Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Design Aid For Triangular Bracket Plates Using AISC Specifications 1 1 PDF
Design Aid For Triangular Bracket Plates Using AISC Specifications 1 1 PDF
The expressions for the critical stress, Fcr, given in the AISC where
Specification (Equations E3-2 and E3-3) are Fy ⎛ a
2 3K 1 ⎞1 (12)
α= +
For Klz ≤ 4.71 E π E ⎜⎝ b a b ⎟⎠ t
r Fy
The experimental work (Martin, 1979; Martin and Robinson,
⎛ Fy
⎞ 1982) showed that the stress in the strip at the 90° corner is
Fcr = ⎜ 0.658 e ⎟ Fy
F
(5) at yield and the stress in the strip near the free edge depends
⎜⎝ ⎟⎠
on the slenderness ratio of the strip at the free edge. There-
fore, it is necessary to determine the boundary of the two
Klz E regions where inelastic buckling and elastic buckling control
For > 4.71
r Fy the critical compressive stress of the strip. The location of
this boundary denoted by z1 (measured from the inside 90°
Fcr = 0.877 Fe (6) corner) can be determined from Equation 8 with the help of
where Equations 9 and 10 and is given here:
Fe = elastic critical buckling stress
3 3 π E ⎡ a b ⎤
z1 = = ⎢ ⎥t (13)
π2E 2α ( )
2
= 2
(7) 4 K Fy ⎢⎣1 + a b ⎥⎦
⎛ Klz ⎞
⎜ r ⎟ This relation may be written in a dimensionless form by
⎝ ⎠
scaling with Equation 4 and simplifying. Thus, we have
Substituting Equation 7 into Equations 5 and 6 and simplify-
ing, we can rewrite Equations 5 and 6 z1 3 π E ⎡ t b ⎤
= (14)
⎢
Fy ⎢ 1 + a b ⎥⎥
B 4 K
( )
2
For λ c ≤ 1.5 ⎣ ⎦
( )F
2
λc
Fcr = 0.658 y (8) Note that a value of z1/B > 1 from Equation 14 indicates
that all the strips fail by inelastic buckling. Substituting this
condition into Equation 14 results
For λ c > 1.5
2
⎛ 0.877⎞ t* 4 K Fy ⎛ a⎞ (15)
Fcr = ⎜ 2 ⎟ Fy (9) = 1+ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ λc ⎠ b 3 p E ⎝ b⎠
where The limiting values of t*/b for different values of a/b and
Klz Fy Fy /E are presented in Table 1.
λc = (10)
rπ E Note that if the actual value of t/b is less than the limit-
ing value given in Table 1 for given a/b and Fy, the strength
Using Equation 1, Equation 10 for the elemental strut at dis- relation (see Equation 19) will have contributions of both
tance z from point o (see Figure 2a) can be expressed as inelastic and elastic buckling stresses.
The nominal compressive strength based on the limit state
λ cz = α z (11) of flexural buckling for a compression member is given by
( )
2 3
where Pn s π2 a b ⎛t⎞
Ag = gross area of member = 2 ⎜ ⎟
×
b3 E 2
⎝ b⎠
12 K ⎡
( )⎤
2
1+ a b ⎥
The relationships of the required strengths (Pu or Pa) to ⎣⎢ ⎦ (21)
the nominal load, Pn, from the AISC Specification (AISC,
2005a) may be written as ⎧ ⎡ 2 ⎤⎫
⎪ 4 K Fy ⎛ a⎞ 1 ⎥ ⎪
× ⎨0.772877 + 0.877 loge ⎢ 1+ ⎜ ⎟ ⎬
Pu = φc Pn (17a) ⎢ 3 π E ⎝ b⎠ t b⎥ ⎪
⎪⎩ ⎢⎣ ⎥⎦ ⎭
Pn (17b)
Pa =
Ωc Knowing the applied load, the plate geometry, and the mate-
rial properties, Equation 21 can be solved for t/b by trial and
where error or a simple computer program may be used to solve
φc = 0.90 for load and resistance factor design numerically.
(LRFD)
Ωc = 1.67 for allowable stress design (ASD) When B > 1, the compressive stress is controlled by
z1
The 90° corner of the plate is assumed to act as a hinge. inelastic buckling in all strips and elastic buckling does not
The strut near the 90° corner could attain yield stress while occur. For this case, Equation 18 after integration with the
the stresses in the farther struts depend on the slenderness upper limit as B and simplification results in
ratio of the strut. See Figure 2b for the distribution of criti-
( )
2 3
cal compressive stress. Equating sum of the moments of all Pn sπ2 a b ⎛t⎞
elemental struts due to compressive forces about the hinge at 3
= 2 2 ⎜⎝ b ⎟⎠
b E 12 K ⎡ ⎤ ( )
2
point o to the external moment due to the externally applied ⎢⎣1 + a b ⎥⎦ (22)
load, we have
B
⎡ ⎛ 12 K 2 Fy [1+ ( a b )2 ] ⎞
⎜ ⎟ ⎤
(18) ⎢ ⎜⎝ π 2 E ( t b )2 ⎟⎠ ⎥
Pn s = ∫ Fcr (t dz ) z 0 .6
6 58 − 1
×⎢ ⎥
0 ⎢ 2 loge 0.658 ⎥
⎢ ⎥
Restoring Equations 8 and 9 for Fcr and with the limits as ⎣ ⎦
shown in Figures 2b, Equation 18 can be expressed as
⎡ z1 λ2
B
zdz ⎤ COMPARISON TO EXPERIMENTAL
Pn s = tFy ⎢ ∫ 0.658 cz z dz + 0.877 ∫ 2 ⎥ (19) AND THEORETICAL RESULTS
⎢⎣ 0 z1 λ cz ⎥
⎦
Equations 21 and 22 are used to compute the nominal
After integrating, simplifying and making Equation 19 di- strengths, Pn, and are compared with the experimental and
mensionless by scaling both sides with (b3E), we obtain theoretical results, Pexpt, (Salmon, Buettner and O’Sheridan,
1964; Martin, 1979; Martin and Robinson, 1982). This com-
( )
2 3
Pn s π2 a b ⎛t⎞ parison is shown in Tables 2a, 2b and 2c in terms of Pexpt./
= 2 ⎜ ⎟ Pn. Note that the value of effective length factor, K, is taken
⎤ ⎝ b⎠
3 2 (20)
b E 12 K ⎡
( )
2
DESIGN AID TABLES Pn s/b3E, varies from 0.25 × 10-6 to 50 × 10-6 in these tables.
Knowing the design load, the design procedure is straight-
In design problems, the values of E, Fy, a, b, φc Pn (= required
forward and the various steps are enumerated as follows:
strength, Pu in LRFD) or Pn / Ωc (= required strength, Pa in
ASD), and s are known and the thickness, t, of the plate is to 1. Compute a/b, the nominal load, and Pn s/b3E from the
be determined. Therefore, design tables would become very known design information.
helpful in the design process. Two design aids in tabular
form, namely, Tables 3 and 4 are presented for steel with Fy 2. Determine t/b from Table 3 or 4, depending on the
= 36 ksi and 50 ksi, respectively. The plate aspect ratio, a/b, steel grade.
ranges from 0.50 to 3.00 and the dimensionless moment,
EXAMPLES
For comparative purposes, the following two examples
(Salmon and Johnson, 1990; Tall, 1974) are reworked.
Example 1
Determine the thickness required for a triangular bracket
plate shown in Figure 3 to carry a factored load of 60 kips.
Assume the load is located 15 in. from the face of support.
Use the LRFD method with Fy = 36 ksi.
Solution
a/b = 20/25 = 0.8
Pn = Pu /φc = 60/0.9 = 66.7 kips
Pn s/b3E = (66.7)(15)/[(253)(29,000)] = 2.208 × 10-6 Fig. 3. Triangular bracket plate for Example 1.