BEHAVIOR OF WF BEAM-TO-SHS COLUMN CONNECTIONS

USING SPECIAL SHAPED HIGH STRENGTH BOLTS

Atsuo TANAKA, Prof. Utsunomiya University

Hiroshi MASUDA, Assistant Prof, Utsunomiya University
Haruyoshi KADOYA, Director, Okabe Engineering Co.
Akiyoshi ITO, Director, Artes Design Corporation

ABSTRACT
Behavior of WF beam-to-SHS column connections using special shaped high
strength bolts called Paddle Bolts was investigated by experimental study using
full scale specimens. From the results of this test the static characteristics of
this type beam-to-column connections becomes clear and this type of connec-
tions can be used practically both semi-rigid and rigid connections depending on
the reinforcement at the column surfaces.

1. INTRODUCTION
In Japan special shaped high strength bolts (which are so called “ Paddle Bolts” as shown in
Fig.1) are used to connect WF beams to WF columns in some case from economical and
quality viewpoints. Such connections are designed as fully moment resisting connections. In
case Paddle Bolts are applied to connect WF beams to SHS columns as shown in Fig.2, many
static problems must be solved. Those problems are prevention of local deformation due to
large bolt holes and sectional shape of SHS column, fixing of the bolts at the joints of column
and the secondary bending effects to the bolts
due to shear force. In order to check the appli-
cability of Paddle Bolts to the WF beam-to SHS
column connections, experimental study was
executed using 5 full scale specimens
with various types of reinforcements. In this
paper detail of the test, main test results and
results of investigation are reported.

Fig.1 Paddle Bolt Fig.2 View of WF Beam-to-SHS Column

Connection

205
2. TEST SPECIMEN AND TEST SETUP
Full scaleT-shaped specimens with beam-to-column connection were used. The figure of speci-
men and test setup is shown in Fig.3. The size of SHS column and WF beam are †-300x300x16
and H-400x200x8x13. The beam was connected to the column by 4 M-36 Paddle Bolts. Two
kinds of strength level of Paddle Bolts with same shape were used, that is 10T (bσu≥1000N/mm2,
bσu: tensile strength of material of bolt) and 11T (bσu≥1100N/mm2). Paddle Bolts were tightened
in snug tight condition. The detail of Paddle Bolt and rectangular nut is shown in Fig.4. Three
types of nuts are used depending on the detail of reinforcement at the connection, those are
usual hexagon nut, enlarged hexagon nut with outer size for M42 and rectangular shaped nut
shown in Fig.4. The detail of each beam-to-column connection is shown in Fig.5. The list of the
specimens and its detail of connection is shown in Table 1. Specimen N-W has usual welded
rigid connection and it is selected as standard. Each connection using Paddle Bolts was rein-
forced by 22mm thick plates(R.Plate), which were welded at the connected part of the column.
Only specimen CCR-B had reinforcement also inside of the column . Depending on the fixing
method of the bolt the shape of bolt holes and the shape of nuts varied in each specimen as
shown in Fig.5 and Table 1. The notation C of the specimen means specimens with circular bolt
holes and S means with rectangular holes. The notation -A means the specimen using 10T
grade Paddle Bolts and -B means 11T grade Paddle Bolts. About specimens using 11T Paddle
Bolts, free length of the bolts at the column connection ec (see Fig.13) was set as short as
possible.Mechanical properties of the material of the specimens are shown in Table 2.
Horizontal load was cyclically applied at the tip of
㫋㪔㪈㪏
the beam as shown in Fig. 3. The loading proce- 㪤 㪊㪍
㪻㪔㪉㪍

㪏㪇
dure is shown in Fig.6. Here δp is the calculated 㪎

value of the displacement at the tip of the beam, 㪉㪌㪇 㪍㪇 㪋㪌 㪍㪇 㪍㪇 㪍㪇 㪍㪇 㪋㪇

which corresponds to the full plastic moment of
㪍㪋㪇
the beam at the column face, using actual yield
㪋㪉 㪋㪉
strength of the material of the beam.
㪋㪇 㪏

㪉㪋 㪊㪍
㪊

Fig.4 Detail of Paddle Bolt and

䋫 䋭 Rectangular Nut

WF beam oil jack

2193( - B)
2200( - A)

6δp
3100

SHS column
4δp
2δp
150

elastic
-2δp
400 2040 400 -4δp
2840
-6δp

Fig.3 Test Setup Fig.6 Loading Procedure

206
 Table 1 List of Specimen
㪩㪅㪧㫃㪸㫋㪼 㪪㫀㫑㪼㩷㫆㪽㩷㪥㫌㫋 㪪㪿㪸㫇㪼㩷㫆㪽㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋㩷㪟㫆㫃㪼
㪪㫇㪼㪺㫀㫄㪼㫅 㪙㪼㪸㫄 㪚㫆㫃㫌㫄㫅 㪧㪸㪻㪻㫃㪼㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋
㫆㫌㫋㫊㫀㪻㪼 㫀㫅㫊㫀㪻㪼 㫆㫌㫋㫊㫀㪻㪼 㫀㫅㫊㫀㪻㪼 㪩㪅㪧㫃㪸㫋㪼 㪚㫆㫃㫌㫄㫅
㪥㪄㪮 㪄 㪄 㪄 㪄 㪄 㪄 㪄
㪪㪪㪄㪘 㪄 㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪇㪫㪀 䂔 䂔
㪚㪪㪄㪘 㪟㪄㪋㪇㪇㬍㪉㪇㪇㬍㪏㬍㪈㪊 䂔㪄㪊㪇㪇㬍㪊㪇㪇㬍㪈㪍 㪄 㫉㪼㪺㫋㪸㫅㪾㫌㫃㪸㫉㩷㫅㫌㫋 㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪇㪫㪀 䇳 䂔
㪚㪪㪄㪙 㩿㪪㪤㪋㪐㪇㪀 㩿㪙㪚㪩㪉㪐㪌㪀 㪧㩷㪄㪉㪉 㪄 㪤㪋㪉 㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪈㪫㪀 䇳 䂔
㪚㪚㪄㪙 㪄 㪤㪋㪉 㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪈㪫㪀 䇳 䇳
㪚㪚㪩㪄㪙 㪧㩷㪄㪈㪉 㪤㪊㪍 㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪈㪫㪀 䇳 䇳

㪥㪄㪮
welded

diaphragm

㪪㪪㪄㪘 bolt hole (all:□) 㪚㪚㪄㪙 bolt hole (all:○)

PL22(SM490) 638×220 PL22(SM490) 638×220

rectanglar nut hexagonal nut
㪚㪪㪄㪘 㪚㪪㪄㪙 bolt hole (column:□,plate:〇) 㪚㪚㪩㪄㪙 bolt hole (all:○)

PL22(SM490) 638×220 PL22(SM490) 638×220

rectanglar nut

Fig.5 Detail of Connection of Each Specimen

Table 2 Mecanical Properties of Material

㪪㫋㪼㪼㫃㩷 㪰㪧 㪫㪪
㪫㪼㫊㫋㩷㪧㫀㪼㪺㪼 㪩㪼㫄㪸㫉㫂㫊
㪞㫉㪸㪻㪼 㩿㪥㪆㫄㫄 㪀 㩿㪥㪆㫄㫄㪉 㪀
㪉

㪸 㪋㪇㪎 㪌㪍㪋 㫎㪼㪹㩿㪼㫏㫇㪼㪺㫋㩷㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀

㪧㪣㪏 㪪㪤㪋㪐㪇
㪹 㪋㪇㪌 㪌㪍㪉 㫎㪼㪹㩿㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀
㪸 㪊㪋㪋 㪌㪊㪊 㪽㫃㪸㫅㪾㪼㩿㪼㫏㫇㪼㪺㫋㩷㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀
㪧㪣㪈㪊 㪪㪤㪋㪐㪇
㪹 㪊㪎㪌 㪌㪌㪋 㪽㫃㪸㫅㪾㪼㩿㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀
㪸 㪋㪇㪎 㪋㪎㪇 㪺㫆㫃㫌㫄㫅㩿㪼㫏㫇㪼㪺㫋㩷㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀
㪧㪣㪈㪍 㪙㪚㪩㪉㪐㪌
㪹 㪋㪈㪐 㪋㪏㪋 㪺㫆㫃㫌㫄㫅㩿㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀
㪧㪣㪈㪐 㪸 㪪㪤㪋㪐㪇 㪊㪊㪋 㪌㪇㪋 㪻㫀㪸㫇㪿㫉㪸㪾㫄㩿㪥㪄㪮㪀
㪸 㪊㪍㪉 㪌㪈㪐 㪩㪅㪧㫃㪸㫋㪼㩿㪼㫏㫇㪼㪺㫋㩷㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀 㪰㪧㪑㩷㪰㫀㪼㫃㪻㩷㪧㫆㫀㫅㫋
㪧㪣㪉㪉 㪪㪤㪋㪐㪇
㪹 㪊㪉㪈 㪌㪉㪌 㪩㪅㪧㫃㪸㫋㪼㩿㪚㪪㪄㪙㪀 㪫㪪㪑㩷㪫㪼㫅㫊㫀㫃㪼㩷㪪㫋㫉㪼㫅㪾㫋㪿
㪧㪸㪻㪻㫃㪼㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋 㪹㪫㫌㩿㫂㪥㪀 㪹㱟㫌㩿㫂㪥㪆㫄㫄㪉㪀 㪘㪼㩿㫄㫄㪉㪀 㪱㫇㩿㫄㫄㪊㪀 㪹㪫㫌㪑㩷㪫㪼㫅㫊㫀㫃㪼㩷㪪㫋㫉㪼㫅㪾㫋㪿㩷㫆㪽㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋
㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪇㪫㪀 㪐㪇㪋 㪈㪈㪇㪍 㪏㪈㪎 㪌㪌㪍 㪹㱟㫌㪑㩷㪫㪼㫅㫊㫀㫃㪼㩷㪪㫋㫉㪼㫅㪾㫋㪿㩷㫆㪽㩷㪤㪸㫋㪼㫉㫀㪸㫃㩷㫆㪽㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋
㪤㪊㪍㩿㪈㪈㪫㪀 㪐㪏㪍 㪈㪉㪇㪎 㪏㪈㪎 㪌㪌㪍 㪘㪼㪑㩷㪥㪼㫋㩷㪪㪼㪺㫋㫀㫆㫅㪸㫃㩷㪘㫉㪼㪸㩷㫆㪽㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋
㪱㫇㪑㩷㪧㫃㪸㫊㫋㫀㪺㩷㪪㪼㪺㫋㫀㫆㫅㩷㪤㫆㪻㫌㫃㫌㫊㩷㫆㪽㩷㪫㪿㫉㪼㪸㪻㪼㪻㩷㪧㪸㫉㫋

207
3. TEST RESULTS
Main test results are summarized in Table 3. Pmax and Py are the maximum strength and the
yield strength of the specimen. α is the maximum strength factor calculated by Pmax/cPp, here
cPp is the calculated full plastic strength, which corresponds to full plastic moment of the beam
at the critical location, where is assumed column surface for the specimen N-W and end bolt
line of beam flange to Paddle Bolt joint for the specimen using Paddle Bolts., which is assumed
column surface for the specimen N-W and end bolt line of beam flange to Paddle Bolt joint for
the specimen using Paddle Bolts. δmax is the displacement at the tip of the beam, which corre-
sponds to the maximum strength. Applied load P versus displacement δ at the tip of the beam
relationship of each specimen is shown in Fig.7.
About the specimen N-W brittle fracture of the beam flange close to the welded part occurred at
the ultimate stage of loading. About each specimen using Paddle Bolts, fracture
of tension side Paddle Bolt occurred at the ultimate stage of loading. At the specimen SS-A
considerable large local deformation was observed at the bolted part of the column. At the
another specimen such local deformation was not so evident. About the specimen CS-B,CC-B
and CCR-B slight local buckling occured at the compression side flange of the beam at the
ultimate stage of loading. The states of fracture of Paddle Bolts are shown in Photo 1.
3
0
0

N-W SS-A CS-A

2
0
0
1
0
0
0
P䋨kN䋩
-
1
0
0
-
2
0
0
-
3
0
0
3
0
0

CS-B CC-B CCR-B

2
0
0
1
0
0
0
P(kN)
-
1
0
0
-
2
0
0
-
3
0
0

-
1
5
0
-
1
0
0
-
5
0
0

5
0
1
0
0
1
5
0
-
1
5
0
-
1
0
0
-
5
0
0

5
0
1
0
0
1
5
0

-150 -100 -50 0 50 100 150

㱐(䋘) 㱐(䋘)

Fig.7 P-δ Relationship of Each Specimen

(SS-A) (CS-B)
Photo 1 Fracture of Paddle Bolts

208
 Table 3 Main Test Results

㪪㫇㪼㪺㫀㫄㪼㫅 㪧㫄㪸㫏㩿㫂㪥㪀 㪧㫐㩿㫂㪥㪀 㱐㫄㪸㫏㩿㫄㫄㪀 㱍 㪝㫉㪸㪺㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㪤㫆㪻㪼

㪥㪄㪮 㪉㪍㪏 㪈㪏㪍 㪈㪉㪍 㪈㪅㪉㪉 䋪㪈
㪪㪪㪄㪘 㪉㪍㪌 㪈㪎㪍 㪈㪉㪋 㪇㪅㪐㪏 䋪㪉
㪚㪪㪄㪘 㪉㪍㪏 㪉㪇㪍 㪈㪊㪇 㪇㪅㪐㪐 䋪㪉
㪚㪪㪄㪙 㪉㪐㪐 㪉㪊㪌 㪈㪋㪊 㪈㪅㪇㪋 䋪㪉
㪚㪚㪄㪙 㪊㪇㪈 㪉㪋㪉 㪈㪉㪍 㪈㪅㪈㪈 䋪㪉
㪚㪚㪩㪄㪙 㪊㪇㪍 㪉㪌㪊 㪈㪍㪌 㪈㪅㪈㪊 䋪㪉
䋪㪈㪑㩷㪹㫉㫀㫋㫋㫃㪼㩷㪽㫉㪸㪺㫋㫌㫉㪼㩷㫆㪽㩷㪹㪼㪸㫄㩷㪽㫃㪸㫅㪾㪼
䋪㪉㪑㩷㪹㫉㪼㪸㫂㩷㪸㫋㩷㫋㪿㪼㩷㫋㪿㫉㪼㪸㪻㩷㫆㪽㩷㫋㪼㫅㫊㫀㫆㫅㩷㫊㫀㪻㪼㩷㪹㫆㫃㫋

4. Investigation
4.1 Restoring force characteristics
Initial rigidity of each specimen and its ratio to that of specimen N-W is shown in Table 4. P-δ
relationship of each specimen at the elastic range is shown in Fig.8. Judging from those Table
and Figure specimen SS-A has initial rigidity of nearly 80% of that of the specimen N-W. About
the specimen CS-A and CS-B the reduction of initial rigidity is less than 10% of that of specimen
N-W. About the specimen CC-B and CCR-B initial rigidity is larger than that of the specimen N-
W. It means that the reinforcement applied to the specimen CS-A and CS-B is almost effectiveand
that of CC-B and CCR-B is effective enough.
1
5
0

Table 4 Initial Regidity of

Each Specimen
1
0
0

N-W 㪪㫇㪼㪺㫀㫄㪼㫅 㪢㩿㫂㪥㪆䋘㪀 㪢㪆㪢㪥㪄㪮

SS-A
CS-A 㪥㪄㪮 㪍㪅㪎㪎 㪈㪅㪇㪇
P(kN)

CS-B 㪪㪪㪄㪘 㪌㪅㪍㪌 㪇㪅㪏㪊

CC-B
5
0

CCR-B 㪚㪪㪄㪘 㪍㪅㪈㪋 㪇㪅㪐㪈

㪚㪪㪄㪙 㪍㪅㪉㪋 㪇㪅㪐㪉
㪚㪚㪄㪙 㪎㪅㪇㪏 㪈㪅㪇㪌
0

㪚㪚㪩㪄㪙 㪎㪅㪋㪌 㪈㪅㪈㪇

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35
㱐(䋘)

Fig.8 P-δ Relationship at Elastic Range

The skeleton curve obtained from P-δ relationship of each specimen about positive loading side
is shown in Fig.9. From this Figure the difference between reinforcement at the connection and
the difference between strength of Paddle Bolts become clear. The specimen N-W shows the
largest deformation until failure. About the specimen SS-A initial rigidity, yield strength and plas-
tic deformation until failure are clearly smaller than that of specimen N-W. About the specimen
CS-A initial rigidity and yield strength are almost same to those of specimen N-W but plastic
deformation until failure is almost half of that of specimen N-W. About the specimens using
stronger Paddle Bolts, those are CS-B, CC-B and CCR-B, initial rigidity is almost same, yield
strength and maximum strength are clearly large and plastic deformation until failure is nearly
2/3 in comparison with those of specimen N-W. Total absorbed energy of those specimens is

209
 1.5

3
0
0 N-W
2
0
0
CC-B CCR-B

㱍=eMu/Mp
CS-B
P(kN)

1.0 CS-A SS-A

1
0
0

N-W
SS-A
CS-A
CS-B
CC-B N-W
CCR-B paddle bolt䋨10T䋩
paddle bolt䋨11T䋩
0 50 100 150 200
㱐(䋘)
0.5
0 1 2 3 4
㱓s
Fig. 9 Skeleton Curve of Each Specimen Fig.10 α-ηs Relationship

almost same to that of specimen N-W. It means that the synthetic static behavior of those
specimens is almost same of that of specimen N-W. It means that the synthetic static behavior
of those specimens is almost same of that of specimen N-W.
Fig.10 shows the relationship between maximum strength factor α and accumulated plastic
deformation ratio ηs. ηs is calculated as Ws/cPp·δp, where Ws is the total absorbed energy obtain
from skeleton curve. From this Figure tendency of increasing α and ηs of specimen using stron-
ger Paddle Bolts and better condition of the reinforcement at the bolted part of column is ob-
served.
4.2 Local deformation at the bolted part
Fig.11 shows the strain distribution at he bolted part of reinforcing plate, which was attached to
column surface. This Figure corresponds to the second loading cycle. The location of strain
gage is shown in Fig.12. It is very clear that the strain at the line of bolts only shows very large
value. It means that the local deformation at the connection is restricted only at the bolted part.
The local deformation of this part is much different between each specimen, that means the
efficiency of the reinforcement applied to each specimen is much different between each other.

SS-A
10000 CS-A
CS-B
CC-B
㱑䇭(㱘)

CCR-B
5000

0 load
1 2 3 4 5

-5000 65
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 85
5000
㱑䇭(㱘)

70 69 69 70

0
Fig.12 Location of Strain
-5000
Gages
6 7 8 9
gage number

Fig.11 Strain Distribution at the Bolted Part

4.3 Estimation of maximum strength
From Table 3 it becomes clear that the maximum strength factor α of the specimens using
Paddle Bolts are clearly smaller than that of the specimen N-W. At the original design of the

210
connections of specimens using Paddle Bolts it is assumed simply that bolts carry only the
couple due to the applied bending moment. In such case the calculated maximum strength cPu1
of each specimen is large enough as shown in Table 5. The ratio of Pmax/ cPu1 is 0.74-0.79. That
means more accurate estimation about the maximum strength of this type connection must be
required. Observing from the detail of the beam end connection using Paddle Bolts, it is clear
that the effect of secondary bending moment due to shear force, which is carried by the bolts, is
considerably large, because the web of the beam did not connected to the column.
In order to consider this effect the following assumptions are adopted.
1) The shear forces carried by tension side bolts P1 and compression side bolts P2 are de-
cided in consideration of the deformation of those bolts due to shear forces (see Fig13).
2) The secondary bending moment occurred by the shear force is assumed to be same as
the fixed end moment due to the compulsive vertical deformation of a both end fixed beam
as shown in Fig.14. The span length of this beam is assumed to be the length between the
end of nut and the loading point of the shear force.
3) The loading point of the shear force P1 is the outside of the nuts, which connect the Paddle
Bolts and flange of the beam. The loading point of the shear force P2 is the end of the beam
as shown in Fig 13.
Based on those assumptions the ratio of P2 to P1 is calculated 1.95(=(100/80)3 about the speci-
mens –A ) or 2.24(=(85/65)3 about the specimens –B ).

Table 5 Calculated Maximum Strength cPu1

㪪㫇㪼㪺㫀㫄㪼㫅 [ 㩿㫄㫄㪀 㪿㩿㫄㫄㪀 㪧㫄㪸㫏 㩿㫂㪥㪀 䌣 㪧㫌㪈㩿㫂㪥㪀 㪧㫄㪸㫏 㪆 㪺㪧㫌㪈

㪪㪪㪄㪘 㪉㪈㪊㪉 㪋㪈㪏 㪉㪍㪋 㪊㪌㪌 㪇㪅㪎㪋
㪚㪪㪄㪘 㪉㪈㪊㪉 㪋㪈㪏 㪉㪍㪏 㪊㪌㪌 㪇㪅㪎㪌
㪚㪪㪄㪙 㪉㪈㪈㪎 㪋㪈㪏 㪉㪐㪏 㪊㪏㪌 㪇㪅㪎㪎
㪚㪚㪄㪙 㪉㪈㪈㪎 㪋㪈㪏 㪊㪇㪇 㪊㪏㪌 㪇㪅㪎㪏
㪚㪚㪩㪄㪙 㪉㪈㪈㪎 㪋㪈㪏 㪊㪇㪍 㪊㪏㪌 㪇㪅㪎㪐
[㪑
㩷㩷㩷㩷㪛㫀㫊㫋㪸㫅㪺㪼㩷㪹㪼㫋㫎㪼㪼㫅㩷㫃㫆㪸㪻㫀㫅㪾㩷㫇㫆㫀㫅㫋㩷㪸㫅㪻㩷㪼㫅㪻㩷㫆㪽㩷㪧㪸㪻㪻㫃㪼㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋㩷㩿㫊㪼㪼㩷㪝㫀㪾㪅㪈㪊㪀
㪑
㪿㩷㩷㪛㫀㫊㫋㪸㫅㪺㪼㩷㪹㪼㫋㫎㪼㪼㫅㩷㫋㪿㪼㩷㪺㪼㫅㫋㪼㫉㩷㫆㪽㩷㪹㫆㫋㪿㩷㫊㫀㪻㪼㩷㪧㪸㪻㪻㫃㪼㩷㪙㫆㫃㫋㩷㩿㫊㪼㪼㩷㪝㫀㪾㪅㪈㪊㪀

[ (to loading point)

half of width of nut
tension side (20mm)
㪧㪈 㪃 㪧㪉
㪼㫋 㪧㪈
h

㪧㪉
㪼
compression side 㪼㪺 㪼㪺㩿㫄㫄㪀 㪼㫋㩿㫄㫄㪀 Fig.14 Assumption of Moment
㪄㪘 㪏㪇 㪈㪇㪇
㪄㪙 㪍㪌 㪏㪌 Distribution at P. Bolt
Fig.13 Assumption of Loading
Point of Shear Force

211
 Table 6 Calculated Maximum Strength cPu2

㪺㪧㫌㪉 㩿㫂㪥㪀 㪧㫄㪸㫏 㪆 㪺㪧㫌㪉

㪚㪸㫉㫉㫐㫀㫅㪾㩷㪩㪸㫋㫀㫆㩷㫆㪽㩷㪪㪿㪼㪸㫉㩷㪣㫆㪸㪻
㪄㪘 㪄㪙 㪪㪪㪄㪘 㪚㪪㪄㪘 㪚㪪㪄㪙 㪚㪚㪄㪙 㪚㪚㪩㪄㪙
㪧㪈㪔㪈㪆㪊㪃㪧㪉㪔㪉㪆㪊 㪉㪊㪐 㪉㪎㪍 㪈㪅㪈㪇 㪈㪅㪈㪉 㪈㪅㪇㪏 㪈㪅㪇㪐 㪈㪅㪈㪈
㪧㪈㪔㪈㪆㪋㪃㪧㪉㪔㪊㪆㪋 㪉㪍㪇 㪉㪐㪏 㪈㪅㪇㪈 㪈㪅㪇㪊 㪈㪅㪇㪇 㪈㪅㪇㪈 㪈㪅㪇㪊
㪧㪈㪔㪈㪆㪌㪃㪧㪉㪔㪋㪆㪌 㪉㪎㪌 㪊㪈㪉 㪇㪅㪐㪍 㪇㪅㪐㪎 㪇㪅㪐㪍 㪇㪅㪐㪍 㪇㪅㪐㪏

In order to certify above mentioned thinking about the effect of secondary bending moment,
maximum strength of each specimen cPu2 is calculated based on this thinking and is shown in
Table 6. In this calculation the ratio of P1 to P2 is assumed simply 1:2, 1:3 and 1:4, considering
small change of above mentioned condition. Judging from the results of this calculation the
shear load carrying ratio of P1 to P2 is assumed to be 1:3 most appropriately and this results is
considered to be almost proper.
4.4 Yield Strength of the Specimens
Yield strength of the specimen SS-A and CS-A was considered to be influenced by local defor-
mation of the bolted part of the column. About another specimen yield strength was decided by
yielding of the beam. About yield strength of those specimens the effect of secondary bending
moment due to the shear force could not be observed, because yield ratio of Paddle Bolt is very
high and such effect is covered by its elastic behavior at the loading stage of yielding of the
beam.

5. Conclusions
In order to investigate the applicability of WF beam-to-SHS column connections using Paddle
Bolts, experimental study was executed using full scale specimens. From this study following
items become clear.
1) Main static characteristics such as initial rigidity, yield strength and plastic deformation ability
of this type beam-to-column connections are clearly influenced by the detail of reinforcement
at the bolted parts of column surface and the shape of bolt holes. In case the reinforcement
is adequate the static characteristics of such connections are almost same as those of
usual welded moment resisting beam-to-column connections.
2) The maximum strength of this type connection, which is decided by the fracture of the bolts,
is greatly influenced by the effect of secondary bending moment due to the shear forces
carried by the bolts. Such effect is estimated precisely and easily by simple assumptions.
3) The yield strength of this type connection is basically decided by the yielding of the beam in
case reinforcement of the bolted part is appropriately. At this stage of loading the effect of
secondary bending moment to the bolts due to shear force is not shown, because yield ratio
of Paddle Bolt is very high.

212