Skip to content
Queensferry

Module 8 · Lesson 8.2

Restraint, moment shape, and where the load sits

Three things change the answer. One is free, one is decided by the structure, and one is a detailing choice most people never think about.

Why this matters

The 8 m beam of the last lesson lost two thirds of its capacity. All three of the things that would recover it are available to a designer, and one of them — where the load is applied relative to the shear centre — is a decision usually made without any thought at all. It is worth 26% on this beam.

By the end of this lesson you should be able to

  • Calculate what a lateral restraint buys, and when it stops buying
  • Explain why uniform moment is the worst case
  • Quantify the load-height effect and say which way it goes
  • State what a restraint must physically do to count

Restraint: the largest lever, and it saturates

Mcr depends on the length between points of lateral restraint, not on the span. So a restraint at midspan halves the length that matters.

For the 8 m beam of the last lesson, restraining the compression flange gives:

RestraintsSegmentλ̄LTχLTMb,RdGain
08.00 m1.690.351290 kNm
14.00 m0.960.727600 kNm2.07×
22.67 m0.660.890735 kNm2.54×
32.00 m0.500.960793 kNm2.74×
51.33 m0.341.000826 kNm2.85×
71.00 m0.251.000826 kNm2.85×

One restraint at midspan more than doubles the resistance. That is a larger gain than any change of section or grade would give, and it costs a tie and two cleats.

And then it saturates. Once χLT reaches 1 the beam has its full cross-section resistance and there is nothing left to recover — the fifth restraint achieves the last 4%, and the seventh achieves nothing at all. Restraint is worth adding until χLT approaches 1, and pointless afterwards.

Worked example

Three ways to recover the same beam

Given

  • The 8 m beam from the previous lesson: Mc,Rd = 826 kNm, unrestrained Mb,Rd = 290 kNm
  • The load is a UDL, so the moment is not uniform
  • It is a floor beam, so the load arrives on the top flange

Find

The effect of each of the three levers, separately.

Assumptions

  • C₁ = 1.13 for a UDL and C₂ = 0.45 — both calibrated and unverified here
  • The restrained case assumes the restraint is effective, per the callout above

    Try it

    Three levers on the same beam

    The 8 m beam from the worked example, at 290 kNm against a cross-section resistance of 826. Restraint, moment shape and load height all move it — and only one of them is under full control.

    0

    Moment shape

    Load applied at

    LTB resistance against the cross-section resistancecross-section826 kNmreference case290 kNmthis beam290 kNmreference = unrestrained, uniform moment, load at shear centre
    Segment length
    8.00 m
    Moment factor C₁
    1.00
    Load height zg
    0 mm
    Critical moment Mcr
    290 kNm
    LTB slenderness λ̄LT
    1.688
    Reduction χLT
    0.351
    Design resistance Mb,Rd
    290 kNm
    Cross-section resistance
    826 kNm
    Gain over the reference
    1.00 ×
    Still lost to LTB
    65 %

    Mb,Rd = 290 kNm, which is 1.00 times the unrestrained reference case and 65% short of the cross-section resistance. There is still 536 kNm to recover.

    Things worth trying

    • Start from the reference case — no restraints, uniform moment, load at the shear centre. 290 kNm against a cross-section resistance of 826: two thirds gone.
    • Add ONE restraint. The resistance more than doubles, to about 600 kNm. That is a bigger gain than any change of section or grade, for a tie and two cleats.
    • Keep adding restraints. The gains shrink fast, and by five χLT reaches 1 and they stop entirely. Restraint is worth adding until χLT approaches 1 and is wasted afterwards.
    • Go back to zero restraints and switch the moment shape to double curvature. C₁ = 2.6 and the resistance nearly doubles — because with equal and opposite end moments only a short length near each end is heavily compressed on the same flange.
    • Now set the moment shape to UDL and move the load between the three positions. Top flange to bottom flange is a factor of about 1.7 — from a detailing arrangement that most people never calculate.
    • Try all three levers together: one restraint, UDL, load at the bottom flange. The three multiply, and the beam becomes a completely different member from the reference case despite identical section, span and total load.

    Practice

    An 8 m unrestrained beam has Mb,Rd = 290 kNm. One restraint is added at midspan, taking χLT from 0.351 to 0.727. What is the new Mb,Rd, in kNm? Take Mc,Rd = 826 kNm.

    Practice

    For a UDL, C₁ = 1.13. If Mcr under uniform moment is 290 kNm, what is it under the UDL?

    Practice

    Top-flange loading gives Mb,Rd = 239 kNm and bottom-flange loading 408 kNm on the same beam. By what factor do they differ?

    Check yourself

    A beam has χLT = 0.96 with three restraints. What does adding a fourth achieve?

    Summary

    • Mcr depends on the length between RESTRAINTS, not the span
    • One restraint at midspan more than doubled the resistance of the 8 m beam
    • Gains saturate once χLT reaches 1 — beyond that, nothing is available
    • Uniform moment is the worst case; C₁ = 1 is the reference and everything else is better
    • Top-flange loading is destabilising and cost 26%; bottom-flange loading gains 37%
    • Top versus bottom is a factor of 1.71 on this beam, from a detailing arrangement
    • The three levers multiply — a restrained UDL beam is a different member entirely
    • A restraint must reach the COMPRESSION flange, which changes side over a support
    Progress is kept in this browser only.

    This is educational material. It uses simplified examples to teach principles, and must not be relied on for real design or safety-critical decisions. Module overview and checkpoint