메일읽기 : 네이버 메일 페이지 1 / 3

FW: Meeting Minute_Feb08,2010_TSC

보낸사람 : "이철호"<ceholee@snu.ac.kr>
보낸시간 : 2010-02-10 (수) 06:33:23 [GMT +09:00 (서울, 도쿄)]
받는사람 : "₩'김성배₩'"<sbkim@senkuzo.com>; "₩'서동기₩'"<dgseo@senkuzo.com>; "₩'김형섭₩'"<hs
kim@senkuzo.com>; "₩'이종호₩'"<jhlee@senkuzo.com>; "₩'김대경연구원₩'"<solarbim@nave
r.com>; "₩'박창희연구원₩'"<changhee1220@naver.com>; "₩'박홍근교수님₩'"<parkhg@snu.a
c.kr>; "₩'이철호교수님₩'"<ceholee@snu.ac.kr>; "₩'황현종연구원₩'"<hwanggun85@naver.co
m>; "₩'이승환₩'"<shlee@senkuzo.com>; "₩'이창남₩'"<cnlee@senkuzo.com>
참조 : "Cheol-Ho Lee"<chl125@ucsd.edu>

어제 LA Meeting에서 AISC-CPRP와 관련하여 논의된 좀 더 구체적 내용과 대응방안에 대한 의견을 2~3일

내로 정리하여 보겠습니다.

From:이승환[mailto:shlee@senkuzo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 09, 2010 6:23 PM
To: 'erzen.hoda@englekirk.com'; 'tony.ghodsi@englekirk.com'; 'tom.sabol@englekirk.com'; 'nagi.abo-shadi
@englekirk.com'; ceholee@snu.ac.kr
Cc: 'seungwu.lee@senvex.net'; hadokim@gmail.com; cnlee@senkuzo.com; parkhg@snu.ac.kr
Subject: Meeting Minute_Feb08,2010_TSC

Dear all,

Today’s meeting was really productive. Thank you for your cooperation and I strongly believe we will fi
nally get successful results with the pursue for both ICC and AISC certifications.

Please briefly check the meeting minute as below and modify or give comment if there is any flaw or m
isunderstanding.

ICC
1. Specification to verify concrete filling in TSC is needed.(Concern raised by ICC staff)
2. Dr. Abo-shadi will find and share a sample of the quality manual of which has similar non-exclusive li
censing relationship between patent holder and manufacturer.
3. Dr. Abo-shadi will send the research paper regarding the comparison between AISI and AISC code to
SH Lee.
4. SENSE will review the comparison research, create a design manual, and send to Dr. Abo-shadi.
5. Dr. Abo-shadi will review the design manual, and apply to the ICC qualification process.
6. On Feb 11, 2010, Dr. Abo-shadi, SENSE, and Dr. David Zhao will have a meeting to discuss about :
1) Flexural test plan (Conforming to AC85)
2) Avoidance of fire-proofing test
3) Quality manual, especially the Licensing issue

AISC
1. “Sufficient number”of specimen is determined only by Committee
2. The flexural Test to the limit state could be helpful for the analysis of Seismic resistance behavior
3. Materials used for the test should have mill certifications which indicates that the material has certain
specifications
4. Test Specimen should be same as the “Real”at the field. I.E, Any Bracings attached to the test specim
en should be also same for the field application
5. Weak axis : simple beam connection only. Should be prepared for the perimeter beam and Cantilever
area.
Professor Sabol will send the testing result of biaxial loading (Connect(?) product)
Limited number of test on weak axis might be needed.
6. Small number of test may limit the extent of approval.
7. 6 inch solid concrete is not that popular, and therefore not competitive in the US (Usually 3inch meta
l deck and 6.25inch light-weight concrete for 2 hour fire proofing)
8. Specimen detail for panel zone reinforcement should be used identically for the field construction.
9. Specification for filler metal should be provided. The filler metal should follow the US standard.

http://mail.naver.com/read_index3.nhn?folder=127&realfoldersn=undefine... 2010-02-26
메일읽기 : 네이버 메일 페이지 2 / 3

10. A325 is the widely being used bolt type, which is regarded as high strength bolt.
11. Should revisit Section 7.2 of AISC for the bolt design, regarding the bearing of bolt
12. Regarding the bolt hole, punching can cover both punching and drilling : Drilling not cover the pun
ching.
13. Workmanship : FCAW
14. Slip Critical Bolt : Class A which is minimum
Splice will be designed enough even not considering the post slip behavior and bearing issue
15. Additional detail
Top bar
Catalogue should contain the top bar specification, because the top bar is part of the system!!
16. It would be good to have recommended design guideline in the catalogue
17. Top bar reinforcement in test specimen should assume the worst case
18. Effective width should be defined, or at least theoretically be explained (Professor Tom Sabol)
Professor Park will follow up this issue.
19. “Component Test”should be planned
- Coupler attached to the column and etc.
20. For composite beam, there is no distinctive confinement regarding the balance between + and – m
oment, (RC, 50%)
- Mr. Ghodsi may find the test result on PT slab composite beam, which shows that there is no signif
icant difference between Post tensioned slab and not-post-tensioned slab

Comments from Mr. Hoda

1. Mf(Moment at column face) should be calculated and applied for the panel zone analysis
2. Catalogue should be updated : currently does not contain 450mm, and 550mm
3. Ry value : Re-bar 1.25, Con’c 1.3 or ACI 318 (Currently 1.1)
4. Strong column : New Provision(2010) should be mentioned
5. Page 12 : “Panel zone contribution” should be separately mentioned.
6. Page 16 : bolt design
Current design is assuming that positive moment governs the whole system : At least there should be
a comment
7. The design criteria for the “Top Flange Bolts” should be provided (Currently there is not)
8. Bolt should be all Class A (Page 19 : there is Class B)
9. Page 22 : Maximum demand level should be applied
10. Step 8 is just for reference : Expression such as “Prescriptive” should be mentioned.
11. Step 9 : There is discrepancy in drawings for upper flange reinforcement (P29 VS P31)

Next Step
1. CPRP will be held in April 20~22
2. SENSE and SNU team will develop the :
1) Design Procedure
2) Testing Matrix/Program
to professor Sabol until middle of March
3. Englekirk Team will submit the package to CPRP in April.

그 밖에 회의에서 논의되지 않았던 이철호 교수님 커멘트

1. 브라켓에서 기둥face와 맞닿는 TSC 돌기부분은 아예 부분적으로 절단하고 평평하게 만들어서 seamless
welding한다.
2. 기둥face와 맞닿는 TSC브라켓의 상부 플랜지 보강은, 기둥face에는 용접하지 않고 양 상부플랜지를 이어
주기만 하도록 볼트 1개씩 설치하여 연결재 설치(용접 안함)
3. Bolt hole 은 drilling으로 하되 punching해도 문제없다는 이론적 배경을 제시하면 됨

본 회의록을 circulate하고 최종적인 커멘트들을 취합하여 서울대학교와 센구조 팀에게 한번에 전달하도록
하겠습니다.

Best regards,

Seunghwan Lee
82 10 9006 5278
SEN Structural Engineers Co., Ltd.

http://mail.naver.com/read_index3.nhn?folder=127&realfoldersn=undefine... 2010-02-26
메일읽기 : 네이버 메일 페이지 3 / 3

(주)센구조연구소
TEL 02.2629.3117
FAX 02.2629.3110
www.senkuzo.com
서울 영등포구 당산동 6가 121-74 SENSE빌딩
SENSE Bldg., 121-74 Dangsan-dong 6-ga, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul 150-808 Korea

http://mail.naver.com/read_index3.nhn?folder=127&realfoldersn=undefine... 2010-02-26