ou may

mark the
major and
minor axis
based on
moment of
inertia,
Greater MI
shall be
major axis
and the
other one
minor,
have you
used the
beta angle
to
rotate the
section,
Can you
upload the
screen
shot with
orientation
, both axes,
3D
rendered
model for
easy
understan
ding . I am
also trying
to find the
best
method to
fix this
major and
minor axis
problem i
am stuck
up

1|Page
Best
regards

Back to top

sknsrinivas Posted: Wed Jan 13, 2016 9:34 am Post subject:

an
...
Dear syed

I don not know how to do that things please refer subramanian sir post what he
Joined: 15 mentioned in red colour like that STAAD will show the orientation if you rotate beta angle
Apr 2013 90 or 0 degree
Posts: 280
Regards
N.Srinivasan

syed_A wrote:

You may mark the major and minor axis based on moment of inertia, Greater MI
shall be major axis and the other one minor, have you used the beta angle to
rotate the section, Can you upload the screen shot with orientation , both axes,
3D rendered model for easy understanding . I am also trying to find the best
method to fix this major and minor axis problem i am stuck up

Best regards

Back to top

Dr. N. Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 4:29 am Post subject:

Subramani
an
General Dear Er Srinivasan,
Sponsor
In General, the depth of the column should be placed in the longer length direction and

2|Page
 the shorter depth in the shorter length direction. Now the higher depth of beam will be
there in the longer direction. Thus, for the length in major axis, we should take L = Height
of column- depth of bigger beam and for the the length in minor axis, we should take L =
Height of column- depth of smaller beam.

In Fig. 13.40 of my book, the local x -x and y-y axes are to be reversed, and this might have
been the cause for your confusion.

Hope it is clear now.

Regards,
Joined: 21 Subramanian
Feb 2008
Posts: 5244
Location:
Gaithersbur sknsrinivasan wrote:
g, MD,
U.S.A. Dear Dr N.S Sir

Thank you very much for your Reply

First No attachment in your Two Reply So I got confusion

I referred Pilli and menon Book He deducted perpendicular axis beam depth
page no 576 example 13.1, I request you plz refer that book if you have time
sir But in your book you deducted the beam depth along the axis That is the
confusion sir Please clarify If I calculate the unsupported length as per pilli and
menon and you The moment due to eccentricity in both axis Mx = Pxey My=Pxex
or Mx=Pxex, My=Pxey please clarify my doubt

Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

3|Page
Dear Er Srinivasan,

I think I did not write it correctly for you to understand. That is why I
enclosed a figure also to show which is Major axis and which is minor
axis in a rectangular column.

Regarding STAAD pro column orientation" Z is Major axis that is in red

colour Y is minor axis that is in Green colour The red arrow mark
always parallel to depth of column Green Arrow mark is parallel to
width of column"; it is the correct axis representation. I also showed
the same thing.

1)If Major and Minor Axis are same, Will be the same unsupported
length in both direction? No. Major and minor axis are different as
explained above. The unsupported length in both these axes depend
on the bracings provided and also as written by you in an earlier
posting on the depth of beam along the direction of the axis.

2) Yes. Both of us are correct. Clause 39.3 states that 'when the min.
ecc. as per Clause 25.4 is less than 0.05 times lateral dimension of
member we may be designed the column member only for axial force
only. But very rarely such a condition will occur. For example, the usual
height will be 2500-3000 mm and the minimum column size is 300 x
300 in seismic zones(though many wrongly use 230 x 230).
Min. ecc. = 2500/500+300/30 or 20 mm = 20 mm
0.05 x 300 = 15 mm
Thus only if you use a bigger column, there is a possibility of min. ecc.
be not considered.

Also note that the min. ecc. needs to be considered only in one axis at
a time for the case of biaxially loaded column.

Best wishes
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear Dr N.S Sir

4|Page
Thank you very much for your reply to my second post

1)If Major and Minor Axis are same, Will be the same
unsupported length in both direction?
2) If the minimum Eccentricity is less than 0.05 times lateral
dimension of member How can we design the column for
that moment? I think the code IS456 cla.39.4 mentioned If the
minimum Eccentricity is less than 0.05 times lateral dimension
of member we may be designed the column member only for
axial force only Need not consider moment

After my first post I have checked in STAAD pro the column

orientation Z is Major axis that is in red colour Y is minor axis
that is in Green colour The red arrow mark always parallel to
depth of column Green Arrow mark is parallel to width of
column I request you please clarify above Two points

Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

Major and minor axis are the same for all. In the
figure enclosed 1-1 is major axis and 2-2 is minor axis.

As per code (IS 456 Clause 25.4)all columns have to be

designed for minimum eccentricity!

Best wishes,
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear syed

5|Page
How you are telling unsupported length will be
same in the both fig which I have attached The
transfer beam depth is 600mm and
longitudinal beam depth is 450mm
Can you explain here. Unsupported length is
with respect to buckling about perpendicular
axis

In pillai & Menon you check page no 576

example 13.1. In that example Major axis (ie
parallel to depth)vertical direction and minor
axis (ie parallel to width) horizontal direction
considered. The same example in Dr
subramanian sir book he considered major axis
horizontal and minor axis vertical you can see
the difference in unsupported length

When you will design the column only Axial

force, If you have Axial force and both axis
moment. I think (M/P<emin<0.05 lateral
dimension of column) at this time only we can
design the column only Axial force P=0.4fck
Ac+0.67fyAsc I am Expecting Reply all

Regards
N.Srinivasan

syed_A wrote:

In both the figure the unsupported

length will be the same in X and Y axis
but adopt the greater
unsupported length to calculate the
eccentricity so also for slenderness

6|Page
 calculation, Please correct if it is wrong

Back to top

sknsrinivas Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 5:47 am Post subject:

an
...
Dear Dr.N.S Sir

Thank you, Happy Pongal to you and All sefi members

Joined: 15
Apr 2013 Exactly correct in the book X-X axis should be instead of Y-Y axis and Y-Y axis should be
Posts: 280 instead of X-X axis that is the cause of confusion am I correct ?

In STAAD, Is Y axis moment major axis moment or minor axis moment in both cases?

Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

In General, the depth of the column should be placed in the longer length
direction and the shorter depth in the shorter length direction. Now the higher
depth of beam will be there in the longer direction. Thus, for the length in major
axis, we should take L = Height of column- depth of bigger beam and for the the
length in minor axis, we should take L = Height of column- depth of smaller
beam.

In Fig. 13.40 of my book, the local x -x and y-y axes are to be reversed, and this
might have been the cause for your confusion.

Hope it is clear now.

7|Page
Regards,
Subramanian

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear Dr N.S Sir

Thank you very much for your Reply

First No attachment in your Two Reply So I got confusion

I referred Pilli and menon Book He deducted perpendicular axis beam

depth page no 576 example 13.1, I request you plz refer that book if
you have time sir But in your book you deducted the beam depth
along the axis That is the confusion sir Please clarify If I calculate the
unsupported length as per pilli and menon and you The moment due
to eccentricity in both axis Mx = Pxey My=Pxex or Mx=Pxex, My=Pxey
please clarify my doubt

Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

I think I did not write it correctly for you to understand. That

is why I enclosed a figure also to show which is Major axis and
which is minor axis in a rectangular column.

Regarding STAAD pro column orientation" Z is Major axis that

is in red colour Y is minor axis that is in Green colour The red

8|Page
arrow mark always parallel to depth of column Green Arrow
mark is parallel to width of column"; it is the correct axis
representation. I also showed the same thing.

1)If Major and Minor Axis are same, Will be the same
unsupported length in both direction? No. Major and minor
axis are different as explained above. The unsupported length
in both these axes depend on the bracings provided and also
as written by you in an earlier posting on the depth of beam
along the direction of the axis.

2) Yes. Both of us are correct. Clause 39.3 states that 'when

the min. ecc. as per Clause 25.4 is less than 0.05 times lateral
dimension of member we may be designed the column
member only for axial force only. But very rarely such a
condition will occur. For example, the usual height will be
2500-3000 mm and the minimum column size is 300 x 300 in
seismic zones(though many wrongly use 230 x 230).
Min. ecc. = 2500/500+300/30 or 20 mm = 20 mm
0.05 x 300 = 15 mm
Thus only if you use a bigger column, there is a possibility of
min. ecc. be not considered.

Also note that the min. ecc. needs to be considered only in

one axis at a time for the case of biaxially loaded column.

Best wishes
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear Dr N.S Sir

Thank you very much for your reply to my second

post

1)If Major and Minor Axis are same, Will be the same
unsupported length in both direction?

9|Page
2) If the minimum Eccentricity is less than 0.05
times lateral dimension of member How can we
design the column for that moment? I think the code
IS456 cla.39.4 mentioned If the minimum Eccentricity
is less than 0.05 times lateral dimension of member
we may be designed the column member only for
axial force only Need not consider moment

After my first post I have checked in STAAD pro the

column orientation Z is Major axis that is in red colour
Y is minor axis that is in Green colour The red arrow
mark always parallel to depth of column Green Arrow
mark is parallel to width of column I request you
please clarify above Two points

Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

Major and minor axis are the same for all. In

the figure enclosed 1-1 is major axis and 2-2 is
minor axis.

As per code (IS 456 Clause 25.4)all columns

have to be designed for minimum eccentricity!

Best wishes,
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear syed

10 | P a g e
How you are telling unsupported length
will be same in the both fig which I have
attached The transfer beam depth is
600mm and longitudinal beam depth is
450mm
Can you explain here. Unsupported
length is with respect to buckling about
perpendicular axis

In pillai & Menon you check page no 576

example 13.1. In that example Major
axis (ie parallel to depth)vertical
direction and minor axis (ie parallel to
width) horizontal direction considered.
The same example in Dr subramanian sir
book he considered major axis
horizontal and minor axis vertical you
can see the difference in unsupported
length

When you will design the column only

Axial force, If you have Axial force and
both axis moment. I think
(M/P<emin<0.05 lateral dimension of
column) at this time only we can design
the column only Axial force P=0.4fck
Ac+0.67fyAsc I am Expecting Reply all

Regards
N.Srinivasan

syed_A wrote:

In both the figure the unsupported

11 | P a g e
 length will be the same in X and Y
axis
but adopt the greater
unsupported length to calculate
the eccentricity so also for
slenderness calculation, Please
correct if it is wrong

Back to top

Dr. N. Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 5:53 am Post subject:

Subramani
an
General Dear Er Srinivasan
Sponsor

I do not have any software. Please ask someone who is using STAAD.

Regards
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear Dr.N.S Sir

Thank you, Happy Pongal to you and All sefi members

Joined: 21
Feb 2008
Exactly correct in the book X-X axis should be instead of Y-Y axis and Y-Y axis
Posts: 5244
should be instead of X-X axis that is the cause of confusion am I correct ?
Location:
Gaithersbur
In STAAD, Is Y axis moment major axis moment or minor axis moment in both
g, MD,
cases?
U.S.A.

Regards
N.Srinivasan

12 | P a g e
Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

In General, the depth of the column should be placed in the longer

length direction and the shorter depth in the shorter length direction.
Now the higher depth of beam will be there in the longer direction.
Thus, for the length in major axis, we should take L = Height of column-
depth of bigger beam and for the the length in minor axis, we should
take L = Height of column- depth of smaller beam.

In Fig. 13.40 of my book, the local x -x and y-y axes are to be reversed,
and this might have been the cause for your confusion.

Hope it is clear now.

Regards,
Subramanian

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear Dr N.S Sir

Thank you very much for your Reply

First No attachment in your Two Reply So I got confusion

I referred Pilli and menon Book He deducted perpendicular

axis beam depth page no 576 example 13.1, I request you plz
refer that book if you have time sir But in your book you
deducted the beam depth along the axis That is the confusion
sir Please clarify If I calculate the unsupported length as per
pilli and menon and you The moment due to eccentricity in
both axis Mx = Pxey My=Pxex or Mx=Pxex, My=Pxey please
clarify my doubt

13 | P a g e
Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

I think I did not write it correctly for you to

understand. That is why I enclosed a figure also to
show which is Major axis and which is minor axis in a
rectangular column.

Regarding STAAD pro column orientation" Z is Major

axis that is in red colour Y is minor axis that is in Green
colour The red arrow mark always parallel to depth of
column Green Arrow mark is parallel to width of
column"; it is the correct axis representation. I also
showed the same thing.

1)If Major and Minor Axis are same, Will be the same
unsupported length in both direction? No. Major and
minor axis are different as explained above. The
unsupported length in both these axes depend on the
bracings provided and also as written by you in an
earlier posting on the depth of beam along the
direction of the axis.

2) Yes. Both of us are correct. Clause 39.3 states that

'when the min. ecc. as per Clause 25.4 is less than
0.05 times lateral dimension of member we may be
designed the column member only for axial force
only. But very rarely such a condition will occur. For
example, the usual height will be 2500-3000 mm and

14 | P a g e
the minimum column size is 300 x 300 in seismic
zones(though many wrongly use 230 x 230).
Min. ecc. = 2500/500+300/30 or 20 mm = 20 mm
0.05 x 300 = 15 mm
Thus only if you use a bigger column, there is a
possibility of min. ecc. be not considered.

Also note that the min. ecc. needs to be considered

only in one axis at a time for the case of biaxially
loaded column.

Best wishes
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear Dr N.S Sir

Thank you very much for your reply to my

second post

1)If Major and Minor Axis are same, Will be the

same unsupported length in both direction?
2) If the minimum Eccentricity is less than 0.05
times lateral dimension of member How can
we design the column for that moment? I think
the code IS456 cla.39.4 mentioned If the
minimum Eccentricity is less than 0.05 times
lateral dimension of member we may be
designed the column member only for axial
force only Need not consider moment

After my first post I have checked in STAAD pro

the column orientation Z is Major axis that is in
red colour Y is minor axis that is in Green
colour The red arrow mark always parallel to
depth of column Green Arrow mark is parallel
to width of column I request you please clarify

15 | P a g e
above Two points

Regards
N.Srinivasan

Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:

Dear Er Srinivasan,

Major and minor axis are the same for

all. In the figure enclosed 1-1 is major
axis and 2-2 is minor axis.

As per code (IS 456 Clause 25.4)all

columns have to be designed for
minimum eccentricity!

Best wishes,
NS

sknsrinivasan wrote:

Dear syed

How you are telling unsupported

length will be same in the both fig
which I have attached The transfer
beam depth is 600mm and
longitudinal beam depth is
450mm
Can you explain here.
Unsupported length is with respect
to buckling about perpendicular
axis

16 | P a g e
In pillai & Menon you check page
no 576 example 13.1. In that
example Major axis (ie parallel to
depth)vertical direction and minor
axis (ie parallel to width)
horizontal direction considered.
The same example in Dr
subramanian sir book he
considered major axis horizontal
and minor axis vertical you can see
the difference in unsupported
length

When you will design the column

only Axial force, If you have Axial
force and both axis moment. I
think (M/P<emin<0.05 lateral
dimension of column) at this time
only we can design the column
only Axial force P=0.4fck
Ac+0.67fyAsc I am Expecting Reply
all

Regards
N.Srinivasan

syed_A wrote:

In both the figure the

unsupported length will be
the same in X and Y axis
but adopt the greater
unsupported length to
calculate the eccentricity so

17 | P a g e
 also for slenderness
calculation, Please correct if it
is wrong

Back to top

sknsrinivas Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 6:08 am Post subject:

an
...
Dear All

Can any one tell the answer to my post I am expecting reply

Joined: 15
Apr 2013 Regards
Posts: 280 N.Srinivasan

Back to top

sakumar79 Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 7:08 am Post subject:

...

Dear Sirs,
Following is my understanding of STAAD modelling with respect to major and minor
Joined: 18 axis:
Apr 2008
Posts: 654 1. By default, YD refers to depth and ZD refers to width in rectangular section definition
which is common for beams and columns.

2. Under that condition, we would input larger lateral dimension of the column as YD and
the smaller dimension as ZD so that major and minor axis as considered by us and model
would be matching. This is modelled in STAAD with YD dimension along X axis and ZD
dimension along Z axis.

3. If we want column with larger dimension along Z axis, we need to either give Beta angle
of 90 degrees to such members, or we need to specify larger value for ZD and smaller value

18 | P a g e
 for YD. It is in this situation that confusion on major and minor axis would take place.

4. Parameters like ELY and ULY correspond to local Y axis. Hence, if modelled by either
options of point 3, first we need to look at which is the Y axis as modelled and suitably
assign the parameters.

Hope that helps.

Arunkumar

Back to top

sknsrinivas Posted: Thu Jan 14, 2016 7:38 am Post subject:

an
...
Dear Arun Kumar

Your first point is ok

Joined: 15
Apr 2013 Your second and third points not clear This is modelled in STAAD with YD dimension along
Posts: 280 X axis and ZD dimension along Z axis. I want to know how X axis will come, then Yd
Dimension along X axis Means parallel YD is not it?

I checked in STTAD Z axis in Red colour, Y axis in Green colour The Z colour Arrow mark
along YD that is parallel to depth and Green colour Arrow mark along ZD that means
parallel to width in this one How I will find out which one axis Major and minor? If you go
to beam and graph the moment diagrame will appear in the right side I am telling in that
basis If rotate beta angle 90 the same thing happend

I asked some people They said which axis perpendicular to depth ( parallel to width) that is
major axis If I look at fig. Green colour perpendicular to depth So I am telling Major axis is Y
axis in STAAD

In your fourth point We have modelled height of floor in Y axis. I request you I want direct
result to understand easily

Thanks
N.Srinivasan

19 | P a g e
 sakumar79 wrote:

Dear Sirs,
Following is my understanding of STAAD modelling with respect to major and
minor axis:

1. By default, YD refers to depth and ZD refers to width in rectangular section

definition which is common for beams and columns.

2. Under that condition, we would input larger lateral dimension of the column
as YD and the smaller dimension as ZD so that major and minor axis as
considered by us and model would be matching. This is modelled in STAAD with
YD dimension along X axis and ZD dimension along Z axis.

3. If we want column with larger dimension along Z axis, we need to either give
Beta angle of 90 degrees to such members, or we need to specify larger value
for ZD and smaller value for YD. It is in this situation that confusion on major and
minor axis would take place.

4. Parameters like ELY and ULY correspond to local Y axis. Hence, if modelled by
either options of point 3, first we need to look at which is the Y axis as modelled
and suitably assign the parameters.

Hope that helps.

Arunkumar

Back to top

sakumar79 Posted: Sun Jan 17, 2016 4:55 pm Post subject:

...

Dear Er Srinivasan,

Joined: 18 1. In STAAD, my statement "This is modelled in STAAD with YD dimension along X axis and
Apr 2008 ZD dimension along Z axis " talks about global axes. If you draw a vertical member and
Posts: 654 assign YD and ZD properties and then look at this in Full Section View or Outline view, it will
be seen that the YD dimension applied is parallel to X axis.

20 | P a g e
 2. Major axis for rectangular section is always parallel to short side and minor axis is always
parallel to long side (major axis will have larger moment of inertia BD^3/12 with D>=B).

3. In STAAD, generally we are working with local X,Y, and Z axis and we don't talk in terms
of Major axis and minor axis.

4. Global Y axis is vertical (along height) in STAAD, but in column (vertical member), this is
local X axis. Local Y and Z axes will be horizontal and the orientation of the same with
respect to B and D will determine if local Y axis is major axis or if local Z axis is minor axis.

5. With respect to the pdf file you had uploaded with two figures, both Fig 1 and 2 are
wrong in marking Major axis and minor axis. They are interchanged. However, the
calculations are okay (no change in ex and ey). For example, in Fig 1, Major axis is
horizontal. For unsupported length in major axis, we should subtract depth of vertical
beam (opp direction of major axis) from floor height. And when taking D/30, we should
take larger dimension. Hence, calculation is correct but marking of major and minor axes is
done incorrectly.

Hope that helps,

Arunkumar

Back to top

sknsrinivas Posted: Mon Jan 25, 2016 5:55 am Post subject:

an
...
Dear Arunkumar

I have another doubt In STAAD, In the surface element which axis is major axis and
Joined: 15 Minor axis. local Y axis is vertical and X,Z Axis are horizontal, so Z axis is perpendicular to
Apr 2013 length of wall X axis is Perpendicular to thick of wall. I think Z axis is major axis
Posts: 280
I have attached one pdf herewith please go through it. In that one surface force X and
surface force Y two table given Which table and which Moment and axial force I have to
consider from the table to design wall please clarify my doubt

Thanks in advance

Regards

21 | P a g e
N.srinivasan

22 | P a g e