Thirteenth International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures

St. Louis, Missouri U.S.A., October 17-18, 1996

THE 1996 AISI SPECIFICATION

Roger L. Brockenbrough*

Summary

The first edition of the AISI specification was adopted in 1946. Thus, the new
specification represents fifty years of progress in the formal structural application
of cold-formed steel. The continued efforts of the Committee on Specifications
and the sponsorship of the Americ\ln Iron and Steel Institute have made this fifty
years of progress in cold-formed steel a reality. The new specification combines
ASD and LRFD provisions in a single document. This affords the design engineer
the opportunity to become familiar with both methods and facilitates the use of
whichever method' is preferred. In addition, the new specification includes a
number of ne:w or revised provisions based on the results of continuing research.
Introduction

For over five years, there have been two AISI specifications for the design of coldformed steel members. The specification in load and resistance factor design
(LRFD) format (AISI, 1991) was introduced in 1991 as an alternative to the
specification in allowable stress design (ASD) format (AISI, 1989), which was last
revised in 1989. Many parts ofthe two specifications were similar with common
equations for nominal strength. The nominal strength was divided by a safety
factor for ASD design or multiplied by a resistance factor for LRFD design. After
careful consideration, it was decided to combine the two specifications into a
common document, the 1996 AISI Specification (AISI, 1996). This greatly
simplifies the process of maintaining and updating, and makes it convenient for the
design engineer to use whichever method is preferred. Also, the drafting of the
specification gave an opportunity to include various new developments and to
coordinate certain provisions with those of the AISC specifications .. The adoption
of the new specification by the AISI Committee on Specifications fOli the Design of
Cold-Formed Steel Structural Members will follow after the public review period
and final balloting. A comprehensive Commentary drafted by Prof Wei-Wen Yu
will accompany the specification and facilitate its application.

*Consulting Engineer, R. L. Brockenbrough & Associates, Inc., Pittsburgh, Pa.

27

28

Fifty Years of Progress

The introduction of a new specification affords the opportunity to reflect briefly on

the history of this document. The first edition of the AISI specification was
adopted in 1946 (AISI, 1946). It was based on a considerable amount of research,
most of which was conducted at Cornell University under the direction of
Professor George Winter beginning in 1939 (Errera, 1990). With continuing
research, additional information was developed that found its way into AISI
specifications in 1956, 1960, 1962, 1968, 1980, 1986, and 1991. In addition to
Cornell University, significant research activities that led to improved
specifications have been conducted at the University of Missouri-Rolla, Virginia
Tech, University of Florida-Gainesville, University of Waterloo, University of
Sydney and at other institutions. Most of this work in North America has been
sponsored by AISI, with co-funding on specific projects by the Metal Building
Manufacturers Association (MBMA), the Steel Deck Institute (SDI), and the Metal
Lath/Steel Framing Association (ML/SFA). The specifications are developed by
the AISI Committee on Specifications, a consensus group of about 40 people with
balanced representation from producers, manufacturers, users, researchers, and
others. It is the continued efforts of this group and the sponsorship of the
American Iron and Steel Institute that has made fifty years of progress in coldformed steel a reality.
Format of New Specification

The new specification can be used with either English or SI units. Most equations
are dimensionless, but equivalent SI values have been given in parenthesis where
specific English units are encountered.
Following the organization of recent editions, the specification is organized under
the following six major sections:
A. General Provisions
B. Elements
C. Members
D. Structural Assemblies
E. Connections and Joints
F. Tests for Special Cases

Section A deals with several important topics including materials, loads, and the
basis of design (ASD or LRFD). Special efforts have been made throughout the
specification to clearly indicate any provisions that apply only to ASD, such as
safety factors, or only to ASD, such as load factors and resistance factors.

29

Equations for effective width, Section B, are the same for ASD and LRFD. Also,
equations for nominal strength in Sections B through E are generally the same for
ASD and LRFD.
Section A5 gives the general equation that must be satisfied for ASD:

where
Ra = Required design strength
Rn = Nominal strength
n = Safety factor
The safety factors are given in Sections B through E ofthe specification. For ASD
design, the loads in the basic load combinations are nominal (unfactored) loads.
Section A6 gives the general equation that must be satisfied for LRFD:

where
Ru = Required strength
Rn = Nominal strength
cp = Resistance factor
The resistance factors are given in Sections B through E of the specification. For
LRFD design, the loads in the basic load combinations are factored loads.
Throughout most of the specification, the equation for nominal strength is given
and the appropriate n factor (ASD) and cp factor (LRFD) is given just below.
However, for clarity, the provisions for combined effects are provided in separate
sections for ASD and LRFD. This includes bending and shear (C3.3), bending
and web crippling (C3.5), and combined axial load and bending (C5).
New Provisions
The significant new provisions that are included in the new AISI specification are
summarized in Table 1 and reviewed below.
B4.2 - This section covers the effective width of uniformly compressed elements
with an edge stiffener. It is divided into three cases depending on the ratio of the

30

width between stiffeners to the thickness, wit, and the parameter S, where S =
1.28(E/t)0.5. The effective width of the element is determined from the equations
in Section B using the plate buckling coefficient k given in this section. For Case
II, S/3 < wit < S, the following new equation is given for k:

where
C2 =IsIIa(1
n=1/2
ku = 0.43
ka = 5.25-5(DI w)~ 4 for lip stiffener
ka = 4.0 for stiffener other than simple lip
Is = Moment of inertia of stiffener about its centroidal axis
Ia= Adequate moment of inertia of stiffener, so that each component
element will behave as a stiffened element (see specification)
D = Depth of stiffener to center of bend (see specification)
w = Width of flange (see specification)

The depth-to-thickness ratio, dlt, of simple lip stiffeners should be limited to 14

because deeper stiffeners may give unconservative results.

C3.1.2 - This section, which addresses the lateral buckling strength of flexural
members has been clarified and improved. Equations for calculating the critical
moment, Me' that previously applied only to 1- or Z-sections bent about the x axis,
now applies to singly-, doubly-, and point symmetric sections. The equations are:
For Me ?;2.78My
M

For Me

=~M
(l_lOM
9
36M

y )

~ O.56My

where
My = Moment causing initial yield in compression
Me = Elastic critical moment

Also, the following new equation for the bending coefficient Cb appears:

31

where
Mmax =absolute value of maximum moment in unbraced segment
Ml =absolute value of moment at quarter point of unbraced segment
M2 =absolute value of moment at centerline ofunbraced segment
M3 = absolute value of moment at three-quarter point of unbraced segment

Cb is used to modify the elastic critical moment equation for a uniform moment to
one that applies for moment gradients. The equation is derived from Kirby and
Nethercott (1979) and agrees with that used in the AISC LRFD specification
(ArSC, 1993). Compared to the previous equation, it gives more accurate results
when the moment diagram is non-linear.

C3.4 - This section, which treats the web crippling strength of flexural members,
has been modified to include a special provision for calculating the end reaction of
a Z-section bolted to the end support. Based on recent tests (Bhakta et ai, 1992;
Cain et ai, 1995), the web crippling capacity is increased by 30 percent if certain
additional critena are met. Specifically, a depth-to-thickness ratio of hit :0;; 150, a
radius-to-thickness ratio Rit :0;; 4, a section thickness t ?! 0.06 in. (1.5 mm), and a
support member thickness ?! 3/16 in. (4.8 rom).

eJ.5 - This section addresses the strength of flexural members under combined
bending and web crippling. Based on recent research (LaBoube et ai, 1994), the
following interaction equations have been added for nested Z-sections over a
support:
M
P
-+-:5l.00 (ASD)
Mno P"
M
P
- + - : 5 1.68~ (LRFD)
Mno Pn

The equation applies for a bearing length-to-thickness ratio Nit :0;; 140, hit :0;; 150,
Rit:o;; 5.5, and Fy :0;; 70 ksi (483 MPa). Also certain connection requirements must
be satisfied and the ratio of the thicker to thinner section must not exceed 1.3.

C4 - In the section on concentrically loaded compression members, the column

equations have been revised to agree with those in the AISC LRFD specification
(AISC, 1993). The new equations are included as follows:
The nominal axial strength, p", is calculated as

32

Pn == AeF"

==,1.80(ASD)
Ie == 0.85 (LRFD)

Qe

where Ae is the effective area at the stress Fn, which is determined from

0.877JFy for AC>I.5

F" == [ T

[F;
e'vF:

where A ==

F;, = Yield point

F. = Least of elastic flexural, torsional, and torsional-flexural buckling
stresses.
The new column equations specifically include the effect of out-of-straightness. In
contrast to the previous equations, the format enables the use of a single, constant
safety factor. In a study that reviewed the results of 299 tests, Pekoz and Sumer
(1992) showed that the new equations were more accurate than the previous ones.
The revisions to Section C4 also eliminated an additional equation for C- and Zsections and single-angle sections with unstiffened flanges, which determined the
strength based on the local buckling stress of the unstiffened element and the full
cross-section area. Studies by Rasmussen (1994) and by Rasmussen and Hancock
(1992) showed that the additional equation was unnecessary and gave excessively
conservative results.
C5 - In the section on combined axial load and bending, equations were added to
check combined axial tension load and bending.
D3.2.2 - This section provides for lateral bracing, of channel- and Z-section beams,
with neither flange connected to sheathing. Under the previous provisions,
bracing was required at quarter-points and at center of a loaded length if
concentrated over a specified length. However, research by EIlifritt et aI (1992)
showed that the specification equations predict loads that are conservative for the
case when one intermediate brace is used, but may be unconservative where more
than one lateral brace is used. This is because the restraining nature of the braces

33

may change the failure mode from lateral-torsional buckling to distortional

buckling at the brace point. Although not a requirement, it is suggested that,
minimally, a mid-span brace be used for channel- and Z-sections, because it may
reduce horizontal deflection and rotation at service load by as much as 80 percent.
D4 - The section on wall studs and wall stud assemblies was expanded to include
provisions for calculating the effective area of studs with non-circular web
perforations. The provisions permit the effective area to be calculated in
accordance with Section B, assuming the web to consist 'of two unstiffened
elements, one on each side of the perforation. The method was verified in tests by
Miller and Pekoz (1994). Based on those tests, certain limitations apply regarding
perforation size and spacing, and web depth-to-thickness ratio. Alternatively, the
effective area can still be determined by stub-column tests.

The table for determining the shear rigidity of sheathing was also revised. The
values are now independent of the stud spacing.
D5 - This section on steel diaphragm construction (floor, roof or wall) was not
included in the previous LRFD specification, and is revised from that in the ASD
specification. It provides a table of safety factors for ASD and resistance factors
for LRFD to be applied to the in-plane nominal shear strength established by
calculation or test. Safety factors range from 2.0 to 3.0 and corresponding cp
factors range from 0.65 to 0.50. Safety factors are about 20 percent higher for
welded connections than for mechanical connections, because their strength is
lJlore difficult to predict. Also, safety factors for diaphragms subjected to
earthquake loads are about 25 percent higher than for those subjected to wind
loads because the ductility demand is higher.

E2.2.2 - New expressions for the strength of arc spot welds in tension are
presented in this section., based on research by LaBoube and Yu (1993). The
nominal tensile strength Pn is taken as the smaller of that limited by weld tensile
failure and that limited by sheet tearing around the weld perimeter.
The expression based on weld failure is

where
de = Effective diameter of fused area

Fxx = Strength level designation in AWS electrode classification

Two expressions are given based on sheet tearing:

34

For F.! E(0.00187 p" =[6.59-3150(F. ! E)]tdaFu:S; 1.46tdaF.

For F.! E::?: 0.00187 p" = 0.70tdaF.
where
F.= Tensile strength of sheet
E = Modulus of elasticity
t = Total thickness of steel sheets
da = Average diameter of arc spot weld

For eccentrically loaded arc spot welds, the nominal strength is reduced by 50
percent. At side lap connections in a deck, the strength is reduced by 30 percent.
E4 - This new section addresses the strength of screw connections in both shear
and tension. It is based on a review by Pekoz (1990) of over 3500 tests worldwide.
Because of the wide scope of application, the safety factor (0 = 3.0, ASD; ~ = 0.5
LRFD) is somewhat higher than typically used elsewhere in the specification.
The nominal shear strength Pns is based on tilting and bearing failure modes. The
minimum shear strength of the screw is specified as 1.25P", to preclude screw
failure. The nominal shear strength is as follows:
For t2! tl :s; 1.0, Pns is the smallest of

For t2! tl ::?: 2'.5, Pns is the smaller of

where
t 1 = thickness of sheet in contact with screw head
t2 = Thickness of screw head not in contact with screw head
Ful = Tensile strength of sheet in contact with screw head
F.2= Tensile strength of sheet not in contact with screw head
d = nominal screw diameter

35

For 1.0(t21 t1 (2.5, the value of Pm is determined by linear interpolation.

The nominal tension strength includes a check on pull-out strength (POOl' screw
pulls out of sheet) and pull-over strength (Pnov' sheet pulls over head of screw or
over washer if present). The tensile strength of the screw is specified as 1.25 times
the lesser of these to preclude screw failure. The nominal tensile strength is the
lesser of the following:

where Ie

= lesser of depth of penetration and thickness 12 ,

where d"
13 mm).

= larger of screw head diameter and washer diameter (max. = 112 in. or
Conclusions

The first edition of the AISI specification was adopted in 1946. Thus, the new
combined specification represents fifty years of progress in the formal structural
application of cold-formed steel. The continued efforts of the Committee on
Specifications and the sponsorship of the American Iron and Steel Institute have
made this fifty years of progress in cold-formed steel a reality.
Due to the foresight of those that developed the original documents, it was feasible
to combine ASD and LRFD provisions in a single specification. This greatly
simplifies the process of maintaining and updating the specification. Also, it
affords the design engineer the opportunity to become familiar with both methods
and facilitates the use of whichever method is preferred.
The new specification' includes various new or revised prOVISIons based on
continuing research. These provisions affect a number of items including the
design of edge stiffeners, lateral buckling strength, web crippling strength, column
strength, wall stud compression strength, diaphragm strength, arc spot weld
tension strength, and the strength of screw connections. The new column
equations and the new equation for Cb, the moment gradient factor for the elastic
critical moment, were adopted to agree with those of the AISC LRFD specification
and to help unify design methods.

36

'References
American Institute of Steel Construction (1993), "Load and Resistance Factor
Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings," Chicago, lL, December 1993.
American Iron and Steel Institute (1989), "Specification for the Design of Cold~
Formed Steel Structural Members," Washington, DC, August 19, 1986 with
Addendum, December 11, 1989.
American Iron and Steel Institute (1991), "Load and Resistance Factor Design
Specification for Cold~Formed Steel Structural Members," Washington, DC,
March 16, 1991.
American Iron and Steel Institute (1996), "Specification for the Design of Cold~
Formed Steel Structural Members," Washington, DC, publication pending.
American Iron and Steel Institute (1946), "Specification for the Design of Light
Gage Steel Structural Members," New York, NY, 1946.
Bhakta, B. H., R. A. LaBoube, and W. W. Yu (1992), "The Effect of Flange
Restraint on Web Crippling Strength," Dept. of Civil Engineering, Center for Cold~
Formed Steel Structures, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, MO, 1992.
Cain, D. E., R. A. LaBoube, and W. W. Yu (1995), "The Effect of Flange Restraint
on Web Crippling Strength of Cold-Formed Steel Z and I Sections," Dept. of Civil
Engineering, Center for Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University of MissouriRolla, Rolla, MO, 1995.
Ellifritt, D. S, T. Sputo, and 1. Haynes (1992), "Flexural Capacity of Discreetly
Braced C's and Z'S," Proceedings of the Eleventh International Specialty
Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University ofMissouri~RoIla, Rolla,
MO, October 1992.
Errera, S. 1., "The 1989 Addendum to the AlSI Specification," Proceedings of the

Tenth International Specialty Coriference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures,

University ofMissouri~Rolla, Rolla, MO, October 1990.
Kirby, P. A. and D. A. Nethercot (1979), Design for Structural Stability, John
Wiley and Sons,Inc., New York, NY, 1979.

37

LaBoube, R. A., J. N. Nunnery, and R. E. Hodges (1994), "Web Crippling

Behavior of Nested Z-PurIins," Engineering Structures, Vol. 16, No.5,
Butterworth-Heinemann Ltd., London, July 1994..
LaBoube, R. A. and W. W. Yu (1993), "Behavior of Arc Spot Weld in Tension,"
Journal ofStructural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 119, No.7, July 1993 ..
Miller, T. H. and T. B. Pekoz, "Unstiffened Strip Approach for Perforated Wall
Studs," Journal ofStructural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 120, No.2, February 1994.
Pekoz, T. B. (1990), "Design of Cold-Formed Steel Screw Connections,"
Proceedings of the Tenth International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed
Steel Structures, university of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, MO, October 1990.
Pekoz, T. B. and 0. Sumer (1992), "Design Provisions for Cold-Formed Steel
Columns and Beam-Columns," Final Report, American Iron and Steel Institute,
Washington, DC, 1992.
Rasmussen, K. J. R. and G. J. Hancock (1992), "Nonlinear Analysis of ThinWalled Channel Section Columns," Thin Walled Structures, Vol. 13, Nos 1-2,
Elsevier Applied Science, Tarrytown, NY, 1992,
Rasmussen, K. J. R. (1994), "Design of Thin-Walled Columns with Unstiffened
Flanges," Engineering Structures, Vol. 16, No.5, 1994.

38

Table 1
Significant New Provisions Included in the AISI Specification
B4.2- Effective Widths, UnifonnIy Compressed Elements with an Edge Stiffener
New equation for determining k for the effective width detennination.
C3.1.2 Flexural Members, Lateral Buckling Strength
Equation for calculating the critical moment that previously applied only to
1- or Z-sections bent about the x axis, now applies to singly-, doubIy-, and
point symmetric sections.
New equation for the bending coefficient Cb'
C3.4 Flexural Members, Web Crippling Strength
Web crippling capacity increased by 30 percent for the end reaction of a Zsection bolted to the end support and meeting other criteria.
C3.5 Flexural Members, Strength for Combined Bending and Web Crippling
Specific provisions have been added for nested Z-sections over a support.

C4 Concentrically Loaded Compression Members

New column equations. Applies also to cylindrical tubular members (C6.2).
Eliminated additional equation for C- and Z-sections and single-angle
sections with unstiffened flanges.
C5 Combined Axial Load and Bending
New provisions for combined axial tension load and bending.
(Cont'd.)

39

Table 1 (Cont'd.)
Significant New Provisions Included in the AlSI Specification

D3.2.2 Lateral Bracing, Channel- and Z-Section Beams, Neither Flange Connected
to Sheathing
Eliminated provision for bracing at quarter-points and at center of loaded
length.
D4 Wall Studs and Wall Stud Assemblies
New provisions for calculating the effective area of studs with non-circular
web perforations.
Revised table for determining shear rigidity of sheathing.
D5 Floor, Roof or Wall Steel Diaphragm Construction
New table of safety factors (ASD) and resistance factors (LRFD) for
diaphragms.
E2.2.2 Arc Spot Welds, Tension
New provisions for arc spot welds in tension.
E4 Screw Connections
New section on screw connections, including shear and tension.