspects of individual structural elements
like beams, columns, braces, and connections. It incorporates design equations, graphical representations,
and illustrative examples tailored for various loading conditions and structural configurations.
6. Connections: This segment is dedicated to the intricate design of connections between structural steel
members, covering bolted, welded, and composite connections. It offers detailed design procedures, tables,
and visual aids tailored for various connection types.
7. Composite Construction: When applicable, this section addresses composite construction methods, which
amalgamate structural steel with materials like concrete to form composite structural systems. It includes
guidelines and protocols for designing composite beams and columns.
8. Specifications for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts: This component furnishes
specifications and directives for employing high-strength bolts in structural steel connections, encompassing
requirements for bolt installation, tightening procedures, and inspection criteria.
9. Design Tables: This part may comprise tables and charts intended for swift reference during structural steel
design tasks, featuring data on section properties, bending capacities, shear capacities, and other pertinent
information.
10. Appendices: The manual might incorporate appendices housing supplementary information, design tools,
reference materials, and additional resources pertinent to steel construction.
11. Commentary: Has additional figures and context to better understand how to design.

Collectively, these segments furnish thorough guidance for professionals engaged in steel construction
endeavors.
3. Allowable Stress Design
The AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, which encompasses both Allowable Stress Design (ASD)
and Plastic Design approaches, has undergone several revisions since its initial publication on June 1, 1923. Each
subsequent edition has been informed by past effective applications, advancements in knowledge, and shifts in
design methodologies. The information contained within has been formulated to establish consistent practices
in the design of steel-framed structures. The primary aim of the Specification is to offer design standards for
common scenarios, rather than addressing rare issues that may arise across the entire spectrum of structural
design. In the realm of the American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), ASD represents Allowable Stress
Design, a conventional approach to structural steel design.
In ASD, engineers assess the maximum stress capacity of a structural element under different loads. This
stress is then compared to the allowable stress for the material, often a fraction of its yield strength. If the
calculated stress remains below the allowable limit, the design is deemed safe.
ASD entails analyzing the loads acting on a structure and designing its components to withstand those loads
while ensuring that stresses within the members remain within specified allowable thresholds. It's important to
note that ASD has been largely replaced by the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) method in
contemporary structural engineering practice.

4. Load and Resistance Factor Design

Load and Resistance Factor Design, commonly known as LRFD, is an alternative method for designing steel
structures and their components, diverging from the conventional approach based on allowable stress format.
The AISC LRFD Specification for Structural Steel Buildings represents a new era in design standards, drawing
upon reliability theory. Like previous AISC specifications, this LRFD Specification builds upon past experiences,
advancements in knowledge, and evolving design practices. Its purpose is to establish consistent guidelines for
designing steel-framed buildings, aiming to facilitate routine design tasks rather than addressing rare or
complex structural issues encountered in the full spectrum of design scenarios. Attempting to encompass all
intricate cases would render the LRFD Specification impractical for everyday design applications.
The Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) method operates on the principle of adjusting the strength
(resistance) of materials and applied loads by specific factors during the design process. This approach ensures
that structural elements are designed using reduced strength and increased loads, resulting in an economically
efficient and safe design consistently. The materials' strength considered for design encompasses the ultimate
strength, which involves the utilization of elastic, plastic, and strain hardening stages, contributing to the
design's economy and safety.
The reduction factors applied to strength depend on the confidence level in predicting the material's
strength. For instance, steel typically has a lower strength reduction factor compared to concrete, reflecting the
greater precision and assurance in predicting steel's strength compared to concrete. Similarly, load factors vary
based on the predictability of the applied loads. Loads that are more unpredictable are assigned higher load
factors, whereas those that can be more accurately predicted are assigned lower load factors. For example,
dead loads typically have lower load factors compared to live loads or wind loads, as dead loads tend to be
more consistent and stable.
Furthermore, the LRFD method incorporates considerations for serviceability limits such as maximum
allowable deflection and cracking, in addition to strength design, ensuring that the structural design meets both
strength and serviceability requirements.
5. Comparison of ASD and LRFD
The key distinction between LRFD and the allowable stress design method lies in their approach to
safety factors. In the allowable stress design method, a single factor of safety is utilized to provide a margin
of safety against failure. This factor of safety is typically applied uniformly to all load combinations and
resistance factors.
On the other hand, LRFD employs multiple factors to address different aspects of safety.
Specifically, LRFD utilizes one factor for resistance and separate factors for different types of load effects.
This means that LRFD considers variations in the factors based on the predictability and uncertainty
associated with different types of loads. By using separate factors for resistance and load effects, LRFD aims
to provide a more tailored and refined approach to ensuring structural safety and reliability.

Actual vs. Ultimate Strength

Historically, the primary distinction between Allowable Stress Design (ASD) and Load and Resistance
Factor Design (LRFD) methodologies has been their approach to assessing structural performance. ASD
focused on comparing actual stresses within a member to allowable stresses, while LRFD centered on
comparing required strength to actual strengths of the structure. While this difference in perspective may
seem significant, it typically only involves multiplying or dividing both sides of the limit state inequalities by
a section property, depending on the direction of the comparison.
In recent years, the terminology within the AISC specifications has evolved, with the introduction of
the new AISC Allowable Strength Design (ASD). This updated approach shifts away from stress-based
terminology to strength-based terminology, aligning more closely with the LRFD philosophy. Consequently,
this change has diminished the disparity between the two methodologies.
When assessing member strengths, the primary objective is to ensure that the actual loads
experienced by the structure remain below the yielding point to prevent permanent deformations. In the
LRFD approach, this is achieved by applying load factors greater than 1.0 to the applied loads. These load
factors account for the probabilities associated with the simultaneous occurrence of different types of loads
and are incorporated into the load combination equations, allowing for a safe comparison to ultimate
strength levels.

Fixed vs. Variable Factors of Safety

The second significant disparity between the two methodologies lies in how they handle the
relationship between applied loads and member capacities. LRFD addresses the predictability of applied
loads separately by employing load factors on the required strength side of the limit state inequalities, and
it addresses material and construction variabilities through resistance factors on the nominal strength side
of the limit state inequality. On the other hand, ASD consolidates these factors into a single factor of safety.
By disaggregating the factor of safety into independent load and resistance factors, as in the LRFD
approach, a more consistent and tailored factor of safety is achieved. This can lead to the creation of
structures that are either safer or lighter, depending on the predictability of the types of loads being
considered. This approach allows for a more nuanced consideration of the uncertainties inherent in both
the applied loads and the material properties, resulting in potentially more optimized designs.

Indeed, the LRFD method offers a more rational and refined approach compared to the ASD
method, primarily due to its ability to separately consider the variability in applied loads and material
properties. By incorporating load and resistance factors independently, LRFD provides a more nuanced and
adaptable framework for structural design. This allows for a better understanding and management of
uncertainties, resulting in designs that are both safer and more efficient.
As a result of these advantages, LRFD has gradually supplanted ASD in the design of both reinforced
concrete (RCC) and steel structures. Engineers and designers have recognized the benefits of LRFD in
providing a more reliable and optimized approach to structural design, leading to its widespread adoption
 in the industry. Additionally, LRFD aligns with modern engineering principles and international standards,
further contributing to its prominence in structural engineering practice.
REFERENCES

[1] Steel Construction Manual | American Institute of Steel Construction. (n.d.).

https://www.aisc.org/publications/steel-construction-manualresources/#:~:text=Since%20the%20early%202000s
%2C%20the,the%2016th%2C%20published%20in%202023.

[2] Specification for Structural Steel Buildings Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design. (1989). AMERICAN INSTITUTE
OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, INC. https://www.aisc.org/globalassets/aisc/manual/15th-ed-ref-list/specification-
forstructural-steel-buildings-allowable-stress-design-and-plastic-design.pdf

[3] American Institute of Steel Construction. (2022). AISC 360-22: Specification for Structural Steel Buildings. Chicago,
IL: American Institute of Steel Construction.

[4] Load and Resistance Factor Design. (n.d.). ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL
CONSTRUCTION. https://www.aisc.org/globalassets/aisc/awards/tr-higgins/past-winners/load-and-
resistancefactor-design.pdf

[5] Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings. (1984). AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF
STEEL CONSTRUCTION, INC. https://www.aisc.org/globalassets/aisc/manual/15th-ed-ref-list/load-and-
resistancefactor-design-specification-for-structural-steel-buildings.pdf

[6] CEng, H. S. P. B. (2022, July 22). What is the different between ASD allowable stress design and LRFD load and
resistance factor design? https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/what-different-between-asd-allowable-stress-
designhasan#:~:text=Load%20and%20Resistance%20Factor%20Design%20(LRFD)%20method%2C%20is
%20based,reduced %20strength%20and%20increased%20loads.

[7] ASD vs LRFD. (n.d.-b). https://www.bgstructuralengineering.com/BGDesign/BGDesign05.htm