STEELCOMMITTEE OFCAUFORNIA

TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCTSERVICE

NOVEMBER 1990
Design of Small Base Plates for Wide Flange Columns*
W. A. THORNTON
The 9th Edition of the AISC Manual of Steel Construc-
tion uses the Murray-Stockwell 2 method for analysis of
small base plates, i.e., plates that are only slightly larger than
the column depth d and width bf. It combines this method
with the cantilever method of the 8th3 and earlier editions
for large base plates. The Murray-Stockwell method assumes
a bearing pressure of Ft,, the maximum permitted, over an
H-shaped contact area under the column cross-section
between the plate and the concrete. The cantilever method,
on the other hand, assumes a uniform bearing pressure, fp
< Fp, over the entire base plate surface of area BxN
(Fig. 1). Thus, the two methods assume very different bear-
ing pressure distributions and are difficult to combine into
a single method.
A solution to this dilemma is to return to the 8th Edition
assumption of uniform pressure between the base plate and
the concrete. This assumption is conservative with respect
to the base plate thickness determination because the true
pressure distribution will be less near the plate edges and
more under the column cross-section, which cross-section
also provides support for the plate at its top surface. Since
the plate is assumed more heavily loaded distant from its
A. Thornton, PhD, PE, is chief engineer, Cives Steel Com-
pany, Roswefi, GA, and is chairman of AISC Committee on
Manual, Textbooks, and Codes.
supports than it will be, a plate thickness determined under
this load will be thicker than it needs to be.
To supplement the cantilever method for large base plates,
which is actually a yield line method, it is consistent again
to use yield line theory applied to the portion of the base
plate contained within the column depth and width. Hap-
pily, exact solutions to this problem are available in the liter-
ature. 4 Consider Fig. 2, which shows a plate supported on
three edges and free on the fourth. The dimensions of the
plate are taken as the column depth d and the half column
width bfi2, rather than the more correct d - 2tf and (bf -
t,.)/2. This is done for simplicity and is conservative. If the
three supported edges are taken as completely fixed, i.e.,
no displacement and no rotation about an axis parallel to each
edge, the required base plate thickness with a factor of safety
of 2 is
tp = o.t,j (1)
where
ft, = uniform pressure between base plate and concrete
= P/BxN, ksi
F.,. -- yield stress of base plate, ksi
G
,, f 3 G - l--6-G- +I'
where r/ = d/bf
Reproduced from AISC Engineering Journal, Volume 27, No. 3, 3rd Quarter 1990
dI
Or
/
m
.95O
r
m ,
N
Unsuppoed
Edge
b
SuppoSed
Edge
Fig. I. Column base plate geometry and symbols (from AISC').
Fig,. 2. Small base plate geometry and support conditions.
The expression for et given in Eq. 2 can be approximated by
et = 4 (3)
with an error of -2. 97 % (unconservative) to +6.00% (con-
servative) in the range of ?7from to 3. Then, Eq. I becomes
with Eq. 3
1
where has been replaced by with an error of 2%.
Combining Eq. 4 with the cantilever method for large base
plates, let
n'= (5)
and
I = max(m,n,n) (6)
where m and n are defined in Fig. 1. Then the required plate
thickness is
tr = 2 t J (7)
If the base plate is small with N d, it may be unconser-
vative to assume complete fixity of the base plate to the col-
umn flanges. If the plate of Fig. 2 is completely fixed to the
column web along the side of length d but simply supported,
i.e., no displacement but rotation unrestrained, along the
sides of length bf/2, the required base plate thickness with
a factor of safety of 2 is given by Eq. 1, with
,2,: + l, /--7--lJ (8)
This expression for et can be approximated bY
et = '/2,J- (9)
with an error of -0% (unconservative) and +t7.7% (con-
servative) in the range of ,/from g to 3. In the more com-
mon range of g _< ,/ < 2, the error is only +8.00% (con-
servative). Using Eq. 9 in Eq. 1,
= 2(Uqj) J (10)
t,
Combining Eq. 10 with the cantilever method for large base
plates, let
n ' = i, (11)
I = max(m,n,n') (12)
2
/Z_
tp = 2 1 (13)
The formulation for the two models just discussed can be
seen to be exactly the same except for n'. Let the first for-
mulation, for which n' = be referred to as Model 1
and the second, with n' = 'Ax/db/be referred to as Model
2. It will be instructive to see how these two models com-
pare with a method suggested by Ahmed and Krepss and
the method of the AISC 8th Edition Manual. To this end,
consider Table 1. The nine examples of this table show that
both Models 1 and 2 produce plate thicknesses !ess than or
equal to the method of the AISC 8th Edition. The method
of Ahmed and Kreps produces plate thicknesses between
Models 1 and 2 for small base plates of square columns, but
tends to produce plates too thick for nonsquare columns
(T/ > 1), as seen from Examples 7, 8 and 9. In the case of
Examples 8 and 9, it produces plates thicker than the 8th
Edition method.
Considering the results shown in Table 1, and recognizing
that Model 2 is clearly conservative while still producing
plates thinner or at most as thick as the method of the AISC
8th Edition Manual, it is recommended that Model 2, i.e.,
n' = I,Xf'f
I = max (m,n,n')
t, = 2l,.
be used to replace the current AISC 9th Edition Manual base
plate design method for axial load.
The equivalent Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)
equation for base plate thickness is:
I,,[ 2Pu
t, = l 0.9F, BN (14)
where
P,, = total factored column load
NOTATION
The symbols used in this paper follow the usage of the AISC
Manual, 8th or 9th Edition.
REFERENCES
1. American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of Steel
Construction, 9th Edition, 1989, pages 3-106 through
3-110.
2. Murray, T. M., "Design of Lightly Loaded Column Base
Plates;' AISC Engineering J., Volume 20, No. 4, 4th
Quarter, 1983, pp. 143-152.
3. American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of Steel
Construction. 8th Edition, 1980, pp. 3-99 through 3-102.
4. Park, R. and Gamble, W. L., Reinforced Concrete Slabs,
Wiley, 1980, pp. 329-331.
5. Ahmed, S. and Kreps, R. R., "Inconsistencies in Col-
umn Base Plate Design in the New AISC ASD (July 1989)
Manual, AISC Engineering J., 3rd Quarter, 1990, pp.
106-107.
6. DeWolf, J. T., and Ricker, D. T., Column Base Plates,
AISC Steel Design Guide Series, No, 1, 1990, pp. 13-15.
7. Fling, R. S., "Design of Steel Bearing Plates/' AISC
Engineering J., Volume 7, No. 2, 2nd Quarter, April 1970,
pp. 37-40.
T a b l e 1.
E x a m p l e s To C o m p a r e M e t h o d s (Fy = 36 ksi for al l c a s e s )
Data n'/tp(in.lin.)
Col. P d bt N B fp m n Mod. Mod. Ahmed & AISC
Example Source Sect. (kips) (in.) (in.) (in.) (in.) (ksi) (in.) (in.) I 2 Kreps 8th Ed.
1. AISC Des. Guidea W 1 0 x l 0 0 200 11.10 10.34 11.5 11 1.58 .48 1.36 2.14 2.68 2.33 3.92
.90 1.12 .98 1.64
2. Ahmed , Krepsb W12x106 331 12.89 12.22 14 13 1.82 .88 1. 61 2.51 3.14 2.71 4.77
1.13 1.41 1.22 2.15
3. -- W12x106 300 12.89 12.22 14 13 1.65 .88 1. 61 2.51 3.14 2.71 4.77
1.07 1.34 1.16 2.04
4. -- W12x106 300 12.89 12.22 16 16 1.17 1.88 3.11 2.51 3.14 2.71 4.77
1.12 1.13 1.12 1.72
5. AISC 8th Ed. W 1 0 x l 0 0 525 11.10 10.34 19 17 1.63 4.23 4.36 2.14 2.68 2.33 3.92
1.86 1.86 1.86 1.86
6. AI SC8t hEd. W12x106 600 12.89 12.22 18 16 2.08 2.88 3.11 2.51 3.14 2.71 4.77
1.50 1.51 1.50 2.29
7. Flingc 1 4 x 8 W F -- 14 8 -- -- .75 -- -- 2.12 2.65 2.94 3.68
.61 .77 .85 1.06
8. -- W 2 4 x 6 8 450 23.73 8.965 24 9 2.08 -- -- 2.92 3.65 4.98 4.23
1.41 1.76 2.40 2.04
9. -- W36x160 1000 36.01 12.00 38 14 1.88 1.90 2.20 4.16 5.20 7.56 5.63
1.90 2.38 3.46 2.57
a. See Ref. 6
b. See Ref. 5
c. See Ref. 7, Fling gets t p = 0.711 in. for this example
I
3
Inconsistencies in Column Base Plate Design
in the New AISC ASD Manual*
SALAHUDDIN AHMED and ROBERT R. KREPS
The new AISC steel design manual (ninth edition)' sug-
gests a new procedure for computing the thicknesses of col-
umn base plates to rectify problems associated with the some-
what conservative design approach adapted in its earlier
version. However, a close scrutiny of the suggested method
reveals that the new approach is sometimes overly conser-
vative and even inconsistent.
Referring to Fig. 1 (pg. 3-106 of the AISC Manual),
P = Total column load, kips
Aj = B x N = Area of plate, in.2
A, = Full cross-sectional area of concrete support, in.'
Fh = Allowable bending stress in base plate, ksi
v = Allowable bearing stress in support, ksi
fp = actual bearing pressure, ksi
f,' = Compressive strength of concrete, ksi
tp = Thickness of plate, in.
$alahuddin Ahmed, Ph.D., is structural engineer, Leonhardt
Kreps LeFevre, Toledo, Ohio.
Robert R. Kreps, P.E., is principal, Leonhardt Kreps LeFevre,
Toledo, Ohio.
Referring to page 3-108 of the Manual, the following proce-
dure is followed to compute base plate size:
For a given P, f! and A2, minimum area of base plate is
computed and reasonable values of B and N are selected.
Based on the column dimensions and selected B and N, quan-
tities m and n are computed and the larger of the two con-
trols. In the next step, the value of L (Fig. 2) is computed
from the following expression, Fv = P/(2 + d + b -
2L)/L, which is quadratic in L. Solving for L,
L = [(d + b) _+ x/((d + /i)2 _ 4P/Fp)]/4
The Manual is silent as to which of the two solutions should
be used in further computation. However, a careful study
of the equation reveals that the smaller of the two L values
should be used. The required base plate thickness is then
computed based on the larger of m and n calculated and the
value of L, as described in the Manual.
The quantity L is computed based on an area with a pres-
sure of Ft, and not fy. Thus it is not clear why fi, is used in
the expression t = Lx/(3fv/Fh) (pg. 3-107 of the Manual).
dll
ri
b
i i i l
.8Ob.
4, ''
N
, r D
r I
e L - - , T -
2L
I
, I / l , - . , z [
Figure I Figure 2
- Reproduced from AISC Engineering Journal, Volume 27, No. 3, 3rd Quarter 1990
4
Example
Let
P = 331 kips
Column W12x106 (d = 12.89, b = 12.22)
f,'. = 3 ksi
F,. = '36 ksi
Pier: 34 in. x 34 in.
1. A = (1/(34 x 34))(331/(.35 x 3))" = 86
A = 331/(.7 x 3) -- 158 Controls
2. A = .5[.95 x 12.89 - .8 x 12.22] = 1.235
N = + 1.235 = 13.8, use 14 in.
B = 158/14 = 11.3, use 13 in.
A = 14 x 13 = 182 in.-'
3. fv = 331/182 = 1.82 ksi
4. m = [14 - 0.95 x 12.89]/2 = 0.88 in.
n = [13 - 0.80 x 12.22]/2 = 1.61 in. Controls
Fv = .35 x 3 x (34 x 34/182) = 2.65 ksi > 2.1 ksi,
use 2.1 ksi
L =
= (25.11 - x/-.036)/4 = 6.23 in.
tv = 1.61 x x/(1.82/(.25x36)) = 0.72 in.
tt, = 6.23 x x/(3xl.82/27) = 2.80 in. Controls
It may be noted that the thickness of 2.80 in. is greater
than what would be obtained according to the eighth edition
AISC Manual.
Now if one repeated the same calculations with a load of
332 kips, L would become imaginary and as per the manual
would be ignored. As a result the required thickness would
be 0.72 in., less than that required for a lighter load.
Therefore the authors feel that the new way of computing
L is basically inconsistent and likely to result in too thick
a base plate when L controls and too thin a base plate when
L is imaginary and thus ignored.
SUGGESTED METHOD OF ANALYSIS
Let us assume that the pressure under the base plate is uni-
form and is equal to P/Al. Let us also assume that the plate
is essentially fixed at the web and flanges of the column.
Thus what we have here is a plate with one long and two
short edges fixed and the fourth edge free with a uniform
load. One can go back to various moment coefficients avail-
able in the literature to compute maximum moment in the
plate. Considering the width to length ratios of usual col-
umn sections, the authors suggest a moment coefficient of
0.022 so that the maximum moment in the plate is 0.022
fp d2 kip-in./in., where d is the depth of the column.
Srqa. = 0.022 x fp x d2/Fh
t = V(6S,e4a.) = V(O. 132fpd2/Fb) (1)
Therefore, to compute the base plate thickness,
a) Compute m and n as discussed in the Manual and select
a thickness based on the larger of the two.
b) Use the larger of the two thicknesses obtained in step
(a) and by Eq. 1.
Applying this method to the example above,
a) Compute thickness to be 0.72 in. for the larger of m
and n.
b) Use Eq. I for t = 4(0.132 1.82 12.892127)
= 1.22 in. Controls
REFERENCES
1. American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., Manual
of Steel Construction, Allowable Stress Design, ninth edi-
tion, Chicago, IL, July 1989.
2. Winter, Urquhart, O'Rourke, Niison, Design of Concrete
Structures, seventh edition, McGraw-Hill Book Company,
New York.
This publication expresses the opinion of the author, and care has been taken to insure
that all data and information furnished are as accurate as possible. The author and
publisher cannot assume or accept any responsibility or liability for errors in the data
or information and 'in the use of such information.
The information contained herein is not intended to represent official attitudes, recom-
mendations or policies of the Structural Steel Educational Council. The Council is not
responsible for any statements made or opinions expressed by contributors to this
publication.
5
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCT SERVICE
JULY 1999
P ractical Design and Detailing
of Steel Column Base P lates
by
Wi l l i am C. Honeck
Derek Westphal
Forell Elsesser Engineers, Inc.
No,
PRACTICAL DESIGN AND DETAILING OF STEEL COLUMN BASE PLATES
Table of Contents
Description Page No.
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
INTRODUCTION 2
1.1 Preface 2
1.2 Purpose 2
1.3 Organization 2
DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR MATERIALS AND FABRICATION
2.1 Materials
2.1.1 Anchor Bolts and Nuts
2.1.2 Plates
2.2 Base Plate Design for Fabrication
2.2.1 Material versus Labor
2.2.2 Welding
2.2.3 Base Plate Dimensions
DESIGN GUIDELINES RELATED TO ERECTION
3.1 Anchor Bolts
3.1.1 Anchor Bolt Position Mislocation
3.1.2 Rotated Anchor Bolt Patterns
3.1.3 Anchor Bolts Set Too Low or Too High
3.1.4 Columns Next to Walls
3.2 Washers
3.3 Base Plate Leveling
ENGINEERING GUIDELINES FOR DESIGN OF BASE PLATES
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.6
4.7
Design for Temporary Construction Loads
Design for Gravity and Other Downward Loads
Design for Gravity Loads in Combination with Uplift Loads
Design for Gravity Loads in Combination with Shear Forces
Design for Gravity Loads in Combination with Shear Forces and Moments
Design for Moments due to Seismic Forces
Architectural Issues
CONCLUSIONS
REFERENCES
3
3
3
3
4
4
4
5
8
8
9
10
10
12
13
14
15
15
PRACTICAL DESIGN AND DETAILING OF STEEL COLUMN BASE PLATES
1.0 I NTRODUCTI ON
1.1 Preface
Steel column base plates are one of the most
~ndament al parts o f a steel structure, yet the
design of base plates is commonly not given the
attention that it should by engineers. This results
in base plate details that are expensive, difficult to
fabricate and may even contribute to the hazards
of the steel erection process by not providing
stability for erection loads applied to the column.
Base plates serve two basic fianctions:
1. They transfer column loads to the supporting
member or foundation. These loads include axial
due to gravity, moments, shears and sometimes
axial due to uplift;
2. They allow the column to stand as a
temporary vertical cantilever after the lifting line is
released without having to guy off the column.
The column and base plate must withstand
temporary wind and erection loads safely.
Steel fabricators and erectors who are members of
the Structural Steel Educational Council (SSEC)
have commented that there are a variety of base
plate designs and details from engineers. Some
fabricators are critical of many of these designs
because they are difficult to fabricate, or specify
materials that are hard to obtain or that do not
exist in the sizes specified. The designs often
result in columns that are hard to erect or are
unstable without guying the column. When anchor
bolts are not properly set, expensive corrective
work is required before the column can be erected,
resulting in delays in the steel erection process.
This publication of Steel Tips attempts to address
these issues.
In order to understand better and respond to the
fabrication and erection issues, a questionnaire was
distributed to several SSEC member firms
requesting their comments about problems
experienced in their shops during fabrication and
in the field during steel erection. Specific issues
included overly expensive designs and problems
with obtaining the materials specified. Suggestions
on how these designs could have been more
economical were solicited. The questionnaire
asked about ~teel erection problems experienced
and requested suggestions to mitigate those
problems. The responses received were very
informative and many of the suggestions in the
responses have been incorporated into this
publication.
1.2 Purpose
The purpose of this issue of Steel Tips is to
provide practical guidelines for engineers,
fabricators and contractors regarding the design
and detailing of steel column base plates.
Guidance is provided toward resolving common
design, fabrication and erection problems. Many
of the topics discussed are simple to implement,
yet are often overlooked.
Unfortunately the behavior of base plates in
moment frames and braced flames subjected to
earthquake forces is not fially understood.
Research and code guidance are limited. The
engineer is forced to use judgement in order to
achieve a desired level of performance and it is
hoped ,that this publication will initiate more
research and development in the areas of base
plate behavior and design guidelines for base plate
assemblies that are subjected to high moments
where some sort of yielding is necessary to
achieve the desired performance.
1.3 Organi zati on
The focus of this issue of Steel Tips is directed
toward the practical aspects of the design and
detailing of base plates particularly as they relate
to economical fabrication and steel erection.
Section 2.0 discusses fabrication issues. Section
3.0 discusses erection and anchor bolt placement
issues. Section 4.0 discusses the "issues" involved
in the design of base plates, rather than providing
"how to" design methods or guidelines, and lists
the names of other authoritative publications
where the reader can find design formulas and
definitive procedures for design of base plates.
Section 4.0 also discusses fixed and partially fixed
column bases, for instance, moment frames which
resist wind or earthquake forces.
2.0 DESI GN GUI DELI NES FOR
MATERI ALS AND FABRI CATI ON
Engineers have numerous types of steel to choose
from when designing anchor bolts and base plate
assemblies. However, materials are often specified
that are not readily available or are not suitable for
specific applications. Base plate details often are
hard to fabricate, overly complicated, call for
expensive welds and/or specify impossible welds.
The following sections provide design guidelines
for specifying suitable materials and suggestions
for details to make fabrication easier and more
economical.
2. 1 Ma t e r i a l s
According to the AISC Specification for
Structural Steel Buildings Allowable Stress Design
and Plastic Design (ASD Specifications), there are
16 ASTM designations specified for structural
applications. For specific material properties,
suitable applications and complete dimensional
information, the reader should refer to the ASTM
Specifications.
2. 1. 1 A n c h o r Bo l t s a n d Nu t s
The most common and readily available anchor
bolt materials are ASTM A36 and A307. Smaller
bolts ge0erally are supplied in A307 and larger
diameter in A36. The material properties for these
relatively "low strength" bolts are very similar.
These two grades are weldable and should be
specified when possible.
When high-strength bolts are required, the
materials typically available are A449, A354 and
A193 type B7 (often referred to as "B7"). B7
bolts are the same material as AISI 4140 and can
be substituted for A449 because A449 and B7
bolts both have material properties that are almost
identical. A325 bolts only come in "headed"
form, are limited to 1 1/2 inch diameter maximum
and are limited in the lengths available. The
properties and chemistry for A325 bolts are similar
to A449 and B7. Generally, it is better to specify
A449, A354 or B7 bolts when high-strength bolts
are necessary. High-strength bolts come as plain
bar stock and threads must be cut into both ends.
Headed bolts fabricated from A325, A490 or
A588 should not be specified since these are not
readily available. All of these high strength
materials are heat treated alloy steels and are
therefore not suitable for welding. Before
specifying a bolt material, contact local fabricators
for information regarding material availability and
review the ASTM standards for the grades being
considered to determine their suitability.
It is important to specify the correct grade of nut
that corresponds to the specified anchor bolt
material. ASTM A563 specifies the various nut
grades that are typically used in building
construction and nuts suitable for use with the
various grades of bolts (see Reference 4). The
"Heavy Hex" nut style should be specified
regardless of the nut grade that is selected.
Footnote A below table X1.1 makes reference to
ASTM A194 grade 2H as a substitute for A563
when certain sizes conforming to A563 are not
available. A194 is a specification for pressure
vessel and non-building uses, but the grades
referenced in footnote A are suitable for use for
anchor bolts in buildings.
2 . 1 . 2 Pl a t e s
The most common base plate materials are A36,
A572 and A588. Fabricators responding to the
questionnaire recommended that A36 material be
specified if possible because it is the most readily
available material. The table on the following page
contains material availability guidelines based on
plate thickness.
Ta b l e 1 - Availability of Pl a t e Ma t e r i a l
Thickness (t)
, , ,
t _< 4"
4" < t _< 6"
Plate Availability
A36
A572 Gr 42 or 50
A588 Gr 42 or 50
A36
A572 Gr 42
A588 Gr 42
t > 6" A36
2 . 2 Ba s e Pl a t e De s i g n f o r F a b r i c a t i o n
Typically, except for very large columns with very
heavy base plates, such as for high rise buildings,
base plates are shop welded to the column. Unless
the weld is a complete penetration, weld, the
bottom end of the column needs to be cut square
so that there will be full bearing where the column
is in contact with the base plate. Some years ago,
this was accomplished using milling machines in
the shop. Today the cold sawing equipment used
in most shops provides a column finished end with
a maximum ANSI roughness height value of 500
which is satisfactory for contact bearing
compression joints.
For very large columns, the base plate is erected
first, using three leveling bolts around the
perimeter of the base plate to level it, then the
column is erected onto the base plate and
connected using angles or other connection
methods. The base plate is grouted before the
column is erected. The mating surfaces should be
prepared by milling or other means so that the
column is in full contact with the base plate. Use
of thick base plates can introduce welding
problems .due to difficulty of meeting preheat
requirements.
2 . 2 . 1 Ma t e r i a l v e r s u s L a b o r
A common suggestion from steel fabricators for
engineers to remember is that "material is cheap
relative to labor." If specifying thicker base plates
will result in not having to add stiffener plates to
the base plate, this will result in less labor to
fabricate and will result in a more economic
design. Adding stiffeners and other plates to a
base plate assembly is labor intensive compared to
using a thicker base plate that could eliminate the
need for these additional stiffener plates.
2 . 2 . 2 We l d i n g
The engineer should attempt to at least match the
thickness of the base plate with the column flange
thickness in order to prevent warping during
welding, particularly if heavy welding, such as
partial or complete penetration welds, is required
to connect the column to the base plate. Thicker
base plates without stiffeners are often more
economical than using a thinner base plate with
stiffeners. Stiffeners, if used, will have an impact
on column finish dimensions. See Section 4.7
"Architectural Issues" for further discussion.
Another common suggestion from fabricators is to
reduce weld sizes as much as possible (but account
for minimum AWS weld sizes based on material
thicknesses) and specify fillet welds in lieu of
complete penetration welds where possible.
Complete penetration welds require more labor
due to the need to bevel the end of the column and
fit up, and require extensive inspection. It is more
economical to detail larger fillet welds, even if
more weld metal is required for the fillet welds, as
a substitute for partial penetration welds.
Fabricators have also pointed out that "all around" "
welds should be avoided. Fillet welds that wrap
around the flange toes (ends of column flanges)
and the column web-to-flange fillets (the "k"
region) can cause cracks due to high residual
stresses in the welds. Such welds often require
welding repair. Stop fillet welds 1/2 inch from
these locations. See Figure 1 for clarification.
Welds should be detailed to account for clearances
and access of welding equipment. Obviously the
engineer should not show welds that are
impossible to access. For example, a common
mistake is to specify "all around" welds at plate
washers that are backed up against the column
flange or web.
High strength bolts fabricated from high strength,
heat treated steel (such as A354, A449 or B7)
cannot be welded - not even tack welded - without
adversely affecting the properties of these steels.
2 . 2 . 3 Ba s e Pl a t e D i me n s i o n s
Where possible, the plate dimensions and bolt
pattern of base plates should be symmetrical about
both axes. This will preclude welding the base
plate rotated 90 degrees from the correct
orientation. Having a doubly symmetrical bolt
pattern will also help avoid potential field
problems (See Section 3.1.2).
The engineer should try to specify the same bolt
hole diameter whenever possible to eliminate the
need for multiple drill bit sizes. This also applies
to any vent holes required to vent out air from
under the larger base plates during the grouting
operation.
Obviously the base plate dimensions should be
sufficient to accommodate the column dimensions
plus anchor bolt holes with sufficient dimensions
to the column flanges and to the edge of the base
plate. Also account for any square plate washers,
if used. Several fabricators have stated that
engineers sometimes erroneously assume their
"typical" base plate detail will cover all conditions.
Columns that are in different size groups require
different base plate sizes. It is generally more
economical to design a "typical" larger base plate
to cover more than one column size in a column
group (such as Wl 0, W12, W14 groupings), than
to design specific base plates for each column size.
The fewer variations of base plates required will
generally result in economy in fabrication even if
more material is required. This is true because of
the labor savings in shop drawing preparation and
the different shop setups required for each
variation in base plate configuration. It is also
true that having fewer "different" anchor bolt
patterns will lead to less confiasion during anchor
bolt placement. See Figure 1 on the following
page for suggested details.
3.0 DESI GN GUI DELI NES RELATED TO
ERECTI ON
Anchor bolts and base plates should be designed
and detailed to accommodate steel erection loads.
Some simple, yet effecctive, attention to details and
dimensions can go a long way in helping to
prevent some common problems encountered
during steel column erection. A previous edition
of Steel Tips (Reference 7) contains usefial
strategies for dealing with common field erection
errors.
3. 1 A n c h o r Bo l t s
Anchor bolt placement is obviously a difficult task
but too often errors result due to poor quality
control and quality assurance or lack of
preparedness in the design. There are several
ways to mislocate anchor bolts and typically one of
the following will occur.
3 . 1 . 1 A n c h o r Bo l t P o s i t i o n Mi s l o c a t i o n
Position mislocation is unfortunately a common
problem. The horizontal location of the anchor
bolts is often incorrect by as much as 1 to 2 inches.
In some cases one of the anchor bolts is not in the
correct location with respect to the remaining bolts
and in other cases the entire layout is in the wrong
location. There are several ways to avoid this
problem during the design phase.
1. The best method for preventing anchor bolt
mislocation is for the contractor to properly set
and hold anchor bolts in the correct position for
plan location and elevation. It is the contractors
responsibility to set anchor bolts correctly within
the tolerance given in the AISC Code of Standard
Practice (Refer to Reference 3). A check by an
independent surveyor will help locate misplaced
bolts before steel is erected so that corrections can
be made by the contractor before steel erection
!
r~@@ V ~
_
WHEN REQUIRED @ <
GROUT P i N
I /
L ~, J ~
~ Tqq ~ - , ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~L~ :
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~
~- ~ . . . . . . ~
-
~ . f~C] ~
I<O>I ~ <C~>~
I ~ I L = V J
~v
SQUARE PLATE ~
_1.
NO W E L D T Y P . ~
2
GROUT HOLE
IF REQUIRED ~
NO WELD TYP. ~
T O P WASHER
P L A T E r Y P .
OVERSIZE HOLE ~
~ LEVELING NUT
AND WASHER ~
ANCHOR BOLT ~
~ Use square plate and hol e pattem dimensions where possible to avoid problems assodated with mis-placed anchor bolts, rotated anchor
bolt patterns or plates that are accidentally rotated 90 degrees during fabrication.
~ Try to reduce numerous base plate variations by sizing typical plate based on the largest column in a size group (e.g. Wl 0' s, W12's or
W14's). Reducing the number of variations will reduce the chance for error during erection and fabrication, and allow for simpler
verification in the field. Provide maximum edge distance to bolt to allow base plate slotting i f bolts are mislocated.
~ When additional bolts are required, add additional holes to make double symmetric bolt patterns. This is useful even i f not all holes and
bolts are needed. Four bolts is the suggested minimum for any base plate.
~ : ~ Anchor bolts should be at least 1" diameter. This is beneficial for erection safety and the anchor bolts are harder to accidentally bend
in the fi el d. Specify A307 or A36 material when possible. Bot h are easier to obtain and weldable.
~ Oversize holes in base plates should be used whenever possible to accommodate anchor bolt placement tolerances.
( ~ ) Pl at e washers with field welds should be used in conjunction with oversize holes to resist nut pull-through and to transfer shear from the
base plate to the anchor bolts. Special attention should be directed toward weld access. Plate washer should have hol e 1/16" larger than
bolt diameter. Welds may not be needed i f the column is for "gravity only" and there are no shear forces at the base of the column.
~ Level i ng nuts are recommended in lieu of leveling plates or shims for ease of construction, safety and efficiency.
~ The thickness of grout specified should accommodate the leveling nuts and be in proportion to the dimensions of the base plate
(for example do not specify 3 inches of grout under a W6 column).
~ Specify an additional bolt extension above the top of the base plate to accommodate bolts that are set too low. Also specify extra
threaded length to accommodate bolts set too high.
~ Specify fillet welds whenever possible. Partial penetration welds and complete penetration welds should only be specified when required.
~ Avoid specifying all-around welds. There should be no weld at the ends of the flanges and in the fillet (k region) of the column.
~ I f a grout hole is needed, specify the same diameter as the anchor bolt holes to reduce the number of drill bit sizes required during
fabrication.
F I G U R E 1 - S U G G E S T E D B A S E P L A T E D E T A I L S
begins. This requirement should be included in
the job specifications. In addition, the engineer
should specify 1/8" sheet metal templates for every
base plate. Typically contractors make one metal
template and construct plywood copies of the
template. This method of constructing templates
and placing anchor bolts introduces several
obvious opportunities for error.
Anchor bolts need to be rigidly held in position
both top and bottom to prevent movement during
concrete placement and to prevent the anchor
bolts from tilting. Plates that connect the anchor
bolts at the bottom should be considered,
particularly for large anchor bolts.
2. Specify oversize bolt holes in the base plate
with washer plates ("weld washers") that are field
welded to the base plate (See Figure 1). The weld
washer should have a standard hole (bolt diameter
plus 1/16 inch). The AISC Code of Standard
Practice allows the following oversized hole
diameters,
Bolt Diameter i Oversize Hole Dia.
3/4" to 1" 5/16"
1" to 2" 1/2"
over 2" 1"
For larger bolts this may not be enough oversize
allowance; a larger oversize of up to 2 inches
would be better. Weld washers are necessary
when using oversize holes to prevent nut pull-
through and for shear transfer to the anchor bolt.
The extra cost of the weld washers is small
compared to the cost of making field corrections
and erection delays due to misplaced anchor bolts.
3.1.2 Rotated Anchor Bolt Patterns
Anchor bolts with a non symmetrical pattern are
sometimes turned 90 degrees from correct
orientation. Detailing anchor bolt patterns with
doubly symmetric patterns will prevent this
problem. See Section 2.2.3.
3.1.3 Anchor Bolts Set Too Low or Too
Hi gh
Specifying anchor bolts with extra bolt projection
will help for anchor bolts set too low. The extra
projection will also prevent the problem of nuts
that do not have fiall thread engagement. I f a fi~ll
nut cannot be obtained, there are methods to
extend the bolt length. Specifying A36 bolt
material allows welding a stub onto the low bolt.
Sometimes, the nut cavity above a low anchor bolt
can be "filled out" with weld metal i f weldable nut
and bolt materials were specified.
Engineers should specify more of the bolt shank to
be threaded than is actually needed. I f the bolt is
set high, the extra threads will allow the nut to be
run down the bolt without requiring additional
washers.
3.1.4 Col umns Next to Walls
Another problem that frequently occurs is
inaccessible anchor bolts due to a column located
next to a wall. This occurs when the anchor bolts
are located between the column flanges or at a
comer where two walls intersect (See Figure 2).
For these conditions, special base plate/anchor bolt
patterns are necessary so that all anchor bolts are
accessible. Refer to the ASD Manual, Connection
Section, for assembly clearance requirements at
nuts.
S
WALL

FIGURE 2 - INACCESSIBLE ANCHOR BOLT LOCATIONS
7
3.2 Washers
If high strength anchor bolts are "tensioned",
hardened "cut" washers should be used in addition
to any weld washer plates used. This will prevent
the nuts from galling the weld washer or base
plate. Normally, anchor bolts are not tensioned;
nuts are usually tightened with a wrench using a
"cheater".
3.3 Base Plate Leveling
Some erectors favor the use of leveling nuts
instead of shim packs or leveling plates (See
Figure 1), other erectors favor shim packs.
Leveling nuts are easier to level and provide a
more stable base for resisting erection loads than
shim packs. Generally, leveling plates are reserved
for special cases and should not be specified for
typical use.
4.0 ENGI NEERI NG GUI DELI NES FOR
DESIGN OF BASE PLATES
This section covers the engineering design of base
plates. The focus of this section is not so much
"how to" calculate base plates, but what the
engineer needs to consider when engineering and
detailing base plates. The reader is referred to
other publications with formulas, design aids and
procedures. See References 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6.
The base plate assembly must be designed to
transfer all forces from the column to the
supporting member whether it is a girder or a
foundation. These forces include axial forces,
shears and moments from the column. The
magnitude and combinations of these loads will
determine the design and details of the base plate.
The simplest and most common condition
encountered in practice is a column supporting
gravity loads only. When there are high shear
forces and moments, such as in a moment frame,
the design becomes more complicated and the base
plate and anchor bolts become heavier. Thd
following subsections discuss the issues related to
the various loads and combinations of loads.
4.1 Design for Temporary Construction
Loads
The first fianction of a base plate is to temporarily
support the column from overturning due to
temporary wind, earthquake, and erection loads,
and from the column getting bumped during
erection until the,beams are attached to "tie in" the
column. Therefore the base plates and anchor bolts
need to be at least sufficient to resist the
overturning moment and shear from these forces.
Although erectors often check the column by
assuming a one kip load applied horizontally at the
top, this does not relieve the engineer from
providing an adequate design.
If the anchor bolts and base plate are too small, f or
example, with only two anchor bolts or anchor
"bolts that are too close together, the base plate
assembly may not be capable of resisting erection
loading (See Figure 3).
1~ h
4
FI GURE 3 - UNSAFE ANCHOR BOLT CONFI GURATI ONS
This can result in a dangerous condition during
erection if the fabricator and erector have not
checked the base plate assembly for erection loads
and have not recognized that this condition exists.
Either the base plate assembly must be enlarged by
the fabricator during the shop drawing stage or the
column will need to be guyed off or held with
another lifting line and "tied in" before releasing
the column. This process is expensive and it slows
the erection progress. Engineers should recognize
this and not undersize anchor bolts, make base
plates too thin, or have anchor bolts too close
together in the anchor bolt pattern. At least four
anchor bol t s shoul d be detailed and spread apar t as
mu c h as possi bl e. See Fi gur e 1 f or suggest ed
details.
4.2 Design for Gravity and Other Downward
Loads
The mos t c o mmo n base pl at e condi t i on is a base
pl at e t hat t ransfers gr avi t y l oads t o t he s uppor t i ng
m e m b e r or f ounda t i on wi t h r el at i vel y l ow shear
f or c e s and mome nt s at t he base o f t he col umn.
These are "gr avi t y onl y" col umns t hat ar e not par t
o f mome nt f r ames or br aced frames. The base
pl at e must be l ar ge e nough so t hat t he ar ea o f t he
c o n c r e t e be ne a t h it is suffi ci ent t o s uppor t t he
loads. Usual l y t hese col umns will t r ansf er nomi nal
s hear and mome nt s t o t he s uppor t i ng member or
f oundat i on. Such f or ces are nor mal l y caused by
s t or y dri ft due t o wi nd or ear t hquake l oads.
Th e AI SC Manual o f St eel Cons t r uct i on
( Re f e r e nc e 3) pr ovi des a t wo st ep pr ocedur e f or
t he design o f axi al l y l oaded base pl at es. First, t he
ar ea o f t he pl at e is cal cul at ed based on t he
al l owabl e be a t i ng st ress defi ned by t he f ol l owi ng
equat i ons.
ASD: Fp ; 0.35 f/c A'-~ ~ 0.70 f/c
q
A2
LRFD: % Pp = 0 . 8 5 t pc f' c A) ~'~ -< qL 1.7f'c A~
wher e,
Fp = Al l owabl e bear i ng st ress (ksi )
fo = Conc r e t e compr es s i ve st r engt h (ksi )
A~ = Bas e pl at e ar ea (in z)
A2 = Ar e a s uppor t i ng base pl at e t hat is
geomet r i cal l y si mi l ar (in z)
q~o = 0. 85 f or compr es s i on
Pp = Ul t i mat e capaci t y o f t he concr et e in
bear i ng
Ba s e d on t hi s equat i on, t he mos t effi ci ent base
pl at e ar ea (A~) is at mos t one - f our t h o f t he
c onc r e t e s uppor t ar ea (A2); or t he concr et e
suppor t i ng ar ea (A2) is i deal l y f our t i mes t he base
pl at e ar ea ( A 0.
II - ]
El
0.80bf
d
0.80 D
~ 0.95 b ~
F I GURE 4 - CRI T I CAL BE NDI NG
DI ME NS I ONS
I m I r
REBAR
~ DOWELS - ~
.
;
STUDS
OR LUGS
a) ANCHOR BOLTS
WITH PLATE
WASHERS
b) SHEAR KEY c) EMBEDDED SHEAR
PLATE WITH
WELDED SlOE PLATES
d) EMBEDDED SHEAR
STRUT
FIGURE 5 - METHODS TO TRANSFER SHEAR FORCE FROM COLUMN TO FOUNDATION
The final step in determining the required base
plate thickness is defined by calculating the
flexural demand for a critical section of plate
acting as a cantilever. For Allowable Stress
Design (ASD) the elastic section modulus (S) is
used; whereas for Load and Resistance Factor
Design (LRFD) the plastic section modulus (Z) is
used. The dimensions of the critical section are
based on 0.95d and 0.8bf for wide flange sections,
0.80 times the outer diameter of pipes and 0.95
times the out-to-out dimension of tubes (See
Figure 4). According to ASD, the allowable
bending capacity is equal t o 0. 75Fy where Fy is the
allowable yield strength of the steel. I f LRFD is
preferred, the design strength is equal t o 0.90Fy.
See References 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 for useful design
equations and design aids.
4.3 Design for Gravity Loads in Combination
with Uplift Loads
When there are net uplift loads, such as can occur
in the end columns of concentric or eccentric
braced frames (CBF or EBF), the anchor bolts
and base plates need to be checked and increased
in size if necessary. When uplift loads are very
high, it may be necessary to add stiffener plates
welded to the column flanges and design longer
anchor bolts above the base plate to accommodate
the stiffeners. However, it still may be more
economical to use a thicker base plate than to add
the stiffeners because of the high labor cost
involved with the stiffeners. Anchor bolts need to
be well embedded in the supporting foundation
concrete to develop the tensile capacity of the
anchor bolts, and to preclude anchor bolt pullout
due to shear cone failure in the concrete. This
detail becomes even more critical for braced
frames or moment frames subjected to wind or
earthquake forces where failure of the base plate
assembly would cause overturning due to uplift
resulting in loss of lateral resistance in the braced
frame or moment frame. For earthquake loads,
since actual loads are much higher than code
design forces (which have been reduced to account
for "ductility" in the braced frame), yielding should
occur in the brace for a CBF or in the "link" beam
for an EBF. The base plate assembly needs to be
strong enough to ensure that yielding will occur in
these other elements.
4.4 Design for Gravity Loads in Combination
with Shear Forces
Taking section 4.3 a step further, i f a brace occurs
at the base of a column, a high shear force is
10
introduced from the horizontal force component in
the brace. This force must be resisted by the base
plate assembly. There are various proposed
methods to transfer this shear force:
1. Anchor Bolts (See Figure 5a);
. Shear Key - A steel shear key is welded to
the bottom of the base plate to interlock with
the concrete
(See Figure 5b);
. Embedded Shear Plate - Shear plates are
field welded to the sides of the base plate
and to an embed plate that has welded shear
studs or shear lugs to transfer shear forces to
the concrete foundation
(See Figure 5c);
. Embedded Shear Strut - A strut member
with welded shear studs or shear lugs is
connected to the base plate or a column
gusset plate. The shear studs or shear lugs
transfer the shear force into the slab concrete
and then to the foundation through rebar
dowels (See Figure 5d).The following is a
discussion of the design issues pertaining to
these methods of transferring shear at the
base of a column.
1. Anchor bolts: When column shear forces are
resisted by the anchor bolts, they must be checked
for a combination of column shear, bending and
tension. If oversize holes are used in the base
plates for anchor bolt placement tolerance, welded
washer plates must be added so that the base plate
will not slip before engaging the anchor bolts. The
washer plates are added to the top of the base
plate and the additional bending in the anchor bolts
must be accounted for due to the increased
distance from the concrete to the washer plate.
There is a practical limit to the amount of shear the
anchor bolt/concrete interface can resist before the
anchor bolts become very large. When shear
fcrces are high, methods 2, 3 or 4 should be
considered.
2. Shear Keys: Steel shear keys can be welded
to the underside of the base plate to provide a
shear interlock with the concrete foundation
below. The bending and shear forces that the steel
key imparts to the base plate must be accounted
for. The use of such keys requires block-out voids
to be formed in the top of the foundation to allow
space for the keys and surrounding grout. Any
rebars in the foundation under the base plate must
be positioned vertically and/or horizontally to
allow for the depression in the foundation concrete
to accommodate the steel key. Shear keys are
effective in transferring shear forces from a brace
into the foundation, so that the anchor bolts only
have to resist tension forces.
3. Side Plates; Another strategy would be to
cast an embed plate into the top of the foundation.
The embed plate would have shear studs or lugs
welded to the bottom to transfer shear forces into
the foundation. The embed plate would be larger
than the base plate to accommodate setting
tolerance and to accommodate side plates to
transfer shear forces from the base plate to the
embed plate and foundation. The column would
be erected and leveled in the same manner as any
conventional column. Loose plates would be
added and field welded to the sides of the base
plate and to the embed plate. Grouting between
the base plate and embed plate would be the final
step in the process. This detail is practical because
it provides a template for the anchor bolts and
allows for confinement of the grout.
4. Struts; When shear forces are high and shear
keys or embedded plates are not practical for
detailing reasons, steel struts can be added that are
embedded into the slab concrete. The strut is
welded or bolted to the base plate or to a stiffener
or gusset plate welded to the base plate. The strut
should have shear studs or lugs welded to it to
transfer axial forces from the strut to the concrete
slab. The slab adjacent to the strut should be
doweled to the foundation to transfer forces from
the slab to the foundation. Attention to
construction details and sequencing is important
so that the rebars around the strut do not interfere
11
with being able to position and connect the strut to
the base plate.
4.5 Design for Gravity Loads in Combination
with Shear Forces and Moments
When a base plate assembly must transfer column
base moments to the foundation, the mechanism
for resisting the moments is typically taken by the
combination of the tensile capacity of the anchor
bolts and the bearing capacity of the concrete or
masonry. This forms a "couple" consisting of the
tension force in the anchor bolts and the equivalent
force at the centroid of the bearing area under the
base plate. This is analogous to the internal forces
to resist bending in a concrete "cracked" section.
The other gravity, shear, and uplift forces acting in
combination with the bending moment must also
be added and accounted for.
Two methods are presented for consideration
when designing base plates subject to bending
moment. See References 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 for
additional information on how to calculate and
design for this combination of loads.
The first method is based on the assumption that
stresses caused by the moment are linear across
the base plate length. The tensile force in the
anchor bolt is dependent on the bearing area. An
equation is provided in Reference 1 to calculate
the effective length of bearing. (See Figure 6,
Method 1). This may not be consistent with actual
behavior since the assumption relies on linear
deformation of the base plate.
The second method is based on the assumption
that the resultant of the bearing length is directly
beneath the column flange. The basis of this
assumption is that the flange experiences a greater
axial load compared to the web because of the
higher combination of axial and flexural stresses,
and the relative width of the column flange to the
web (See Figure 6, Method 2). This method may
produce inaccurate results as well since the
bearing length may extend over to the anchor bolt
in tension. More testing and research is required
to confirm the validity of either method with actual
, ~ M
P+T /
METHOD 1
TENSION B
FORCE
IN BOLT
AXIAl. & FLEXURAL
STRESS IN
COLUMN
FORCE
P I TRANSMITTED
~ ~ M TO BASE PLATE
& ANCHOR BOLT
\
PT
METHOD 2
FI GURE 6 - COLUMN WI TH AXI AL
& FLEXURAL DEMAND
12
behavior. See References 1 and 5 for further
explanation and useful equations.
When the column moments are known, the design
is more straightforward than if the moments are
more unpredictable, such as at the base of
moment frame columns which resist earthquake
forces where ductility becomes an important issue.
See Section 4.6 for additional discussion of base
plate assemblies that resist seismic forces.
4. 6 De s i gn f or Mo me n t s due to Se i s mi c
Forces
Unfortunately, the behavior of base plates in
moment frames and braced flames subjected to
earthquake forces is not fully understood.
Research and code guidance are limited. The
engineer is forced to use judgment and the
interpretation of the results from tests on
assemblies with similar components in order to
achieve a design that hopefully will have the
desired level of performance.
Trying to fix, or partially fix, the base of moment
frame or braced frame columns against rotation
may be necessary to reduce the drift: in the story
above the base plate location. Consider the
following scenarios:
1. Continue the column into the foundation or
into a basement level below;
2. Design a heavy base plate assembly strong
enough to force a plastic hinge in the column.
This is difficult to accomplish even for relatively
small columns. The base plate and anchor bolts
become very large and anchor bolt anchorage
becomes difficult. The foundation must be capable
of resisting the high moments from the column
base assembly (See Figure 7a). Currently,
research is ongoing at the University of Michigan
by Professor Subhash Goel on base plate
assemblies of this type;
3. I f the steel frame is supported on spread
footings with moment resisting grade beams
between the footings or supported on a grade
beam grid system, partially fix the base of the
column by designing the footing/grade beam
system to form plastic hinges in the grade beams
that behave in a ductile manner. Size the base
plate assembly to develop the strength of the
footing/grade beam considering the overstrength
of the concrete sections.' Any plastic hinges
should occur in the grade beams;
4. Design a partially fixed base plate assembly.
This will help limit drift, and the base plate and
anchor bolt dimensions will be more manageable
than with a fixed base solution. Drift can be
reduced dramatically because the column will be
forced to bend in double curvature. The challenge
is to design the base plate assembly to behave in a
ductile manner. I f partial fixity is lost during an
earthquake due to the failure of the base plate or
stretching or breakage of the anchor bolts, the drift
of the first story will increase dramatically
resulting in more damage and possible failure of
the column. A failure of the second floor beams
could also occur if they were not designed for the
extra bending or are not ductile enough to
accommodate the extra rotation. (See Figures 7b,
7c, and 7d);
5. "Pin" the base of the column by designing a
base plate assembly that will have relatively little
moment resistance, but will be ductile enough to
accommodate the first story seismic drift:.
Some design issues relative to scenarios 4 and 5.
will be discussed further. Scenarios 1, 2 and 3 are
beyond the scope of this paper.
For all column to base plate welded connections,
the same issues relative to beam to column
connections in ductile moment frames should be
considered to preclude a failure in or near the
weld, particularly if a full plastic hinge in the
column above the base plate is the desired design
goal. The reader should refer to the documents
and research currently being done by the SAC
Joint Venture on moment frames (See Reference
8).
13
..co oM. j / \ ,.BAsE L
~ m m
~ " 1 , . , . ,,: ...... : . : : . i . . : ~ :. ),:,: ~ ( : . . ~ . : i ' ~ :' ~ ! .::!! ~ L E ~ L IN G ~ ~ ":;~::~ ~ ~ - '~ '
[ I i t I t k P T E /11
+
ANCHOR
BOLT
YIELD
ZONE
a) HINGE IN
COLUMN
b) BASE P~TE
YIELDING
c) ANCHOR BOLT
YIELDING BELOW
BASE P~TE
FI GURE 7 - YI ELDI NG MECHANI SMS
~ - - - t - - ~ ] . ~ - ~ A N C H O R
I I I I I I I I I 1 | BoLT
,' , , , , ', I . Y . % 2
~ i:::: ~.~.~.. _~f.w~ , : : :
NO
/ I ' - LEVELING
6) ~NCNOR BOkT
YEk~ING ~OV~
BASE P~TE
For . a partially fixed column base as described in
scenario 4, there are t wo mechanisms to achieve
the ductility in the base plate assembly:
a. Design the base plate t o yield in bending by
designing the anchor bolts t o be strong enough to
force plastic hinges in the base plate (See Figure
7b). The plate must be large enough, but not t oo
t hi ck so t hat a plastic hinge region can form
bet ween the column flanges and the anchor bolts
wi t hout inducing a shear failure in the base plate.
A leveling plate should be provided under the base
plate t o prot ect the gr out while the base plate
under goes deformat i ons during the cyclical
bending excursions.
b. Desi gn the base plate strong enough to force
yielding in the anchor bolts (See Figures 7c and
7d). Nut s and washers must be used above and
bel ow the base plate (Figure 7c) or the top
horizontal plate (Figure 7d) to force the anchor
bol t s t o resist axial forces in both tension and
compr essi on so that there will be cyclic capacity
and ductility in the assembly. There must be
sufficient unbonded length in the bolts to allow for
the required elongation without overstraining the
bolts. The ultimate strength of the bolt must be
high enough t o preclude failure at the reduced
sect i on in the t hreaded portion of the bolt before
the bolt yields. This can become a problem when
the ultimate strength of the bolt ( F, ) is t oo close t o
t he yield strength (Fy). Some accommodat i on
must be made so t hat the bolts will not buckle
when they are in compression. De-bondi ng and
buckling resistance can be provi ded by using pipe
sleeves within the foot i ng (Figure 7c). I f the
yielding portion of t he anchor bolts is above the
base plate, sleeves or "gui des" can be provided to
resist bolt buckling (Figure 7d).
Ver y few test results are available t o validate the
behavi or of either mechanism described in a or b.
Mor e research and devel opment into base plate
behavi or and design guidelines are needed for
anchor bolt/base plate assemblies t hat are
subjected to very high moment s where yielding is
necessary to achieve the desired performance.
4.7 Architectural Issues
Archi t ect ural issues should be considered when
designing and detailing base plate assemblies.
Anchor bolt assemblies need to fit within slab
thicknesses. There needs t o be sufficient distance
between the t op of foundat i on and the t op of slab
to accommodat e grout , leveling nut and washer
14
plate below the base plate, the base plate, the
washer plate, nut and bolt projection plus concrete
cover above the top of bolt. Usually, this
dimension is at least 12 inches. For projects with
large columns and thick base plates, 12 inches is
not enough. This is an important dimension to
establish early because it affects the foundation
depth.
Any stiffener plates added above the base plate
must fit within the architectural finish around the
column. I f stiffeners are needed, the dimensions
should be co-ordinated with the architect early in
the design since it may be necessary to increase the
finish dimensions, since this dimension will affect
useable floor space. Also, the dimensions of any
vertical stiffener plates should be checked to insure
that the stiffener plates will not protrude above the
slab outside of the column finish dimensions.
5. 0 CONCLUSI ONS
Base plates serve a critical role in transferring
column loads to the foundation. This Steel Tips
discusses design, fabrication and erection issues
related to base plates and anchor bolts. Suggested
details are presented and details to be avoided are
shown. The engineer needs to be aware of
materials available and should recognize that
special attention to base plate and anchor bolt
details can result in reduced costs during
fabrication and erection. Base plate assemblies
must be designed to accommodate temporary
erection loads until the column is tied in with other
structural members. Special attention by
contractors when placing anchor bolts can reduce
field problems and delays due to mislocated anchor
bolts.
6.0 REFERENCES
1. Design of Welded Structures by Omer W.
Blodgett, James F. Lincoln Arc Welding
Foundation, 15 ~h Printing, 1996
2. AISC Manual of Steel Construction, LFRD
Design, Volumes I and II, Second Edition,
1994
3. AISC Manual of Steel Construction, ASD
Design, Ninth Edition, 1989
4. ASTM Standards in Building Codes, Volume
1, 35 'h Edition, 1998
5. Column Base Plates, Steel Design Guide
Series 1 by John T. DeWol f and David T.
Ricker, AISC 1990
6. AISC Engineering Journal "Beam-Column
Base Plate Design - LRFD Method" by
Richard M. Drake and Sharon J. Elkin, First
Quarter 1999, Volume 36, Number 1.
7. Steel Tips, "Common Steel Erection Problems
and Suggested Solutions" by James J. Putkey,
SSEC publication, December 1993.
8. SAC Interim Guidelines: Evaluation, Repair,
Modification and Design of Welded Steel
Moment Frame Structures, FEMA 267,
August 1995
More research and design guidelines are needed
for base plate assemblies subjected to high bending
moments, such as in moment frames subjected to
earthquake forces. For partially fixed column base
assemblies, mechanisms that must behave in a
ductile manner are needed. Some alternative
strategies and concepts are presented.
15
About the Authors
Bill Honeck, a Principal of Forell/Elsesser
Engineers, Inc., has 34 years of experience in
st ruct ural engineering, 9 o f which were in
structural steel design, fabrication and erection.
This also included 2 years designing electric
transmission t ower s and substation framing. In
addition, several o f his large-scale projects have
been produced on fast-track.
Fr om 1965 t o 1974 Bill Honeck was project
manager/ engi neer for Bethlehem Steel in the
construction o f numerous highrise and large scale
structures. Duri ng t hese 9 years Bill Honeck had
practical experience in structural steel highrise
buildings and large bridges. His responsibilities
included structural steel erection, cost estimating
and erection engineering, coordinating jobs,
scheduling, reviewing costs, and implementing
savings where possible.
He wor ked in the field and office in connection
with steel erection as a field engineer, and was in
charge o f erection engineering for the West ern
District from 1967 t o 1974. He was also
responsible for designing fal sework and related
structures, erection scheming, and checking
structural integrity of steel f r amewor k for erection
related loads.
Der ek Westphal, a project engineer and analyst
with Forell/Elsesser, began his career with the firm
in earl y 1996. In his experience t o dat e he has
devel oped a st rong background in the seismic
ret rofi t o f historic buildings as well as the new
construction o f office buildings, l aborat ory, and
university facilities.
16
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCT SERVICE
March 2001
Large Seismic Steel
Beam-to-Column Connections
by
Egor P. Popov, Professor
Shakhzod M. Takhirov, Ph.D.
Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center (PEER)
University of California, Berkeley
Professor Egor Paul Popov standing next to his last steel connection test specimen
(February 2001).
Egor Paul Popov, Professor Emeritus of Civil and Environmental Engineering at the
University of California, Berkeley, passed away Thursday, April 19, 2001, after a brief
illness.
Professor Popov began his engineering studies at the University of California, Berkeley,
and continued with graduate work at the California Institute of Technology, the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and Stanford University, where he obtained his
doctorate degree in 1946. In his lengthy and illustrious career, he was called upon by
NASA for his engineering expertise and played a key role in the structural analyses of the
Alaskan Pipeline and the Oakland-San Francisco Bay Bridge. Popov joined the
Department of Civil Engineering at UC Berkeley in 1946, and was active in teaching and
research there for more than 50 years. His research interests covered a wide spectrum of
topics in earthquake engineering, including cyclic testing and modeling of structural
members; the development, research, and application of the eccentrically braced frame;
research on the seismic resistance of steel connections and the development of improved
connection details; and the development of friction devices to retrofit existing structures.
He was appointed the first chairman of AISCD's Committee on Seismic Provisions for
Steel Buildings and served in this position for several years. Elected to the National
Academy of Engineering in 1976, Professor Popov was honored in 1999 with the
Earthquake Engineering Research Institute's highest honor, the George W. Housner
Medal.
Table of Contents
Abstract...........................................................................................ii
1 Review of the Previous Research
1.1 Introduction.. ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ..............................................................1
1.2 Overview .........................................................................................1
1.3 Tension Tests on A490 1 Bolts............................................................1
1.4 Test Specimen Design and Detailing.......................................................2
2 Connection Design and Estimate Calculations
2.1. Test specimens based on the proposed design...........................................2
2.2. Basic Parameters Used in the Connection Calculation................................2
2.2.1. Calculation of Plastic Hinge Location in the Beam.....................................3
2.2.2. Calculation of Probable Plastic Moment at the Hinges.................................3
2.2.3. Beam Shear Calculation... ... ..............................................................3
2.2.4. Calculation of the Moment at the Centerline of the Column..........................4
2.2.5. Check for Strong Column - Weak Beam Condition. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.3. The Connection Details Calculations......................................................5
2.3.1. Calculation of the T-section Stem Thickness at the Weakest Section near the
Column Face. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2.3.2. Calculation of the T-section Flange Size. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
2.3.3. Calculation of Bolt Size Between the T-section and the Column Flanges (During
the Design 1 inch High-Strength Bolts were Chosen)......................................7
2.3.4. Calculation of Weld Size to Beam Flanges for Both Specimens (3/4 inch Fillet
Weld Was Used). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3 Experimental Program
3.1 Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2 Test Specimens, Test Setup and Instrumentation.......................................9
3.2.1 Test Setup. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.2 Instrumentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5.2.3 Data Acquisition......................................................................................9
3.2.4 Loading History. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.2.5 Data Processing. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.3 Test Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.3.1 Specimen 1.....................................................................................11
3.3.2 Specimen 2.....................................................................................12
4 Experimental Results and Conclusions
4.1 Experimental results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2 Conclusions: advantages and disadvantages of proposed connections............13
4.2.1 Advantages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.2.2 Disadvantages. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
4.2.3 Future Research Directions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
i
ABSTRACT
Two large bolted steel moment-resisting connections were studied by experiments. These
connections were single-sided beam-column assemblies that are representative of exterior
beam-column connections, and they were composed of W36xl50 Grade 50 beams and
W14x283 Grade 50 columns. T-sections were cut from W40x264 sections of Grade 50
steel. The T-section stems were welded to the beams and pre-stressed by bolts to the
beam flanges in the shop. Final beam-to-column assembly required no additional
welding: the T-section flanges were bolted to the column and the column shear tab was
bolted to the beam web. The specimens had two symmetrically located T-sections with
the difference in web geometry: the Specimen 1 had rectangular shape of stems, whereas
the Specimen 2 had U-shaped stems. During the cyclic testing the beam deformation was
minimal due to active participation of the T-section flanges: a separation between T-
section flanges and the column flanges were observed. This separation was occurred due
bending plastic deformation in the T-section flanges. This phenomenon allowed energy
dissipation and prevented the beam flanges and beam web from severe buckling.
ii
1 Review of the Previous Research
1.1 Introduction
The generally accepted detail of attaching steel beams to columns in seismic applications
consists of shear tabs attached to the column and direct welding of beam flanges with or
without cover plates to column flanges. Numerous tests on this type of a connection were
supported by NSF with many specimens donated by the fabricators. The testing of such
specimens was organized by SAC Joint Venture.
The moment capacity of such connections depends on cyclic endurance of flange welds
in both tension and compression. Under these conditions numerous tension weld failures
were observed both in the laboratory and the field. SAC has proposed six connections to
avoid future weld failures. We propose another connection that avoids weld failures and
it is field bolted and shop welded.
1.2 Overview
An attempt at the above approach on several end-plate connections was made by K.C.
Tsai and E.P. Popov at University of California, Berkeley (1988 and 1990). An example
of this kind of a connection is shown in Fig. 1-1. It is of interest to note that direct
welding of a beam to a column stub shown Specimen 9 in Fig. 1-1 results in good
behavior, but the erection is not generally practical. Specimen 10 in Fig. 1-1 with no ribs
over the beam flanges did not give satisfactory results. Specimen 10R with ribs over the
beam flanges at the column stub behaved very well under cyclic loading as can be seen in
Fig. 1-2. Note the required large thickness of the end plate (a connection based on the
design of Specimens 10 and 10R may require shims during assembling).
The above approach recently was also pursued by T.M. Murray and his associates in
2000 at Virginia Polytechnic Institute (VPI) with good results. They achieved a number
of successful tests with W36xl50 beams. It appears that for larger or heavier beams the
use of ribs over beam flanges at columns would be required.
An extensive excellent study of bolted connections has been done at Georgia Institute of
Technology by R. Leon and his associates in 2000. The work is very comprehensive, but
is limited to small and medium size members.
The newly developed and tested connection at University of California, Berkeley is
somewhat related to the end plate connection but is more versatile as it is more readily
adaptable to a larger range of heavier beams. The new connection depends on the use of
A490 1 bolts in tension in oversize round holes (as in the column flange and in the T-
section flange as well) and shop fillet welds.
1.3 Tension Tests on A490 1 Bolts
l
In order to conduct ductility study on the A490 1 bolts two tests were performed. For
the first test, a special device was built to test simultaneously the shank of the bolt and the
threaded part of the bolt below the nut. The actual failure occurred in the threaded region.
The remarkable ductility of A490 bolt was clearly demonstrated and the load versus
elongation diagram is presented on Fig. 1-3. Another experiment on a specimen of
constant diameter machined from A490 bolt also showed excellent ductility. Figure 1-4
shows stress versus strain diagram for this test.
1.4 Test Specimen Design and Detailing
One of newly developed connections using A490 1 bolts is shown in Fig. 1-5. The
details for the two specimens are shown in Fig. 1-6 and 1-7. In both cases the attachment
of a beams to a column is made using structural tees cut from W shapes (T-sections). A
large choice of such sections is available. By rotating the beam all fillet welds can be
done in the shop in a down-hand position. Generous rounded fillets occur in all cases
between a beam flange and the stem of the T-sections. Shop experience in fabricating
these two specimens was very encouraging.
2 Connection Design and Estimate Calculations
2.1. Test specimens based on the proposed design.
The beams were fabricated from a W36xl50 section of A572-Gr.50 steel, the columns
were fabricated from a W14x283 section of A572-Gr.50 steel. The T-sections were made
from W40x264 section of A572-Gr.50 steel. The geometrical properties of the beam
sections used in the specimens are presented in Tables 2-1 though 2-3. They represent
widely available data for standard rolled I-beams with W- shapes (see, for instance, AISC
1995a).
The global dimensions and geometry of the specimens are shown in Fig. 1-5. Figures 1-6
and 1-7 show the design details for the Specimen 1 and the Specimen 2. The material
properties of the connections from mill certificate data are presented in Table 2-4. The
specimens had two symmetrically located T-sections with the difference in the geometry
of the stems: the Specimen 1 had rectangular shape of the stems, whereas the Specimen 2
had U-shaped stems. The T-section stems were welded to the beams in the shop, and later
the T-section flanges were bolted to the columns.
2.2. Basic Parameters Used in the Connection Calculation.
Nonlinear deformation of a building frame is typically accommodated through the
development of inelastic flexural or shear stains within discrete regions of the structure.
At large deformations these regions can develop into plastic hinges, which can
accommodate significant concentrated rotations without significant changes of the load,
as shown in Fig. 2-1. This behavior is accompanied by significant energy dissipation,
particularly by members involved in plastic deformation. The formation of plastic hinges
in the beams is extremely desirable.
2
2.2.1. Calculation of Plastic Hinge Location in the Beam.
The probable location for the formation of the plastic hinges is a basic parameter for the
connection calculations. Figure 2-2 shows the suggested location of the plastic hinge. The
location depends on the type of connection and our design is close to a cover-plate type,
therefore the plastic hinge can be developed at the following distance from the face of the
column (FEMA 267a):
L
h
= d
sts
+ d
b
/4,
Where:
d
b
is a depth of the beam, the value of the beam depth db is presented in the Table 2-1;
d
sts
is a total depth of the T-section. This parameter is 28.75 inches for the Specimen 1
and 20 inches for the Specimen 2, as it is shown in Table 2-3.
Therefore the plastic hinge is located at the following distance from the face of the
column:
L
h
= 37.7 inches, for the Specimen 1 and
L
h
= 29.0 inches, for the Specimen 2.
2.2.2. Calculation of Probable Plastic Moment at the Hinges.
The probable value of the plastic moment, M
pr
, at the location of the plastic hinge should
be calculated from the equation, proposed in FEMA-267b:
M
pr
=1.1Z
b
F
yb
.
Where:
F
yb
is the actual yield stress of the beam material, as identified from mill test reports in
the Table 2-4,
Zb is the plastic modulus of the beam section determined from the Table 2-1.
Therefore for the proposed design and for chosen material properties Z
b
= 581 inch
3
, and
F
yb
= 56.6 ksi, the probable value of the plastic moment is as following:
M
pr
= 36173 kip*inch.
2.2.3. Beam Shear Calculation.
The shear in the beam, at the location of the plastic hinge should be determined. The
length of the arm at plastic hinge location is calculated from total beam length, L
b
, minus
the distance of the hinge location, Lh. Therefore the shear at the plastic hinge Vp can be
determined from the formula:
V
p
=M
pr
/(L
b
-L
h
).
3
Therefore the values of the shear at the location of the plastic hinge are
V
p
= 375.7 kips, for the Specimen 1, and
V
p
= 344.4 kips, for the Specimen 2.
2.2.4. Calculation of the Moment at the Centerline of the Column.
The moment at centerline of the column can be calculated as following, as it shown on
Fig. 2-3:
M
c
= M
pr
+ V
p
(L
h
+ d
c
/2).
This expression is modified by using previous expression for the shear and the formula
for the moment calculation has the following form:
M
c
= V
p
(L
b
+ d
c
/2).
In our particular case the values of the moment at the centerline of the column are
M
c
= 53485 kip*inch, for the Specimen 1, and
M
c
= 49030 kip*inch, for the Specimen 2.
2.2.5. Check for Strong Column - Weak Beam Condition.
Buildings with the plastic hinges in the beams dissipate more energy than buildings with
plastic hinges in the columns. Therefore, the connection in the building has to develop the
plastic hinge in the beam rather than in the column. To determine if the desired strong
column - weak beam condition exists, the connection assembly should be checked for the
following condition (FEMA 267b):
Where:
Zc - is the plastic modulus of the column section above and below the connection,
Fyc - is the maximum specified yield stress for the column above and below,
f
a
- is the axial stress in the column above and below,
- is the sum of the column moments at the top and the bottom of the panel zone,
respectively, resulting from the development of the probable beam plastic moments, M
pr
.
In our case the column moment at the top of the panel zone, M
ct
, and the moment at the
bottom of panel zone, M
cb
, are the same:
M
cb
= M
ct
= (M
C
/2)(L
C
/2 - d
c
/2)/( L
c
/2) .
For the proposed connection the last formula produces the following values for both
specimens:
4
Z F f M
c yc a c
( ) / . . >10
M
c
M
cb
= M
ct
= 23351 kip*inch for the Specimen 1 and
M
cb
= M
ct
= 21406 kip*inch for the Specimen 2.
The axial stress in the column is calculated from the shear load acting in the column
divided by the effective area of the column cross section:
f
ab
= f
ab
= V
p
/A
c
.
In case of the proposed connection the axial stress is calculated as following:
f
ab
= f
ab
= 4.51 ksi for the Specimen 1 and
f
ab
= f
ab
= 4.13 ksi for the Specimen 2.
Therefore the main criteria for the strong column - weak beam condition will be satisfied
for both specimens, because of the following results:
2.3. The Connection Details Calculations.
2.3.1. Calculation of the T-section Stem Thickness at the Weakest Section near the
Column Face.
The weakest cross section near the column face is located at the K-line of the T-section.
This section is at a distance, which includes the flange thickness of the T-section, t
sts
and
radius of the fillet in the K-line. This value is equal to 3 inches. The location of the
section is presented on Fig. 2-4. The moment at this location is calculated as following:
M
ws
= V
p
(L
b
3).
The numeric values for the moment in case of the proposed connection are calculated as
following:
M
ws
= 49214 kip*inch for the Specimen 1 and
M
ws
= 45114 kip*inch for the Specimen 2.
The chosen cross section consists of the cross sections of T-section stems and the cross
section of the shear plate, as it is shown in Fig. 2-5. The out of scale picture of the chosen
cross section with the dimensions used during the calculation is presented on Fig.2-5.
The connection design allows a plastic deformation in this cross section. Therefore the
total moment in this cross section will consists of two moments. The fist moment, M
1
, is
calculated with the plastic modulus of the shear plate, Z
1
, and has the following
expression:
M
1
=F
ysp
* Z
1
,
5
Z F f M
c yc a c
( ) / . . = > 110 10
Z F f M
c yc a c
( ) / . . = > 121 10
for the Specimen 1 and
for the Specimen 2.
where Z
1
=(0.75*(24)
2
) /4.
The corresponding numerical value (for F
ysp
= 56.6 ksi) is calculated as following and it
is the same for both specimens:
M
1
=6113 kip*inch.
The second moment, M
2
, is calculated with the plastic modulus of stems sections, Z
2
:
M
2
=F
yts
*Z
2
,
where Z
2
=2*18.4*16*0.96.
Therefore the numerical value of this moment (with F
yts
= 64 ksi) can be calculated as
M
2
=36176 kip*inch.
The total moment at this cross section calculated with the assumption of plastic
deformation of the section is:
M
designed
=42289 kip*inch.
The difference between the designed moment, M
designed
, and the expected one at this
weak section, Mws, is within 14 percent. This difference is acceptable, because the weak
cross section has extremely small length (less then 3 percent of the beam depth) and it is
followed by a very strong cross section. The strong cross section has very high value of
the elastic section modulus and allows only elastic deformation up to the following value
of the moment:
M
stong
=58415 kip*inch.
2.3.2. Calculation of the T-section Flange Size.
In order to find the thickness of the T-section's flange the flange was modeled as a fixed-
end beam shown in Fig. 2-6. The concentrated load acts at the midpoint of the beam and
represents the stem's puling force. The maximum force developed in the stem can be
calculated as following:
P = F
yts
A
stem
,
where the cross section area of the stem is A
stem
=16*0.96=15.36 inch
2
. Therefore the
value of the load is as following:
P = 983 kips.
The statically indeterminate beam presented in Fig. 2-6, can be solved for the reaction
forces and moments and they have the following expressions (AISC 1995a, page 4-195):
R
a
= R
b
=P/2,
6
M
a
= M
b
=PL/8.
Therefore the reaction moment applied at the bolt location has the following maximum
value:
M
a
= M
b
=584 kip*inch
The connection design assumes that the plastic deformations can be developed near the
bolt location. Therefore the required plastic modulus of the flange cross section is as
following:
Z
required =
M
a
/F
yts
,
or Z
required
= 9.1 inch
3
.
The chosen flange of the T-section has to have the plastic modulus not lower then the
required one, and it's value for the chosen flange thickness is:
Z
designed
= 16*(1.73)
2
/4 =11.97 inch
3
.
The elastic section modulus for the rectangular cross section of the flange is 1.5 times
less then the plastic one and is equal to
S
designed
= 7.98 inch
3
.
Therefore the design allows the flange yielding but without developing a plastic hinge
near the bolt location.
2.3.3. Calculation of Bolt Size Between the T-section and the Column Flanges (During
the Design 1 inch High-Strength Bolts were Chosen).
As it was discussed before the model for the T-section flanges is shown in Fig. 2-6.
According this model the total axial force acting in each row (of 4 bolts) is:
R
a
=R
b
=P/2=492kips.
The corresponding axial force acting in one bolt is:
R
bolt
=123 kips.
For the chosen 1 inch high-strength bolts the design tensile strength is (AISC 1995b)
R
bolt(LFRD)
=104 kips.
The conducted tests on the high-strength bolts (see section 1.3 of this report) show very
high ductility of the used bolts, the bolt specimen started to yield at 132 kips with the
ultimate tensile load of 150 kips (see results presented on Fig. 1-3). These results explain
7
the chose of the 1 inch high-strength bolts for the column and the T-section
connection.
2.3.4. Calculation of Weld Size to Beam Flanges for Both Specimens (3/4 inch Fillet
Weld Was Used).
The total length of the weld is different for the specimens, the length per the beam flange
is designed as following (including weld in U-shaped part for Specimen 2):
l
weld
- 2*23.5=47.0 inch for the Specimen 1 and.
l
weld
= 2*14.75+2*9.25=48.0 inch for the Specimen 2.
The maximum force in the beam flange will be equal to the product of the flange cross
section area, A
bflange
, and the specified yield stress for the beam, F
yb
:
F
max
= A
bflange
F
yb
.
For the numerical parameters of the proposed connection, the value of this force is equal
to
Fmax = 638 kips for both specimens.
The load per inch of the fillet weld is calculated as following:
F
per\inch
=13.3 kips/inch for the Specimen 1 and
F
per\inch
=13.6 kips/inch for the Specimen 2.
The required leg length is calculated the widely used expression
l
leg
= F
per\inch
/(0.707*1.7*21 ksi).
The required leg length for the designed specimens is determined as following:
l
leg
=0.54 inch for the Specimen 1 and
l
leg
=0.53 inch for the Specimen 2.
Based on the results of these calculations the 3/4 inch weld was used during the
manufacturing the specimens.
3 Experimental Program
3.1 Introduction
This section summarizes the results of cyclic testing of two full scale beam-column
bolted connection specimens. The specimens were designed by Prof. E.P. Popov and
were fabricated by Stoltz Metals, Inc. The tests were carried out in the Structural
8
Research Laboratory of the Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University
of California at Berkeley.
3.2 Test Specimens, Test Setup and Instrumentation
3.2.1 Test Setup
The specimens were tested in the Structural Research Laboratory of PEER, UC Berkeley.
The test setup was designed to accommodate specimens with columns in vertical
position, as shown in Fig. 3-1. The specimens were attached to horizontal and vertical
frames. The horizontal steel frame was pre-stressed to the strong floor. The columns in
the test specimens were attached to the horizontal frame and the vertical reaction frame
using short segments of W 14x311 to achieve near pinned boundary conditions.
The load was applied to the cantilever beam end by a 400-kip hydraulic actuator, through
a clevis bolted to the beam end plate. The testing setup had displacement capacity of
7.75 inches and load capacity of 350-kip. No axial load was applied to the column.
The test was conducted using the beam end displacement control. The beam end was at a
distance of 134 in from the column face. To prevent out of plane movement of the beam,
a vertical bracing system was provided near the beam end. The photograph in Fig. 3-2
shows a view of a test in progress.
3.2.2 Instrumentation
Many sensors were used to monitor the response of the specimens during the test in order
to understand the specimen behavior. Figure 3-3 shows the location of displacement
measuring instruments on the specimens. The imposed displacement at the end of the
beam was measured by LVDT (Linear Variable Differential Transformer). This
displacement is denoted by , a load cell in-line with the actuator measured axial force P.
The DCDT (which is a LVDT with built-in solid state oscillator and phase-sensitive
demodulator) displacement transducers were used to provide the remaining displacement
measurements. The deformation of the beam panel zone was calculated from readings at
and DCDT locations. Global deflection shape of the column was measured by
displacement transducers. The amplitude of gap opening between the T-section
flanges and the column flanges was measured by two displacement transducers and
Strain gages and rosettes were glued at critical locations to investigate local response.
Figures 3-4 shows these locations on the Specimen 1, the strain measuring
instrumentation for the Specimen 2 was the same, excluding some minor changes in gage
locations. Thirty-eight channels of data were used during testing.
3.2.3 Data Acquisition
The test control and the data acquisition system were run by a PC Windows-based control
and acquisition program called Automated Testing System (ATS) developed by SHRP
Equipment Corporation of Walnut Creek, California. This Program is capable of signal
9

-
.
generation, four-channel servo-actuator command, and sixteen-channel data acquisition.
For the tests the ATS system was used to monitor and control the displacement and force-
feedback signals.
Other data were monitored and recorded using an AutoNet data acquisition system with a
capacity of 64 channels. Pacific Signal Conditioners were used to amplify the transducers
and the strain gages signals and to remove frequencies above 100 Hz from the analog
signal.
3.2.4 Loading History
The testing program was based on the ATC-24 document "Guidelines for Cyclic Seismic
Testing of Steel Structures". The specimens were tested under displacement control,
following a loading history consisting of stepwise increasing deformation cycles. At
certain stage of plastic deformation of the specimens a few cycles with small amplitude
were imposed. Each loading step was defined by the peak beam end displacement and by
the number of cycle. Table 3-1 presents the testing program for the Specimen 1 and the
Specimen 2.
3.2.5 Data Processing
The specimen behavior was characterized by the following parameters: applied load,
beam end displacement, total plastic rotation of the connection, panel zone shear
deformation, column deformation, deformation in the T-section flange, and beam
deflection. A test specimen layout, the corresponding measurements, and the chosen
positive direction of applied load, and measured displacements are shown on Fig. 3-3.
Total displacement of the beam end is caused by rigid body motion of the
connection, the deformations of the beam itself, column, panel zone, and deformation in
the T-section flange. The rigid body motion was possible due small flexibility in the
vertical reaction frame. This part of the displacement was not too large, but it could not
be neglected. Therefore the beam end relative displacement was calculated from the
total one by subtracting of the rigid body displacement. As a result of the column and
panel zone deformations, the panel zone rotates trough an angle and changes its initial
configuration. Four displacement measurements ( and ) were used to compute
the connection rotation due column deflection and panel shear deformation . The
total beam rotation can be separated into four components: rotation due deformation of
the beam itself , rotation caused by rigid connection rotation , the contribution from
the panel zone , and the rotation due gap opening in the T-sections . These values
were determined as follows:
Total beam end displacement:
Relative beam end displacement: The remainder of the
calculation was done using this value of the displacement; where H is a distance from
pin to pin along the column, and L is the distance from the beam end to the center line
of the column
Total rotation:
10

total

1

2

4

5

total

, , ,
= - -
total
L H ( ) / .
6 3
= / L

c
Connection rotation due column deflection: Where d is a distance
between continuity plates
Panel zone shear deformation: . Where a and b are the
dimensions of the rectangular panel zone area (distance between targets in horizontal
and vertical directions)
Rotation due gap opening (and deformation) between T-section flange and column
flange:
Total plastic rotation: Where M=PL
0
(L
0
is a distance from center-line
of the actuator to the face of the column) is the moment at the face of the column and
is the elastic stiffness determined from M versus curve. The unloading path of
one of the elastic cycles below the reverse point was used to estimate this stiffness, to
avoid the influence of initial imperfections, clearances, hysteresis, etc.
A set of programs for the MATLAB 5.3 environment was created to process data and to
plot results in accordance with the procedure described above.
3.3 Test Results
3.3.1 Specimen 1
Testing of the first specimen was conducted on July 30, 2000. The specimen sustained all
loading steps up to and including the 5.69" beam tip displacement cycles without
significant damage. Testing was stopped because the maximum load for the test setup
was reached. Photo of the specimen's close up side view after the test is presented on Fig.
3-5. During the last set of the load reversals a slight buckling in the beam web and
flanges was observed. The residual buckling in the beam flange and web is shown on Fig.
3-6 and Fig. 3-7. During the test energy was dissipated by cyclic yielding of the flanges
of the T-sections, the gap between the T-section and column flanges was opening and
closing periodically. The residual gap in the upper T-section is shown on Fig. 3-8.
Table 3-1 presents the loading protocol for the both specimens. The first row in the table
presents total beam end displacement (in other words: beam end total vertical
deflection). The loading history for Specimen 1 is plotted in Fig. 3-9.
The plot of applied force versus beam tip displacement response is presented on
Fig. 3-10. The values of the displacement were obtained directly from the LVDT reading.
The relative displacement ( ) was calculated from previous displacement by subtracting
the specimen's displacement as rigid body. Because of some small flexibility in the
vertical reaction frame occurred this displacement could not be neglected. The plot of
applied force versus relative beam tip displacement is presented on Fig. 3-11.
Based on the values of the relative beam tip displacement the total beam rotation is
calculated. The imposed moment versus beam total rotation is presented on Fig. 3-12.
Figure 3-13 shows the applied moment versus the beam plastic rotation. The deformation
of the column panel zone is presented on Fig. 3-14.
11

c
d = - ( )/ .
5 4
a b ab = - + ( ) / ( )
5 4
2 2
2

T
d = - / ( ) .
8 7

pl
M K = - / .
K

pl

total

total

During the test the visible opening between the T-section flanges and the column flanges
was observed. The amplitude of the opening between flanges was measured in the
following way, the installed DCDT shows the relative displacement between targets
located at the center plane of the column and the T-section flanges (see details in Fig.3-
3). Therefore during mutual compression of two flanges this displacement is negative,
whereas the tension in T-sections web increases this distance and it becomes positive.
This relative displacement between the flanges is called as "gap opening" in the report.
Figure 3-15a and 3-15b shows these values during the test. The gap opening between T-
section flange and column flange for the upper T-section is presented on Fig. 3-15a. The
same value for the lower T-section is presented on Fig. 3-15b. The beam rotation due
these openings in the T-sections is presented on Fig.3-16.
The imposed force versus beam rotation due panel zone rotation is presented on Fig. 3-
17. The relative beam rotation calculated by subtracting rotation of the panel zone,
rotation due gap opening in T-sections and the panel zone deformation is presented on
Fig.3-18.
3.3.2 Specimen 2
Testing of the second specimen was conducted on July 20, 2000. The specimen sustained
all loading steps up to the 5.69" beam tip displacement cycles and failed at the first ramp
of the last cycle. The fracture was caused by crack in the web of the lower T-section. The
crack line started at the end of the weld and went through the hole for 1 inch bolt. Testing
was stopped after the finishing this cycle. Photo of the specimen's side view after the
testing is presented on Fig. 3-19.
During the test some energy was dissipated by cyclic yielding of the T-sections, the gap
between the T-section and the column flanges was open and closed periodically. The
residual gap in the top T-section is shown on Fig. 3-20.
At the end of the test a slight buckle in the beam web and flanges was observed. The
residual buckling in the beam flanges is shown on Fig. 3-21 and Fig. 3-22.
The crack in the stem of the bottom T-section is shown on Fig. 3-23 and 3-24. Fig. 3-23
presents the view of the location of this crack on the stem of the T-section. The location
was close to the K-line of the T-section and it was parallel to it. The crack started from
the end of the fillet weld, continues through the nearest hole for the 1 in bolt and ends at
the next bolt hole. The close view of the crack is presented on Fig. 3-24. The arrows trace
the crack line.
The loading protocol for the Specimen 2 is presented in Table 3-1. The loading history is
plotted in Fig. 3-25.
The layout of the displacement measuring instrumentation was identical for both
specimens given in Fig. 3-3. The displacement at the beam tip was measured by LVDT,
whereas the remainder of displacement measurement was done using DCDT.
12
The plot of applied force versus beam tip total displacement is presented on Fig. 3-26.
The values of the displacements were obtained directly from the LVDT reading. The
relative displacement was calculated from previous displacement by subtracting the
specimen's displacement as a rigid body. The flexibility of the reacting frame was taken
into account. The plot of applied force versus relative beam tip displacement is presented
on Fig. 3-27.
Based on the values of the relative beam tip displacement the total beam rotation is
calculated. The imposed moment versus the beam total rotation is presented on Fig. 3-28.
Figure 3-29 shows the applied moment versus the beam plastic rotation. The deformation
of the column panel zone is presented on Fig. 3-30.
During the test the visible opening between the T-section and column flanges was
observed. The values of the gap opening were measured by DCDT. Figure 3-3la and 3-
31b shows these values during the test. The gap opening between the T-section flange
and column flange for the top T-section is presented on Fig. 3-3la. The same data for the
bottom T-section is presented on Fig. 2-31b. The beam rotation due these openings in the
T-sections is presented on Fig. 3-32.
The imposed force versus beam rotation due panel zone rotation is presented on Fig. 3-
33. The relative beam rotation calculated by subtracting rotation of the panel zone,
rotation due gap opening in the T-sections and the panel zone deformation is presented on
Fig.3-34.
4 Experimental Results and Conclusions
4.1 Experimental results
A brief summary of experimental results and key parameters characterizing the
performance of tested specimens is presented in Table 4-1. The beam end displacement
corresponds to the relative beam end displacement .
4.2 Conclusions: advantages and disadvantages of proposed connections
4.2.1 Advantages
The design and performance of the proposed beam-to-column connections shows the
following advantages:
- all welding work can be done in a welding shop, in convenient welding positions
final assembling with bolts is relatively easy procedure and does not require a
rigorous quality assurance inspection (in order to achieve the required clamping force
between the column and the T-section flanges the widely available torque multiplier
from WRIGHTTOOL: Model 9S393A was used; the device does not produce any
noise and has an accuracy of 5%)
13

-
after test disassembling of Specimen 2 shows that repairing and replacing beam with
new T-section is neither difficult nor expensive
the beam deformation is minimal due to active participation of the T-sections flanges
and the column flanges during cyclic input
with shims properly installed, the connection develops less residual strain
eliminating large quantities of field weld greatly helps the connecting work to keep
up with the steel erection.
4.2.2 Disadvantages
The chosen design and the failure of Specimen 2 show the following disadvantages and
suggested improvements:
steel along the K-line of the T-section must be carefully selected
1 inch bolts (as used in Specimen 2 to pre-stress the T-section web to beam flange)
requires a greater distance between the bolt and the end of the fillet weld.
Alternatively, it appears that the bolts can be omitted altogether
- steel material of 1 " bolts has to be high quality as used in the tested connections
- connection based on the proposed design require shims for field assembly
- beams with welded top and bottom T-sections require more shipping space during
transportation.
4.2.3 Future Research Directions
Based on the conducted tests and followed data analysis the following future research on
this type of connections is planned:
- conduct 3D finite element analysis (FEA) of the connection to explore the possibility
of exchanging the existing 1 inch bolts to clamps and to investigate the decision to
remove some or all of them
- conduct 3D FEA of the connection to evaluate the critical parameters at the column-
tee joint, including the T-section size, bolt diameter, the clamping load variation and
the prying action
- fabricate and test new specimens with an improved design based on the theoretical
research and results of the previous tests.
14
-
-
-
-
-
-
References:
1. Tsai, K.C. and Popov, E.P. 1990. Cyclic behavior of end-plate moment connections.
ASCE J. of Struct. Engineering, Vol.116, No.11.
2. Tsai, K.C. and Popov, E.P. 1988. Steel Beam-Column Joints in Moment Resisting
Frames. Report No. UCB/EERC 88/19, Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
University of California at Berkeley.
3. Murray, T.M. et al. 2000. Cyclic testing of bolted moment end plate connections.
Struct. And Materials Lab., Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University.
4. Leon, Roberto et al. 2000. Tests on bolted connections. School of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, Report No. SEMM 00-02, Georgia Institute of
Technology.
5. FEMA-267. 1995a. Interim guidelines: evaluation, repair, modification and design of
welded steel moment frames. FEMA Report No. 267. Washington, D.C.: Federal
Emergency Management Agency.
6. FEMA-267. 1995b. Interim guidelines: advisory No. 1. supplement to FEMA 267.
FEMA Report No. 267. Washington, B.C.: Federal Emergency Management Agency.
7. AISC. 1995a. Manual of steel construction. Load & resistance factor design. Vol.1,
Structural members, Specifications & codes, Second edition. Chicago: American
Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.
8. AISC. 1995b. Manual of Steel Construction. Load & Resistance Factor Design.
Vol.2, Connections, Second edition. Chicago: American Institute of Steel
Construction, Inc.
15
Table 2-1. Dimensions of the W36xl50 beam.
Flange width,
b
fb
[inch]
12
Flange
thickness, t
fb
[inch]
0.94
Web
thickness,
t
wb
[inch]
0.625
Depth, d
b
[inch]
35.85
Section
modulus,
z
b
[inch
3
]
581
Area, A
b
[inch
2
]
44.2
Moment of
inertia, I b
[inch
4
]
9040
Length, L
b
[inch]
134
Table 2-2. Dimensions of the W14x283 column.
Flange width,
b
f
[inch]
16.125
Flange
thickness, t
fc
[inch]
2.06
Web
thickness,
t
f
[inch]
1.29
Depth, d
c
[inch]
16.74
Section
modulus,
Z
c
[inch
3
]
542
Area, A
c
[inch
2
]
83.3
Moment of
inertia, I
c
[inch
4
]
3840
Length, L
c
[inch]
136
Table 2-3. Dimensions of the T-sections cut fromW40x264.
Flange width,
f
ts
[inch]
12
Flange thickness,
[inch]
1.73
Stem thickness,
t
sts
[inch]
0.96
Total depth for Specimen 1
(Specimen 2), d
sts
[inch]
28.75 (20)
Length, L
ts
[inch]
16
Table 2-4. Material Properties.
No
1
2
3
Part of Connection
Beam
Column
T-section
Yield Stress, F
y
[ksi]
56.6
52
64
Ultimate Stress
[ksi]
74.4
66
79
Section Size
W36xl50
W14x283
WT40x264
Grade
Gr50
Gr50
Gr50
Table 3-1. Testing program for the both specimens.
Total beam end
displacement
[inch]
No of cycles
0.36
6
0.53
6
0.71
6
1.07
6
1.42
4
2.14
2
0.53
2
2.85
2
4.27
3
5.69
6*
* Only 2 cycles at this level were performed for Specimen 2.
16
t
fts
Table 4-1. Short summary of test results
Key parameters
Yield load [kips]
Beam end displacement at the yield point [inch]
Elastic stiffness of the connection [kips/inch]
Maximum beam end displacement
Beam end displacement at failure [inch]
Maximum imposed load [kips]
Maximum imposed moment at the column face [kips*inch]
Maximum connection rotation [ % ]
Maximum plastic connection rotation [ % ]
Maximum rotation due gap opening [ % ]
Maximum relative beam rotation itself [ % ]
Specimen 1
230
1.2
180
5.2
N/A
345
48645
4
2.5
1.0
0.6
Specimen 2
230
1.2
178
5.2
3.5
327
43164
4
3.3
0.7
1.5*
This value is high because it includes the beam rotation after the bottom beam flange failure
17
Figure 1-1. Design details of end-plate connections for Specimens 10 and 10R, and that
of direct welding to column, Specimen 9 (K.C. Tsai, E.P. Popov 1988, 1990).
L
o
a
d

(
k
i
p
s
)
Beam Rotation (%)
Figure 1-2. Cantilever beam load versus beam rotation for Specimen 10R (K.C. Tsai, E.P.
Popov 1988, 1990).
18
Figure 1-4. Stress versus strain for coupon test of A490 1 bolt material.
19
Figure 1-3. Load versus elongation for A490 1 bolt.
F
i
g
u
r
e

1
-
5
.

G
l
o
b
a
l

d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s

a
n
d

g
e
o
m
e
t
r
y

o
f

t
h
e

t
e
s
t
e
d

s
p
e
c
i
m
e
n
s
.
20
F
i
g
u
r
e

1
-
6
.

D
e
s
i
g
n

d
e
t
a
i
l
s

o
f

S
p
e
c
i
m
e
n

1
.
21
F
i
g
u
r
e

1
-
7
.

D
e
s
i
g
n

d
e
t
a
i
l
s

o
f

S
p
e
c
i
m
e
n

2
.
22
Figure 2-1. Desired plastic frame behavior with plastic hinges developed in beams.
Figure 2-2. Probable plastic hinge location.
23
Figure 2-3. Calculation of the moment at the centerline of the column.
Figure 2-4. The weakest cross-section of the beam near the column face.
24
Figure 2-5. Dimensions of the weakest cross section near the column face.
Figure 2-6. View of the column and T-section connection with the corresponding
mechanical model.
25
Figure 3-2. View of a test in progress.
26
Figure 3-1. Test setup for both specimens.
Figure 3-3. Reference dimensions and measurements for the test specimens.
Figure 3-4. Strain gages and rosettes location for Specimen 1.
27
Figure 3-6. Residual beam flange buckling (after the test).
28
Figure 3-5. Specimen 1 after the test (side view).
Figure 3-7. Residual beam web buckling (after the test).
Figure 3-8. Residual gap opening in the upper T-section (after the test).
29
Figure 3-9. Loading history for Specimen 1.
Figure 3-10. Imposed load versus total beam end displacement for Specimen 1.
30
T
i
p

D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

[
i
n
c
h
]
Time [sec]
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Beam end total displacement [inch]
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Beam end displacement [inch]
Figure 3-11. Imposed load versus beam end displacement for Specimen 1.
M
o
m
e
n
t

[
k
i
p
s
*
i
n
c
h
]
Beam Rotation [%]
Figure 3-12. Moment versus beam total rotation for Specimen 1.
31
M
o
m
e
n
t

[
k
i
p
s
*
i
n
c
h
]
Beam Plastic Rotation [%]
Figure 3-13. Moment versus beam plastic rotation for Specimen 1.
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Panel zone shear deformation [%]
Figure 3-14. Imposed load versus deformation in panel zone for Specimen 1.
32
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Relative displacement between flanges[inch]
Figure 2-15a. Relative displacement between column and top T-section flanges for
Specimen 1.
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Relative displacement between flanges[inch]
Figure 3-15b. Relative displacement between column and bottom T-section flanges for
Specimen 1.
33
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Rotation [%]
Figure 3-16. Imposed load versus beam rotation due gap opening in T-sections
(Specimen 1).
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Rotation [%]
Figure 3-17. Imposed load versus panel zone rotation for Specimen 1.
34
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

f
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Relative beam rotation [%]
Figure 3-18. Imposed load versus relative beam rotation for Specimen 1.
35
Figure 3-19. Specimen 2 after the test (side view).
Figure 3-20. Specimen 2: Residual gap opening in top T-section.
36
Figure 3-21. Specimen 2: top beam flange buckling.
Figure 3-22. Specimen 2: bottom beam flange buckling.
37
Figure 3-23. Specimen 2: crack line location.
Figure 3-24. Specimen 2: close view of the crack line.
38
Figure 3-25. Loading history for Specimen 2.
Tip Displacement [inch]
Figure 3-26. Imposed load versus total beam end displacement (Specimen 2).
39
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
T
i
p

D
i
s
p
l
a
c
e
m
e
n
t

[
i
n
c
h
]
Time [sec]
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Tip Displacement [inch]
Figure 3-27. Imposed load versus beam end displacement (Specimen 2).
Beam Rotation [%]
Figure 3-28. Moment versus beam total rotation (Specimen 2).
M
o
m
e
n
t

[
k
i
p
s
*
i
n
c
h
]
40
M
o
m
e
n
t

[
k
i
p
s
*
i
n
c
h
]
Beam Plastic Rotation [%]
Figure 3-29. Moment versus beam plastic rotation (Specimen 2).
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Panel Zone Shear Deformation [%]
Figure 3-30. Imposed load versus column panel zone deformation (Specimen 2).
41
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Gap Opening [inch]
Figure 3-3la. Relative displacement between column and top T-section flanges
(Specimen 2).
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Gap Opening [inch]
Figure 3-31b. Relative displacement between column and bottom T-section flanges
(Specimen 2).
42
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Rotation [%]
Figure 3-32. Imposed load versus beam rotation due gap opening in T-sections
(Specimen 2).
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Rotation [%]
Figure 3-33. Imposed load versus panel zone rotation for Specimen 2.
43
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
i
p
s
]
Rotation [%]
Figure 3-34. Imposed load versus relative beam rotation for Specimen 2.
44
STEELCOMMITTEEOFCALIFORNIA
TECHNICALINFORMATION & PRODUCTSERVICE
DECEMBER, 1990
Design of single Plate
Shear ConnectS,ohs.
by
Abolhassan Astaneh
Steven M. Call
Kurt M. McMullin
with discussion by
Ralph M. Richard
DISCUSSION*
Design of Single Plate Shear Connections
Paper by ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH, STEVEN M. CALL and KURT M. McMULLIN
(lst Quarter, 1989) See page 7 of This Publication.
Discussion by Ralph M. Richard
The paper develops a design procedure for single plate shear
connections based upon the results of a shear-rotation de-
vice (shown in Fig. 4 of the original paper). The claim is
made that in previous studies "...the shear connectors have
been subjected to moment and rotation or only direct shear
without rotation." This is not true.
This writer developed a design procedure for single plates
based upon stub beam tests and full scale beam tests that
included realistic connection shears. Shown in Figs. 13 and
14 of this writer's paper are moment-rotation curves which
show the effect of shear and given on page 45 of that paper
is the analytical moment-rotation curve which indeed includes
the effect of shear. It was found, however, that for practi-
cally all single plate designs the ratio, e/ h, (eccentricity
divided by bolt pattern depth), was 0.5 or greater and as
shown in Fig. 13, the moment-rotation relationship is not sig-
nificantly affected by the connection shear. The reason for
this is that the maximum moment in single plate shear con-
nections occurs at about 1.5 times the service load. This is
shown for a three and a five bolt connection in Figs. 1 and
2, respectively, of this discussion paper and is in agreement
Ralph M. Richard is professor, Department of Civil Engineer-
ing and Engineering Mechanics, University of Arizona, Tuc-
son, Arizona.
with Astaneh's observation that "...based on observations
made during the tests, it appears that shear' tabs go through
three distinctive phases of behavior. At the very early stages,
a shear tab acts as a short cantilever beam with moment be-
ing dominant. As load increases, the shear tab acts as a deep
shear beam with the shear yielding effect dominant." Had
Astaneh performed a full scale test, he would have observed
that the shear tab does not begin the shear yielding phase
of action before application of 1.5 times service load. This
linear connection action is shown in the shear-rotation plots
of Fig. 9 in Astaneh's paper. Moreover, consider Astaneh's
Design Example 1. His design procedure results in a 21 in.
x 1/2 in. x 41/2 in. plate with a shear of 102 kips service
load. At 1.5 times service load, the shear stress in this 3 in.
long and 21 in. deep cantilever beam is approximately 15
ksi which is less than the shear yield stress of 21.6 ksi for
A36 steel. In his Design Example 2, he uses a 12 in. x IA
in. 41/2 in. plate with a service shear load of 33 kips. The
shear stress in this plate at 1.5 times service load is 16.5 ksi
which again is well below the yield stress of 21.6 ksi for A36
steel.
The research at the University of Arizona, based upon stub
beam tests, full scale beam tests, and inelastic finite element
analyses that used experimentally determined bolt-deforma-
tion results, found thaf the maximum connection moment
0
0
Moment
Uniform ' ..-
IO
" x ./' ..... ,s 'X
,span L=20 'x
' / C ......... .3,3/4 A325 ' x
/ Plate : 5/t6 x
' " l " l h l l l l l l l l h I H H ' ' ' I ' ' H ' ''1 'J'Lcltlll' '[ " '' ' ' ' ' ' l ' ' "' ' ' H I ' "' ' H' 0
lO 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Uniform Load. If, Kips
Fig. 1. Single plate moments and eccentricities.
ca
c
400
3'50
300
3,90
190
100
50
O
'm rT?T?T? rn r TrrlTrTr' [.........I.........f .........I'" crrrr
't
, Loed Uniform '
Ir' Benm w 18 X ,' 1,5 '
, Span L=20
w Connection 5 . 3/4' A325
. ' Plate 5/16'
. , w.,.. 46I Kips
d
uLt u r[ uuaxt tlu&xu h i i ,, ,, i, I. . . . . . . , h . , , , ,
lo 30 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Unilorm Iond. W, Kips
Fig. 2. Single plate moments and eccentricities.
3O
20 >
tO
5
o
'k Reproduced from AISC Engineering Journal, Volume 27, No. 3, 3rd Quarter 1990
occurred near or above 1.5 times working load as shown in
Figs. I and 2 of this paper. The structural engineering pro-
fession requires that structural elements (connections, beam,
etc.) must be designed to have the strength to resist the max-
imum value of the envelope of forces the element is subjected
during loading. For the single plate shear connection, the
maximum value of the moment the weld is subjected is at
about 1.5 times the service load. Beam end rotations at these
loads are of the order of 0.006 to 0.014 radians which are
well below the 0.030 test values used by Astaneh. For uni-
formly loaded beams, it is noted that in Design Example 1,
the end rotation of this beam is 0.0055 radians at service
load and for Design Example 2 it is 0.0046 radians. How-
ever, Astaneh's recommended test and design procedure
which is based upon shear yielding of the plate, used rota-
tions four to six times these values.
Because of the significant difference in the design eccen-
tricities recommended by Astaneh and those of this writer
for the design of the single plate welds, this writer strongly
recommends that a minimum of three full scale tests with
beams subjected to a factored uniform load of 1.5 times the
service load be performed by an independent laboratory to
evaluate the moment generated by the single plate shear con-
nection before this design procedure is recommended to the
structural engineering profession. This writer has found that
these connections generate significantly larger moments than
double framing angles subjected to the same beam shear. 2
Because the bolts of the single plate are in single shear,
whereas these are in double shear for double framing an-
gles, the single plate is twice as deep and therefore much
stiffer.
REFERENCES
1. Richard, R. M. , P. E. Gillett, J. D. Kreigh, and B. A.
Lewis, "The Analysis and Design of Single Plate Fram-
ing Connections," AISC Engineering Journal, Vol. 17
(No. 2): 38-52.
2. Richard, R. M., W. K. Hsia, and M. Chmielowiec, "Mo-
ment Rotation Curves for Double Framing Angles," In-
ternational Journal of Computers and Structures, Vol. 30
(No. 3): 485-94.
Addendum/Closure by A. Ast aneh, S. C. Call and K. M.
McMullin
The discussion by Professor Richard mainly compares the
research methodologies and design procedures developed by
researchers at the University of Arizona (UA Method) to
those developed by Authors at the University of California
at Berkeley (UCB Method). The UCB Method has formed
the basis of the methods currently in the 9th Edition of the
AISC Manual. u In order to make the closure of discussion
useful to the readers, the authors have responded to the state-
ments made in the above discussion and have provided a brief
comparison of the UA and UCB design methods in the fol-
lowing sections.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
In the paper, it was indicated that "... in the past in most
cases, the shear connections have been subjected to moment
and rotation or only shear without rotation instead of a realis-
tic combination of shear and rotation." This statement is par-
ticularly true with experiments conducted at the University
of Arizona. Figure I (reproduced from Fig. 3 of the paper)
shows representative shear-rotation relationship that existed
in the connections tested by Professor Richard and his re-
search associates (Lines OA and OB). Also shown in the fig-
ure are actual shear-rotation relationship in a shear connec-
tion (Line OCD) and shear-rotation relationship that existed
in UCB tests (Line OCE).
In the stub (cantilever) tests conducted at UA, the con-
nections were primarily subjected to rotations with very small
shear applied to the connection. The shear-rotation relation-
ship for these tests is represented in Fig. I by the line OA.
By comparing this shear-rotation line to the actual shear ro-
tation line (Line OCD), it is clear that the connections in
stub beam tests were subjected to unrealistically large rota-
tions with very small shear forces applied to the connection.
Since shear forces generated in stub (cantilever) beam tests
are small compared to actual shear forces in shear connec-
tions, failure modes are very unrealistic, therefore, unrealistic
tests should not be used to develop design procedures for
shear connections.
From published data apparently a total of four tests have
been conducted using the test set-up shown in Fig. 2. Simi-
lar test set-ups have been used in the past by several
researchers to apply large shear forces to the connection.
However, if the beam shown in Fig. 2 is not loaded to fail-
ure, the amount of rotation that will be developed in the con-
Q_
:f
O
0
z
z
0
0
Z
0
bO
ACTUAL SHEAR-ROTATIOb! CURVE D G4.
C Ac2uAL>-, ' '
100
0.02 0.04 0.06
ROTATION OF BEAM END, rod.
Fig. 1. Shear-rotation relationship in UA and UCB tests.
2
nection will be very small and will be limited to elastic end
rotations which are very small compared to realistic rota-
tions that will be imposed on the connection at the time of
beam collapse.
In the full-scale tests conducted at the University of Ari-
zona, the amount of maximum shear applied to the connec-
tions is unexplainably very low. A representative of the shear-
rotation relationship applied to the connections in UA full-
scale tests is shown in Fig. 1 as Line OB. Due to application
of very low shear to the connection in these full-scale tests,
no realistic failure mode has been observed or reported and
apparently only some minor yielding of bolt holes and defor-
mation of bolts have been observed.
It is unfortunate that full-scale tests conducted at the iJni-
versity of Arizona have not been loaded to failure. Appar-
ently, the loading was not even enough to cause significant
yielding in the connections. If the tests were destructive,
several failure modes observed by us as well as by other
researchers -6' might have been observed and invaluable
data on strength of connection could be obtained. The rea-
son for stopping the loading at such a low level apparently
was a decision to load the specimens up to 1.5 times yield
capacity of the beam. From published information, it is not
clear why strength of the connections were studied under such
an arbitrary and unrealistically low load level. Therefore,
in our view, full-scale tests conducted at the University of
Arizona were incomplete and have not provided informa-
tion regarding strength and failure modes of the connections.
The details of full-scale tests conducted at the University
of Arizona and the results are not published. However, from
published data, it appears that the objective of full-scale tests
at the University of Arizona may have been to study move-
ment of point of inflection of the beam and moment-rotation
behavior. Since these full-scale tests have been non-
destructive and no connection failure modes have been ob-
served, it is not clear how the information obtained from
loading of specimens in elastic range could be used to de-
velop design procedures concerning failure modes and the
corresponding shear strength capacities.
The inelastic finite element program used in UA studies
is an analysis program and could only provide useful infor-
{top and bottom)
W Section
Load Cell I ,
/2 /2
i
Fig. 2. Test setup used in UA tests (Ref 8).
mation on the state of the strain and or stress. The program
is not capable of predicting failure modes and strengths such
as weld fracture, bolt fracture, fracture of net section or frac-
ture of the edge distance. Apparently, the finite element pro-
gram is used to simulate moment-rotation response. Again,
similar to full-scale tests, in the finite element analyses the
maximum load was about 1.5 times service load of the beams.
As far as behavior of the connection is concerned, the max-
imum load of 1.5 times service load of the beam used in UA
tests and finite element analyses is very small. For exam-
ple, the connection studied in Fig. 2 of the Discussion is
loaded up to about 50 kips shear force (100 kips total beam
load) whereas according to information obtained from our
destructive tests of similar connections and by using well
established design concepts, the shear capacity of the con-
nection is about 130 kips (260 kips total beam load). It
appears that the University of Arizona studies were limited
to the initial stage of loading where beam and connection
are almost elastic. Then the results of these studies are applied
to full range of loading up to the failure. Since the problem
is highly nonlinear, the validity of this extrapolation is
questionable.
To remove the above difficulties, the authors have devel-
oped and used a test set-up that has enabled them to apply
realistic combinations of shear and rotation to the connec-
tion until the connection fails. The shear-rotation relation-
ship used by the authors is shown in Fig. 1 as Line OCE.
The details of test set-up as well as authors' methodology
are given in several references (1 to 6) and are not repeated
here. The experimental work has resulted in establishing
realistic failure modes and corresponding design procedures
as reported in the paper.
COMPARISON OF UCB DESIGN PROCEDURES
WITH UA PROCEDURES
The destructive tests conducted by a number of researchers
including the authors have indicated that single plate shear
connections have six failure modes as follows:
a) shear yielding of plate
b) bearing failure of bolt holes
c) failure of edge distance
d) shear fracture of net section
e) bolt failure
f) weld failure
The following sections provide a discussion of each fail-
ure mode and corresponding design equations in UCB
Method and UA Method. In summarizing UA Method, the
authors have used the available published information. TM
a. Shear Yielding of Plate
In UCB method, this failure mode, which is very ductile and
desirable, is intentionally made to be the governing failure
mode.
3
The equation to be used to calculate the ultimate shear
strength of connection for this failure mode is:
R, = (L)(t)(0.6F,.) (1)
In UA method, this failure mode is not recognized.
b. Bearing Failure
In the UCB studies, t 6 bearing failure was observed in some
specimens. In the corresponding design procedures bearing
failure mode is recognized and equations that already exist
in the AISC Specification u are used to predict bearing fail-
ure capacity of the connections.
In UA method, this failure mode is not considered. Using
UA method, since there is no lower limit on the thickness
of the shear tab, it is quite possible that designer unknow-
ingly can use a thin plate with relatively large diameter bolt
and cause bearing failure to be governing without ever notic-
ing it.
The UCB design procedures as well as UA method recog-
nize the beneficial effects of limited bearing yielding at the
bolt holes. As a result both methods have an upper limit of
thickness of plate relative to the bolt diameter. In UCB
method the limit is dr,/2 + h6 inch and in UA method the
limit is d,/2. The limited bearing yielding provides rota-
tional ductility and causes release of moment in the con-
nection.
c. Shear Fracture of Net Area
I n U C B method this failure mode is fully recognized and
the following design equation is recommended to be used
to predict ultimate shear capacity of the net area:
R,,/, = [L - N(V2)(dl, + 6)l(t)(0.6F,) (2)
In a conservative approach, Eq. 3 which reflects the phi-
losophy used in the AISC Specification u for shear failure
of net area can be used.
R,a, = [L - N(dh + 6)](t)(0.6F,) (3)
The UA method apparently does not consider this failure
mode. Again, similar to bearing failure mode, it is possible
that by using thin plates, net section failure can govern with-
out the knowledge of the designer.
d. Edge Distance Failure
As a result of experiments conducted by the authors at UCB,
it was realized that due to dominance of shear, the vertical
edge distance below the lowest bolt is the most critical edge
distance and should not be less than 1.5db nor 1.5 in. In
UCB design method, it is recommended that this limitation
be applied to all edge distances (see Fig. 3a).
In UA method, it is recommended that horizontal edge dis-
tance should not be less than 2do (see Fig. 3b). Apparently
this recommendation is derived from results of cantilever
+o* .... hra la,,mc or cnlaioptcl tn lrof rntation and small
shear forces. In our tests, the horizontal edge distances did
not show signs of being critical whereas vertical edge dis-
tances particularly the lower vertical edge distance proved
to be very important and critical.
e. Failure of Bolts
In UCB method, bolts are designed for the combined effects
of direct shear and bending moment along the bolt line. Our
tests indicated that as beam is loaded, connections yield and
bending moment in the connection continuously is released
to the midspan of the beam. As a result, point of inflection
of the beam continuously moves toward the connection and
is stabilized at a distance of el, from the bolt line. The value
of et, can be obtained from the following equation.
el, = (n - a - 1)(1.0) (4)
Therefore, in UCB method, bolts are designed to resist
combined effects of shear reaction of the beam and a mo-
ment equal to reaction multiplied by et,.
In UA method, bolts are designed for direct shear only.
This implies that bolt line is the location of point of inflec-
tion of the beam where moment is zero and only shear ex-
ists. Our experiments, as well as other tests conducted in
Canada, have clearly indicated that some moment de-
velops along the bolt line.
Figure 4 shows variation of shear force and bending mo-
ment in a typical shear tab connection. The connection used
to plot the curves is the same used in Fig. 2 of the Discus-
sion. Figure 4 shows an experimental curve, UA finite ele-
ment results and design equations according to UCB and UA
methods. It should be mentioned that test results shown in
Fig. 4 are plotted using test results for exactly similar speci-
men but with Y8 in. thick plate rather than 6 in. The test
results for 3/8 in. plate are multiplied by Y6to adapt them to
h6 in. plate and then are plotted in Fig. 4.
It is not known why UA's design method neglects the mo-
ment that exists along the bolt line. Even the finite element
Critical
)
Critical
Critical ical
Fie. 3. Ed.ee distance requirements in UCB and UA methods.
4
analysis given by Professor Richard in Figs. 1 and 2 of the
Discussion shows that considerable moment is present along
the bolt line. In our view, based on seven tests conducted
so far by us and several other tests by other researchers on
the shear tabs, neglecting moment along the bolt line is not
justifiable and can result in unconservatively overestimat-
ing shear capacity of the bolts.
f. Weld Failure
In UCB method welds are designed for the combined effects
of direct shear and a moment due to the eccentricity of the
reaction from the weld line, e,.. The eccentricity e,, is given
by the following equation. The equation is based on results
of tests.
e,. = n(1.0) (5)
In UA method welds are designed for combined effects
of shear and moment, however, the moment that is estab-
lished for design of the welds is unrealistically very large.
Figure 5 shows shear and moment variation along the weld
line for the same shear tab shown in Fig. 2 of the Discus-
sion. Similar to bolt design, the figure shows test results,
UA finite element analysis (adapted from Fig. 2 of the Dis-
cussion) as well as design equations according to both
methods. The plots clearly shows that if one follows UA
method in design of welds, the design point will be some-
where in the vicinity of point A where moment is much larger
and shear force is smaller than the realistic values that actu-
ally occur in the connection (test curve).
The reason UA method results in using very large and un-
realistic moment in design of welds is the use of large ec-
centricity. Notice that in Fig. 5, slope of lines drawn from
the origin (such as aA and OB) represent values of constant
eccentricity. In the Discussion Professor Richard indicates
that connection should be designed for maximum possible
values of shear and moment. This statement is correct, but
in UA's method rather than designing connection for maxi-
mum combination of shear and moment, the connection is
designed for shear corresponding to 1.5 times service load
of the beam and an eccentricity of shear that exists at the
point of 1.5 times service load of the beam. What this actu-
ally means is that as beam is loaded, eccentricity moves to-
ward the support and when shear force exceeds a value cor-
responding to 1.5 times service load of the beam, the
eccentricity remains constant. This is shown in Fig. 5 by
Line CA. This is not realistic. As Fig. 5 indicates in actual
loading shown by test curve, after onset of the bolt slip and
yielding in the connection (Point D), eccentricity decreases
continuously and stabilizes at much smaller value than the
eccentricity corresponding to Point C. This can easily be seen
by comparing slope of Line CA (e,,. = 13 in.) and Line EB
(e, = 5 in.).
In summary, tests conducted at the University of Arizona
were not destructive and thus cannot be used to establish fail-
ure modes and design procedures. And, furthermore, the cor-
responding design procedure considers only bolt failure and
weld failure which are only two of the six failure modes that
actually should be considered. In addition, the design equa-
tions suggested for the bolt failure appear to be unconserva-
rive whereas equations proposed for weld design are baed
on unrealistically large moment and a small shear.
The design procedures proposed by the authors are only
a step in direction of improving the design methods by us-
ing more realistic test results and failure modes. Much work
needs to be done in this area particularly with respect to cy-
clic behavior of these connections.
700
i
600
5OO
400
E
o 300
.__ 2oo
_J
0 100
CD
0
i I '
[ - eb=O
I ' , " , " T . i F - / , : , I ' '
20 40 60 80 100 200
....... UA'sAnalysis
- ,; ; UA'sDesign Line
. . . . UCBTest Result
UCB's Design Line
I I I I i I I
300
Uni f orm Load, W , Kips
400
1500
1400 --
1300
' i 1200
1300
1000
900
800
700
_ 600
500
400
2 300
- 200
100
. . . . . . . UA'sAnalysis
- - - - - UA'sDesign Une
Ultimate Strergth / . . . . UCBTest Result
of P/ot... / - - UCB'sDesign Line
Y i e ' d S t r e n g t h / m
I I I I I I I I I I' I I I I I I I'
20 40 60 80 100 200 300
Uni f orm Load, W , Ki ps
4OO
Fig. 4. Variation of shear and moment along the bolt line. Fig. 5. Variation of shear and moment along the weld line.
5
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The opinions expressed in this closure are those of the authors
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the AISC or the
University of California at Berkeley. The words "UCB
method" and "UA method" are only used to refer to the
methods developed by the authors and by the researchers
at the University of Arizona respectively.
sign of Single Plate Framing Connections with A307
Bolts," AISC Engineering Journal, Vol. 19 (No. 4).
10. Wyss, U., "Single Plate Connections for Steel Beams,"
Thesis presented to University of British Columbia,
April 1967.
11. American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of
Steel Construction, 9th ed., Chicago: AISC, 1989.
NOTATION
a Distance between bolt line and weld line, in.
dt, Diameter of bolts, in.
et, Eccentricity of beam reaction from bolt line, in.
e,, Eccentricity of beam reaction from weld line, in.
L Length of shear tab, in.
M, Moment along bolt line, kip-in.
n Number of bolts.
R, Reaction of the beam causing yielding of shear tab, kips.
R,, Reaction of the beam causing fracture of net section,
kips.
t Thickness of shear tab, in.
W Total load carried by the beam, W = 2R, kips.
REFERENCES
1. Astaneh, A., "Experimental Investigation of Tee-
Framing Connection," Progress Report, submitted to
American Institute of Steel Construction, April 1987.
2. Astaneh, A., "Demand and Supply of Ductility in Steel
Shear Connections," Review in Journal of Steel Con-
' struction Research, March 1988.
3. Astaneh, A., K. M. McMullin, and S. M. Call, "De-
sign of Single Plate Framing Connections," Report No.
UCB/SEMM-88/12, Department of Civil Engineering,
University of California-Berkeley, July 1988.
4. Astaneh, A., K. M, McMullin, and S. M. Call, "De-
sign of Single Plate Shear Connections," AISC Engi-
neering Journal, Vol. 26 (No. 1).
5. Astaneh, A. and M. Nader, "Behavior and Design of
Steel Tee Framing Connections," Report No. UCB/
SEMM-88/ll, Department of Civil Engineering, Uni-
versity of California-Berkeley, July 1988.
6. McMullin, K. M., and A. Astaneh, 'Analytical and Ex-
perimental Investigations of Double-Angle Connec-
tions;' Report No. UCB/SEMM-88/14, Department of
Civil Engineering, University of California-Berkeley,
August 1988.
7. Richard, R. M., "Single Plate Framing Connection
Designs," Steel Tips, Steel Committee of California,
December 1986.
8. Richard, R. M., P, E. Gillett, J. D. Kriegh, and B. A.
Lewis, "The Analysis and Design of Single Plate Fram-
ing Connections," AISC Engineering Journal, Vol. 17
(No. 2).
9. Richard, R. M., J. D. Kriegh, and D. E. Hormby, "De-
AISC Commentary on Design of Shear Tabs
AISI and AISC sponsored research on single shear plate con-
nections (shear tabs) at the University of Arizona in the late
1970s and early 1980s. At the request of the AISC Commit-
tee on Manuals and Textbooks and the ASCE Committee on
Steel Building Structures, additional research was conducted
at the University of California-Berkeley in 1988-89. In each
case, the project scope and limit state criterion was suggested
by AISC and followed by the researchers. Because the limit
state was different in the two cases, the design procedure
resulting from each research effort is different. This is evi-
dent by the two preceding discussions in this issue of the
Engineering Journal, AISC assumes responsibility for these
changes in the context of a natural evolution of research and
improved understanding of shear tab behavior.
In the University of Arizona case, AISC directed the limit
state to be a maximum connection rotation in this initial re-
search on shear tab connections. Because AISC did not re-
quest tests to destruction, none were made. On this basis,
tests and analytical studies were made and a design proce-
dure appearing in several AISC publications was developed.
In the recent University of California-Berkeley case, the
limit state was changed to ultimate load, to be determined
by testing to destruction. Based on this work and previous
research, a different design procedure was then developed
by applying a conservative factor of safety.
The AISC Committee on Research and the AISC Com-
mittee on Manuals and Textbooks determined that the ulti-
mate load criterion given to the University of California-
Berkeley was more realistic and better represented the be-
havior traditionally assumed for steel connections. The ASCE
Committee on Steel Building Structures concurred in this
judgment.
AISC feels that both shear tab design procedures include
an adequate factor of safety and either can be safely used.
Because of the simpler nature of the new University of
California-Berkeley method, and because its strength limit
states are considered to be more complete and realistic, that
method was adopted for inclusion in the Ninth Edition of
the Manual of Steel Construction. Additional research on this
method to expand its applicability to other detailing condi-
tions is in progress.
AISC expresses its appreciation to both Professor Richard
and Professor Astaneh for their contributions to the solu-
tion of this vexing design problem.
6
Design of Single Plate Shear Connections*
ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH, STEVEN M. CALL AND KURT M. McMULLIN
INTRODUCTION
Single plate shear connections, often referred to as shear
tabs, have gained considerable popularity in recent years
due to their efficiency and ease of fabrication. Shear tab
connections are primarily used to transfer beam end reac-
tions to the supporting elements. The connection consists
of a plate welded to a support at one edge and bolted to
a beam web. Figure 1 shows typical applications of single
plate shear connections. This paper presents the summary
of a research project on the behavior and design of single
plate shear connections. Based on experimental and aha-
lyrical studies, a new design procedure is developed and
presented.
The AISC-ASD 5 as well as AISC-LRFD 6 specifica-
tions have the following provisions with regard to shear
connections:
"Except as otherwise indicated by the de-
signer, connections of beams, girders, or
trusses shall be designed as flexible, and may
ordinarily be proportioned for the reaction
shears only.
"Flexible beam connections shall accommo-
date end rotations of unrestrained (simple)
beams. To accomplish this, inelastic action in
the connection is permitted."
Steel shear connections not only should have sufficient
strength to transfer the end shear reaction of the beam but
according to above provisions, the connections should also
have enough rotation capacity (ductility) to accommodate
the end rotation demand of a simply supported beam. In
addition, the connection should be sufficiently flexible so
that beam end moments become negligible. Thus, like any
shear connection, single plate shear connections should be
designed to satisfy the dual criteria of shear strength and
rotational flexibility and ductility.
Shear-Rotation Relationship in a Shear Connection
To investigate the behavior and strength of a shear con-
nection, it is necessary that realistic shear forces and their
corresponding rotations be applied to the connection. In
Abol hassan Astaneh is assistant professor, University of Califor-
nia, Berkeley.
Steven M. Carl is graduate research assistant, University of
Cafifornia, Berkeley.
Kurt M. McMullin was graduate research assistant, University of
Cafifornia, Berkeley.
an earlier research project? the shear-rotation relation-
ship for the end supports of simply supported beams was
studied. A computer program was developed and used to
simulate increased monotonic uniform loading of the
beams supported by simple connections until the beams
collapsed. 1,2
The studies indicated that the relationship between the
end shear and end rotation is relatively stable and depends
primarily on the shape factor Zx/Sx of the cross section,
L/d of the beam and the grade of steel used. Figure 2
shows a series of curves representing shear forces and cor-
responding rotations that will exist at the ends of simply
supported beams. The curves correspond to beams of A36
steel having cross sections from W16 to W33 and L/d ra-
tios of 4 to 38. Also shown in Fig. 2 is a tri-linear curve
"abcd" suggested to be a realistic representative of the
shear-rotation curves. The tri-linear curve "abcd" is pro-
posed to be used as a standard load path in studies of shear
connections. Curve "abcd" is used instead of the more
conservative curve "aef" because it is felt that curve
"abcd" represents a more realistic maximum span-to-
depth ratio for most steel structures. For special cases of
very large span-to-depth ratio or high strength steels, the
rotational demand may be greater than that of curve
"abcd". For such cases special care must be taken to as-
sure the rotational ductility demand of the beam is sup-
plied by the connection.
CONCRETE SUPPORT COLUMN
(o) (b)
(d) (e)
BEAM BEAM
(c)
Fig. 1. Typical Single Plate Shear Connections
'k Reproduced from AISC Engineering Journal, Volume 26, No. 1, 1st Quarter 1989
7
The shear-rotation curves plotted in Fig. 2 are estab-
lished based on the assumption of elastic-perfectly-plastic
bending moment capacity for the beam. To include the ef-
fect of strain hardening, the segment "cd" in curve "abcd"
is included.
The behavior of shear connections has been studied in
the past by several investigators. 8342 However, in most
cases, the shear connections have been subjected to mo-
ment and rotation or only direct shear without rotation in-
stead of a realistic combination of shear and rotation. Fig-
ure 3 shows the shear rotation relationships that existed
in several studies including this research project.
EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH
In order to identify limit states of strength and to verify
the validity of the design procedures that were developed
and proposed, five full scale beam-to-column connection
assemblies were tested. A summary of the experimental
studies follows. More detailed information on the research
project can be found in References 3 and 6.
Test Set-up
The test set-up shown in Fig. 4 was used to apply shear-
rotation relationship of curve "abcd" in Fig. 2 to the speci-
mens.
The main components of the test set-up were a com-
puter based data acquisition and processing system, two
actuators R and S and support blocks. Actuator S, which
was close to the connection, was force controlled and pro-
vided the bulk of the shear force in the connection. Actua-
tor R, which was displacement controlled, provided and
controlled the beam end rotation.
Test Load Path
The proposed standard shear-rotation relationship
shown as curve "abcd" in Fig. 2 was applied to the connec-
tions in all of the test specimens. To establish the curve,
coupon tests of the plate material were conducted prior
to connection tests and the yield point and ultimate
strength of the plate material were obtained. The shear
yield capacity of the single plate in each test specimen was
calculated by multiplying the von Miess criterion of shear
yield stress, 1/X/3Fi, by the shear area of the plate. The
shear yield capacity of the plate, denoted as Ry, was taken
as equal to the shear at point "c" of curve "abcd" in Fig.
2. Thus the shear yield capacity of the shear tab was as-
sumed to occur when the moment at midspan was equal
to flip. As a result, a corresponding Mp can be calculated
for each connection to be equal to RyL/4. The end rota-
tion of the beam when midspan moment reached Mp was
set equal to 0.03 radians.
To establish point "b" in curve "abcd", the shear at this
point was set equal to 4My/L and the rotation was set
equal to 0.02 radian. This implies that when beam
midspan moment reaches My, the end rotation will be
equal to 0.02 radian. The value of My, the end rotation
will be equal to 0.02 radian. The value of My for each spec-
imen was calculated by dividing Mp by the shape factor.
A shape factor of 1.12 was used in all specimens.
Segment "cd" in Fig. 2 corresponds to strain hardening
of the beam and the increased moment at beam midspan
which results in increased shear at the beam ends. To es-
tablish "cd", it was assumed that when the midspan mo-
ment reaches a value of (F,/Fy)Mp, the beam end rotation
will be equal to 0.1 radian.
In summary, load path "abcd" in Fig. 2 reflects the be-
havior of the beam and its effect on connection shear and
rotation. Segment "ab" corresponds to the elastic behav-
ior of beam. At point "b", midspan moment of the beam
reaches My and the beam softens. Segment "bc" corre-
sponds to inelastic behavior of the beam. At point "c", the
midspan moment reaches Mp. Segment "cd" represents
extra beam capacity that can develop due to beam strain
hardening.
!6
!41 d
LO=4 C
' 'f(: /,',,. //',//, ( / / o Legend:
-I/J w3o - -
06 _...___d' ./,' /g' Y' ?' w2r
,,, . , ,,, , , , .,. L . o . 3 8
W24 - - -
( / W 8 ....
02
-1 a Vy=4SxFy L
oo !Ir I I I
I t I
O0 001 002 003 004 005 006 007
END ROTATION, r a d .
Fig. 2. Shear-Rotation Relationship for Ends of Simple Beams
g
Z
9
F-
O
Z
z 100
0
0
Z
O
Ud
fao
F/g. 3.
,- Ref 8
sEAR
11 ROI 12 .[ . . . . . . . . . . .
J ,4,
0.0 002 0 04 006
ROTATION OF BEAM END, r a d .
Shear-Rotation Relationship used in Several Studies
8
Table 1.
Properti es of Test Specimens
TEST TEST NO. OF DIA. OF TYPE OF PLATE EDGE ACTUAL BEAM PLATE
GROUP NO. BOLTS BOLTS BOLTS* DIMENSIONS DI STANCE W E L D MATERI AL MATERIAL
SIZE
in. in. x in. x in. in. in.
ONE 1 7 3/4 A325-N 21 x 3/8 x 4-Y4 1-V2 1/4 A36 A36
2 5 % A325-N 15 x % x 4-Y4 1-V2 '/4 A36 A36
3 3 % A325-N 9 x % x 4-Y4 1-V2 % A36 A36
TWO 4 5 3/4 A490-N 14-V3 x % x 3-% 1-Va %2 Gr. 50 A36
5 3 3/4 A490-N 8-% x 3/8 x 3-% 1-V8 %2 Gr, 50 A36
*Al l bolts were tightened to 70% of proof load. In all specimens diameter of bolt hole was 6 inch larger than nominal diameter of bolt. indicates that
i n al l specimens threads were included i n shear plane.
.1:Size of all welds was speci fi ed as inch.
Test Specimens
Each test specimen consisted of a wide flange beam
bolted to a single plate shear connection which was welded
to a column flange as shown in Fig. lb. The properties of
the test specimens were selected in consultation with a
professional advisory panel. These properties are given in
Table 1. The bolt holes in all specimens were standard
round punched holes. All bolts were tightened to 70% of
proof load using turn-of-the-nut m e t h o d ? ' 4 All shear
tabs were cut from a single piece of steel. The yield stress
and ultimate strength for material of shear tabs were 35.5
ksi and 61 ksi respectively. The condition of faying sur-
faces was clean mill scale. The electrodes were equivalent
of E7018.
The bolt spacing in all specimens was 3 in. The edge dis-
tance in the horizontal as well as vertical direction for
specimens 1,2 and 3 was 1-1/2 in. (two times diameter of
bolt) and for specimens 4 and 5 was l-lA in. (1.5 times di-
ameter of bolts).
CONTROL
COMPUTER GRAPHICS ANALOG
i ' , PLOTTER
ACTUATOR ACTUATOR PRI NTER
CONTROLLER CONTROLLER
['"'"'"3
FEEDBACK
TOI NSTRUMENTAI ON
^OTUATOR' :V !7
SINGLEPLATE 41:-i::! :: :-:-ii:.:]
SHEARCONNECTION / :i-i!i;!i :.- ]
COLUMN / li:.i-:.!:! i <: : ]
REACTION BLOCK j
Fig, 4. Test Set-up Used in Experiments
Behavior of Test Specimens
The experiments were conducted in two groups as indi-
cated in Table 1. The main differences of specimens in
these two groups were the type of bolt (A325 or A490),
material of beam (A36 or grade 50) and edge distance (2db
or 1.5db). The behavior of specimens in the two groups
is summarized in the following sections.
Behavior of Specimens 1,2 and 3 (Group One)
Specimens 1,2 and 3 showed very similar behavior
throughout the loading. The most important observation
was the significant inelastic shear deformations that took
place in all three specimens as shown in Fig. 5.
All test specimens failed due to sudden shear fracture
of the bolts connecting the single plate to the beam web
as shown in Fig. 6a. The examination of bolts after failure
indicated that the A325 bolts in these specimens had de-
veloped significant permanent deformations prior to frac-
ture as indicated in Fig. 6b. In these three specimens the
welds did not show any sign of yielding other than in speci-
men 3 which showed minor yielding at the top and bottom
of welds prior to fracture of bolts.
A study of the bolt holes after the completion of tests
1,2 and 3 indicated that permanent bearing deformations
had taken place in the plate as well as in the beam web.
The magnitude of the deformations in the plate and beam
9
bolt holes were almost equal but in opposite directions.
The deformations of the plate bolt holes, drawn to scale
are shown in Fig. 7. The arrows indicate the direction of
the movement of the bolts which is expected to be approx-
imately the direction of the applied force due to shear and
moment. It is interesting to note that nearly vertical orien-
tations of arrows indicate the presence of a large vertical
shear accompanied by a relatively small moment in the
connections.
Behavior of Specimens 4 and 5 (Group Two)
The behavior of specimens 4 and 5 was similar to the
previous three tests. However, shear yielding of the plate
was more apparent. Specimen 4 failed due to shear frac-
ture of bolts in a manner similar to previous tests shown
in Fig. 6a. In addition, minor yielding was observed on the
weld lines of this specimen. Specimen 5 failed by almost
simultaneous fracture of weld lines and bolts as shown in
Fig. 8. It appears that at the time of failure, weld lines
started to fracture first while bolts were on the verge of
fracture. When sudden fracture of welds occured the re-
sulting shock caused fracture of the bolts which appeared
to be almost simultaneous with weld fracture. Bolts in
specimens 4 and 5 were A490 bolts. An examination of the
bolts after fracture showed less permanent deformations
in these bolts than the A325 bolts used in previous three
tests (see Fig. 6b).
Study of bolt holes in the shear tabs of specimens 4 and
5 indicated that significantly larger bolt hole deformations
had occured in these two specimens compared to speci-
mens 1,2 and 3. However, the bolt holes in the beam web
in specimens 4 and 5 had only minor permanent deforma-
tions.
In summary, based on observations made during the
O
i
I
Iq)
O
<Y
43
+
TEST ONE TEST TWO TEST THREE
Fig. 5. Plate Shear Deformations in Specimens 1,2,3
tests, it appears that shear tabs go through three distinc-
tive phases of behavior. At the very early stages, a shear
tab acts as a short cantilever beam with moment being
dominant. As load increases, the shear tab acts as a deep
shear beam with the shear yielding effect dominant (as in
specimens i through 4). If bolts and welds do not fail dur-
ing the shear phase, because of large deformations, the
shear tab acts similarly to the diagonal member of a truss
and carries the applied shear by a combination of shear
and diagonal tension effects (as in specimen 5),
Experimental Data
The results of experiments at the time of failure are
summarized in Table 2.
DISCUSSION OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Shear Yielding of Single Plate
The yielding of the single plate was primarily due to
shear stresses and was quite ductile. It was evident that
considerable shear yielding occurred in the plate between
the bolt line and weld line. The shear yielding was almost
uniformly distributed throughout the depth of the plate as
measured by strain gages that were attached to the
plates. 3'0 Therefore, in the proposed design procedure dis-
cussed later, the shear capacity of plate is calculated by
multiplying gross area of plate by uniformly distributed
shear stresses.
In specimen 3, at later stages of loading and after signifi-
cant shear yielding, the bottom portion of the shear tab
showed signs of minor local buckling as shown in Fig. 6a.
This local buckling was attributed primarily to loss of stiff-
ness of plate material due to shear yielding. Until this phe-
A325 Bolts
(15 Bolts Tested)
Fig. 6.
A490 Bolts
(8 Bolts Testedl
(a) (b)
Typical Bolt Failure of Test Specimens
10
Table 2.
Results of shear strength Tests
Specimen Observed Connection Response
Failure Mode $ $ Maximum
Test Test No. of Shear Shear BeamEnd Moment at Moment at Moment at
Group No. Bolts Displacement Force Rotation Bolt Line WeldLine Weld Line
in. kips rad. kip in. kip in.
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (1O)
1 7 Bolts Fractured 0.27 160 0.026 306 745 1028
One 2 5 Bolts Fractured 0.34 137 0.054 314 691 734
3 3 Bolts Fractured 0.46 94 0.056 20 279 350
Two 4 5 Bolts Fractured 0.35 130 0.053 273 631 686
5 3 Welds and Bolts Fractured 0.52 79 0,061 -47 170 237
*In some cases like these, moment decreased as shear and rotation increased.
Positive moments cause top of connection to be in tension.
nomenon is studied thoroughly, it is suggested that local
buckling be avoided. To prevent local buckling, it is rec-
ommended that the distance between the bolt line and the
weld line be less than 1/2 of the plate length.
Fracture of Net Area of Plate
In the single plate specimens that were tested, the net
area of the plate did not fracture. Only specimen 5 showed
signs of approaching fracture of net section. Nevertheless,
this failure mode has been observed in similar cases in sev-
eral experiments on tee framing connections. 4'5 The stem
in a tee framing connection behaves similarly to a shear
tab. The formula currently used in calculating net area in
shear fracture is: ]5
Ans = Avg-n(db +l/16)tp (1)
The studies of tee connections indicated that the shear
fracture occurred consistently by fracture of net section
along the edge of the bolt hole and not along the
centerline of bolts. It was suggested that 4,s the net area ef-
fective in shear be equal to the average of net area along
the bolt centerline and the gross area. Using the suggested
method to calculate net area in shear, the effective net
area in shear can be written as:
Anse = Avg-(n/ 2)(db +V]o)tp (2)
Shear-Rotation Behavior
Figure 9 shows the actual shear-rotation relationship
that was recorded during each test. It is observed that the
rotational ductility of the connections increased as the
Fig. 7. Plate Bolt Hole Deformations after Tests Fig. 8. Failure of Welds and Bolts in Specimen 5
11
number of bolts decreased. The rotational ductility of the
connection in specimen ! with 7 bolts was 0.026 radians
which was about half the rotational ductility of the connec-
tions in specimens 2, 3, 4 and 5 with three or five bolts,
all of which were able to reach rotations in excess of 0.05
radians.
Movement of Point of Inflection
Figure 10 shows movement of point of inflection of the
beam toward the support as the shear force was increased.
Even under relatively small load, in all specimens, the
point of inflection moved toward the support and re-
mained almost stationary for the remainder of each test.
Using experimental data, the following empirical equa-
tion was developed to define the location of the point of
inflection for test specimens.
e = (n-I)(1.0), in. (3)
where n is the number of bolts used in the connection, and
e is the distance of point of inflection from the support
(i.e. from the weld line).
It is important to realize that in the experiments re-
ported here, the columns were fixed to supports and rigid
body rotation of the connections was prevented. If due to
frame action or other causes, the support to which a shear
tab is connected rotates, due to rigid body rotation, the
location of point of inflection may be affected. However,
the concurrent values of shear and moment acting on the
shear tab at any given time cannot exceed the values ob-
tained from plasticity conditions (interaction curves) of
plate for shear and moment.
Behavior and Design of Bolts
In all specimens, an examination of bolts and bolt holes
after failure indicated that bolt shanks had experienced
considerable shear deformations before failure.
Studies on the behavior of single bolts in shear have
indicated that for A325 bolts and A36 plate, if the thick-
ness of the plate is not greater than 1/2 times the diameter
of the bolt, considerable but tolerable bolt hole deforma-
tions will take place. The limited bolt hole deformations
are desirable since they increase rotational flexibility and
ductility of the connections. In studies of tee connec-
tions4'5 in three specimens, V2 in. thick tee stems were
used with 7/8 in. diameter bolts. The behavior of these tee
specimens indicated that even when thickness of stem was
equal to db + V6 in., desirable bearing deformations took
place in the bolt holes. Therefore, based on these studies,
and to obtain flexible and ductile single plate connections,
the thickness of the plate is recommended to be less than
or equal to 1/2 of the bolt diameter plus 1/16 in.
An examination of the deformations of bolts and bolt
holes at the completion of the tests indicated that the bolts
were primarily subjected to direct shear accompanied by
a small moment (see arrows in Fig. 6a).
As Fig. 10 indicates, the point of inflection for test spec-
imens was almost stationary, fluctuating between an ec-
centricity of n and n - 1 in. At the time of failure of the
bolts in all specimens, the location of the point of inflec-
tion was close to n - 1 in. Therefore, it is recommended
that bolts be designed for combined effects of direct shear
and a moment equal to the shear multiplied by the eccen-
tricity of the bolt line from point of inflection given by:
eb = ( n - 1 ) ( 1 . 0 ) - a (4)
where,
a = distance between the bolt line and weld line,
eb = distance from the point of inflection to the bolt
line.
Behavior and Design of Welds
Table 2 gives values of shear and moment at failure for
each test. The fillet welds mainly experienced a direct
200-
180;
1601
03 1401
Cl..
" 1201
a/ '
,< 100.
LU
"1- 80.
60
40
20-'
0'
TEST 1 0 V
f (7-Bolt)
/ :::':4 . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . .
/ / / _---Tost3
%" ; " ' " ". . . . . . . ,.. . . . . . . ( 3 B o l t )
0.02 004 006
ROTATION AT BOLT LINE, rad.
g
of
<I:
W
OO
200-1 7" ,
. . . . Test1(7A325Bolts)
I -- - - - Test2(5A325Bolts)
I I I - - - - - Test3{3A325 Bolts)
150 1 q" J(I Test4(5.A490Bolts)
lOO. Li(',
0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,, , - - ' ; -
fewf
v
Point of
Inflection
I -"mll
Momenl
10 20 30
DISTANCE OF PT. OF INFL. FROM WELD, in.
4O 5O
Fig. 9. Shear-Rotation Curves for Test Spectmens Fig. 10. Movement of Point of Inflection
12
shear accompanied by a relatively small moment. The
strain measurements adjacent to the welds also supported
this conclusion. 3'6 Therefore, fillet welds are recom-
mended to be designed for the combined effects of shear
and a small bending moment.
The main goal of the proposed design procedure is to
ensure yielding of shear tab prior to failure of welds. In
order to achieve this goal the welds should be designed to
be stronger than the plate. Thus, the design shear force
acting on the welds is recommended to be equal to the
shear capacity of the plate and not the applied shear force.
Therefore, the maximum shear force acting on the weld
is equal to 1/V'-3 FyLptp. In Allowable Stress Design, the
design shear force for welds is equal to 0.40FyLvtp. The
moment acting on the weld is equal to shear force multi-
plied by the eccentricity of the point of inflection from the
weld line. To be conservative, it is recommended that the
eccentricity of the point of inflection from the weld line
be equal to n inches,
ew = (n)(1.0) (5)
Since the design of welds in the proposed method is a
capacity design, it is not necessary to use welds that can
resist forces much greater than the plate capacity. As part
of phase two of this investigation, a study was conducted
to establish minimum and maximum weld requirements to
develop the strength of single plate. The study indicated
that for A36 plate and E70 electrodes the weld size need
not be more than 0.75tv and should not be greater than
tv. The upper limit of tv on the weld size was imposed to
prevent excessive welding of the plate which will be costly
and might cause heat damage to the plate without achiev-
ing extra strength in the connection.
Moment-Rotation Curves
Moment-rotation curves for the test specimens are
shown in Fig. 11. Moments and rotations were measured
1200-
6
lO00-
Z
.-I
800-
,,-I
LLI
600-
I--
l,,-, 400-
Z
LIJ
200-
0
0
0
SpecimenswithA325Bolts
Specimens with A490 Bolts
Test 1
(7-Bolt) . Test 2
. . . . . . . %' Test 4
(5-Bolt)
Test 3
(3-Bolt)
/ / . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' - Test5
- - - (3-Bolt)
' o . b 2 ' & 4 ' 0.6 '
ROTATION OF BEAMEND, rad.
Fig. 11. Moment-Rotation Curves for Test Specimens
along the bolt line. As the plots indicate, connections with
fewer bolts developed smaller moments and exhibited
larger rotational ductility. During the elastic range of be-
havior, moment increased with shear. As the load in-
creased, due to connection deformations, rotational stiff-
ness and bending moment decreased and then gradually
increased at a much smaller rate. The decrease is attrib-
uted to slips and inelastic deformations in the connections
and the increase is attributed to strain hardening.
PROPOSED DESIGN PROCEDURE
The following design procedure is based on the analyses
of the experimental results and the information available
on the actual behavior of shear connections?6'9
General Requirements
The single plate framing connections covered by these
procedures consist of a plate bolted to a beam web and
welded to a support on one edge of plate.
In design of a single plate framing connection, the fol-
lowing requirements should be satisfied:
1. The cortnection has only one vertical row.of bolts
and the number of bolts is not less than 2 or more
than 7.
2. Bolt spacing is equal to 3 in.
3. Edge distances are equal to or greater than 1.5db.
The vertical edge distance for the lowest bolt is pre-
ferred not to be less than 1.5 in.
4. The distance from bolt line to weld line is equal to
3 in.
5. Material of the shear plate is A36 steel to facilitate
yielding.
6. Welds are fillet welds with E70xx or E60xx elec-
trodes.
7. Thickness of the single plate should be !ess than or
equal to db/2 + 1,/16.
8. The ratio of Lp/a of the plate should be greater than
or equal to 2 to prevent local buckling of plate.
9. ASTM A325 and A490 bolts may be used. Fully
tightened as well as snug tight bolts are permitted.
The procedure is not applicable to oversized or long
slotted bolt holes. Standard or short-slotted punched
or drilled holes are permitted.
Consideration of Limit States in Design
The following limit states are associated with the single
plate framing connections.
1. Shear failure of bolts.
2. Yielding of gross area of plate.
3. Fracture of net area of plate.
4. Fracture of welds
5. Bearing failure of beam web or plate.
13
Shear Failure of Bolts
Bolts are designed for the combined effects of direct
shear and a moment due to the eccentricity eb of the reac-
tion from the bolt line. The eccentricity eb for single plate
connections covered by these procedures can be assumed
to be equal to 3 in., which is the distance from bolt line
to weld line. The value is conservative when the single
plate is welded to a rigid support. The value is more realis-
tic when the supporting member is a relatively flexible ele-
ment.
More realistic values for eb can be calculated from the
following equations:
if single plate is welded to a rotationally rigid element, eb
is obtained from:
eb = (n- 1)(1.O)-a (6)
if single plate is welded to a rotationally flexible element,
eb is larger value obtained from:
eb = Max
(n- 1)(1.0) - a (7a)
a (7b)
where,
n = number of bolts
a = distance from bolt line to weld line, in.
eb = eccentricity, in.
By using methods outlined in Reference 7 including
using Tables X of the AISC-ASD Manual 3 the bolts are
designed for the combined effects of shear R, and moment
equal to R%.
Yielding of Gross Area of Plate
The equation defining this limit state in allowable stress
design (ASD) format is:
fry < Fy (8)
where,
fry = R / Avg (9)
Fry = 0.40 Fy (10)
Avg = Lp tp (11)
Fracture of Net Area of Plate
The equation defining this limit state in allowable stress
design (ASD) format is:
fy. -< Fu (12)
where,
fuu = R /Ans (13)
Fvu = 0.30/:, (14)
Ans= [Lp -- n(db + 1/16)]tp (15)
If the beam is coped, the block shear failure of the beam
web also should be considered as discussed in the AISC-
ASD Specification. 5
Weld Failure
The welds connecting the plate to the support are de-
signed for the combined effects of direct shear and a mo-
ment due to the eccentricity of the reaction from the weld
line, ew. The eccentricity ew is equal to the larger value
obtained from:
ew = Max
(n)(1.0) (16a)
a (16b)
where,
n = number of bolts
ew = eccentricity, in.
a = distance from bolt line to weld line, in.
By using methods outlined in Reference 7 including
using Tables XIX of the AISC-ASD Manual, 13 the fillet
welds are designed for the combined effects of shear equal
to R and moment equal to Re,,.
Bearing Failure of Plate or Beam Web
To avoid reaching this limit state, it is recommended
that the established rule of horizontal and vertical edge
distances equaling at least 1.5 the bolt diameter be fol-
lowed. The bolt spacings should satisfy requirements of
the AISC-ASD Specification. 5 The bearing strength of
connection can be calculated using the provisions of the
AISC-ASD Specification. 5
Summary of Design Procedure
The following steps are recommended to be taken in de-
sign of single plate framing connections:
1. Calculate number of bolts required to resist combined
effects of shear R, and moment R% using Table X of the
AISC-ASD Manual. 13
If the single plate is welded to a rotationally rigid sup-
port eb is the value obtained from Eq. 6.
If the single plate is welded to a rotationally flexible ele-
ment, eb is the value obtained from Eq. 7:
2. Calculate required gross area of plate:
Avg R / 0.40Fy (17)
Use A36 steel and select a plate satisfying the following
requirements:
a. lh and l,, 1.5db.
b. Lp--> 2a
c. t, -< db/2 + V6
d. ti, --> Ava/Lp
e. Bolt spacing =3 in.
(18)
(19)
(20)
(21)
14
3. Check effective net section:
Calculate allowable shear strength of the effective net
area:
Rns=[tp-n(db+Vl6)]()(o.3eu) (22)
and satisfy that R. -> R.
4. Calculate actual allowable shear yield strength of the
selected plate:
Ro = Lptp (0.40Fy) (23)
Design fillet welds for the combined effects of shear Ro
and moment Roewusing Table XIX of the AISC Manual?
ew is given in Eq. 16 as:
ew = Max ]
i
(n)(1.0) (16a)
I a (16b)
The weld is designed for a capacity of Ro, and not for
the applied R, to ensure that the plate yields before the
welds. However, for A36 steel and E70 electrodes the
weld size need not be larger than 3/4of the plate thickness.
5. Check bearing capacity of bolt group:
(n)(t)(db)(1.2Fu) > R (24)
If the bolts are expected to resist a moment (as they nor-
mally would), this calculation should reflect the reduced
strength as determined by Table X of the AISC Manual3
as demonstrated in the following examples.
6. If the beam is coped, the possibility of block shear fail-
ure should be investigated.
Application to Design Problems
The following examples show how the design procedure
can be implemented into the design of steel structures.
Design Example 1
Given:
Beam:
Beam Material:
Support:
Reaction:
Bolts:
Bolt Spacing:
Welds:
W27 x 114, t = 0.570 in.
A36 steel
Column flange (Assumed rigid)
102 kips (Service Load)
7/8 in. dia. A490-N (snug tight)
3 in.
E70XX fillet welds
Design a single plate framing connection to transfer the
beam reaction to supporting column.
Sol ut i on:
1. Calculate number of bolts:
Shear = R = 102 kips
Let us assume M = 0, (will be checked later)
n = R/rv= 102/16.8 = 6.1
Try 7 bolts
The distance between the bolt line and the weld line
a is selected equal to 3 in.
Check moment:
e0 = ( n - 1 ) l . 0 - a = 7 - 1 - 3 = 3.0 in.
Moment = 3 x 102 = 306 kip-in.
Using Table X of the AISCASD Manual 3 with eccentric-
ity of 3 in., a value of 6.06 is obtained for effective number
of bolts (7 bolts are only as effective as 6.06 bolts).
Therefore,
Rbolt = 6.06 x 16.8 = 101.8 - 102 kips O.K.
Use: Seven in. dia. A490-N bolts.
2. Calculate required gross area of the plate:
Avg = R / 0.40Fy
Avg = 102/(0.40 x 36) = 7.08 in.2
Use A36 steel and select a plate satisfying the following
requirements:
a. lh and l > 1.5db
lh = lv = 1.5(7/8) = 1.32 in.
W = a +Ih = 3 + 1.32= 4.32; useW=
4V2 in.
b. Lp/a -> 2.0
Lp = 2 x 1.32 + 6 x 3.0 = 20.6 in.; use Lp =
21 in.
Check:Lp/a= 21/3 = 7 > 2 O.K.
c. tv < db/2 + 1/16
tp -- (7/8)/2 + 1/16 = V2in.
d. tv = Aug/L.
tv = 7.08/21 = 0.337 in.
Try PL 21 x 3/8 x 4-1/2
3. Calculate allowable shear strength of the net area:
Rns = [Lp-n(db + IA6)](tp)(O.3Fu)
R, = [21-7(% + 1/16)](8)(0.3 58) = 94 < 102
kips N.G.
Try V2 in. thick plate:
Rs = [21-7(7/8 + 1A6)](I/2)(0.3 x 58) = 125 > 102
kips. O.K.
Use: PL 21xx4%, A36 Steel.
4. Calculate the actual allowable yield strength of the se-
lected plate:
Ro = Lptp (0.40Fy)
Ro = 21 x 0.5 x 0.40 x 36 = 151 kips
Design fillet welds for the combined effects of shear
and moment:
Shear = Ro = 151 kips
[ n(1.0) = 7(1.0) = 7 in.
ew Max
I a = 3in.
Therefore, ew = 7.0 in.
Moment = Roe = 151 x 7 = 1057 kip-in.
Using Table XIX AISC Manual 3
1 5
a = 7/21 = 0.333
C1 = 1.0
C = 1.07
Dl6 = Ro/CC/Lp = 151/(1.0 x 1.07 x 21). = 6.72
Since weld size need not be greater than 0.75tp,
Use: % in. E70 Fillet Welds.
5. Check bearing capacity:
For plate:
rv = drip (1.2Fu) = .875 x .5 x 1.2 x 58 = 30.45
Rbrg = 6.06(30.45) = 184.5 kips > 102 kips. O.K.
Since the beam web is thicker than the plate, the web
will not fail.
6. Beam is not coped, therefore, there is no need for con-
sideration of block shear failure.
Design Example 2
Given:
Beam:
Beam Material:
Support:
Reaction:
Bolts:
Bolt Spacing:
Welds:
W16x31, tw = 0.275
A572 Gr. 50 steel
Condition of support is unknown
33 kips (Service Load)
3/4 in. dia. A325-N or A490 (snug tight)
3 in.
E70XX fillet welds
Design a single plate shear connection to transfer the
beam reaction to the support.
Solution:
1. Calculate number of bolts:
Shear = 33 kips
Let us assume M = 0, (will be checked later)
Try A325-N bolts with 9.3 kips/bolt shear capacity:
n = R/r, = 33/9.3 = 3.5
Try 4 bolts.
The distance between bolt line and weld line a is
selected equal to 3 in.
Check moment:
Since condition of support is not known, the sup-
port is conservatively assumed to be flexible for
bolt design. Therefore eb is equal to 3 in.
Moment = 3 x 33 -- 99.0 kip-in.
Interpolating from Table X13, C 2.81
Rat/= 2.81 x 9.3 = 26.1 kips<33 N.G.
Which indicates 4 A325 bolts are not enough. Let
us try 4 A490-N bolts:
Ra//= 2.81 x 12.4 = 34.8 kips>33 O.K.
Use: Four % in. dia. A490-N bolts.
2. Calculate required gross area of plate:
Avg = R / 0.40Fy
Avg = 33/(0.40 x 36) = 2.29 in.2
Use A36 steel and select a plate satisfying the following
requirements:
a. lh and Iv -> 1.5db.
Ih = Iv = 1.5(3/4) = 1.125 in.
W= a + lh = 3 + 1.125 = 4.125 in.
Use: W = 41/2 in.
b. Lp/a -> 2.0
Lp = 3 + 3 x 3 = 12 in.
Check: Lp/a = 12/3 = 4 > 2 O.K.
c. tp -< db/2 + 1/16
tp < (3/4)/2 + 1/16 = ?/16 in.
d. tp = A vg/mp
tl, = 2.29/12 = 0.19 in.
Use: PL 12xx41/2, A36 Steel.
3. Calculate allowable shear strength of the net area:
R,s = [Lp-n(db + 1A6)](tp)(O.3F)
R,s = [12 - 4(3/4 + V16)](I/4)(0.3 x 58) = 38.1 kips
R,, -> R is satisfied.
4. Calculate actual allowable yield strength of the selected
plate:
Ro = Lpt, (0.40Fy)
Ro = 12 x 0.25 x 0.40 x 36 = 43.2 kips
Design fillet welds for the combined effects of shear
and moment:
Shear = Ro = 43.2 kips
(n)(1.0) = 4(1.0) = 4 in.
ew = Max
a = 3.0
Therefore, ew = 4.0 in.
Moment = Roe,, = 43.2 x 4 = 172.8 kip-in.
Using Table XIX AISC Manualt3
a -- 4/12 = 0.33
C1 -= 1.0
C = 1.07
D/6 = Ro/CC/Lp = 43.2/(1.0 x 1.07 x 12) = 3.36
Since weld size need not be greater than 0.75tp,
Use: 6 in. ET0 Fillet Welds.
5. Check bearing capacity.
For plate:
nddp (1.2F,) = 2.81 x .75 x .25 x 1.2 x 58
= 36.7 kips > 33 kips.
and for beam:
nddw(1.2F) = 2.81 x .75 x .27 x 1.2 x 65
= 44.4 kips > 33 kips.
6. Beam is not coped, therefore, no need for considera-
tion of block shear failure.
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the studies reported here, the following con-
clusions were reached:
1. The experimental studies of single plate connections in-
16
dicated that considerable shear and bearing yielding
occurred in the plate prior to the failure. The yielding
caused reduction of the rotational stiffness which in
turn caused ielease of the end moments to midspan of
the beam.
2. The limit states associated with single plate connections
are:
a. Plate yielding.
b. Fracture of net section of plate.
c. Bolt fracture.
d. Weld fracture.
e. Bearing failure of bolt holes.
3. A new design procedure for single plate shear connec-
tions is developed and recommended. The procedure
is based on a concept that emphasizes facilitating shear
and bearing yielding of the plate to reduce rotational
stiffness of the connection.
4. To avoid bearing fracture, the horizontal and vertical
edge distance of the bolt holes are recommended to be
at least 1.5 times diameter of the bolt. The study re-
ported here indicated that vertical edge distance, par-
ticularly below the bottom bolt is the most critical edge
distance.
5. Single plate connections that were tested were very
ductile and tolerated rotations from 0.026 to 0.061 radi-
ans at the point of maximum shear. Rotational flexibil-
ity and ductility decreased with increase in number of
bolts.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The project was supported by the Department of Civil
Engineering, the University of California, Berkeley and
the American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. The
support and constructive comments provided by R. O.
Disque, N. Iwankiw and Dr. W. A. Thornton are sin-
cerely appreciated. Single plates used in the test speci-
mens were fabricated and supplied by the Cives Steel
Company. The assistance of R. Stephen, laboratory man-
ager, in conducting the experiments was essential and is
appreciated.
REFERENCES
1. Astaneh, A., "Experimental Investigation of Tee-
Framing Connection", Progress Report submitted to
American Institute of Steel Construction, April 1987.
2. Astaneh, A., "Demand and Supply of Ductility in
Steel Shear Connections", Journal of Steel Construc-
tion Research, 1989.
3. Astaneh, A., K. M. McMullin, and S. M. Call, "De-
sign of Single Plate Framing Connections," Report
No. UCB/SEMM-88/12, Department of Civil Engi-
neering, University Of California, Berkeley, July,
1988.
4. Astaneh, A., and M. Nader, "Design of Tee Framing
Shear Connections," Engineering Journal, American
Institute of Steel Construction, First Quarter, 1989.
5. Astaneh, A., and M. Nader, "Behavior and Design of
Steel Tee Framing Connections," Report No. UCB/
SEMM-88/ll, Department of Civil Engineering, Uni-
versity of California, Berkeley, July, 1988.
6. Call, S. M., and A. Astaneh, "Behavior of Single
Plate Shear Connections with A325 and A490 Bolts",
Report No. UCB/SEMM-89/04, Department of Civil
Engineering, University of California, Berkeley,
April 1989.
7. Iwankiw, N. R., "Design for Eccent'ric and Inclined
Loads on Bolts and Weld Groups," Engineering Jour-
nal, American Institute of Steel Construction, 4th
Quarter, 1987.
8. Lipson, S. L., "Single-Angle Welded-Bolted. Connec-
tions,'' Journal of the Structural Division, March,
1977.
9. McMullin, K. M., and A. Astaneh, "Analytical and
Experimental Investigations of Double-Angle Con-
nections'', Report No. UCB/SEMM-88/14, Depart-
ment of Civil Engineering, University of California,
Berkeley, August, 1988.
10. Patrick, M., I. R. Thomas, and I. D. Bennetts, "Test-
ing of the Web Side Plate Connection," Australian
Welding Research, December, 1986.
11. Richard, R. M., P. E. Gillett, J. D. Kriegh, and B.
A. Lewis, "The Analysis and Design of Single Plate
Framing Connections," Engineering Journal, Ameri-
can Institute of Steel Construction, 2nd Quarter,
1980.
12. White, R. N., "Framing Connections for Square and
Rectangular Structural Tubing, Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, July, 1965.
13. American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of
Steel Construction, 8th Edition, Chicago, 1980.
14. American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of
Steel Construction. LRFD, 1st Edition, Chicago,
1986.
15. American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., Speci-
fication for the Design, Fabrication and Erection of
Structural Steel for Buildings, Chicago, November 13,
1978.
16. American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., Load
and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Struc-
tural Steel Buildings, Chicago, September 1, 1986.
17
Arts
An.se
Ay s
C
c,
D6
VU
L
R
Rbolt
R.
Ro
Ry
NOMENCLATURE
Net area in shear, in.2
Effective net area of plate in shear, in.2
Gross area of plate in shear, in2.
Coefficient in the AISC Manual Tables X and XIX
Coefficient in the AISC Manual Table XIX
Number of sixteenth of an inch in fillet weld size
Specified minimum tensile strength of steel, ksi
Allowable shear stress for plate in yielding =
0.40Fy, ksi
Allowable ultimate shear strength = 0.30Fu, ksi
Specified yield stress of steel, ksi
Length of span, in.
Length of plate, in.
Plastic moment capacity of cross section = ZxFy
Yield moment of beam cross section, kip-in.
Reaction of the beam due to service load, kips
Allowable shear capacity of bolt group
Allowable shear fracture capacity of the net section
Allowable shear yield strength of plate, kips
Reaction corresponding to plastic collapse of beam,
kips
$x Section modulus in.3
V Shear force, kips
W Width of plate, in.
Zx Plastic section modulus, in.3
a Coefficient in the AISC Manual Table XIX
a Distance between bolt line and weld line, in.
d Depth of beam, in.
db Diameter of bolt, in.
e Eccentricity of point of inflection from the support
eb Eccentricity of beam reaction from bolt line, in.
ew Eccentricity of beam reaction from weld line, in.
fry Computed shear stress in plate gross area, ksi
fvu Computed shear stress in plate effective net area,
ksi
In Horizontal edge distance of bolts, in.
lv Vertical edge distance of bolts, in.
n Number of bolts
rv Allowable shear strength of one bolt, kips
tp Thickness of plate, in.
tw Thickness of beam web, in.
This publication expresses the opinion of the author, and care has been taken to insure
that all data and information furnished are as accurate as possible. The author and
publisher cannot assume or accept any responsibility or liability for errors in the data
or information and in the use of such information.
The information contained herein is not intended to represent official attitudes, recom-
mendations or policies of the Structural Steel Educational Council. The Council is not
responsible for any statements made or opinions expressed by contributors to this
publication.
18
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCT SERVICE
OCTO BER 1999
Wel ded Mo ment F rame
Connecti ons
Wi th
Mi ni mal Res i dual Stress
By
Al var o L. Col l i n
and
James J. Put key
Acknowledgments
The Aut hor s wi sh t o t hank t he f ol l owi ng per sons f or t hei r r evi ew and c o mme n t s on t he cont ent
of t hi s St eel TIPS:
Pat Hasset t , Hasset t Engi neer i ng
Bill Honeck, For el l / El sesser Engi neer s, Inc.
Dave McEuen, Cal i f or ni a Er ect or s, Bay Ar ea, Inc.
Lar r y McLean, McLean St eel
Member s of t he St r uct ur al St eel Educat i onal Counci l
In Memoriam
Al varo L. Col l i n
The members of the Structural Steel Educational Council dedicate this Steel TIPS to
the memory ofAl Collin. Mr. Collin died on April 26, 1999. He had a long and
distinguished career in the structural steel fabrication and erection, especially in the
welding of structural steel. Council members and the rest of the structural steel
industry will miss AI.
Di scl ai mer . The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance wi th
recognized engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate,
this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application wi t hout competent
professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed
professional engineer, designer, or architect. The publication of the material contained herein is not
intended as a representation or warrant y on the part of the Structural Steel Educational Council or of any
other person named herein that this information is suitable for any general or parti cul ar use or of freedom
from infringement of any patent or patents. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability
arising from such use.
Caution must be exercised when relying upon other specifications and codes devel oped by other bodies
and incorporated by reference herein since such material may be modified or amended from time to time
subsequent to the printing of this publication. The Structural Steel Educational Council and the authors
bear no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and i ncorporate it by reference at the ti me
of the initial printing of this publication.
WE L D E D MOME N T F R A ME C ON N E C T I ON S
WI T H MI NI MAL RE S I DUAL S TRES S
By Alvaro L. Collin and James J. Putkey
CONT E NT S
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. INTRODUCTION / Page 1
2. TERMS / Page 2
3. THE PROBLEM / Page 3
4. THE SUGGESTED SOLUTION / Page 9
5. ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES / Page 14
6. CONCLUSION / Page 16
7. REFERENCES / Page 17
EXHIBITS / Page 18
ABOUT THE AUTHORS / Page 22
1. INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Steel TIPS is to address the problem of residual stress in welded moment
frame connections with heavy steel members. First, the authors extensively review the residual
stress problem. Second, they suggest a solution to the problem.
The Problem. Present design and welded construction practice produces residual stress by:
Joint and connection restraint.
Member restraint resulting from two floor erection and welding sequence.
Residual stress results when restraint does not allow welds to shrink.
Suggested Connection. The suggested welded moment frame connection uses a design
concept that:
Reduces residual stress in joints and connections to a minimum.
Eliminates residual stress from member restraint.
Locates the plastic hinge outside the connection.
ORGANI ZATI ON
To accomplish the purpose, the authors present the subject matter of this Steel TIPS as follows:
Terms used in the suggested solution and problem.
The problem of residual stress.
The suggested solution.
Advantages and disadvantages of the suggested solution.
A Conclusion.
Welded Moment Frame Connecti ons with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 1
2. ERMS
The various Sections use the terms listed below. We took
terms marked with an asterisk from the AISC Engineering
Journal. [1]
Re s i dua l St r e s s
. g R e s t r a / n t
' s "
Component Restraint.* Restraint existing because of rigidity of various elements of a joint or
connection.
Connection.* Complete assembly consisting of the various joints making up the total unit.
Joint.* A single element of a connection.
Member Restraint.* Restraint in closure member where inherent rigidity requires weld
shrinkage to be absorbed by the parent metal.
Residual Stress. Stress remaining in connection or member after completing the connection's
welds.
Restraint.* Resistance of the joint or connection to weld shrinkage strains.
Shrinkage. Contraction in the size of a weld joint as it cools.
Strain.* Deformation due to changes in applied forces.
Stress.* Force per unit of area.
Thermal Upsetting. Permanent expansion of weld perpendicular to face of a weld when
restraint prohibits a joint from expanding.
Our, We. Pronouns referencing the authors of this Steel TIPS.
* A me r i c a n I ns t i t ut e of St eel Co n s t r u c t i o n , I nc. Re p r i n t e d wi t h p e r mi s s i o n . Al l r i ght s r e s e r v e d .
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 2
3. THE P ROB L E M
This section addresses the causes and locations of residual
stress that occur in currently used welded connections.
C A U S E S O F R E S I D U A L S T R E S S
Residual stress results when restraint does not allow large welds in heavy members to shrink.
Two conditions cause residual stress:
Thermal upsetting
Shri nkage
Various parts of this Section 3 set forth restraint conditions and residual stress levels caused by
thermal upsetting and shrinkage. The residual stress levels generally correspond to the restraint
levels noted in AWS Welding Code, Annex XI. [2]
The r ma l Upset t i ng. As noted in Section 2, thermal upsetting results from permanent
expansion of weld metal perpendicular to the face of a weld when fit-up and weld sequence
restrain the joint from expanding.
Within Joint. A joint expands from heat input when it is welded. The hot weld will try
to push the members apart. However, as the bottom weld layers cool they restrain the
members. Heat input in the larger volume of the top weld layers causes thermal
upsetting. Low residual stress results from this internal restraint.
By External Restraint. When fit-up and weld sequence restrain the joint from
expanding, the weld can only expand perpendicular to the weld surface. Medium or high
residual stress results from this perpendicular expansion.
Shr i nk a ge . Weld shrinkage causes most residual stress. The stress level depends on the
physical fit-up of the joint.
Within Joint. Fit-up will allow the members of a joint to move. However, as the bottom
weld layers in the joint cool, they restrain the members while welding the top layers.
Low residual stress results from this internal restraint.
By External Restraint. Fit-up and weld sequence restrain the members of a joint and
prevent them from moving. Medium, high, or very high residual stress results from this
external restraint. The residual stress level depends on the weld size and restraint level.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 3
R E S T R A I N T A N D R E S I D U A L S T RE S S I N J OI NT S
This discussion is limited to joints with one plate welded to another plate, beam, or column; shop
attached; and with or without external restraint. Plates considered include:
Continuity Plates
Cover Plates
Shear Plates
Cont i nui t y Plates. Continuity plates usually attach to the column web and flanges with
groove welds. See Figure 3-1. Medium or high residual stress may occur when welding the
plate to the column flanges.
To Col umn Web. Make these welds first.
Restraint: Within joint.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage: Low
residual stress.
To C ol umn F l anges . Make these welds second.
Restraint: External, from flanges.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage: Medium or
high residual stress depending on the flange
thickness.
F 1
Fi gur e 3-1
Cover Plates. Depending on the type of connection, cover plates attach to the column flange
with groove welds, or attach to the beam flange or flanges with fillet welds.
To C ol umn F l ange. Only bottom plate welded. See Figure 3-2.
Restraint: Within joint.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage: Low residual stress.
To Beam Flange(s). Cover plates fabricated wider than beam flanges and attached with
fillet welds. See Figures 3-3 and 3-4.
Restraint: Within joint.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage: Very low residual stress.
!
Fi gures 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 4
Shear Pl at es. Shear plates usually attach to the
column fl anges wi th compl ete penetration groove wel ds
as shown in Figure 3-5. Engineers design the shear
plates for either a bolted or a wel ded connection to the
beam web.
To Column Flange. Shop attached.
Restraint: Within joint.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage: Low
residual stress.
Figure 3-5
REST RAI NT AND RESI DUAL STRESS IN CONNE CT I ONS
Connections consist of field wel ded or bolted joints acting together. Bolts and fit-up material in
the connection usually extend some level of restraint to the joints. The bolts and fit-up material
carry erection loads, pl umb-up the steel frame, and set root openi ngs for wel ded joints. Fit -up
material may include drift pins, wedges, and small wel ded plates. For this discussion, we
assume the bolts, fit-up material, and weld sequence externally restrain the connection joints
whi l e welding.
Connections currently used include: beam flanges wel ded directly to the column, cover plates
on the beam wel ded to the column, a combination of cover plates and beam flanges welded to
the column, and the beam web connection to the shear plate. Residual stress in these
connections varies, as discussed in the following groups:
Beam Flanges
Beam Cover Plates
Beam Cover Plates and Flanges
Webs of Beams
Beam Flanges.
Beam Section connection. See Figure 3-6. These wel ds
are similar to the wel ds commonl y made prior to the
Northridge earthquake.
Top Flange, Erectors usually make this weld
first.
Restraint: External, from bolts and fit-up
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage:
Medium to high residual stress.
Beam flanges still weld directly to the column flange when using the Reduced
Bottom Flange. Welded after top flange.
Restraint: External from bolts, fit-up, and
compl eted top flange weld.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage:
High residual stress because of added
top flange restraint.
Figure 3-6
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 5
Beam Cover Plates. The Forell/EIsesser cover plate design looks similar to our suggested
connection. See Figure 3-7. This design uses a bottom cover plate shop welded to the column
flange and a top cover plate shop fillet welded to the beam top flange. Field crews first groove
weld the top cover plate to the column flange, and then fillet weld the bottom flange cover plate
to the beam bottom flange.
~,-
Top Flange. Erectors make this weld first. ~
Rest r ai nt : Ext er nal . ~ _ _ _ ~ _ _ ~ _ ~
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage:
Probably high residual stress, but ~
depends on external restraints, level. ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ t ~ - ~ 3 S ~ D E ~
Bottom Flange. Welded after top flange.
Restraint: Within fillet weld. [ [ [[~, ~
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage:
Low.
Figure 3-7
Beam Cover Plates and Flanges. Another connection uses top and bottom cover plates
shop fillet welded to the beam flanges. Field crews then weld these cover plates and the beam
flanges to the column flange. See Figure 3-8. Web bolts to the shop welded shear plate restrain
both top and bottom joints.
Top Flange. Assume erectors weld first.
Restraint: External.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage:
Medium residual stress.
Bottom Flange. Welded after top flange.
Restraint: External from web bolts and
completed top flange weld.
Thermal Upsetting and Shrinkage:
High residual stress because of added
top flange restraint.
We do not recommend the combined flange and cover
plate joint because of the discontinuity caused by the
interface between the beam flange and the cover plate.
I
I
I
I I I
I A
Figure 3-8
Webs o f Beams . Beam webs connect to the column with the following options:
.
2.
3.
Bolts to the shear plate.
Fillet welds to the shear plate.
A groove weld direct to the column flange.
In option 2, low residual stress occurs. In options 1 and 3, tightened bolts or already completed
flange welds externally restrain the weld joint, and high residual stress may occur.
!
W e l d e d M o m e n t F r a m e C o n n e c t i o n s w i t h M i n i m a l R e s i d u a l S t r e s s , A . L . C o l l i n a n d J . J . P u t k e y , S t e e l T I P S , O c t o b e r 1 9 9 9 6
MEMBER RESTRAI NT
~
Figure 3-9 shows an exampl e of
member restraint when wel di ng
/ /
beams between rigid braced ~
bents. As stated in Figure 3-9,
/ /
member restraint causes high
r esi dual st r ess because,
"Closing wel ds for members
/ /
between rigid assembl i es are "~,,,~
subj ect to high restrai nt." v,.
x
Another si mi l ar exampl e of
member restraint, and the main
focus of this Steel TIPS, occurs
because of the erection method
used to construct a typical ti er
building. Thi s type of member
restraint has been a probl em
r i
L
Fig. 19. Closing welds .for members between rigid assemblies are
subject to high restraint.
Figure 3-9* AISC Engineering Journal, 1973 [1]
since the advent of heavy wel ded moment connect i ons- - whet her recogni zed or not.
Er e c t i o n Me t h o d , A typical ti er building usually has two floors of steel per tier, but someti mes
has three floors per tier. Col umn spl i ces usually occur approxi matel y 4 ft. above every second
or third floor. If a ti er building had onl y one fl oor per tier, the probl em woul d not exist. For
discussion purposes, this TIPS assumes two floors of steel per tier.
Two Fl oor Erection. Figure 3-10 illustrates a simplified exampl e of two floors per tier.
Starting on the work floor, covered solidly for safety purposes, field crews erect the
col umns, then the mid fl oor beams, and then the top fl oor beams.
Top Floor
Mid Floor
Column Splice
Work Floor --~
r l
Figure 3-10
* Amer i can Insti tute of St eel Const ruct i on, Inc. Repri nt ed wi t h permi ssi on. Al l ri ghts reserved.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 7
Wel d Sequence. After crews erect and plumb-up the steel, they then weld it. Welders can
weld the top floor first and then the mid floor, or they can weld the mid floor first and then the top
floor. Either way, the problem of member restraint occurs. For illustration purposes we show
the top floor welded first. See Figure 3-1 1 below. Columns
Step 1
Top
Mid
Work
Floor - - 1
Floor '
_ Z
I
leaned out
Assume beams
detailed longer
or root openings
made larger to
allow for weld
shrinkage
[ 5 ] p4- 11
- - B e a ms detailed
correct length
- - C o l u mn splice
Beams welded
Step 2
Member
Restraint
Step 3
- ~k,__ Closing
[ ~ welds
Beams welded,
weld shrinkage
moves columns
in
Beams must
hove correct
root opening
. ~ ] ~ - - C o l u m n s p l i c e
Column splice
- - Beams welded
/
H
Columns provide
J external restrai nt
~ _ Closing ?
welds
_ I 1
Beams welded
_ High residual
~ stress from
- member restrai nt
- - C o l u mn splice
- - Beams welded
Figure 3-11
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 8
4. THE SUGGESTED
SOLUTION
This section describes and details the welded moment
connection suggested by the authors.
USE JOI NT DETAI L WI TH MI NI MAL RESTRAI NT
The suggested solution avoids residual stresses caused by large groove welds not allowed to
shrink because of external restraint. See Section 3, The Problem. Suggested readings on
restraint and weld shrinkage include the following references:
AISC Engineering Journal, 1973. [1]
AWS Structural Welding Code. [2]
AISC Manual of Steel Construction, Allowable Stress Design. [3]
AISC Manual of Steel Construction, Load and Resistance Factor Design. [4]
AISC Manual, Volume II Connections. [5]
Preece and Collin, Steel TIPS, 1991. [6]
Joi nt Detai l . Figure 4-1, Connection Detail, on page 10, shows an elevation view and plan
sections of the suggested solution.
Rest r ai nt Condi t i ons. Please note the beam flanges and web do not directly weld to the
column flange. Instead, the beam flanges fillet weld to cover plates already welded to the
column flange. This procedure results in minimal residual stress because:
Cover plates and the web shear plate groove weld to the column flange without
external restraint and without member restraint with resulting low residual stress.
Fillet welds from the beam flanges to the cover plates contribute very low
residual stress.
The connection from the beam web to the shear plate contributes low or no
residual stress. On the bolted web connection, the bolts obviously contribute no
residual stress. If the shear plate is fillet welded to the beam web, those fillet
welds contribute very low residual stress.
Continuity plates on the column contribute medium to high residual stresses from both thermal
upsetting and shrinkage due to flange restraint. However, these stresses are the same as for
other welded connections.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 9
ALTERNATE TOP COVER PLATE CONFIGURATION
L
[
FOR HORIZONTAL FILLET WELD 7
1 '
L ~ _ ~ _ _
7
~- - - COVER PLATE, T & B
PLAN
CONTINUITY PLATE
COLUMN I
ERECTION BOLTS ~
C.JoP.
REMOVE BACK-UP BAR
(STEEL OR CERAMIC)
AND RUN-OFF TABS
SEE NOTE 1
~- - COVER PLATE
~ / / - - BEAM
~ ~,~
SIDES
SHEAR PLATE
WELD AFTER I
GROOVE
WELDING
TOP COVER /
PLATE TO /
COLUMN ~
. "-,.,.......---.---- COVER PLATE
C.J.P.
REMOVE BACK-UP BAR
AND RUN-OFF TABS
SEE NOTE 1
NOTE I. GRIND SMOOTH TO REMOVE STRESS RISERS AND LAYER OF MARTENSITE
FROM BURNING OPERATION
ELEVATION
CONNECTION DETAIL
Figure 4-1 Detai l of Suggested Sol uti on
We l d e d Mo me n t F r a me Co n n e c t i o n s with Mi ni mal Re s i dua l Stress, A. L. Col l i n and d.d. Put key, St e e l TIPS, Oc t o b e r 1 9 9 9 1 0
H I S T O R Y OF S U G G E S T E D S O L U T I O N
Our suggested solution is not new. Engineers have described it in various wel di ng publications
and used it on past projects, but not for relocating the plastic hinge. The fol l owi ng publications
and personal experience discuss and illustrate the suggested connection.
The James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation
The Book, "Design of Welded Structures" by Blodgett [7], presents designs similar to the
suggested solution. Among other things, Blodgett presents the loose top cover plate design for:
Proper fit up and correct root opening.
Reduced beam preparation.
See Figures 4-2 and 4-3 for the connections presented.
Figure 4-2*
Figure 4-3*
Personal Experience
In 1972 Mr. Putkey served as project manager for
steel erection on a Federal Office Building in
Seattle, Washington. This building is 38 stories high
with the interior moment frame connections
designed very similarly to the suggested solution.
See Figure 4-4. The shop fabricated the loose top
cover plate narrower than the beam flange so the
field welders could make the fillet wel d in a
horizontal position.
I
I
I I
Figure 4-4
*Repri nted wi th permission from Li ncol n Electric Co.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 1 1
A I S C J o u r n a l
The article, "Commentary on Highly
Restrained Welded Connecti ons" in the
AI SC Engi neer i ng J our nal [1],
comment s on occurrences of l amel l ar
tearing in highly restrained joints. This
article presents recommendati ons to
mi ni mi ze or avoid l amel l ar tearing.
(Note: Engineers found l amel l ar tearing
was not a problem in the SAC program.
We refer to the Comment ary to address
restraint.) Recommendati on No. 2
states, "Design connecti ons to mi ni mi ze
accumul ati on and concentration of
s t r a i n s r e s u l t i n g f r o m met al
concentrated in localized areas."* The
recommendati on includes a Fig. 24
showing a moment connection detail,
" . . . designed to allow dissipation of
~ m !
~ . . . . . . , , , , 1 .
I /
F i g . 2 4 . M o m e n t connection us i ng f l a n g e connection p l a t e s . T o av oi d
hi gh shrinkage s t r ai ns , beam seat i s shop w e l d e d to column; top pl ate
w e l d to column i s made i n f i e l d , f o l l o w e d by f i l l e t we l d s o f top a n d bottom
p l a t e s to beam f l a n g e s .
Figure 4-5*
shrinkage strains from full penetration flange welds."* See Figure 4-5. Thi s connection is very
si mi l ar to our suggested solution. The detail sol ves the probl em of connecti on and member
restraint. See Section 3.
The article also mentions that, "Closing wel ds for members between rigid assembl i es are subject
to high restraint."* The suggested solutiqlt avoids this restraint condition. (See t wo fl oor erection
procedure in Section 3).
A I S C Ma n u a l
A loose top cover plate connection is illustrated in Chapter 4, Moment Connecti ons, AI SC
Manual, Volume II Connections [5]. See Figure 4-5, Part II on page 4-10, and Figure 4-7 on
page 4-16. The details shown in these figures are si mi l ar to the detai l s in the above Lincoln Arc
Welding Foundation book and the AI SC Journal.
S A C R e p o r t , ,
, ,
"Steel Moment Frame Connection, Advi sory No. 3", by the SAC Joi nt Venture [8], contai ns loose
top cover plate connection design details on pages C - 33 and D - 154. Rutherford & Chekene
Consulting Engineers present a design detail on page C - 33 that is si mi l ar to our suggested
solution. See Exhibit 1. Mr. Collin presents design details of our suggested solution on page
D - 154. See Exhibit 2.
Please note the Rutherford & Chekene design represents speci fi c cover plate thi cknesses and
sizes for specific column and beam sizes.
* Amer i c an I nst i t ut e of St eel Const r uct i on, Inc. Repr i nt ed wi t h per mi ssi on. Al l r i ght s r eser ved.
Welded Moment Frame Connections wi th Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 12
TESTI NG
Codes require testing of beam to column moment frame connections unless prior testing of the
joints and connection meet specified requirements.
Tests By Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc.
In August 1995, Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc. published a pamphlet titled, "Steel Connection
Update: Successful Test of Welded Steel Beam - Column Moment Connection." [9] This
pamphlet discussed successful tests conducted on a cover plate connection similar to our
suggested solution. See Figure 3-7 and Exhibit 3 for the design details of the Forell/Elsesser
connection. See Exhibit 4 for the plastic rotation results of one test specimen. The Department
of Energy funded the testing.
Note: The cover plate thickness and size in the Forell/Elsesser connection detail shown in
Exhibit 3 are sensitive to the beam and column sizes used. Forell/Elsesser "tuned" the plate
thicknesses and dimensions to those sizes. The connection detail shown in the 1995 publication
[9] was for specific column and beam sizes on a specific project. Do not apply to other member
sizes without closely matching the original sizes tested. Different sizes would require additional
testing.
Tests By SAC
The University of California, Berkeley, Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center is
testing various moment connections for SAC. One connection has top and bottom cover plates
with both plates fillet welded to the beam in the shop and groove welded to the column in the
field. The end result is similar to our suggested solution.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 13
5. ADVANTAGES AND
DISADVANTAGES
The following advantages and disadvantages result from
comparing the suggested connection presented in Section 4
to other connections in current use.
ADVANT AGES
Principal Advantage
Mi ni mal Residual Stress. Our suggested connection avoids direct beam flange to column
flange welds and restrained cover plate to column flange welds. It eliminates medium or high
residual stress that occurs when welding these joints to a column flange because connection
restraint or member restraint is not present. Instead, low residual stress occurs in the top and
bottom cover plate joints to the column flange because erectors do not restrain these plates
during welding.
Other Advantages
Correct Fi t -up. The loose top cover plate assures fit-up with the correct root opening.
Erectors lay the top plate on the top flange of the beam, position it for correct root opening, and
loosely clamp its end to prevent lifting.
No Change in Column Spacing Because of Weld Shrinkage. No groove weld
shrinkage on beam to column connections allows detailing the beams for exact column spacing.
Detailers need not contend with shrinkage allowance.
Plumbing-up. Plumbing-up is easier and more exact because of:
Beams detailed for positive connections and to exact column spacings.
No requirement to plan and allow for weld shrinkage.
No need to work around a groove welded beam joint.
Welding Sequence. With no change in column spacing because of weld shrinkage, beam to
column welding can start in any part of the building. When weld shrinkage occurs, erectors
usually start welding in the center of a building.
Welded Moment Frame Connecti ons with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 14
Be a m Fa b r i c a t i o n . Beam ends require no preparation for field wel di ng; they require only hole
punching in the beam web for erection bolts. Further, the positive web connection eliminates
the need for an access hole to place the back-up bar for the top cover plate weld.
Bo l t / We l d Se q u e n c e . Other connections with welded flanges and bolted webs still have the
problem of when to tighten the bol tsmbefore or after the flange welds. [10] The suggested
connection eliminates that problem.
D I S A D V A N T A G E S
L o o s e Top Cover Pl ates. The loose plates require more shipping pieces and more pieces to
handle in the field.
Co v e r Pl ates. Cover plate design may require additional steel and additional field welding.
Wel di ng Posi t i on. Loose top plates the same size as the bottom plates require welding fillet
welds in an overhead position. Narrower and thicker top plates change the welding position to
the horizontal position, but may increase the quantity of wel d metal for flat groove welding.
Shi ppi ng. Shop wel ded bottom cover plates make stacking, handling, and shipping columns
more difficult than other types of connections.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 1 5
6. CONCLUSION
Opt o s!
O p tio n s !
O p tio n s !
LEVEL OF RESI DUALSTRESS
Current field welding practices produce residual stress in wel ded moment frames. Some
connections produce more residual stress than others either by design, wel di ng practices, or
welding sequence. The residual stress level is unknown, but the stress is present.
The Northridge earthquake caused many welded connection failures, wi th most failures related
to the bottom fl ange joint. We conclude residual stress may have contributed to the bottom
flange j oi nt failure because of a welding sequence of top flange first and bottom fl ange second.
This sequence sets up high residual stress in the bottom flange.
A CONCLUSI ON TO CONSI DER
While developing this Steel TIPS, we kept arriving at the same conclusion, "The structural steel
industry should change its current practice of making welded moment frame connections from
a connection that produces high residual stress to a connection that produces minimal residual
stress."
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 16
7. REFERENCES
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
10.
"Commentary on Highly Restrained Welded Connections," AISC Engineering Journal,
AISC, Chicago, Third Quarter, 1973, p. 61-73.
Structural Welding Code-Steel D1.1-98, AWS, Miami, 1998, Annex XI, p. 266 and 271;
C426.
Manual of Steel Construction: Allowable Stress Design, 9 th ed, AISC, Chicago, 1989, p.
1-6, 4-152.
Manual of Steel Construction: Load and Resistance Factor Design for Structural Steel
Buildings, 2nd Edition, AISC, Chicago, 1994, p.1-5,1-6, 5-177.
Manual of Steel Construction: Volume II Connections, ASD/LRFD, First ed., AISC,
Chicago, 1992, p.2-19 to 22, p. 4-10 and 11, p. 4-16.
Preece, F. Robert and Collin, Alvaro L., "Structural Steel Construction in the '90s," Steel
TIPS, Structural Steel Education Council, Walnut Creek, September 1991, p. 14.
Blodgett, Omer W., "Design of Welded Structures," The James F. Lincoln Arc Welding
Foundation, Cleveland, June 1966, p.5.1-8; p.5.7-1 and 2.
"Steel Moment Frame Advisory No. 3," SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, 1995, p. C-33
to 36, p, D-154.
"Steel Construction Update: Successful Test of Welded Steel Beam - Column Moment
Connection," Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc., Structural Engineers, San Francisco,
August 1995.
Putkey, James J., "Common Steel Erection Problems and Suggested Solutions", Steel
TIPS, Structural Steel Educational Council, Moraga, December 1993, p. 33.
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 17
R I . I T H ~ R F O R D & G H ~ . K E , N ~ I O~II~EUI~TIN~
= ~ , ~ , ~ = i I ~ ~
m ~ + ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " - ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~
~ ~ , ~ o ~ m ~ ~ + ~ ~ . . . , m~ ~
m : ( ~ 4 + ~ z t ~ = : ( m ~ S + ~ S S + ~ ~ ~++ ~+ ~ _ ~ ~
- ~ ~. ++ + f ~ - + ..
~ - + . " I t . ~ +~+m+t . "
/ o ~ ~ I ~ ~ - - I ~ . . . . . . ~ .
~ ' ~ ~ I i ~ . u , ~ ~ ~ 4
" r ~ ; ' - - " i ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ' ~ "
~, ~ ~ ] ~ ~+~ ~
9 ~ ~ ~ m b m ~ ~ .
+ ~ ' ~ ~ . ~ ~ X ~ ~ =
. . . . ~ k ~ ~
+ - - + . , . + + ~ ~wt +
~ + m + ~ + , . + ~ ~ ~ , p
'+
$ ~ ~ ~ I I
t I ~ ~ ' > ' ~ '
i i ~ ~ P
+
. i -
~-t,ml=
, i ~ i ~ > : , - - , F - + - i l I I I - - - - + } . . . ' i e ' - - "- - +
'~ , ~ - l . - - - - - ~ - m t . ~
+' .; ~ ~ ' ~ ~:~-'
" 7 - ~ ' ~ &~+~ ~
~I~'4 + + + + + +
I~I ~ - ~ ~4 ~ ~ . -
- r ~ ,
m . + - , , l , ,
' - ' r Y P. 5 , , ~ ,
, \ II \
" , 1 " ~ . ~ ' ~ \ \ ~ / /~ ,.,_ _ ~
~ , ~ i..I~'P,,.,~ ~ $ m~ " ~ ' ~ " - - ' ~ ' ~ - ~
c ~ . . . . . . ~ ' t ,+ " ~ ; \ ~ " "
" ' ~ " ~ ~
, ,
t . . ~ ~ ~ ~ . - _ _
. . . . . I . . ~' ~ ~ ~ + ~ ~ I ~ ~ P ~ I
- _ ~ ~ '
~ ~ . ~ ~
C-33
E X H I B I T 1
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 18
Ref 5. 4k
. _ ~ A C J O H . d ' 7 - V , ~ ' t G T~i~x~ - W o ~ ~ o ~ ~ T I M E ~ o . ~ ~ ' "
~ o ~ M ~ ~ I ~ T / ~ ~ ~ f ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ M ~ T / o ~
..~_c_~,__,~_~ ". B " - , ~_~. M M <a~_c. z~- . p__~_~_~. . - _C#_<~, ~. ~z, e. zr , ~' ~__z: ~__, 5,
= D / 2 , ~ , , ' I ~ .
l- T o p C o ~, c r -~ ~ / o ~
L . ~ F / a l d ,~..,l a l d '~'/~ _ _
~o~.~,~,~ ! - - ~
~ M . Llo r ' ~ 5
/ - d o ~o~a,6o/c~ o o r
~Tel~i z i o ~ x - Wo u F ~ 9 . .
~ ~ ~ I ~ o ~ t ~ i ~
~ l " A "
~ ' , ~ - - , P - I : " ! ~ r ~ / / ~ , -/c> , ~ / o , ~ n .
~ , ~ . = / ~ ~ $ ~ ~,- ~ # t ~ 1 ~ x , ~
~ I -~ . - - V ~ ~ P / o / ~ I ~ t e e = / ~ ~. A r ~ o F
I ~ ~ ~ k m ~ d d ~ ~ / . I ~ ~ ~ s ~ m .
. - ~ { ~ ~ , ~ - ~ ~ # ~ ~ ~,i ~ . - ~ ~ ~ ~
" ' I. ' . . " ~ I ~ l B ~ ~ n ~ o ~ o y
~ " _ I I . ~ . 1. . ~ t . . ~ . . o ~ z . . . . . . '
. . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ X ~ . ~ . ~ , ; ~ l ~ d
. ~ ~ ~ V T ~ . n 7 g ? ~ T -
, , . , , , ~ _ - . _ ; ; . . . .
. . ~ Z . . ~ ~ . ~ ~i dy
_ ~ ..... ~k ~. ~l ~. . ~ ~L ( x T ~J ~- ~. ~: ~. - C a i i ={~
...... , ~ ~ I _ ~ ~ 1 ~ # ~ . ~ , - ( ~ J - ....... ~ . ~ _ . ~ _ . ~ l ~ _ _
.. ~ k ~ . ~ ~ ~ _ ~ z
" " ~ . . . . . . . . ~ ~ ~ ~ i o ~ . . . . . . . . ~ ~v ~. ~ ~d J
. . . . . . . . ~ ~ . ~ ~ .....
~ ~ E ~ / Z ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~. . ~ ~ . ~ , .
~ . . . I l - i , , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ - . . / a , - ~ , . ~ / d ~ ~ , ~ . ~ l z
l . .. I ~ - ~ , < . : < .~~-..: ~ ... -..- . . . . . . . . . / ~ . . ~ - k D ~ w ~ d , ~
~ / I i " ~ ~ ~
. . . . l . i . ~ . ~ , ~ . . . . . # ~ u , ~ ~ ~ d ~
- ~ ~1~ ~ - - . ~ - - ~ 1 = ~ ~ l l ~ t m ~ s J
. A . ~ J - ~L .. ~ ~ i ~ . ~ . __-.
. " - I ~ . ~ " 7 . . . . . . : . ' [ : , v ~ " ~ r ~ X x v ~ i k~ l i d ~ .
. . . . . . . . ~ ~ p ~ : ~ ~Io#~ . ~ I ~ ~. c J P ~ ~
. ~. ~o ~I _ ~_ ~, ~ . ( ~ ". bo =~, n~= ~#~I ~
' ~ " - - " ' " * ~ - - - " - ~Z ~ l ~ . o r . c ~ c
~ ~ . ~ - 7 ~ P C ~ K ~ ~ T ~ D ~ : ~ L . , ~ $ ~ ,
.: . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . / ~ . : D ~ t ~ / / ~ ~ ~ -
~ . . . ~ . c . 4 ~ ~ o o ~ ~ / ~
~ i - ; . , . , , ~ ; , . , ; . . ; . ~ : ' . " " " . . . . . . . . .
" " . . . . . - . : - , - - : ~ . . . . . . . . . :'1 . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : " . . . . "
I ~ . H ! . . . . . . . , , , . , + . . . . . . . , . L , . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . " . . t < . . . . . . . . . . ~ . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . .
I < . . . . . , I - . - . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . -
~ _ - ~ . , , - . L . . . : , ~ - ~ ..... g ~ . . . . . . . . . . . .
. ~ ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . ~ . . ~ e ~ . ~ / ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ _ .
.. ~ o ~ . . ~ d ~ ~ l o ~ n : ( ~ ] . . . . .
. . . . ~ l d ~ . ~ . ~ ~ ( ~ 9 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . ~ ~ : ' ~ : . - ~ o ~ _ . ~ . ~ ~ - ~ B ~ ! ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. .
D-~54
E X H I B I T 2
Wel ded Mo me n t Fr ame Connec t i ons wi t h Mi ni mal Resi dual St r ess, A. L. Col l i n and J. J. Put k ey , St eel TI PS, Oc t ober 1999 1 9
L B L H U M A N G E N O M E L A B
S T E E L J O I N T T E S T
~.~.~ ~ ~
NO WELD ~
AT RLLET
W14x211 ~
(A572 GR. 50)
FLAME CUT COVER PLATE /
/ AND GRIND SMOOTH
24"
/
.
1" NO WELD TYP. EA. END
" t
r ROLLING - ~
I ~
GRAIN " " ~
~ ~ ~ . . . . . . . . . . : = . . . . . . = = ~ =
~ 1 - - - - ~ = = ~ - ~ N O W E L D
. . . . . . . I "t~
. _ _ . . ~ - ~
PLAN \ ~' ~" ~' T~ . T B
t
~ ~ C . J . P .
REMOVE BACK-UP BAR
AFTER ROOT IS CLEANED
AND INSPECTED, TYP. T & B
I - - I
v
W.P.
2 ERECTION BOLTS - ~
. , ~
SIDES
J . P .
~ / ~ t : 2 2 " ~ 1 ~ "
~" W3 0 x 9 9 ( A 3 6 )
~ I . ~ ~.o~
RELD
-.4"x3/8" BAR AT ~ OF COL.
(REMOVE BAR AFTER STEEL
ERECTION IS COMPLETED)

SHOP WELD
C. J. P.
REMOVE BACK-UP BAR
NOTE: ALL WELDS SHALL BE
"SR" WELDS - SEE SPECIRCATIONS.
E X H I B I T 3
F i g u r e 6
J OI NT D E T A I L
For el l / El sesser Engi neers, Inc.
Morch 24, 1995
Wel ded Moment Frame Connecti ons with Minimal Resi dual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, Oct ober 1999 20
The Test
A beam and column sub-structure assembly was fabricated into a "T"
configuration, shown in the photo below, to mimic the actual configuration
found in the building. Laid fiat on the testing floor, the column was restrained
and a 150,000 pound hydraulic actuator drove the free end of the beam back
and forth over a plus and minus 5 inch range.
Both specimens survived this test regime with the expected yielding occurring
in the beam and virtually no signs of distress or fatigue visible or detected in
the connection region. Specimen 2 was tested with a pre-existing crack in the
column flange, and was successfully cycled I0 times over the 5 inch range,
indicating that the connection also provides good protection of the column as
well as the welded joint region.
The detailed study and test program, completed at a cost of $60,000, is reported
in a paper entitled "Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Steel Joint Test
Technical Brief' available from Forell/Elsesser Engineers upon request.
150
100
50
-50
LBNL STEEL JOINT TEST
SPECIMEN NO. 2
I
-
~ - - ~
- - i ~
1
-150 ~ ,
-0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04
PLASTIC ROTATION (RADIAN)
EXHI BI T 4
Welded Moment Frame Connections with Minimal Residual Stress, A.L. Collin and J.J. Putkey, Steel TIPS, October 1999 21
About the Aut hors
Al varo L. Collin was a Consulting Engineer with California registration in Civil Engineering and
Metallurgical Engineering. He received a BS degree from the University of California, Berkeley,
in 1941 as a Civil Engineering major and a Mechanical Engineering minor. He spent 24 years
with Kaiser Steel Corporation as Manager of Engineering of the Fabrication Division, Southern
California, and as Senior Development Engineer, Steel manufacturing Division, Oakland, CA.
For the past 18 years he consulted on welded construction, heavy equipment design and
material handling systems.
Mr. Collin is a life member of the Structural Engineers Association of Northern California. He
was a member of the Board of Directors and the Steel and Seismic committees of SEAONC.
He was a long-time member of the American Welding Society, having served on the National
Board of Directors, on the National Qualification and Certification Committee, and as chairman
to the Los Angeles and San Francisco sections. AI was awarded the National, District and
Section Meritorious Awards of AWS. He served on AISC and AISI Code Committee Task
Groups, the SAC Joint Venture Task Group, and was a member of the Earthquake Engineering
Research Institute.
Mr. Collin died during the development of this Steel TIPS. He was able to
review the general outline, detailed outline, the first draft, and all concepts
presented in the text.
James J. Putkey is a consulting civil engineer in Moraga, California. He received a BCE degree
from the University of Santa Clara in 1954. After two years in the U.S. Army, 19 years with the
Erection Department of Bethlehem Steel Corporation--Pacific Coast Division, and seven years
with the University of California--Office of the President, he started his own consulting business.
He has provided consulting services to owners, contractors, attorneys, and steel erectors for the
past 18 years.
Mr. Putkey is now "Semi-Retired." However, he still serves as a hearing officer for the University
of California-Office of the President, and occasionally writes construction related articles.
Wel ded Mo me n t Fr ame Co n n e c t i o n s wi t h Mi ni mal Resi dual St r ess, A. L. Col l i n and J. J. Put key, St eel TI PS, Oc t o b e r 1999 22
STRUCTURALSTEELEDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCT SERVICE
AUGUST 1999
Design of Reduced Beam Section
(RBS) Moment Frame Connections
by
Kevin S. Moore, James O. Malley, Michael D. Engelhardt
DE SI GN OF REDUCED BE AM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
KEVIN S. MOORE is a Desi gn Engi neer wi t h Degenkol b Engi neer s in San Franci sco, Califor-
nia. He ear ned hi s M.S. degree at The Uni versi t y of Texas at Aust i n wor ki ng unde r t he direc-
t i on of Dr. J. A. Yur a and Dr. M. D. Engel har dt . While conduct i ng r esear ch, Kevin assi st ed
Dr. Engel har dt wi t h mat er i al t est i ng for t he '~UT Tests, " some of t he first mome nt connect i on
t est s following t he 1994 Nort hri dge ear t hquake. He was t he l ead engi neer for a 5-stolry SMF
bui l di ng utilizing RBS connect i ons cons t r uct ed i n San Fr anci sco and is a regi st ered Profes-
si onal Engi neer in California.
J AMES 0. MALLEY is a Seni or Pri nci pal at Degenkol b Engi neer s in San Franci sco, Califor-
nia. He is t he Project Di rect or for Topical Invest i gat i ons of t he SAC J oi nt Vent ur e Par t ner shi p.
The SAC Joi nt Vent ur e was cr eat ed to develop gui del i ne document s for t he desi gn, eval uat i on,
and repai r of steel mome nt frame bui l di ngs in r esponse to t he damage caus ed by t he Nort h-
ridge ear t hquake. J i m has been involved wi t h ma ny steel desi gn and peer review proj ect s,
i ncl udi ng t he 5-st ory SMF bui l di ng listed above. He is a member of t he AISC Commi t t ee on
Speci fi cat i ons and Chai r of t he Sei smi c Subcommi t t ee and has aut hor ed nume r ous paper s on
steel desi gn and const r uct i on t hr oughout hi s career. He is also a r egi st er ed St r uct ur al Engi-
neer in California.
MICHAEL D. ENGELHARDT is an associ at e professor of Civil Engi neer i ng at The Uni versi t y
of Texas at Aust i n. Mike t eaches cour ses on s t r uct ur al steel desi gn at The Uni versi t y of Texas
and conduct s r esear ch on sei smi c r esi st ant steel frami ng. His previ ous wor k i ncl udes maj or
cont r i but i ons to t he devel opment and val i dat i on of eccent ri cal l y br aced f r ames (EBFs). Mike
has been an active par t i ci pant in moment connect i on r esear ch si nce t he 1994 Nort hri dge
ear t hquake and has wor ked ext ensi vel y on RBS r el at ed r esear ch. Mike is a member of AISC
Task Commi t t ee Number 113 on Sei smi c Desi gn and is a regi st ered Professi onal Engi neer in
California.
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
C ON T E N T S
I .
.
3.
4.
o
6.
.
I NTRODUCTI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. 1 DESCRI PTI ON OF SMF . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. 2 BACKGROUND OF RBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
HI S TORY OF THE DEVELOP MENT OF RBS S MF CONNECTI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. 1 I NI TI AL RESEARCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
S UMMARY OF TES T RES ULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. 1 OVERVI EW OF TEST RESULTS FOR RADI US CUT RBS SPECI MENS . . . . . . . . . . . 4
RBS DES I GN P ROCEDURE F OR S MF S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. 1 RBS DESI GN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4. 2 RBS SI ZI NG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. 3 STEP- BY- STEP PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4. 4 ADDI TI ONAL DESI GN CONSI DERATI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
RBS DES I GN EXAMP LE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 8
P ROCEDURES F OR ACCEP TANCE OF DES I GN BY BUI LDI NG AUTHORI TI ES . . . 2 1
6. I COMMUNI CATI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6. 2 METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
6. 3 CONSTRUCTI ON DOCUMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
F ABRI CATI ON AND I NS P ECTI ON I S S UES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7. 1 CUTTI NG AND GRI NDI NG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
7. 2 WELDI NG . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
REF ERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
AP P ENDI X A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ai
LI S T OF F I GU R E S
1. 1
1. 2
2. 1
2. 2
4. 1
4. 2
4. 3
4. 4
4. 5
4. 6
4. 7
4. 8
5. 1
5. 2
5. 3
PRE- NORTHRI DGE MOMENT CONNECTI ON DETAI L . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
RADI US CUT RBS MOMENT CONNECTI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
TAPERED CUT RBS MOMENT CONNECTI ON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
EXAMPLE OF LABORATORY BEHAVI OR OF RADI US CUT RBS TEST SPECI MEN ..... 4
(A) DETAI L OF TEST SPECI MEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
(B) RESPONSE OF TEST SPECI MEN . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
MOMENT DI AGRAM AND BEAM GEOMETRY FOR RBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
GEOMETRY OF RADI US CUT RBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
TYPI CAL MOMENT FRAME BEAM WI TH RBS CONNECTI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
BEAM AT MI NI MUM SECTI ON OF RBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
FREE BODY DI AGRAM BETWEEN CENTERS OF RBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
FREE BODY DI AGRAM BETWEEN CENTER OF RBS
AND FACE OF COLUMN FLANGE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
FREE BODY DI AGRAM FOR CALCULATI ON OF COLUMN MOMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
COMPARI SON OF TEST RESULTS FOR COVER PLATED AND RBS CONNECTI ONS 17
RBS DI MENSI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
PORTI ON OF EXAMPLE BEAM BETWEEN RBS CENTERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
CONNECTI ON DETAI L FOR DESI GN EXAMPLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
I. I nt r o duc t i o n
When subj ect ed to a maj or ear t hquake, bui l d-
ings desi gned to meet t he desi gn requi re-
ment s of typical bui l di ng codes, such as t he
Uni I' orm Bui l di ng ~ Code (1997), are expect ed
to have damage to bot h st r uct ur al and non-
st r uct ur al el ement s. The st r uct ur al desi gn for
large sei smi c event s mus t therefore explicitly
consi der t he effects of r esponse beyond t he
elastic range. The "Special Moment Frame"
(SMF) steel bui l di ng syst em is desi gned s uch
t hat t he connect i ons bet ween t he f r ame
beams and col umns absor b s ubs t ant i al
energy and provide maj or cont ri but i ons to t he
di spl acement duct i l i t y demand.
1.1 Descr i pti on of SMF
Recent st udi es by Lee (1997) and ot her s have
demons t r at ed t hat t hi s as s umpt i on is far dif-
ferent from t he act ual behavi or.
l
~ ~ - - ~ C.P. ~70T-4
I I : I . 7 / 8 " A 3 2 5 - X BOLTS 1
A SMF l at eral force resi st i ng syst em is often
preferred by bui l di ng owner s and ar chi t ect s
because t hi s type of syst em provi des large
unobs t r uct ed spaces t hr oughout t he bui l d-
ing pl an. This "open" l ayout offers t he most
flexibility for pr ogr ammi ng t he spaces as well
as ar chi t ect ur al appoi nt ment s. For t hese rea-
sons, steel bui l di ngs wi t h SMF syst ems are
qui t e common in maj or commer ci al and
i nst i t ut i onal st r uct ur es. Fur t her mor e, t he
SMF syst em is consi der ed by many to be one
of t he most duct i l e steel bui l di ng syst ems
available to t he engi neer. For t hi s r eason,
SMF syst ems have been wi del y used in ar eas
of hi gh seismicity.
SMFs are typically compr i sed of connec-
t i ons bet ween wi de fl ange be a ms a nd
col umns wher e beam flanges are wel ded to
col umn flanges utilizing compl et e j oi nt pene-
t rat i on welds. Figure 1.1 shows a t ypi cal
unr ei nf or ced desi gn detail for a beam-t o-col -
umn connect i on used in SMF syst ems pri or
to t he 1994 Nort hri dge ear t hquake. Common
pract i ce pri or to t he Nort hri dge ear t hquake
was to ei t her bolt or wel d t he web to t he col-
umn shear plate, and to wel d t he beam
flanges to t he col umn flange usi ng a com-
plete j oi nt penet r at i on groove weld. Histori-
cally, desi gner s have as s umed t hat beam
shear is t r ansf er r ed to t he col umn by t he
beam web connect i on and t he moment is
t r ans f er r ed t hr ough t he beam fl anges.
Fi gure 1. I Pre- Nort hri dge
Mo me nt Co nne c t i o n De t ai l
In t he desi gn of SMF connect i ons, t he
engi neer mus t set objectives for bot h l oad
and def or mat i on capaci t i es. Usual l y, t he l oad
capaci t y r equi r ement is based on t he pl ast i c
moment of t he beam. The connect i on mus t
be st rong enough to devel op t he st r engt h of
t he beam, t hus r educi ng t he ri sk of brittle
failure in t he connect i on. Inel ast i c deforma-
tion capaci t y is r equi r ed to as s ur e duct i l i t y in
pr edet er mi ned l ocat i ons when subj ect ed to
large def or mat i on demands .
After some of t he pr obl ems observed in
SMF connect i ons after t he Nort hri dge ear t h-
quake, a common phi l osophy has been to
desi gn t he connect i on to r emai n nomi nal l y
el ast i c at t he col umn face, and force t he
i nel ast i c def or mat i on of t he f r ame to occur in
a port i on of t he beam, away from t he con-
nect i on. This phi l osophy is execut ed by usi ng
a "capaci t y desi gn" appr oach. The pl ast i c
mome nt and associ at ed s hear of t he beam is
based on probabl e st r engt hs of mat eri al s.
These ma xi mums t hen become t he desi gn
l oads for t he connect i on. The connect i on of
t he beam to t he col umn flange is t hen
desi gned usi ng nomi nal mat er i al propert i es.
Most post -Nort hri dge connect i on desi gns
l ocat e t he pl ast i c hi nge (where i nel ast i c
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
d e f o r ma t i o n s a r e c o n c e n t r a t e d i n t h e SMF
be a m) a wa y f r o m t h e c o l u mn f l ange t h r o u g h
r e i nf or c i ng a s h o r t p o r t i o n of t h e b e a m n e a r
t h e c o l u mn . By i n c r e a s i n g t h e s t r e n g t h of t h e
b e a m i n t hi s r e gi on, a pl a s t i c h i n g e wi l l t e n d
t o f or m j u s t a d j a c e n t t o t h e r e i nf or c e d por -
t i on of t h e b e a m. Th e i n h e r e n t di f f i cul t y wi t h
ut i l i zi ng a r e i n f o r c e d b e a m- c o l u mn c o n n e c -
t i on i s t h e i n c r e a s e d ma t e r i a l a n d l a bor c os t s
a s s o c i a t e d wi t h t h i s c o n n e c t i o n a n d t h e SMF
s y s t e m a s wel l a s r e q u i r i n g we l d s t h a t a r e
di f f i cul t a n d c os t l y t o ma k e a n d i ns pe c t .
1.2 Backgr ound of RBS
An o t h e r t ype of c o n n e c t i o n d e v e l o p e d t o f or ce
t h e i n e l a s t i c d e f o r ma t i o n a wa y f r om t h e
b e a m- c o l u mn i n t e r f a c e i s r e f e r r e d t o a s a
" Re d u c e d Be a m Se c t i on" c o n n e c t i o n (RBS) or
" dogbone" . Thi s c o n n e c t i o n r el i es o n t h e
s el ect i ve r e mo v a l of b e a m f l ange ma t e r i a l
a d j a c e n t t o t h e b e a m- t o - c o l u mn c o n n e c t i o n ,
t ypi cal l y f r om b o t h t op a n d b o t t o m f l anges ,
t o r e d u c e t h e c r o s s s e c t i o n a l a r e a of t h e
b e a m. Thi s r e d u c t i o n i n c r o s s s e c t i o n a l a r e a
wi l l r e d u c e t h e mo me n t c a p a c i t y at a d i s c r e t e
l oc a t i on i n t h e b e a m. Va r i o u s s h a p e s of
c u t o u t s a r e pos s i bl e , i n c l u d i n g c o n s t a n t c ut ,
t a p e r e d c ut , r a d i u s c u t a n d o t h e r s . Fi gur e
1. 2 i l l u s t r a t e s a r a d i u s c u t RBS c o n n e c t i o n .
The L u x e mb o u r g - b a s e d s t eel ma n u f a c -
t u r i n g c o mp a n y , ARBED, h e l d a 1992 US
p a t e n t on t h e r e d u c e d b e a m s e c t i on (RBS).
' A
~L ~ - - . .
F i g u r e 1. 2
Ra d i u s Cu t RBS Mo me n t Co n n e c t i o n
Fol l owi ng t h e Nor t hr i dge e a r t h q u a k e , t h e y
wa i v e d al l p a t e n t a n d c l a i m r i g h t s a s s o c i a t e d
wi t h t h e RBS f or t h e be ne f i t of t h e p r o f e s s i o n .
Thi s g r a c i o u s g e s t u r e a l l owe d f u r t h e r devel -
o p me n t of t h e c o n c e p t for u s e i n p o s t - No r t h -
r i dge SMF bui l di ngs .
Th e s h a p e , si ze a n d l oc a t i on of t h e RBS
al l h a v e a n ef f ect o n t h e c o n n e c t i o n d e ma n d s
a n d p e r f o r ma n c e . Va r i o u s s h a p e s h a v e b e e n
t e s t e d a n d u s e d i n n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n d u r i n g
t h e p a s t s e ve r a l ye a r s . Tes t p r o g r a ms h a v e
b e e n p e r f o r me d t o i nve s t i ga t e s t r a i g h t c u t
( Pl umi e r , 1997) , t a p e r c u t ( Chen, et . al . 1996)
a n d r a d i u s c u t ( En g e l h a r d t 1997; Tr e mb l a y ,
et . al . 1997; Popov, et . al . 1998) r e d u c e d b e a m
s e c t i o n s .
Th e RBS f or ces yi e l di ng a n d h i n g e f o r ma -
t i on t o o c c u r wi t h i n t h e r e d u c e d s e c t i o n of
t h e b e a m a n d l i mi t s t h e mo me n t t h a t c a n be
d e v e l o p e d at t h e f ace of t h e c o l u mn . By
r e d u c i n g d e ma n d s on t h e b e a m f l ange gr oove
we l d s a n d t h e s u r r o u n d i n g b a s e me t a l
r e gi ons , t h e RBS r e d u c e s t h e pos s i bi l i t y of
f r a c t u r e s o c c u r r i n g i n t hi s v u l n e r a b l e r e gi on.
Al t h o u g h t h e RBS e s s e n t i a l l y we a k e n s t h e
b e a m, i t s i mp a c t o n t h e o v e r a l l l a t e r a l
s t r e n g t h a n d s t i f f nes s of a s t eel mo me n t
f r a me i s g e n e r a l l y qui t e s mal l .
Th e i n e l a s t i c d e f o r ma t i o n f o c u s e d i n a n
RBS c o n n e c t i o n r e ma i n s i n t h e r e d u c e d
b e a m s e c t i on, wh i c h c a n be d e s i g n e d a n d
l o c a t e d s u c h t h a t mi n i ma l pr ot e c t i ve me a s -
u r e s n e e d t o be t a k e n at t h e c o n n e c t i o n of
b e a m t o c o l u mn . The s ma l l e r mo me n t g e n e r -
a t e d a t t h e f ace of t h e c o l u mn f or a n RBS
c o n n e c t i o n , i n a d d i t i o n t o r e d u c i n g s t r e s s
l evel s on t h e we l ds , al s o of f er s s o me a d v a n -
t a g e s i n s a t i s f yi ng s t r o n g c o l u mn - we a k b e a m
r e q u i r e me n t s a n d i n mi n i mi z i n g c o l u mn
d o u b l e r pl a t e r e q u i r e me n t s .
F a b r i c a t i o n a n d e r e c t i o n of t h e RBS c o n -
n e c t i o n a voi ds t h e a d d i t i o n of s t r e n g t h e n i n g
p l a t e s a n d s p e c i a l we l d me n t s t h a t a r e
r e q u i r e d of ma n y p o s t - No r t h r i d g e mo me n t
c o n n e c t i o n s . Co n s e q u e n t l y , t h e RBS c o n n e c -
t i on i s ve r y c ompe t i t i ve f r om a c o s t p e r s p e c -
t i ve. Be c a u s e of t h e c ompe t i t i ve c o s t a n d
e s t a b l i s h e d p e r f o r ma n c e b a s e d o n e x t e n s i v e
t e s t i n g a n d a n a l y s i s , t h e RBS c o n n e c t i o n
a p p e a r s t o be a c os t ef f ect i ve, c o n s i s t e n t l y
p e r f o r mi n g c o n n e c t i o n for u s e i n t h e s e i s mi c
d e s i g n of SMF b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e s .
2
DESI GN OFF REDUCED BE AM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
.
Hi s t o r y o f t h e D e v e l o p me n t
o f R B S S MF C o n n e c t i o n s
A numbe r of si gni fi cant event s led to t he cur-
r ent envi r onment s ur r oundi ng SMF desi gn
and const r uct i on met hodol ogi es. Concer ns
over mat er i al propert i es, connect i on geome-
try, desi gn par amet er s and wel d qual i t y are
j us t a few i ssues whi ch became a concer n
after brittle fai l ures were observed in SMF
moment connect i ons after t he 1994 North-
ridge ear t hquake.
SMF s t r uct ur es were still bei ng desi gned
and r equest ed by owner s for all t he r easons
descr i bed earlier. The pre-Nort hri dge con-
nect i on detail had become a dri vi ng eco-
nomi c factor for t he viability of t he SMF sys-
t em. To redesi gn moment connect i ons in a
SMF syst em utilizing expensi ve connect i on
r ei nf or cement t echni ques made t hi s bui l di ng
syst em l ess competitive.
2.1 I ni ti al Resear ch
A si gni fi cant amount of r esear ch and t e s t i ng
on RBS moment connect i ons has al r eady
been compl et ed, and addi t i onal wor k is
under way. Appendi x A provi des a listing of
t est s on RBS connect i ons. The list i ncl udes
key f eat ur es of each test, i ncl udi ng member
sizes and st r engt hs, connect i on details, RBS
size and shape, and t he pl ast i c rot at i on
achi eved by each t est assembl age. As indi-
cat ed by t he dat a- i n Appendi x A, successf ul
t est s have been conduct ed on cons t ant cut ,
t aper ed cut and r adi us cut RBS speci mens.
The t aper ed cut , shown in Fi gure 2.1, is
i nt ended to allow t he sect i on modul us of t he
beam to mat ch t he sei smi c moment gr adi ent
in t he r educed region, t her eby pr omot i ng
more uni f or m yi el di ng wi t hi n t he r educed
section. This is i nt ended to creat e a reliable,
uni f or m hi ngi ng location. However, st ress
concent r at i ons at t he r e- ent r ant cor ner s of
t he flange cut may l ead to f r act ur e at t hese
locations. After si gni fi cant pl ast i c rot at i on,
bot h t he const ant cut and t aper ed cut RBS
connect i ons , have exper i enced f r act ur es
wi t hi n t he RBS in some l aborat ory tests.
These f r act ur es have occur r ed at changes in
sect i on wi t hi n t he RBS, for exampl e at t he
mi ni mum sect i on of t he t aper ed RBS. These
changes of cr oss- sect i on i nt r oduce st r ess
concent r at i ons t hat can l ead to f r act ur e
wi t hi n t he hi ghl y st r essed r educed sect i on of
t he beam.
I
~ ~= ~
F i g u r e 2 . I
T a p e r e d C u t RB S Mo me n t C o n n e c t i o n
The r adi us cut RBS appear s to mi ni mi ze
st ress concent r at i ons, t her eby r educi ng t he
chances of a f r act ur e occur r i ng wi t hi n t he
r educed sect i on (Engel hardt , et.al. 1996).
Fur t he r mor e , t est r es ul t s i ndi cat e t ha t
i nel ast i c def or mat i ons di st r i but e over tl~e
l engt h of t he r educed section. The r adi us cut
is also relatively si mpl e to fabri cat e.
Fi gure 2. 2 shows an exampl e of a l abora-
tory t est of a r adi us cut RBS speci men. The
connect i on det ai l is shown in Fi gure 2.2(a)
and t he mome nt ver s us pl ast i c r ot at i on
r esponse is s hown in Fi gure 2.2(b). As is typ-
ical of most r adi us cut RBS t est s, t hi s speci-
men showed excel l ent per f or mance.
As shown i n Fi gure 2.2(a),.it is i mpor t ant
to not e t hat most RBS t est speci mens, in
addi t i on to i ncor por at i ng t he RBS, also i ncor-
por at ed si gni fi cant i mpr ovement s in wel di ng
and in ot her det ai l i ng f eat ur es as compar ed
to t he pr e- Nor t hr i dge connect i on. All speci-
mens wer e cons t r uct ed usi ng wel di ng elec-
t rodes t hat exhi bi t i mpr oved not ch t ough-
ness as compar ed to t he E70T-4 el ect rode
commonl y us e d pr i or to t he Nor t hr i dge
ear t hquake.
The maj or i t y of speci mens also i ncorpo-
r at ed i mpr oved pr act i ces wi t h r espect to
backi ng bar s and wel d t abs. In most cases,
bot t om fl ange backi ng bar s were removed,
backgouged and seal ed wi t h a fillet weld, and
top flange backi ng bar s were seal wel ded to
t he col umn. Wel d r un- of f t abs wer e r emoved
in most cases. In addi t i on to wel di ng r el at ed
i mpr ovement s, most speci mens also i ncorpo-
3
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
~ ~ / B.U, bar to r e ma i n
---.--~"~J / ~ Remove we l d t a b s
~ "~'>~ . . . . . . . i ~' i "" N o t e :
i ~ ~ 45 ~ Al l f i e l d we l d s : E71T-8
r ~ " ) ( S ~ i f ~ e d CVN = 20.-~
~ ~ \-~W~,lg4
~ ~l t S: 1" A3 ~ 25 9" C-C ~
' ~Hol es: 1-1/16" DIA. J
E ~8" x 6" x 2'-6" /
~ Z ................. ~
. . . .
~ ~ I k c l e a n e d a n d i n s ~ c t e d
~ R e a v e B.U. b a r
I N k Remove ~ l d t a b s
~ 8
~ o o
" 3'-4" R a d i u s
~ ~ / Gr i n d S mi t h
5 / 1 ~ ~/ ~ / G r i n d P a r a l l e l t o B e a m F l a n g e
/
~ ~ ~ 2.31"
~ ,~ ~
9" 27"
(a) De t a i l o f ~ e s t S p e c i me n
d CVN = 20 f t - l b s a t - 2 0 d e g F)
40000 .
'
$1:~. ~ B 4 I
i
.,0000
i -20000
.30000 I
~ 0 0 0 0
. 0 . 0 ~ .0.114
~ Moment ~nd RotafJon Computed
v, lth Rs~pe~ to Faca o~ Col,~nn
I I I
, -0. 03 -0.02 .0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Total Pl ast i c Rotation ( radi an)
(b) Re s p o n s e o f Te s t S p e c i me n
Fi gur e 2 . 2 Ex a mp l e o f Labor at or y Be h a v i o r o f Ra di us Cut RBS Te s t S p e c i me n
r a t e d a d d i t i o n a l d e t a i l i n g i mp r o v e me n t s .
Co n s e q u e n t l y , a l t h o u g h t h e b e a m f l a n g e
c u t o u t s a r e t h e mo s t d i s t i n g u i s h i n g f e a t u r e
of t h e RBS c o n n e c t i o n , t h e s u c c e s s of t h i s
c o n n e c t i o n i n l a b o r a t o r y t e s t s i s a l s o l i kel y
r e l a t e d t o t h e ma n y o t h e r we l d i n g a n d de t a i l -
i n g i mp r o v e me n t s i mp l e me n t e d i n t h e t e s t
s p e c i me n s , i . e. t h e u s e of we l d me t a l wi t h
i mp r o v e d n o t c h t o u g h n e s s , i mp r o v e d p r a c -
t i c e s wi t h r e s p e c t t o b a c k i n g b a r s a n d we l d
t a b s , u s e of c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s , et c.
3. S u mma r y o f T e s t Re s u l t s
Th e t a b l e i n Ap p e n d i x A p r o v i d e s a l i s t i n g of
RBS t e s t d a t a . Whi l e t h i s l i s t ma y n o t b e
e x h a u s t i v e or c o n t a i n e ve r y t e s t p e r f o r me d
o n RBS b e a m- c o l u mn s u b a s s e mb l i e s or
a n c i l l a r y t e s t i n g t o s u p p o r t p e r f o r ma n c e , t h e
l i s t d o e s p r o v i d e t h e r e a d e r wi t h a s u b s t a n -
t i al a mo u n t of d o c u me n t e d p e r f o r ma n c e c o n -
d i t i o n s f or t h i s c o n n e c t i o n . Th e t a b l e a l s o
i n c l u d e s RBS t e s t s c o mp l e t e d u n d e r t h e SAC
P h a s e 2 r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m a s of mi d - 1 9 9 9 .
T h e s e t e s t r e s u l t s h a v e n o t b e e n f o r ma l l y
p u b l i s h e d , b u t a r e i n c l u d e d b a s e d o n avai l -
a bl e t e s t r e p o r t s .
Th e AI SC Seismic Provisions for Structural
Steel Buildings ( 1997) r e q u i r e q u a l i f i c a t i o n
t e s t i n g f or SMF c o n n e c t i o n d e s i g n s . Th e t e s t
r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d i n Ap p e n d i x A ma y b e u s e f u l
i n s a t i s f y i n g t h ~ s e q u a l i f i c a t i o n t e s t r e q u i r e -
me n t s . Ap p e n d i x S of t h e Seismic Provisions
for Structural Steel Buildings p r o v i d e s g u i d e -
l i n e s o n e x t r a p o l a t i n g t e s t r e s u l t s b e y o n d t h e
t e s t e d me mb e r si zes.
Ap p e n d i x A i n c l u d e s l i s t i n g s f or 4 3 RBS
t e s t s . Th i s n u mb e r d o e s n o t i n c l u d e t e s t s b y
P l u mi e r ( 1997) , or s h a k i n g t a b l e t e s t s b y
Ch e n , Ye h a n d Ch u ( 1996) . Ad d i t i o n a l t e s t s
h a v e a l s o b e e n c o n d u c t e d o n s p e c i me n s i n
wh i c h t h e RBS wa s p r o v i d e d i n t h e b o t t o m
f l a n g e o n l y f or u s e a s a r e t r of i t me a s u r e f or
e x i s t i n g mo me n t f r a me c o n n e c t i o n s . T h e s e
RBS r e t r of i t t e s t s a r e n o t r e p o r t e d i n Ap p e n -
di x A. I n f o r ma t i o n o n t h e t e s t s i s a v a i l a b l e i n
t h e AI SC Steel Design Guide Series Twelve
( Gr os s , et . al . 1999) .
3.1 Over vi ew of Test Resul ts f or
Radi us Cut RBS Speci mens
Th i s s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s a n ove r vi e w of t h e t e s t
d a t a l i s t e d i n Ap p e n d i x A f or r a d i u s c u t RBS
t e s t s p e c i me n s . Th e r e a r e 27 r a d i u s c u t RBS
t e s t s l i s t e d i n t h e t a bl e . E x a mi n a t i o n of t h i s
d a t a i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s e c o n n e c t i o n s de ve l -
o p e d p l a s t i c r o t a t i o n s r a n g i n g f r o m 0 . 0 2 9 r a d
t o b e y o n d 0 . 0 5 r a d . T h e s e r e s u l t s s u g g e s t
t h a t t h e r a d i u s c u t RBS c o n n e c t i o n c a n
d e v e l o p l a r ge p l a s t i c r o t a t i o n s o n a c o n s i s -
t e n t b a s i s . Al so n o t a b l e i s t h e f a c t t h a t a
4
DESI GN OF REDUCED BE AM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
large number of r adi us cut RBS connect i ons
have been t est ed unde r a vari et y of condi-
tions by a numbe r of different i nvest i gat ors,
and t her e has not been a single t est wi t h
poor performance. This suggest s t he connec-
tion is qui t e r obust and reliable.
The dat a in Appendi x A demons t r at es t he
possi bl e ul t i mat e fai l ure modes for t he r adi us
cut RBS connect i on. In ma ny t est s, speci men
st r engt h gr adual l y det er i or at ed due to local
and l at eral t orsi onal buckl i ng, and t est i ng
was t er mi nat ed due to l i mi t at i ons of t he test-
ing equi pment or t est set up. However, a
numbe r of connect i ons have been l oaded well
past t he occur r ence of local flange buckl i ng
wi t hi n t he RBS, and ul t i mat el y failed by low
cycle fat i gue f r act ur e of t he RBS. Only one of
t he 27 r adi us cut RBS speci mens experi-
enced a f r act ur e at t he beam- t o- col umn con-
nect i on. This speci men, desi gnat ed "DBBW-
C - Beam 2" in Appendi x A, f r act ur ed in t he
beam bot t om flange base met al adj acent to
t he groove weld, wi t h t he f r act ur e i ni t i at i ng
at t he wel d access hole. However, even t hi s
connect i on devel oped 0. 038 rad. of pl ast i c
rot at i on pri or to fract ure.
Most of t he r adi us cut RBS speci mens
ha ve been t est ed pseudo statically, usi ng a
l oadi ng prot ocol in whi ch appl i ed di spl ace-
ment s are progressi vel y i ncr eased. However,
one speci men ("S-l") was t est ed monot oni -
cally to failure. Two speci mens ("LS-2" and
"LS-3") were t est ed us i ng a l oadi ng prot ocol
i nt ended to r epr esent near sour ce gr ound
mot i ons t hat cont ai n a large pul se. Finally,
two speci mens ("S-4" and "SC-2") were t est ed
dynami cal l y. The r adi us cut RBS speci mens
have per f or med well unde r all of t hese load-
i ng condi t i ons.
A wi de r ange of beam sizes have been
t est ed wi t h t he r adi us cut RBS. The smal l est
beam listed in Appendi x A is a W530x82
( Canadi an desi gnat i on) whi ch is r oughl y
equi val ent to a W2 l x50. The heavi est beam
t est ed is a W36x300. All col umns for r adi us
cut RBS t est s have been W14 sect i ons. Most
of t he col umns have been sized to provi de for
a very st rong panel zone, al t hough a smal l
numbe r of t est s have i ncl uded moder at e
panel zone yielding. No t est s have been con-
duct ed on speci mens wi t h very weak panel
zones. However, s uch t est s will be compl et ed
dur i ng 1999.
Of t he 27 r adi us cut RBS speci mens
listed in Appendi x A, t her e are no r epor t ed
cases of wel d fract ure. Beam flange groove
wel ds for all r adi us cut RBS speci mens have
been made by t he self shi el ded flux cor ed arc
wel di ng pr ocess (SS-FCAW) usi ng el ect rodes
wi t h a mi ni mum specified CVN t oughnes s of
20 ft.-lbs, a t - 20 F. Three different el ect rode
desi gnat i ons have been us ed in t hese tests:
E71T-8, E70TG-K2, and E70T-6. For one of
t he r adi us cut RBS speci mens, det ai l s of t he
backi ng bar s were not report ed. However, for
t he r emai ni ng 26 speci mens in whi ch back-
i ng bar det ai l s wer e report ed, t he bot t om
flange backi ng was r emoved and t he top
flange backi ng was left in place. For t he
maj ori t y of t hese speci mens, t he top flange
backi ng was seal wel ded to t he face of t he
col umn, al t hough t hese seal wel ds were not
provi ded in four s peci mens (WG-1 to WG-4).
Note t hat onl y one of t he 27 r adi us cut RBS
speci mens us ed cover pl at es at t he beam- t o-
col umn connect i on as a s uppl ement to t he
RBS.. The r emai ni ng 26 speci mens us ed no
s uppl ement al r ei nf or ci ng me a s ur e s (cover
pl at es, ribs, etc.) at t he connect i on.
Di mensi ons of t he RBS cut s for t he 27
r adi us cut speci mens vary over a fairly smal l
range. The di st ance from t he face of t he col-
umn to t he st ar t of t he RBS cut (desi gnat ed
as L 1 in Appendi x A) r anged from 50 to 75%
of t he beam flange wi dt h. The l engt hs of t he
cut s (desi gnat ed as LRB S in Appendi x A)
have vari ed from 74 to 82% of t he beam
dept h. The a mount of flange wi dt h r emoved
at t he mi ni mum sect i on of t he RBS (desig-
nat ed as FR i n Appendi x A) has var i ed from
38 to 55%.
Two t ypes of web connect i on det ai l s have
been us ed for r adi us cut RBS t est speci mens:
a wel ded and a bol t ed detail. In t he wel ded
detail, t he beam web is wel ded di rect l y to t he
col umn flange us i ng a compl et e j oi nt pene-
t rat i on groove weld. For t he bol t ed detail,
fully t ensi oned hi gh st r engt h bolts are used.
Approxi mat el y hal f t he speci mens have us e d
t he bol t ed detail, and hal f t he wel ded detail.
The dat a i ndi cat es no si gni fi cant di fference i n
per f or mance for r adi us cut speci mens.
5
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
Beam l at eral br aci ng det ai l s have also
vari ed among t he r adi us cut RBS speci mens.
Of t he 27 speci mens, seven are r epor t ed to
have provi ded a br ace at t he RBS. For t he
r emai ni ng 20 speci mens, t he l at eral br ace
was typically f ur t her away from t he RBS
pl aced near t he poi nt of l oad appl i cat i on.
Finally, of t he 27 r adi us cut speci mens
listed in Appendi x A, six were t est ed wi t h a
composi t e concr et e floor slab. For Speci mens
"SC-1" and "SC-2," a one- i nch gap was i nt en-
t i onal l y left bet ween t he face of t he col umn
and t he slab, in an at t empt to mi ni mi ze com-
posi t e act i on. For Speci mens "DBBW-C
Beams 1 & 2" and "DBWW-C Beams 1 & 2,"
no such gap was provided. No det r i ment al
effects of t he slab were observed in any of
t hese tests. In some t est s, t he i nvest i gat ors
not ed t hat t he slab enhanced overall energy
di ssi pat i on by del ayi ng beam instability. Note
t hat for all composi t e speci mens, no shear
st uds were pl aced in t he region of t he RBS or
bet ween t he face of t he col umn and t he st art
of t he RBS.
As descr i bed above, a r at her wi de r ange of
condi t i ons has been i nvest i gat ed in RBS test-
i ng compl et ed t o-dat e. Test i ng of RBS con-
nect i ons is cont i nui ng under t he SAC pro-
gr am and for specific bui l di ng const r uct i on
projects. The r eader is encour aged to r emai n
abr east of t hi s dat a, as it becomes available.
Even t hough ma ny vari abl es have al r eady
been i nvest i gat ed in RBS t est i ng, t her e are a
numbe r of condi t i ons t hat have recei ved l ess
at t ent i on. These condi t i ons, when t hey ari se
in desi gn, shoul d be appr oached wi t h cau-
tion si nce dat a is l acki ng in t hese areas. In
s uch cases, addi t i onal t est i ng may be war-
r ant ed. For exampl e, no r adi us cut RBS con-
nect i ons to t he weak axis of a wide flange col-
umn have been t est ed, al t hough dat a for
some ot her RBS connect i ons to t he col umn
weak axi s ar e avai l abl e (see Speci mens
"COH-3" and "COH-4" in Appendi x A). No
speci mens wi t h deep col umns have yet been
consi dered. Fur t her , no t est s on speci mens
wi t h very weak panel zones have been con-
duct ed. Fut ur e r esear ch is unde r wa y to
addr ess t hese and ot her i ssues.
4. RBS De s i g n Pr o c e d u r e f or
SMFs
The following sect i ons cont ai n r ecommenda-
t i ons for t he desi gn of new r adi us cut RBS
moment connect i ons. Based on t he suc-
cesses out l i ned above, and t he preference of
engi neer s desi gni ng new SMF st r uct ur es, t he
desi gn met hodol ogy pr esent ed her ei n focuses
on t he r adi us cut RBS shape. Globally
i mpor t ant desi gn par amet er s such as panel
zone part i ci pat i on, beam shear and overall
frame drift are addr es s ed as par t of t he rec-
omme nde d pr ocedur e. Many i mpor t a nt
aspect s of moment connect i on desi gn are
appl i cabl e and mus t be consi der ed when
desi gni ng SMF RBS connect i ons. The RBS
desi gn met hodol ogy shoul d be per f or med in
conj unct i on wi t h available t est r esul t s as
par t of t he j ust i fi cat i on of t he desi gn proce-
dure.
The initial par t of t he SMF/ RBS desi gn is
to det er mi ne t he confi gurat i on of t he mome nt
frames, t he t ypi cal bay sizes, pl an di men-
si ons and frame l ocat i ons. Many of t hese
r equi r ement s are det er mi ned by ot her s,
(archi t ect s, owner s, devel opers), but t he
engi neer shoul d i nfl uence t hese deci si ons
based on s ound desi gn pract i ces. One exam-
ple woul d be to consi der t he bay size if a
SMF/ RBS syst em is to be utilized. Because
of t he hi gh moment gr adi ent ratio associ at ed
wi t h shor t bays, mor e beam flange removal
in RBS connect i ons will be r equi r ed for shor t
bay f r ames t han l ong bay frames. In addi -
tion, beam sizes may be affected. With proper
gui dance, t he engi neer can suppl y i nforma-
tion t hat will hel p t he ar chi t ect develop a
r at i onal , effi ci ent bui l di ng desi gn. Upon
det er mi nat i on of t he basi c st r uct ur al par am-
eters, t he engi neer can begi n t he member
and connect i on desi gn process.
4.1 RBS Desi gn
The engi neer will begi n t he desi gn of t he
st r uct ur e by det er mi ni ng t he force level and
drift limits to be i ncor por at ed as par t of t he
design. These par amet er s are typically set by
a model bui l di ng code s uch as t he Uniform
Building Code (1997) or, in t he f ut ur e, t he
6
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
International Building Code. On c e t h e f or ce
l evel i s d e t e r mi n e d b a s e d o n si t e c o n d t i o n s ,
s t r u c t u r a l s y s t e m, s e i s mi c i t y of t h e r e gi on
a n d t a r g e t dr i f t l i mi t s , t h e e n g i n e e r c a n be gi n
t h e d e s i g n of t h e s e i s mi c s y s t e m u s i n g t h e
AI SC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
Buildings { 1997).
Ba s e d on t h e r e q u i r e d d e s i g n p a r a me t e r s ,
t h e e n g i n e e r wi l l d e t e r mi n e t h e b e a m a n d
c o l u mn s i zes r e q u i r e d t o me e t dr i f t l i mi t s ,
et c. It i s i mp o r t a n t t h a t t h e e n g i n e e r r e me m-
b e r t h a t t h e f r a me i s l e s s st i f f d u e t o t h e RBS
de s i gn, t h a n a "t ypi cal " n o n - RBS SMF.
Af t er p r o p e r b e a m- c o l u mn s i zes h a v e
b e e n d e t e r mi n e d for t h e f r a me , t h e RBS
d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e s h o u l d b e f ol l owe d t o
de ve l op t h e p r o p e r f l a nge r e d u c t i o n t o pr o-
d u c e t h e d e s i r e d p e r f o r ma n c e . Ma n y of t h e
d e s i g n s t e p s a n d r e c o mme n d a t i o n s pa r a l l e l
i n f o r ma t i o n p r o v i d e d i n r e p o r t s r e f e r e n c e d a t
t h e e n d of t h i s d o c u me n t .
Th e s t r e n g t h of t h e b e a m at t h e mi n i mu m
s e c t i o n of t h e RBS mu s t s a t i s f y c o d e r e q u i r e -
me n t s u n d e r al l a p p l i c a b l e l o a d c o mb i n a -
t i o n s i n c l u d i n g gr avi t y, wi n d , a n d o t h e r l o a d s
a p p r o p r i a t e f or t h e s t r u c t u r e u n d e r c o n s i d e r -
at i on. Be a m s i zes i n t ypi c a l SMFs a r e n o r -
ma l l y g o v e r n e d by c ode s pe c i f i e d dr i f t l i mi t s .
Co n s e q u e n t l y , e ve n wi t h a r e d u c t i o n i n b e a m
mo me n t d u e t o t h e a d d i t i o n of t h e RBS, t h e
s t r e n g t h of t h e mo d i f i e d f r a me wi l l of t e n be
s a t i s f a c t o r y f or al l l o a d c o mb i n a t i o n s . I n
s o me c a s e s , a mi n o r i n c r e a s e i n b e a m si ze
ma y b e n e e d e d .
Th e a d d i t i o n of RBS c u t o u t s wi l l r e d u c e
t h e s t i f f ne s s of a s t eel mo me n t f r a me . Thi s
r e d u c t i o n i n s t i f f nes s , a l t h o u g h g e n e r a l l y
qui t e s ma l l , ma y af f ect t h e abi l i t y of t h e
f r a me t o s a t i s f y c o d e s pe c i f i e d dr i f t l i mi t s . A
r e c e n t s t u d y b y Gr u b b s (1997) e v a l u a t e d t h e
r e d u c t i o n i n e l a s t i c l a t e r a l s t i f f ne s s of s t eel
mo me n t f r a me s d u e t o t h e a d d i t i o n of r a d i u s
c u t RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . Thi s s t u d y s h o we d
t h a t over a wi d e r a n g e of f r a me h e i g h t s a n d
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , t h e a v e r a g e r e d u c t i o n i n stiff-
n e s s for a 50 p e r c e n t f l a nge r e d u c t i o n wa s on
t h e o r d e r of 6 t o 7 p e r c e n t . For a 40 p e r c e n t
f l a nge r e d u c t i o n , t h e r e d u c t i o n i n e l a s t i c
f r a me s t i f f nes s wa s o n t h e o r d e r of 4 t o 5 per -
c e nt . If t h i s r e d u c t i o n i n s t i f f ne s s i s a c on-
c e r n , dr i f t c a n be c o mp u t e d i n t h e u s u a l
ma n n e r u s i n g a mo d e l t h a t d o e s n o t expl i c-
i t l y a c c o u n t f or t h e RBS, a n d t h e n i n c r e a s e d
b y t h e a mo u n t s n o t e d a b o v e t o a c c o u n t for
t h e RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . Al t e r na t i ve l y, a r e f i n e d
s t r u c t u r a l mo d e l , i n c l u d i n g t h e r e d u c e d stiff-
n e s s a t e a c h c o n n e c t i o n d u e t o t h e RBS, c a n
be d e v e l o p e d t o c h e c k t h e s t i f f ne s s of t h e
f r a me .
4.2 RBS Si zi ng
Th e l o c a t i o n a n d si ze of t h e RBS wi l l d i c t a t e
t h e l evel of s t r e s s a t t h e b e a m f l a n g e - c o l u mn
f l a nge c o n n e c t i o n . Th e RBS s e i s mi c mo me n t
d i a g r a m i s p r e s e n t e d i n Fi g u r e 4. 1 a n d i ndi -
c a t e s t h e No mi n a l Ca p a c i t y , t h e Pr o b a b l e
De ma n d , a n d t h e No mi n a l De ma n d f or t h e
RBS b e a m. Not e t h a t M' p RBS i s t h e ma x i -
mu m mo me n t e x p e c t e d a t l~he f ace of t h e col -
u mn f l a nge wh e n t h e RBS h a s y i e l d e d a n d
s t r a i n h a r d e n e d u n d e r c o mb i n e d e a r t h q u a k e
a n d gr a vi t y l oa ds . M' p RBS i s di r e c t l y i nf l u-
e n c e d b y t h e Pr o b a b l e i J e ma n d , a n d t h e l oca-
t i on of t h e RBS. M' P, RBS i s l a t e r r e f e r r e d t o
a s Mf i n t h i s d o c u me n t .
r - - ~ r . . . . . . , ~ ; ~ , ~ - ~ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i
, \ I ,
~ ~,~as i
~ - - ~ , - , , ~ o ~
Moment Diegrem
L~
~am , ~y
F i g u r e 4 . I Mo me n t D i a g r a m a n d
B e a m G e o me t r y f o r RB S
Th e over al l goal i n s i zi ng t h e RBS c u t i s t o
l i mi t t h e ma x i mu m b e a m mo me n t t h a t c a n
de ve l op a t t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn t o v a l u e s i n
t h e r a n g e of a b o u t 85 t o 100 p e r c e n t of t h e
b e a m' s a c t u a l p l a s t i c mo me n t . Th i s
a p p r o a c h , i n ef f ect , l i mi t s t h e a v e r a g e ma x i -
mu m s t r e s s a t t h e b e a m f l a nge gr oove we l d s
t o v a l u e s o n t h e o r d e r of t h e a c t u a l yi e l d
s t r e s s of t h e b e a m. E x p e r i me n t s h a v e s h o wn
t h a t c o n n e c t i o n s d e t a i l e d i n a c c o r d a n c e wi t h
7
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTI ONS
t h e r e c o mme n d a t i o n s p r o v i d e d b e l o w a r e
c a p a b l e of s a f e l y r e s i s t i n g t h i s l evel of
mo me n t . As a p o i n t of c o mp a r i s o n , t e s t s o n
p r e - No r t h r i d g e mo me n t c o n n e c t i o n s wi t h o u t
RBS c u t o u t s o f t e n s h o w ma x i mu m mo me n t s
a t t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn of a b o u t 125 p e r -
c e n t of M~ or g r e a t e r ( Popov, S t e p h e n 1972;
Ts a i , PopoPv 1988; E n g e l h a r d t , Hu s a i n 1993) .
Co n s e q u e n t l y , t h e a d d i t i o n of t h e RBS
c u t o u t s i n t h e b e a m r e s u l t s i n a s u b s t a n t i a l
r e d u c t i o n i n mo me n t a t t h e f a c e of t h e col -
u mn .
Mu c h of t h e d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d
b e l o w f o l l o ws r e c o mme n d a t i o n s of t h e
I nt er i m Gui del i nes: Eval uat i on, Repai r, Modi -
f i cat i on a n d De s i gn o f We l de d St eel Mo me n t
Fr a me St r uc t ur e s ( FEMA 267) ( 1995) a n d t h e
I nt er i m Gui del i nes Ad v i s o r y No. 1, Suppl e-
me n t to FEMA 2 6 7 ( FEMA 267A) ( 1997) , wi t h
s e v e r a l e x c e p t i o n s . Mo s t s i g n i f i c a n t of t h e s e
e x c e p t i o n s i s t h a t FEMA 2 6 7 A p l a c e s a l i mi t
o n t h e ma x i mu m s t r e s s p e r mi t t e d a t t h e f ace
of t h e c o l u mn e q u a l t o n i n e t y p e r c e n t of t h e
mi n i mu m s p e c i f i e d yi e l d s t r e s s of t h e col -
u mn . For t h e c a s e of a n A9 9 2 ( A572 Gr. 50)
c o l u mn , t h i s r e s u l t s i n a l i mi t of 4 5 ks i . Th i s
l i mi t wa s e s t a b l i s h e d t o a d d r e s s c o n c e r n s
r e g a r d i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l f or t h r o u g h - t h i c k n e s s
f a i l u r e s i n c o l u mn f l a nge s . Th e d e s i g n p r o c e -
d u r e l i mi t s t h e ma x i mu m s t r e s s a t t h e f a c e of
t h e c o l u mn t o a v a l u e o n t h e o r d e r of t h e
a c t u a l yi e l d s t r e s s of t h e b e a m. Th i s e xc e p-
t i o n t o t h e r e q u i r e me n t s of FEMA 2 6 7 A h a s
b e e n a d o p t e d f or s e ve r a l r e a s o n s . Fi r s t , s p e c -
i me n s d e s i g n e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e p r o c e d u r e s
d e s c r i b e d h e r e i n h a v e p e r f o r me d wel l i n l ab-
o r a t o r y t e s t s . S e c o n d , s a t i s f y i n g t h e 45 ks i
s t r e s s l i mi t , wo u l d r e s u l t i n l a r ge f l a nge
c u t o u t s i n ma n y c a s e s , or wo u l d r e q u i r e s u p -
p l e me n t a l f l a nge r e i n f o r c e me n t s u c h a s c ove r
p l a t e s or r i bs . F u r t h e r , r e c e n t l y c o mp l e t e d
r e s e a r c h c o n d u c t e d u n d e r t h e SAC P h a s e 2
p r o g r a m s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e p o t e n t i a l f or
t h r o u g h - t h i c k n e s s f a i l u r e s i s c o n s i d e r a b l y
l e s s t h a n p r e v i o u s l y t h o u g h t , a n d t h a t t h e
c u r r e n t l i mi t of 4 5 ks i c a n mo s t l i kel y be
i n c r e a s e d wi t h o u t p o s i n g a n i n c r e a s e i n r i s k
of f r a c t u r e i ni t i a t i on.
Th e d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e a s s u me s t h a t a
r a d i u s c u t RBS i s p r o v i d e d i n b o t h t h e t o p
a n d b o t t o m f l a n g e s a t t h e mo me n t c o n n e c -
t i o n a t e a c h e n d of a mo me n t f r a me b e a m.
Th e p r o c e d u r e a l s o a s s u me s t h e mi n i mu m
s p e c i f i e d yi e l d s t r e s s of t h e b e a m i s 50 ks i or
l e s s (Gr. 50 b e a ms ) , a n d t h a t t h e mi n i mu m
s p e c i f i e d yi e l d s t r e s s of t h e c o l u mn i s 50 ks i
or g r e a t e r (Gr. 50 or Gr . 65 c o l u mn s ) .
Fi g u r e 4. 2 s h o ws t h e g e o me t r y of a r a d i u s
c u t RBS, a n d Fi g u r e 4. 3 s h o ws t h e e n t i r e
mo me n t f r a me b e a m. Th e k e y d i me n s i o n s
I ~ ~ 1 ~
a
4 c ~ + d
R = r a d i u s o f cut
8c
C
~1
- - 1
b
F i g u r e 4 . 2
G e o me t r y o f R a d i u s C u t RB S
t h a t mu s t b e c h o s e n b y t h e d e s i g n e r a r e a,
t h e d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn t o
t h e s t a r t of t h e RBS c u t , b, t h e l e n g t h of t h e
RBS c u t , a n d c, t h e d e p t h of t h e RBS c u t a t
i t s mi n i mu m s e c t i o n . Th e r a d i u s of t h e c u t R
c a n be r e l a t e d t o d i me n s i o n s b a n d c b a s e d
o n t h e g e o me t r y of a c i r c u l a r a r c , u s i n g t h e
e q u a t i o n i n Fi g. 4. 2. Th e a mo u n t of f l a nge
ma t e r i a l t h a t i s r e mo v e d a t t h e mi n i mu m
s e c t i o n of t h e RBS i s s o me t i me s r e f e r r e d t o
t h e p e r c e n t f l a n g e r e mov al wh i c h i s c o m-
p u t e d a s ( 2c/ bf . ) x 100, wh e r e b f i s t h e u n r e -
d u c e d f l a n g e v~i dt h of t h e be a m~
I n p a s t r e s e a r c h t e s t s , t h e d i me n s i o n s a
a n d b h a v e g e n e r a l l y b e e n c h o s e n b a s e d o n
t h e j u d g me n t of t h e r e s e a r c h e r s . I n g e n e r a l ,
t h e s e d i me n s i o n s s h o u l d b e k e p t a s s ma l l a s

w = u n i f o r m b e a m g r a v i t y l o a d ~ I I I I
RBS RBS
_ _ ~ ~ . ~ _ . 1 l . ~ r . ! ~ ~ 1 I } I I t ~ ~ 1 t I } ~ l ~ l ~ ~ . ! ? . . t . ~ . ! . | ~ [ ~ ]
' &4 i i
~ ,- ,n -~ , n - ~

, , l l a + ~ " L ' = distance be~een ~ n t e r s o f R B S ~ t s ~ a + ~ ~
I ~
L : d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n c o l u m n e n t e d i n e s
F i g u r e 4 . 3
T y p i c a l Mo me n t F r a me B e a m w i t h
RBS C o n n e c t i o n s
8
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
possi bl e in order to mi ni mi ze t he i ncr ease of
moment bet ween t he pl ast i c hi nge l ocat ed in
t he RBS and t he face of t_he col umn.
The di mensi on a shoul d be large enough,
however, to per mi t st ress in t he r educed sec-
tion of t he beam to spr ead uni f or ml y across
t he flange wi dt h at t he face of t he col umn.
Similarly, t he di mensi on b shoul d be large
enough to avoid excessi ve i nel ast i c st r ai ns
wi t hi n t he RBS. Based on an eval uat i on of
successf ul past t est s, t he following sugges-
t i ons are made for sel ect i ng t hese di men-
sions:
(o.s to o.Ts) bf tl)
b ~ (65 to 0 . 8 5 ) d (2)
wher e by and d ar e t he beam flange wi dt h
and delSth. Exami nat i on of RBS t est dat a
i ndi cat es t hat successf ul connect i on per-
f or mance has been obt ai ned for a wi de r ange
of val ues for a and b. Consequent l y, a great
deal of preci si on in choosi ng t hese val ues
does not appear j ust i fi ed and Equat i ons 1
and 2 shoul d be consi der ed an appr oxi mat e
guide.
The r emai ni ng di mensi on t hat mus t be
chosen when sizing t he RBS is c, t he dept h of
t he cut . The val ue of c will cont rol t he maxi -
mum mome nt devel oped wi t hi n t he RBS, and
t herefore will cont rol t he ma xi mum moment
gener at ed at t he face of t he col umn. As not ed
above, t he final di mens i ons shoul d be chosen
so t hat t he ma xi mum moment at t he face of
t he col umn is in t he r ange of about 85 to 100
per cent of t he beam' s act ual pl ast i c moment .
At pr esent , it is suggest ed to avoid utilizing
flange r educt i ons gr eat er t han about 50 per-
cent. Thus, t he val ue of c shoul d be chosen
to be l ess t han or equal to 0.25bf.
The basi c appr oach t aken in "this proce-
dur e is to choose pr el i mi nar y val ues for a, b,
and c, t hen comput e t he mome nt at t he face
of t he col umn, and check t hi s mome nt
agai nst t he limit not ed above. Some i t erat i on
in t he RBS di mensi ons may be needed to
arrive upon a sat i sfact ory desi gn. Fur t her
desi gn checks are compl et ed upon satisfac-
t ory sizing of t he RBS.
The beam size will typically be chosen for
drift r equi r ement s, followed by some amount
of flange r educt i on. The desi gner mus t exam-
i ne t he effect of all appl i ed l oads at t he RBS
location. It is possi bl e t hat beam size may
need to be adj ust ed, and different RBS sizing
and l ocat i on mus t be det er mi ned, to meet all
desi gn criteria.
This RBS sizing det er mi nat i on is also
appl i cabl e when ret rofi t t i ng exi st i ng SMF
st r uct ur es. Access is l i mi t ed or i mpossi bl e at
t he upper flange of t he beam, due to t he
pr esence of a floor slab, so RBS modi fi cat i ons
typically occur at t he bot t om flange of t he
mome nt beam only. If access is available to
t he top flange of t he beam, it is r ecommended
to appl y t he RBS desi gn met hodol ogy to bot h
flanges. There has been a great deal of effort
and r esear ch spent on t he use of RBS modi -
fi cat i ons to exi st i ng SMFs. The AISC Desi gn
Guide Seri es Twel ve (1999) t hat s ummar i zes
t hi s work, cont ai ns a si gni fi cant a mount of
i nf or mat i on r egar di ng retrofit of SMFs utiliz-
i ng RBS connect i on modi fi cat i ons. It is rec-
omme nde d t hat desi gner s us i ng an RBS
appr oach to retrofit an exi st i ng SMF refer to
t he AISC document pri or to utilizing t he
desi gn met hodol ogy cont ai ned her ei n.
Upon sel ect i on of t he beam- col umn com-
bi nat i on to be ut i l i zed in t he SMF desi gn and
t he l ocat i on, shape and size of t he RBS, fur-
t her connect i on desi gn checks are r equi r ed
to ens ur e t he desi gn will per f or m in a duct i l e
manner .
The first check s houl d be t he "St rong Col-
umn- We a k Beam" confi rmat i on. This check
is i nt ended to limit i nel ast i c def or mat i ons of
col umns out si de of t hei r panel zone regions.
It is general l y recogni zed t hat col umn yield-
i ng is an undes i r abl e mode becaus e of t he
possi bl e effect on t he col umn, and in t ur n,
t he global stability of t he s t r uct ur al frame.
The AISC Sei smi c Desi gn Provi si ons (1997)
out l i ne an accept abl e desi gn level for t he
be a m/ c ol umn r el at i onshi p. As a mi ni mum,
t hi s AISC proviso s houl d be met .
RBS connect i on desi gn mus t also addr ess
t he panel zone. The panel zone is subj ect ed
to l arge shear forces as t he beams r each t hei r
full capaci t y. Based on FEMA 267A (1997),
t he panel zone mus t be st r ong enough to
develop at l east 80% of t he s hear s associ at ed
wi t h Mfl The panel zone r equi r ement s can be
met in one of two ways. One way is to provi de
a col umn wi t h a t hi ck enough web to resi st
t he r equi r ed shear in accor dance wi t h t he
9
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
d e s i g n r e q u i r e me n t s . Th e o t h e r wa y t o s u p -
pl y s u f f i c i e n t p a n e l z o n e s h e a r r e s i s t a n c e i s
t o a d d d o u b l e r p l a t e s t o t h e s e l e c t e d s e c t i o n .
Do u b l e r p l a t e s s h o u l d c o n s i s t of t h e r e q u i r e d
a d d i t i o n a l t h i c k n e s s of s t eel , a d d e d t o o n e or
b o t h s i d e s of t h e c o l u mn we b. F a b r i c a t o r s
i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e u s e of a h e a v i e r c o l u mn s e c -
t i on, i n s t e a d of d o u b l e r p l a t e s a n d o t h e r
l a b o r i n t e n s i v e r e i n f o r c i n g de t a i l s , ma y r e s u l t
i n a mo r e e c o n o mi c a l s t r u c t u r a l f r a me .
Th e f i nal d e s i g n c h e c k t o be p e r f o r me d o n
t h e s e l e c t e d b e a m- c o l u mn c o mb i n a t i o n i s t h e
b e a m s h e a r . Th e ma x i mu m b e a m s h e a r i s
d e v e l o p e d i n t h e s e c t i o n of t h e b e a m b e t we e n
t h e RBS a n d t h e c o l u mn f l a nge f ace, wh e r e
gr a vi t y s h e a r a n d s e i s mi c s h e a r c o i n c i d e . At
t h i s l o c a t i o n , s h e a r c a p a c i t y of t h e b e a m s e c -
t i on n e e d s t o b e c h e c k e d t o e n s u r e t h a t t h e
b e a m wi l l h a v e a d e q u a t e s h e a r c a p a c i t y a f t e r
t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e i n t h e b e a m d e v e l o p s d u e t o
a p p l i e d l a t e r a l l o a d s .
Th e f ol l owi ng s t e p - b y - s t e p p r e s e n t a t i o n
o u t l i n e s t h e RBS d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e r e l a t i n g t o
t h e r e mo v a l of t h e b e a m f l a nge a n d t h e
c h e c k s r e q u i r e d t o e n s u r e p r o p e r b e h a v i o r
a n d c o r r e l a t i o n wi t h t e s t a n d r e s e a r c h
r e s u l t s .
4.3 Step- by- step P r ocedur e
STEP 2 Co mp u t e t h e p l a s t i c s e c t i o n mo d u -
l u s a t t h e mi n i mu m s e c t i o n of t h e
RBS.
Fi g u r e 4. 4 s h o ws a c r o s s - s e c t i o n of t h e
b e a m a t t h e mi n i mu m s e c t i o n of t h e RBS.
b~
" ~ ' ~ " " " ' ' ~ P ~ i o n s c u t f r o m f l a n g e
d / 2 ~ ~ t w
P l a s t i c N e u t r a l A x i s
d / 2
/ . / . ~ P o r t i o n s c u t f r o m f l a n g e
/
_ _ _ ~ , ~ , ' ~ t
~ ~.~
c c
F i g u r e 4 . 4
B e a m a t Mi n i mu m S e c t i o n o f R B S
Ba s e d o n t h e d i me n s i o n s s h o wn i n t h i s fig-
u r e , Z R B S c a n b e c o mp u t e d a s f ol l ows:
S TEP 1 Ch o o s e t r i a l v a l u e s f or RBS d i me n -
s i o n s a, b, a n d c.
Th e t r i a l v a l u e s f or a a n d b s h o u l d b e
c h o s e n wi t h i n t h e l i mi t s of E q u a t i o n s 1 a n d
2. To e s t a b l i s h a t r i a l v a l u e of c, a f l a n g e
r e d u c t i o n of a b o u t 4 0 p e r c e n t i s s u g g e s t e d
f or t h e i ni t i a l d e s i g n i t e r a t i o n . T h u s , c h o o s e c
~ 0 . 2 0 b f As n o t e d ear l i er , v a l u e s f or c i n
e x c e s s o f a p p r o x i ma t e l y 0 . 2 5 b f a r e n o t r e c -
o mme n d e d .
a (O. S to 0.75) bf
b ~ (0. 6 5 t o O. 8 5 ) d
10
Z ~ s = Z b - 2 c t. f ( d - t. f ) (3)
Whe r e :
Z R B S = p l a s t i c s e c t i o n mo d u l u s a t mi n -
i mu m s e c t i o n of RBS
( 1 )
= p l a s t i c s e c t i o n mo d u l u s f or f ul l
b e a m c r o s s - s e c t i o n
(i.e. wi t h o u t f l a n g e c u t o u t s )
o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s s h o wn i n Fi g u r e 4. 4.
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
S T E P 3 Es t a b l i s h t h e e x p e c t e d yi e l d s t r e s s
of t h e b e a m.
Th e e x p e c t e d yi e l d s t r e s s f or t h e b e a m
c a n b e d e t e r mi n e d f r o m S e c t i o n 6. 2 of t h e
AI SC Seismic Provisions f or Structural Steel
Buildings ( 1997) . Ac c o r d i n g t o t h e s e pr ovi -
s i ons :
Fy e = Ry Fy (4)
wh e r e :
Fy e = e x p e c t e d yi e l d s t r e s s
= mi n i mu m s p e c i f i e d yi e l d s t r e s s
= r a t i o of e x p e c t e d t o mi n i mu m
s p e c i f i e d yi e l d s t r e s s
= 1. 5 f or A36 s t e e l
Th e f a c t o r of 1. 15 i n E q u a t i o n 5 a c c o u n t s
f or s t r a i n h a r d e n i n g , a n d i s b a s e d o n s t r a i n
h a r d e n i n g v a i a e s me a s u r e d i n RBS t e s t s .
STEP 5 Co mp u t e t h e s h e a r f or c e a t t h e
c e n t e r of t h e RBS c u t s a t e a c h e n d
of t h e b e a m.
Th e s h e a r a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e RBS c a n be
c o mp u t e d f r o m a f r ee b o d y d i a g r a m of t h e
mo me n t f r a me b e a m t a k e n b e t we e n RBS
c e n t e r s . S u c h a f r e e b o d y d i a g r a m i s i l l us -
t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 4 . 5 f or t h e c a s e of a u n i -
f o r ml y d i s t r i b u t e d gr a vi t y l o a d w.
f
R~BS R B S
I w = u n i f o r m b e a m g r a v i t y ~ o a d
l ! . ~ . , ~ ~ ~ t ~ I t t t t I t t I t ~ ~ I t I I I t t ~ t . ! . . ! , {
. . . . . .
R B S R B S ! i R B S R B S
i L ' = d i s t a n c e b e t w e e n c e n t e r s o f R B S ' -I
Fi gure 4 . 5
Free Body Di agr am Be t we e n
Ce n t e r s o f RBS
= 1. 1 f or A5 7 2 Gr. 50 a n d A9 9 2
s t e e l
T h e v a l u e of Fve r e c o g n i z e s t h a t t h e
a c t u a l yi e l d s t r e n g t l ~ o f s t r u c t u r a l s t e e l c a n
s i g n i f i c a n t l y e x c e e d t h e mi n i mu m s p e c i f i e d
v a l u e .
S u mmi n g mo me n t s a b o u t e a c h e n d of
t h i s f r e e b o d y d i a g r a m r e s u l t s i n t h e f ol l ow-
i ng:
2MRBs wL'
V~S - L ' + - ~- (6a)
S T E P 4 Co mp u t e t h e ma x i mu m mo me n t
e x p e c t e d a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e RBS.
MRB S = 1.15 ZRB S Fy e
(5)
2 MRB s wL'
V~O~S - L' 2 (6b)
wh e r e :
wh e r e :
MRB S =
ZRB S =
ma x i mu m mo me n t e x p e c t e d a t
t h e c e n t e r of t h e RBS
p l a s t i c s e c t i o n mo d u l u s a t mi n -
i mu m s e c t i o n of t h e RBS
e x p e c t e d yi e l d s t r e s s of b e a m
VRBS V' BS =
s h e a r f or c e a t t h e c e n t e r
of t h e RBS a t e a c h e n d
of b e a m
L' = d i s t a n c e b e t we e n c e n t e r s of
RBS
W
= u n i f o r ml y d i s t r i b u t e d g r a v i t y
l o a d o n b e a m
11
DE SI GN OF RE DUCE D BE AM SE CTI ON (RBS} MOME NT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
For gr a vi t y l o a d c o n d i t i o n s o t h e r t h a n a
u n i f o r m l oa d, t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a d j u s t me n t
c a n e a s i l y be ma d e t o t h e f r ee b o d y d i a g r a m
a n d t o E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6b.
E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6 b a s s u me t h a t p l a s t i c
h i n g e s wi l l f o r m a t t h e RBS a t e a c h e n d of t h e
b e a m. If t h e gr a vi t y l o a d o n t h e b e a m i s v e r y
l ar ge, t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e a t o n e e n d of t h e
b e a m ma y mo v e t o wa r d t h e i n t e r i o r p o r t i o n
of t h e b e a m s p a n . If t h i s i s t h e c a s e , t h e f r ee
b o d y d i a g r a m i n Fi g u r e 4 . 5 s h o u l d be mo d i -
f i ed t o e x t e n d b e t we e n t h e a c t u a l p l a s t i c
h i n g e l o c a t i o n s . To c h e c k i f E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d
6 b a r e val i d, d r a w t h e mo me n t d i a g r a m f or
t h e s e g me n t of t h e b e a m s h o wn i n Fi g u r e
4. 5, i . e. , f or t h e s e g me n t of t h e b e a m b e t we e n
t h e c e n t e r s of t h e RBS c u t s . If t h e ma x i mu m
mo me n t o c c u r s a t t h e e n d s of t h e s p a n s ,
t h e n E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6 b a r e val i d. If t h e
ma x i mu m mo me n t o c c u r s wi t h i n t h e s p a n ,
a n d e x c e e d s Mp. e of t h e b e a m ( see E q u a t i o n
8), t h e n t h e mo d i f i c a t i o n d e s c r i b e d a b o v e wi l l
b e n e e d e d .
STEP 6 Co mp u t e t h e ma x i mu m mo me n t
e x p e c t e d a t t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn .
M f = Mp, B s + VRB s a +
wh e r e :
( 7 )
= ma x i mu m mo me n t e x p e c t e d a t
t h e f ace of t h e c o l u mn
a l l o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s p r e v i o u s ~
d e f i n e d
E q u a t i o n 7 n e g l e c t s t h e gr a vi t y l o a d o n
t h e p o r t i o n of t h e b e a m b e t we e n t h e c e n t e r of
t h e RBS a n d t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn . Th i s
s i mp l i f i e s t h e e q u a t i o n a n d i n t r o d u c e s l i t t l e
er r or . I f d e s i r e d , t h e gr a vi t y l o a d o n t h i s
s ma l l p o r t i o n of t h e b e a m c a n be i n c l u d e d i n
t h e f r ee b o d y d i a g r a m a n d i n E q u a t i o n 7.
STEP 7 Co mp u t e t h e p l a s t i c mo me n t of t h e
b e a m b a s e d o n t h e e x p e c t e d yi e l d
s t r e s s .
Mpe = Z b Fy e (8)
Th e mo me n t a t t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn c a n
b e c o mp u t e d f r o m a f r ee b o d y d i a g r a m of t h e
s e g me n t of t h e b e a m b e t we e n t h e c e n t e r of
t h e RBS a n d t h e f ace of t h e c o l u mn f l a nge .
S u c h a f r ee b o d y d i a g r a m i s i l l u s t r a t e d i n
F i g u r e 4. 6.
RBS
- - M f ..... "~". VRB s MRB s
~ ,
I - b
- - - N a + . - Z -
F i g u r e 4 . 6
F r e e B o d y D i a g r a m B e t w e e n C e n t e r o f
RB S a n d F a c e o f C o l u mn F l a n g e
S u mmi n g mo me n t s a b o u t t h e l ef t e n d of
t h i s f r e e b o d y d i a g r a m r e s u l t s i n t h e f ol l ow-
i ng:
wh e r e :
Mpe = p l a s t i c mo me n t of b e a m b a s e d
o n e x p e c t e d yi e l d s t r e s s .
STEP 8 Ch e c k t h a t Mf i s i n t h e r a n g e of 85
t o 100 p e r c e n t of Mpe.
M. f ~ 0 . 8 5 to 1.0 (9)
m pe
If E q u a t i o n 9 i s n o t s a t i s f i e d, mo d i f y t h e
v a l u e s of c a n d / o r a a n d b a s n e e d e d , a n d
r e p e a t S t e p s 2 t h r o u g h 8. Not e t h a t t h i s
c h e c k o n mo me n t a t t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn i s
s i mp l i f i e d f or d e s i g n p u r p o s e s , b a s e d o n
mo r e d e t a i l e d a n a l y s e s a n d p a s t t e s t r e s u l t s .
Th e a c t u a l f or c e t r a n s f e r me c h a n i s m a n d
s t a t e of s t r e s s a n d s t r a i n a t t h i s l o c a t i o n i s
q u i t e c o mp l e x d u e t o t h e c o n s t r a i n t g e n e r -
a t e d by t h e c o n n e c t i o n t o t h e c o l u mn f l a nge .
For mo r e d e t a i l e d i n f o r ma t i o n o n t h e i s s u e ,
t h e r e a d e r i s r e f e r r e d t o (Lee, et . al . 1997) .
12
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
STEP 9 St rong Col umn- Weak Beam Check
To check s t r ong c ol umn- we a k beam Z Mc
r equi r ement s, t he pr ocedur e pr esent ed in
FEMA 267A (1997) will be used, wi t h mi nor Where:
modi fi cat i ons. The equat i on to be us ed to
check t hi s r e qui r e me nt (from Equat i on Vc =
7. 5. 2. 5-1 of FEMA 267A (1997)) is as follows:
= Mc t + Me b (14)
s hear force i n t he c ol umns
above and bel ow t he connect i on
~ Z(F~c - J~) > 1.0 (10) Mct
Z M c
= col umn mome nt
above connect i on
i mmedi at el y
where:
Mcb = col umn mome nt i mmedi at el y
bel ow connect i on
pl ast i c sect i on modul us of t he
c ol umn sect i on above and
bel ow t he connect i on
ht
di st ance from top of beam to
poi nt of i nfl ect i on in t he col-
umn above t he connect i on
YMc
= mi ni mum specified yield st ress
of t he col umn
= axi al s t r es s i n t he c ol umn
above and bel ow t he connect i on
~VM c
s um of t he col umn moment s at
t he top and bot t om of t he panel
zone c or r e s pondi ng to t he
devel opment of MRB S at t he
cent er of t he RBS in t he
at t ached beams
Fi gure 4. 7 shows a free body di agr am t hat
can be us ed to est i mat e col umn moment s
when checki ng Equat i on 10. This free body
cut s t he beams at t he RBS cent er s and cut s
t he col umns at a s s ume d poi nt s of inflection
(often t aken as mi d- hei ght of t he adj acent
st ori es for desi gn purposes).
Based on Fi gure 4.7, ' M c can be esti-
mat ed from t he following equat i ons:
, ,(de _,~
Z M R~s + (VR~s + V ~ s ) ~ - + a +
2J
V~ : (11)
h t + d b + h b
Mct = Vch t ( 1 2 )
Mcb = Vch b ( 1 3 )
d c = dept h of col umn
hb
di st ance from bot t om of beam
to poi nt of i nfl ect i on in t he col-
umn bel ow t he connect i on
d b = dept h of beam
All ot her vari abl es as previ ousl y defined.
M c t
~ -,,~-.-.~ V
~i C
i M c b
I
l
I I
a+( b/ 2) d c a+( b/ 2)
Fi g ur e 4 . 7
~ M R B S
V
R B S
Fr e e Bo d y Di a g r a m f or
Ca l c u l a t i o n o f Co l u mn Mo me n t s
h t
d b
hb
13
DE SI GN OF RE DUCE D BE AM SE CT I ON (RBS) M OM E NT F RAME CONNE CT I ONS
Th e a p p r o a c h p r e s e n t e d i n FEMA 2 6 7 A
( 1997) a c c o u n t s f or t h e d i f f e r e n c e i n c o l u mn
s h e a r f or c e s a b o v e a n d b e l o w t h e c o n n e c t i o n ,
wh e r e a s t h e s i mp l i f i e d a p p r o a c h a b o v e
a s s u me s t h e s a me s h e a r f or c e i s p r e s e n t i n
t h e c o l u mn s a b o v e a n d b e l o w t h e c o n n e c -
t i on. Al t h o u g h t h e a p p r o a c h i n FEMA 2 6 7 A
( 1997) ma y b e s o me wh a t mo r e a c c u r a t e , t h e
c o mp u t a t i o n of V c p r e s e n t e d i n E q u a t i o n 11
a b o v e i s s i mp l e r t o i mp l e me n t , a n d i s st i l l
r e a s o n a b l y a c c u r a t e f or i ni t i a l d e s i g n p u r -
p o s e s c o n s i d e r i n g t h e n u me r o u s u n c e r t a i n -
t i e s i n v o l v e d i n t h e s t r o n g c o l u mn - we a k
b e a m d e s i g n p h i l o s o p h y . T h e r e a d e r i s
r e f e r r e d t o S e c t i o n 7 . 5 . 2 . 5 of FEMA 2 6 7 A
( 1997) t o i mp l e me n t a mo r e a c c u r a t e c a l c u -
l a t i o n f or V c t o b e u s e d i n t h e f i na l d e s i g n
c h e c k .
S T E P 10 Ch e c k P a n e l Zo n e
To c h e c k t h e c o l u mn p a n e l z one , t h e p r o -
c e d u r e u s e d i n S e c t i o n 6 . 6 . 6 . 3 . 7 of FEMA
2 6 7 A ( 1997) wi l l b e u s e d . Th i s s e c t i o n
r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e p a n e l z o n e h a v e s uf f i c i e nt
s t r e n g t h t o d e v e l o p t h e s h e a r f or c e d e v e l o p e d
b y 0. 8 'M/: Ba s e d o n t h i s a p p r o a c h , t h e
p a n e l z o n e ' s h e a r f or c e c a n b e c o mp u t e d a s
f ol l ows :
M? = ma x i mu m mo me n t e x p e c t e d a t
o p p o s i t e c o l u mn f a c e
All o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s p r e v i o u s l y de f i ne d.
Th e v a l u e of My c o mp u t e d a c c o r d i n g t o
E q u a t i o n 7 c o mb i n e s t h e , s e i s mi c mo me n t
d u e t o (2XMRBs)/ L' wi t h t h e mo me n t d u e t o
gr a vi t y l oa d. On t h e s i d e of t h e c o l u mn o p p o -
s i t e t o t h a t wh e r e My i s d e v e l o p e d , t h e
mo me n t a t t h e f a c e of" t h e c o l u mn wi l l be
s o me wh a t s ma l l e r s i n c e t h e gr a vi t y l o a d
mo me n t wi l l o p p o s e t h e s e i s mi c mo me n t .
Th i s s o me wh a t s ma l l e r mo me n t i s c a l c u l a t e d
u s i n g E q u a t i o n 17.
Th e s t r e n g t h of t h e p a n e l z o n e c a n b e cal -
c u l a t e d a s f ol l ows:
3b c t~
V = 0.55Fycdct 1 + dbdc--~ ~
( 1 8 )
wh e r e :
V = p a n e l z o n e s h e a r s t r e n g t h
M' f = M~ S + V~S a +
(15)
Mf= Mf + M~r (16)
o.8Z
Vpz - 0.8V c (17)
0.95 d b
Wh e r e :
b c = wi d t h of c o l u mn f l a nge
t cf = t h i c k n e s s of c o l u mn f l a nge
= t ot a l t h i c k n e s s of p a n e l z o n e
i n c l u d i n g d o u b l e r p l a t e s
All o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s p r e v i o u s l y d e f i n e d .
S T E P 11 Ch e c k Be a m S h e a r
Vpz
p a n e l z o n e s h e a r f or c e c or r e -
s p o n d i n g t o t h e d e v e l o p me n t of
80 p e r c e n t of t h e ma x i mu m
e x p e c t e d c o l u mn f a c e mo me n t s
ma x i mu m mo me n t e x p e c t e d a t
t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn , c a l c u -
l a t e d a c c o r d i n g t o E q u a t i o n 7
Th e f i na l d e s i g n c h e c k s h o u l d b e ma d e t o
e n s u r e t h a t t h e b e a m h a s a d e q u a t e c a p a c i t y
f or s h e a r a s s s o c i a t e d wi t h l a t e r a l a n d g r a v i t y
l o a d s . Th i s c h e c k c o mb i n e s t h e b e a m s h e a r
a s s o c i a t e d wi t h t h e p l a s t i c mo me n t wi t h i n
t h e RBS u s i n g E q u a t i o n 6a , c o mb i n e d wi t h
t h e p o r t i o n of gr a vi t y l o a d a d d i n g s h e a r t o
t h e b e a m wi t h i n t h e s e c t i o n b e t we e n t h e RBS
14
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
cent er and t he col umn flange. This can be
cal cul at ed usi ng Equat i on 19:
VRB s q
( / - / , )
W - -
2 (19)
2
4.4 Addi ti onal Desi gn Consi der a-
ti ons
In addi t i on to est abl i shi ng t he di mensi ons of
t he RBS cut , t her e are a numbe r of addi -
t i onal desi gn and det ai l i ng f eat ur es t hat may
si gni fi cant l y affect connect i on per f or mance
and economy of t hi s syst em. These i t ems are
di scussed below.
The pr ocedur e pr esent ed above for sizing
t he RBS cut per mi t s a r ange of accept abl e
val ues for t he di mensi ons a, b and c. Fabri-
cat i on can likely be simplified by st andar di z-
i ng t hese di mens i ons over a large numbe r of
beams on a project. Maki ng smal l changes
on t he RBS di mens i ons from beam to beam
is not likely to i mprove connect i on perform-
ance and may unneces s ar i l y i ncr ease fabri-
cat i on costs. The desi gner may wi sh to con-
sul t wi t h a fabri cat or before finalizing t he
RBS di mensi ons to i dent i fy ways of r educi ng
fabri cat i on costs. For exampl e, if t he fabrica-
t or is ma ki ng RBS cut s us i ng a t or ch
mount ed on a gui de wi t h a fixed r adi us, t he
economy of t he connect i on may be i mpr oved
by mai nt ai ni ng a cons t ant r adi us of cut R
over a large numbe r of connect i ons.
The RBS cut is nor mal l y made by t her mal
cut t i ng in t he fabri cat i on shop. The cut
shoul d be made to avoid ni cks, gouges, and
ot her di scont i nui t i es. After t he cut is made,
t he sur f ace shoul d be gr ound, to ai d in
r educi ng t he pot ent i al for f r act ur es occur r i ng
in t he RBS at hi gh pl ast i c rot at i ons and l ow
cycle fatigue. The gri ndi ng shoul d be done to
avoid pr oduci ng gri nd mar ks per pendi cul ar
to t he beam flange, si nce t hey are per pendi -
cul ar to t he di rect i on of pri nci pal st ress.
These mar ks can act as st r ess ri sers. Varia-
t i ons on gri ndi ng met hods may be possi bl e to
r educe fabri cat i on effort.
Anot her consi der at i on for desi gn of RBS
moment connect i ons is welding. Resear ch
conduct ed si nce t he Nort hri dge ear t hquake
has demons t r at ed t he i mpor t ance of wel d
met al t oughnes s in t he groove wel ds of seis-
mi c r esi st ant mome nt connect i ons (Kauf-
mann, et.al. 1996; Tide 1998 I. The AISC Se i s -
mi c Pr ov i s i ons (1997) r ecommends t he use of
a filler met al wi t h a mi ni mum specified t en-
sile st r engt h of 70 ksi, ( assumi ng a 50 ksi
base mat er i al specified yield) and a mi ni mum
specified CVN val ue of 20 ft.-lb, at -20 F.
Previ ous r esear ch t est s on RBS connect i ons
have general l y empl oyed t he sel f-shi el ded
flux cored arc wel di ng pr ocess (FCAW), usi ng
E70TG-K2, E71T-8 or E70T-6 el ect rodes. All
of t hese el ect rodes provi de a mi ni mum spec-
ified CVN of 20 ft.-lb, at -20 F. A numbe r of
ot her FCAW el ect rodes are available t hat pro-
vide t hi s mi ni mum CVN val ue. In addi t i on,
successf ul t est s on ot her t ypes of connec-
t i ons have empl oyed t he shi el ded met al arc
wel di ng {SMAW) pr ocess usi ng an E7018
electrode. The final choi ce of wel di ng pr ocess
and el ect rode is best left to t he fabri cat or.
Ot her factors, s uch as t he mi xi ng of different
filler met al s in t he same wel d j oi nt may r esul t
in lower CVN val ues for t he combi nat i on,
t han for one of t he filler met al s alone. A
paper wr i t t en on t hi s subj ect , "The Effects of
I nt er mi xed Weld Metal on Mechani cal Prop-
erties" ( Johnson, Qui nt ana 1998), may be
usef ul to t he engi neer when consi der i ng t he
i nt er-mi xi ng of wel d filler met al s.
At t he beam flange compl et e j oi nt pene-
t rat i on wel ds, it is r e c omme nde d t hat t he
wel d run-off t abs be r emoved at bot h t he top
and bot t om fl anges, and t hat t he edges of t he
groove wel ds be gr ound smoot h. The pre-
ferred final profile of t he wel d t ab gr ound
sur f ace is r adi used, to f ur t her r educe t he
possi bi l i t y of f r act ur e at t hese l ocat i ons. Thi s
will mi ni mi ze any pot ent i al not ches intro-
duced by t he pr es ence of t he wel d t abs, or by
di scont i nui t i es cont ai ned in t he wel d met al
wi t hi n t he r un- of f regi ons. In addi t i on, it is
r ecommended t hat t he bot t om flange steel
backi ng be r emoved and a rei nforci ng fillet be
pl aced at t he base of t he wel d after t he j oi nt
is backgouged to s ound met al . Thi s requi re-
ment is i nt ended bot h to el i mi nat e t he not ch
effect pr oduced by t he st eel backi ng, and to
per mi t bet t er i nspect i on and ul t r asoni c t est -
ing of t he weld. At t he top flange groove weld,
15
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
i t i s r e c o mme n d e d t h a t t h e s t e e l b a c k i n g be
s e a l we l d e d t o t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn u s i n g a
mi n i mu m si ze fi l l et we l d, t ypi c a l l y a 5 / 1 6 " fil-
l et . An a l y s i s h a s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e n o t c h
ef f ect of t h e s t e e l b a c k i n g i s n o t a s s e v e r e a t
t h e t o p f l a nge , a n d t h a t we l d i n g t h e s t e e l
b a c k i n g t o t h e c o l u mn f u r t h e r r e d u c e s t h e
n o t c h ef f ect . F u r t h e r , d e f e c t s a r e l e s s l i kel y
a t t h e t o p f l a nge we l d s i n c e t h e gr oove we l d
i s n o t i n t e r r u p t e d by t h e b e a m we b, a s i t i s a t
t h e b o t t o m f l a nge .
Ma n y r e s e a r c h e r s a n d d e s i g n e r s be l i e ve
t h a t t h e we l d a c c e s s h o l e h a s a n i mp o r t a n t
ef f ect o n c o n n e c t i o n p e r f o r ma n c e . Al t h o u g h
c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h i s a d d r e s s i n g i s s u e s r e l a t e d
t o t h e we l d a c c e s s hol e , t h e r e a p p e a r s t o b e
n o c o n s e n s u s a s of y e t o n t h e o p t i mu m si ze
a n d s h a p e . Co n s e q u e n t l y , p e n d i n g f u r t h e r
r e s e a r c h , a c c e s s h o l e g e o me t r y s h o u l d c o n -
f o r m t o t h e r e q u i r e me n t s s h o wn i n Fi g u r e 5. 2
of AWS D1 . 1 - 9 8 (AWS 1998) . Th e r e i s n o
i n d i c a t i o n t h a t we l d a c c e s s h o l e si ze, wi t h i n
t h e AWS l i mi t s , wi l l a d v e r s e l y af f ect t h e p e r -
f o r ma n c e of RBS mo me n t c o n n e c t i o n s .
Th e r e f o r e , si ze a n d s h a p e of t h e a c c e s s h o l e
s h o u l d be l ef t t o t h e f a b r i c a t o r t o c o n f o r m t o
AWS r e c o mme n d a t i o n s .
An o t h e r i mp o r t a n t a s p e c t of we l l - b e h a v e d
mo me n t c o n n e c t i o n s a r e t h e c o n t i n u i t y
p l a t e s b e t we e n t h e c o l u mn f l a nge s . All of t h e
s u c c e s s f u l t e s t s o n RBS c o n n e c t i o n s f or n e w
c o n s t r u c t i o n ( Ap p e n d i x A) h a v e e mp l o y e d
c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s . Howe ve r , n o RBS t e s t s t o
d a t e h a v e o mi t t e d c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s , s o i t i s
u n c l e a r u n d e r wh a t c o n d i t i o n s c o n t i n u i t y
p l a t e s a r e a c t u a l l y r e q u i r e d . P e n d i n g t h e o u t -
c o me of f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h , i t i s r e c o mme n d e d
t h a t c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s be p r o v i d e d f or al l RBS
c o n n e c t i o n s , wi t h a c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e t h i c k -
n e s s s i mi l a r t o t h e b e a m f l a nge t h i c k n e s s .
We l d s t h a t a t t a c h a c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e t o t h e
c o l u mn f l a n g e or we b, s h o u l d be ma d e wi t h
a n e l e c t r o d e wi t h a r a t e d CVN of a t l e a s t 20
f t . - l b, a t - 20 F. Ba s e d o n e x p e r i me n t a l
r e s u l t s , r e mo v a l of b a c k i n g b a r s f r o m c ont i -
n u i t y p l a t e we l d s , h o we v e r , d o e s n o t a p p e a r
t o be n e c e s s a r y . Wh e n we l d i n g t h e c o n t i n u i t y
p l a t e s t o t h e c o l u mn , we l d i n g i n t h e " k- a r e a "
of t h e c o l u mn s h o u l d be a v o i d e d (AISC
1997}.
All we l d i n g s h o u l d be s p e c i f i e d t o be i n
c o n f o r ma n c e wi t h t h e l a t e s t e d i t i o n of AWS
D 1. 1. Ac c e p t a n c e c r i t e r i a for u l t r a s o n i c t e s t -
i n g of gr oove we l d s i s r e c o mme n d e d t o be i n
c o n f o r ma n c e wi t h Ta bl e 5. 2 of AWS D 1. 1- 98.
Ad d i t i o n a l u s e f u l i n f o r ma t i o n o n we l d i n g
mo me n t c o n n e c t i o n s c a n be f o u n d i n a n u m-
b e r of r e f e r e n c e s l i s t e d a t t h e e n d of t h i s doc -
u me n t .
Re c e n t t e s t s h a v e s h o wn t h a t RBS c o n -
n e c t i o n s wi t h b o l t e d we b d e t a i l s c a n me e t t h e
r e c o mme n d e d p l a s t i c r o t a t i o n d e ma n d s of
FEMA 2 6 7 ( 1995) . Howe ve r , i t s h o u l d be
n o t e d t h a t a t l a r ge r o t a t i o n d e ma n d s , t h e
b o l t e d de t a i l a p p e a r s t o be mo r e s u s c e p t i b l e
t o f r a c t u r e i n i t i a t i n g n e a r t h e we l d a c c e s s
hol e . Th i s i s s u e i s t h e s u b j e c t of f u r t h e r SAC
s p o n s o r e d r e s e a r c h . Unt i l mo r e de f i ni t i ve
g u i d a n c e i s p r o v i d e d i n t h e u p c o mi n g SAC
Guidelines, t h e e n g i n e e r s h o u l d c a r e f u l l y
c o n s i d e r r e q u i r e d c o n n e c t i o n a n d SMF pe r -
f o r ma n c e wh e n c h o o s i n g a b e a m we b c o n -
n e c t i o n .
Th e ma j o r i t y of t h e we l d e d we b c o n n e c -
t i o n t e s t s h a v e ut i l i z e d a c o mp l e t e j o i n t p e n -
e t r a t i o n (CJP) gr oove we l d b e t we e n t h e b e a m
we b a n d c o l u mn f l a n g e ove r t h e f ul l d e p t h of
t h e web. Th e s h e a r t a b, wh i c h i s we l d e d t o
t h e c o l u mn a n d b o l t e d t o t h e b e a m we b, i s
st i l l p r o v i d e d . Th i s s h e a r t a b s e r v e s s e v e r a l
p u r p o s e s . Fi r s t , i t a c t s a s b a c k i n g f or t h e
CJ P gr oove we l d. S e c o n d , i t c a r r i e s e r e c t i o n
l o a d s a n d h e l p s ma i n t a i n t h e f r a me i n a
p l u mb p o s i t i o n u n t i l we l d i n g a t t h e c o n n e c -
t i o n i s c o mp l e t e d . Si n c e t h e s h e a r t a b i s p r o -
v i d e d f or e r e c t i o n p u r p o s e s onl y, i t i s r e c o m-
me n d e d t h a t t h e d e s i g n of t h e s h e a r t a b b e
l ef t t o t h e f a b r i c a t o r . Howe ve r , t o e n s u r e t h a t
t h e s h e a r t a b d o e s n o t r e s i s t l o a d s i n t h e
e v e n t t h a t e x c e s s i v e p l a s t i c r o t a t i o n s c a u s e
t h e we b c o n n e c t i o n t o f r a c t u r e , t h e d e s i g n e r
c o u l d c o n s i d e r i n d i c a t i n g t h a t t h e s h e a r t a b
b e f a b r i c a t e d wi t h s h o r t h o r i z o n t a l s l o t t e d
hol e s .
Tr a d i t i o n a l l y t h e s h e a r t a b wo u l d b e
we l d e d o n b o t h s i de s . Howe ve r , wh e n ut i l i z-
i n g a we b CJ P we l d, t h e "~backsi de" fi l l et we l d
ma y p o s e p o t e n t i a l fi l l er me t a l mi x i n g a n d fi t
u p p r o b l e ms . Th e e n g i n e e r s h o u l d wo r k wi t h
t h e f a b r i c a t o r t o g e n e r a t e a n a c c e p t a b l e
we l d i n g s e q u e n c e . As a n a l t e r n a t i v e t o a CJ P
gr oove we l d, t h e b e a m we b c o n n e c t i o n c a n
a l s o be ma d e u s i n g a h e a v y fi l l et we l d e d
s h e a r t a b. Th e s h e a r t a b i s t ypi c a l l y we l d e d
16
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTI ONS
to t he col umn usi ng ei t her fillet wel ds or a
CJP groove weld. The shear tab, in t urn, is
t hen wel ded to t he beam web wi t h fillet
welds. An exampl e of such a connect i on can
be found in "Moment Frame Connect i on
Devel opment and Testing for t he City of Hope
National Medical Center" (Zekioglu, et.al.
1997).
If t he engi neer chooses to use a bol t ed
web connect i on, all aspect s of t he connect i on
shoul d be desi gned to resi st t he full shear
appl i ed to t he beam due to gravity and eart h-
quake loads. Short slotted hol es may be uti-
lized to fut her prot ect t he shear tab and
beam web from possz'bie excesive defl ect i ons
when t he connect i on in subj ect ed to large
rot at i ons as t he syst em under goes i nel ast i c
action dur i ng an ear t hquake. It shoul d be
not ed t hat st r uct ur al steel erect ors prefer
st andar d hol es to sl ot t ed hol es to aid in erec-
tion.
One of t he most di scussed aspect s of RBS
design, and one of t he most i mport ant , is t he
suppl ement al lateral braci ng requi red for
t hi s syst em. FEMA 267A (1997) r ecommends
t hat a lateral brace be provi ded near t he
RBS. The following di scussi on pr esent s an
anal ysi s of t est r esul t s t hat did not have lat-
eral braci ng provi ded near t he RBS.
Virtually all moment connect i ons t hat
di ssi pat e energy by yielding of t he beam are
subj ect to varyi ng degrees of beam i nst abi l i t y
at large levels of i nel ast i c rotation. This is
t rue bot h for rei nforced connect i ons (cover
plates, ribs, haunches , etc.) and for RBS con-
nect i ons. This i nst abi l i t y generally involves a
combi nat i on of flange buckl i ng, web buckl i ng
and lateral t orsi onal buckl i ng and typically
resul t s in det eri orat i on of t he beam flexural
st rengt h, wi t h i ncr easi ng inelastic rot at i ons.
In t he experi ence of some researchers, t he
degree of i nst abi l i t y and associ at ed st r engt h
det eri orat i on for RBS connect i ons t est ed in
t he l aborat ory have been no more severe, and
per haps somewhat l ess severe t han for many
t ypes of rei nforced connect i ons. Thi s is
demonst r at ed by t he connect i on t est resul t s
shown in Figure 4.8.
This figure shows a plot of beam tip load
ver sus beam tip di spl acement for two differ-
ent t est speci mens. These two speci mens
were virtually identical, except for t he con-
nect i on detail. Bot h speci mens were con-
s t r uct ed wi t h t he s ame me mbe r si zes
(W36xl S0 beam and W14x426 col umn) and
heat s of steel, and t est ed in t he same t est
set up wi t h i dent i cal member l engt hs, i dent i -
cal member end suppor t condi t i ons, and
i dent i cal l at eral bracing. Bot h speci mens
were subj ect ed to t he same l oadi ng history.
The only difference was t hat one speci men
was const r uct ed wi t h a cover pl at ed connec-
tion and t he ot her wi t h an RBS connect i on.
Bot h speci mens were provi ded wi t h a single
beam l at eral suppor t near t he poi nt of load
application.
2 5 0
2 0 0
1 5 0
1 0 0 .
~ 5 0 .
~ o .
.~ -~0.
- 1 0 0 ,
- 1 5 0 .
- 2 0 0 ,
- 2 5 0
- 6
C o v e r ' P l a ~ e d C o n n e c t l o n ~.______,~_
- ~- - ~- - , ~
R B S C o n n e c t i o n ] * ~
\ ' ~ ~ -
_ _ _
- - - -
~ '~"'~'~'({~:;e ~
I
I
. ~ - 2
~. ~. ~ : ~- ~
:~* " ~
~ '~ ~
, ,
D i s p l a c e m e n t ( i n c h e s )
Fi gure 4 . 8
Co mpa r i s o n o f Te s t Re s ul t s f or
Cover Pl at e d and RBS Co n n e c t i o n s
As can be seen from Figure 4.8, t he peak
st r engt h of t he RBS connect i on is l ess t han
t hat of t he cover-pl at ed connect i on. This, of
course, is expect ed and is in fact a pot ent i al
advant age of t he RBS in t hat it r educes t he
moment gener at ed at t he connect i on and t he
moment del i vered to t he col umn. After reach-
ing t hei r peak st rengt h, bot h connect i ons
exhi bi t ed some st r engt h det eri orat i on due to
combi ned flange, web and lateral t orsi onal
buckl i ng i n t he beam. Note however t hat t he
rate of det eri orat i on is l ess for t he RBS spec-
i men. In fact, at large i nel ast i c deformat i ons,
t he RBS exhi bi t s t he same st r engt h as t he
cover-pl at ed connect i on. This compar i son
demonst r at es t he observat i on made above,
i.e., RBS connect i ons exhi bi t no mor e
st r engt h det eri orat i on, and per haps some-
what l ess det eri orat i on t han rei nforced con-
nect i ons.
17
DE SI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
Th e t e s t d a t a s u mma r i z e d i n Ap p e n d i x A
i n d i c a t e s t h a t ma n y RBS c o n n e c t i o n t e s t s
h a v e b e e n c o n d u c t e d wi t h o u t a n a d d i t i o n a l
l a t e r a l b r a c e a t t h e RBS. Th e r e i s n o i n s t a n c e
wh e r e a n i n v e s t i g a t o r r e p o r t e d u n u s u a l l y
s e ve r e or u n a c c e p t a b l e s t r e n g t h d e t e r i o r a t i o n
d u e t o t h e a b s e n c e of a l a t e r a l s u p p o r t n e a r
t h e RBS. F u t h e r , a s d i s c u s s e d a b o v e ,
s t r e n g t h d e g r a d a t i o n i n t h e RBS i s c o mp a r a -
bl e t o t h a t s e e n i n ma n y o t h e r c o n n e c t i o n
t y p e s f or wh i c h n o a d d i t i o n a l l a t e r a l b r a c i n g
i s p r e s e s n t l y r e q u i r e d . Co n s e q u e n t l y , b a s e d
o n c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e d a t a , a n a d d i t i o n a l l at -
e r a l b r a c e a t t h e RBS d o e s n o t a p p e a r n e c e s -
s a r y i n o r d e r t o a c h i e v e a c c e p t a b l e p e r f o r m-
a n c e . Howe ve r , t h e d e s i g n e r s h o u l d st i l l
a d h e r e t o t h e n o r ma l c o d e p r o v i s i o n s for
b e a m l a t e r a l s u p p o r t a n d f or b e a m f l a nge
a n d we b s l e n d e r n e s s l i mi t s . La t e r a l b r a c i n g
f or b e a ms i n Sp e c i a l Mo me n t F r a me s s h o u l d
b e p r o v i d e d a t a ma x i mu m s p a c i n g of 2 5 0 0
/ FY, a s r e q u i r e d b y Se c t i o n 9. 8 of t h e AI SC
is~nic Provisions ( 1997}.
As d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r , mo s t mo me n t c on-
n e c t i o n s s h o w g r a d u a l s t r e n g t h d e g r a d a t i o n
a t l a r ge l evel s of p l a s t i c r o a t a t i o n d u e t o c o m-
b i n e d l oc a l a n d l a t e r a l t o r s i o n a l b u c k l i n g of
t h e b e a m. Th i s o c c u r s f or t h e RBS a s wel l a s
f or mo s t o t h e r c o n n e c t i o n t y p e s , a s i l l us -
t r a t e d i n Fi g u r e 4. 9. Re d u c i n g t h e l a t e r a l
s u p p o r t s p a c i n g i n t h e r e g i o n of t h e p l a s t i c
h i n g e f r o m t h a t r e q u i r e d i n Se c t i o n 9. 8 of t h e
AI SC Sei smi c Provisions ma y t h e r e f o r e
r e d u c e t h e r a t e of s t r e n g t h d e g r a d a t i o n for
mo s t t y p e s of mo me n t c o n n e c t i o n s . F u r t h e r
d e f i n i t i v e r e c o mme n d a t i o n s a n d r e s e a r c h
r e s u l t s wi l l be p r o v i d e d i n t h e u p c o mi n g SAC
Guidelines.
If a d e s i g n e r s h o u l d c h o o s e t o p r o v i d e a
l a t e r a l b r a c e a t t h e RBS, t h e b r a c e s h o u l d
n o t b e l o c a t e d wi t h i n t h e r e d u c e d s e c t i o n of
t h e b e a m. We l d e d or b o l t e d b r a c e a t t a c h e -
me n t s i n t h i s h i g h l y s t r a i n e d r e g i o n of t h e
b e a m ma y s e r v e a s f r a c t u r e i n i t i a t i o n s i t es .
Co n s e q u e n t l y , i f a l a t e r a l b r a c e i s p r o v i d e d , i t
s h o u l d b e l o c a t e d a t or b e y o n d t h e e n d of t h e
RBS t h a t i s f a r t h e s t f r o m t h e f a c e of t h e col -
u mn . If b r a c i n g i s t o be p r o v i d e d a s p a r t of
t h e d e s i g n , r e q u i r e me n t s a n d r e c o mme n d a -
t i o n s c a n be g a t h e r e d f r o m d o c u me n t s s u c h
a s FEMA 2 6 7 A ( 1997) a n d " F u n d a me n t a l s of
Be a m Br a c i n g " ( Yur a 1993) .
5 RBS Desi gn Exampl e
Descri pt i on of Desi gn Example Project
Co mme r c i a l Offi ce Bu i l d i n g / Me d i c a l
Of f i ce Bu i l d i n g
Lo c a t e d i n S a n Fr a n c i s c o , Ca l i f o r n i a
Di s t a n c e f r o m Ne a r e s t E a r t h q u a k e
Fa u l t : ~ 9 k i l o me t e r s ( Sa n An d r e a s )
Hi g h Se i s mi c i t y Zo n e wi t h Ne a r F a u l t
Ch a r a c t e r i s t i c s
Descri pt i on of Desi gn Exampl e Frame
P e r i me t e r Mo me n t F r a me s
F r a me c e n t e r l i n e d i me n s i o n s :
s t o r y h e i g h t = 13' - 0"
b a y wi d t h = 22' - 8"
Be a m: W2 4 x 1 1 7
A5 7 2 Gr. 50 (A992)
Fy b = 50 k s i
Co l u mn : W1 4 x 3 1 1
A572 Gr. 50 (A992)
Fy c = 50 ks i
Gr a vi t y l o a d o n b e a m:
( 1. 2D + . 5L p e r
Se c t . 9 . 2 c of AI SC Seismic Provisions):
2 k i p s / f t ( 0. 17 k i p s / i n )
Gr a vi t y l o a d s a r e d u e t o f l oor t r i b u t a r y
l o a d s a s wel l a s e x t e r i o r wa l l l o a d s .
De s i g n t y p i c a l i n t e r i o r mo me n t
c o n n e c t i o n of p e r i me t e r f r a me .
I ~ V l ~
a
R = r adi us of cut = 4c~+ b ~
8c
_1
- - I
b
Fi gure 5. 1 RBS Di me n s i o n s
18
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
S e c t i o n P r o p e r t i e s : Fr o m Eq u a t i o n 5:
W24x117:
d b = 24. 26 i n.
b f = 12. 80 i n.
fw = 0. 85 i n.
= 0. 55 i n.
Zxb = 327 i n. 3
W14x311:
d c = 17. 12 i n.
b c f = 16. 23 i n.
t c f = 2. 26 i n.
t cw = 1. 41 i n.
Zxc = 603 i n. 3
S TEP 1 Choos e t r i al va l ue s for RBS di me n-
s i ons a, b a nd c
MRB S = 1. 15 ZRBS_Fy e
= 1 1 5 x 2 1 8 x 5 5
= 13789 i n- ki p
S TEP 5 Comput e t he s he a r f or ce a t t he
c e nt e r s of t he RBS at e a c h e nd of
t he be a m
L ' =L - d c - 2 a+ =272- 17. 12- 2 7+ =222in.
Fr om Equa t i ons 6a a nd 6b:
2Me~ s wL' 213789 0.17x222
Vm~ s - - - + - ~ =143kips
L' 2 222 2
a - ~ ' ( 0 . 5 t o 0. 75) b f
~6 i n. t o 10 i n.
Try: a = 7 i n.
b ~( 0. 65 t o 0. 85) d b
~ 16 i n. t o 21 i n.
Try: b = 19 i n.
c ~0. 2 b f
~2. 6 i n.
Try: c = 2. 75 i n.
S TEP 2 Comput e t he pl as t i c s ect i on modu-
l us at t he mi ni mum s ect i on of t he
RBS
Fr om Equa t i on 3:
ZRB S = Zx b- 2 c t f ( d b - t ~
= 327 - 2 x 2. 75 x 0. 85 x (24.26 - 0.85)
= 218 i n. 3
S TEP 3 Es t a bl i s h t he e xpe c t e d yi el d s t r e s s
of t he be a m
For A572 Gr. 50 st eel , Ry = 1.1.
Fr om Equa t i on 4:
V~ s _ 2M~s wL' _ 213789 0.17222 =105kips
L' 2 222 2
Fi gur e 5. 2 s hows t he s he a r f or ce di a gr a m,
t he be ndi ng mome nt di a gr a m, a nd t he f r ee
body di a gr a m t he for t he por t i on of t he be a m
be t we e n RBS c e nt e r s . Obs e r ve t ha t t he ma x-
i mum mome nt oc c ur s at t he e nds , i . e. , at t he
c e nt e r s of t he RBS. If t he gr avi t y l oa d wer e
e xt r e me l y l ar ge, c ompa r e d t o t he mome nt
143 105
V ( k i p )
M ( k i p - i n )
13789
- 13789
Fy e = Ry Fy b = 1. 1x50 = 55ks i
S TEP 4 Comput e t he ma xi mum mome nt
e xpe c t e d at t he c e nt e r of t he RBS
~ R E D S w = 0 . 1 7 k i p s / i n . ~ R I B S
Ii . , . l . . i ~ I i ~ I i I I I I ~ t I t i i I I I t I ~ I i i . l . . ! j
. . . . . . . . t J
1 4 3 ' " ~ 0 5 k ~
,
L ' ~ 2 2 2 i n .
F i g u r e 5 . 2
P o r t i o n o f E x a mp l e B e a m
b e t w e e n R B S C e n t e r s
19
DE SI GN OF RE DUCE D BE AM SE CTI ON (RBS) MOME NT F RAME CONNE CTI ONS
,
d e v e l o p e d d u e t o a p p l i e d l a t e r a l l o a d s , t h e
c u r v e d p o r t i o n of t h e mo me n t d i a g r a m c o u l d
dr i ve t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e t o wa r d t h e c o l u mn ,
a wa y f r o m t h e RBS. Th i s e x a mp l e i n d i c a t e s
t h a t t h e gr a vi t y l o a d i s n o t l a r ge e n o u g h t o
f o r m a p l a s t i c h i n g e wi t h i n t h e s p a n , a wa y
f r o m t h e RBS. Co n s e q u e n t l y , t h e c a l c u l a -
t i o n s a b o v e f or t h e mo me n t a n d s h e a r f or c e s ,
a t t h e RBS c u t s , a r e val i d.
S T E P 6 Co mp u t e t h e ma x i mu m mo me n t
e x p e c t e d a t t h e f a c e of t h e c o l u mn
M s
F r o m E q u a t i o n 7:
=Mees + Veas(a + 2b-/= 13789 + 143(7 + ~ ) = 16149in - kip
S T E P 7 Co mp u t e t h e p l a s t i c mo me n t of
t h e b e a m b a s e d o n t h e e x p e c t e d
yi e l d s t r e s s
F r o m E q u a t i o n 8:
Mpe = Zxb Fy e = 3 2 7 x 55 = 1 7 9 8 5 i n - k i p
S T E P 8 Ch e c k t h a t Mf i s i n t h e r a n g e of 85
t o 100 p e r c e n t of Mpe
F r o m E q u a t i o n 9:
ZMc
> 1.0 ( Eq u a t i o n 10)
Re t u r n i n g t o t h e e x a mp l e , a s s u mi n g t h a t
p o i n t s of i n f l e c t i o n i n t h e c o l u mn s o c c u r a t
t h e i r mi d - h e i g h t s , a n d a s s u mi n g a n axi al
s t r e s s (fa) of 15 k s i i n t h e c o l u mn s u n d e r
c o mb i n e d e a r t h q u a k e a n d gr a vi t y l oa di ng,
t h e f ol l owi ng c a l c u l a t i o n s r e s u l t .
F r o m E q u a t i o n s 11, 12, 13 a n d 14:
h~ + d b + h b
2 x 13789+ (143 + 105(17;12 + 7 + ~ )
156
= 217kips
Met
Mcb
= V c h t
= 2 1 7 x ( 156 - 2 4 . 2 6 ) / 2
= 1 4 2 9 4 i n - k i p
1 4 2 9 4 i n - k i p
= 2 x 1 4 2 9 4 = 28588 in - k i p
Mf 16149
- -
Mpe 17985
- - - 0. 90 OK
T h u s , t h e p r e l i mi n a r y d i me n s i o n s a r e OK.
Us e : a = 7 i n .
b = 1 9 i n .
c = 2 . 7 5 i n.
S T E P 9 S t r o n g Co l u mn - We a k Be a m Ch e c k
To c h e c k s t r o n g c o l u mn - we a k b e a m
r e q u i r e me n t s , t h e p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d i n
FEMA 2 6 7 A ( 1997) wi l l be u s e d , wi t h t h e
mi n o r mo d i f i c a t i o n s n o t e d i n Se c t i o n 4. Th e
f i na l e q u a t i o n t o b e u s e d t o c h e c k t h i s
r e q u i r e me n t ( f r om E q u a t i o n 7 . 5 . 2 . 5 - 1 of
FEMA 267A) i s a s f ol l ows:
~Zc(Fyc-.f~) 2603(50-15)
- = 1.5 > 1 OK
~ M~ 28588
S T E P 10 Ch e c k Co l u mn P a n e l Zo n e
To c h e c k t h e c o l u mn p a n e l z one , t h e p r o -
c e d u r e d i s c u s s e d i n S e c t i o n 4 wi l l b e u s e d .
Ba s e d o n t h e e x a mp l e , t h e c o l u mn p a n e l
z o n e s h e a r i s c o mp u t e d a s f ol l ows :
Mf = 1 6 1 4 9 i n - k i p ( Eq u a t i o n 7)
F r o m E q u a t i o n s 15, 16 a n d 17:
27Mf = Mf+ M:f
= 1 6 1 4 9 + 1 5 5 2 2 = 3 1 6 7 4 i n - k i p
,
Mf=M~Bs+V~Bs a+ =13789+105 7+ =15522 in - kip
i | 1
2 0
DE SI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
Vez - 0.8z..,~'Mr 0.8Vc Vc - 0.8x31671 0.8x217 = 926kips
0.95dt) 0.95 24.26
Panel zone st rengt h is comput ed as fol-
lows:
From Equat i on 18:
= 0.55F~,~d~tIlL + 3b~ft~d+d~t 1
I 3 x 16"23 x (2"26)~ ]
= 0.55xSOx17.12x1.41 1+ 24.26xlT.12xl.41J
= 946 kips
946 > 926 .'.No doubl er pl at es r equi r ed
STEP 11 Check Beam Shear
From Equat i on 19:
w ( l - l ' ) / 272~222/
V~ 4 2 0.17 -
' 2 143
2
= 145kips
V , = A , , , F y = ( 0 . 5 5 ) ( 2 4 . 2 6 ) ( 5 O) = 6 6 7 k i p s > 1 4 5 k i p s
RBS flange r educt i on is approxi mat el y 43
percent . Consequent l y, it is expect ed t hat t he
i ncl usi on of tlae RBS t he beams will i ncr ease
i nt erst ory drift by about 5 percent .
S ~ e ~ c Ab u t
,~
~ . B.U. bar to remain
I / ~ ~ Remove weld tabs
IE 718" x 6" ~,.~,,.T-~-~'~"r-.~ / ~ IP
{B.S.) ~ I ! [ I / _1 16 ~ Weld B.U. bar Io coiutnn
~ l ~ . l I~ . ~ _ 5 .
- - N . . . .
~ l / * ~
I . t ' i I w 2 , . , , 7
~i I.I I'\i I g;-~'~-------------~,~,:,,d~,,,~,,~,,oo,~d,
~, t o s e ~ v a s b a c i ~ g C~, ~ - - ~
I Z . . . . ooo,0,.to
, . ] ~ , ~ , _ ~ ~ ~ \ , ~ , ~ . ~ : ~ column a n d b e a m byfabdcato~.
I I
5/16 \ cleaned and inspected
.
Configure plate comes to \ ~ 17 75" Radius
= . o , o 0 , . . . . . . / .
of column Grind Smooth
~ ~ J ~ 1 ~ 2 . 7 5 "
7.3"
2.75"
5 / ' I ' ~ NI welds: ET0
~lI groove welds: electrodes must b e rat~;I for
' CVN of at teast 20 It-fos at -20 deg. F.
All welding shall conform to AWS D1.1
Fi gure 5 . 3 Co nne c t i o n De t ai l f or
De s i g n E~ mp l e
6 Pr o c e d u r e s f o r Ac c e p t a n c e
o f De s i g n b y Bu i l d i n g
Au t h o r i t i e s
Cont i nui t y Pl ates
Use cont i nui t y pl at es wi t h a t hi ckness
appr oxi mat el y equal to t he beam fl ange
t hi ckness. The beam flange t hi ckness is 0. 85
i nches. Therefore, use 7/ 8" t hi ck cont i nui t y
pl at es (0.875"). Connect cont i nui t y pl at es to
col umn fl anges usi ng CJP groove welds, and
t he web usi ng doubl e fillet welds. The cor-
ner s of cont i nui t y pl at es shoul d be config-
ur ed to avoid wel di ng into t he k- ar ea of t he
col umn.
Beam Web Connect i on
Connect beam web to col umn fl ange
usi ng CJP groove weld over full dept h of web
(between wel d access holes).
A drawi ng of a generic final connect i on
detail is shown in Figure 5.3. The resul t i ng
frame shoul d be checked for all code speci-
fied st r engt h and drift limits. Note t hat t he
The desi gn of SMF bui l di ng syst ems requi re
t hat t he desi gn account for i nel ast i c defor-
mat i on de ma nds on t he connect i on. The
AISC S e i s m i c P r o v i s i o n s f o r S t r u c t u r a l S t e e l
B u i l d i n g s (1997), Sect i on 9.2, pr esent s t he
r equi r ement s for SMF st ruct ures. The RBS
connect i on is an opt i on t hat can meet
r equi r ement s set by bui l di ng codes and con-
s ens us document s. The following comment s
are i nt ended to descri be act i ons t hat can be
followed to hel p facilitate t he per mi t t i ng
process for a SMF bui l di ng syst em.
6.1 Communi cati on
It is r ecommended t hat early in t he process,
t he St r uct ur al Engi neer of Record communi -
cate wi t h t he bui l di ng official regardi ng t he
proposed use and per t i nent aspect s of t he
RBS mome nt connect i on. The engi neer may
need to provi de backgr ound document at i on
to t he bui l di ng official if he or she is unfami l -
iar wi t h t he desi gn and t ermi nol ogy rel at i ng
21
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
to t he design. The use of t hi s document may
ai d t he bui l di ng official in under s t andi ng t he
desi gn i nt ent .
6.2 Methodol ogy
Once t he bui l di ng official unde r s t a nds t he
desi gn i nt ent and syst em behavi or, it is
i mpor t ant to cl earl y st at e t he desi gn met hod-
ology to be us ed earl y so t hat any mi s under -
st andi ngs can be avoided. This document
pr esent s a general desi gn met hodol ogy, uti-
lizing some si mpl i fyi ng as s umpt i ons and
some of t he bet t er aspect s of many different
desi gn met hods. There are ot her ways to
desi gn an RBS moment connect i on and SMF
syst em t han t hat r epr esent ed in t hi s docu-
ment . If ot her met hods are utilized, t he engi-
neer shoul d be sur e to cl earl y i ndi cat e t he
met hod us ed and t he i mpor t ant aspect s t hat
show desi gn compl i ance wi t h t he governi ng
bui l di ng code.
Any desi gn met hodol ogy ut i l i zed shoul d
correl at e well wi t h ot her publ i shed met hods,
t est r esul t s and r esear ch papers. Sect i on 9.2
of t he AISC Seismic Provisions requi re t hat
t he desi gn be based on qualifying cyclic tests.
The t abl e in Appendi x A will hel p to satisfy
t hi s r equi r ement for t he RBS connect i on.
Any si gni fi cant devi at i on from est abl i shed
met hodol ogi es or t est s shoul d be j ust i fi ed. It
is i mpor t ant to unde r s t a nd t hat ma ny rec-
ommendat i ons cont ai ned in t hi s document
are based on exper i ment al r esear ch. Desi gn
equat i ons and RBS sizing val ues are based
on successf ul r esear ch, bot h anal yt i cal l y and
experi ment al l y. Therefore, any new desi gn
equat i ons shoul d be compar abl e to est ab-
l i shed equat i ons.
6.3 Constr ucti on Documents
After a desi gn is compl et e, it is i mperat i ve to
convey t he i nformat i on accur at el y on con-
st r uct i on document s. While cal cul at i ons are
i mpor t ant and descri be t he final const r uct ed
connect i on, const r uct i on document s provide
di rect i on to t he fabri cat or and erector. The
el ement s expr essed on t he drawi ngs will be
mor e i mpor t ant to t he final qual i t y of t he
desi gn t han any cal cul at i on.
The document at i on rel at ed to t he RBS
connect i on shoul d be cl ear and conci se, yet
provide enough detail for t he fabri cat or to
properl y i ncor por at e all t he difficult and
i mpor t ant aspect s of t he connect i on. The
i nformat i on shoul d be such t hat any fabrica-
tor or erect or can utilize t he i nformat i on pro-
vided, and const r uct t he final connect i on in
such a ma nne r t hat t he per f or mance will
di rect l y correl at e wi t h t he desi gn i nt ent .
I mpor t ant aspect s of t he desi gn to be
i ncl uded in t he dr awi ng details are wel di ng
det ai l s, RBS s hape and l ocat i on, not es
r egar di ng gri ndi ng of t he RBS after cut t i ng,
shear t ab detail i nformat i on and beam web to
col umn flange connect i on details. It is rec-
ommended to provide a set of not es specific
to t he RBS connect i ons, rel at i ng to wel di ng
pract i ces and connect i on const r uct i on proce-
dur es to hel p t he cont r act or unde r s t a nd t he
connect i on and t he i mpor t ance it has on t he
bui l di ng syst em per f or mance. Reference to
appl i cabl e port i ons of AWS D I.1 and ot her
AWS or AISC document s shoul d be i ncl uded
in t hese not es to clearly st at e a level of
expect ed quality. This level of i nf or mat i on
will also facilitate obt ai ni ng t he appr opr i at e
level of i nspect i on r equi r ed for t hi s t ype of
connect i on.
7 Fabri cat i on and I ns pe c t i o n
I s s ue s
A numbe r of f abr i cat i on and i nspect i on
i ssues are i mpor t ant to ens ur e a wel l -con-
st r uct ed RBS connect i on. As di s cus s ed ear-
lier proper fabri cat i on and erect i on of t hi s
connect i on is a critical port i on of t he sys-
t em' s per f or mance. If wel ds ar e poorl y
pl aced, t he st ress at whi ch f r act ur e i ni t i at es
and pr opagat es is muc h l ower t han t he
st ress a t ough wel d met al , pl aced wi t h care,
can resist. Cut t i ng and gri ndi ng are critical
aspect s of fabri cat i on whi ch mus t be well
execut ed to pr oduce a hi gh qual i t y final con-
nect i on.
7.1 Cutti ng and Gr i ndi ng
The cut port i on of bot h t he cur ved RBS sec-
tion, as well as t he pr epar at i on of t he end of
22
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS

t he beam, needs to be smoot h and free of

not ches. This s moot hnes s is i mpor t ant for
r easons di scussed earlier. Many fabri cat i on
shops have t he ability to make vi rt ual l y
not ch free t her mal cut s. While t hi s is a ben-
efit to r educe t he numbe r of per pendi cul ar
not ches, whi ch may pr esent st ress ri sers,
smal l i mperfect i ons exist t hat may affect con-
nect i on per f or mance.
Therefore, it is i mpor t ant to cl earl y i den-
tify what is t he adequat e a mount of mat er i al
to remove (by grinding) from t he cut surface.
FEMA 267A (1997) di s cus s es a level of
accept abl e sur f ace r oughnes s val ue l ess t han
or equal to 1000 as defi ned in ANSI/ASME
B46. 1. This level is difficult to det er mi ne
wi t hout a si gni fi cant a mount of equi pment
and expertise. Therefore, t hi s document rec-
omme nds t hat t he t her mal cut s be gr ound
smoot h in t he following manner : "It is i mpor-
t ant t hat t he pat t er n of any cut s made in t he
flange be pr opor t i oned so as to avoid shar p
cut corners. All c ome r s shoul d be r ounded to
mi ni mi ze not ch effects and in addi t i on, cut
edges shoul d be cut or gr ound to have a sur-
face r oughnes s meet i ng t he r equi r ement s of
AWS C4. 1-77 cl ass 4, or smoot her. "
The desi gner shoul d di scuss t he i nt ent
wi t h t he fabri cat or and develop cri t eri a for an
accept abl e mock- up to be made for r ef er ence
dur i ng f abr i cat i on i nspect i ons. The final
gri ndi ng t hat t he engi neer and fabri cat or
have agreed upon, shoul d be i nspect ed by
t he fabri cat or' s r epr esent at i ve as well as t he
owner' s t est i ng agency, to ens ur e compl i ance
wi t h t he accept ed mock- up.
Many beams us ed for SMF syst ems are
large wi t h t hi ck fl anges and webs. Shear
punchi ng hol es i n t hese t hi ck port i ons of t he
member coul d l ead to localized del ami nat i on
or t eari ng. In si t uat i ons wher e hol e di ame-
t ers are smal l er t ha n t he base mat er i al
t hi ckness, t he desi gner may consi der t hat
hol es r equi r ed for fabri cat i on of el ement s and
port i ons of t he RBS beam be drilled r at her
t han punched. No r esear ch r esul t s i ndi cat e
t hat a r educt i on in connect i on per f or mance
is at t r i but abl e to punchi ng hol es in RBS
beams.
7.2 Wel di ng
Wel di ng is a very critical par t of t he proper
fabri cat i on of t hi s connect i on. A si gni fi cant
a mount of effort has been made to pr oduce a
beam wi t h a r e duc e d sect i on modul us ,
des i gned to yi el d pr i or to devel opi ng
moment s whi ch deliver very hi gh st r esses to
beam flange - col umn flange welds. However,
if t he wel di ng r equi r ed for t hi s connect i on is
done poorly, t he st r ess at whi ch bri t t l e
behavi or may occur is muc h l ower t han t he
engi neer expect s. Good wel ds, usi ng t ough
filler met al , will resi st hi gher l oads t han sur-
r oundi ng base met al . Therefore, it is i mper a-
tive t hat t he wel di ng for t hi s t ype of connec-
t i on be of hi gh qual i t y, to pr oduce a
connect i on t hat will per f or m as desi gned.
Any specific i ssues r el at ed to wel ds, s uch
as wel d profiles, s equence, submi t t al of
mat er i al s or cert i fi cat i ons t hat are consi d-
ered i mpor t ant for compl i ance of t he fabri ca-
tor' s wor k to meet t he desi gn i nt ent , shoul d
be cl earl y st at ed in t he const r uct i on docu-
ment s. I t ems s uch as pr eheat shoul d be
addr es s ed in t he proj ect speci fi cat i ons and
const r uct i on dr awi ngs. Typically, AWS will
adequat el y addr es s mos t i ssues, and for new
desi gn will provi de t he f abr i cat or ampl e
di rect i on to compl et e t he const r uct i on in a
safe and hi gh qual i t y manner .
The engi neer s houl d be cl ear in t he proj-
ect speci fi cat i ons and const r uct i on dr awi ngs
t hat filler met al s shal l not be mi xed i n s uch
a way as to pr oduce a CVN val ue bel ow t hat
specified and r equi r ed for a single filler
met al . Most fabri cat i on shops pr esent l y use
gas shi el ded FCAW met hods for wel ds to
col umns and beams. The erect i on crews,
especi al l y when wel di ng compl et e j oi nt pene-
t r at i on groove wel ds, t ypi cal l y us e sel f
shi el ded FCAW. Also, t her e are different filler
met al s us ed for t he flat posi t i on as well as
ot her posi t i ons. Some combi nat i ons of filler
met al s in t he s ame j oi nt may pr oduce a com-
bi ned CVN val ue, whi ch coul d pr esent "brit-
fie behavior". The engi neer shoul d careful l y
revi ew t he i nf or mat i on pr ovi ded in "The
Effects of I nt er mi xed Weld Metal on Mechan-
ical Propert i es" (1998) and t he submi t t ed
WPS pri or to f abr i cat i on to ens ur e t hat t he
fabri cat or and er ect or are not cr eat i ng a
23
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SE CTI ON (RBS} MOMENT F RAME CONNECTI ONS
pot ent i al pr obl em by i nappr opr i at el y mi xi ng
filler met al s.
Pa r a me t e r s s houl d be set for qual i t y con-
t rol of s hop wel di ng a nd f abr i cat i on. The fab-
r i cat or mu s t have a n accept abl e Qual i t y Con-
t rol (QC) pr ocedur e i n pl ace t hr oughout t he
f abr i cat i on of t he proj ect . In addi t i on, Qual i t y
As s ur a nc e me a s ur e s s houl d be t a ke n to hel p
e ns ur e t ha t t he QC pr ocedur e i s bei ng i mpl e-
me nt e d a nd followed. Typi cal l y QA or Verifi-
cat i on I ns pe c t i on i s pr ovi ded by speci al
i ns pect or s , hi r ed by t he owner. It i s t he
r es pons i bi l i t y of t he engi neer to e s t a bl i s h
i ns pect i on prot ocol , r eques t a pr e- f abr i cat i on
a nd pr e- er ect i on meet i ng, a nd i mpr e s s upon
t he f abr i cat or a nd er ect or t he i mpor t a nt
i s s u e s s u r r o u n d i n g t he RBS c onne c t i on
det ai l s a nd cons t r uct i on. Compl et e j oi nt pen-
et r at i on groove wel ds s houl d be i ns pect ed by
a Level II qual i f i ed NDT i nspect or as defi ned
i n t he AWS D 1.1. Each j oi nt s houl d be ul t r a-
soni cal l y t es t ed a nd all wel ds as s oci at ed wi t h
t he connect i on s houl d receive c ont i nuous
speci al i ns pect i on. Fi el d i ns pect i on s houl d be
sensi t i ve to s uc h i s s ue s as wel d pr epar at i on
a n d f i t - up, wel d profi l e a nd wel d p a s s
s equence, ba c k- up bar r emoval a nd gr i ndi ng
of r un- of f t abs . The i n s p e c t o r s s h o u l d
devel op a n accept abl e prot ocol for i ns pect i on
a nd r epor t s i n r egar ds to wel di ng a nd con-
nect i on compl et i on.
24
DESI GN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTI ONS
Re f e r e n c e s
"AISC Initiates Research Into k Area Crack-
ing," Modern Steel Construction, Vol. 37,
No. 9, September 1997, pp.23-24.
Grubbs, K.V., "The Effect of t he Dogbone
Connection on the Elastic Stiffness of
Steel Moment Frames, " M.S. Thesis,
Depart ment of Civil Engineering, the Uni-
versity of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas,
August 1997.
Blodgett, O., Funderburk, S., and Miller, D.,
"Fabri cat ors' and Erect ors' Guide to
Welded Steel Construction," The Lincoln
Electric Company, Cleveland, 1997.
Int ernat i onal Conference of Building Officials
(ICBO), The Uniform Building Code
(UBSC), April 1997.
Chen, S.J., Yeh, C.H. and Chu, J.M, "Ductile
Steel Beam-to-Column Connections for
Seismic Resistance," Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 122, No. 11, November
1996, pp. 1292-1299.
Iwankiw, N., "Ultimate Strength Considera-
tions of Seismic Design of t he Reduced
Beam Section (Internal Plastic Hinge),"
Engineering Journal , American Institute
of Steel Construction, Inc., Vol. 34, No. 1,
First Quart er 1997.
Engelhardt, M.D. and Husain, A.S., "Cyclic
Loading Performance Of Welded Flange -
Bolted Web Connect i ons, " Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 119,
No. 12, December 1993.
Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany,
A.J. ,and Potyraj, T., ~The Dogbone Con-
nection: Part II." Modern Steel Construc-
tion, August 1996.
Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany,
A.J. , and Potyraj, T., "Experimental Inves-
tigation of Dogbone Moment Connec-
tions," Proceedings: 1997 National Steel
Construction Conference, American Insti-
tute of Steel Construction, Chicago, May
1997.
Johnson, M., Qui nt ana, M., '~The Effects of
Intermixed Weld Metal on Mechanical
Properties, Part III," Proceedings, Interna-
tional Conference on Welded Construc-
tions in Seismic Areas, AWS, October
1998.
Kaufmann, E., Xue, M., Lu, L., and Fisher,
J. , "Achieving Duct i l e Behavi or of
Moment Connections," Modern Steel Con-
struction, Vol. 36, No. 1, American Insti-
t ut e of Steel Construction, J anuar y 1996.
Lee, K., Goel, S.C., Stojadinovic, B., "Bound-
ary Effects in Welded Steel Moment Con-
nections," Research Report No. UMCEE
97-20, December 1997.
Engelhardt, M.D. and Sabol, T.A., "Reinforc-
ing of Steel Moment Connect i ons with
Cover Plates: Benefits and Limitations,"
Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp.
510-520, 1998.
Noel, S. N., "Reduced Beam Section Design
for Seismic Retrofit of Steel Moment
Frame Connections, " M.S. Thesis, Divi-
sion of St ruct ural Engineering, University
of California, San Diego, 1997.
Gross, J., Engelhardt, M., Uang, C., Kasai,
K., and Iwankiw, N., "Modification of
Existing Steel Welded Moment Frame
Connect i ons for Seismic Resi st ance, "
Steel Design Guide Series Twelve, Ameri-
can Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.,
Chicago, 1999.
Plumier, A., "The Dogbone: Back to t he
Future," Engineering Journal, American
Institute of Steel Const ruct i on, Inc. 2nd
Quarter 1997.
25
DESI GN O F REDUCED BEAM SECTI ON (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTI ONS
Popov, E. and Stephen, R., "Cyclic Loading of
Full Size Steel Connections," Bulletin No.
21, American Iron and Steel Institute,
1972.
SAC Joi nt Venture, Background Reports on
Metallurgy, Fracture Mechanics, Welding,
Moment Connections and Frame Syst ems
Behavior, Published by the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency, Report FEMA
288, 1996.
SAC Joi nt Venture, Interim Guidelines: Eval-
uation, Repair, Modification and Design of
Welded Steel Moment Frame Structures,
Publ i shed by t he Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Report FEMA 267,
August 1995.
SAC Joi nt Venture, Interim Guidelines Advi-
sory No. 1 - Supplement to FEMA 267,
Publ i shed by t he Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Report FEMA 267A,
March 1997.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Build-
ings, American Institute of Steel Con-
struction, Inc., Chicago, April 15, 1997.
"Structural Welding Code - Steel," AWS D 1.1-
98, American Welding Society, Miami,
1998.
Tide, R., "Stability of Weld Metal Subjected to
Cyclic Static and Seismic Loading," Engi-
neering Structures, Vol. 20, Nos. 4-6,
April-June 1998.
Tsal, K.C. and Popov, E.P., "Steel Beam-Col-
umn Joi nt s In Seismic Moment Resisting
Frames", Report No. UCB/EERC - 88/ 19,
Eart hquake Engineering Research Cen-
ter, University of California at Berkeley,
1988.
Yura, J.A., "Fundament al s of Beam Bracing,"
Proceedings, Structural Stability Research
Council Conference, "Is Your Structure
Suitably Braced?," 1993.
Zekioglu, A., Mozaffarian, H. and Uang, C.,
"Moment Frame Connection Development
and Testing for the City of Hope National
Medical Center," Proceedings; Structures
Congress XV, Portland, April 13-16, 1997,
Ameri can Society of Civil Engi neers,
1997.
26
APPENDIX A
Summary of Experiments on Reduced Beam Section Moment Connections for New Construction
Ref
[ 1 ]
[ 1 ]
[1]
[1]
[1]
Spec.
YC-1
YC-2
PC-1
PC-2
PC-3
Beam
Built-up W shape
d=23.6", b~=l 1.8",
tf=0.79", tw=0.47"
Lb=73"
A36 steel
Fy_f =40 ksi
Fo.~ =66 ksi
Fy.w =40 ksi
Fu.w =65 ksi
Column
Built-up Box:
19.7"xl 9.7"x.79"
Lc = 87"
A572 Gr. 50
Fy =56 ksi
Fu =82 ksi
Flange Welds
SS-FCAW
E70T-7
No weld tabs used
Web
Connection
Bolted:
7-7/8" A325
RBS Details
and Other
Flange
Modifications
Tapered cut
L1=2"
LRBS=I 3.8"
FR=20%
Tapered cut
L~=2"
LRBS=17.7"
FR=25%
Tapered cut
L1=4.7"
LRBS=I 5.7"
FR=34%
Tapered cut
L1=4.7"
LRSS = 17.7"
FR=42%
Tapered cut
L1=4.7"
LRss=I 7.7"
FR=42%
Op
( % )
2.4
2.9
4.1
4.8
3.8
Comments
Fracture of beam
flange initiating at wel d
access hole
Fracture of beam
flange initiating at wel d
access hole
Fracture of beam
flange initiating at weld
access hole
Fracture of beam
flange initiating at wel d
access hole
Fracture of beam
flange initiating at weld
access hole
I m ~
Ref
[2]
[2]
[2]
[2]
[3,4]
[3,4]
Spec.
DBT-
1A-99-
176
Beam
W30x99
A572 Gr. 50
L~= 138"
Column
W14x176
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=168"
Flange Wel ds
SS-FCAW
E70TG-K2;
backing bar removed
Web
Connection
Bolted:
7-1" A325
RBS Details
and Other
Flange
Modifications
Tapered cut
L1=7.5"
LRBS=20.25 ''
DBT-
1 B-99-
176
DBT-
2A-150-
257
DBT-
2B-150-
257
ARUP-
1
Fy.w = 61.6 ksi
Fu.w = 82.8 ksi
W30x99
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=138"
Fy. w = 51.5 ksi
Fu.w = 72.1 ksi
W36x150
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=138"
F~.w = 60.2 ksi
Fu.w = 72.3 ksi
W36x150
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=138"
Fy.w = 62.9 ksi
Fu.w = 83.1 ksi
W36x150
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=132"
Fy.w =55.6 ksi
Fu.w =70.7 ksi
W14x176
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=168"
Fy.w =55.5 ksi
Fu.w =71.8 ksi
W14x257
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=168"
Fy.w =59.6 ksi
Fu.w =75.2 ksi
W 14x257
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=168"
Fy.w =64.5 ksi
Fu.w =83.2 ksi
W 14x426
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
at bottom flange
SS-FCAW
E70TG-K2
backing bar left in
Bolted:
9-1" A325
wel ded
(heavy shear
tab groove
FR=45%
Tapered cut
L1=7.5"
LRBS=20.25 "
FR=45%
Tapered cut
L1=9"
LaBs=24"
FR=45%
Tapered cut
L1=9"
LRBS=24 ''
FR=45%
Tapered cut
L1 =9"
LABS=24"
COH-1
Fy.f =55.5 ksi
Fu4 =73 ksi
Fy.w =62.5 ksi
Fu-w =77 ksi
W27x178
A572 Gr. 50
Lb= 132"
Fy.f =44 ksi
Fu.f =62 ksi
Fy.w =46 ksi
Fu-w =62 ksi
W 14x455
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
Fy.f =55 ksi
Fu4=84 ksi
Fy.w =54 ksi
Fu-w =86 ksi
place w/ seal wel d at
top flange;
backi ng bar removed
at bottom flange
wel ded to
col umn and
fillet wel ded
to beam
web)
FR=44%
top & bottom
fl anges
reinforced wi th
vertical ribs
Tapered cut
L~=7"
LABS=20"
FR=38%
top & bottom
fl anges
reinforced with
vertical ribs
0p
(%)
2.8
4.0
Comments
no failure; t est st opped
due to limitations in
test set up
no failure; t est st opped
due to limitations in
test set up
3.5 ' Fracture of beam top
fl ange near groove
we d
1.7 Fracture of beam top
fl ange we d;
propagat ed to divot-
type fracture of
col umn fl ange
3.5 Fl ange fracture at
mi ni mum secti on of
RBS
3.5
A-2
[3,4]
[3,4]
[3,4]
[3,4]
COH-4
~ =~
COH-5
| ~
[5,6]
[5,6]
Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web
Connection
RBS Details
and Other
Flange
Modifications
COH-2
(~ = ~
COH-3 Wl 4x455
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
Fy.f =55 ksi
Fu.f =84 ksi
F y o w =54 ksi
Fu-w =86 ks i
Beam connected to
column web
W33x152
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=132"
Fy.f =57.6 ksi
Fu.f =78.5 ksi
F y . w =62 ksi
Fu-w =84.5 ksi
Tapered cut
L1=9"
LRBS=26"
FR=43%
top & bottom
flanges
reinforced with
vertical side
plates
Ref
DB1 Wl 4x426
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
W 14x426
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
Fy.f =50 ksi
Fu4 =74.5 ksi
Fy.w =50 ksi
Fu.w =75 ksi
W33x152
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=132"
F~4 =62.8 ksi
Fu.f =86 ksi
F~.w =69.1 ksi
Fu.w =93.7 ksi
SS-FCAW
E71T-8
backing bar left in
place w/ seal weld at
top flange;
backing bar removed
at bottom flange
W36x160
L~=134"
Fy.f =54.7 ksi
Fu4 =75.6 ksi
Fy.w =53.5 ksi
Fu-w =79.2 ksi
welded
(beam web
W36x150
Lb=134"
Fy.f =41.4 ksi
Fu4=58.7 ksi
Fy.w =47.1 ksi
Fu-w =61.8 ksi
DB2
Constant cut
L1=9"
groove
welded to
column)
LRBS=I 9.5"
FR=40%
Radius cut
L1=9"
L~Bs=27"
FR=40%
Gp Comment s
( O / o )
3.8
3.2
4.0
1.8
2.0 Flange fracture at
RBS
3.0 Testing stopped due"
to limitations of test
setup
A-3
Ref
[5,6]
[5,6]
[5,6]
[7]
Spec.
DB3
DB4
DB5
DB1
Beam
W36x170
L~=134"
Fy.f =58 ksi
Fu.f =73 ksi
Fy,w =58.5 ksi
Fu.w =76.7 ksi
W36x194
Lb=134"
Fy.f =38.5 ksi
Fu4 =58.6 ksi
Fy,w =43.6 ksi
Fu.w =59.8 ksi
W30x148
Lb=134"
Fy.f =46.6 ksi
Fu.f =64.5 ksi
Fy.w =48.5 ksi
Fu.w =65.4 ksi
W36x135
A36 Steel
Lb=134.5"
Column
W 14x426
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
W 14x426
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
Fy4=50 ksi
Fu4 =74.5 ksi
Fy,w =50 ksi
Fu.w =75 ksi
W 14x257
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=136"
Fy.f =48.7 ksi
Fu.f =69 ksi
Fy. w =49.4 ksi
Fu.w =66.2 ksi
W 14x257
with 1-5/16" thk.
cover plates
(cover plates wel ded
across fl anges of
W14x257 to form
box)
A572 Gr, 50
L~=132"
Flange Welds
SS-FCAW
E71T-8
(details of backing
and weld tabs not
available)
Web
Connection
Not
Available
RBS Details
and Other
Flange
Modifications
Radi us cut
L1=9"
LRBS=27 ''
FR=40%
Radi us cut
L1=9"
LRBS=27 "
FR=38%
Radi us cut
L1 =5"
LRas=25 "
FR=38%
Radi us cut
L1=8"
LRBS=28 ''
FR=40%
~p
(%)
3.8
3.7
4.0
3.0
Comments
Test i ng st opped due
to limitations of test
setup; significant
col umn panel zone
yielding
Testi ng st opped due
to limitations of test
set up
A-4
Ref
[ 8 ]
[ 8 ]
[8]
[ 8 ]
[ 8 ]
Spec. Beam Column
S-1
S-2A
SC-1
S-3
S-4
W530x82 (Canadian
Designation)
d=20.8", bf=8.2",
tf=0.52", tw=0.37"
wt.=54 Ib/ft.
Lb= 142"
CSA G40.41-350W
steel
F y . f =52.4 ksi
Fo.f =76.6 ksi
Fy.w =57.5 ksi
Fu.w =81 ksi
( ~
W 14x 120
A572 Gr. 50
Lc=120"
Flange Wel ds
SS-FCAW
E71T-8
backing bar left in
place w/ seal weld at
top flange;
backing bar removed
at bottom flange
Web
Connection
Bolted:
5-1" A325
RBS Details
and Other
Flange
Modifications
Radius cut
L1=4.7"
LRss=l 5.7"
FR=55%
0p
( % )
9.0
3.6
3.4
note
( 8 )
note
( 9 )
Comment s
Specimen loaded
monotonically; testing
stopped due to
limitations of test
setup
Testing stopped due
to limitations of test
setup
Composite slab
included (6); testing
stopped due to
limitations of test
setup
statically applied
simulated earthquake
loading (7); testing
stopped due to
reaching end of
simulated earthquake
loading; no connection
failure
dynamically applied
simulated earthquake
loading (7); testing
stopped due to
reaching end of
simulated earthquake
loading; no connection
failure
A-5
Ref
[ 8 ]
[11]
[11]
[11]
[11]
[12]
[12]
Spec.
SC-2
LS-1
Beam Col umn
W30x99
A572 Gr. 50
W14x176
A572 Gr. 50
Fl ange Wel ds
SS- FCAW
E70T-6
Web
Connect i on
wel ded
(Beam web
RBS Detai l s
and Ot her
Fl ange
Modi f i cat i ons
Radi us cut
L1 = 7"
LS-2
LS-3
LS-4
DBBW
Beam 1
Lb = 141"
Fy.f = 54. 0 ksi
Fu4= 71. 9 ksi
Fy.w = 58.0 ksi
Fu.w = 74. 8 ksi
W36x150
A572 Gr. 50
Lb = 141"
Lc = 150"
Fy. f = 5 5 . 5 k s i
Fu4 = 74.0 ksi
Fy.w= 54.0 ksi
Fu.w= 73.1 ksi
(~
W 14x398
A572 Gr. 50
Lc = 146"
backi ng bar left in
place w/seal wel d at
t op flange;
backi ng bar removed
at bottom fl ange
~
SS- FCAW
E70T-6
backi ng bar left in
groove
wel ded to
col umn)
Bolted:
10 - 1" A490
LaB s = 20"
FR = 50%
Radi us cut
L1 = 9"
LaBS = 27"
FR = 50%
DBBW
Beam 2
m
Fy.f = 54. 3 ksi
Fo.f = 68. 8 ksi
Fy.w = 59. 4 ksi
Fu.w= 72.0 ksi
Fy = 53.0 ksi
Fu = 73.0 ksi
(based on CMTR)
place w/seal weld at
top flange;
backi ng bar removed
at bottom fl ange
.
0p
( % )
Note
( 9 )
Comment s
Composi t e sl ab
i ncl uded (6);
dynami cal l y appl i ed
si mul at ed eart hquake
l oadi ng (6); t est i ng
st opped due to
reachi ng end of
si mul at ed eart hquake
l oadi ng; no connect i on
fai l ure
4.0 No connect i on fai l ure
+1. 0 note (12)
/ - 5. 0
- 1. 0/ note (12)
+5. 0
4. 0 No connect i on failure;
t est i ng st opped due to
l i mi t at i ons of t est
set up
4. 0 No connect i on fai l ure;
t est st opped due to
l i mi t at i ons of t est
set up;
see note (13)
4. 0
A-6
Ref
[12]
[12]
[13]
[13]
[13]
[13]
Spec.
DBBW-
C
Beam 1
DBBW-
C
Beam 2
DBWW
Beam 1
DBWW
Beam 2
DBWW
-C
Beam 1
DBWW
-C
Beam 2
Beam Col umn Fl ange Wel ds We b
Connect i on
W36x150
A572 Gr. 50
Lb= 141"
F y . f = 54.3 ksi
Fu.f = 68.8 ksi
Fy.w = 59.4 ksi
Fu.w= 72.0 ksi

W 14x398
A572 Gr. 50
Lc = 144"
F v = 53.0 ksi
Fu = 73.0 ksi
(based on CMTR)
SS-FCAW
E70T-6
backi ng bar left in
place w/seal wel d at
top flange;
backing bar removed
at bottom fl ange
( (
wel ded
(Beam web
groove
wel ded to
col umn)
RBS Det ai l s
and Ot her
Fl ange
Modi f i cat i ons
Op
(%)
5.0
3.8
3.5
Comment s
Low cycle fati gue
fracture in RBS;
see note (14)
Fracture of bot t om
beam fl ange adj acent
to groove wel d;
fracture initiated at
wel d access hole;
see note (14)
No connect i on failure;
test st opped due to
limitations of test
set up
see note (13)
3.5
5.0 Low cycle fati gue
5.0
fracture in RBS
see note (14)
Low cycle fati gue
fracture in RBS
A- 7
Ref Spec.
[14] WG-1
[14] WG- 2
[14] WG- 3
[ 1 4 j
Notes:
Beam
W33x201
A572 Gr. 50
L b = 160.5"
F~.f = 52.0 ksi
Fu-f = 72.8 ksi
Fy.w = 51.5 ksi
Fu-w = 68.0 ksi
W36x300
A572 Gr. 50
Lb = 159"
F~.f = 56.0 ksi
Fu4 = 72.9 ksi
Fy.w = 56.7 ksi
Fu.w = 74.5 ksi
WG- 4 "
Col umn
W14x311
A913 Gr. 65
Lc = 152"
F y . f = 69.0 ksi
Fu4 = 88.3 ksi
Fy-w = 68.0 ksi
F..w= 86.5 ksi
5/8" doubl er pl ates
(A572 Gr. 50)
provi ded on each
si de of col umn web
W14x550
A913 Gr. 65
Lc = 152"
Fy.f = 67. 0 ksi
Fu4= 86.8 ksi
Fy.w= 68.1 ksi
Fu.w = 87.6 ksi
Fl ange Wel ds
SS- FCAW
E70TG-K2;
backi ng bar removed
at bottom fl ange
Web
Connect i on
Bolted:
13-1" A490
Bol ted:
20 - 1" A490
(2 rows of 10
bol ts each)
RBS Detai l s
and Ot her
Fl ange
Modi f i cat i ons
Radi us cut
L1 = 9.3"
LRBS = 25"
FR = 54%
Radi us cut
L1 = 10"
Lass = 27"
FR = 51%
~p
(%)
2.9
2.9
3.5
Comment s
f ract ure of RBS at
local buckl e in RBS
see note (15)
No connect i on fai l ure;
t est st opped due to
l i mi tati ons of t est
set up
1~
" 4.5 "
1. All speci mens are si ngl e cant i l ever type, except DBBW, DBBW-C, DBWW, and DBWW- C
2. All speci mens are bare steel, except SC-1, SC-2, DBBW- C and DBWW- C
3. All speci mens subj ect to quasi st at i c cycl i c loading, wi t h ATC-24, SAC or si mi l ar l oadi ng protocol , except S-1, S-3, So4, SC-2, LS-2 and LS-3
4. All speci mens provi ded wi t h cont i nui t y pl ates at beam-t o-col umn connect i on, except Popov Speci men DB1 ( Popov Speci men DB1 was provi ded wi t h
external fl ange plates wel ded to col umn).
5. Speci mens ARUP-1, COH-1 to COH-5, S-1, S-2A, S-3, S-4, SC-1, SC-2 and LS-4 provi ded wi t h lateral brace near l oadi ng poi nt and an addi t i onal
lateral brace near RBS; all ot her speci mens provi ded wi th lateral brace at l oadi ng poi nt only.
6. Composi t e sl ab detai l s f or Speci mens SC-2 and SC- 2: 118" wi de fl oor slab; 3" ribbed deck (ri bs perpendi cul ar to beam) wi t h 2.5" ~oncrete cover;
normal wt. concrete; wel ded wi re mesh rei nforcement; 3.4" dia. shear st uds spaced at 24" (one st ud in ever y ot her rib); f i rst st ud l ocated at 29" f rom
face of col umn; 1" gap left bet ween f ace of col umn and sl ab to mi ni mi ze composi t e acti on.
A- 8
7. Specimens S-3, S-4 and SC-2 were subjected to simulated earthquake loading based on N10E horizontal component of the Llolleo record from the
1985 Chile Earthquake. For Specimen S-3, simulated loading was applied statically. For Specimen S-4 and SC-2; simulated loading was applied
dynamically, and repeated three times.
8. Specimen S-3: Connection sustained static simulated earthquake loading without failure. Maximum plastic rotation demand on specimen was
approximately 2%.
9. Specimens S-4 and SC-2: Connection sustained dynamic simulated earthquake loading without failure. Maximum plastic rotation demand on
specimen was approximately 2%.
10. Tests conducted by Plumier not included in Table. Specimens consisted of HE 260A beams (equivalent to W10x49) and HE 300B columns
(equivalent to W12x79). All specimens were provided with constant cut RBS. Beams attached to columns using fillet welds on beam flanges and web,
or using a bolted end plate. Details available in Refs. 9 and 10.
11. Shaking table tests were conducted by Chen, Yeh and Chu [1] on a 0.4 scale single story moment frame with RBS connections. Frame sustained
numerous earthquake records without fracture at beam-to-column connections.
12. Specimens LS-2 and LS-3 were tested using near field loading protocol. The specimen was subjected to peak pulses corresponding to 6% story drift
ratio. Loading was repeated six times for LS-2 and four times for LS-3. The specimens eventually failed due to low cycle fatigue fracture at the
narrowest section in the RBS.
13. Specimens DBBW and DBWW were cruciform t~,pe specimens with beams attached to each column flange.
14. Specimens DBBW-C and DBWW-C were cruciform type specimens with composite floor slab. Composite slab details:
96" wide slab; 2" ribbed metal deck (ribs parallel to beam) with 3.5" topping of normal weight concrete; concrete compressive strength at time of
testing = 3600 psi for DBBW-C and 6800 psi for DBWW-C; slab reinforced with #4 Gr. 60 bars in each direction; 3.4" dia. shear studs spaced at 12";
first stud located at 36" from face of column (at end of RBS).
15. Specimens WG-1 to WG-4: Test report provided slightly conflicting data on location along length of beam where displacement was measured. Values
of plastic rotation reported above are based on an estimated location for displacement measurements.
A-9
Notation:
Fy.f = flange yield stress from coupon tests
Fu_f = flange ultimate stress from coupon tests
Fy_w = web yield stress from coupon tests
Fu-w = web ultimate stress from coupon tests
Lb = Length of beam, measured from load application point to face of column
Lo = Length of column
L~ = distance from face of column to start of RBS cut
EBBS = length of RBS cut
FR = Flange Reduction = (area of flange removed/original flange area) xl 00
(Flange Reduction reported at narrowest section of RBS)
ep = Maximum plastic rotation developed for at least one full cycle of loading, measured with respect to the face of the column (based on occurrence
of fracture or based on end of loading)
References:
[1] Chen, S.J., Yeh, C.H. and Chu, J.M, "Ductile Steel Beam-to-Column Connections for Seismic Resistance," Journalof Structural Engineering, Vol.
122, No. 11, November 1996, pp. 1292-1299.
[2] Iwankiw, N.R., and Carter, C., "The Dogbone: A New Idea to Chew On," Modern Steel Construction, April 1996.
[3] Zekioglu, A., Mozaffarian, H., and Uang, C.M., "Moment Frame Connection Development and Testing for the City of Hope National Medical Center,"
Building to Last- Proceedings of Structures Congress XV, ASCE, Portland, April 1997.
[4] Zekioglu, A., Mozaffarian, H., Chang, K.L., Uang, C.M. and Noel, S., "Designing After Northridge," Modem Steel Construction, March 1997.
[5] Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany, A.J. and Potyraj, T.J., "Experimental Investigation of Dogbone Moment Connections," Proceedings; 1997
National Steel Construction Conference, American Institute of Steel Construction, May 7-9, 1997, Chicago.
[6] Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany, A.J. and Potyraj, T.J., "The Dogbone Connection, Part II, Modem Steel Construction, August 1996.
[7] Popov, E.P., Yang, T.S. and Chang, S.P., "Design of Steel MRF Connections Before and After 1994 Northridge Earthquake," International
Conference on Advances in Steel Structures, Hong Kong, December 11-14, 1996. Also in: Engineering Structures, 20(12), 1030-1038, 1998.
[8] Tremblay, R., Tchebotarev, N. and Filiatrault, A., "Seismic Performance of RBS Connections for Steel Moment Resisting Frames: Influence of
Loading Rate and Floor Slab," Proceedings, Stessa '97, August 4-7, 1997, Kyoto, Japan.
[9] Plumier, A., "New Idea for Safe Structures in Seismic Zones," IABSE Symposium - Mixed Structures Including New Materials, Brussels, 1990.
[10] Plumier, A., "The Dogbone: Back to the Future," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. 2nd Quarter 1997.
[11] Uang, C.M., Unpublished preliminary test reports for SAC Phase 2 RBS tests, University of California at San Diego, December 1998 and February
1999.
[12] Engelhardt, M.D. and Venti, M., Unpublished preliminary test reports for SAC Phase 2 tests, University of Texas at Austin, 1999. "
[13] Fry, G., Unpublished preliminary test reports for SAC Phase 2 tests, Texas A & M University, 1999.
[14] Unpublished report of connection proof tests for building construction project in southern California; project title withheld at request of building owner,
January, 1999.
A-10










June 2002





Use of Deep Columns
In
Special Steel Moment Frames

By

Jie-Hua Jay Shen, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.
Associate Professor
Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering
Illinois Institute of Technology

Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, Ph.D., P.E.
Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
University of California, Berkeley

David B. McCallen, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Complex Distributed Systems
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory

____________________________________________________________________________
(A copy of this report can be downloaded free of charge for personal use from www.aisc.org)
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
1
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames

By Jie-Hua Jay Shen, Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl and David B. McCallen

This report discusses some of the issues related to the use of deep columns in special moment frames.
Since 1994 Northridge earthquake significant amount of research and development projects have been done
in U.S., Japan and elsewhere on seismic behavior and design of steel moment frames. In almost all of these
research projects, the column used in testing or analyses have been W14 or smaller sections. One of the
most important research projects during this period was the SAC Steel joint Venture Project where a large
number of moment connections were tested and analyzed and design recommendations were formulated. In
this project, almost all specimens had a column with depth of no more than 14-16 inches. However, since in
many cases of moment frames, the governing design requirement is the stiffness to control the drift, the use
of deep columns with a depth of 24, 27 and even 30 inches, becomes very economical. Unfortunately, there
is no extensive and reliable information on actual cyclic behavior and design of moment frames with deep
columns. This report discusses: (a) the issues that need to be considered in using deep columns in moment
frames, (b) a comparison of seismic behavior of two 10 story moment frames designed using W14 and
W27 respectively, (c) the results of a series of realistic non-linear finite element analysis of moment-
rotation behavior of connections with deep columns and; (d) the conclusions.

First Printing, June 2002.
__________________________________________________________________________________
Jie-Hua Jay Shen, Ph.D., P.E., S.E. Associate Professor, Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering,
Illinois Institute of Technology, 3201 South Dearborne Street, Chicago, IL, 60616.
Phone: (312) 567-5860, Fax: (312) 567-3579.
E-mail: shen@iit.edu.
____________________________________________________________________________________________
Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl, Ph.D., P.E., Professor, 781 Davis Hall, Univ. of California, Berkeley, CA 94720-1710,
Phone: (510) 642-4528, Fax: (925) 946-0903,
E-mail: astaneh@ce.berkeley.edu , Web page: www.ce.berkeley.edu/~astaneh
____________________________________________________________________________________________
David B. McCallen, Ph.D., Director, Center for Complex Distributed Systems, Lawrence Livermore National
Laboratory, 7000 East Avenue, MS L-151, Livermore, CA 94550.
Phone: (925) 423-1219
E-mail: mccallen2@llnl.gov.
____________________________________________________________________________________________

Disclaimer: The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized engineering
principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate, this information should not be used or relied
upon for any specific application without competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and
applicability by a licensed professional engineer, designer or architect. The publication of the material contained herein is not
intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the Structural Steel Educational Council or of any other person named
herein, that this information is suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or
patents. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use.
Caution must be exercised when relying upon specifications and codes developed by others and incorporated by reference
herein since such material may be modified or amended from time to time subsequent to the printing of this document. The
Structural Steel Educational Council or the authors bears no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and
incorporate it by reference at the time of the initial publication of this document.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The publication of this report was made possible in part by the support of the Structural
Steel Educational Council (SSEC). The authors wish to thank all SSEC members for their
valuable comments. Particularly, special thanks are due to Fred Boettler, Jeff Eandi, Lanny Flynn,
Pat Hassett, William Honeck, Brett Manning and James Putkey for their valuable and detailed
review comments. The authors also appreciate the review comments provided by James Malley
of Degenkolb Engineers and Dr. Farzad Naeim of John A. Martin Associates.
The opinions expressed in this report are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Illinois Institute of Technology, the University of California Berkeley, the
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory where authors are employed nor the Structural Steel
Educational Council or other agencies and individuals whose names appear in this document.
A portion of this work was performed at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under
the auspices of DOE Contract W-7405-Eng-48. The analyses and design of the 10-story frames
were done using the latest version of the SAP-2000n program. The generous donation of the
program by Computers and Structures Inc. of Berkeley (www.csiberkeley.com) is sincerely
appreciated. The finite element analyses of connections were conducted using ABAQUAS and
NIKE-3D program.


















Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
3
USE OF DEEP COLUMNS IN
SPECIAL STEEL MOMENT FRAMES

By:

JAY SHEN, Ph.D., P.E., S.E.
Associate Professor
Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Illinois Institute of Technology , Chicago

ABOLHASSAN ASTANEH-ASL, Ph.D., P.E.
Professor
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California, Berkeley

DAVID B. McCALLEN, Ph.D.
Director
Center for Complex Distributed Systems, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore
____________________________________________

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABSTRACT / Page 1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS / Page 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS / Page 3

NOTATIONS / Page 4

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION / Page 5

CHAPTER 2. USE AND BEHAVIOR OF FRAMES WITH DEEP COLUMNS / Page 8

CHAPTER 3. ANALYSIS OF CYCLIC BEHAVIOR OF DEEP COLUMN CONNECTIONS / PAGE 17

CHAPTER 4. CONCLUSIONS / Page 33

REFERENCES/Page 36

ABOUT THE AUTHORS / Page 38

LIST OF PUBLISHED STEEL TIPS REPORTS / Page 39
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
4
_________________________________________________________________________

Notations
_________________________________________________________________________


In preparing the following notations, whenever possible, the definitions are taken from
various references as indicated inside the parentheses whenever applicable.

b
f
Width of flange.
E Modulus of elasticity.
F
y
Specified minimum yield stress of the type of steel to be used, ksi. As used in the LRFD
Specification, "yield stress" denotes either the minimum specified yield point (for those
steels that have a yield point) or the specified yield strength (for those steels that do not
have yield point). (AISC, 1997).
F
yw
Specified minimum yield stress of the web.
h Depth of web.
J Torsion constant, cross section property.
in. Inch, 1 inch= 25.4mm.
I
x
Moment of inertia about x-axis.
I
y
Moment of inertia about y-axis.
ksi Kilo-pounds per square inches, 1 ksi=6,895 kilo-Pascal.
r
x
Radius of gyration about x-axis.
r
y
Radius of gyration about y-axis.
S
x
Section modulus about x-axis.
S
y
Section modulus about y-axis.
t
f
Thickness of flange.
t
w
Thickness web.
Z
x
Plastic modulus about x-axis.
Z
y
Plastic modulus about y-axis.

p
Limiting slenderness parameter for a compact element. (AISC, 1997).

r
Limiting slenderness parameter for a non-compact element. (AISC, 1997).

f
Equals b
f
/2t
f
for flange.

w
Equals h/t
w
for web.

c
Twisting of column.

Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
5
1. Introduction






1.1. Introduction
Moment-resisting frames are one of the frequently used lateral load resisting systems in
many steel building structures. During the 1994 Northridge earthquake, a large number of welded
steel moment frames developed cracks in their beam-to-column welds at or near joints. Although,
none of the damaged structures developed any partial collapse or even injuries, the structural
engineering and steel construction community undertook an extensive effort to study the
phenomenon and mitigate it. In the aftermath of the 1994 Northridge earthquake and during
1994-2000 periods, a comprehensive research and technology development project was
undertaken by SAC Steel Joint Venture (FEMA-350, 2001) primarily funded by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency to address this problem. The main goal of the project,
sometimes denoted as simply the SAC project, was to develop technologies for design,
construction, inspection, evaluation and retrofit of the moment frames subjected to seismic
effects.
As part of the SAC Project, a large number of cyclic tests of beam-to-column connections
of moment frames were conducted. The aim was to establish the actual behavior of existing as
well as the improved beam-to-column moment connections. Most of these tests were done on
specimens where the columns were W14 sections with a maximum depth of column being about
14-16 inches. When the studies were completed, SAC Project produced a set of reports (FEMA-
35, 2001) on various aspects of the problem and its solutions. One of the important items in the
FEMA reports was the introduction of pre-qualified moment connections. The pre-qualified
connections have specific ranges of material properties and geometry, which are based on tested
connections. It is expected that if properties of a designed connection fall within these ranges, the
designed connection will behave in a manner similar to those tested within the SAC Program.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
6
Almost all the pre-qualified connections in SAC reports have a W14 column traditionally
used in many structures. However, in todays design offices, structural engineers in many projects
find it more economical to use columns that are deeper than the W14 sections. In recent years, it
has been recognized that there is a strong economic incentive for the design engineer to use deep
columns to satisfy increasingly more stringent drift limitations. Using W14 columns to satisfy drift
limitations specified by the codes often results in unnecessarily heavy columns. Structural
engineers have, from time to time, used deeper columns for some steel building projects, when
they had resources to carry out the physical tests of project-based connections. The deep
columns would be more extensively used for moderate-rise to high-rise buildings if the time
consuming and costly physical tests could be avoided. So far, limited research has been done
regarding the behavior and design of a beam-to-column connection with deep columns. Two
reports (Gilton et al, 2000) and (Ricles et al., 2000) include the results of cyclic testing of a few
beam-to-column connection specimens where the column was a deep wide flange section.
Therefore, there is a need for information on the performance of beam-to-column moment
connections with deep columns. A deep column in this context is a column with a depth of
greater than 21 inches.

1.2. Background on This Study
After the 1994 Northridge earthquake, extensive studies were conducted to improve the
performance of the steel moment-resisting frame when subjected to strong ground motions. Since
then, the Reduced Beam Section (RBS), where a portion of the beam flange is removed in order
to force the plastic hinge in the beam away from the column face, has become one of the
frequently used welded moment connections. Researchers have studied the behavior of the RBS
connections when connected to W14 columns (FEMA-350, 2001), and have found that the
connections with RBS have larger cyclic rotational ductility than the same connections without
RBS. This type of beam-to-column connection assembly has been pre-qualified by FEMA-350
for seismic design of moment-resisting frames along with a number of other configurations of
welded and bolted connections
In 2000, a report by Gilton et al. (2000) presented the results of cyclic tests of three RBS
moment connections where deep columns were used. The authors have reported twisting of the
deep columns. Although the twisting of deep column in their tests appears to have been observed
during the late stages of loading and after rotations in excess of 0.03 radian, the authors have
expressed concern about twisting of the deep columns and have formulated and proposed
limitations on the geometry of the column cross section to prevent the observed twisting of deep
columns. A review of the report by Gilton et al (2000) indicates that the lateral movement of
RBS hinge and the resulting twisting of deep columns in their tests may have been due to
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
7
unrealistic boundary conditions and lack of bracing normally provided to top flange by the floor
beams.
To investigate this, non-linear cyclic behavior of RBS moment connections with W14 and
deep columns were studied and the results are summarized here. The analyses began with
building the model of a beam-to-column sub-assemblage that had been physically tested (Gilton
et. al., 2000). After the results of a tested specimen was well simulated by a finite element model,
a group of more realistic beam-to-column sub-assemblages with other deep column configurations
were analyzed, and the results were evaluated. The results confirmed that indeed column twisting
in Gilton et al. (2000) tests might have occurred primarily because of the way the specimen was
tested. In these tests, there was no flange bracing which normally is provided to the top flange of
the beam by the floors in actual buildings.
The authors hope the information presented here can be useful in better understanding the
actual behavior of moment connections with deep columns in buildings. In addition, we hope the
information can assist future researchers in planning their test set-up to test moment connections
with deep columns in a realistic and proper manner.

1.3. Objectives of this Report
The main objectives of this Steel Technical Information and Product Services (Steel TIPS)
report are:
1. To review the use of frames with deep columns (Section 2).
2. To conduct pushover and inelastic time history analyses of frames with W14 as well as
deep columns and compare their seismic behavior (Section 2).
3. To conduct a critical review of the results of a few cyclic tests available at this time on
deep columns. The deep columns are defined as columns with a depth of 21 inches or
greater, particularly columns with 24, 27, 30 and 33 inch depths (Section 3).
4. Using realistic models of the connections with deep columns, to conduct simulated cyclic
tests of these connections and compare the results of computer analyses to actual test
results to ensure that the computer analyses predict the actual test results well (Section 3).
5. To conduct more analyses of moment connections with different beam and deep columns
sections and with floors being present or not (Section 3).
6. To formulate tentative recommendations for the use of deep columns in moment frames.
Such recommendations can be verified by selective, well-planned and correctly executed
testing (Section 4).
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
8
2. USE AND BEHAVIOR
OF FRAMES WITH
DEEP COLUMNS



2.1. Introduction
In most cases of design of moment frames, drift limitations, and not strength, govern the
design. One of the efficient ways of reducing the drift of a moment frame is to increase the
bending and shear stiffness of its columns. Using deeper cross sections than the W14s
traditionally used in many moment frames will accomplish this. The following text provides a
discussion of the issues related to the use of deep columns.

2.2. Issues Related to the Use of Deep Columns
2.2.a. Stiffness of the Moment Frame
Deep columns with W21 to W30 sections provide larger moment of inertia for the same
weight compared to traditional W14 column sections. For example, the weight/ft of a W27
section will be less than of the weight/ft of a W14 section with comparable moment of inertia.
Relatively large bending stiffness of the deep columns results in increasing the global stiffness of
the moment frame, which in turn results in reducing the drift and damage.

2.2.b. Strength
In moment frames subjected to relatively large lateral forces, bending strength of the
columns is one of the important parameters. Deep columns provide larger plastic moment capacity
than the equivalent W14s, making it possible to more easily meet the strong column-weak beam
design requirements. For example, the weight/ft of a W27 section will be less than 70% of the
weight of a W14 section having the same plastic moment capacity. In using deep columns with
relatively small weak axis moments of inertia, one has to check the possibility of lateral torsional
buckling of the deep column, especially for tall floors.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
9
yw w
F E t h / 45 . 2 /
yw y p
F E r L / 7 . 1 =
yw y
F E r L / 7 . 1 /
According to AISC Specification (AISC, 2001), if un-braced length of compression flange
of a beam in bending is less than the L
p
given by the following Equation 2.2, lateral-torsional
buckling is not expected to occur before the beam reaches its plastic moment capacity.

If L L
p
the beam is compact for lateral-torsional buckling, where:

(AISC-LRFD Manual, 2001, P. 16.1-33) (2.1)

By rearranging the above equation we can obtain a limit for L/r
y
of the column, Equation
2.2, that below this limit lateral-torsional buckling is not expected and need not be checked.

(2.2)

For A36, Grade 50 and Grade 65 steel, the above limit of L/r
y
is equal to 48, 41 and 36
respectively.

2.2.c. Panel Zone Issues
Deep column sections have deeper webs than the W14 columns and provide more web
area than the W14 for the same weight. This means that shear strength and stiffness of the panel
zone in a deep column is greater than the corresponding values in a W14 column with the same
weight. The larger shear strength of the panel zone in deep columns can help reduce the need for
doubler plates. The larger shear stiffness of the panel zone in deep columns can help reduce panel
zone distortions. As a result, the contribution of panel zone distortions to the story drift can be
smaller when deep columns are used. In deep columns, where the web is relatively slender, shear
buckling of panel zone should be investigated. Shear buckling of web can be avoided by limiting
the h/t
w
of the column web to the following value from the AISC Specification (AISC, 2001).

(AISC-LRFD Manual, 2001, P. 16.1-35) (2.3)

If h/t
w
of the column web satisfies the above equation, it is expected that the column web
can reach shear yielding before buckling. The term on the right side of the Equation 2.3 above
for A36, grade 50 and Grade 65 steel (Fy=36, 50 and 65 ksi) is equal to 69, 59 and 52
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
10
respectively. A check on currently available rolled shapes indicate that all rolled wide flange
shapes tabulated in the first part of the current AISC-LRFD Manual (AISC, 2001) have h/t
w
less
than 59 therefore satisfy the limit of Equation 2.3 above for A36 and grade 50 steels. For grade
65 steel, with the exception of a few sections, almost all rolled shapes have h/t
w
less than 52
satisfying the limit of Equation 2.3.

2.2.d. Local Buckling
As far as local buckling is concerned, deep columns have a disadvantage compared to
W14 columns. In general, b/t ratio of flanges and h/t
w
of webs of deep columns are larger than the
W14s with the same weight. However, most deep column sections with grade 50 steel have
compact webs and flanges and can be used in high seismic areas.

2.3. Comparison of Behavior of a Frame with W14 and Deep Columns
In order to identify benefits and limitations of using deep columns in moment frames, a
limited comparative study was done. In the study, a typical building was selected and was
designed using W14 columns. Then, the same building was designed using W27 columns. Both
frames had the same girders. The results of analyses of these two frames indicated that in all
respects, the frames behaved similarly. However, the weight of the frame with W27 columns was
considerably less. Of course, one should not generalize the outcome of this one case of
comparison, but as an example, it sheds some light on seismic behavior of similar frames with
W14 and W27 columns. In addition, it shows the extent of saving in the weight of columns for
this building if one uses deep columns.

2.3.a. Building Used in the Comparative Studies
The building selected for the comparative study was a 10-story perimeter frame building.
This building structure, using W14 columns, was almost the same as the structure of a 10-story
study building designed by the SAC Joint Venture (SAC, 1996) and provided to researchers in
1996. For these studies, the building was assumed located in seismic areas of California within a
10 km distance of a major fault. Hayward fault ground motions were the used in the nonlinear
time history analyses. SAC designed the study buildings to comply with the UBC-97 (ICBO,
1997). Figures 2.1 shows framing plan and elevation of the 10-story study structure.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
11

2.3.b. Design of the Building Used in the Comparative Studies
As indicated earlier, the building used in the study was adapted from one of the study
buildings that was developed and used in the SAC Joint Venture program (SAC, 1996). The ten-
story building designed by SAC for a Los Angeles site had W14 columns. The SAC-designed
structure complied with the UBC-97 and its maximum inter-story drift (for 18 feet tall ground
floor, see Figure 2.1) was 1.7%, which is less than the 2% limit given by the UBC-97 for this
structure. The frame on column line 6 of SAC structure was selected as one of our two study
frames and was denoted as W14 Study Frame. Then, we replaced the W14 columns with W27
columns while keeping the same beams and denoted this frame W27 Study Frame. Since in
moment frames, usually drift is the governing design parameter, the replacement W27 were
selected such that the frame had still a drift value less than 2% and both W14 and W27 study
frames had comparable stress level in their members. Figure 2.2 shows cross sections of the
girders and columns used in both frames. Figure 2.3 shows Demand/Capacity ratios for members
of study frames. Instead of LRFD methods, in the design we used AISC-ASD design option of
the SAP2000n software and the nominal loads. This was done to be able to compare the stresses
and deformations generated in each frame by the combined design forces at service load level and
not at factored-load levels. The use of ASD methods here is not to advocate its use in design,
which is best done using LRFD methods. To the authors, the ASD method provided a better feel
about service level (unfactored) stresses and deformations in the frames.
Figure 2.1. Plan and Elevation Views of the 10-Story Structure
18 ft
8 @ 13 ft
12 ft
ELEVATION
PLAN
30 ft
30 ft
30 ft
30 ft
30 ft
30 ft 30 ft
5 6
A
B
C
D
E
F
30 ft 30 ft
30 ft
2 3 4 1
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
12
The analysis of the frame with W27 columns showed that the maximum inter-story drift in
the frame was 1.2% and for the frame with W14 columns was 1.7%. Both drift values were less
than the limit of 2% as per UBC-97 (IBC, 1997) and occurred at the 18 feet tall ground floor.
Figure 2.3 shows values from the interaction equation for the two frames, which indicates the
stress level at code service level forces to be similar in both frames and relatively low as expected
in a moment frame.
Figure 2.2. Girders and Columns of W14, and W27 Study Frames

W14 Study Frame
W27 Study Frame
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
13




Figure 2.3. Values of ASD M-P Interaction Equation for the W14 Study-Frame
(upper frame) and the W27 Study Frame (lower frame)
W14 Columns
W27 Columns
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
14
Push-over Analyses:
In order to compare the performance of two frames, using the SAP 2000n program,
pushover analyses of the frames shown in Figure 2.2 were conducted. In the pushover analyses,
both frames were subjected to ever-increasing first mode pushover displacements. Figure 2.4
shows the push over curves. Both frames were able to reach a roof displacement of about 2.5 feet
before collapse. Figure 2.5 shows the hinges at the time of collapse. The frame with W14
columns showed soft story formation while the frame with W27 columns had more yielding in the
columns at the time of collapse. The columns in the frame with W27 columns were considerably
lighter than the columns in the frame with W14 columns.


Figure 2.4. Pushover Curves for the Frames with W14 and W27 Columns
Roof Displacement, ft.


Base
Shear,
kips.
0
1000
3000
1.0
2.0 3.0
2000
W27
W14
Roof Disp.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
15

Note: Indicates a plastic hinge with partial yielding
Indicates a plastic hinge with full yielding of the cross section

Figure 2.5. Hinges in the Frames Just Prior to Collapse

Inelastic Time History Analyses:
In order to compare the dynamic response of two frames, inelastic time history analyses of
both frames were conducted. The dead and live load as well as the mass applied to both frames
were the same as given by SAC (FEMA-350, 2001). The inelastic models of the frames shown in
Figure 2.2 were subjected to the E-W acceleration component of the Hayward Seismic Evaluation
Earthquake (SEE) generated by Bolt and Gregor (1993). Figure 2.6 shows the time history of
displacement of the first floor for the two frames. The drift values for the first floor can be
obtained by dividing displacements by 18 feet, the height of ground floor. The inter-story drift of
the frames with W27 and W14 columns were 1% and 1.2% respectively. The drift values
calculated using UBC-97 (ICBO, 1997) provisions were 1.2% and 1.7% for frames with W14 and
W27 columns respectively. Plastic hinges formed in both frames at the RBS areas. However,
since the girders in both frames were the same, it was not expected that non-linear behavior of
frames would be much different.
In previous sections, it was shown that the drift values and stresses in two study frames,
one with W14 columns and the other with W27 columns, were essentially the same. However, for
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
16
this 10-story building with a 150ft by 150ft plan, the weight of the steel using W27 deep columns
was about 1.3 lbs/ft
2
less than the steel in the same frame but with W14 columns. According to a
leading steel fabricator, the 1.3 lbs/ft
2
equals to about 6-8% in total material saving based on 16-
18 psf of steel for a typical structure of this type. Of course as mentioned earlier, this 10-story
building was just an example to demonstrate that using deep columns instead of W14 can result in
improvement in lateral load resisting behavior, much better drift and damage control as well as
possible savings in the cost of construction of steel frames.
Figure 2.6. Time History of Horizontal Displacement of First Floor to
Hayward SEE Earthquake


W14 Frame

W27 Frame
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
17

3. ANALYSIS OF
CYCLIC BEHAVIOR
OF DEEP COLUMN
CONNECTIONS


3.1. Introduction
This Chapter investigates, analytically, the cyclic behavior of beam-to-column connections
with deep column sections ranging from W14 to W33. A compact beam section was used for
most of parametric studies, since; almost all available wide flange sections are compact. For
comparison, a non-compact section beam was also included. Detailed nonlinear finite element
analyses were conducted to address the issues that influence the cyclic performance and design
considerations of one of the most commonly used connections pre-qualified by FEMA-350
(2001), namely the RBS connection, whit the column becoming deeper and deeper. In the
following sections, a summary of the results of these studies is presented.

3.2. Simulation of Cyclic Behavior of Tested Specimen
3.2.a Computer Model of Test Specimen
As indicated in previous chapter, two of the three specimens tested by Gilton et al. (2000)
had web doubler plates added to the column panel zone. The third specimen without the doubler
plate, assumed to more realistically represent the current design practice, was therefore selected
to be modeled and analyzed in this study. This specimen was Specimen DC-2 (Gilton et. al.,
2000). A nonlinear finite element model of this specimen was constructed with the nonlinear
finite element program, ABAQUS (ABAQUS, 2001). The specimen was a standard beam-to-
column assembly consisting of a W27194 column and a W36150 beam, both specified as A572
Gr.50 steel. A reduced beam section (RBS) was introduced to make the beam side of the
connection pre-qualified by FEMA 350 (FEMA 350, 2001). The details of the RBS, the column
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
18
stiffeners and web shear tab plate are shown in Figure 3.1. The test setup of the beam-to-column
assembly connection is shown in Figure 3.2.











Figure 3.1. Non-Linear Computer Model of the Specimen

Figure 3.2. Model of Test Set-up Used by Gilton et al. (2000)

Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
19
The computer model, denoted here as ABQ-DEEP, used fully integrated six-node
and eight-node three-dimensional solid elements (Element types C3D6 and C3D8 in ABAQUS).
A finer mesh was used in the RBS area, panel zone and shear tab plate areas. Rigid links were
used to connect the beam tip to the actual loading point (reference node), which was also
restrained to prevent out-of-plane translation (Figure 3.2). The material properties of the steel,
yield strength and ultimate strength, were specified from the mill certified coupon test of the
Specimen DC-2 (see Table 3.1). Stress-strain curve for the steel was a tri-liner curve with three
segments: (a) first segment, (the elastic segment) from the origin to the yield point, (b) the second
segment from the yield point to ultimate strength point with stress equal to Fu and strain of 0.20;
and (c) the last segment, a horizontal line at stress level of Fu.
Table 3.1. Properties of Specimen DC-2 Tested by Gilton et al., (2000)







Cyclic loading pattern in the test, controlled by the displacement at the tip of the beam,
was of a standard small-to-large displacement cycles as shown in Figure 3.3. At small
displacements, the cycles were repeated four times. At larger inelastic displacements, the cycles
were repeated twice.









Figure 3.3. Loading History Used in the Test and Analysis

Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
20
3.2.b. Simulated Cyclic Behavior of Connection
When simulated cyclic loading was applied to the nonlinear model of specimen, the
specimen remained virtually elastic before 1% drift cycles, when some yielding was observed.
Though such elastic deformation cycles might be desirable for physical testing, a finite element
analysis does not record any effects of elastic cyclic loading and unloading on the assembly. Thus,
in the simulation analysis, the cyclic loading history for the analysis started from the cycles
immediately before any yielding was observed. The number of inelastic cycles appears to have a
significant influence on the post-buckling behavior in terms of strength degradation. The actual
test of specimen DC-2 indicated that strength was reduced considerably when the inelastic cycle
was repeated. Such cycle-related strength reduction became more significant when a larger
inelastic cycle was repeated, apparently due to the Bauschinger effect leading to local buckling
and low cycle fatigue phenomenon.

3.2.3. Comparison of Analytic and Experimental Results
Figure 3.4 shows the load-displacement curves from the test specimen DC-2 tested by
Gilton et al. (2000), and from the analysis discussed here. The overall cyclic responses from the
analysis and the test match reasonably well. There are some noticeable discrepancies in unloading
and reloading regions, particularly at large inelastic deformation levels. The unloading curve of
the tested specimen was highly nonlinear, significantly different from the linear unloading curve
conventionally used as analytical models of hysteretic behavior. The reloading in an opposite
direction after a full inelastic unloading made the specimen softer. The softening in unloading and
reloading appear to have been responsible for an accelerated strength reduction from its peak
value after each cycle with the same or higher level of displacement.
The deformed shapes of specimen from analysis model at 5% drift level are presented in
Figures 3.5, showing an isometric view of the buckling shape near the beam-to-column joint. The
deformed shape is similar to the final buckling shape observed in the test (Gilton et. al., 2000),
especially large deformations in the RBS area. Figure 3.6 shows top and end views of the
deformed specimen at 5% story drift.




Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
21




Figure 3.4. Load-Displacement Curve of Specimen DC-2 and Analytical Results
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
22


Figure 3.5 Buckling Shape of the Specimen Model at 5% Story Drift

Figure 3.6. Deformed Shape of Web and Flanges at 5% Story Drift

3.3. Parametric Study of Cyclic Behavior of Deep Column Connections
Having successfully simulated the cyclic behavior of the tested specimen, the ABAQUS
model, ABQ-DEEP as the prototype, was used to model the connection assembly with various
column sizes. In the seismic design of steel moment-resisting frames based on improved
connection details summarized in recent FEMA publications (FEMA-350, 2001), there are some
concerns related to the connection strength reduction after its peak strength is reached. Slower
reduction might indicate a more stable connection performance, and vice versa. It has been
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
23
observed that strength reduction after the peak strength is reached heavily depends on the number
of inelastic cycles. The main goals of the parametric studies were:
1. To investigate whether or not there are any significant characteristics in a connection with
deep column sections that are not considered in current design practice;
2. To investigate the effects of floor slab and transverse beams in bracing the connection and
preventing lateral movement of hinge areas.
Six beam-to-column connection assemblies were studied analytically. Five of them had the
columns listed in Table 3.2, and the W36x150 beam section. The five columns were selected to
construct the connection assemblies within a practical range. The column sections were selected
based on their plastic section modulus (Z
x
) and moments of inertia (I
x
and I
y
), so that the
comparison could be made with respect to lateral movement of the hinge areas and twisting of
columns with different combinations of Z
x
, I
x
, and I
y
.
Table 3.2. Section Properties of the Studied Column Sections
In addition, the effect of lateral bracing on the connection assembly performance was also
investigated by introducing actual lateral supports from transverse beams and the concrete with
metal deck floor that exists in almost all steel framed buildings. To study bracing effects of the
floor slab, in some analytical cases, the beam was laterally braced along the beam top flange
outside the RBS. Two different boundary condition cases were considered: (1) Unbraced case
where the beam had no lateral restraints similar to specimens tested by Gilton et al (2000); and (2)
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
24
Braced case where the beam was laterally restrained in its panel zone and top flange except in
the RBS region. For comparison, an additional beam-to-column connection with a non-compact
beam section, W30x90, and a W27x194 column, was also included in this study. The cyclic
analyses applied a maximum displacement of 6% story drift ratio in the same manner as
conducting a physical test per FEMA-350 (2001). The following sections will present a summary
of the analytical results together with discussions of various issues.

3.3.1. Overall Cyclic Behavior of Deep Column Connections

Figures 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9 show the cyclic behavior of the connection assemblies with
W30x191, W33x169, and W201x201, respectively. The cyclic loops of the connections
demonstrated that the connections with deeper columns were stable. With lateral bracing (the
solid-blue lines in the figures), the connections did not have any significant strength reduction
before the 4% drift ratio. Under the cyclic loading, the strength degradation occurred upon the













Figure 3.7. Cyclic Behavior of the Connection with W30x191 Column and
W36x150 Beam.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
25
load reversal in both positive and negative deformation regions after the plastic hinge formed in
the RBS region at about 3% drift ratio, mainly due to inelastic local web and flange buckling.
Without lateral bracing (the dashed-red lines in Figures 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9), the connections
experienced column twisting and beam lateral torsional buckling after 4% drift ratio,
demonstrating a larger strength reduction than those with lateral bracing.

It seems apparent that the lateral supports to the beam flange under compression improved
the inelastic behavior of connections with deep columns. In particular, the post-buckling strength
degradation was reduced considerably by lateral supports provided by the floor, as shown in
Figures 3.7, 3.8, and 3.9. The lateral supports to the beam prevented lateral movement of plastic
hinge area and extended the deformation prior to the onset of strength degradation. The local
buckling of the flanges and web was mainly responsible for a slow degradation in strength at a
later deformation stage for the braced connections. A larger strength degradation under negative
bending moment, when the beam top flange was in tension, in the above figures indicates that
extra lateral supports to the bottom flange can help to enhance inelastic cyclic behavior. Note that
all cases involved a compact beam section, W36x150 with F
y
=50 ksi. If any non-compact beam
section were used, the strength degradation would have been more significant, as discussed later.
Figure 3.8. Cyclic Behavior of the Connection with W33x169 Column and W36x150 Beam
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
26

3.3.2. Effect of Column Size/Depth

Figure 3.10(a) shows the plan views of deformed RBS connections, with no floor
slab and transverse beams present, at a relatively large story drift ratio of 6%. The large
story drift was selected to show the deformations at very late stages of cyclic behavior and
at drift values much beyond what can be expected in major seismic event. The figure
shows RBS connections with deep columns where no lateral bracing was provided in
order to reveal the effect of the column size on the lateral stability of the connection
assembly. The larger lateral torsional deformation of the beam was observed when the
column was weaker in out-of-plane stiffness. For example, there was no lateral torsional
buckling of the same beam when the column was changed to a W14x426.
It seems that in this case, due to lack of floor slab and transverse beams, the deep
column was the only element responsible to resist the torque applied to it by the beam.
Being subjected to such twisting effects, the deep columns with no floor underwent
twisting as shown in Figure 3.10(a) for four study cases. The values of
c
given in Figure
3.10 are approximate values of column twisting alone in degrees.
Figure 3.9. Cyclic Behavior of the Connection with W33x201 Column and W36x150 Beam.

Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
27

Figure 3.10. Lateral Deformation of the RBS Area and Column Deformations for:
(a) Connections with no Floor Slab and Transverse Beam; and
(b) Connections with Floor Slabs and Transverse Beams

Figure 3.10(b) shows the same four connections as in Figure 3.10(a) but this time the
connections have floor slab attached to the top flange of the beam at shear stud locations and a
transverse beam is attached to the panel zone of the column. As the figure indicates, by having the
floor slab and transverse beam, the column twisting was negligible.
As can be seen in Table 3.2, the torsional stiffness and weak-axis flexural stiffness of a
W14 sections are greater than the corresponding values for deeper columns with comparable
strong axis flexural stiffness. When a beam-column connection specimen is tested with no slab
and transverse beam, there is no lateral restraint to prevent lateral movement of the highly yielded
and locally buckled RBS hinge as shown in Figure 3.10(a). When the hinge area, not attached to
the floor, moves laterally, it can apply large enough moment to bare column to twist it as shown
in Figure 3.11.

W27x194 Column W30x191 Column W33x169 Column W33x201 Column
Note: All Beams: W36x150)
W27x194 Column W30x191 Column W33x169 Column W33x201 Column
Note: (All Beams: W36x150) ,
(a)
(b)
c 0.0 c 0.0
c 0.0
c 0.0
c
1.5
c
. 2.5
c
3.0
c
2.5
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
28

Figure 3.11. Torque acting on Column due to Lateral Movement of RBS


We believe that the lack of floor slab in Gilton et als (2000) tests is the main reason for
development of column twisting in their tests. Had the floor slab been present, as is the case in
almost all buildings, or at least the restraining effects of floor slab been represented by bracing in
the test set-up, most likely the twisting of columns would have been minor and non-consequential.
It is strongly recommended that in future tests of beam-column connections particularly RBS
connections with deep columns, the restraining effects of the floor be represented either by having
the actual floor cast with the specimen or by attaching to top flange appropriate bracing
mechanisms to represent the floors.

3.3.3. Effect of Beam Section Compactness
It is necessary to use a compact beam section in the earthquake-resistant moment frame to
ensure a stable cyclic performance during a strong earthquake. The limit of b
f
/2t
f
ratio for a
compact flange,
p
, is equal to 52 (F
y
). In practice, most wide flange sections are compact
sections. In this study, all previous discussions have been based on a compact beam section,
W36x150 (
f
= b
f
/2t
f
= 6.4;
f
/
p
=0.87). In this section, a non-compact section, W30x90 (b
f
/2t
f
=
8.5;
f
/
p
=1.16), was selected to compare the behavior of the deep-column connection assembly
with compact and non-compact beam sections. For definitions of terms, see Notations in Page
4. Figure 3.12 shows the cyclic response of the assembly with W30x90 beam and W27x194
column. The strength reduction rates are 35% and 50% at 4% and 5% story drift levels,
respectively, which are twice as much as those observed from previous analyses based on
W36x150 beam. An early local buckling of the flanges, as well as the lateral torsional buckling
might be responsible for such accelerated strength degradation. Figure 3.13 and 3.14 present the
buckling shape of the assembly at 5% story drift level. It is apparent that the buckling of the
flange is much more extensive with a non-compact flange than the compact one. However, even
in the case with a non-compact beam, after considerable local buckling and distortion of the RBS
hinge, the column did not develop twisting.
Torque=(Flange Force)x( Eccentricity.)
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
29

Figure 3.12. Load-displacement curve of the assembly with W30x90 beam and W27x194 column
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
30
Figure 3.14 Buckling shape of the assembly with W30x90 beam and W27x194 column
(the top flange view).



Note: 1 kN= 0.225 kips, 1mm=0.0394 inch.

Figure 3.15. Cyclic Behavior of Connection with W14x426 Column and W36x150 Beam
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
31
3.3.4. Lateral Stability of the Connection with W14 Column
For comparison with deep-column connections, an RBS connection assembly with
W14x426 column and W36x150 beam was used. Four cases were investigated. The first case,
named as ABQ-Fu, involved no RBS. Other three cases involved RBSs with different
eccentricities and flange reduction rates. The eccentricity is measured from the column flange face
to the near end of the RBS, and the flange reduction rate is the ratio of the cut flange area of the
smallest RBS to the original flange area. Figure 3.14 shows analytical and experimental responses
of the assembly with ABQ-e1 RBS. There was practically no strength reduction visible from the
load-displacement curve. The deformed shapes of the four cases are given in Figure 3.15. There is
no lateral torsional buckling in all but one case. The case with a large eccentricity RBS suffered
lateral torsional buckling primarily due to a distant RBS from the column. In none of the cases,
there was any torsion or weak-axis flexural deformation visible in the column.


Figure 3.16. Deformed Shapes of Connections with W14x425 Column and W36x150 Beam: (a)
No RBS; (b) Small eccentricity and moderate flange reduction RBS; (c) Large
eccentricity and moderate flange reduction RBS; and (d) Moderate eccentricity and
large flange reduction RBS
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
32
In order to compare behavior of connections with W14 and deep columns, a connection
with W14x426 also was analyzed. The beam at this connection was the same as the others, a
W36x150. Figure 3.15 shows cyclic moment-rotation behavior of this connection established by
non-linear finite element analysis. The connection was analyzed with and without the bracing
provided by floor slab. In addition, a third case was also analyzed where the beam did not have
the RBS. The analyses indicated that in this case, presence or absence of floor slab did not make
much difference. The RBS area of the beam did not move laterally and the column did not show
tendency to twist as shown in Figure 3.16.
It appears that in this case, the W14 column alone, because of its large stiffness in torsion
and lateral bending, was able to brace the RBS hinge and prevent its lateral movement. This may
be the reason why in more than 100 tests of connections conducted within the SAC Program, and
almost all were without the slab, very few specimens showed tendency for column twisting. As a
result, the SAC tests using W14 columns, by default, ended up being valid tests even though there
was no floor to brace the beam. Simply put, the column alone provided the bracing. However, in
case of connections with deep columns, the columns were not able to provide the bracing that the
floor normally provides. As a result, the RBS area of these specimens moved in lateral direction
causing twisting of column making these tests somewhat unrealistic and the results questionable.
Based on studies summarized in previous sections, it can be concluded that the twisting of
the deep columns during the tests conducted by Gilton et al (2000) most likely was the result of
the way the tests were done rather than a realistic behavioral phenomenon. The test specimens did
not have the lateral bracing provided by the floors that exists in almost all steel structures. Had
Gilton, Chi and Uang (Gilton et al, 2000) done the tests with correct boundary conditions and
representative bracings, the results would have been realistic representation of actual condition in
the field and most likely the twisting of deep columns would have been negligible and non-
consequential to the behavior and design. This was clearly the case with tests done by Ricles,
Mau, Lu and Fisher (Ricles et al, 2000), where the boundary conditions in the test set-up were
correctly presented. No twisting of deep columns were reported for deep column specimens
tested by Ricles et al.
Currently, a series of cyclic tests on RBS moment connections with deep columns is in
progress at Lehigh University by Professor Ricles and his research team. The results of such
tests, expected to be done properly as the earlier tests at Lehigh (Ricles et al, 2000) and the
design recommendations stemming from such results, will be a valuable addition to the field.
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
33
4. CONCLUSIONS





4.1. Introduction

Based on the results of non-linear analyses of steel moment frames with RBS connections
and with W14 through W33 columns, the following conclusions were reached. The conclusions
herein should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent
professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed
professional engineer, designer or architect. As indicated in the Disclaimer section, anyone
making use of the information herein assumes all liability arising from such use.

4.2. Conclusions

1. Based on the observed performance of the frames with deep columns and the behavior of
their connections, there were no considerable reasons found to suggest preventing the use
of deep column sections in any moment frame including special moment frames.

2. The inelastic analyses of connections with deep columns indicated that the study
connections should be able to provide the required strength and especially the rotational
ductility in excess of those required by FEMA-350 (2001) for pre-qualified connections.
Figure 4.1 shows the FEMA requirement for minimum moment-rotation envelope curve
(curve OYF) as well as representative envelop curve for connections with deep column
studied herein (curve OYA). As the figure indicates, the connections with deep column
clearly satisfy the FEMA requirement.


Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
34


3. In reference to deep columns, FEMA-350 (2001), Page 2-23, states: The pre-qualified
connections should only be used with W12 and W14 column sections. According to
FEMA-350, this statement is based on the results of only two tests of deep column
specimens that were done at the time of development of FEMA reports. In these two
tests, the deep columns showed a tendency to twist. A critical review of the test set-up, as
discussed in previous sections, revealed that most likely such column twisting would not
have occurred had the test set-up and the specimens been realistic representative of actual
buildings. The specimens had no transverse beams connected to the panel zone of the
columns and had no floor slabs. Almost all moment frame steel structures have floors
(typically steel deck/concrete slab) and transverse beams, which provide significant lateral
bracing. This investigation indicated that presence of the floor was enough to provide
necessary bracing and to eliminate or to reduce the column twisting to insignificant and
non-consequential levels.

4. The cyclic behavior of RBS connections with deep columns was found to be similar to the
behavior of the same connection with W14 columns. Our studies indicated that there is no
difference in bracing requirement for RBS connections with W14 and deep columns of up
to W33 when there is a floor slab at least on one side of the beam.

5. By using deep columns, in a moment frame, the drift limits can be met with less steel
tonnage compared to W14 column sections. This is due to considerably large moment of
inertia of deep sections for the same weight per foot as a comparable W14 column.

Figure 4.1. Comparison of the M- Curve of Connections with Deep Columns to
the M- Required by FEMA for Special Moment Connections
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
35
6. An added advantage of using deep column is a potential for saving in the cost of material
and construction. In the 10-story study frames, the weight of the steel using W27 deep
columns was about 1.3 lbs/ft
2
less than the steel in the same frame but with W14 columns.
According to a leading steel fabricator, the 1.3 lbs/ft
2
equals to about 6-8% in total
material saving based on 16-18 psf of steel for a typical structure of this type. Of course
as mentioned earlier, this 10-story building was just an example to demonstrate that using
deep columns instead of W14 not only can result in increasing lateral load resisting
strength, decreasing drift, and reducing the cost. In other cases, the amount of saving may
vary but most likely still there will be some economic gain in using deep columns.

7. The specimens without floor bracings, Figure 4.2(a), tested by Gilton, Chi and Uang
(2000), cannot be considered representative of the actual structures. Design procedures
and recommendations based on such test results cannot be justified. Future testing of the
connections with deep columns need to be done such that the bracing effects provided by
the floors and transverse beam(s) are represented. An example is shown in Figure 4.2(b). .
Figure 4.2. (a) Unrealistic Test Set-up used by Gilton, Chi, Uang (2000) and (b) Realistic Set-up
(a)
(b)
Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
36
________________________________________________________________________
References
________________________________________________________________________

ABAQUS (2001), User Manual I, II and III, Version 6.2, Hibbitt, Karlsson & Sorensen, Inc.,
Providence, RI.

AISC (1998), Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, IL.

AISC (2002), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, (in review at this writing),
American Institute of Steel Construction Inc., Chicago, IL.

Astaneh-Asl, A. (1995), Seismic Behavior and Design of Bolted Steel Moment-Resisting
Frames, Steel TIPS, Structural Steel Educational Council, Moraga, CA.
(This report can be downloaded free from www.aisc.org web site.)
Bolt, B. and Gregor, N., (1993), Synthesized Strong Ground Motion for the Seismic Condition
Assessment of the Eastern Portion of the San Francisco Bay Bridge, Report No.
UCB/EERC-93/12, University of California, Berkeley, CA.

FEMA-350 (2001), Seismic Design Criteria for Steel Moment-Frame Structures, Report,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, MD.
(This report can be downloaded free from www.fema.gov web site.)

Flynn, L., (2000), Letter to the Editor, Modern Steel Construction, American Institute of Steel
Construction, November, Chicago, IL.

Gilton, C., Chi, B. and Uang, C. M. (2000), Cyclic Response of RBS Moment Connections:
Weak-Axis Configuration and Deep Column Effects, Report No. SSRP-2000/03,
Structural Systems Research Project, Department of Structural Engineering, University of
California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA.

ICBO (1997), Uniform Building Code, International Conference of Building Officials, Whittier,
CA.

Use of Deep Columns in Special Steel Moment Frames, J. Shen, A. Astaneh-Asl and D. B. McCallen, 2002.
37
Kitjasateanphun T. (2001), Seismic performances of Reduced Beam Section Frames, Ph.D.
Thesis, Department of Civil and Architectural Engineering, Illinois Institute of
Technology, Chicago, IL.

Moore, K.S., Malley, J.O., and Engelhardt, M.D., (1999), Design of Reduced Beam Section
(RBS) Moment Frame Connections, Steel TIPS, Structural Steel Educational Council,
Moraga, CA.
(This report can be downloaded free from www.aisc.org web site.)

Ricles, J.M., Mao, C., Lu, L-W and Fisher, J.W., (2000) Development and Evaluation of
Improved Details for Ductile Welded Unreinforced Flange Connections, ATLSS Report
No. 00-04, ATLSS Engineering Research Center , Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.

SAC, (1996), Northridge Model Buildings, Internal Report for SAC Researchers, SAC Joint
Venture, Sacramento.

SCI, (2000), Structural and Earthquake Engineering Software, SAP-2000 Software, Computers
and Structures, Berkeley.

SDI (1989), LRFD Design manual for Composite Beams and Girders with Steel Deck, No.
LRFD1, The Steel Deck Institute.

SEAOC, (1999), Recommended Lateral Force Requirements and Commentary, Seventh Ed.,
Structural Engineers Association of California, Sacramento, CA.

Steel
TIPS
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION & PRODUCT SERVICE
August 2002
Cost Consi derati ons
f or
Steel Moment Frame
Connecti ons
by
Patrick M. Hassett
and
James J. Putkey
(A copy of this report can be downloaded free of charge for personal use from www.aisc.org)
Acknowledgments
The Authors wish to thank the members of the Structural Steel Educational Council (SSEC) for
their support in publishing this Steel TIPS. Special thanks are due to the following SSEC
members and their firms for providing reviews and specific comments:
Bill Honeck, Forell/Elsesser Engineers
Brett Manning, The Herrick Corporation
Rick Wilkinson, Gayle Manufacturing
Disclaimer. The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with
recognized engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate,
this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent
professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed
professional engineer, designer, or architect. The publication of the material contained herein is not
intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the Structural Steel Educational Council or of any
other person named herein that this information is suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom
from infringement of any patent or patents. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability
arising from such use.
Caution must be exercised when relying upon other specifications and codes developed by other bodies
and incorporated by reference herein since such material may be modified or amended from time to time
subsequent to the printing of this publication. The Structural Steel Educational Council and the authors
bear no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and incorporate it by reference at the time
of the initial printing of this publication.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002

COST CONSIDERATIONS FOR

STEEL MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
By Patrick M. Hassett and J ames J . Putkey
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
2. CONNECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
From FEMA 350 (Prequalified)
1. Welded Unreinforced Flange - Bolted Web (WUF-B) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Welded Unreinforced Flange - Welded Web (WUF-W) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5
3. Welded Free Flange (FF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Welded Flange Plate (WFP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
5. Reduced Beam Section (RBS) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
6. Bolted Unstiffened End Plate ( BUE P ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
7. Bolted Stiffened End Plate (BSEP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
8. Bolted Flange Plate (BFP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9. Double Split Tee ( DS T ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
From Previous Steel TIPS
10. Welded Flange Plate - Top Plate on Beam (WFP-Alt. 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11. Welded Flange Plate - Loose Top Plate (WFP-Alt. 2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12. Double Split Tee - Tees on Beam (DST-Alt. 1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Proprietary
13. Slotted Beam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
14. Bolted Bracket . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
15. Reduced Web . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
3. COST CONSIDERATION SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
APPENDIX 1- Pre-Northridge Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
APPENDIX 2- Quality Assurance for Prequalified Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
ABOUT THE AUTHORS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
LIST OF PUBLISHED STEEL TIPS
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel 77PS, August 2002
1. INTRODUCTION
This section sets forth the purpose of the Steel TIPS and
gives a history of why the authors selected the various
connections and their cost considerations.
PURPOSE
This Steel TIPS informs engineers of the various cost
considerations to construct ordinary and special moment frame connections.
Connections. The authors chose to gather information on 15 connections. These connections
include:
Nine prequalified connections addressed in FEMA-350.
Three proprietary connections referenced in FEMA-350.

Three connections included in previous Steel TIPS.

Limitations. This Steel TIPS does not comment on:
Connection design, including performance during an earthquake.
Relative Cost Factors of the different connections.
Beam to column web connections.
HISTORY OF CONNECTIONS AND COST CONSIDERATIONS
1986 Steel TIPS. A 1986 Steel TIPS, "Steel Connections, Details and Relative Costs," gave
relative costs of various types of connectionsshear, non-moment, and moment. The TIPS
authors used fabrication and erection costs to determine relative costs, but without showing cost
items. Connection CF-1 in the TIPS, web bolted-flange butt welded, later known as the "pre-
Northridge" connection, became the moment frame connection of choice with the lowest relative
cost of 1.0.
Northridge Earthquake. During the Northridge Earthquake, the "pre-Northridge" connection
experienced brittle fractures. See FEMA-350 for a background on the fractures. The brittle
fractures showed a need for welding electrodes with higher notch toughness.
FEMA-350 Recommendations. FEMA-350 gives design recommendations on prequalified
connections for ordinary and special moment frames. See AISC "Seismic Provisions for
Structural Steel Buildings" for prequalification requirements. Rather than attempt to determine
the lowest cost connection, the authors present cost considerations comparing connections
shown in FEMA and other currently used connections to the "pre-Northridge" connection. This
approach is intended to encourage the use of the variety of connections made available after
the Northridge earthquake. This information also empowers the engineer to consider the
preferences of local fabricators and erectors when selecting connection types.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 1

2. CONNECTIONS
This Section presents the 15 selected connections.
ORGANIZATION
The following 30 pages show and discuss each of the 15 connections by showing the connection
detail on one page and discussing the cost considerations on the opposite page.
The cost considerations include material, detailing, fabrication, shipping, erection, quality control,
and quality assurance. Additionally, some connections include FEMA prequalification
parameters for beam flange thickness. See FEMA-350 for complete prequalification data.
Each main cost consideration item includes sub-items appropriate to the main item. For
example, fabrication includes sub-items for fit-up and welding.
DEVELOPMENT OF COST CONSIDERATIONS
The authors developed cost considerations based on their experience, and input from SSEC
fabricators and erectors. Obviously, not all fabricators and erectors agreed with each other.
Fabrication and erection methods vary according to the firm's size, equipment, personnel, and
location. Engineers should consider those variations when designing a connection and
reviewing shop drawings.
Cost consideration comments compare connections to the "pre-Northridge" connection shown
in Appendix 1. The comment "standard
1
indicates the cost item considered has the same
approximate cost as the "pre-Northridge" connection.
Chapter 3 gives a summary of the cost considerations in tabular format.
PROPRIETARY CONNECTIONS
Because of their nature, the authors needed permission from the patent holders to include
proprietary connections in this TIPS. We included connections of patent holders who gave us
the necessary permission.
EARTHQUAKE PERFORMANCE OF CONNECTIONS
Connections have different seismic performance characteristics. Please refer to FEMA reports
for details regarding performance characteristics.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 2
2.1 WELDED UNREINFORCED FLANGE - BOLTED WEB
(WUF-B)
Notes
1. See Figure 3-8 and Note 1 of Figure 3-8 for top and bottom flange weld requirements. QC/QA category
AH/T. Refer to Figure 3-5 for weld access hole detail.
2. Bolted shear tab. Use pretensioned A325 or A490 bolts. Weld to column flange with fillet weld both
sides, or with CJP weld, to develop full shear strength of plate. Weld QC/QA Category BL/T.
3. See Figure 3-6 for continuity plate and web doubler plate requirements.
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequalification Data Considered.
Type of frame: Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) only
Maximum beam flange thickness: 1 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002
Figure 3-7 Welded Unreinforced Flange - Bolted Web (WUF-B) Connection
3
2.1 WELDED UNREINFORCED FLANGE - BOLTED WEB
(WUF-B)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabri cati on
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Weldi ng
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Weldi ng
Standard
Weld access holes require special detailing.
Standard
Weld access holes on beams require special work for cutting and grinding to roughness
within 500 micro inches.
Standard
Weld for continuity plates and shear tabs on columns needs notch tough electrode with
slower deposition rates.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates. Removal of back-up bar, back
gouging, and fillet reinforcing is all overhead work and labor intensive.
Sequenci ng Standard
Quali ty Control /
Quality Assurance
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 4
2.2 WELDED UNREINFORCED FLANGE - WELDED WEB
(WUF-W)
Notes
1. CJP groove weld at top and bottom flanges. At top flange, either (1) remove weld backing, backgouge,
and add 5/16" minimum fillet weld, or (2) leave backing in place and add 5/16" fillet under backing. At
bottom flange, remove weld backing, backgouge, and add 5/16" minimum fillet weld. Weld: QC/QA
Category AH/T.
2. Weld access hole, see Figure 3-5.
3. CJ P groove weld full length of web between weld access holes. Provide non-fusible weld tabs. Remove
weld tabs after welding and grind end of weld smooth at weld access hole. Weld: QC/QA Category
BH/T.
4. Shear tab of thickness equal to that of beam web. Shear tab length shall be so as to allow 1/8" overlap
with the weld access hole at top and bottom, and the width shall extend 2" minimum back along the
beam, beyond the end of the weld access hole.
5. Full-depth partial penetration from far side. Weld: QC/QA Category BM/T.
6. Fillet weld shear tab to beam web. Weld Size shall be equal to the thickness of the shear tab minus 1/16".
Weld shall extend over the top and bottom one-third of the shear tab height and across the top and
bottom. Weld: QC/QA Category BL/L.
7. Erection bolts: number, type, and size selected for erection loads.
8. For continuity plates and web doubler plates see Figure 3-6.
Figure 3-8 Welded Unreinforced Flange-Welded Web (WUF-W) Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequalification Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, Special Moment Frame (SMF)
Maximum beam flange thickness: OMF -1 inch, SMF -1 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 5
2.2 WELDED UNREINFORCED FLANGE - WELDED WEB
(WUF-W)
Cost Considerations
Materi al
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Standard
Weld access holes require special detailing.
Web welding requires special detailing to suit erector.
Ends of column shear tabs require angled cuts adding labor to hand made plates.
Column shear tabs require bevel preparation for weld to column.
Weld access holes on beams require special work. Fabricated roughness is required to
500 micro-inches.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002
Fit-up
Welding
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Sequencing
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Standard
Weld for continuity plates and shear tabs on columns needs notch tough electrode with
slower deposition rates.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Tight fit-up of web to shear tab may require more bolts than determined for erection
loads.
Fit-up of web for CJ P web weld can be difficult if fabrication is not done correctly.
CJ P and fillet welds for web require additional preheat.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates. Removal of back-up bar, back
gouging, and fillet reinforcing is all overhead work and labor intensive.
Vertical CJ P weld of beam web to column requires significant additional difficult welding.
Skill level of welders and UT technicians are important factors to field production on these
CJ P welds.
Non-fusible run-off tabs for web end weld require additional work in a cramped space.
Fillet weld of beam web to shear tab requires significant additional welding.
Special sequencing is required when considering preheat, restraint, and cooling of welds.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
6
2.3 WELDED FREE FLANGE (FF)
Notes
1. CJ P groove weld. Note 1 of Figure 3-8 applies. Weld: QC/QA Category AH/T.
2. See design procedure in Section 3.5.3.1, Steps 5 through 8, for web plate size and thickness.
3. " minimum radius.
4. Erection bolts: number, type and size selected for erection loads.
5. CJ P double-bevel groove weld. Weld: QC/QA Category BH/T.
6. Fillet welds size, length, calculated in Section 3.5.3.1, Step 8. Weld: QC/QA Category BH/L.
7. For continuity plates and web doubler plates see Figure 3-6.
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequalification Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Maximum beam flange thickness: OMF -1 1/4 inch, SMF - 3/4 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002
Figure 3-9 Welded Free Flange (FF) Connection
7
2.3 WELDED FREE FLANGE (FF)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Weldi ng
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Weldi ng
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Larger shear tabs required.
Special detailing required for girder web cut-out.
Ends of column shear tabs require angled cuts; adding labor for hand made plates.
Column shear tabs require double bevel preparation.
Beam web cut-out requires special work. Cutting in the fillet region of the web-flange
intersection is difficult, especially when hand burned, with grinding required.
CJ P weld for shear tab requires some additional fit-up work.
Weld for continuity plates and shear tabs on columns needs notch tough electrode with
slower deposition rates.
CJ P weld for shear tab causes difficult welding distortion control.
Standard, but wider shear tab on column must be watched. Care must be taken to avoid
bending ends of beam flanges.
Standard
Standard
Standard
The deep cut-out of the web may present plumb-up problems.
Tight fit-up of web to shear tab may require more bolts than determined for erection
loads.
Standard
Additional preheat required for shear tab fillet welding.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates. Removal of back-up bar, back
gouging, and fillet reinforcing is all overhead work and labor intensive.
Additional shear tab fillet welding with multiple passes in vertical and overhead positions
is likely.
Sequencing Special sequencing required when considering preheat, restraint, and cooling of welds.
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 8
2.4 WELDED FLANGE PLATE (WFP)
Notes
1. Flange plate. See Section 3.5.4.1, Steps 1-4, for sizing requirements. Plates shall be fabricated with
rolling direction parallel to the beam.
2. CJP groove weld: single or double bevel. Weld in shop or field. When using single-bevel groove weld,
remove backing after welding, back-gouge, and reinforce with 5/16"-minimum fillet weld. When using
double bevel weld, back-gouge first weld before welding other side. Weld QC/QA Category AH/T. If
plates are shop welded to column, care must be exercised in locating and leveling plates, as shimming is
not allowed between the plates and the beam flanges. If plates are field-welded to column after
connecting to beam, weld access holes of sufficient size for weld backing and welding access shall be
provided.
3. Fillet welds at edges of beam flanges to plate. Size welds according to the procedure in Section 3.5.4.1,
Step 5. Welds may be shop or field. Provide weld tabs at end to provide full weld throat thickness to the
end of the plate. Remove weld tabs and grind the end of the weld smooth. Use care to avoid grinding
marks on the beam flange. Weld: QC/QA Category BH/L.
4. Fillet weld at end of flange plate to beam flange. Welds may be shop or field. Maintain full weld throat
thickness to within 1" of the edge of the flange. Weld: QC/QA Category BH/T.
5. Shear tab of length equal to d
b
-2k-2". Shear tab thickness should match that of beam web.
6. Erection bolts: number, type, and size selected for erection loads.
7. Full depth-partial penetration from far side. Weld: QC/QA Category BM/T.
8. Fillet weld both sides. Fillet on side away from beam web shall be same size as thickness of shear tab.
Fillet on the side of the beam web shall be ". Weld: QC/QA Category BH/T.
9. Fillet weld shear tab to beam web. Weld size shall be equal to the thickness of the shear tab minus 1/16".
Weld: QC/QA Category BH/L.
10. For continuity plates and web doubler plates see Figure 3-6. For calculation of continuity plate requirements,
use flange plate properties instead of beam flange properties.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002
Figure 3-11 Welded Flange Plate (WFP) Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequali fi cati on Data Consi dered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Maximum beam flange thickness: OMF - 1 inch, SMF -1 inch
9
2.4 WELDED FLANGE PLATE (WFP)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Weldi ng
Fit-up
Preheat
Weldi ng
Sequencing
Extra material required for flange plates.
The authors consider the shop welding of both top and bottom flange plates impractical
because of resulting erection tolerances. We consider a shop welded bottom plate and
field welded top plate as the practical option.
Special detailing is required for locating beam web to shear tab holes in relation to the
bottom flange plate.
Flange plates require CJ P bevel preparation, and shop must track rolling direction.
Beam does not require flange bevel preparation or access holes. Top flange needs a
cope for back-up bar. Web requires bevel for PJ P weld to shear tab.
Shear tab and bottom flange plate require additional fit-up. Bottom flange plate fit-up
must be square and level.
Weld for continuity plates, shear tabs, and flange plates on columns needs notch tough
electrode with slower deposition rates.
CJ P welds on flange plates need distortion control.
Column shipping takes more trailer space because of protruding flange plates.
Protruding flange plates require special care to avoid bending.
Protruding flange plates require special care to avoid bending.
Column flange plates take some additional deck space.
Erection can be impaired if detailing and fabrication do not account for beam tolerances
and if flange plates are not square to column.
Proper sequencing of the top flange plate weld will eliminate problems of bay shrinkage
with resulting benefits to plumb-up.
Tight fit-up of web to shear tab may require more bolts than determined for erection
loads.
The loose top flange plate allows field to set correct root openings.
Less preheat required for fillet welds
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates.
Removal required of back-up bars and run-off tabs on top flange plates.
Fillet welding in lieu of CJ P welding is a benefit for the field.
Fillet weld of beam web to shear tab and vertical PJ P weld of beam web to column
require significant welding.
Possible gaps at bottom flange of beam to flange plate may require larger fillet welds.
Preheat, restraint, and cooling of web groove weld may require special sequencing.
Welders must follow a specified joint construction procedure.
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 10
2.5 REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RSB)
Notes
1. See Section 3.5.5.1 for calculation of RBS dimensions. See FEMA-353, Recommended Specifications
and Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment Frame Construction for Seismic Applications, for
fabrication details including cutting methods and smoothness requirements.
2. See Figure 3-8, and Note 1 to Figure 3-8, except that weld access hole may be as shown there, or as in
AISC LRFD Vol. 1, Fig. C-J 1.2, for rolled shapes or groove welded shapes.
3. Web Connection: Erection bolts: number, type, and size selected for erection loads.
a. Alternative 1: CJ P welded web. Weld QC/QA Category BM/L. Shear tab length is equal to the
distance between the weld access holes plus ". Shear tab thickness is as required for erection and
the tab serves as backing for CJP weld (3/8" min. thickness). Shear tab may be cut square, or
tapered as shown. Weld of shear tab to column flange is minimum 3/16" fillet on the side of the
beam web, and a fillet sized for erection loads (5/16" minimum) on the side away from the beam
web. No weld tabs are required at the ends of the CJ P weld and no welding of the shear tab to the
beam web is required.Weld: QC/QA Category BM/L. Erection bolts are sized for erection loads.
b. Alternative 2: Bolted shear tab. Shear tab and bolts are sized for shear, calculated as in Section 3.2
and using the methods of AISC. The shear tab should be welded to the column flange with a CJ P
groove weld or fillet of t
pl
on both sides. Weld: QC/QA Category BL/T. Bolts shall be ASTM
A325 or A490, and shall be fully-tightened.
4. For continuity plates and web doubler plates see Figure 3-6.
Figure 3-12 Reduced Beam Section (RBS) Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequali fi cati on Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Maximum beam flange thickness: 1 3/4 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002
11
2.5 REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS)
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Sequencing
Cost Considerations
(For welded web or bolted web options)
Reduced section requires a slight increase in beam weight.
Special detailing required for cut-out of flange reduced section and weld access holes.
End cuts on column shear tabs are not mandatory; increased cost if manually cut.
Column shear tabs require large fillets, or bevel preparation and CJ P if bolted option used.
Weld access holes on beams require special work for cutting and grinding to roughness
within 500 micro inches.
Automated equipment provides more precise and efficient cutting of reduced beam
sections. Reduced section cuts may require grinding. See FEMA-350 for repair
recommendations.
If welded web option used, then beam web requires beveled edge.
More fit-up required for bolted web option because of CJ P weld.
Weld for continuity plates and shear tabs on columns needs notch tough electrode with
slower deposition rates.
Bolted web option requires CJ P or heavy fillet weld on shear tab.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard, but tight fit-up of web to shear tab may require more bolts than determined for
erection loads.
Standard for bolted option. Welded web option may be more difficult if fabrication
tolerances are not controlled.
Standard for bolted option; welded web requires additional preheat.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates. Removal of back-up bar, back
gouging, and fillet reinforcing is all overhead work and labor intensive.
CJ P weld of beam web to column requires significant additional welding.
Special sequencing is required for welded web option when considering preheat,
restraint, and cooling of welds.
Quali ty Control /
Quality Assurance
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 12
2.6 BOLTED UNSTIFFENED END PLATE (BUEP)
Notes
1. ASTM A36 end plate. For sizing see Section 3.6.1.1.
2. CJP groove weld. This weld has special requirements. SeeFEMA-353, Recommended Specifications and
Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment Frame Construction for Seismic Applications, for
fabrication details. Weld: QC/QA Category AH/T.
3. Fillet weld both sides, or CJP weld; see Section 3.6.1.3 for sizing requirements. SeeFEMA-353,
Recommended Specifications and Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment Frame Construction
for Seismic Applications, for fabrication details. Weld: QC/QA Category BM/L.
4. Pretensioned ASTM A325 or A490 bolts. Diameter not to exceed 1-1/2 inch. See Section 3.6.1.1 for
sizing requirements.
5. Bolt location is part of the end plate design. See Section 3.6.1.1.
6. For continuity plates and web doubler plates, see Figure 3-6. For calculation of panel zone strength, see
Section 3.6.1.1.
7. Shim as required. Finger shims shall not be placed with fingers pointing up.
Figure 3-13 Bolted Unstiffened End Plate (BUEP) Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequalification Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Maximum beam flange thickness: 3/4 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002
13
2.6 BOLTED UNSTIFFENED END PLATE (BUEP)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Weldi ng
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Heavy end plate, shims, and longer doubler plates add significant material cost.
Special detailing is required for end plates and to allow for erection clearances, column
depth over-run tolerances, column flange twist tolerance, and shimming.
End plate holes must be precisely located to match column holes. Automated equipment
provides more precise and efficient plate cutting and hole drilling.
Hole drilling on column flange must be precise to match end plate holes; best made with
automated fabrication equipment.
No weld access holes are required.
Positioning of end plate requires careful fit-up on beam.
CJ P of beam flanges to end plate requires additional shop welding.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates.
No web bolt holes or weld access holes required. Note: The CJ P flange weld is made
without a weld access hole; testing has shown this procedure acceptable.
End plates may require additional cribbing.
Extended end plate causes handling problems.
End plates require additional blocking on deck.
End plates present the problem of fitting the beam between the column flanges resulting
in extra erection time including expensive crane time.
Plumb-up is difficult due to fixity of connection and shimming.
Column depth tolerance can throw off bay widths.
Shimming is required to obtain correct bay width.
The shimming required is time consuming.
Bolt fit-up and installation may be a problem if fabrication is imperfect.
Misaligned holes may require reaming.
Bolt sizes greater than 1 1/8 inch diameter require heavier equipment to fully tension.
No field welding is required.
Welding quality control and quality assurance are shifted from the field to the shop.
Shop must perform more careful fabrication with resulting quality control increase.
Absence of weld access hole simplifies UT at web intersection.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 14
2.7 BOLTED STIFFENED END PLATE (BSEP)
Notes
1. ASTM A36 end plate. For sizing, see Section 3.6.2.1.
2. CJP groove weld. This weld has special requirements. SeeFEMA-353, Recommended Specifications and
Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment Frame Construction for Seismic Applications, for
fabrication details. Weld: QC/QA Category AH/T.
3. Fillet weld both sides, or CJP weld; see Section 3.6.2.4 for sizing requirements. SeeFEMA-353,
Recommended Specifications and Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment Frame Construction
for Seismic Applications, for fabrication details. Weld: QC/QA Category BM/L.
4. Pretensioned ASTM A325 or A490 bolts. See Section 3.6.2.1 for sizing requirements.
5. Bolt location is part of the end plate design. See Section 3.6.2.1.
6. For continuity plates and web doubler plates, see Figure 3-6. For calculation of panel zone strength, see
Section 3.6.2.1.
7. Stiffener is shaped as shown. Stiffener thickness shall be the same as that of the beam web.
8. Stiffener welds are CJ P double-bevel groove welds to both beam flange and end plate. Weld: QC/QA
Category AH/T for weld to endplate. BM/L for weld to beam..
9. Shim as required. Finger shims shall not be placed with fingers pointing up.
Figure 3-15 Stiffened End Plate Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequali fi cati on Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Maximum beam flange thickness: 1 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 15
2.7 BOLTED STIFFENED END PLATE (BSEP)
Cost Considerations
Materi al
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Weldi ng
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Weldi ng
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Heavy end plates, stiffeners, shims, and longer doubler plates add significant material
cost.
Special detailing is required to allow for erection clearances, column depth over-run
tolerances, column flange twist tolerance, and shimming. End plates and stiffeners
require additional detailing.
End plate holes must be precisely located to match column holes. Automated equipment
provides more precise and efficient fabrication.
Hole drilling on column flange must be precise to match end plate holes; best made with
automated fabrication equipment.
No weld access holes are required.
Positioning of end plate requires careful fit-up. Stiffener plates require additional fit-up
work.
CJ P of beam flanges to end plate requires additional shop welding.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates.
No web bolt holes or weld access holes required. Note: The CJ P flange weld is made
without a weld access hole; testing has shown this procedure acceptable.
Stiffener plate CJ P weld to end plate may cause end plate distortion.
Multiple positioning of beam requires more rolling of beam due to CJ P at top flange,
bottom flange, and stiffener plates.
Beams take more trailer space and require more cribbing because of end plates.
Stiffened end plate causes handling problems.
End plates require additional blocking on deck.
End plates present the problem of fitting the beam between the column flanges resulting
in extra erection time including expensive crane time.
Stiffener plates may distort the end plate, causing additional erection problems.
Plumb-up is difficult due to fixity of connection and shimming.
Column depth tolerance can throw off bay widths.
Shimming is required to obtain correct bay width.
The shimming required is time consuming.
Bolt fit-up and installation may be a problem if fabrication is not nearly perfect.
Misaligned holes may require reaming.
Bolt sizes greater than 1 1/8 inch diameter require heavier equipment to fully tension.
Increased number of holes increases probability of misalignment.
No field welding is required.
Welding quality control and quality assurance are shifted from the field to the shop.
Shop must perform more careful fabrication with resulting quality control increase.
Absence of Weld access holes simplifies UT at web intersection.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 16
2.8 BOLTED FLANGE PLATE (BFP)
Notes
1. Size the flange plate and bolts in accordance with Section 3.6.3.1. Bolts are fully pretensioned ASTM
A325 or A490, designed for bearing. Bolt holes in flange plate are oversize holes. Use standard holes in
beam flange. Washers as required by RCSC, Section 7.
2. CJ P groove weld, single or double bevel. Weld in shop or field. When using single-bevel groove weld,
remove backing after welding, backgouge, and reinforce with 5/16" minimum fillet weld. When using
double bevel weld, backgouge first weld before welding other side. Weld: QC/QA Category AH/T.
3. Shims are permitted between flange plates and flanges.
4. Size shear tab and bolts by design procedure in Section 3.6.3.2. Bolt holes in shear tab are short-slotted-
horizontal; holes in web are standard. Weld QC/QA Category BM/L.
5. For continuity plates and web doubler plates see Figure 3-6. For calculation of continuity plate requirements,
use flange plate properties as flange properties.
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequalification Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Maximum beam flange thickness: OMF -1 1/4 inch, SMF - 3/4 inch
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 17
Figure 3-17 Bolted Flange Plate (BFP) Connection
2.8 BOLTED FLANGE PLATE (BFP)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Flange plates and shims add additional material.
The authors consider shop welded, field bolted flange plates as the practical option since
shimming facilitates the necessary erection tolerances.
Special detailing required to allow for beam depth over-run tolerance, beam flange twist
tolerance, and shimming for shop attached flange plates.
Flange plate holes must be precisely located to match beam flange holes.
Flange plates require bevel preparation. Shop must track rolling direction.
Hole drilling on beam flanges must be precise. Automated equipment provides more
precise and efficient fabrication.
No weld access holes required on beams.
Flange plate fit-up must be carefully braced square and level and allowance made for
weld shrinkage.
Weld for continuity plates, shear tabs, and flange plates on columns needs notch tough
electrode with slower deposition rates.
CJ P beam flange plate weld to column adds shop welding, but weld is better positioned
in shop and protected from weather.
Flange plate angular distortion must be controlled during welding.
Shipping Column shipping takes more trailer space because of protruding flange plates.
Protruding flange plates require special care to avoid bending.
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Protruding flange plates require special care to avoid bending.
Column flange plates take some additional deck space.
Can go smoothly if flange plates are straight. Sufficient gap must be made between
flange plates to allow quick erection between columns.
Bolts in flange plates may help plumb-up process by keeping bays from racking.
Required shimming is time consuming.
Oversized holes in flange plates and slotted holes in shear tabs will help hole alignment.
Bolt sizes greater than 1 1/8 inch diameter require heavier equipment to fully tension.
No field welding.
Weld quality control and quality assurance are shifted from the field to the shop.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 18
2.9 DOUBLE SPLIT TEE (DST)
Notes
1. Split Tee: length, width, and thickness determined by design according to Section 3.7.1.2.
2. Fully pretensioned ASTM A325 or A490 bolts in standard holes sized for bearing. For sizing, see
Section 3.7.1.2, Step 7.
3. Fully pretensioned ASTM A325 or A490 bolts in standard holes sized for bearing. For sizing, see
Section 3.7.1.2, Step 4.
4. Shear tab welded to column flange with either CJ P weld or two-sided fillet weld. For calculation of
design strength of shear tab, welds, and bolts, see Section 3.7.1.2, Step 14. Weld: QC/QA Category
BM/L.
5. For continuity plates and web doubler plates see Figure 3-6.
Figure 3-20 Double Split Tee (DST) Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequalification Data Considered
Type of frame: OMF, SMF
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 19
2.9 DOUBLE SPLIT TEE (DST)
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Bolting
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Cost Considerations
Split tees and shims add additional material.
Special detailing required to allow for beam and column depth over-run tolerance, beam
flange twist tolerance, and shimming.
Split tee holes must be precisely located to match beam flange holes and column flange
holes. Automated equipment provides more precise and efficient fabrication.
Commonly, tees are cut from W shapes to make WT shapes.
Hole drilling on beam flanges and column flanges must be precise, best made with
automated fabrication equipment.
No weld access holes required on beams.
Shear tab is more easily fit-up when fillet welded.
Weld for continuity plates, shear tabs, and doubler plates on columns needs notch tough
electrode with slower deposition rates.
Split tee positioning must be carefully made square and level and allowance made for
shim compression.
Beam or column shipping takes more trailer space because of protruding split tees.
Protruding split tees require special care to avoid bending.
Protruding split tees require special care to avoid bending.
Split tees on columns or beams need special cribbing.
Can go smoothly if split tees are straight. A bend in WT web will hold up erection due to
beam getting jammed between columns.
Standard.
Required shimming is time consuming.
Standard holes specified may require reaming.
Bolt sizes greater than 1 1/8 inch diameter require heavier equipment to fully tension.
No field welding.
Weld quality control is shifted from the field to the shop.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 20
Prequalification Data Considered
Forell/Elsesser Engineers qualified this connection by test for a specific column and beam
combination on a specific project.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 21
2.10 WELDED FLANGE PLATE - TOP PLATE ON BEAM
(WFP-ALT.1)
This connection is a version of the Welded Flange Plate (WFP) Connection. The top flange plate is
shop fillet welded to the beam.
2.10 WELDED FLANGE PLATE - TOP PLATE ON BEAM
(WFP-ALT.1)
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Cost Considerations
Flange plates require extra material.
Locating beam web holes and shear plate holes with bottom flange plate requires special
detailing.
Column shear tabs require CJ P bevel preparation.
Flange plates require CJ P bevel preparation.
Flange plates require cutting to fit flange width. Automated equipment provides more
precise and efficient fabrication. Shop must track rolling direction.
Beam does not require bevel preparation or access holes.
Cope required at top flange.
Bottom flange plate and shear plate require careful fit-up to ensure tolerances are kept.
Weld for continuity plates, shear plate, and bottom flange plate on column needs notch
tough electrode with slower deposition rates.
CJ P weld on shear plate and bottom flange plate need distortion control.
Column shipping takes more trailer space because of protruding flange plates.
Protruding flange plates require special care to avoid bending.
Column flange plates take some additional deck space.
Bottom plate could cause problems for connecting if not fabricated with care.
Standard
Web connection requires only two erection bolts.
May need to clamp bottom flange plate to bottom flange of beam.
Field must remove shop fit-up bar on bottom flange plate.
Fillet welds require less preheat.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates.
Back-up bar removal and fillet weld reinforcement requires work in overhead position.
Fillet welding of bottom flange plate to beam flange requires significant welding, but in
horizontal position.
Fillet weld of beam web to shear tab requires significant welding, some in overhead and
vertical positions.
Sequencing Special sequence is required when considering preheat, restraint, and cooling of welds.
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Since top flange plate CJ P weld is not impaired by beam web, it is inherently a weld that
has less problems with quality and UT.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 22
ELEVATION
Reprinted from Steel TIPS, see Reference 5
Prequalification Data Considered
This connection lacks prequalification.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 23
2.11 WELDED FLANGE PLATE - LOOSE TOP PLATE
(WFP-ALT. 2)
This connection is a version of the Welded Flange Plate (WFP) connection. The top flange plate is shipped
loose. See Reference 5 for connection origin.
2.11 WELDED FLANGE PLATE - LOOSE TOP PLATE
(WFP-ALT.2)
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Weldi ng
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Sequencing
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Cost Considerations
Flange plates require extra material.
Locating beam web holes and shear plate holes with bottom flange plate requires special
detailing.
The absence of restrained field welds eliminates the need to provide for weld shrinkage.
Column shear tabs require CJ P bevel preparation.
Flange plates require CJ P bevel preparation.
Flange plates require cutting to fit flange width, an operation best suited for automated
fabrication equipment.
Beam does not require bevel preparation or access holes.
Bottom flange plate and shear plate require careful fit-up to ensure tolerances are kept.
Weld for continuity plates, shear plate, and bottom flange plate on column needs notch
tough electrode with slower deposition rates.
CJ P weld on shear plate and bottom flange plate need distortion control.
Column shipping takes more trailer space because of protruding flange plates.
Protruding flange plates require special care to avoid bending.
Column flange plates take some additional deck space.
If not properly fabricated, bottom plate could cause problems aligning beam web holes
with column shear tab holes.
Tightening of web bolts before welding sets column bay spacing.
Welding will not effect column spacings with resulting benefits to plumb-up.
Web connection requires only three erection bolts.
Top and bottom flange plates may require clamping to beam flanges.
Fillet welds require less preheat.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates.
Back-up bar removal and fillet weld reinforcement requires work in overhead position.
Fillet welding of top and bottom flange plates to beam flanges requires significant
welding, half in overhead position.
Fillet weld of beam web to shear tab requires significant welding, some in overhead and
vertical positions.
Possible gaps at bottom flange of beam to flange plate may require larger fillet welds.
Welders must make CJ P weld on top flange plate before fillet welding plate to beam.
No other joint, connection, or bay sequencing is required.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 24
2.12 DOUBLE SPLIT TEE - TEES ON BEAM (DST-ALT.1)
This connection is a variation of the Double Split Tee (DST) connection. The split tees are shop fillet
welded to the beam flange.
Reprinted from Steel TIPS, see Reference 9
Prequalification Data Considered
Professor Popov tested this connection for a specific column and beam size. See Reference 9.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 25
2.12 DOUBLE SPLIT TEE - TEES ON BEAM (DST-ALT.1)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Bolting
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Split tees, longer doubler plates, larger shear tabs, and shims add additional material.
Shims are required between WT flanges and column flange.
Special detailing required to allow for beam and column depth over-run tolerance and
shimming.
Split tee holes must be precisely located to match column flange holes.
Commonly, tees are cut from W shapes to make WT shapes.
Hole drilling on column flanges must be precise, an operation best suited for
automated fabrication equipment.
No weld access holes required on beams.
Beams require no flange bevel preparation.
Split tee fit-up must be carefully made square and level and allowance made for shim
compression.
Fillet welded shear tab requires careful fit-up to match beam web holes.
Weld for continuity plates, shear tabs, and doubler plates on columns and tees to
beam flanges needs notch tough electrode with slower deposition rates.
The only shop bolting is the four bolts for each tee.
Beam shipping takes more trailer space because of protruding split tees.
Protruding split tees require special care to avoid bending.
Protruding split tees require special care to avoid bending.
Beam split tees take some additional cribbing to properly stack on deck prior to
erecting.
Shop welded split tees may cause erection problems because beams need to be
entered sideways.
Standard
Required shimming between split tee flanges and column flanges is time consuming.
1 1/4 inch diameter bolts require heavier equipment to fully tension.
No field welding.
Weld quality control is shifted from the field to the shop, and CJ P welds are
replaced with fillet welds.
See Appendix 2 for current QA recommended by FEMA-350 and 353.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 26
Cost Consi derati ons for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 27
2.13 SLOTTED BEAM (PROPRIETARY)
Prequalification Data Considered.
Type of frame: OMF and SMF
The patent holder, SSDA, has qualified this connection for various beam/column combinations,
including columns greater than W14.
Reprinted from "Slotted Web connection Manual." See Reference 10.
SSDA BEAM SLOT CONNECTI ON- Prequalified by ICBO (ER -5861)
U.S. Patent Nos. 5,680,738 & 6,237,303
2.13 SLOTTED BEAM (PROPRIETARY)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Standard, but there is an added cost for using the proprietary system.
Weld access holes and beam web slots require special detailing.
Web welding requires special detailing depending on beam sizes.
Standard
Weld access holes and beam slots require special work. Automated equipment
provides more precise and efficient fabrication.
Standard
Welds for continuity plates, if those plates are required by the engineer, and shear
tabs on columns need notch tough electrode with slower deposition rates.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Due to web flexibility, some erectors leave a portion of slot temporarily uncut to
facilitate plumbing. After the flange and web welds are completed, the remainder of
slot is cut. Short slotted holes in shear tab, if used, require more plumb-up work.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates.
Removal of back-up bar, back gouging, and fillet reinforcing is all overhead work and
labor intensive; however, the top flange back up bar does not require removal.
CJ P weld of beam web to column requires significant additional welding.
Fillet weld of beam web to shear tab requires significant welding.
Sequencing Erector must follow patent holder's specified connection construction procedure.
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Fabricator must submit shop drawings to SSDA for approval.
See FEMA-350 and 353 for current QA recommendations.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 28
2.14 BOLTED BRACKET (PROPRIETARY)
Patented cast steel brackets, supposedly available on the marketplace, make this connection
proprietary. However, the authors could not locate the patent holder for such brackets. The authors
added fabricated brackets to this TIPS because fabricated brackets are within the public domain.
Figure 3-25 Bolted Bracket Connection
Reprinted from FEMA-350
Prequali fi cati on Data Considered
No known data.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 29
2.14 BOLTED BRACKET (PROPRIETARY)
Cost Considerations
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
Bolting
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Quality Control /
Quality Assurance
Brackets add additional material.
Additional detailing is required for brackets.
Fit-up issues must be identified and detailed to suit.
Consider the beam depth and out of square tolerances. Oversized holes should help.
Brackets require additional fabrication.
Flanges of column and beams require drilling that must be precise. Automated
equipment provides more precise and efficient fabrication.
No weld access holes required on beams.
Bolt bottom bracket to column with fully tensioned bolts. Consider whether to attach
top bracket or ship it loose.
Welds for continuity plates on columns and stiffeners on brackets need notch tough
electrode with slower deposition rates.
Bolt bottom bracket and furnish bolts for top bracket.
Must allow for brackets.
Brackets require special care.
May need to handle loose brackets.
Brackets take some additional deck space and cribbing; more blocking needed for
shakeout.
Connectors must take care to bolt and pin bottom flange to prevent beam from
tipping. Erector may need to consider adding a web plate.
Standard size holes in bottom bracket and bottom beam flange set correct bay
spacing. No weld shrinkage to consider.
Oversize holes in top bracket facilitate hole alignment.
Bolt sizes greater than 1 1/8 inch diameter require heavier equipment to fully tension.
No field welding.
Bolting quality control replaces welding quality control in field.
See FEMA-350 and 353 for current QA recommendations.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 30
2.15 REDUCED WEB (PROPRIETARY)
Reduced Web Section configurations: (a) dual opening and (b) single opening.
Reprinted with permission from Professor Aschheim. See Reference 12.
Prequalification Data Consi dered.
This connection is patented. Professor Mark Aschheim is the inventor and Programmatic
Structures Inc., owned by Professor Aschheim, is the assignee. Professor Aschheim has tested
various combinations of opening geometry and beam depth in combination with W14 columns
under quasi-static reversed cyclic loading conforming to the SAC loading protocol.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 31
2.15 REDUCED WEB (PROPRIETARY)
Material
Detailing
Shop Fabrication
Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Weldi ng
Shipping
Erection
Unloading
Shakeout
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Welding
Fit-up
Preheat
Welding
Sequencing
Quali ty Control /
Quality Assurance
Cost Considerations
(For bolted web [WUF-B] or welded web [WUF-W])
Standard
Weld access holes and web openings require special detailing.
Welded web requires special detailing to suit erector.
Standard
For welded web:
Ends of column shear tabs require angled cuts adding labor to hand made plates.
Column shear tabs require bevel preparation for weld to column.
Weld access holes require special work for cutting and grinding to roughness within
500 micro inches.
Web openings on beams require additional work.
Standard
Weld for continuity plates and shear tabs on columns needs notch tough electrode
with slower deposition rates.
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard
Standard for bolted web option.
For welded web:
Tight fit-up of web to shear tab may require more bolts than determined for
erection loads.
Fit-up of web for CJ P web weld can be difficult if fabrication is not correct.
Standard for bolted web.
CJ P and fillet welds for welded web require additional preheat.
Notch tough electrode has slower deposition rates. Removal of back-up bar, back
gouging, and fillet reinforcing is all overhead work and labor intensive.
For welded web:
Vertical CJ P weld of beam web to column requires significant additional difficult
welding.
Skill level of welders and UT technicians are important factors to field production
on these CJ P welds.
Non-fusible run-off tabs for web end weld require additional work in a cramped
space.
Fillet weld of beam web to shear tab requires significant additional welding.
Standard for bolted web.
Special sequencing is required for welded web when considering preheat, restraint,
and cooling of welds.
See FEMA-350 and 353 for current QA recommendations.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 32
3 COST CONSIDERATION SUMMARY
A GENERAL NOTE ON COST CONSIDERATIONS REGARDING WELDING
QUALITY CONTROL AND QUALITY ASSURANCE
Brittle fractures experienced in the Northridge earthquake have increased the intensity of welding
inspection with a corresponding increase in the cost of welded connections.
A review of Appendix 2 shows FEMA-353 recommendations: Complete joint penetration (CJ P)
groove welds require more costly ultrasonic testing (UT), and fillet welds require less costly
magnetic particle testing (MT). Therefore, fabricators and erectors normally prefer fillet welded
joints over groove welded joints. Additionally, UT testing brings up the following issues:
The skill and training of the UT technician.
The UT method used.
The skill of the welder.
The welder's methods and techniques.

Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 33

CO
TASK
MATERIAL
DETAILING
SHOP Detail Parts
Main Parts
Fit-up
Welding
SHIPPING
ERECTION
QA/QC
0
d
s
I
mi
Unloading
Shake-out
Erection
Plumb-up
Bolting
Weld Fit-up
Weld Preheat
Welding
Weld Seq.
s
s
s
i
s
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
s
i
s
s
i
i
s
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
i
mi
i
i
No cost, task eliminated
s
s
i
i
s
i
s
s
s
s
i
s
s
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
s
i
mi
i
s
i
i
d
s
i
i
i
i
i
s
i
s
mi
s
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
i
mi
s
i
i
i
i
s
i
mi
i
s
i
mi
i
mi
0
0
0
0
s
Decreased cost from Pre Northridge (significant)
i
mi
mi
s
mi
mi
i
s
i
mi
i
mi
0
0
0
0
i
i
i
i
i
mi
mi
i
i
i
i
d
mi
0
0
0
0
i
i
mi
mi
i
i
s
s
s
s
i
s
i
0
0
0
0
i
Same cost as Pre Northridge (or just a small increase or decrease)
Increase in cost from Pre Northridge (significant)
Major increase in cost from pre Northridge
i
mi
i
s
i
i
s
i
i
i
s
s
s
s
i
i
i
i
i
i
d
i
i
s
I
i
s
d
s
d
i
i
i
i
i
i
mi
d
i
i
i
s
i
i
s
mi
0
0
0
0
i
s
i
s
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
s
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
s
d
i
0
0
0
0
s
s
i
s
i
s
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
s
i
s
i
i
i
s
i
s
s
s
s
s
s
i
i
mi
i
i
C
o
s
t

C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

f
o
r

S
t
e
e
l

M
o
m
e
n
t

F
r
a
m
e

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
,

H
a
s
s
e
t
t

a
n
d

P
u
t
k
e
y
,

S
t
e
e
l

T
I
P
S
,

A
u
g
u
s
t

2
0
0
2
CONNECTION COST COMPARISON SUMMARY
Secti on Ref : 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.15
Conn. Abbrev. W
U
F
-
B
W
U
F
-
W
F
F
W
F
P
R
B
S
(
W
E
L
D

W
E
B
)
B
U
E
P
B
S
E
P
B
F
P
D
S
T
W
F
P
-
A
L
T
.
1
W
F
P
-
A
L
T
.
2
D
S
T
-
A
L
T
.
1
S
L
O
T
T
E
D
B
R
A
C
K
E
T
R
E
D
.

W
E
B
(
W
U
F
-
B
)
R
E
D
.

W
E
B
(
W
U
F
-
W
)
4. REFERENCES
1. AISC, (1992), Manual of Steel Construction: Volume II
Connections, ASD/LRFD, First ed., American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago.
2. AISC, (1994), Manual of Steel Construction: Load and Resistance Factor Design for Structural Steel
Buildings, 2nd Edition, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago.
3. AISC, (April 15,1977), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, American Institute of Steel
Construction, Chicago.
4. AISC, (November 10, 2000), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, (1997) Supplement
No.2, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago.
5. Collin, A.L., and Putkey, J .J ., (1999), "Welded Moment Frame Connections With Minimal Residual
Stress," Steel TIPS, Structural Steel Educational Council, Moraga.
6. FEMA-350, (2000), Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings,
prepared by the SAC J oint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington,
DC.
7. FEMA-353, (2000), Recommended Specifications and Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel
Moment-Frame Construction for Seismic Applications, prepared by the SAC J oint Venture for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC.
8. Forell/Elsesser, (1995), "Steel Construction Update: Successful Test of Welded Steel Beam - Column
Moment Connection," Forell/Elsesser Engineers, Inc., Structural Engineers, San Francisco.
9. Popov, E.P and Takhirov, S.M., (2001), "Large Seismic Steel Beam-to-Column Connections," Steel
TIPS, Structural Steel Educational Council, Moraga.
10. SSDA, (2002), Slotted Web Connection Manual, Seismic Structural Design Associates, Inc.,
Mission Viejo.
11. Steel Committee, (1986), "steel connections/details and relative costs," The Steel Committee of
California, Walnut Creek and El Monte.
12. Halterman, A., and M.A. Aschheim (2002), "Reduced Web Section Beams: Experimental Findings
and Design Implications," Proceedings of the 7
th
US National Conference of Earthquake Engineering,
Boston, Massachusetts, J uly 21-25.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 35
APPENDIX 1 - "PRE-NORTHRIDGE" CONNECTION
For this category of connection, the beam-to-
column moment connection CF-1 is the base Rela-
tive Cost Index 1.00 connection, with a single
shear plate being fillet welded to the column
flange. Beam flanges are fully welded to the
column flange, providing a very ductile and eco-
nomical moment connection. Attaching the shear
tab to the column with a full penetration weld
rather than a double fillet weld increases the rela-
tive cost 6%.
Reprinted from Steel TIPS, 1986. See Reference 11.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 36
A
P
P
E
N
D
I
X

2

-

Q
U
A
L
I
T
Y

A
S
S
U
R
A
N
C
E

F
O
R

P
R
E
Q
U
A
L
I
F
I
E
D
C
O
N
N
E
C
T
I
O
N
S
FEMA WELD INSPECTION RECOMMENDATIONS
Reference:
FEMA 353 Part II
TABLE 5-3, 5-4
C
o
s
t

C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

f
o
r

S
t
e
e
l

M
o
m
e
n
t

F
r
a
m
e

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
,

H
a
s
s
e
t
t

a
n
d

P
u
t
k
e
y
,

S
t
e
e
l

T
I
P
S
,

A
u
g
u
s
t

2
0
0
2

3
7
The following table summarizes requirements outlined by FEMA 353 and referenced in FEMA 350 PREQUALIFIED connection details:
CONNECTION WELD_________QA/OC CATEGORY CATEGORY INSPECTION_______________NOTES
TABLE 5-3 TABLE 5-4
2.1 WUF-B
2.2 WUF-W
2.3 FF
2.4 WFP
2.5 RBS-WW
RBS-BW
Flange welds
Shear Tab weld
Flange welds
Shear Tab weld
Web End weld
Web to Shear Tab weld
Flange welds
Shear Tab weld
Web End weld
Web to Shear Tab weld
Flange Plate butt welds
Flange Plate side fillet welds
Flange Plate end fillet welds
Shear Tab weld
Web End weld
Web to Shear Tab weld
Flange welds
Shear Tab weld
Web End weld
Flange welds
Shear Tab weld
AH/T
BL/T
AH/T
BM/T
BH/T
BL/L
AHT
BH/T
BH/L
BH/L
AH/T
BH/L
BH/T
BH/T
BM/T
BH/L
AH/T
BM/L
BM/L
AH/T
BL/T
1
3
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
2
2
1
3
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
UT 10% CJ P's MT10% FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% PJ P's, FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 10% FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT 25% FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT 25% FILLETS
MT 25% FILLETS
MT 25% PJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT.UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT.UT 100% CJ P's
UT 10% CJ P's MT10% FILLETS
NO REDUCTIONS
MT 6" SPOT RANDOM
NO REDUCTIONS
FULL LENGTH
REDUCTION APPLIES
MT 6" SPOT RANDOM
NO REDUCTIONS
REDUCTION APPLIES
PARTIAL LENGTH
PARTIAL LENGTH
NO REDUCTIONS
PARTIAL LENGTH
FULL LENGTH
FULL LENGTH
FULL LENGTH
PARTIAL LENGTH
NO REDUCTIONS
PARTIAL LENGTH
PARTIAL LENGTH
NO REDUCTIONS
MT 6" SPOT RANDOM
2.6 BUEP
2.7 BSEP
2.8 BFP
2.9 DST
ALL
ALL
AH/T
BM/L
AH/T
BM/L
BM/L
AH/T
AH/T
BM/L
1
2
1
2
2
1
1
2
BM/T
BL/L
BL/L
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT,UT 100% CJ P's
MT 25% FILLETS
MT, UT 100% CJ P's
MT 10% PJ P's, FILLETS
MT 10% PJ P's, FILLETS
NO REDUCTIONS
PARTIAL LENGTH
NO REDUCTIONS
PARTIAL LENGTH
PARTIAL LENGTH
NO REDUCTIONS
NO REDUCTIONS
PARTIAL LENGTH
REDUCTION APPLIES
MT 6" SPOT RANDOM
MT 6" SPOT RANDOM
NOTE:
REDUCTION:
PARTIAL LENGTH:
REDUCE INSPECTION TO 25% IF REJECTION RATE IS LESS THAN 5% AFTER 40 WELDS FOR A GIVEN WELDER
FOR WELDS OVER 24 INCHES LONG, TEST 6 INCHES ON EACH END AND 6 INCHES ALONG THE LENGTH AT STARTS
& STOPS
C
o
s
t

C
o
n
s
i
d
e
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

f
o
r

S
t
e
e
l

M
o
m
e
n
t

F
r
a
m
e

C
o
n
n
e
c
t
i
o
n
s
,

H
a
s
s
e
t
t

a
n
d

P
u
t
k
e
y
,

S
t
e
e
l

T
I
P
S
,

A
u
g
u
s
t

2
0
0
2

3
8
Flange welds
Web weld
Flange welds
Web weld
Stiffener weld to beam
Stiffener weld to end plate
Flange Plate butt welds
Shear Tab weld
NO WELDING
CONT'Y PLATES
Flange Welds
Web Weld
DOUBLER PLATE
All welds
2
3
3
About the Authors
Patrick M. Hassett received his Bachelor's degree in Civil Engineering in 1983, and a Master's
degree in Structural Engineering and Structural Mechanics in 1985 from The University of
California at Berkeley. He is a licensed Civil and Structural Engineer in California and is also
licensed in Illinois and Missouri. He has fifteen years experience in the fabrication and erection
of major structural steel construction projects. He is a member of SEAONC, and ASCE, is past
chairman of the Structural Steel Educational Council, has served on the SAC J oint Venture
Project, and currently serves on the AISC Seismic Design committee.
He is currently running his own consulting firm in Castro Valley, California, primarily serving the
engineering needs of steel fabricators and erectors. Among his recent projects is the connection
design and erection engineering on the 54-story Torre Mayor Tower in Mexico City. More
recently, he engineered the steel erection procedure on the Walt Disney Concert Hall in Los
Angeles.
James J. Putkey is a Consulting Civil Engineer in Moraga, California. He received a Bachelor
of Civil Engineering degree from the University of Santa Clara in 1954. After two years in the
U.S. Army, 19 years with the Erection Department of Bethlehem Steel CorporationPacific
Coast Division, and seven years with the University of CaliforniaOffice of the President, he
started his own consulting business. He has provided consulting services to owners,
contractors, attorneys, and steel erectors for the past 20 years.
Mr. Putkey is now "Semi-Retired." He serves as a hearing officer for the University of California-
Office of the President, and occasionally writes or helps write Steel TIPS.
Cost Considerations for Steel Moment Frame Connections, Hassett and Putkey, Steel TIPS, August 2002 39
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICAL INFORMATION &PRODUCTSERVICE
APRIL 1995
Structural Details to Increase
Ductility of Connections
By: Omer W. Blodgett, P.E.
Senior Design Consultant
The Lincoln Electric Company
INTRODUCTION
Materials used in steel structures are increas-
ingly becoming thicker and heavier. A greater
chance of cracking during welding of beams
to columns, for example, has resulted due to
increased thickness of material. With weld
shrinkage restrained in the thickness, width,
and length, triaxial stresses develop that may
inhibit the ability of steel to exhibit ductility.
This paper will attempt to explain why these
cracks may occur, and what can be done to
prevent them, by expanding on information
presented in the AISC Supplement No. 1
(LRFD) or Chapter J 9th Ed. AISC Manual.
O
stress
psi
I I I I I I
strain in/in
Figure 1
FIELD RESULTS
I learned about the stress-strain curve (Figure
1) while taking "Strength of Materials" along
with laboratory work at the University of Min-
nesota. It took me a long time before I real-
ized that this applied only to simple tensile
specimens in the laboratory.
During World War II while I was working in a
shipyard, a docked, all-welded tanker, the
Schenectady, suddenly broke in two. At the
time, we had no answer as to what could have
caused such a catastrophic failure. We passed
it off as perhaps a poor grade of steel or poor
workmanship, and kept on welding our ships.
A short time later, we received a bulletin from
The Lincoln Electric Company in which it was
stated that ductility values come from simple
tensile specimens which are free to neck down.
The bulletin pointed out that if the same plate
had many transverse stiffeners welded to it,
the ability to neck down would be greatly re-
stricted, and the plate would fail with less ap-
parent ductility.
DEFINING DUCTILITY
In Figure 2, Mohr's Circle of Stress has been
drawn, showing a tensile stress of 10 ksi up to
the ultimate of 70 ksi (numbered from 1 to 7).
The correspondi ng maxi mum shear stress is at
the t op of each circle. For conveni ence, each
point of shear (illustrated as a solid dot) is moved
horizontally until it lies directly above the corre-
spondi ng tensi l e stress (depicted as an open
dot). Notice that t hese points form a straight line,
representing a si mpl e tensile specimen. From
this line, it is possible to read off the maxi mum
shear stress f or a given tensile stress. Thi s is
the basic f i gure used by Professor Gensamer,
as shown in Figure 3.
Gensamer introduced the concept of graphically
illustrating the maxi mum shear-stress theory of
failure. In Figure (4), the horizontal axi s repre-
sents the tensi l e stress (o), and the vertical axis
represents the shear stress (-[). The critical ten-
sile stress woul d be the ultimate tensile strength,
but exceedi ng this val ue causes immediate fail-
cri t i cat shear ? Zc
/stress r o
7 tensile
stress
(ksi)
30'
20'
10
Figure 2 ,'
I 0
/ ia
: : t I I I I
I 2 3 /4 5 6 7
tensile stress (ksi)
Figure 3
40 I
I
--30 ., ,,,th ..
I ., I
v, crlticat shear stress t ":1
, n i ..," - ; ' 1.
" / ,,<' - ! i ,-
, ,
10 2'0 30 40 50 60 70
applied tensile stress (ksi)
Shear Tensi l e Rel at i onshi p for a Si mpl e Tensile Specimen
Figure 4
ure with little energy absorbed, that is, brittle fail-
ure. Exceedi ng the critical shear stress causes
slip or ductile failure. In a simple tensile speci-
men, the resulting shear. st ress is one half of
the applied tensile stress. Thi s means moving
up al ong a line having a 26.56 slope. This slope
is not dependent upon the type or strength of
steel used. When this specimen reaches the-
yi el d strength (ay), the correspondi ng shem
stress is at its critical val ue (:CR)' Thi s means
the critical shear (:CR) is equal to one half of the
usual yield strength of the material in a simple
tensile test. Above the critical shear value, plas-
tic deformation t akes place, with the specimen
slipping al ong millions of 45 slip planes. Dur-
ing this time, there is some work hardening of
the material. Finally, the critical tensile stress is
reached, and failure occurs.
4sot.-. ,' I
'=1/2o
-- L = W q
4 s o - , f I
i v:, i
I f ' ' f I

I L - W I
necked downtensilo specimen
Ductility of Steel
Figure 5
2 Steel Tips April 1995
In Figure 5a, the member is subjected to a ten-
sile stress (o) under the yield strength (ay). This
results in elastic strain and is recoverable when
the stress is removed. Notice also in Figure 5a
that a shear occurs which has a maximum value
of :--1/20 on a plane at 45, with the axis of the
applied tensile stress. If the applied stress (o) is
increased to a value of (0), the resulting shear
stress exceeds its critical value-tcR=l/2ov , then a
permanent slip occurs on planes at 45, as
shown in Figure 5b and 5c.
This is plastic strain and, if continued, will cause
the specimen to neck down (Figure 5d). As the
cross-sect i onal area cont i nues t o become
smaller, the tensile stress finally exceeds the
critical normal stress (tensile strength) and the
member fails.
All of this can be seen in the stress-strain curve
of Figure 6. Region (a) below the yield strength
covers the elastic strain portion. Region (c) cov-
ers the plastic strain portion with the member
necking down. Point (d) is tensile failure. In the
stress-strain curve of Figure 6, region (a) is all
elastic strain. The resulting shear stress () is
under the critical value -OcR=l/2 ay, so no plastic
strain takes place.
In region (c) the resulting shear stress exceeds
the critical value and plastic strain takes place
with more and more necking down. The ductility
of the si mpl e tensile stress specimen occurs
because there is a shear stress component from
the particular load condition and, more impor-
tantly, it exceeds the critical value by a consid-
erable amount. Let us see if we can find out why
this test specimen is ductile; then we can check
the ductility of other loaded members or details.
The ductility of a simple tensile specimen oc-
curs because there are two shear stresse (%-3)
and ('2-3) resulting from the applied tensile stress
(o3), as shown in Figure 7a and 7b. Notice that
when the stress (%) reaches its critical value
for failure (70 ksi in this example), the two shear
stresses have already exceeded their critical
value of 20 ksi. There are two shear stresses
because there are two circles: circle (1-3) and
circle (2-3). The third circle, (1-2), has no ra-
dius, and hence no shear stress, since it is a
point.
=zer
tension
g
w ' ri ' 3 el
r--TT7--- , _ .
%!
0 ' 2 0'3
Figure 7A
-- 6aT
e 3Of
4t
.=20
lo! - - I ' I - -
.oi .02 .03
' i I I '
.G4 .OS .Q6 .107 ,.(}6
Total $tra;n E Tn/in
: ; ,I '
.09 .10 .11 .t2
,G$rGt.e 1-3
Ptqsti c ,
movement' / ' I
m4ke; Sl)g;men I I
r w e O . t = zen=
i3(l-i)
aircte 2-3
Z-3)
I .Thi smqvernent c.i .3)i oi rl the
dirion Of (3
Ptastic
mYJvement
makes sp4K:imen
thinner
This movement 'a(z.alis ;n the I
direction af 0'3
I
tatar ptost; strain ]n d;rectlon of
JZ 3 (I-3) '[' '3 C2-3} I
fram fram
t-3 'rz-3
wiU tend to reduce the residual stres. ((T3)
Figure 6 Figure 7B
Steel April 1995 3
Any value of shear for 1;1. 3 and 1;2-3 above the
critical 20 ksi will cause plastic strain. Notice in
Figure 7a that both circle (1-3) and circle (2-3)
cause plastic strain $3(1-3) and 3(2-3)' Therefore
(o3) will be: 3 = E3(1-3)+ s3(2-3).
Since E3(1.3) ' - 3(2-3)' we then have: s3 = 2s3.3),
whi ch wi l l tend to reduce resi dual stresses
caused by welding.
If the speci men is pulled t o failure, o3 will reach
its critical value, or tensile strength; see Figure
8. By this time, the two shear stresses are above
the critical value and plastic strain or movement
will have taken place. Notice that the total plas-
tic strain consists of two values: C3(1.3) and 3(2-3)'
The movement 3 acts in the direction of the
40;
t..-
crlticot shear \ I
!
lr'cr_, s toad tine I
t.''} r e p r e s e n t s I
{ O ' I I
I
; : .* I I I I
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
normqt stress 0'3
Figure 8
I 2 3 4
normal el asti c t o t a l plastic
stress st rai n st rai n strain
0 3 e T Ep
10 .00033 .00033
15 .00050 .00050
20 .00067 .00067
25 .00083 .00083
30 .00100 .00100
35 .00117 .00117
40 .00133 .00133
45 .0015 .00236 .00086
50 .0017 .00485 .00315
55 .0018 .01200 .01020
60 .0020 .03185 .02985
65 .0022 .08234 .08014
70 .0023 .20229 .20000
Table 1
stress o3 and would tend to reduce any residual
stress. Thi s member should behave in a ductile
manner. Plastic behavior takes place from 03 = *
40 ksi up to 70 ksi, and is caused by two differ-
ent plastic strains E3(1.3) and 3(2-3)'
Table 1 lists the data from a typical stress-strain
curve for structural steel. Total elastic plus plas-
tic strain is listed in Column 3. The elastic strain,
calculated from s = /E, is listed in Column 2. By
subtracting the elastic strain from the corre-
sponding total rain, we obtain the plastic strain,
shown in Column 4.
RESIDUAL STRESSES I SOLATED
Figure 9 illustrates that two important residual
stresses exist in the weld's termination zone. The
butt joint in the flange has a residual stress lon-
gitudinal to the length of the flange (o3), as well
as a stress transverse to the flange (%). Longi-
tudinal stress is tensile along the center line of
the fl ange where the wel d access hole termi-
nates. It can be compared t o tightening a steel '
weld (access
hole
roG,e
w e l d
o
4 _3
Figure 9
4 Steel Tips April 1995
30 ''
I u : critit shear sts,
. . . . . . . . . -
u t t' 2 _ :
10 2O 30 &O SO 60 70 80
Figure 10
cable lengthwise in the center in tension, with
compression spread out on both sides. The
transverse stress (Ol) is tensile in the weld zone,
including a portion of the adjacent plate, going
through zero, and then compression, beyond the
adjacent plate. This transverse stress (o) is also
similar to tightening a steel cable.
RESIDUAL STRESSESAPPLIED
These residual stresses may be applied to a
weld detail having a narrow weld access hole,
as shown in Figure 10. This hole terminates at
a point where (0) and (03) are in tension. Since
the web at the edge of the weld access hole
offers some restraint against movement in the
through thickness direction of the flange plate,
stress in the (02) direction may have an appre-
ciable value. All of the circles will be small. Nei-
ther (T2.3) nor (T.3) will probably ever reach the
critical shear stress value, and plastic strain or
ductility will not occur, as the right hand of Fig-
ure 10 illustrates.
If the weld access hole can be made wider, as
recommended by AISC Specification, Ninth Edi-
tion, so that it terminates in a zone where the
transverse residual stress (0) is compressive
(see Figure 11), then a more favorable stress
condition will result in greater ductility in the (03)
direction. In this case, shear stress (-c.3) will be
high as shown on Mohr' s Circle of Stress, and
the critical shear value will be reached at a much
lower tensile stress or load value. This will pro-
duce more ductility in the (o3) direction, greatly
reducing the chance of a transverse crack in the
flange at the termination of the weld access hole.
EXAMPLE #1
Consider the unrestrained section, similar to a
simple tensile specimen, shown in Figure 12.
When there is no applied stress (o) in the
through thickness direction or (o2) across the
width, these values are zero. This will produce
the largest of Mohr's circles, and the greatest
value of shear (;2.3) and ('-3)' In both cases,
these shear stresses are equal to one half of
the applied tensile stress (o3). These two shear-
tensile lines are drawn in the lower portion of
the figure. Although there are two lines, which
would indicate good ductility, there is a differ-
ence between the two. One line represents neck-
lng down through the thickness, and the other
represents necking down across the width. Al-
though the unit strains are the same in this case,
the strain acting across the width would result
in greater overall movement or elongation over
the length of the specimen.
' o, . .
'F 0 / . I cr;tiCOt .sh_ Str_
- --(ki) 2 f - ; ? - - - : - -- -.,--"2d'k,; -
Figure 11
Apri11995 5
In the case of the restrained section shown in
Figure 13, (here L=W/4), the angle of maximum
shear stress lies along an angle of o - 76 and
the resulting shear value is : -- .23 03. The two
shear values (%-3) and ('2-3) produce two shear-
tensile lines. The lower line acting across the
width does not produce enough shear to exceed
the critical value, hence no plastic yielding. The
upper line indicating good plastic yielding, how-
ever, acts only through the thickness and the
overall movement would be less than the ex-
ample on the right. To get a better picture of this
behavior, the stress-strain curve shown in Fig-
ure 14 has been created for the two details.
' , - : : r I t - I . .
I I I I
TO
,, sa
? o
41t
$ 0
.01 .02 .03 .04 .05 .OG .07 14 .09 JO .!1 .12 J ) .14 .lis Jll J? J!) .2Q
unit strO)n in/in
Figure 14
EXAMPLE#2
There has been some discussion about the weld
connecting the beam flange to the column flange
as being brittle. Referring to Figure 15, the ma-
terial at point (A), whether it be weld metal or
base metal it cannot exhibit the ductility of a
J_
necking dcTw thru thickness
]
necking ocrosswk neckbJ downthru tlcknesS
2
necking down across width
lrZ.3
I
al
40'
30.
10'
I
. ',.,
ec' ' ;b
10 20 30 40 SO 60 70
tensite stress (ksi)
40
v
2o
10
i.
I
Hti shear stress _ ',
. . . . . . . - -- - . . . . . . . . . . l
qr'cr:2O ks, ( Y . . . . . . . . . . i '
/ !
10 20 30 40 5 GO 70
tensite stress (ksD
Figure 12 Figure 13
6 Steel April 1995
simple tension test. Ductility can only take place
if the material can slip in shear along numerous
slip planes. Four conditions are required for duc-
tility:
1. There must be a shear stress () component
resulting from the given load condition.
2. This shear stress must exceed its critical
value by a reasonable amount. The more it
exceeds this value, the greater will be the
resulting ductility.
3. The plastic shear strain resulting from this
shear stress must act in the direction which
will relieve the particular stress which can
cause cracking.
4. There must be sufficient unrestrained length
of the member to permit "necking down."
If conditions (1) and (2) are not met, there will
be no ductility and no yield point. The stress will
simply build up t o the ultimate tensile strength
with little or no plastic energy absorbed. We call
this condition a brittle failure.
Figure 15 shows two regions in question:
Figure 15
I
Point (A) at the weld joining the beam flange to
the face of the column flange. Here there is re-
straint against strain (movement) across the
width of the beam flange () as well as through
the thickness of the beam flange (s2)-
Point (B) is along the length of the beam flange
away from the connecting weld. There is no re-
straint across the width of the flange or through
its thickness.
Figure 16 shows the three equations for strain
given in most strength of material texts, shown
O2
(1 O3
1
3 = "E (O3-.[%-[[,[(1)
1
2= (-%+%-o)
1
s,= - (-%-%+o)
or it can be shown that
E [E3+2+(1-),]
o= (l+tz) (1-21z)
E [3+(1-!Z)2+[Lt]
02= (1+) (1-2)
E [(1-tZ)3+2+p.]
03= (1+[) (1-21Z)
Figure 16
steel Tips April 1995 7
- - - r I1' IIr I
... , , : , . - . ; - - , v, +
02=0
a
i
,
!
!
!
L.
-
ol=O
o3=30ksi
3=+.001
.'
E [tz%+ze2+(1-)e l ]
%= (1 +lz) (1-2tz)
30000
o,- (1+.3) (1-.6)
[.3(+.001 ) +.3(-.O003)+.7(-.O003)]=Zero
in the flange. By using Poisson's ratio of iz=0.3
for steel the following strains are found for a
si mpl e t ensi l e speci men when st ressed to
o3=30ksi.
3 = +.001
s2 =-.0003
s =-.0003
Using these strains in the three formulas for re-
sisting stresses we find:
o = Zero
02 = Zero
o3 = 30 ksi
o2=% =Zero
E [(1-p,)3+$S:+!,te,]
3= (1 +It) (1-21Z)
30000
3:- (1.3) (1-.6)
[.7(.001)+.3(-.0003)+.3(-.0003)]=30.0 ksi
ac1.3=35
:
Figure 17
0.=70
in upper box. For our use, these have been con-
verted into corresponding equations for stress,
shown in lower box.
Figure 17 is an element of the beam flange from
Fi gure 15 poi nt (B). There is no restraint
(%+o2=0) against the 30 ksi longitudinal stress
This is plotted as Mohr's circle of stress in a
dotted circle. The larger solid line circle is for a
stress of 70ksi or ultimate tensile stress. The
resulting maxi mum shear stresses (%-3) and
(-c2.3) are the radii of these two circles or 35 ksi.
The ratio of shear to tensile stress is 0.5. Figure
18 plots this as line (B). Notice at a yield point of
55 ksi, the critical shear value is 1/2 of this or
27.5 ksi. When thi s critical shear stress is
reached, plastic straining or movement takes
place and ductile behavior will result up to the
ultimate tensile strength, here 70 ksi. Figure 19
shows a predicated stress-strain curve indicat-
ing ample ductility.
Figure 20 shows an element from Point (A) (Fig-
ure 15) at the junction of the beam and column
flange. Whether we consider weld metal or the
material in the column or beam makes little dif-
ference because this region is highly restrained.
Suppose we assume:
e3 = +.001 (as before)
2 = Zero '. (but now highly restrained
E1 = Zero J with little strain)
From the given equations, we find the following
stresses:
8 Steel Tips April 1995
30
27.5
. . . h e
m 20
fJ
tll
ID
I 0
critical shear stress 'c=1/2 o b o y .
Y' t . J,
";' ' ' , iv , i ,
10 20 30 40 50 55 60 70
Figure 18
% = 17.31 ksi ) Increase to ( = 30.0 ksi
(72 : 17.31 ksi ultimate tensile I, = 30.0 ksi
(73 = 40.38 ksi strength = 70.0 ksi
The lower portion of the sheet is a plot of Mohr's
circle of stress. The maximum stresses are:
-c. 3 = 1:2.3 = 20 ksi
The ratio of shear to tensile stress is 0.286. In
Figure 18, this condition is plotted as line (A).
Notice it never exceeds the value of the critical
shear stress (27.5 ksi); therefore, there will be
no plastic strain or movement, and it will behave
as a brittle material. Figure 19 shows a predi-
cated stress-strain curve going upward as a
straight line (elastic) until the ultimate tensile
stress is reached in a brittle manner with no
energy absorbed plastically.
Would it help if the strength and ductility of the
weld metal or base metal were changed? See
Figure 21. The top figure is for lower strength,
more ductile steel, tensile strength of 60 ksi and
a yield strength of 40 ksi. The lower figure is for
a higher strength, lower ductile steel, tensile
strength of 70 ksi and a yield strength of 55 ksi.
Notice in the case of no restraint (B) that the
lower strength material will result in more ductil-
ity. However, in the real world where there is
80
70
60
50
(/3
40
(/3
30
20
10
.05 .1 ,15
strain in/in
Figure 19
.2 .25 .3 .35
Steel Tips April 1995 9
t
v
restraint (A), the lower strength material does
not provide any help against cracking. Neither
material will provide any ductility. It might be ar-
gued thatthe higher strength material (lower fig-
ure) would be stronger. It still will perform in a
brittle manner if over stressed.
Assuming we have good workmanship with no
defects or stress raisers, the real success of this
connection will depend upon getting the adja-
( 7 1 =
0' 2
l
!
i
i
i
i
i
l
I
(J1
E [g3+g2+(1-L),]
(1+) (1-2)
- 03
i
,,' E3=+.001
30,000
1- (1+.3)(1-.6)
o2=0=17.31 ksi
O 3 =
30,000
3= (1.3)(1-.6)
[.3(+.001)+Zero+Zero]=17.31 ksi or 30.00 ksi
E [(1-ILL)E3+ -
(1+) (1-2)
- - [(1-.3)(.001)+Zero+Zero]= 40.38 ksi or 70.00 ksi
1 1.3=20
/ , / " - ' " O 3 = 7 0
Figure 20
30
20
(/)
(/)
' 10
ID
Steel I
TS=60 ksi I
YP=40 ksi I.
= i ,
10 20 30 40 50 60 70
tensile stress (o) ksi
Steel
TS=70 ksi
YP=55 ksi
30 .
' 27.5.
20
O'J
ID
U'J
1;=1/2 o=27.5 ksi
' , , , i !
10 20 30 40 50 55 60 70
tensile stress (o) ksi
Figure 21
cent beam to plastically deflect before this criti-
cal section cracks.
C O N C L U S I O N
The way in which a designer selects structural
details under particular load conditions greatly
i nfl uences whether the condition provi des
enough shear stress component so that the criti-
cal shear value may be exceeded first, produc-
ing sufficient plastic movement before the criti-
cal normal stress value is exceeded. This will
result in a ducti l e detail and minimize the'
chances of cracking.
10 Steel Tips April 1995
I
REFERENCES
AISC Supplement No. 2, January 1, 1989. To
the Specification for the Design, Fabrication &
Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings.
Bjorhovde, Brozzetti, Alpsten and Tall. "Residual
Stresses in Thick Welded Plates," AWS Weld-
ing Journal, August 1972.
Blodgett, Omer W. Weight of Weld Metal, The
James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, Bul-
letin D417, April 1978.
Estuar and Tall. "Experimental Investigation of
Welded Built-Up Columns," AWS Welding Jour-
nal, April 1963.
Gayles and Willis. "Factors Affecting Residual
Stresses in Welds," AWS Welding Journal, Au-
gust 1940.
Gensamer, Maxwell. "Strength of Metals Under
Combined Stresses," American Society of Met-
als, 1941.
Parker, Earl R., Brittle Behavior of Engineering
Structures, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1957.
Shanley, F.R., "Plastic Strain--Combined Load-
ing,'' Strength of Materials, McGraw-Hill Book
Co., 1957; Chapter 11.
Steel Tips Apri l 1995 11
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICALINFORMATION& PRODUCTSERVICE
AUGUST 1997
Dynamic Tension Tests of
Simulated Moment Resisting
Frame Weld Joints
by
E.J. Kaufmann
ATLSS Engineering Research Center
Lehigh University
TABLEOFCONTENTS
I
II.
III.
INTRODUCTION
TEST SPECIMENS
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Page
1
2
4
IV. TESTPROCEDURE
V. TEST RESULTS
7
VI. SUMMARY
8
VII. REFERENCES
9
APPENDIX A - Test Results
APPENDIX B - Weld Cost Comparisons
Index of Steel Tips Publications
The following is a list of available Steel Tips. Copies will be sent upon request. Some are in
very limited quantity.
Seismic Design of Special Concentrically Braced Frames
Seismic Design of Bolted Steel Moment Resisting Frames
Structural Details to Increase Ductility of Connections
Slotted Bolted Connection Energy Dissipaters
Use of Steel in the Seismic Retrofit of Historic Oakland City Hall
Heavy Structural Shapes in Tension
Economical Use of Cambered Steel Beams
Value Engineering & Steel Economy
What Design Engineers Can Do to Reduce Fabrication Costs
Charts for Strong Column Weak Girder Design of Steel Frames
Seismic Strengthening with Steel Slotted Bolt Connections
Seismic Design of Steel Column-Tree Moment-Resisting Frames
Dynamic Tension Tests of Simulated Resisting Frame Weld Joints
I. INTRODUCTION
Under the SAC Phase I program a pilot project was conducted to develop and evaluate a
relatively simple and inexpensive test specimen for studying moment frame weld joint
performance (Ref. 1). A specimen was designed to simulate the behavior of a single beam
flange-to-column flange weld joint which could be tested in a large capacity universal test
machine in tension under dynamic loading rates similar to earthquake loadings. The test
specimen concept is illustrated in Figure 1.
The results of the pilot test program showed that weld joints fabricated using electrodes with
higher notch toughness than the E70T-4 electrode in common use prior to the Northridge
earthquake, such as E7018, E70TG-K2, and E71T-8, performed satisfactorily in the test. This
was also in conjunction with improved detailing including removal of weld backing and weld
tabs and adherence to D I. I welding code procedural requirements. The results indicated that
brittle fractures initiating in the weld metal, as occurred in ETOT-4 welded connections, could be
avoided when weld metal with a minimum CVN impact toughness requirement of 20 ft-lbs @-
20F was used. Although only axial tension loads were applied in the test the results closely
paralleled the performance of similarly fabricated weld joints in full-size connection tests (Ref.
2) and appeared to provide a viable means of assessing weld metal toughness requirements for
moment frame applications.
To expand the test database to include other currently available flux-cored electrodes the
Structural Steel Educational Council of the California Field Ironworkers Administration Trust
sponsored additional testing, reported herein, to evaluate the performance of weld joints welded
with other electrode types as well as duplicate tests performed in the pilot study. Eight test
specimens were fabricated by a commercial fabricator in California using three currently available
flux-cored electrodes (E70T-6, E70T-7, and E71T-8) and one shielded metal arc electrode
(E7018). The fabricated specimens were then shipped to the ATLSS Engineering Research
Center at Lehigh University for testing.
Figure 1 Simulated Beam-Column Tension Specimen
II. TEST SPECIMENS
A sketch of the simulated beam flange-to-column flange weld joint test specimen is shown
in Figure 2. The column element consists of an 8 in. length of a W14x176 wide flange shape
(A572 Gr. 50) with one flange removed. A l"x 6" plate (A36) is groove welded to the column
flange face to simulate the beam flange-to-column flange connection. A slotted pull plate is
welded to the column web to permit the the assemblage to be gripped in a universal test machine
and loaded in tension at static or dynamic loading rates. A simulated coped beam web plate is
tack welded to the beam plate to introduce welding restrictions similar to welding the bottom
flange of a moment connection. The web plate was removed after welding to facilitate
installation of test instrumentation.
Duplicate specimens were prepared using each of four electrode types. Table 1 gives a summary of
the welding procedure parameters. In all eight specimens the weld tabs and backing were removed
after welding and a reinforcing fillet weld was applied to the weld root. All simulated beam flange
to column joints were fabricated to a 3/8" root and a 30 included angle.
Both
Sides 5/8....
40"
< I
5/8'Cf/
12"
'""--'->-<Tack
_ 16"
I N 8 , , ix<CJP
W 1 4 x 176 6"x1"
A572 Gr. 50 (A36/
(one flange removed)
Figure 2 Simulated Be Flange-to-Column Flange Test Specimen Design.
<
<
I
m
B-Z
t
m
r-

p..
,_ '- co o
E z o_ o_ z
'-' IJJ W IJJ UJ
UQ.
- I
E
.E[ o o < o I o < o o < o o <
- E
II.
i
cg < co < to < o eg <
,_ ,_ '- d Z co co
-- I
u u ,- ,- ,- Z Z ,- ,- ,. cj c
' .,- C
I
I
I
0
c'") -i. .. cO u' cO u'
*"=' esi c' ("q
i
o c o e 4 e e c5 6
t-q (,4 04 e- e' Oq --
Z
= _._ to to eg o
tO u 0 0 I. (q 0
o P G - P
o o
-- w w w w
w
c
o
o
o.
8
'13
(D
0
0-
O
C
' 0
Q.I
II
c
c
C
o
-o
c
E
o
c
II
3
IH. MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
The mechanical properties of the beam flange plate and column shape were determined after
testing. Unyielded material located at the end of the grip length of the beam plate was used to
fabricate standard 0.505 in. dia. tensile specimens. Standard 0.505 in. dia. specimens were also
fabricated from the W14 x 176 column flange at the ASTM A673 test location. Table 2 gives
a summary of the base material properties. The stress-strain behavior of the two materials is
shown in Figure 3.
Table 3 gives AWS required and typical mechanical properties for the filler metals used.
Mechanical properties of E70T-4 filler metal is also included for comparison. E70T-6, E71T-8
and E7018 filler metals have a required Charpy V-notch (CVN) impact toughness requirement
of 20 ft-lbs @ -20F. E70T-4 filler metal does not have a notch toughness requirement and
typically provides 5-15 ft~lbs @ +70F. E70T-7 filler metal, like E70T-4, also has no AWS
minimum toughness requirement. Procedure qualification tests using E70T-7 weld metal has
indicated a notch toughness intermediate to E70T-4 and the higher toughness filler metals. These
tests provided an average toughness of 8 ft-lbs @ OF. CVN test data for the various filler metals
is shown in Figure 4.
TABLE 2 MECHANICAL PROPERTIES
Y.S. T.S. Elong.(2") R.A.
(ksi) (ksi ) (%) (%)
W14 x 176 (Column) 56.6m 75.2m 38.6) 77.1)
ASTM A572 Gr. 50
Beam Flange Plate 42.9 73.5 28.4 59.3
ASTM A36
I) Standard I-lange location
IINI-
,' ............................................................... , - - A 5 7 2 . - ( G o } - ,
'2
m 5li-
t.
tiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . *. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i, 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!::::::: ............................................
(,, , . ,
0 Il. 1 0.2 0.3 0.4
Strain
Figure 3 Material Stress-Strain Behavior.
4
TABLE 3
WELD METALPROPERTIES
AWS Required Typical
Y.S. U . T . S . Elong. CVN Y.S. U.T.S. Elong. CVN
ksi ksi % fi-lbs ksi ksi % fi-lbs
E70T-4 60 min. 72 min. ' 22 min. .m 60-70 80-95 15-25 5-15
@+70F
E70TG-K2 58 mi n. 70-90 22 min. -( 70-75 85-90 2 5 - 3 0 20-40
@-20F
E71T-8 60 min. 72 min. 22 min. 20 min. 65-75 70-90 2 5 - 3 0 20-70
@-20F @-20F
E70T-6 60 min. 72 min. 22 min. 20 min. 65-75 70-90 2 5 - 3 0 25-75
@-20F @-20F
E70T-7 60 min. 72 min. 22 min. -) 60-65 80-90 22-26 5-10
@ OF
E7018 58 min. 70 min. 22 min. 20 min. 65-75 75-85 2 5 - 3 0 90-120
@-20F @-20F
1. No Requirement
2. No Requirement, will meet 20 ft-lbs @-20F
3. From manufacturer or laboratory tests
O9
m
>
(.5
U.I
Z
U.I
LLI
O
O3
-95
200
[ ]
160 -- ,
O
120 --
X
80 --
40 --
0
-' 40
TEMPERATURE, C
-55 -15 25 65
I I I I
E70T-4
E70TG-K2
E71T-8
E7018
E7OT-7
O
O O
o o 4.
O O Z
8 o
[ i a I g B I
-80 -20 40 100 160
TEMPERATURE, F
105
I
I
220
Figure 4 CVN test data for various filler metals.
240
200
160
120
80
40
0
Q
::3
0
>.
(.5
ILl
z
ILl
ILl
O
(/3
95.D047
5
IV. TEST PROCEDURE
Specimens were tested in a PC-controlled 600 kip capacity universal test machine modified to
permit dynamic load rates to be applied to the test specimen. With modification, a maximum
crosshead displacement rate of 0.15 inches/sec could be achieved. Dynamic tests were conducted
in displacement control at the maximum crosshead displacement rate. In addition to recording
crosshead displacements, a 2 in. displacement range linear variable differential transformer
(LVDT) was also installed to measure weld joint displacements over the ungripped length of the
beam flange (approx. 8 inches) relative to the column flange face. Figure 5 shows an
instrumented test specimen installed in the test machine. Load, crosshead displacement, and
LVDT displacement data were recorded with a PC data acquisition system.
Test specimens were loaded to failure in a single tension load cycle applied in two ramp rate
segments. Initially specimens were loaded at a crosshead displacement rate of 0.05 inches/sec
to a load of 60 kips (-10 ksi in beam flange plate) to seat the grips after which the displacement
rate was increased to 0.15 inches/sec to failure. A typical LVDT displacement-time plot for a
dynamic test is shown in Figure 6. Over the 8 in. gauge length the displacement rate in the
vicinity of the weld joint corresponds to a strain rate of -0.02 sec't. This strain rate corresponded
to about 1 sec. loading through the elastic range. In comparison, strain rates for static loading
are typically of the order of 0.001-0.0001 sec't. After testing the specimens were examined
visually for evidence of cracking or to determine the fracture origin, mode of fracture, and crack
path.
Figure 5 Test specimen installed in 600 kip test machine.
6
"'-7'. 2
,.,. 1.8
(-. 1.6
Q )
1.4 _
CD 1.2
O
GO
ch o6
0.4
0.2
1 o
F I t I i 1
i i
i i I i i
/ I I ' !
F t f 1 i
! , ' I ,
I I t I i i
I i , i
i I I ! i
0 5 10 15 20 25 3O
Time (sec)
Figure 6 Typical LVDT displacement vs. time plot.
V. TEST RESULTS
A summary of the results of the eight tests is given in Appendix B. With the exception of the
specimens welded with E70T-7 filler metal, all other test specimens behaved similarly. Duplicate
specimens welded with E7018, E71T-8, and E70T-6 filler metals failed by ductile tensile failure
of the beam flange plate. No visual evidence of weld joint cracking was detected in any of these
test specimens. Absence of whitewash flaking on the weld metal surface and column flange face
area also indicated that little or no inelastic deformations developed in these areas.
The two specimens welded with ETOT-7 filler metal showed mixed performance. Test Specimen
No. 5 failed brittlely in the beam flange plate after significant yielding occurred in the plate.
Examination of the fracture indicated that localized ductile tearing developed at the weld toe of
the beam flange plate prior to initiation of brittle fracture (see Test No. 5 photographs in
Appendix B). The tearing appeared to follow the weld fusion line although it was not clear
whether the tear propagated in weld metal or in the heat-affected-zone (HAZ). The duplicate test
specimen (Test No. 6) failed by ductile tearing of the beam flange plate, however, evidence of
sub-critical tearing at the same weld toe location and also in the adjacent base material was also
observed (see Test No. 6 photographs in Appendix B).
The cause of the weld toe tearing is not entirely clear, however, examination of the fracture in
cross-section in Test No. 5 also revealed significant weld toe undercut and a steep transition of
the top reinforcement weld bead which was not observed in the other test specimens. The
undercut in Test No. 5 was measured to be 0.08" in depth which just exceeds the 1/16" maximum
permitted by Di.1. No undercut was measured in Test No. 6 although a similar steep transition
of the weld reinforcement also existed. The weld toe undercut observed in Test Specimen No.
7
5 may have influenced tearing initiation at the weld toe. It is also noteworthy that the E70T-7
specimens were welded with a higher heat input than any of the other specimens (88 Kj/in vs.
28-56 Kj/in) which may have resulted in a softer HAZ than in the other specimens. Ductile
tearing at the weld toe at beam flange tips has also been observed in cyclically loaded full-scale
connection tests after extensive plastic deformation of the beam flange has occurred (Ref. 2).
The test results support the current SAC recommendation for weld metal used in critical joints
having a minimum CVN impact toughness of 20 ft-lbs @ OF (Ref. 3). All test specimens welded
with filler metals which exceeded this requirement (ie. 20 ft-lbs @ -20F) performed well under
intermediate strain rate loading. Although the ETOT-7 specimens did not satisfy the 20 ft-lb @
OF recommendation (Avg. 8 ft-lbs @ OF) and also exhibited brittle behavior in one test, there was
no clear indication that weld metal fracture was causal to the failure. Additional test data on the
fracture toughness and weld joint performance of this weld metal would be helpful in defining
minimum weld metal toughness requirements.
VI. SUMMARY
1. Eight simulated beam flange-to-column flange weld joint test specimens were
fabricated using three currently available flux-cored electrodes (E70T-6, E70T-7, E71T-8)
and one shielded metal arc electrode (E7018). Duplicate specimens welded with filler
metals having a minimum CVN impact toughness requirement of 20 ft-lbs @ -20F (E70T-
6, E71T-8, and E7018) performed satisfactorily under dynamic loading conditions.
Duplicate specimens fabricated using an E70T-7 electrode with lower notch toughness (8
ft-lbs @ OF) also performed satisfactorily although premature brittle fracture developed
in one test presumably due to excessive weld toe undercut. The test results provide
additional confu'mation that brittle fracture in moment frame weld joints can be
suppressed through adequate levels of weld metal toughness in conjunction with improved
weld joint detailing (ie. removing weld tabs and weld backing).
2. The test results support the current SAC recommendation for weld metal used in
critical joints having a minimum CVN impact toughness of 20 ft-lbs @ OF.
8
REFERENCES
1. Kaufmann, E.J., Fisher, J.W., "A Study of the Effects of Material and Welding Factors on
Moment Frame Weld Joint Performance Using a Small-Scale Tension Specimen", SAC
Technical Report 95-08, 1995.
2. Xue, Ming, Kaufmann, E.J., Lu, Lc-Wu, Fisher, J.W., "Fracture and Ductility of Moment
Connections Under Dynamic Loading", Proceedings ASCE Structures Congress, Portland,
Oregon, 1997.
3. Interim Guidelines: Evaluation, Repair, Modification and Design of Welded Steel Moment
Frame Structures, FEMA 267, 1995.
9
APPENDIX A - Test Results
l0
Test No.: !
Test Date: 8/27/96
Weld Electrode: E7018
Test Description: Specimen welded
with 1/8" E7018. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added. UT
acceptable.
Test Result: No weld joint cracking.
Specimen failed by ductile tensile
failure of the beam flange plate.
500
450
400
350
300
"''250
G 200
0
..J 15o
100
50
Test #1
F I i i
,"" N
" ' I
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Crosshead Displacement (in)
11
Test No.: 2
Test Date: 8/28/96
Weld Electrode: E7018
Test Description: Duplicate of
Test gl. Specimen welded
with 1/8"q E7018. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added. UT ....
acceptable.
Test Result: No weld joint cracking.
Specimen failed by ductile tensile
failure of the beam flange plate.
T e s t # 2
50O
45O
4OO
350
300
"-" 250
"0
Cd 200
0
__J 150
100
50
0
I ! i
h
/ .,
, , ,
t
/ .... l
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
C r o s s h e a d Di spl acement (in.)
12
Test No.: 3
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E71T-8
Test Description: Specimen welded
with 0.072" E71T-8. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added. UT
acceptable.
Test Result: No weld joint cracking.
Specimen failed by ductile tensile
failure of the beam flange plate.
Test #3
50O
450
4OO
' 350
300
v 2 5 0
"0
200
0
-..1 150
lO0
50
0
" ; "' Li
i i i
jr
J
/
-.
i
J
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Crosshead Displacement (in.)
13
Test No.: 4
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E71T-8
Test Description: Duplicate of
Test #3. Specimen welded
with 0.072" E71T-8. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added. UT
acceptable.
Test Result: No weld joint cracking.
Specimen failed by ductile tensile
failure of the beam flange plate.
Test #4
500
450
400
' 350
Q.
- 300
" 250
'ID
('d 200
0
.._1 150
lO0
50
0
[
. , . m m''''-' b..
S
- f
! ,
i
P
- J I
I t
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Crosshead Displacement (in.)
14
Test No.: 5
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-7
Test Description: Specimen welded
with 7/64" E70T-7. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added. UT
acceptable.
Test Result: Specimen failed by
brittle fracture of the beam flange
plate. Fracture initiated at the edge
of the beam flange plate from a localized
ductile tear at the weld toe from
undercut. Fracture occurred at a load nero
the ultimate tensile strength of the beam
plate. 0.93" LVDT displacement at
fracture. No weld metal or column flange
fracture detected.
Test #5
500
450
400
'' 35O
-300
250
%3
(13 200
o
...J 15o
100
50
f
J
/ '
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
LVDTDisplacement (in)
15
Test No.: 5
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-7
Top) Beam flange plate fracture surface Bottom) Enlarged view of
weld toe ductile tear
16
Test No.: 5
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-7
Top) Re-assembled cross-section of the fracture Bottom) Enlarged view
of the weld toe crack initiation location. Note the weld toe undercut.
17
Test No.: 6
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-7
Test Description: Duplicate of
Test #5. Specimen welded
with 7/64"q E70T-7. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added. UT
acceptable.
Test Result: Specimen failed by
ductile tensile failure of the
beam flange plate. Sub-critical
tears developed at the edge of
the beam flange plate at the weld
toe (same location as Test #5)
and in the base material adjacent
to the weld toe. No weld metal or
column flange cracking detected.
Test #6
5OO
450
400
'G'350
L
- 300
' ' 250
-O
03 2O0
0
.._1 150
100
50
0
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Crosshead Displacement (in.)
4 4.5
18
Test No.: 6
Test Date: 8/29/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-7
Top) Sub-critical tearing of the beam plate at the weld toe and
in adjacent base material. Bottom) Enlarged view of tears.
19
Test No.: 7
Test Date: 8/30/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-6
Test Description: Specimen welded
with 3/32" E70T-6. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fillet added.
Test Result: No weld joint cracking.
Specimen failed by ductile tensile
failure of the beam flange plate.
Test #7
5OO
45O
4O0
'' 350
Q.
. 300
" 250
'rJ
Cd 200
O
--.I 150
100
50
0
] I - - L _ _
, / /
[
/ , II
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
Crosshead Di spl acement (in.)
20
Test No.: 8
Test Date: 8/30/96
Weld Electrode: E70T-6
Test Description: Duplicate of
Test #7. Specimen welded
with 3/32"4 E70T-6. Weld tabs and
backing removed. Weld root re-
inforcing fdlet added.
Test Result: No weld joint cracking.
Specimen failed by ductile tensile
failure of the beam flange plate.
Test #8
5OO
450
400
'350
300
250
'0
(13 200
O
150
100
50
0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5
Crosshead Di spl acement (in.)
4 4.5
21
APPENDIX B - Weld Cost Comparisons
22
COSTCOMPARISON
In order to provide the reader with a more complete picture, the Structural Steel Education Council
(SSEC) has complied a cost comparison of the electrodes utilized in the Lehigh University tests. E 70T-4
electrode which was used in earlier studies was requested by SAC. The 70T-4 electrode in the 0.120
diameter was included because most estimating programs utilized that electrode as a basis for calculating
complete penetration costs in the fiat or horizontal position.
The cost comparison factors were determined by reviewing the cost data supplied by 3 of the erector
members from the council and reviewed by the remaining members. They took the following factors into
consideration when calculating those costs:
1. Cost of the Electrode
2. Labor to install the weld
3. Cost of equipment required to weld
It should be noted that the inefficiency costs of using additional welders in order to maintain a reason-
able schedule was not included in the cost data, nor were the additional training costs associated with the
use off those electrodes not normally used for this application.
Cost Comparison Lehigh University Test Specimens
Manufacturer Process Manufacturer AWS AWS Notch Diameter Cost Factor
Designation Specifications Classifications Tough
Li ncol n F C A W NR232 5.20 E71T8 Yes 0.072 3.1
Li ncol n F C A W NR305 5.20 E7OT6 Yes 3/32 2.0
Li ncol n F C A W NR311 ni 5.29 E70TG-K2 Yes 7/64 2.4
Li ncol n SMAW LH70 5.1 E7018 Yes 5/32 7.3
Li ncol n FCAW NS3M 5.20 E7OT4 No 0.120 1.0
Li ncol n F C A W NR311 5.20 E7OT7 No 7/64 1.4
COST FACTOR ASSUMPTION:
1. Mid- 1997 California Labor and Electrode prices.
2. Costs are based on field deposition of weld metal utilizing the AWS D1.1 parameters for volts,
amps; electrodes stick out and travel speed shown on the attached procedure qualification
records for each of the electrodes shown.
3. Cost of inspection not included.
4. Based on welding under normal field conditions in the flat position.
23
I'E.. 110N &- Sc"I =I Vl C' E
REPORTNO.
UCB/EERC-92/10
JULY 1992
EARTHQUAKEENGINEERINGRESEARCHCENTER
SLOTTEDBOLTEDCONNECTION
ENERGYDISSIPATERS
(WITHANAPRIL,1993ADDENDUMOF
SOMERECENTRESULTS)
by
CARL E. GRIGORIAN
TZONG-SHUOHYANG
EGORP. POPOV
Report to National Science Foundation
Abstract
Slotted Bolted Connections (SBCs) are modified bolted connections designed to dissipate
energy through friction during rectilinear tension and compression loading cycles. Exper-
imental results on two types of SBCs are reported. In one type, friction occurs between
clean mill scale steel surfaces; in the other, friction is between clean mil1 scale steel and
brass surfaces. The behavior of connections with brass on steel frictional surfaces is found
to be more uniform and simpler to model analytically than that with steel on steel surfaces.
These connections maintain essentially constant slip force, and unlike those with steel on
steel surfaces, require minimal overstrength of the system in design. The frictional mecha-
nisms giving rise to the observed behavior are explained. As an example of application a one
story diagonally braced frame was designed and its behavior determined for four different
earthquakes. Experimental results are presented for the fabricated SBC for this frame sub-
jected consecutively to the four displacement histories derived from these earthquakes. The
agreement between the analytical and experimental results is found to be excellent. Because
of the intrinsic simplicity of the SBCs and their very low cost, their use in seismic design
and retrofit applications appears to be very promising.
This 7ps publication is a re-print of a Univ. of California, Berkeley,
Earthquake Engineering Research Center Report No. UCB/EERC-92/10
and includes an April 1993 addendum.
Introduction
Various types of energy dissipating devices, utilizing friction as means of energy dissipation,
have been tested and studied by researchers [4, 6, 7]. Two of the common features of these
devices have been that their manufacture requires precision work or exotic materials and
that their installation demands specialized training. Consequently, the additional expense
in using such devices has prevented their wide acceptance in engineering practice. The
development of the Slotted Bolted Connections (SBCs) as energy dissipators represents an
attempt to overcome the abovementioned shortcomings of these systems. SBCs, as presented
in this paper, require only slight modification of standard construction practice, and require
materials that are widely available commercially.
In this paper a Slotted Bolted Connection (SBC), see Figure 1, refers to a bolted connec-
tion where the elongated holes or slots in the main connecting plate, in which the bolts are
seated, are parallel to the line of loading. In addition a Belleville washer [8] is placed under
the nut. Two types of SBC specimen are discussed in this paper, one with brass insert plates
and one without. Upon tightening of the bolts, the main plate is "sandwiched" directly
between either the brass insert plates or the outer steel plates. The holes in the brass insert
plates and in the steel outer plates are of standard size. When the tensile or compressive
force applied to the connection exceeds the frictional forces developed between the frictional
surfaces, the main plate slips relative to either the brass insert plates in the case of the first
type specimen or the outer steel plates in the case of the second. This process is repeated
with slip in the opposite direction upon reversal of the direction of force application. Energy
is dissipated by means of friction between the sliding surfaces. Application of cyclic loads of
magnitude greater than the slip force results in approximately rectangular hysteresis loops.
The earliest investigations of SBCs as energy dissipators date back to 1976 when a series of
experiments were carried out at San Jose State University (SJSU) [1] on specimens similar
in concept to those presented here. The term SBC used here is adopted from the report
by T. F. Fitzgerald, et al. [3]. A number of other researchers have also investigated similar
devices [2, 5].
Specimens and Experimental Results
To date, over forty SBC specimens of various bolt sizes, configurations and surface conditions
have been tested at the University of California at Berkeley (UCB). Experimental results
for specimens presented in this paper are representative of the salient SBC characteristics
encountered throughout testing. Presented here are two specimens which are identical in
every aspect with the exception that one includes shim like brass insert plates with a hole
pattern matching that of the outer steel plates. Figures 1 and 2 show, respectively, the
details of an SBC connection and the overall view of a typical assembled test specimen.
3
Both specimens are of A36 steel. The steel surfaces were cleaned to clean mill scale
condition. The brass plates were of the widely available half hard cartridge brass variety
(UNS-260). The test specimens were prepared by a local structural steel fabricator so as
to simulate industry standards. Holes and slots in the steel plates were punched, and the
edges were deburred. The two specimens described in this section are two bolt specimens.
The bolts used were inch diameter, 3 inches long A325 bolts. The Belleville washers used
were 8-EH-112 Solon compression washers. One such washer with a hardened washer on top
was placed under each nut. Belleville washers are initially cone shaped annular disk springs
which flatten when compressed. Earlier studies of SBCs [1] have shown that without the
use of Belleville washers, and under large cyclic displacements, there is an almost immediate
loss of bolt tension resulting in quick degeneration of the slip force. With the inclusion of
Belleville washers, both turn of the nut and torque wrench methods of developing minimum
bolt tension (70% of minimum tensile strength [ll D become inapplicable. To achieve the
desired initial bolt tension, Direct Tension Indicator (DTI) washers were placed under each
bolt head. DTIs are specially produced washers with protrusions pressed out of the flat
surface. As the bolt is tightened, the compressive force exerted on the DTI flattens the
protrusions and reduces the gaps between the flat portions of the DTI and the head of the
bolt. The gaps can easily be measured with a supplied feeler gage. When the feeler gage
fails to enter a specified number of gaps, the desired load in the bolt has been reached. DTIs
used here were designed to indicate a bolt tension in the range of 12 to 14 kips.
The specimens, described above, were placed within an MTS loading frame as shown
in Figure 3. The ram was capable of applying forces of 300 kips statically and 250 kips
dynamically, with a maximum displacement stroke of 6 inches. Both displacement and
force control were possible through a controller unit, and a function generator enabled the
servorarn to produce preprogrammed load or displacement histories. All testing was done
under displacement control. Axial load and displacements in the specimen were measured
through a load cell built into the MTS loading frame and a Linearly Variable Displacement
Transducer (LVDT) built into the servoram. Axial force and displacement were monitored
and recorded using a Data Acquisition System in conjunction with an IBM PC-AT computer.
In addition, an X-Y plotter recorded load-displacement curves on paper for immediate visual
observation of results.
Figures 4 and 5 show the applied displacement histories, force responses and the resulting
hysteresis loops for the two selected tests. Figure 4, representing the case of friction between
like clean mill scale steel surfaces, shows the main shortcoming of SBCs with friction between
steel surfaces. As seen in the force response diagram, there is an almost immediate increase
in the slip force followed by a quick drop to a magnitude several times less than the peak
slip force. Although this behavior has not been observed in all tests of SBCs with friction
between like steel surfaces, it has been present, to various extents, in the majority of cases.
In tests with specimens where the mill scale steel surfaces were polished by wire brushing
and those in which the surfaces were roughened and the mill scale removed by sand blasting,
this behavior not only did not disappear but was actually intensified. The occurrence of this
behavior in SBCs where friction occurs between steel surfaces renders such SBCs inefficient,
at best, and impractical, at worst, as energy dissipators. Figure 5 represents the case of a
SBC test with friction between clean mill scale steel and brass surfaces. As seen in Figure
5, the use of brass insert plates significantly reduces the variations in slip force magnitude
observed in SBCs where friction occurs between steel plates, almost completely eliminating
this undesirable behavior.
Discussion of Experimental Results
A discussion of experimental results involving friction must necessarily involve concepts
of Tribology. Tribology is the body of science dealing specifically with friction, wear and
lubrication. Terminology is a matter controversy in this field. The Tribological terminology
used here is adopted from E. Rabinowicz's classic book "Friction and Wear of Materials"
[9]. Friction is defined as "resistance to motion which exists when a solid object is moved
tangentially with respect to the surface of another which it touches." Wear is defined as the
"removal of material from solid surfaces as a result of mechanical action." Of the several types
of wear discussed in Tribology literature, the two most relevant to the present discussion are
adhesive wear and abrasive wear. Adhesive wear occurs when "two smooth bodies are slid
over each other, and fragments are pulled off one surface to the other." These fragments
may later return to the original surface or form into loose wear particles. Abrasive wear
occurs when "a rough hard surface, or a soft surface containing hard particles, slides on
a softer surface and ploughs a series of grooves in it." The material from the grooves
generally forms into loose wear particles. Adhesive wear is almost universally present in all
frictional phenomena, and it is the authors' belief that it, in conjunction with some abrasive
wear, is the main mechanism of wear in the SBCs tested. In general, no one explanation
can satisfactorily account for observed frictional behavior as many different mechanisms
are involved in friction and wear processes, some simultaneous, some sequential and often
interacting with each other. Presented here is a qualitative explanation of the experimentally
observed SBC behavior based on the above mentioned Tribological notions and experimental
observations. The explanation given here applies to both SBCs where friction occurs between
like steels and where friction occurs between steel and brass. It is believed that as sliding
is begun, wear particles are formed due to adhesive wear between the sliding surfaces. This
results in outward displacement of the outer plates in the direction of the bolt axes. This in
turn results in an increase in the bolt tension force and therefore an increase in the normal
force between the sliding surfaces. As frictional force is directly proportional to normal
force, this increase in the normal force is observed as an increase in the slip force. With
continued sliding, a portion of the loose wear particles fall out of the connection, as observed
experimentally, while the rest are either reabsorbed or act as abrasive particles contributing
5
to abrasive wear. In Tribological terminology, the phenomenon that occurs here can be,
simplistically, described as adhesive wear giving rise to wear particles which then cause
additional abrasive wear. That abrasive wear occurs despite the smoothness of the original
surfaces is evidenced by the appearance of sliding surfaces observed after the completion of
experiments and upon the dismantling of the specimens. In the case of friction between like
clean mill scale steel surfaces, both surfaces can be described as severely scratched. While
in the case of friction between clean mill scale steel on brass, only the brass surface appears
as scratched while the steel surface appears undamaged but with smears of brass. Scratched
surfaces are a typical consequence of abrasive wear. The fall out and reabsorption of wear
particles has the effect of reducing the bolt tension force as the outer plates now displace
inward. This results in a reduction of normal force and is observed as a drop in the slip
force. That the outer plates displace outward and then inward simultaneous with rise and
drop in the slip force has been confirmed by measurements of the displacements of the outer
plates along the axes of the bolts.
The above mentioned behavior, i.e. initial increase in slip force followed by a drop,
observed in both Figures 4 and 5, although clearly far more poignantly evident in Figure 4,
is directly attributed to the wear mechanisms mentioned above. The difference in behavior
between the two types of specimens is solely due to the choice of the use of brass as a
frictional surface, as the other two parameters known to influence adhesive wear, namely
initial normal force and total travel distance, were identical for the two presented specimens.
This choice was made precisely with the reduction of wear in mind. Brass is a common
choice as a material frictionally compatible with low and medium carbon steels, and is often
used in moderate cost applications where it is desired to reduce adhesive wear [9].
Application and Verification of Assumptions
As an illustration of the utility of SBCs as energy dissipators, consider the example structure
shown in Figure 6. A SBC with a slip force of 60 kips connects the diagonal brace to the main
structure. Analysis of the structure was performed using the DANS [10] computer program.
Newmark's step-by-step integration method was used. The structure was assumed to behave
as a shear structure, and the SBC was assumed to behave as an elastic-perfectly-plastic
connection. Viscous damping was assumed to be 2%. Responses due to four acceleration
histories were calculated. The acceleration histories were as follows: the 1971 Pacoima Dam
earthquake S16E, the 1952 Taft earthquake N21E with magnification factor of 5, the 1940
E1 Centro earthquake S00E with magnification factor of 2 and the 1987 Whittier earthquake
N00E, at Sylmar, with magnification factor of 40. Figures 7, 8, 9 and 10 show ground
acceleration histories, structure displacement responses and energy diagrams for each applied
history. The columns remain elastic at all times and the SBC prevents the buckling or
yielding of the diagonal brace. An examination of the energy diagrams reveals that on the
6
average close to 85% of the total input energy is dissipated by the SBC.
To verify the validity of the assumption of elastic-perfectly-plastic behavior for SBCs with
brass insert plates and to observe the response of such an SBC to displacement histories more
realistically representing response to actual earthquakes, an SBC specimen was designed to
slip at 60 kips. Based on previous results from tests of specimens with two inch diameter
A325 bolts, a test specimen with eight inch A325 bolts was fabricated. The specimen was
subjected to SBC slip displacement responses derived from the above mentioned analyses.
The four SBC slip displacement response histories were applied consecutively, in the order
of acceleration histories mentioned above, to this specimen. Figures 11, 12, 13 and 14
show SBC sup displacement response histories and analytical and experimental hysteresis
diagrams for each acceleration history. It is seen that the target slip force of 60 kips is
attained almost perfectly in response to the first displacement history. As expected, the slip
force drops, although not significantly, for the next three applied displacement histories. The
rectangular shape of the hysteresis loops, coupled with the reasonably constant slip force,
indicates that the assumption of elastic-perfectly-plastic behavior for SBCs with brass insert
plates is a valid one.
Concluding Remarks
Both SBC types have been shown capable of dissipating significant quantities of energy as
judged by the areas enclosed by the experimentally arrived at hysteresis loops. Slip force in
SBCs where friction occurs between like steel plates has been shown to vary significantly.
The peak slip force for such SBCs occurs almost immediately and may be several times
the magnitude of the mean slip force. As such, for this type of SBC to dissipate energy
throughout the course of ground excitation, either the members supporting the SBC must
be designed with excessively large safety factors or the SBC itself must be under-designed.
On the other hand, in SBCs where because of the brass insert plates friction occurs between
brass and steel, slip force has been shown to remain relatively constant over the range of
interest. It has also been shown that such SBCs behave in nearly perfect elastic-perfectly-
plastic manner. In view of these results, it is evident that SBCs with steel on brass frictional
surfaces possess significant advantages in terms of efficiency as energy dissipators and ease
of modelling. As such, and with low material and fabrication cost, these SBCs exhibit great
potential as an alternative choice for energy dissipation in seismic design and retrofit of
structures.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the support of the National Science Foundation under Grant
BCS-9016781 enabling the pursuit of the described research. The continued encouragements
of Henry Lagorio and S. C. Liu of NSF are particularly appreciated.
Thanks are also due to Bill MacCracken our electronics engineer who has been involved in
every phase of testing over three years and whose assistance with testing and data acquisition
equipment operation has been invaluable.
Machine shop specialists Mark Troxler, Jeff Higginbotham and Doug Zulaica are also thanked
for their assistance.
The opinions expressed in this paper are those of the writers and do not necessarily reflect
the views of the sponsor.
References
[1]
[2]
Venuti, W.J., "Energy Absorption of High Strength Bolted Connections," Test Report,
Structural Steel Educational Council, California, May, 1976.
Pall, A.S. and Marsh, C., "Energy Dissipation in Panelized Buildings Using Limited
Slip Bolted Joints," Proceedings, AICAP-CED conference, Vol. 3, Rome, Italy, May,
1979.
[3]
[ 4]
[6]
[7]
Fitzgerald, T.F., Anagnos, T., Goodson, M., Zsutti, T., "Slotted Bolted Connections
in Aseismic Design of Concentrically Braced Connections," Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5,
No. 2, 1989.
Pall, A.S., Verganalakis, V. and Marsh, C., "Response of Friction Damped Braced
Frames," J. Struct. Div., ASCE, 108(6), 1313-1323, 1987.
Roik, K., Dorka, U. and Dechent, P., "Vibration Control of Structures Under Earth-
quake Loading by Three Stage Friction Grip Elements," Earthquake Engineering and
Structural Dynamics, Vol. 16, 501-521, 1988.
Constantinou, M.C., Reinhorn, A.M., Mokha, A. and Watson, R., "Displacement Con-
trol Devices for Base Isolated Bridges," Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 7, No. 2, 1991.
Aiken, I.D. and Kelly, J.M., "Earthquake Simulator Testing and Analytical Studies of
Two Energy Absorbing Systems for Multistory Structures," Report No. UCB/EERC-
90/03, University of California, Berkeley, October, 1990.
[8] Timoshenko, S., Strength of Materials, Vol. 2, Van Nostrand Co., New York, NY,
1934.
[9]
[10]
[11]
Rabinowicz, E., Friction and Wear of Materials, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New
York, NY, 1965.
Yang, T.S., "DANS, A Computer Program for the Dynamic Analysis of Nonlinear Shear
Buildings," CE99 Project, University of California, Berkeley, 1991.
Kulak, L.K., Fisher J.W. and Struik, J.H.A., Guide to Design Criteria for Bolted
and Riveted Joints, 2nd. Ed. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York, 1987.
9
1/8" TH. BRASS PU
MAIN PLATE...............
.... 1/2" DIA. A325 BOLT. 3-1/2" LONG
,.HARDENED FLAT WASHER
8-EH-112 SOLON
COMPRESSION WASHER
NUT
DIRECT TENSION INDICATOR (DTI)......:
UNDER HEAD
_JTER PLATES
'- 9/16"x3-1/2" LONG SLOT
Figure 1
1/8" TH. BRASS INSERT PLATES.'::::::.'
, i ! ? ,
! ,
................................ I , . . I I ,
.......... HARDENED WASHER
B-EH- 112 SOLON
COMPRESSION WASHERS
UNDER NUT
I
' .......... DIRECT TENSION INDICATOR WASHER
(DTI), UNDER HEAD
........... 1/2" DIA. A525 BOLT, 5 - 1 / 2 " LONG
,'.' ALL PLATES ARE 5/8" TH. Al6 BAR STOCK
- , I
I o o O o O o i = . . . . , ooooo
................................ o o o o I I o o oo o
o I i ' l ' o o o
i 0 0 0 0 0
i.,.
"" WELD
l'][''gure 2 g/1 s"x3-M2" LONG SLOT
10
LOAD CELL
ADJUSTABLE GRIPS
SBC TEST SPECIMEN
! I
I !
! I
1
I I I I
I ' , ', I I . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .I '. . . . . . .! ''' . . . . .
I
MTS TESTING FRAME
LVDT
MTS SERIES 252 SERVORAM
Figure 3
11
STEEL ON S'I'TT. IMPOSED D I S P L A STEELON BRASS IMPOSED
2 i ; 2 i i i
...... i . . . . . . . . . . - : i
0.5
0
-1
-1.5 i i :i :i i ...........
-2
40
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(SF_"ONDS)
STEEL ON STF FORCBRrsms
,_.20
r
g
-20
-40
140 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
(SECONDS)
STEEL ON BRASS FORCERESPONSE
i i ' ' i
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2O
0
-20
4O
40
,.,2O
o
-20
20 40 60 8O 100 120
TIME (SECONDS)
STEEL ON s'r.h':L HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
140
-2
I I I I I I I
4.5 4 ..e.5 o o.5 1 J.s 2
DISPLACEMENT (INCHES)
40
20
-20
-40
-2
20 40 60 80 100 120 140
TrME(SECONDS)
STEELON BRASS HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
............................................ [ ...................... i ...............................................................................................................
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
DISPLACMta,rr (INCHF_.S)
Figure 4 Figure 5
Note: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
12
150 kips
i ,
Rigid deck
W12 !
,6 ft
, W12X72 W12X190
42 ft ,
o
F i g u r e 6
13
AOUPlI.RATION Iii,STORY:I*PACOIMA ACCI I.RATION HISTORY:5*TAFT
$
Z 0.5 0.5
O
0 0 . . . . . . . . .
4
1 . ] a [ ] , , [ ! 1 . 5 m , , _ , ] [ , [
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 = 0 2" 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tnvm(srcolrDS) (SSCONDS)
1.5 D NSE, 1.5 STRUCTUREDISPLACEMENTRESPONSE
. . _ _ . . _ . . . 5
0
................................................................................................... o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-0.5
4
-1.5 ' . . . . . . . . . ] -1.5 . . . . . . . . . .
9O0
80O
E
100
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME(S'X)S)
ENERGYDIAGRAM
,. , V'o D T
[
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
( S S )
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
(sFcos)
ENERGYDIAGRAM
, 2 r FrictionD ned I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
(sr=cos)
Figure 7 Figure 8
Note: 1 Inch -- 25.4 mm, 1 Kip - 4.45 kN.
1.5
1
$
0
-0.5
-1
ACCr I.RATION HISTORY 2*ELCENTRO
-1.5
14
I I I I I I I I ,
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME (SF.Z'OlVDS)
STRUCnmE m S P L mSNS
1.5
!..i
1.5
1
0.5
0
-.0.5
-1
-1.5
-1.5 . . . . . . . . . .
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
(SF.COS)
ENERGYDIAG
45O
. . . . . . ,t F.n4
Friction Dnm *xl
i
I I I I I I I
,40O
5O
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tn (SECONDS)
100
ACCI.[OtTION HISTORY: 40*WH1TflER
I I I J I I I I I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tn (SF-' ONDS)
STRUCTURE DISPLACEMENT RESPONSE
1
O.5
0 : ' ; - :;-: ' % ' ; ; ........................
-O.5
-1
= 1 . - ' ' ' J ' ' L , , ,
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME (SECONDS)
ENERGYDIAGRAM
/ visco Damp
0 2 d 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Tn (SECONnS)
Figure 9 Figure 10
Note: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
1.5
1
o
-1
-1.5
0
80
60
40
o
ua 0
-20
-40
-60
-80
8 0
60
4O
20
% . J
0
O -20
-4O
-60
1 5
SBC SLIP DUE I*PACOIMA
{ T { T ! T I
J I I
I I I {
' - - - q - - - - + .... ' {-.......... 4- ' ' ' ' .... + .... {-----F---{--
I { I I ' ' ' ' i I i /
I { I I I I t I
. . . . . ' . - - k - . - _ I t ,
J i l {J { i i {
I r i i l B I l I I t I
! I I I t n I I I ! I
" " ' " "
....... - t . . . . . - . . . . +-----------------{ . . . .
I I I I I t J 1
/ - ' - 4 - - i ' ' { ' q----%---+- F - ' '{
! ! t ' I { i I
! I I I I I
I { I I I I I l
. . . . -{ . . . . -i. . . . . -- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . J - - - - - - - - - L - - - - { _
{ ! i I { I I i {
i { I , J I ', , I J J I
, L , t i I i [ [ J
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME (SECONDS)
ANALYTICAL HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
i T T J
i I I l
........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i J
1
I
J
. . . . . . . . . . . . .
1
j ' { [
i { I
I I , i I
--0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
DISPLACEMENT(INCHES)
EXPERIMENTAL HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
I
I
t
I
I
{
-1.5 -1
- 8 0
' !
t i t
. . . . . . . . . . { . . . . . . q -
---t . . . . . ._, ul , . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i i
SBC ;LIPDUE 5*TAFT
1.3 I I I ! I
I I I I i I i I
I ! t
I I I I [ I I I
L ! I ! I
1 r ' ' r - " ' T i t
J t ! I i ! {
J [ I i i } ! I
I I I I i i I
/ ! { I t i I
0- l .... : I : d
/ i i I t i t { k {
I i
I I , A l i i I
/ I I I ] ! I
I I i ' i
0 , i . . . . . i . . . . . . , / ' -
{ 1 J I t i
, U , i * , ,
t w ! I I i i t
i I I { { I I I
4., - i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..i . . . . . . .
I ! I i I
t I I t i I
i I I I I
! t j i I ,
I I
-1.5 , , I , , I ,
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
TIME (SECONDS)
ANALYTICAL HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
, , {
i i
i ! I
, , , t I
-1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
DISPLACEMENT (INCHES)
EXPERIMENTAL HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
80
60
40
20
0
-20
-40
- 6 0
-80
-1.5
80
6O
4O
20
0
-20
-4O
-6O
-80
-1.5
j ' ,
-
[ -
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0 . 5 1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0 . 5 1 1.5
DISPLACEMENT (INCHES) DISPLACEMENT (INCHES)
F i g u r e 1 1 F i g u r e 1 2
Note: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
1
- 1
-1.5
e
SBU SLIP DUE 2*EL CENTRO
' i : ' ! !' '
I { I t J t ! I
I - - - - . t 1............. .............. - ........... .t . . . . . . . t . . . . . ? - - - " J . . . . -I
_ i [ i [ i i -
i J i i i J J
i i i i i i f
............ 4 ........ . . . . . . . ............. i ................. i ............ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .i . . . . 4 . . . . . .
J { { i J J ! |
........ 4 ........... .l. . . . . . . . .4 ........... i .................. i .............. 4. . . . . . . . . . . . j . . . . . . .' . . . . .
t ! 1
I I I I J I I I
2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 0
(SECONDS)
ANALYTICAL HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
8O
6O
4O
-2o
-4O
16
8O
6O
4O
-4O
-6O
-8O
1='
0 - '
t
- 1 . :
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-6o ......................i . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................
* !
' " 8 0 J I , , i
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 I 1.5
E X P E R I I A L HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
, ,, , , { {
j { i i {
i J { {
,. I , I I I I
-1.s - .o.s o o.s 1 1.s
DISPLACEMENT (INCHF_.S)
SBC SLIP DUE 40*wHrrrlER
' ' ' i J i ! , { i i i J I
: } { ..........{................. {........... , . J . . . . i - - r - i.......
{ i I [ i {
{ { , { { { }
i l l { i l J { J m d{ { { } i {
. . . . . . . . . . .t............................ -1 ---} .................... .-T----"
' J i
! ==
i
, , , , , , , , i i
0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2 1 4 1 6 1 8 2 0
TIME (SF,C O S )
ANAJ.,Y33CAJ., HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
4 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-80 '
-1 -1 -0.5 0 0_5 1 1-5
D I S P L A C E M E N T ( m C t m S )
EXPERIMENTPJ, HYSTERESIS DIAGRAM
8 0 ! '" i
6 0 . . . . . . . . . .]--- .............. ........................ . . . . . . ? ............. F ...................
J
4020 {
0
-20
..4O
-60
..8O
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
r r (mOW_S)
F i g u r e 1 3 F i g u r e 1 4
N o t e : 1 Inch = 25.4 m m , 1 K i p = 4.45 kN.
17
Addendum
April, 1993
Shake Table Experiments
Within six months of the publication of the original body of this document, a test structure
incorporating twelve SBCs was tested on the shake table at UCBs Earthquake Simulator
Laboratory. For sake of completeness, a sampling of the experimental results gained from
this testing program is presented in this addendum.
The three story one bay steel test structure, depicted in Figure lA, supported 30,000
lbs. per floor and stood over 20 ft. high. The lateral force resisting system of the structure
consisted of two moment resisting frames and Chevron braces connected with SBCs at each
level and on each of the two frames of the structure. The design slip loads for the SBCs were
determined by computer simulation of the structure's response to various seismic inputs. The
design called for slip forces of 15 kips for SBCs at the first level and 7.5 kips at the second
and third levels. This requirement was accommodated by using two bolt SBCs identical
to that shown in Figures 1 and 2 of this report and leaving one of the two bolts loose in
the second and third levels. This arrangement was chosen so that slip loads in the second
level could be doubled by tightening of the second bolt midway through the testing program
to experiment with an altogether different design with a different structural response. The
entire bracing system, including the SBCs, was fabricated commercially using standard shop
tolerances and practice at a local steel fabrication shop.
Figure 2A shows the shake table acceleration history for one of the tests conducted on
the structure. Figures 3A and 4A show hysteresis diagrams for the six SBCs on each of
the two frames in the structure in response to the above table acceleration history. The
diagrams are arranged such that they represent hysteresis diagrams for SBCs at the first,
second and third levels at the bottom, middle and top of the figures respectively. The data
presented in these figures is raw, unfiltered with no adjustment to account for zero shifts
in instrumentation. It is seen that the curves are similar in character to those obtained
for SBCs tested in the MTS testing frame. The slip loads are within reasonable range of
the design requirements. It must be noted that as the second and third level SBCs were
effectively single bolt connections, variations in slip loads axe expected to be greater than
those in the two bolt connections at the first level. With a larger number of bolts, as would
be the case in a real structure, the degree of variation between slip loads for SBCs with same
18
number and size of bolts is expected to be smaller due to averaging of errors. It is also noted
the these curves verify again the validity of the elastic-perfectly-plastic characterization of
the behavior of SBCs. A sense for the effectiveness of SBC may be gained from Figure
5A. In this figure, the top curve represents the absolute input energy of the structure based
on integration of the measured base shear force of the structure with respect to the table
displacements. The curve immediately below this curve represents the sum of the total energy
dissipated by the SBCs, based on calculation of areas enclosed by the hysteresis curves, and
strain and kinetic energies. It is seen that at the end of the record, where kinetic and strain
energies vanish, nearly 75 % of the input energy is dissipated by the SBCs. The figure also
indicates the relative magnitude of energy dissipated at each story and the magnitude of
energy dissipated by each individual SBC, each layer below the "Total Dissipated" curve
representing the contribution of one SBC.
In summary, the results obtained from the shake table testing of the structure with
SBCs, a glimpse of which has been presented above, appear to verify at once the practicality
of implementation of SBCs into realistic structures and their effectiveness. A tremendous
wealth of data has been generated from these experiments and the process of data reduction
is currently in progress. Furthermore, analytical studies complementing and motivated by
the experimental efforts are being conducted by the authors with the aim of establishing
design guidelines for use of SBCs in real structures.
19
Figure IA
TABLEACCELERATIONHISTORY
1985CHILEEQ, LLOLLEOSIGNAL, AMPLIFIEDTOPTA=.88G
=;
I
5
I I
10 15
TIME(SECONDS)
Figure 2A
!
2O
I
25
HYSTERESIS OF BRACE SF_3A
. . . . .
o
.
-15
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
DISPLACEMENT 0NCHF3)
i i ....................................................... ii
15 .................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
o .......................................................i ............................ i ............................................................ i .......................
- l o ! i i
-20 i i , i i ;
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
DISPLACEMENT 0NCT-IES)
HYSTERESIS OF BRACE SE1A
20
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
20
HYSTERESIS OF BRACE NE3A
i
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
2O
15
10
5
0
-5
-10
-15
-20
-0.3
DSPt. A (m)
HYS'rERF_3IS OF BRACE NE2A
-0. 2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3
r r ( m a r e s )
HYSTERF_SlS OF BRACE NE1A
20 20
15 .........................i ...................................................................................... 'i ................................................ 15 ...................-' ....................... i ............................ = ..........:....... --- . . . . . . . .
i i! iii iii ........................... ...... ..................... !i!ii i ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
i ............................. i!............... . , ' ? - - ...............i . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-15 -15 .................... i
-20 ' ' -20
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.3 -0. 2 -0.1 0 0.1 0. 2 0.3
r)xst,LACEMrr (n,ctms) DXSPLnCEMt-T (mctms)
F i g u r e 3 A
Note: 1 Inch = 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
OF BRAC SW3A
20 J i 'i
15 i
10 ......................................................... ...........................................
{
-10 ..................... ................................................................................................................. J.....................
{
-20 { i { J i
0.3 0.2 oa 0 -0.1 -o.2 -o_a
DrSPLACEMEm' (nqclms)
}rvgmRSSiS OFBRACESW2A
2O
15
10
o
-
. o ] ] . } Z ] Z i i i i i i 'i
t
-20 ' ' ' { {
0.3 0.2 0.1 0 -0.1 -0.2 -0.3
0 N )
OF BRACE SW1A
' [ 5 ...................................................................................................................................................
; .....:i.................
1 0 .............................
5 ...... ........................................
0 .. . . . . . i ............
- , , ' - i i i i i j ' ' ' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
-10 .................................
. 2 O I I l
0. 3 0. 2 0.1 - 0. 2 -0.3 0 -0.1
DISPLACE (n,i)
21
HYSTERESIS OF BRACE NW3A
2O
15 - - . 4 . . . . . ' ...................-: .................................................... i . . . . . . .
1 0 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
- 5
- - : i i : i !iiii .. :ilil i i . i i i:- .iii i :.i :ii:ii.i:iiii ii:i:i<i::i:ii:i:i:
-15
' 2 0 '
0. 3 0. 2 0. 1 0 -O.1 -0.2 -0.3
DISPLACEMENT ( I N a m S )
HYSTERESIS OF BRACE NW2A
2 0 T , , f ,
- --
i,i i :i:i iii i:i"::i:i
- 2 0 '
0.3 0. 2 0. 1 0 -O.1 -0.2 -0.3
2O
15
l0
5
0
- 5
-10
-15
-20
0.3
ACEmmT
HYSTERESIS oF BRACE)WA
................................................... - .........................t .............................. ? .................................................
I [ I t {
0.2 0.1 0 -o. 1 -0.2 -0.3
DISPt. A C E m r r )
F i g u r e 4 A
Note: 1 Inch -- 25.4 mm, 1 Kip = 4.45 kN.
ENERGYINPUTANDDISSIPATIONiSTOltW. S
1985CHil.V.EQ,LLO SIGNAl.A M P TO lA
22
l
l
BYSDCa
. ....................................
. . _ t'" r .;*
...... - - - ,
&4/d
I f J
10 IS 20
A T 3
AT2BYM
AT 1
t
2S 3O
Figure 5A
EARTHQUAKE ENGINEERING RESEARCH CENTER REPORT SERIES
EERC reports are available from the National Information Service for Earthquake En$ineerinNISEE) and from the National Technical Information
Service(NTIS}. Numbers in parentheses are Accession Numbers assigned by the National Technical Information Service:. these are followed by a iiee code.
Contact NTIS. 5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield Virginia. 22161 for more information. Reports without Accession Numbers not available from NTIS
at the time of printing. For a current complete list of EERC reports (from EERC 67-1) and availablity information, please contacl University of Califonmt,
EERC, NISEE. 1301 South 46th Street. Richmond, California 94804.
UCB/EERC-90/16 'Sensitivity of Long-Period Response Spectra to System Initial Conditions,' by Bla.uez. R., Ventunt, C. and Kelly, J'.M., 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/17 ' Behavior of Peak Values and Spectral Ordinates of Near-Source Strong Ground-Motion over a Dense Array,' by Niazi, M., June 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/18 'Material of Elastomers used in Earthquake Base Isolation,' by Papoulia, K.D. and Kelly, J.M., 1990.
UCB/EERC-90/19 'Cyclic Behavior of Steel Top-and-Bottom Plate Moment Connections,' by HarrioR, J.D. and Astaneh-Asl. A.. August 1990, (PB9 ! 229
260/AS)A05.
UCB/EERC-90/20 'Seismic Response Evaluation of an Instrumented Six Story Steel Building,' by Shem J.-H. and Astaneh-Asl, A., December 1990, (PB91
229 294/AS)A04.
UCB/EERC-90/21 'Observations and Implications of Tests on the Cypress Street Viaduct Test Structure,' by BolIo, M., Mahin, S.A.. Moehle, J.P.,
Stephen. R.M. and Qi, X.. December 1990.
UCB/EERC-91/01 'Experimental Evaluation of Nitinol for Eneri Dissipation in Structures,' by Nims, D.K., Sasaki, fl=K. and Kelly, J.M., 1991.
UCB/EERC.91/02 'Displacement Design Approach for Reinforced Concrete Structures Subjected to Earthquakes,' by Qi, X. and Moehle, J.P., January
1991.
UCB/EERC-91/03 'A Lons-Period Isolation System Using Low-Modulus Hijh-Damping Isolators for Nuclear Facilities at Soft-Soil Sites,' by Kelly, J.M.,
March 1991.
UCB/EERC-g[/04 'Dynamic and Failure Characteristics of Bridgestone Isolation Bearing,' by Kelly, J.M., April 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/05 'Base Sliding Response of Concrete Gravity Dams to Earthquakes.' by Chopra, A.K. and Zhan$, L., May 1991.
UCn/EERCo91/06 'Computation of Spatially Varying Ground Motion and Foundation-Rock Impedance Matrices for Seismic Analysis of Arch Dams," by
Zhang, L. and Chopra, A.K., May 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/07 'Estimation of Seismic Source Processes Using Strong Motion Array Data,' by Chiou, S.-J., July 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/08 'A Response Spectrum Method for Multiple-Support Seismic EJtcitations,' by Der A. and Neuenhofer, A., AulPiSt 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/09 'A Preliminary Study on Energy Dissipating Cladding-to-Frame Connection,' by Cohen, J.M. and PoweU, O.H.. September 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/10 'Evaluation of Seismic Performance of a Ten-Story RC Building During the Whittier Narrows Earthquake,' by Miranda, E. and Berg
tero, V.V., October 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/I 1 'Seismic Performance of an Instrumented Six Story Steel Building.' by Anderson, J.C. amd Bertero, V.V, November 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/12 'Performance of Improved Ground During the Loma Prieta Earthquake,' by Mitchell, J.K. and Wentz, Jr., F.J., October 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/13 'Shaking Table - Structure Interaction,' by Rinawi, A.M. and Clouf, R.W, October 1991.
UCB/ERC-91/14 'Cyclic Response of RC Beam-Column Knee Joints: Test and Retrofit,' by Mazzoni, S.. Moehle, J.P. and Thewalt, C.R., October 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/I$ 'Design Guidelines for Ductility and Drift Limits: Review of State-of-the-Practice and State-of-the-Art isa Ductility and Drift-Based
Earthquake-Resistant Design of Buildings,' by Bertero. V,V., Anderson, J.C., K.rawin.kler, H., Miranda, E. and The CUREa and The
Kajima Research Teams,, July 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/16 'Evaluation of the Seismic Performance ora Thirty-Story RC Buildinl,' by Anderson. J.C., Miranda, E., Bertero. V.V. and The Kajima
Project Research Team., July 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/17 ' A Fiber Beam-Column Element for Seismic Response Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Structures,' by Taucer, F., Spacone, E. and
Filippou, F.C.. December 1991.
UCB/EERC-91/18 'Investition of the Seismic Response of a Lightly-Damped Torsionally-Coupled Building.' by Boroschek. R. and Mahin, S.A.,
December 1991.
'Studies of a 49-Story Instrumented Steel Structure Shaken dui'inS the l.oma Prieta Earthquake,' by Bonowitz, D., Chert. C.-C. and
Astaneh-AsL A., February 1992.
UCB/EERC-92/02 'Response of the Dumbarton Bridge in the Loma Prieta Earthquake,' by Fenves, G.L.. Filippou. F.C. and Sze. D.T., January 1992.
UCEERC-92/03 'Models for Nonlinear Earthquake Analysis of Brick Masonry Buildinls,' by Menili, Y.,'McNiven, H.D. and Tanrikulu, A.K., March
1992.
UCB/EERC-92/04 'Shear StreniBh and Deformability of RC Bridge Columns Subjected to Inelastic Cyclic Displacements,' by Aschheim. M. and Moehle.
J.P., March 1992.
UCB/EERC-92/05 'Parameter Study of Joint Openin$ Effects on Earthquake Response of Arch Dams,' by Fenves, G. L, Mojitahedi, S. and Reimer, R.,
April 1992.
UCB/EERC,92/06 "Seismic Behavior and lsign of Semi-Rigid Steel FTamcs,' by Nadet, M.N., and Astancb-Asl, A., May 1992.
UCB/EERC-g2/07 "A Beam Element for Seismic Damage Analysis,' by Spacone, E., Ciampi, V. and FUippou, F.C., August 1 .
UCIEERC-2/O8 ' Nonlinear Static and Dynamic Analysis of Reinforced Concrete Subasscmblages," by Filippou, F.C., D'Ambrisi, and lsan, ,it.,
August 1992
UCB/EERC-92/10 "Slotled Bolted Connection Energy Dissipators," by Grigorian, C.E., Yang, T.-S. and Popov, E.P., July 1)2.
UCB/EERC-88/14
UCB/EERC-88/15
UCB/EERC-88/16
UCB/EERC-88/17
UCB/EERC-88/18
UCB/EERC-88/19
UCB/EERC-88/20
UCB/EERC-89/0 I
UCB/EERC-89/02
UCB/EERC-89/03
UCB/EERC-89/04
UCB/EERC-89/05
UCB/EERC-89/06
UCB/EERC-$9/07
UCB/EERC-89/08
UCB/EERC-89/09
UCB/EERC-89/10
UCB/EERC-89/I I
UCB/EERC-89/12
UCIFEERC.89/l 3
UCB/EERC-89/14
UCB/EERC-89/15
UCB/EERC-89/16
UCB/EERC-90/01
UCB/EERC-90/02
UCB/EERC-90/03
UCB/EERC.90/04
UCB/EERC-90/0$
UCB/EERC-90/06
UCB/EERC-90/0?
UCB/EERC-90/08
UCB/EERC-90/09
UCB/EERC-90/I 0
UCB/EERC-90/i 1
UCB/EERC-90/i 2
'An Experimental Study of' the Behavior of Dual Steel Systems.' by Whittaker. A.S., UanlL C.-M. and Berteto. V.V,, September 1918.
(PB91 212 712)AI6.
' Dynamic Moduli and Damping Ratios for Cohesive Soils,' by Sun, J.g.. Golesorkhi. R. and Seed, H.B., August 1918, (PB91 210
922)A04.
'Reinforced Concrete Flat Plates Under Lateral Load: An Experimental Study Including Biaxial Effects,' by Pan, ,aL and Moehle, J.P.,
October 1988, (PB91 210 856)AI3,
'Earthquake Engineering Research at Berkeley - 1988.' by EERC, November 1988, (PB91 210 864)A!0.
'Use of Energy as a Design Criterion in Earthquake-Resistant Design,' by Uanlg C.-M. and Benero, V.V., November 19811,(PB91 210
906/AS)A04.
'Steel Beam-Column Joints in Seismic Moment Resisting Frames,' by Tsai, K.-C. and Popov, E.P., November 19118, (PBgl 217
98a/AS)A20.
'Base Isolation in Japan, 1988,' by Kelly, J.M., December 1988, (PB91 212 449)A08.
'Behavior of Long Links in Eccentrically Braced Frames,' by Enlelhardt, M.D. and Popov, E.P., January 1989, (PB92 143 OS6)Aig.
'Earthquake Simulator Testing of Steel Plate Added Damping and Stiffness Elements,' by Whittaker, A., Bertero, V.V., Alonso, J. amd
Thompson, C., January 1989, (PB91 229 252/AS)Al0.
'Implications of Site Effects in the Mexico City Earthquake of Sept. 19, 1985 for Earthquake-Resistant Design Criteria in the San Fran-
cisco Bay Area of California,' by Seed, II.B. and Sun, J.l.. March 1989, (PBgl 229 369/AS)A07.
'Earthquake Analysis and Response of Intake-Outlet Towers,' by GoyaL A. and Chopra, A.IC. July 1989, (PB91 229 286/AS)AIg.
'The 1985 Chile Earthquake: An Evaluation of Structural Requirements for Bearing Wall Buildinp,' by Wallace, J.W. and Moehle,
J.P., July 1989, (PB91 218 O08/AS)AI3.
'Effects of Spatial Variation of Ground Motions on Large Multiply-Supported Structures,' by HaG, H., July 1989, (PB91 229
16 l/AS)A08.
'EADAP - Enhanced Arch Dam Analysis Program: Users's Manual.' by Ghanaat, Y. and Clough. R.W., AulluSt 1989, CPB91 212
$22)A06.
'Seismic Performance of Steel Moment Frames Plastically Designed by Least Squares Stress Fields,' by Obi. lC, and Mahin, SA.,
August 1989, (PBgl 212 597)A05.
'Feasibility and Performance Studies on [mprovin8 the Earthquake Resistance of New and Existing Buildin8s Using the Friction Pendu-
lum System,' by Zayas. V., Low. S.. Mahin, S.A. and Bozzo, L , July 1989, {PB92 143 064)A!4.
'Measurement and Elimination of Membrane Compliance Effects in Undrained Triaxial TestinlL' by Nicholson. P.O., Seed, R.B. and
Anwar. II.. September 1989. (PB92 139 641/AS)Al3.
'Static Ti l t Behavior of Unanchored Cylindrical Tanks,' by Lau, D.T. and Clough, R.W., September 1989, (PB92 143 049)AI0.
' ADAP-88: A Computer Proip=am for Nonlinear Earthquake Analysis of Concrete Ah Dams,' by Fenves, G.L, Mojtahedi, S. and Rei-
ruer, R.B., September 1989, (PB92 139 674/AS)A07.
'Mechanics of Low Shape Factor Elastomeric Seismic Isolation Bearings,' by Aiken, I.D., Kelly, $.M. and Tajirian, F.F., November
1989, (PB92 139 732/AS)A09.
'Preliminary Report on the Seismological and Engineering Aspects of the October 17, 1989 Santa Cruz oma Prieta) Earthquake,' by
EERC, October 1989, (PB92 139 682/AS)AC)4.
'Experimental Studies of a Single Story Steel Structure Tested with Fixed, Semi-Ri8id and Flexible Connections,' by Nader, M.N. and
Astaneh.Asl, A, August 1989, (PB91 229 21 I/AS)Al0.
'Collapse of the Cypress Street Viaduct as a Result of the l,oma Prieta Earthquake,' by Nims, D.IC, Miranda, ., Aiken, I.D., Whit-
taker, A.S. and Bertero. V.V., November 1989, (PB91 217 93S/AS)A05.
'Mechanics of High-Shape Factor Elastomeric Seismic Isolation Bearings,' by Kelly, J.M., Aiken, I.D. and Tajirian, F.F, March 1990.
'Javid's Paradox: The Influence of Preform on the Modes of Vibrating Beams,' by Kelly, J.M., Sackman, J.L. and Javid, A., May 1990,
(PB91 217 943/AS)A03.
'Earthquake Simulator Testing and Analytical Studies of Two Energy-Absorbing Systems for Muitistory S t r u , a u ' by Aiken, I.D. and
Kelly, J.M., October 1990.
'Damage to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridle Durinl the October 17, 1989 Earthquake,' by Astaneh-Asl, A., June 1990.
'Preliminary Report on the Principal Geotechnieal Aspecu of the October IT, 1989 l.oma Prieta Earthquake,' by Seed, ]LB., Dicken-
son. S.E., Riemer, M.F., Bray, J.D., Sitar, N., Mitchell, J.IC, Idriss, I.M., Kyen, R.E., Kropp, A., Harder, Jr. and Power, M.S.,
April 1990.
'Models of Critical Regions in Reinforced Concrete Frames Under Seismic Excitations,' by Zul6qar, N. and Filippou, F.C., May 1990.
' A Unified Earthquake-Resistant Design Method for Steel Frames Using ARMA Models,' by I, Conte, J.P., Mahhng S.A. and
Pister, K.S,, June 1990.
'Soil Conditions and Earthquake Hazard Mitiltion in the Marina District of San Francisco,' by Mitchell J.IC, Masood, T Kayen,
R.E. and Seed, R.B., May 1990.
'Influence of the Earthquake Ground Motion Process and Structural Properties on Response Characteristics of Simple S ' by
Conic, J.P., Pister, K.S. and Mahin, S.A., July 1990.
'Experimental Testing of the Resilient-Friction Base Isolation System,' by ClarlL P.W. and Kelly, J.M., July 1990, (PB92 143 OT2)A011.
'Seismic Hazard Analysis: Improved Models, Uncertainties and Sensitivities,' by Araya, R. and Der Kiureghiam A., Mat 1988.
'Effects of Torsion on the Linear and Nonlinear Seismic Response of Structures," by Sedarat, H. and Berteto, V.V., September 19119.
STRUCTURALSTEELEDUCATIONALCOUNCIL
TECHNICALINFORMATION&PRODUCTSERVICE
MARCH 1998
Compatibility
of
Mixed Weld Metal
By
Al varo L. Col l i n
and
James J. Putkey
Acknowledgments
The Authors wish to thank Pat Hassett, Rudy Hofer, Dave McEuen, and Jamie
Winans of the St r uct ur al Steel Educat i on Counci l , and Roger Ferch of the Herri ck
Cor por at i on for t hei r review and comments.
The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized
engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate,
this information should not be used or relied upon f or any specific application wi thout
competent professional exami nati on and veri fi cati on of its accuracy, suitability, and
applicability by a licensed professional engineer, designer, or architect. The publication of the
material contained herein is not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the
Structural Steel Education Council or of any other person named herein that this information
is suitable f or any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or
patents. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising f rom such use.
Caution must be exercised when relying upon other specifications and codes developed by
other bodies and incorporated by reference herein since such material may be modified or
amended from time to time subsequent to the printing of this edition. Structural Steel Education
Council bears no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and incorporate it by
reference at the time of the initial publication of this edition.
Index of Steel TIPS Publications
The following is a list of available Steel TIPS. Copies will be sent upon request. Some are in
very limited quantity.
Seismic Design of Special Concentrically Braced Frames
Seismic Design of Eccentrically Braced Frames
Seismic Design of Column Tree Moment Resisting Frames
Dynamic Tension Tests of Simulated Moment Resisting Frame Welded Joints
Reference Guide for Structural Steel Welding Practices
Seismic Strengthening with Steel Slotted Bolt Connections
Slotted Bolted Connection Energy Dissipaters
Heavy Structural Shapes in Tension Applications
j l
INTRODUCTION
PURPOSE
The purpose of this Steel TIPS is to provide structural designers, fabricators, and
erectors with the history, use, and compatibility of mixed weld metals for
structural steel applications.
ORGANIZATION AND CONTENT
To accomplish the purpose, the authors have organized this Steel TIPS into the
following categories:
Historical background.
AWS and AISC requirements.
Effect of the Northridge Earthquake.
Combanations of mixed weld metal.
The authors do not recommend or approve any particular combination of mixed
weld metal Instead, they set forth combinations used and possible combinations.
Please remember, the Engineer has the right to approve any combination of mixed
weld metal.
CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
1. HISTORICALBACKGROUND/ 1
2. AMERICANWELDING SOCIETY(AWS)REQUIREMENTS / 3
3. AISCREQUIREMENTS / 5
4. EFFECTOF 1994 NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE/ 8
5. IMPACTTESTING BEFORENORTHRIDGE / 9
6. MIXEDWELDMETALCOMBINATIONS / 10
7. COMMENTARYON IMPACTREQUIREMENTS AND IMPACT TESTING / 17
REFERENCES / 21
1. HISTORICALBACKGROUND
For many years fabricators and erectors have
used, as common practice, electrodes wi th
different specifications and classifications in the
same weld (mixed weld metals). Mixed weld
metal results from:
Different root pass and fill-in pass
electrodes.
Weld repair work to both shop and field
welds.
The more recent practice of making field
welds over shop welds.
Compatibility is a basic requi rement of mixed weld metals. The different
electrodes and the mixed weld metal must have, as a minimum, matching yield
strength, tensile strength, and impact properti es--i f impact properties are
specified.
In this SteelTIPS, the authors will limit their discussion to two welding processes:
Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW).
Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW).
MIXING ELECTRODES.
In the Same Weld Process. First, fabricators and erectors commonl y used different
manual coated "stick" electrodes (SMAW) in the same weld. Then, when f l ux cored
electrodes (FCAW) came on the market in the mid 1950's, they started using
di fferent FCAW electrodes in the same weld. They used the different electrodes:
To take advantage of one electrode's penetration capabilities for root passes
and the other electrode's capabilities for fill-in passes.
For weld repair work.
In Different Weld Processes. With the availability of self shielding f l ux cored
electrodes, fabricators and erectors began using electrodes from the t wo different
welding processes in the same weld. They used:
SMAW electrodes in the root passes for good penetration and Iow hydrogen
properties, and FCAW electrodes in the fill-in passes for high deposition
rates.
SMAW over FCAW for weld repair work.
FCAW With Outside Gas Shielding. With the availability of fl ux cored electrodes
with outside gas shielding in the mid 1960's, fabricators and erectors started using
two FCAW processes in the same weld:
Self-shielding from the flux in the core of the wire (FCAW-ss).
Gas shielding from an outside source (FCAW-g).
Fabricators generally used:
FCAW-g in the root passes for good welding characteristics.
FCAW-ss electrodes in fill-in passes for good deposition rates.
Outside gas shielding was generally limited to shop fabrication because erectors
had difficulty protecting the gas from winds encountered in field erection.
Interestingly, fabricators and erectors used Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW)
equipment to make the first Flux Cored Arc Welds. GMAW equipment used solid
wire electrodes with inert gas shielding. Users called this GMAW welding process
"Dual Shielding." Now common practice is to call fl ux cored electrodes with
outside gas shielding (FCAW-g) as "Dual Shielding."
Since Northridge. Then the 1994 Northridge Earthquake occurred. Since the
Earthquake, the volume of mixed weld metal has proliferated greatly, and with just
about any combination of SMAW and FCAW electrodes. Combinations resulted
from both damage repair work and from new welds. Damage repair work involved
welding one classification or process over another classification or process. New
design details set up the situation where erectors used one process to weld over
a different shop process.
IMPACT REQUIREMENTS.
At first, the construction industry paid little regard to impact requirements of the
electrodes. Later, various Advisory Task Groups formed to investigate the
Earthquake damage (e.g., AISC, AWS, SAC Joint Venture, SEAOC, LA City and
County, and other Code Agencies) called for impact requirements in electrodes
used in seismic designs. The various code agencies are putting these impact
requirements into their codes.
2. AMERICANWELDINGSOCIETY
(AWS) REQUIREMENTS
The AWS Structural Welding Code--Steel (AWS t - - - - - -
Code) covers the welding requirements for 1
welded steel structures. [1] This Code does not i \/ I
directly address the use of mixed weld metals or ' I ( I
impact requirements for welds. However, the I
AWS Code:
Implies the use of mixed weld metals in Section 3.3.
Sets forth impact testing requirements in Annex III if the contract drawings
or specifications require impact testing.
MIXING WELD METALS
Base Metal/Filler Metal Combinations. Although the AWS Code does not directly
address the use of mixed weld metals, it does imply their use. Close attention to
the untitled table in Section 3.3, "Base Metal/Filler Metal Combinations," page 41,
shows:
"Any steel to itself or any steel to another in the same group" can be welded
by "Any filler metal listed in the same group."
"Any steel in one group to any steel in another" can be welded by "Any filler
metal listed for a lower strength group. [SMAW electrodes shall be the Iow
hydrogen classification]" (E7015, E7016, and E7018). [2]
Implications. Section 3.3 and Table 3.1 on page 42 show that many base metals
in asteel group can be welded to each other by different electrodes; therefore, the
AWS Code allows mixed weld metal in the same weld based on strength
relationships.
Additional Requirements by Advisory Task Groups. Besides compatible yield
strength and tensile strength requirements required by the AWSCode, the Advisory
Task Groups recommended that electrodes involved in mixed weld metal welds
must have compatible impact requirements Further, the Advisory Task Groups
recommended testing and evaluation of the mixed weld metal combinations.
IMPACT
Not Addressed in AWS Code. The AWS Code does not address impact
requirements; that is the Engineer's responsibility. However, the AWS Code does
address impact testing requirements in Annex III.
IMPACT TESTING
Application of Annex III of the AWS Code. Annex III of the AWS Code addresses
impact testing. The title of Annex III is "Requirements for Impact Testing" wi th a
subtitle "Mandatory Information." A further comment under the subtitle states:
(This Annex is a part of ANSI/AWS D1.1-96, Structural Welding
Code--Steel and includes mandatory requirements for use in this
standard.) [3]
However, Section III1.1 states:
The impact test requirements and test procedures in this Annex shall
apply only when specified in the contract drawings or specifications in
accordance wi th 5.26.5(3)[d] and 4.1.1.3, and Table 3.1 of this code. [4]
Thus, the decision to call for impact testing requirements is left to the discretion
of the designer or engineer responsible for the contract drawings or specifications.
Use of Test Results. Annex Section III1.2 states in part:
. . . The energy values determined are qualitative comparisons on a
selected specimen and although frequentl y specified as an acceptance
criterion, they cannot be used directly as energy figures that would
serve for engineering calculations [e.g., failure analysis calculations]. [5]
Scatter. A great scatter is normal in Charpy V-Notch test results. The AWS Code
provides a limited discussion of scatter in Annex Ill; however, it references other
publications that thoroughl y discuss fracture toughness--i ncl udi ng scatter. Annex
III, Table II1-1, calls for three specimens for each test location, wi th an optional five
specimens per test location. When using five specimens, Note 2 in the Table
applies and states in part, "The highest and lowest values are then discarded to
minimize some of the scatter normally associated with Charpy testing of welds and
HAZ. [Emphasis added.]" [6] HAZ denotes the porti on of the base metal whose
mechanical properties or microstructure has been altered by the heat of welding
and quenching effect of the base metal. See Article 7, "Commentary on Impact
Requirements and Testing," for comments on impact testing and scatter.
4
3. AISC
REQUIREMENTS
The AISC Manual of Steel Construction:
AIIowableStress Design(AiSC Manual) addresses
mixing weld metals and impact requirements for
both the base metal and weld metals as follows:
Mixed Weld Metal. PART 5-Specifications and Codes, Specification for
Structural Steel Buildings--Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design (AISC
Specifications), discusses mixing weld metals.
Impact. PART 1-Dimensions and Properties, briefly discusses impact. PART
5 -Specifications and Codes, addresses limited impact requirements. [7]
MIXING WELD METALS
AISC Specifications. Refer to Chapter J-Connections, Joints and Fasteners. Section
J2.6., Mixed Weld Metal, states:
6. Mixed Weld Metal
When notch-toughness is specified, the process consumables for all
weld metal, tack welds, root pass and subsequent passes,
deposited in a joint shall be compatible to assure notch-tough
composite weld metal. [8]
The following AISC Specification Commentary illustrates a lack of compatibility
between process consumables (electrodes), and reinforces the Advisory Task
Groups' recommendation that users evaluate mixed weld metals by testing.
AISC Specifications Commentary. Section C-J2.6., Mixed Weld Metal, states:
6. Mixed Weld Metal
Instances have been reported in which tack welds deposited using
a self-shielded process with aluminum deoxidizers (which by itself
provided notch-tough weld metal) were subsequently covered by
weld passes using a submerged arc process (which by itself
provided notch-tough weld metal) resulted in composite weld metal
with Iow notch-toughness (Terashima and Hart, 1984; Kotecki and
Moll, 1970; and Kotecki and Moll, 1972). [9]
IMPACT
PART I Dimensions and Properties. Pages 1-4, 1-5, and 1-6 have very good,
concise write-ups on Brittle Fracture, Lamellar Tearing, and Jumbo Shapes and
Heavy Welded Built-up Sections. However, PART 1 barely touches on notch-
toughness (im pact). The last paragraph under the subtopic "Selecting a Steel" does
mention notch toughness.
PART 5 Specifications and Codes. The Specifications and corresponding
Commentary address impact in Sections A3.1.c. Heavy Shapes, A4.2. Impact, and
A.4.5. Other Forces. Engineers seldom request impact requirements for base
metal, except for heavy shapes. See below.
Section A3.1.c. Heavy Shapes specifies impact requirements for the following
members when subject to primary tensile stresses due to tension or flexure if
spliced using full penetrauon welds:
ASTM A6 Groups 4 and 5 rolled shapes.
Built-up members with plates exceeding 2 in. thick
For this use the contract documents shall specify, "... the steel shall be specified
in the contract documents to be supplied with Charpy V-Notch testing in
accordance withASTMA6, Supplementary Requirement S5. The impact test shall
meet a minimum average value of 20 ft-lbs, absorbed energy at +70F . . . . "[ 10]
When using mixed weld metal in Groups 4 and 5 rolled heavy shapes, the designer
or engineer, fabricator, and erector, should be familiar with impact requirements
and precautions addressed in:
Section A3.1.c.
The Section's Commentary.
All sectaons listed In Section A3 1 c on page 5-126, Including
corresponding commentary sections
The Section also states in part:
The above supplementary toughness requirements shall also be
considered for welded full-penetration j oi nts other than splices in heavy
rolled and built-up members subject to primary tensile stresses. [11]
The Specification Commentary discusses "considered."
Section A4.2. Impact, does not call for Charpy V-Notch toughness testing. The
Section states:
2. Impact
For structures carrying live loads* which induce impact, the
assumed live load shall be increased sufficiently to provide for
same.
If not otherwise specified, the increase shall be not less than:
[See pages 5-29 for listings ranging from 10% - 100%]
[The * footnote is not included in the above quote] [12]
Note: The listed percentages increase the live loads to compensate for loads that
induce impact.
Section A4.5. Other Forces, states:
5. Other Forces
Structures in localities subject to earthquakes, hurricanes and other
extraordinary conditions shall be designed with due regard for such
conditions. [13]
1 1 1 EFFECTOF 1994
NORTHRIDGE
EARTHQUAKE
As Mentioned in Article 1, "Historical
Background," fabricators and erectors had used
electrodes with different specifications and
classifications for many years before the
Northridge Earthquake.
MIXED WELD METALS
1
.20F
Northridge Damage Repairs. The use of mixed weld metals increased following the
Earthquake, mainly because damage repairs involved gouging out for weld cracks,
and rewelding with an electrode other than the electrode used in the original weld.
Erectors most commonly used--and continue to use--SMAW E701 8 Iow hydrogen,
manual electrodes and certain FCAW electrodes to repair damaged weld joints
made with FCAW, E70T-4 flux cored electrodes.
New Welds. Engineers started following the Advisory Task Group's
recommendation of requiring impact tests for mixed weld metals in new welds.
IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
Northridge Damage Repairs. During initial damage repairs, engineers paid little
attention to the impact requirements of the original weld metal and the repair
electrode because:
Expediency of the repairs precluded investigative testing.
AWS Code and the AISC Specifications did not have any impact requirements
for base metals--except for limited requirements by AISC for Steel Groups 4
and 5 jumbo shapes and certain built-up members. (See Specification A3.1 .C
reviewed in Article 3, "AISC Requirements").
SMAW and FCAW repair electrodes had good impact requirements--usually
20 ft. lbs. at-20F.
As repair work progressed, the Investigating Advisory Task Groups made their
recommendations available. Engineers expressed concern about the
recommendations regarding impact requirements of the original weld metal and
the repair weld metal. However, engineers apparently took no action regarding
recommendations on the original weld metal, but did follow recommendations on
repair weld metal.
New Welds. Later, the Advisory Task Groups recommended that if engineers
wanted impact requirements for mixed weld metal, each electrode used to make
the weld had to meet those impact requirements. As a result, engineers now
frequently request impact requirements for both SMAW and FCAW electrodes.
8
11 IMPACTREQUIREMENTS
AND IMPACTTESTING
BEFORENORTHRIDGE
Most of the structural steel construction before
the 1994 Northridge Earthquake had very little
impact requirements because:
Applicable editions of the AWS Code had
no impact requirements.
Applicable editions of the AISC Manual had
limited or no impact requirements.
AWS IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
%
In AWS Code. Various AWS Codes governed the construction of structures
subjected to the Northridge Earthquake. The 1988, 1990, and 1994 AWS Codes
included Appendix Ills that are almost identical to Annex III in the 1996 AWS Code.
Therefore, the present AWS impact requirements limited to impact
testing--reviewed in Article 2, "AWS Requirements"--applied to structures built
under the earlier named codes. Before 1988 the AWS Code lacked even those
impact testing requirements.
AISC IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
In AISC Manual. Various AISC Manuals governed construction of structures
subjected to the Northridge Earthquake. The 1980 AISC Manual included 1978
Specifications sim ilar to the 1989 AISC Manual Therefore, the present AISC im pact
requirements--reviewed in Article 2, "AISC Requirements"--applied to structures
built from 1978t o 1994. Before 1978, the AISC Manual did not address impact
requirements.
6. MIXEDWELDMETAL
COMBINATIONS
The use of mixed weld metal combinations can
be divided into the following three main periods
based on the different conditions for the
combinations during the periods:
1. Pre-Northridge Earthquake Practice.
2. Urgent Northridge Earthquake Damage Repairs.
3. Post-Northridge Earthquake Practice.
The following "General Criteria," "Conditions" listed under a Period, and criteria
within the tables, decided the electrode combinations used for each period.
GENERAL CRITERIA
The following criteria pertain to electrodes listed in Period 1, 2, and 3 tables:
Root weld passes require good penetration and good fusion to base metals.
Fill-in weld passes require good fusion to base metals and to other passes.
The AWS Welding Handbook and electrode manufacturers' bulletins contain
electrode information and specifications. [14]
FCAW-ss and FCAW-g electrodes make good fill-in passes because of their
higher deposition rates. However, outside gas shielded electrodes create
problems in field welding because the shielding gas must be protected from
the wind.
The Engineer may require approval of mixed weld metal including electrode
combinations previously qualified by test.
The following AWS Specifications give root pass, fill-in pass, and impact
requirements for electrodes listed in Period 1, 2, and 3 tables:
AWS AS. 1 Specification f or Carbon Steel Electrodes f or Shielded Metal Arc
Welding. [ 15 ]
AWS AS. 5 Specification f or Low Al l oy Steel Electrodes for Shielded Metal Arc
Welding. [16]
AWS A5.20 Specification f or Carbon Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc
Welding. [17]
AWS A5.29 Specification f or Low Alloy Steel Electrodes f or Flux Cored Arc
Welding. [18]
10
PERIOD 1. PRE-NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE PRACTICE
Conditions. Based on the type of weld, Pre-Northridge Earthquake Practice can be
divided into two categories; 1) Original Weld, and 2) Weld Repair. Weld Repair
Combinations probably made up a much larger volume of mixed weld metal than
Original Weld Combinations.
Original Welds. Combinations in Table 1 show SMAW and FCAW fill-in pass
electrodes welded over SMAW root pass electrodes. Typically the root pass
electrodes were selected for good penetration and good fusion. The fill-in pass
electrodes were selected for good fusion to base metals and to other passes.
Engineers, fabricators, and erectors paid very little attention to electrode impact
requirements; however, they reported no problems with the mixed weld
combinations.
TABLE 1 ORIGINAL WELD COMBINATIONS
ROOT PASS ELECTRODES
AWS CLASSIFICATION
GROUP 1 - KNOWN
FILL-IN PASS ELECTRODES
AWS CLASSIFICATION
COMBINATIONS
Impact Requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F.
SMAW Electrodes
E701 5
E701 6
E701 8
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F, unless noted.
SMAW Electrode
E7028
FCAW Electrodes
E70T-4 (No Impact)
E7XT-7 (No Impact)
E71T-8
E70TG-K2
GROUP 2 - POSSIBLE COMBINATIONS
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F to -1 50F.
SMAW Electrodes
E701 5
E701 6
E701 8
E7048
E801 5
E801 6
E801 8
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F to -1 00F.
FCAW Electrodes
E7XT- 1 E70T4-K2
E7XT-5 E70TS-A1
E70T-6 E71T8-Nil
E71T-8 E71T8-Ni2
E7XT-9 E71T8-K6
E7XT-12 E8XT-Nil, Ni2
E61T8-K6 E80T-Nil, Ni2, K2
Notes: 1. Erectors and fabricators could have welded any Fill-in pass electrode
over any root pass electrode.
11
Weld Repairs. Combinations in Table 2 show SMAW and FCAW weld repair
electrodes welded over SMAW and FCAW original weld electrodes. Fabricators and
erectors used a multitude of electrode combinations to make weld repairs to shop
and field welds. Repair items included'
Undercut.
Cracks, porosity, incomplete fusion, and slag inclusion.
Undersized welds.
Lamellar tearing (gouging into adjacent weld metal required).
Fabricators and erectors could have made the original weld with SMAW, FCAW,
GMAW, or SAW electrodes. SMAW and FCAW electrodes usually made up the repair
electrodes.
TABLE 2 WELD REPAIR COMBINATIONS
ORIGINAL WELD ELECTRODES WELD REPAIR ELECTRODES
AWS CLASSIFICATION AWS CLASSIFICATION
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F, unless noted.
SMAW Electrodes
E701 5
E7016
E7018
E7028
FCAW Electrodes
E70T-4 (No Impact)
E7XT-7 (No Impact)
E7XT-8
E70TG-K2
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F, unless noted.
SMAW Electrodes
E701 5
E701 6
E701 8
FCAW Electrodes
E70T-4 (No Impact)
E7XT-7 (No Impact)
E7XT-8
E70TG-K2
Notes: 1.
.
Electrodes listed under "Original Electrodes" are taken from
"Group 1-Known Combinations" in Table 1.
Erectors and fabricators could have welded any repair electrode
over any existing weld electrode.
12
PERIOD 2. URGENT NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE REPAIRS
Conditions. Combinations in Table 3 show SMAW repair weld electrodes welded
over SMAW and FCAW electrodes in the existing weld. FCAW electrodes were
readily available for damage repairs. They were very popular, high deposit
electrodes. However, for the emergency damage repairs immediately following the
earthquake, erectors commonly used SMAW Iow hydrogen electrodes welded over
a gouged out j oi nt made with SMAW or FCAW electrodes.
Most of the weld j oi nt damage consisted of a lack of fusion of the weld metal to
the base metal. Erectors repaired this type of damage by:
Back-gouging the j oi nt to clean base metal and clean weld metal.
Grinding to clean up.
Rewelding fill-in and build-up with E70XX electrodes.
Again, engineers and erectors paid little attention to electrode impact
requirements of the resulting mixed weld metal joint, although they suspected
most original welds were made with FCAW E70T-4 electrodes that had no impact
requirements. Engineers accepted most of the combinations in Table 3, with
acceptance based on normal welding procedures.
TABLE 3
URGENT EARTHQUAKE DAMAGE REPAIR COMBINATIONS
EXISTING WELD ELECTRODES REPAIR WELD ELECTRODES
AWS CLASSIFICATION AWS CLASSIFICATION
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F, unless noted.
SMAW Electrodes
E701 5
E701 6
E701 8
E7028
FCAWElectrodes
E70T-4 (No Impact)
E7XT-7 (no Impact)
E7XT-8
E70TG-K2
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F.
SMAWElectrodes
E701 5
E7016
E701 8
Notes: 1. Erectors could have welded any repair electrode over any existing
weld electrode.
13
PERIOD 3. POST-NORTHRIDGE EARTHQUAKE PRACTICE
Conditions. Based on the type of welding, Post-Northridge Earthquake Practice can
be subdivided into two categories:
Later Northridge Earthquake damage repairs.
New welds.
Later Northridge Earthquake Damage Repairs. After completing the urgent
Northridge Earthquake damage repairs, erectors started making "later" damage
repairs. Erectors made these later damage repairs under criteria based on reports
by the Advisory Task Groups. The Advisory Task Groups unanimously
recommended that all electrodes in aweld metal combination shall have matching
physical properties (e.g., yield strength, tensile strength, and elongation) and
compatible impact Requirements--usually 20 ft. lbs. at -20F. Combinations in
Table 4 show SMAW or FCAW repair electrodes welded over SMAW or FCAW
electrodes in the existing weld.
TABLE 4 LATER DAMAGE REPAIR WELD COMBINATIONS
EXISTING WELD ELECTRODES REPAIR WELD ELECTRODES
AWS CLASSIFICATION AWS CLASSIFICATION
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs at
-20F, unless noted.
SMAWElectrodes
E701 5
E701 6
E701 8
E7028
FCAW Electrodes
E70T-4 (No Impact)
E70T-7 (No Impact)
E71T-8
E70TG-K2
Impact requirements = 20 ft. lbs. at
-20F.
SMAWElectrodes
E7015
E7016
E7018
FCAW Electrodes
E71T-8
E70TG -K2
Notes: 1. Erectors could have welded any repair electrode over any existing
weld electrode.
14
NewWelds. Criteria developed by the Advisory Task Groups and new j oi nt designs
developed by engineers have increased the use of mixed weld combinations. The
following situations may require mixed weld metal:
1. Back-up bar removal with subsequent fill-in and build-up.
2. Beam flange weld to column flange with a shop welded cover plate acting as
a back-up bar.
3. Beam web weld to column flange with a shop welded shear plate acting as a
back-up bar.
4. Column splice weld over box column shop weld.
Test Program Combinations. The James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation is
conducting tests on compatibility of various electrode combinations. See the
Foundation's publication "Fabricators' and Erectors' Guide to Welded Steel
Construction" for a discussion of mixing weld metal and for test results. [1 9] Table
5.3 in the Guide gives intermixing recommendations. Most combinations listed an
the Table meet the Advisory Task Groups' impact requirements, although some
individual electrodes have no specified impact requirements.
Currently Used Combinations. The authors have helped develop or have learned
of various combinations of mixed weld metal. Table 5 shows some currently used
combinations of FCAW electrodes welded over SMAW electrodes or other FCAW
electrodes.
15
TABLE 5 NEW WELD COMBINATIONS
ROOT PASS OR FILL-INPASS APPLICATIONS
BASE WELD ELECTRODES OF
ELECTRODES WELD COMBINATIONS
AWS CLASSIFICATION
E701 8 E71T-8 Beam flange to column flange
E70T-6 E71T-8 Make column splice smooth
E70T-6 E71T-8 Overlay from back-up bar removal
E70T-7 E71T-8 Make column splice smooth
(No impact)
E70T-1 E71T-8 Column splice weld over shop weld on
box column
E70T-1 E71T-8 Beam flange to column flange weld over
shop weld on cover plate
E70T-1 E71T-8 Beam web to column flange weld over
shop weld on shear plate
E70T-1 E70T-6 Column splice weld over shop weld on
box column
E70T-1 E70T-6 Beam flange to column flange weld over
shop weld on cover plate
I
ETOT-1 E70TG-K2 Column splice weld over shop weld on
box column
E70TG-K2 E70T-6 Beam bottom flange to column flange
E70TG-K2 E71T-8 Beam bottom flange to column flange
E70T-1 E70TG-K2 over Test, Joint B-U4a-GF
E71T8-Nil
E71T-8 E70T-6 Test, Joint B-U2a-F
Notes: 1. The fill-in pass electrodes are welded over root pass electrodes or
base weld electrodes.
2. Each row shows a specific weld combi nati on.
3. Electrode impact requirements vary from 20 ft. lbs. to 45 ft. lbs. at
-20F, unless noted.
4. New weld repairs also use the combi nati ons shown in Table 5.
5. Fabricating shops use the ETOT-I classification (FCAW-g) electrode.
6. The Engineer may require approval of any mi xed weld metal
combi nati on.
16
7. COMMENTARYON
IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
AND IMPACTTESTING , , ,,7
This Article gives the authors' personal views on 'L' {I
impact requirements and impact testing. The / 7/
text in this Article 7 assumes the Engineer /z/.c.___
specifies impact requirements and impact '%.
testing requirements.
IMPACT REQUIREMENTS
Welding Electrodes. AWSSpecificationsAWSAS.1,AS.5, A5.20, andA$.29 give
impact requirements for commonly used welding electrodes. See "General Criteria"
in Article 6, "Mixed Weld Combinations," for complete Specification titles.
Approximately 60 to 75 percent of the specified electrodes have impact
requirements of 20 ft. lbs. at -20F. So specifying SMAW and FCAW welding
electrodes with proper impact requirements is not a problem. We recommend the
Engineer specify the electrode impact requirements in the project Specifications,
just like the Engineer specifies the grade of steel for the project.
Base Metal. Most structural steels in the AISC Specifications have no impact
requirements. An exception is ASTM A6 Steel Groups 4 and 5 hot-rolled shapes
and welded sections made of plate with a minimum thickness of 2 in. These
shapes and sections need impact requirements of 20 ft. lbs. at 70F, under certain
tension stresses and with complete joint penetration welded splices (See Article 3,
"AISC Requirements"). These are not strict impact requirements, especially when
most SMAW and FCAW electrodes have impact properties of 20 ft lbs at -20F.
AWS Welding Handbook, Figure 12.18 on page 400, "Typical Transition Curve for
Mild Steel Plate," shows absorbed energy values. [14] For temperate zones,
especially if the structural steel frame is enclosed, mild steel and Iow alloy high
strength steels have absorbed energy values of 20 ft. lbs. to 40 ft. lbs. at 25F to
750F.
However, for very Iow temperature zones, (e.g., the North Slope in Alaska, Parts of
Canada, and the Rocky Mountains), the Handbook recommends the Engineer
specify a minimum impact requirement. We will always be indebted to the Charpy
V-Notch impact test for pointing out in World War II how cold water temperatures
caused brittle fracture on ships. Recent discoveries and a review of eyewitness
accounts now confirm the passenger ship TITANIC experienced brittle fracture
failure when colliding with the iceberg and when sinking.
IMPACT TESTING
Charpy V-Notch Test. The Steel Industry extensively uses the Charpy V-Notch
17
Impact Test on its steel products--including weld metal. Test specimens are small
bars--machined, ground, and notched, usually 10mm x 10mm x 55mm in length
(0.394 in. x 0.394 in. x 2.165 in.). A specially designed testing machine supports
the specimens in the horizontal position. A pendulum force strikes and breaks the
specimen with asingle blow, with the pendulum force striking on the side opposite
the notch. The testing machine measures and records the energy absorbed in
breaking the test specimen.
Other Standard Methods. Besides CharpyV-Notch testing, ASTM A370-92 Standard
Test Methods and Definitions f or Mechanical Testing of Steel Products and ASTM
E23-88 Standard Test Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of Metallic Materials
address the following other methods of impact testing:
The Izod V-Notch Test (broken in vertical cantilever action).
The Drop Weight Test--developed by the U.S. Navy National Research
Laboratory.
The Crack Tip Opening Displacement Test (CTOD). [20,21]
AWS Requirements. Annex III of the AWS Code sets forth the following impact
testing requirements'
Three Specimens. Table II1-1 calls for a set of three test specimens for each
test location. The Engineer has the responsibility to specify the following
items on the contract drawings or specifications:
Test temperature.
Minimum average energy value per set of three (location).
Minimum energy value per specimen from any set.
Five Specimens. An optional test--probably used Jn 75 to 80 percent of
tests--allows a set of five test specimens for each location with the highest
and lowest values discarded. The result is the average value for the three
middle specimens. Discarding the highest and lowest values minimizes the
variations (scatter) normally associated with Charpy V-Notch test results of
welds and Heat Affected Zone (HAZ). See Table II1-1, Note No. 2.
Specimen Location. Figure II1-1 notes the locations of the test specimens
from the weld centerline, the Heat Affected Zone, and the weld face.
Scatter. Charpy V-Notch test results have large variations (great scatter) because
of many potential differences in testing procedures This scatter of test results
sets up a difficult situation to make a judgment when only a single specimen is
tested at each location. Unfortunately the evidence--or lack of evidence--indicates
the single test is generally the procedure followed. Differences in testing
procedures contributing to scatter include:
Material strength and thickness.
Heat input of the weld specimen.
Roiling direction of grain orientation.
Variations in testing procedures.
Small specimens.
18
Locations of tests.
Personnel maki ng the tests.
ASTM Codes. ASTM A370-92 and ASTM E23-88 give impact requi rement testing
procedures for the various impact testi ng methods. The Codes also alert the
Engineer t o be careful in compari ng the results of impact tests, i ncl udi ng steel test
specimens machined from the same heat number lot. See:
Annex AS, "Notes on Significance of Notch-Bar Impact Testing" in ASTM
A370-96.
Appendi x Xl, "Notes on Significance of Notched-Bar Impact Testing" in ASTM
E23-88. (Applies to all steel products.)
Notes Relating to the ASTM Codes.
. The Charpy V-Notch (CVN) impact test is especially appropri ate for mi ni mum
operati ng temperatures and maxi mum in service rates of loading.
. The notch behavior of face-centered cubic metals does show a broad
relationship of tensile test results. In contrast, body-centered cubic ferrite
steel test results show very little relationship between tensile test and CVN
impact test results.
The property that keeps a notched-bar from cleaving (holds together under
load), is its "cohesive strength." The bar fractures when the normal stress
exceeds the cohesive strength. Fracture wi t hout the bar deformi ng is the
condi ti on for brittle fracture.
Usually plastic deformation precedesfadure. Besides the normal stress, the
applied load also sets up shear stresses that are about 45 degrees to the
normal stress. Elastic behavior ends when the shear stress exceeds the shear
strength of the material and when deformation or plasuc yielding sets in.
Fracture wi th the bar deformi ng is the condition for ductile failure.
. Size effect of the test specimens is another source of differences that cause
variations in test results. The larger the specimen, the hi gher value the test
results; however, an increase in width will also increase the restraint of the
notch action tendi ng to reduce the absorbed energy
. The temperature effect has great influence on the notched specimen
behavior. Steel temperature at the time of the test must be known, and the
absorbed energy test results must be recorded and compared to
requi rement s--_f t , lbs. at_F. Temperature influence is especially true for
body centered cubic ferrite steels.
. The testi ng machine also contri butes to variations in test result values
through items like:
Machine rigidity.
Support anvil detail.
19
.
.
.
Pendulum stri ki ng of the specimen (not squarely).
Details of the machine anchor bolts.
While Charpy or Izod tests may not directly predi ct the ducti l e or brittle
behavior of the steel specimens or of large masses (large structures), the test
results can serve as acceptance criteria.
The Engineer must recognize that the proj ect Specifications in the Bid
Documents should specify:
The dimensional detail of the specimens.
Base metal material.
Weld deposit material.
The testi ng procedure.
The Engineer must know a structure's operating conditions, and set the test
results the Engineer is tryi ng to achieve The engi neer should also be
thoroughl y familiar wi th typical absorbed energy transi ti on curves (ft. lbs. at
F) for the types of steel to be use on the project.
20
REFERENCE
1. Structural
2. Structural
3. Structural
4. Structural
5. Structural
6. Structural
7.
.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
LIST
Welding Code--Steel D1.1-96, AWS, Miami, 1996.
Welding Code--Steel, p. 41.
Welding Code--Steel, p. 235.
Welding Code--Steel, p. 235.
Welding Code--Steel, p. 235.
Welding Code--Steel, p. 237.
ManualofSteelConstruction:AIIowableStress Design, 9th ed., AISC, Chicago,
1989.
Manual of Steel Construction
Manual of Steel Construction
Manual of Steel Construction
Manual of Steel Construction
Manual of Steel Construction
Manual of Steel Construction p
Welding Handbook, 8th ed., Vol
p. 5-69
p. 5-165.
p. 5-26.
p. 5-27.
p. 5-29.
5-30.
1, AWS, Miami, 1987.
AWS A5.1 Specification f or Carbon Steel Electrodes f or Shielded Metal Arc
Welding, AWS, Miami, 1991.
AWS AS. 5 Specification f or Low Alloy Steel Electrodes f or Shielded Metal Arc
Welding, AWS, Miami, 1996.
AWS A5.20 Specification for Carbon Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc
Welding, AWS, Miami, 1980.
AWS A5.29 Specification for Low Alloy Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc
Welding, AWS, Miami, 1995.
Fabricators' and Erectors' Guide to Welded Steel Construction, The James F
Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, Cleveland, 1997.
ASTM A370-92' Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical
Testing of Steel Products, ASTM, Philadelphia, 1992.
ASTM E23-88' Standard Test Methods for Notched Bar Impact Testing of
Metallic Materials, ASTM, Philadelphia, 1988.
21
ABOUTTHEAUTHORS
Alvaro L. Collin is a Consulting Engineer with California registration in Civil
Engineering and Metallurgical Engineering. He received a BS degree from the
University of California, Berkeley, in 1941 as a Civil Engineering major and a
Mechanical Engineering minor. He spent 24 years with Kaiser Steel Corporation as
Manager of Engineering of the Fabrication Division, Southern California, and Senior
Development Engineer, Steel manufacturing Division, Oakland, CA. Al has been
consulting the past 17years on welded construction, heavy equipment design and
material handling systems.
Mr. Collin is a life member of the Structural Engineers Association of Northern
California. He has been a member of the Board of Directors and the Steel and
Seismic committees of SEAONC. He is a Iongtime member of the American
Welding Society, having served on the National Board of Directors, on the National
Qualification and Certification Committee, and as chairman to the Los Angeles and
San Francisco sections. Al has been awarded the National, District and Section
Meritorious Awards of AWS. Recently, he was awarded national honorary
membership in theAWS. He has served on AISC and AISI Code Committee Task
Groups, the SAC Joint Venture Task Group, and is a member of the Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute.
James J. Putkey is a consulting civil engineer in Moraga, California. He received
a BCE degree from the University of Santa Clara in 1954. He served two years in
the U.S. Army, and then spent 19 years with the Erection Department of Bethlehem
Steel Corporation--Pacific Coast Division, and seven years with the University of
California--Office of the President. After leaving the University, Jim started his own
consulting business. He has provided consulting services to owners, contractors,
attorneys, and steel erectors for the past 1 7 years.
Jim is now "Semi-Retired." However, he still serves as a hearing officer for the
University of California, and occasionally writes construction related articles.
22
STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
TECHNICALINFORMATION & PRODUCTSERVICE
JANUARY 1997
QUICK REFERENCE GUIDE
for
STRUCTURAL STEEL WELDING
PRACTICES
This Guide provides a quick reference to codes and standards for selected
topics regarding the wel di ng of structural steel. The Guide mainly
addresses welding practices, but contains some related design topics.
Topics are grouped alphabetically, within the eight section titles in the
Structural Welding Code--Steel, AWS D1.1-96.
The Guide consists of a Reference Table, Reference List, and Index of
Topics. To use the Guide, 1) locate the subject matter in the Index of
Topics, 2) find the topic in the Reference Table and note the corresponding
reference list number and location, and 3) find the title of the reference
list number in the Reference List. Not all topics and topic locations are
listed. However, the topics listed and locations given should allow the
user to find most subject matter on welding practices.
The information presented in this Steel TIPs is for general information
only, and should not be used wi thout independent examination and
verification of its suitability by the user.
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCE LIST
NO. LOCATION
1. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
Safety Hazards present an welding and 1 Pg 2, Annex J
cutting 2a Pg 520
13 Pg 15 1-1
Structural Steel, Defined Elements of steel frame that 4 Pg 5
support design load
Symbols Symbols to indicate joint type, 1 Pg 2, 3
size, length, position, location, 2a Pg 195
and process 3 Pg 4-152 to 155
6 Pg 6-14, 15, 19
13 Pg 16 1-39
Terms and Definlbons Definlbons for terms used Enthe 1 Annex B
AWS Code and for general 2a Pg 554
welding terms 4 Pg 3
9 Pg 71
13 Pg 16 1-1
2. DESIGN OF WELDED CONNECTIONS
Engineer's Role m Minimizing Steels to use, weldments to 10 Pg 18
Weld Defects avoid, and submittals to require
Field Instruchons Informabon to erector on making 1 Pg 3
welds 6 Pg 6-40
Lamellar Tearing Defimtlon, causes, and 1 Pg 3
prevention of this phenomenon 2a Pg 137
5 Pg 2-19
8 Pg 44
9 Pg 61
10 Pg 16
13 Pg 6 1-9
Notches and Bnttle Fracture Locabons where notches can 1 Pg 162
occur, and details to avoid 5 Pg 2-21
notches
Sequence of Joint Welding When and how to convey welding 1 Pg 3, 230
sequence 2a Pg 136
9 Pg 37, 67, 71
10 Pg 20
Welded Joints (Connections) Requirements for design of I Pg 3
welded joints and connections 3 Pg 4-152
5 Pg 2-3
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCELIST
NO. LOCATION
3. PREQUALIFICATION OF WPSs
Fillet Welds Requirements and techniques. 1 Pg 49, 160, 169
2a Pg 154
5 Pg 2-4
8 Pg 31
Groove Welds Requirements and technaques 1 Pg 49, 169
2a Pg 149
5 Pg 2-5
Plug and Slot Welds Requirements and techn,ques 1 Pg 49, 169
Prequallfied Joint Details Joint preparation details for joints 1 Pg 52 to 99
m prequahfied welding procedure 3 Pg 4-153 to 173
specifications 6 Pg 6-12
11 Pg 29
Root Layer Lmltatlons on peenIng 1 Pg 172
9 Pg 67
Root Opening Tolerances for root openings 1 Pg 49, 164
13 Pg 2 2-6
Stnnger Beads What they are and why they are 1 Annex B(Pg 282)
used. 9 Pg 67
Welding Procedure Specficahons Scope and requirements I Pg 41,239
(WPSs) 2a Pg 439
5 Pg 2-3
10 Pg 26
12 Pg D-57
14 All
15 All
Welding Processes Common welding processes for 1 Pg 41, 51
both prequahfied and quahfied by 2b All
test 5 Pg 2-12
6 Pg 6-3
10 Pg 12
13 Pg 5 0-1, 5 6-1
Electrogas Welding (EGW) Automahc, sohd or flux core wire 1 Pg 41, 105, 157
electrode with gas shielding 2a Pg 12
2b Pg 234
5 Pg 2-17
13 Pg 5.5-3
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCELIST
NO. LOCATION
Electroslag Weldtng ( E S W ) AutomatEc,solid were electrode(s) 1 Pg 41, 105, 157
that melt m slag pool (not an arc 2a Pg 13
welding process) 2b Pg 272
5 Pg 2-17
10 Pg 13
13 Pg 5 5-1
Flux Cored Arc W e l d i n g Sema-automatlc,with flux in core 1 Pg 41, 102
(FCAW) of tubular electrode 2a Pg 7
2b Pg 158
5 Pg 2-16
10 Pg 12
13 Pg 5 3-1
Gas Metal Arc W e l d i n g Seml -automahc,sohd wire 1 Pg 41, 102
(GMAW) electrode with gas shleldmg 2a Pg 7
2b Pg 110
5 Pg 2-16
10 Pg 13
13 Pg 5 4-2
Shielded Metal Arc Wel di ng Manual ,flux coated "sttck" 1 Pg 41, 102
(SMAW) electrode 2a Pg 4
2b Pg 44
5 Pg 2-12
10 Pg 12
13 Pg 5 1-1
Submerged Arc Welding Automabc or semi-automatic, 1 Pg 41, 102
(SAW) sohd wire electrode with arc 2a Pg 5
submerged m a granular flux 2b Pg 192
5 Pg 2-15
10 Pg 13
13 Pg 5 2-1
4. QUALIFICATION
Potations of Welds and Wel di ng Onentatlon and hmltahons of the 1 Pg 51, 102, 103,
Potations four positions for groove and fillet 104
Flat welds, and corresponding 5 Pg 2-13
Honzontal welding positions 6 Pg 6-13
Overhead
Vertical
Quahficahon of Performance Requi rementsfor quahficatlon 1 Pg 137
(Welder) tests of welders 2a Pg 438, 455
8 Pg 30
13 Pg 11 4-1
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCE LIST
NO. LOCATION
Qualification of W e l d i n g Requirements for quahficaton 1 Pg 102
Procedure Specifications tests for welding procedure 2a Pg 438, 451
specifications 8 Pg 30
13 Pg 11.3-1, 6 2-1
5. FABRICATION
Arc Strikes Disposton of arc strikes. 1 Pg 172
8 Pg 31
Backing (Backing Bars) Requirements and sketch of 1 Pg 159
backing 5 Pg 2-49
13 Pg 2 2-6
Backing Bar Tack Welds Sketch of backing bar tack welds 5 Pg 2-23
Base Metal Approved base metal for 1 Pg 155,
structure, weld tabs, backing, and Annex M
spacers 2a Pg 111
Cleaning Welds Slag removal between passes 1 Pg 172
and on completed weld 13 Pg 2 1-5
Clearance for Welding Requirements for positioning I Pg 171
electrode 5 Pg 2-55
6 Pg 6-38
Cracking, Cracks Causes and repair 1 Pg 171,
Annex XI(Pg263)
10 Pg 14
13 Pg 6 3-17
Discontinuities and Defects Avoiding and correcting defects I Pg 171, 174,
175, 183
2a Pg 364
10 Pg 14, 21
13 Several Iocabons
Dstortlon and Shrinkage How to control and correct 1 Pg 164
2a Pg 136, 218
8 Pg 43
10 Pg 22
13 Pg 3 1-1
Electrodes (Consumabl es) Combi nat i onswith base metal, 1 Pg 41, 155,
requirements, and classifications Annex M
6 6-7
10 Pg 15
13 Pg 4 1-1
Environment Allowable temperature, wetness, 1 Pg 160
wind
4
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCELIST
NO. LOCATION
Equipment for Welding and Requirements 1 Pg 159
Cutting 2a Pg 9
2b Pg 2
13 Pg 4 2-1, 4 3-1
Fitting Objecbves and inspection of 7 Pg 17
placing parts together 13 Pg 4 4-1
Highly Restrained Welded Joints Causes and mltlgabon of 1 Annex XI
restrained joints (Pg 266)
CX12 (Pg 426)
3 Pg 4-152
9 All
11 Pg 33
Peemng Reasons for and hmltatons 1 Pg 172
9 Pg 67
10 Pg 20
13 Pg 3 1-7
Preheat and Interpass Reasons for, minimum 1 Pg 45, 158
Temperatures temperatures, and other 10 Pg 16
requirements 13 Pg 3 3-1
Preparation of Base Metal Edge dascontmuhes and their 1 Pg 160
hmtatlons 8 Pg 7, 8
Stress Relief Requirements for stress rehef by 1 Pg 158
heat treatment 10 Pg 16, 18
13 Pg 33-1
Temporary and Tack Welds General requtrements for 1 Pg 163
placement and removal 8 Pg 14
Thermal Cutting Processes and capabdltles 2a Pg 27
2b Pg 450, 482
5 Pg 2-17
13 Pg 13 5-1
Tolerance of Joint Dimensions Joint assembly requirements 1 Pg 164
including sketches 7 Pg 50
Weld Tabs (and Weld Dams) Use and sketches on how to 1 Pg 172
place 5 Pg 2-48, 49
8 Pg 32
12 Pg B-6
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCE LIST
NO. LOCATION
Weldablhty Required capacltaes for steel to 1 Annex B(Pg 284)
be welded 2a Pg 119
5 Pg 2-7
10 Pg 11
13 Pg 6 1-1
Workmanship, Techmques Proper welding practmes. 1 All
8 Pg 29
9 Pg 67
10 Pg 14
11 Pg 33
13 Several Iocabons
6. INSPECTION
Inspection Checks Vanous items to check dunng 7 Pg 20
welding
Inspectors and Inspecbon General requirements, and 1 Pg 173, 193, 403
Objectives objectives of welding mspecbon 2a Pg 466
5 Pg 2-24
7 Pg 20
9 Pg 68
13 Pg 11 2-1
Nondestructive Testing Descnptlon, use, and 1 Pg 175, 195
(Examination) requirements 2a Pg 468
7 Pg 38
8 Pg 41
10 Pg 23
Lquld Penetrant Inspection Descnphon and requirements 1 Pg 175, 193
2a Pg 473
5 Pg 2-24, 25
10 Pg 25
13 Pg 11 2-13
Magnetic Particle Inspection Descnptlon and requirements 1 Pg 175, 193
2a Pg 478
5 Pg 2-24, 26
13 Pg 11 2-11
Radlographm Inspection Descnphon and requirements 1 Pg 177, 195
2a Pg 486
5 Pg 2-24, 26
10 Pg 25
13 Pg 11 2-6
REFERENCE TABLE
TOPIC REFERENCE CONTENT REFERENCE LIST
NO. LOCATION
Ultrasonic Inspection Description and requirements 1 Pg 183, 204
2a Pg 502
5 Pg 2-24, 27
10 Pg 24
13 Pg 11 2-14
Visual Inspect]on Descrlpbon and requirements 1 Pg 175
2a Pg 469
5 Pg 2-24, 25
7 Pg 27
10 Pg 24
13 Pg 11 2-3
Quahty Control Quality and an example of a 2a Pg 360, 462
quahty control program 12 Pg E-17
13 Pg 11 1-1
7. STUD WELDING
Repairing Stud Welds Completion of flash by fillet weld 1 Pg 225, 228
Stud Arc Welding General requfrements and 1 Pg 223
description 2b Pg 300
13 Pg 5 5-3
Visual Inspection and 15 Bend Bend test for studs that do not 1 Pg 228
Test show full 360 flash
8. STRENGTHENING AND REPAIRING EXISTING STRUCTURES
Strengthening and Repairing General requirements 1 Pg 229
Provisions
Work Plan Engineer required to prepare a 1 Pg 229
comprehensive plan for the work
REFERENCE LIST
1. Structural Welding Code--Steel, ANSI/AWS D1.1-96, Miami, 1996.
2.a. Welding Handbook, 8th ed., Vol. 1, AWS, Miami, 1987.
2.b. Welding Handbook, 8th ed., Vol. 2, AWS, Miami, 1991.
3. Manual of Steel Construction: Allowable Stress Design, 9th ed., AISC, Chi cago, 1989.
4. Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges, AISC, Chi cago, June 10, 1992.
5. Manual of Steel Construction, Vol. II--Connections ASD 9th ed./LRFD 1st ed., AISC, Chi cago,
1992.
6. Detailing for Steel Construct/on, AISC, Chi cago, 1983.
7. Shop Inspector Training Guide, AISC, Chi cago, 1985.
8. Quality Criteria and Inspection Standards, 3d ed., AISC, Chi cago, 1988.
9. "Commentary on Hghly Restrai ned Welded Connections," AISC Engineering Journal, 3d
Quarter 1973/Vol. 10, No. 3, Chi cago, 61-73; and "Discussion," AISC Engineering Journal, 1st
Quarter 1975/Vol. 12, No. 1, Chi cago, 36-68.
10. F. Robert Preece and Alvaro L. Collin, "Structural Steel Construction in the '9Os,' Steel TIPS,
Structural Steel Educati on Council, Walnut Creek, California, September 1991.
11. James J. Putkey, " C o m m o n Steel Erecti on Problems and Suggested Solutions," Steel TIPS,
Structural Steel Educati onal Counci l , Moraga, Califorma, December 1993.
12. Steel Moment Frame Connection, Advisory No. 3, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, 1995.
13. The Procedure Handbook of Arc Welding, 13th ed., The Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland,
1994.
14. Guidelines for Welding Procedure Spec/f/cations, SEAONC, San Franci sco, October 1996.
15. Alvaro L. Collin, Welding Procedure Specfmatlons, Ori nda, California, November 1995 (available
from Structural Steel Educati onal Counci l ).
Index of Steel TIPS Publications
The following is a hst of avatlable Steel TIPS Copies wdl be sent upon request Some are in very hmted quanbty
Seasmac Design of Special Concentrically Braced Frames
Selsmm Design of Bolted Steel Moment-Resisting Frames
Structural Detads to Increase Ductdlty of Connections
Slotted Bolted Connecbon Energy Dsspaters
Use of Steel in the Seismic Retrofit of Hstonc Oakland Cty Hall
Heavy Structural Shapes Jn Steel Tension Apphcattons
Economical Use of Cambered Steel Beams
Value Engineering and Steel Economy
What Desagn Engineers Can Do to Reduce Fabrication Costs
Charts for Strong Column Weak Grder Design of Steel Frames
Sesmm Strengthemng wth Steel Slotted Bolt Connechons
Sesmm Dessgn Pracbce for Eccentrically Braced Frames
INDEX OF TOPICS
Arc Stnkes, 4
Backing (Backing Bars), 4
Backing Bar Tack Welds, 4
Base Metal, 4
Cleaning Welds, 4
Clearance for Welding, 4
Cracking, Cracks, 4
DESIGN OF WELDED CONNECTIONS, 1
DiscontinuJhes and Defects, 4
Distortion and Shrmkage, 4
Electrodes (Consumables), 4
Electrogas Welding (EGW), 2
Electroslag Welding (ESW), 3
Engineer's Role in Minimizing Weld Defects, 1
Environment, 4
Equipment for Welding and Cutting, 5
FABRICATION, 4
Field Instructions, 1
Fillet Welds, 2
Fitting, 5
Flat Welds, 3
Flux Cored Arc Welding (FCAW), 3
Gas Metal Arc Welding (GMAW), 3
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS, 1
Groove Welds, 2
Highly Restrained Welded Joints, 5
Horizontal Welds, 3
INSPECTION, 6
Inspechon Checks, 6
Inspectors and Inspection ObJectives, 6
Lamellar Tearing, 1
LJquad Penetrant Inspection, 6
Magnetic Particle Inspection, 6
Nondestructive Tesbng (Exammahon), 6
Notches and Brittle Fracture, 1
Overhead Welds, 3
Peening, 5
Plug and Slot Welds, 2
Poslhons of Welds and Welding Poslhons, 3
Preheat and Interpass Temperatures, 5
Preparation of Base Metal, 5
PREQUALIFICATION OF WPSs, 2
Prequahfied Joint Details, 2
QUALIFICATION, 3
Quahficahon of Performance (Welder), 3
Qualification of Welding Procedure
Specifications, 4
Quality Control, 7
Radlographac Inspecbon, 6
Repamng Stud Welds, 7
Root Layer, 2
Root Opening, 2
Safety, 1
Sequence of Joint Welding, 1
Shielded Metal Arc Welding (SMAW), 3
STRENGTHENING AND REPAIRING
EXISTING STRUCTURES, 7
Strengthening and Repalnng Prowslons, 7
Stress Rehef, 5
Stringer Beads, 2
Structural Steel, Defined, 1
Stud Arc Welding, 7
STUD WELDING, 7
Submerged Arc Welding (SAW), 3
Symbols, 1
Temporary and Tack Welds, 5
Terms and Definttons, 1
Thermal Cutting, 5
Tolerance of Joint Dimensions, 5
Ultrasonic Inspection, 7
Vertmal Welds, 3
Visual Inspection, 7
Visual Inspechon and 15 Bend Test, 7
Weld Tabs (and Weld Dams), 5
Weldablhty, 6
Welded Joints (Connections), 1
Welding Procedure Speclficabons (WPSs), 2
Welding Processes, 2
Work Plan, 7
Workmanship, Techniques, 6
Note Topms m bold caps (e g, INSPECTION)
refer to the eight AWS Code sechon htles