Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Design of Reduced Beam Section (RBS) Moment Frame Connection
Design of Reduced Beam Section (RBS) Moment Frame Connection
by
Kevin S. Moore, James O. Malley, Michael D. Engelhardt
ABOUT T H E AUTHORS
KEVIN S. MOORE is a Design E n g i n e e r with Degenkolb E n g i n e e r s in S a n Francisco, California. He e a r n e d his M.S. degree at The University of Texas at A u s t i n w o r k i n g u n d e r th e direction of Dr. J. A. Y u r a a n d Dr. M. D. E n g e l h a r d t . While c o n d u c t i n g r e s e a r c h , Kevin a s s i s t e d Dr. E n g e l h a r d t with m a t e r i a l testing for th e '~UT Tests," s o m e of th e first m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n tests following t he 1994 Northridge e a r t h q u a k e . He was th e lead e n g i n e e r for a 5-stolry SMF building utilizing RBS c o n n e c t i o n s c o n s t r u c t e d in S a n F r a n c i s c o a n d is a registered Professional E n g i n e e r in California.
J A M E S 0. MALLEY is a Senior Principal at Degenkolb E n g i n e e r s in S a n Francisco, Califor-
nia. He is t he Project Director for Topical Investigations of the SAC J o i n t V e n t u r e P a r t n e r s h i p . The SAC J o i n t V e n t u r e w a s c r e a t e d to develop guideline d o c u m e n t s for t h e design, evaluation, a n d repair of steel m o m e n t frame bui l d in g s in r e s p o n s e to th e d a m a g e c a u s e d by th e Northridge e a r t h q u a k e . J i m h a s b e e n involved with m a n y steel design a n d peer review projects, i n c l u d i n g t he 5-story SMF building listed above. He is a m e m b e r of th e AISC C o m m i t t e e on Specifications a n d Chair of t he Seismic S u b c o m m i t t e e a n d h a s a u t h o r e d n u m e r o u s p a p e r s on steel design a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n t h r o u g h o u t h is career. He is also a r e g i s t e r e d S t r u c t u r a l Engin e e r in California. MICHAEL D. ENGELHARDT is a n a s s o ciate professor of Civil E n g i n e e r i n g at The University of Texas at Austin. Mike t e a c h e s c o u r s e s on s t r u c t u r a l steel design at The University of Texas a n d c o n d u c t s r e s e a r c h on seismic r e s i s t a n t steel framing. His previous w o r k i n c l u d e s m a j o r c o n t r i b u t i o n s to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d validation of eccentrically b r a c e d f r a m e s (EBFs). Mike h a s b e e n a n active p a r t i c i p a n t in m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n r e s e a r c h since t h e 1994 Northridge e a r t h q u a k e a n d h a s w o r k e d extensively on RBS r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h . Mike is a m e m b e r of AISC T a s k C o m m i t t e e N u m b e r 113 on Seismic Design a n d is a registered Professional E n g i n e e r in California.
CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1 1.1 DESCRIPTION OF SMF ................................................................................. 1 1.2 BACKGROUND OF RBS ............................................................................... 2 HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF RBS SMF CONNECTIONS ........................ 3 2.1 INITIAL RESEARCH ....................................................................................... 3 SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS .............................................................................. 4 3.1 OVERVIEW OF TEST RESULTS FOR RADIUS CUT RBS SPECIMENS ........... 4 RBS DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR SMFS .................................................................. 6 4.1 RBS DESIGN ................................................................................................. 6 4.2 RBS SIZING .................................................................................................. 7 4.3 STEP-BY-STEP PROCEDURE ...................................................................... 10 4.4 ADDITIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 RBS DESIGN EXAMPLE ....................................................................................... 18 PROCEDURES FOR ACCEPTANCE OF DESIGN BY BUILDING AUTHORITIES ...21 6. I C O M M U N I C A T I O N ....................................................................................... 21 6.2 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... 22 6.3 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ................................................................... 22 FABRICATION AND INSPECTION ISSUES ........................................................... 22 7.1 CUTTING AND GRINDING ........................................................................... 22 7.2 WELDING .................................................................................................... 23 REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 25 APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................... Ai
3. 4.
6.
LIST OF FIGURES
1.1 1.2 2.1 2.2 PRE-NORTHRIDGE MOMENT CONNECTION DETAIL ................................................. 1 RADIUS CUT RBS MOMENT CONNECTION ............................................................... 2 TAPERED CUT RBS MOMENT CONNECTION ............................................................ 3 E X A M P L E O F L A B O R A T O R Y B E H A V I O R O F R A D I U S C U T R B S T E S T S P E C I M E N ..... 4 (A) DETAIL OF TEST SPECIMEN ........................................................................... 4 (B) RESPONSE OF TEST SPECIMEN ..................................................................... 4 MOMENT DIAGRAM AND BEAM GEOMETRY FOR RBS ............................................. 7 GEOMETRY OF RADIUS CUT RBS ............................................................................. 8 TYPICAL MOMENT FRAME BEAM WITH RBS CONNECTIONS ................................... 8 B E A M A T M I N I M U M S E C T I O N O F R B S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 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 S O F R B S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 FREE BODY DIAGRAM BETWEEN CENTER OF RBS AND FACE OF COLUMN FLANGE ............................................................................ 12 F R E E B O D Y D I A G R A M F O R C A L C U L A T I O N O F C O L U M N M O M E N T S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 C O M P A R I S O N O F T E S T R E S U L T S F O R C O V E R P L A T E D A N D R B S C O N N E C T I O N S 17 RBS DIMENSIONS ................................................................................................... 18 P O R T I O N O F E X A M P L E B E A M B E T W E E N R B S C E N T E R S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 CONNECTION DETAIL FOR DESIGN EXAMPLE ....................................................... 21
4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7 4.8 5.1 5.2 5.3
I.
Introduction
W h e n s u b j e c t e d to a major e a r t h q u a k e , buildings designed to m e e t the design requirem e n t s of typical building codes, s u c h as the UniI'orm B u i l d i n g ~ C o d e (1997), are expected to have d a m a g e to both s t r u c t u r a l a n d n o n s t r u c t u r a l elements. The s t r u c t u r a l design for large seismic events m u s t therefore explicitly consider the effects of r e s p o n s e beyond th e elastic range. The "Special Moment Frame" (SMF) steel building system is designed s u c h t h a t t he c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n t he f r a m e beams and columns absorb substantial energy a n d provide major contributions to the d i s p l a c e m e n t ductility d e m a n d .
~--~
C.P.7 T4 ~0 -
I I : I . 7/8" A325-XB LS 1 OT
1.1
A SMF lateral force resisting s y s t e m is often preferred by building o w n e r s a n d a r c h i t e c t s b e c a u s e this type of s y s t e m provides large u n o b s t r u c t e d s p a c e s t h r o u g h o u t the building plan. This "open" layout offers the m o s t flexibility for p r o g r a m m i n g the spaces as well as a r c h i t e c t u r a l a p p o i n t m e n t s . For t he s e reasons, steel buildings with SMF s y s t e m s are quite c o m m o n in m a j o r c o m m e r c i a l a n d instit ut i ona l s t r u c t u r e s . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e SMF s y s t e m is c o n s i d e r e d by m a n y to be one of the m o s t ductile steel building s y s t e m s available to the engineer. For this r e a s o n , SMF s y s t e m s have b e e n widely u s e d in a r e a s of high seismicity. SMFs are typically c o m p r i s e d of c o n n e c tions b e t w e e n wide flange b e a m s a n d c o l u m n s w h e r e b e a m flanges are welded to c o l u m n flanges utilizing complete joint penetration welds. Figure 1.1 s how s a typical u n r e i n f o r c e d design detail for a beam-to-colu m n c o n n e c t i o n u s e d in SMF s y s t e m s prior to the 1994 Northridge e a r t h q u a k e . C o m m o n practice prior to the Northridge e a r t h q u a k e was to either bolt or weld the web to the colu m n s h e a r plate, a n d to weld the b e a m flanges to the c o l u m n flange u s i n g a complete joint p e n e t r a t i o n groove weld. Historically, de si gne rs have a s s u m e d t h a t b e a m s h e a r is t r a n s f e r r e d to the c o l u m n by the b e a m web c o n n e c t i o n a n d the m o m e n t is t r a n s f e r r e d t h r o u g h t h e b e a m flanges.
1.2
Background of RBS
A n o t h e r type of c o n n e c t i o n d e v e l o p e d to force the inelastic deformation away from the b e a m - c o l u m n i n t e r f a c e is r e f e r r e d to as a " R e d u c e d B e a m Section" c o n n e c t i o n (RBS) or "dogbone". This c o n n e c t i o n relies o n t h e selective r e m o v a l of b e a m flange m a t e r i a l a d j a c e n t to t h e b e a m - t o - c o l u m n c o n n e c t i o n , typically f r o m b o t h top a n d b o t t o m flanges, to 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 . This r e d u c t i o n in c r o s s s e c t i o n a l a r e a will r e d u c e t h e m o m e n t c a p a c i t y at a d i s c r e t e location in t h e b e a m . V a r i o u s s h a p e s of c u t o u t s a r e possible, i n c l u d i n g c o n s t a n t c u t , t a p e r e d c u t , r a d i u s c u t a n d o t h e r s . Figure 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 m b o u r g - b a s e d steel m a n u f a c t u r i n g c o m p 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 o n (RBS).
' A
~L~ - - . .
A n u m b e r of significant events led to the curr e n t e n v i r o n m e n t s u r r o u n d i n g SMF design a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n methodologies. C o n c e r n s over m a t e r i a l properties, c o n n e c t i o n geometry, design p a r a m e t e r s a n d weld quality are j u s t a few i s s u e s w h i c h b e c a m e a c o n c e r n after brittle failures were observed in SMF m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s after the 1994 Northridge e a r t h q u a k e . SMF s t r u c t u r e s were still being d e s i g n e d a n d r e q u e s t e d by o w n e r s for all t he r e a s o n s de sc ri be d earlier. The pre-Northridge connection detail h a d b e c o m e a driving econ o m i c factor for t he viability of t he SMF system. To redesign m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s in a SMF s y s t e m utilizing expensive c o n n e c t i o n r e i n f o r c e m e n t t e c h n i q u e s m a d e this building s y s t e m less competitive.
m i n i m u m section of the t a p e r e d RBS. These c h a n g e s of c r o s s - s e c t i o n i n t r o d u c e s t r e s s c o n c e n t r a t i o n s t h a t c a n lead to f r a c t u r e within th e highly s t r e s s e d r e d u c e d section of the b eam.
~=
2.1
Initial Research
A significant a m o u n t of r e s e a r c h a n d t e s t i n g on RBS m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s h a s a l r e a d y b e e n c o m p l e t e d , a n d a d d i t i o n a l w o r k is u n d e r w a y . Appendix A provides a listing of tests on RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . The list i n c l u d e s key f e a t u r e s of e a c h test, i n c l u d i n g m e m b e r sizes a n d s t r e n g t h s , c o n n e c t i o n details, RBS size a n d shape, a n d t he plastic rotation achieved by e a c h test assemblage. As indicated by t he d a t a - i n Appendix A, s u c c e s s f u l tests have b e e n c o n d u c t e d on c o n s t a n t cut, t a p e r e d c u t a n d r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s . The t a p e r e d cut, s h o w n in Figure 2.1, is i n t e n d e d to allow the section m o d u l u s of th e b e a m to m a t c h the seismic m o m e n t g r a d i e n t in the r e d u c e d region, t h e r e b y p r o m o t i n g more u n i f o r m yielding within t he r e d u c e d section. This is i n t e n d e d to create a reliable, u n i f o r m hi ngi ng location. However, stress c o n c e n t r a t i o n s at t he r e - e n t r a n t c o r n e r s of the flange c ut m a y lead to f r a c t u r e at t h e s e locations. After significant p l a s t i c rotation, both the c o n s t a n t c u t a n d t a p e r e d c u t RBS connections, have experienced fractures within the RBS in some laboratory tests. These fra c t ures have o c c u r r e d at c h a n g e s in section within t he RBS, for example at the 3
40000 .
i ~ "~'>~. . . . . . . i~'i"" ~ ~ 45
Note: ~ All field welds: E71T-8 d ")(S~if~ed CVN = 20 ft-lbs at -20 deg F) 20.-~
'
$1:~.~B4
~ ~
~
\-~W~,lg4
~ J /
~ Z .................
~ ~ IN ~8
~oo
~ ~ltS: 1" A325 9" C-C ' ~Holes: 1-1/16" DIA. E ~8" x 6" x 2'-6"
~
....
i
i
.,0000
-20000 .30000
" ~ ~ 5/1~
~/
/
/
2.31"
~0000
.0.0~ .0.114
0.03
0.04
0.05
9"
,~
27"
(a) Detail of ~ e s t S p e c i m e n
(b) R e s p o n s e of T e s t S p e c i m e n
3.
T h e t a b l e in A p p e n d i x A p r o v i d e s a l i s t i n g of R B S t e s t d a t a . While t h i s list m a 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 v e r y t e s t p e r f o r m e d on RBS beam-column subassemblies or a n c i l l a r y t e s t i n g to s u p p o r t p e r f o r m a n c e , t h e list d o e s p r o v i d e t h e r e a d e r w i t h a s u b s t a n tial a m o u n t of d o c u m e n t e d p e r f o r m a n c e c o n d i t i o n s for t h i s c o n n e c t i o n . T h e t a b l e a l s o i n c l u d e s R B S t e s t s c o m p 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 m i d - 1 9 9 9 . These test results have not been formally 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 available test reports. T h e AISC 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 for S M F c o n n e c t i o n d e s i g n s . T h e t e s t r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d in A p p e n d i x A m a y b e u s e f u l
3.1
for
T h i s s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s a n o v e r v i e w of t h e t e s t d a t a l i s t e d in A p p e n d i x A for r a d i u s c u t R B S t e s t s p e c i m e n s . T h e r e a r e 27 r a d i u s c u t R B S t e s t s l i s t e d in t h e table. E x a m i 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 developed plastic rotations ranging from 0.029 rad to 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 that the radius cut RBS connection can develop large plastic rotations on a consist e n t b a s i s . Also n o t a b l e is t h e fact t h a t a
4.
RBS D e s i g n SMFs
Procedure
for
The following sections co n tain r e c o m m e n d a tions for th e design of n e w r a d i u s c u t RBS m o m e n t connections. Bas ed on the successes outlined above, a n d the preference of e n g i n e e r s designing n e w SMF s t r u c t u r e s , t h e design meth o d o lo g y p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n focuses on t h e r a d i u s c u t RBS shape. Globally i m p o r t a n t design p a r a m e t e r s s u c h as p a n e l zone participation, b e a m s h e a r a n d overall frame drift are a d d r e s s e d as p a r t of th e reco m m e n d e d procedure. Many important a s p e c t s of m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n design are applicable a n d m u s t be c o n s i d e r e d w h e n designing SMF RBS connections. The RBS design meth o d o lo g y s h o u l d be p e r f o r m e d in c o n j u n c t i o n with available test r e s u l t s as p a r t of th e justification of th e design procedure. The initial p a r t of th e S M F / R B S design is to d e t e r m i n e the configuration of th e m o m e n t frames, th e typical b ay sizes, p l a n d i m e n sions a n d frame locations. Many of t h e s e r e q u i r e m e n t s are d e t e r m i n e d by o t h e r s , (architects, o w n e r s , developers), b u t t h e engineer s h o u l d influence t h e s e d ecis i o n s b a s e d on s o u n d design practices. One ex ample w o u l d be to c o n s i d e r th e b ay size if a SMF/RBS s y s t e m is to be utilized. B e c a u s e of the high m o m e n t g r a d i e n t ratio a s s o c i a t e d with sh o rt bays, m o r e b e a m flange removal in RBS c o n n e c t i o n s will be r e q u i r e d for s h o r t bay f r a m e s t h a n long b ay frames. In addition, b e a m sizes m a y be affected. With proper g u id an ce, th e e n g i n e e r c a n s u p p l y information t h a t will help th e a r c h i t e c t develop a r a t i o n a l , efficient b u i l d i n g d esig n . U p o n d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the basic s t r u c t u r a l p a r a m eters, the e n g i n e e r c a n begin th e m e m b e r a n d c o n n e c t i o n design process.
4.1
RBS Design
The e n g i n e e r will begin th e design of t h e s t r u c t u r e by d e t e r m i n i n g th e force level a n d drift limits to be i n c o r p o r a t e d as p a r t of t h e design. These p a r a m e t e r s are typically set by a model building code s u c h as th e Uniform Building Code (1997) or, in the f u t u r e , the 6
DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS International Building Code. O n c e t h e force
level is d e t e r m i n e d b a s e d o n site 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 m i c i t y of t h e region a n d t a r g e t drift limits, t h e e n g i n e e r c a n begin t h e d e s i g n of t h e s e i s m i c s y s t e m u s i n g t h e AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings {1997). B a 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 m e t e r s , t h e e n g i n e e r will d e t e r m i n e t h e b e a m a n d c o l u m n sizes r e q u i r e d to m e e t drift limits, etc. It is i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e e n g i n e e r r e m e m b e r t h a t t h e f r a m e is l e s s stiff d u e to t h e RBS d e s i g n , t h a n a "typical" n o n - R B S SMF. After p r o p e r b e a m - c o l u m n sizes h a v e b e e n d e t e r m i n e d for t h e f r a m e , 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 o l l o w e d to develop t h e p r o p e r flange r e d u c t i o n to prod u c e t h e d e s i r e d p e r f o r m a n c e . M a n y of t h e design steps a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s parallel i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d in r e p o r t s r e f e r e n c e d at t h e e n d of t h i s d o c u m e n t . T h e s t r e n g t h of t h e b e a m at t h e m i n i m u m s e c t i o n of t h e RBS m u s t satisfy c o d e r e q u i r e m e n t s u n d e r all a p p l i c a b l e l o a d c o m b i n a t i o n s i n c l u d i n g gravity, w i 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 for 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 ation. B e a m sizes in typical S M F s a r e n o r m a l l y g o v e r n e d by c o d e specified drift limits. Consequently, even with a reduction in b e a m m o m e n t d u e to 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 m o d i f i e d f r a m e will often be s a t i s f a c t o r y for all l o a d c o m b i n a t i o n s . In s o m e c a s e s , a m i n o r i n c r e a s e in b e a m size may be needed. T h e a d d i t i o n of RBS c u t o u t s will r e d u c e t h e stiffness of a steel m o m e n t f r a m e . This r e d u c t i o n in stiffness, a l t h o u g h g e n e r a l l y q u i t e small, m a y affect t h e ability of t h e f r a m e to satisfy c o d e specified drift limits. A r e c e n t s t u d y b y G r 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 in elastic l a t e r a l stiffness of steel m o m e n t f r a m e s d u e to 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 . T h i s s t u d y s h o w e d t h a t over a w i d e r a n g e of f r a m e 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 in stiffn e s s for a 50 p e r c e n t flange r e d u c t i o n w a s on t h e o r d e r of 6 to 7 p e r c e n t . For a 40 p e r c e n t flange r e d u c t i o n , t h e r e d u c t i o n in elastic f r a m e stiffness w a s o n t h e o r d e r of 4 to 5 percent. If t h i s r e d u c t i o n in stiffness is a conc e r n , drift c a n be c o m p u t e d in t h e u s u a l m a n n e r u s i n g a m o d e l t h a t d o e s n o t explicitly a c c o u n t for 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 m o u n t s n o t e d a b o v e to a c c o u n t for t h e RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . Alternatively, a r e f i n e d s t r u c t u r a l m o d e l , i n c l u d i n g t h e r e d u c e d stiffn e s s at e a c h c o n n e c t i o n d u e to t h e RBS, c a n be d e v e l o p e d to c h e c k t h e stiffness of t h e frame.
4.2
RBS Sizing
T h e l o c a t i o n a n d size of t h e RBS will d i c t a t e t h e level of s t r e s s at t h e b e a m f l a n g e - c o l u m n flange c o n n e c t i o n . T h e RBS s e i s m i c m o m e n t d i a g r a m is p r e s e n t e d in F i g u r e 4.1 a n d indicates the Nominal Capacity, the Probable D e m a n d , a n d t h e N o m i n a l D e m a n d for t h e RBS b e a m . Note t h a t M ' p RBS is t h e m a x i m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d at l~he face of t h e colu m n flange w h e n t h e RBS h a s y i e l d e d a n d strain hardened under combined earthquake a n d gravity loads. M' p RBS is d i r e c t l y influe n c e d b y t h e P r o b a b l e i J e m a n d , a n d t h e location of t h e RBS. M' P,RBS is l a t e r r e f e r r e d to a s Mf in t h i s d o c u m e n t .
r--~
,
r ......
\
,~;~,~-~,
..............................
i
,
~,~as
~--~,-,,~o~
Moment
Diegrem
L~ ~am , ~ y
F i g u r e 4. I M o m e n t D i a g r a m a n d B e a m G e o m e t r y for R B S
T h e overall goal i n sizing t h e RBS c u t is to limit t h e m a x i m u m b e a m m o m e n t t h a t c a n develop at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n to v a l u e s i n t h e r a n g e of a b o u t 85 to 100 p e r c e n t of t h e beam's actual plastic moment. This a p p r o a c h , in effect, l i m i t s t h e a v e r a g e m a x i m u m s t r e s s at t h e b e a m flange groove w e l d s to 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 yield s t r e s s of t h e b e a m . E x p e r i m e n t s h a v e s h o w n t h a t c o n n e c t i o n s d e t a i l e d in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h
8c
Interim Guidelines: Evaluation, Repair, Modification and Design of Welded Steel Moment Frame Structures (FEMA 267) (1995) a n d t h e Interim Guidelines Advisory No. 1, Supplement to FEMA 2 6 7 (FEMA 267A) (1997), w i t h
s e v e r a l e x c e p t i o n s . M o 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 is t h a t FEMA 2 6 7 A p l a c e s a limit o n t h e m a x i m u m s t r e s s p e r m i t t e d a t t h e face of t h e c o l u m n e q u a l to n i n e t y p e r c e n t of t h e m i n i m u m s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s of t h e colu m n . F o r t h e c a s e of a n A 9 9 2 (A572 Gr. 50) c o l u m n , t h i s r e s u l t s in a l i m i t of 4 5 ksi. T h i s l i m i t w a s e s t a b l i s h e d to 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 for t h r o u g h - t h i c k n e s s f a i l u r e s in c o l u m n f l a n g e s . T h e d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e l i m i t s t h e m a x i m u m s t r e s s at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n to 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 yield s t r e s s of t h e b e a m . T h i s e x c e p t i o n to t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of F E M A 2 6 7 A h a s b e e n a d o p t e d for s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . First, s p e c i m e n s d e s i g n e d a c c o r d i n g to 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 m e d well in labo 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 k s i s t r e s s limit, w o u l d r e s u l t in l a r g e f l a n g e c u t o u t s in m a n y c a s e s , or w o u l d r e q u i r e s u p p l e m e n t a l f l a n g e r e i n f o r c e m e n t s u c h a s cover p l a t e s or ribs. F u r t h e r , r e c e n t l y c o m p 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 for t h r o u g h - t h i c k n e s s f a i l u r e s is c o n s i d e r a b l y less than previously thought, and that the c u r r e n t limit of 4 5 k s i c a n m o s t likely be i n c r e a s e d w i t h o u t p o s i n g a n i n c r e a s e in r i s k of f r a c t u r e i n i t i a t i o n . The design procedure assumes that a r a d i u s c u t R B S is p r o v i d e d in 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 at t h e m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n at e a c h e n d of a m o m e n t f r a m e b e a m .
~1
I~ a ~1 ~
--1
__
RBS
~ RBS II ~.!?..t.~.!.|~[~]
,- ,n -~ ,n - ~
i
'
&4
i
~a+ ~ ~
II
,, lla +~ "
(o.s to o.Ts) bf
b ~ (65 to 0 . 8 5 ) d
tl)
(2)
w h e r e by a n d d a r e t he b e a m flange w id th a n d delSth. E x a m i n a t i o n of RBS test d a t a i n d i c a t e s t h a t s u c c e s s f u l c o n n e c t i o n perf o r m a n c e h a s b e e n o b t a i n e d for a wide r a n g e of v a l u e s for a a n d b. C o n s e q u e n t l y , a great deal of precision in c h o o s i n g t h e s e values does n o t a p p e a r justified a n d E q u a t i o n s 1 a n d 2 s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a n a p p r o x i m a t e guide. The r e m a i n i n g d i m e n s i o n t h a t m u s t be c h o s e n w h e n sizing t h e RBS is c, t h e d e p t h of the cut. The value of c will control t he maxim u m m o m e n t developed w i t h i n t h e RBS, a n d therefore will control t h e m a x i m u m m o m e n t g e n e r a t e d at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n . As n o t e d above, t he final d i m e n s i o n s s h o u l d be c h o s e n so t h a t t he m a x i m u m m o m e n t at t he face of th e c o l u m n is in t h e r a n g e of a b o u t 85 to 100 p e r c e n t of t he b e a m ' s a c t u a l plastic m o m e n t . At p r e s e n t , it is s u g g e s t e d to avoid utilizing flange r e d u c t i o n s gr e a t e r t h a n a b o u t 50 percent. Thus, t he va l ue of c s h o u l d be c h o s e n to be less t h a n or e qua l to 0.25bf. The basic a p p r o a c h t a k e n in "this proced u r e is to c h o o s e p r e l i m i n a r y v a l u e s for a, b, a n d c, t h e n c o m p u t e t h e m o m e n t at the face of t h e c o l u m n , a n d c h e c k this m o m e n t a g a i n s t t he limit n o t e d above. Some iteration in the RBS d i m e n s i o n s m a y be n e e d e d to arrive u p o n a satisfactory design. F u r t h e r design c h e c k s are c o m p l e t e d u p o n satisfactory sizing of the RBS. The b e a m size will typically be c h o s e n for drift r e q u i r e m e n t s , followed by some a m o u n t of flange r e d u c t i o n . The designer m u s t examine the effect of all applied loads at t he RBS 9
STEP 2
F i g u r e 4 . 4 s h o w s a c r o s s - s e c t i o n of t h e b e a m at t h e m i n i m u m s e c t i o n of t h e RBS.
b~
d/2
PlasticNeutralAxis
/
_ __
~.~
,~,'~t
of RBS
4.3
Step-by-step Procedure
B a s e d o n t h e d i m e n s i o n s s h o w n in t h i s figu r e , Z R B S c a n b e c o m p u t e d a s follows:
Z ~ s = Z b - 2 c t.f (d - t.f )
(3)
STEP 1
C h o o s e trial v a l u e s for R B S d i m e n s i o n s a, b, a n d c. Where: ZRB S = plastic section modulus at mini m u m s e c t i o n of R B S p l a s t i c s e c t i o n m o d u l u s for full beam cross-section (i.e. w i 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 w n in F i g u r e 4.4.
(O.Sto 0.75) bf
(1)
b ~ (0. 6 5 to O. 85) d
10
T h e e x p e c t e d yield s t r e s s for t h e b e a m c a n b e d e t e r m i n e d f r o m S e c t i o n 6 . 2 of t h e AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (1997). A c c o r d i n g to t h e s e provisions:
STEP 5
C o m p u t e t h e s h e a r force a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e R B S c u t s a t e a c h e n d of t h e b e a m .
Fy e = Ry Fy
where:
(4)
T h e s h e a r a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e R B S c a n be c o m p u t e d f r o m a free b o d y d i a g r a m of t h e moment frame beam taken between RBS c e n t e r s . S u c h a free b o d y d i a g r a m is illust r a t e d i n F i g u r e 4 . 5 for t h e c a s e of a u n i f o r m l y d i s t r i b u t e d g r a v i t y l o a d w. f
R~BS I RBS w = uniform b e a m gravity ~oad
Fy e
= =
=
expected yield stress m i n i m u m s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s r a t i o of e x p e c t e d to m i n i m u m s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s 1.5 for A 3 6 steel 1.1 for A 5 7 2 Gr. 50 a n d A 9 9 2 steel
l!.~.,~ ~ ~ t ~ I t t t t I t t I t ~ ~ I t I I I t t ~ t.!..!,{
. . . . . .
RBSRBS!
i L' = distance between centers of RBS
i RBS RBS
' -I
= =
T h e v a l u e of F v e r e c o g n i z e s t h a t t h e a c t u a l y i e l d s t r e n g t l ~ o f s t r u c t u r a l steel c a n significantly exceed the minimum specified value. STEP 4 Compute the maximum moment e x p e c t e d at t h e c e n t e r of t h e RBS.
V~S -
(6a)
(5)
V~O~S where:
2 MRB s L'
wL' 2
(6b)
MRB S = m a x i m u m m o m e 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 R B S ZRB S = p l a s t i c s e c t i o n m o d u l u s a t m i n i m u m s e c t i o n of t h e R B S
e x p e c t e d yield s t r e s s of b e a m
V R B S V'
BS = s h e a r f o r c e a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e R B S a t e a c h e n d of b e a m
distance RBS between centers of
L'
gravity
11
D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} M O M E N T F R A M E C O N N E C T I O N S
For gravity load conditions other than a u n i f o r m load, t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a d j u s t m e n t c a n e a s i l y be m a d e to t h e free b o d y d i a g r a m a n d to E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6b. Equations 6a and 6b assume that plastic h i n g e s will f o r m a t t h e R B S at e a c h e n d of t h e b e a m . If t h e gravity l o a d o n t h e b e a m is v e r y large, 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 beam may move toward the interior portion of t h e b e a m s p a n . If t h i s is t h e c a s e , t h e free b o d y d i a g r a m in F i g u r e 4 . 5 s h o u l d be m o d i fied to e x t e n d b e t w e 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 if E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6 b a r e valid, d r a w t h e m o m e n t d i a g r a m for t h e s e g m e n t of t h e b e a m s h o w n in F i g u r e 4.5, i.e., for t h e s e g m e n t of t h e b e a m b e t w e 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 m a x i m u m m o m e n t o c c u r s at 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 valid. If t h e maximum moment occurs within the span, 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 m o d i f i c a t i o n d e s c r i b e d a b o v e will be needed.
M f = Mp,Bs + VRBs a +
where: =
(7)
STEP 7
STEP 6
Mpe = Z b Fy e
where:
Mpe
STEP 8
RBS
C h e c k t h a t M f i s in t h e r a n g e of 85 to 100 p e r c e n t of Mpe.
M.f ~ 0 . 8 5
m pe
to
1.0
(9)
Mf
~
I---N
a +.-Z-
Figure 4.6 Free Body Diagram Between Center of RBS and Face of Column Flange
S u m m i n g m o m e n t s a b o u t t h e left e n d of t h i s free b o d y d i a g r a m r e s u l t s in t h e following: 12
If E q u a t i o n 9 is n o t s a t i s f i e d , m o 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. Note t h a t t h i s c h e c k o n m o m e n t at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n is s i m p l i f i e d for d e s i g n p u r p o s e s , b a s e d o n more detailed analyses and past test results. T h e a c t u a l force t r a n s f e r m e 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 at t h i s l o c a t i o n is q u i t e c o m p l e x d u e to 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 to t h e c o l u m n flange. For more detailed information on the issue, t h e r e a d e r is r e f e r r e d to (Lee, et.al. 1997).
To c h e c k s t r o n g c o l u m n - w e a k b e a m r e q u i r e m e n t s , t he p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d in FEMA 267A (1997) will be u s e d , with m i n o r modifications. The e q u a t i o n to be u s e d to c h e c k t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t (from E q u a t i o n 7.5.2.5-1 of FEMA 267A (1997)) is as follows:
(14)
Where:
Vc =
s h e a r force in t h e c o l u m n s above a n d below th e c o n n e c t i o n column moment above c o n n e c t i o n column moment below c o n n e c t i o n immediately
(10)
Mct
ZMc
where: plastic section m o d u l u s of th e c o l u m n s e c t i o n a bove a n d below t he c o n n e c t i o n
Mcb
immediately
ht
YMc
dc hb
db ~VM c
~~i -,,~-.-.~ C V
Figure 4.7 s h o w s a free body d i a g r a m t h a t c a n be u s e d to e s t i m a t e c o l u m n m o m e n t s w h e n c h e c k i n g E q u a t i o n 10. This free body c u t s t he b e a m s at t he RBS c e n t e r s a n d c u t s th e c o l u m n s at a s s u m e d points of inflection (often t a k e n as m i d - h e i g h t of t he a d j a c e n t stories for design purposes). B a s e d on Figure 4.7, 'Mc c a n be estim a t e d from t he following equations:
ht
Mct MRBS
db
~
V
RBS
i
I
Mcb
hb
V~ :
(11)
I
Mct Mcb = = Vch t Vch b
(12) (13)
a+(b/2) d c a+(b/2)
D E S I G N O F R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) M O M E N T FRAME C O N N E C T I O N S
T h e a p p r o a c h p r e s e n t e d in FEMA 2 6 7 A (1997) a c c o u n t s for t h e d i f f e r e n c e in c o l u m n s h e a r forces above a n d below the connection, whereas the simplified approach above a s s u m e s t h e s a m e s h e a r force is p r e s e n t in the columns above and below the connection. A l t h o u g h t h e a p p r o a c h in FEMA 2 6 7 A (1997) m a y b e s o m e w h a t m o r e a c c u r a t e , t h e c o m p u t a t i o n of Vc p r e s e n t e d in E q u a t i o n 11 a b o v e is s i m p l e r to i m p l e m e n t , a n d is still r e a s o n a b l y a c c u r a t e for initial d e s i g n p u r poses considering the numerous uncertaint i e s i n v o l v e d in t h e s t r o n g c o l u m n - w e 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 is r e f e r r e d to S e c t i o n 7 . 5 . 2 . 5 of F E M A 2 6 7 A (1997) to i m p l e m e n t a m o r e a c c u r a t e c a l c u l a t i o n for Vc to b e u s e d i n t h e final d e s i g n check. S T E P 10 C h e c k P a n e l Z o n e To c h e c k t h e c o l u m n p a n e l z o n e , t h e p r o c e d u r e u s e d in S e c t i o n 6 . 6 . 6 . 3 . 7 of FEMA 2 6 7 A (1997) will b e u s e d . T h i s s e c t i o n requires that the panel zone have sufficient s t r e n g t h to d e v e l o p t h e s h e a r force d e v e l o p e d b y 0 . 8 'M/: B a 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 force c a n b e c o m p u t e d a s follows:
M?
m a x i m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d at o p p o s i t e c o l u m n face
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 . T h e v a l u e of My c o m p u t e d a c c o r d i n g to Equation 7 combines the, seismic moment d u e to (2XMRBs)/L' w i t h t h e m o m e n t d u e to g r a v i t y load. O n t h e s i d e of t h e c o l u m n o p p o site to t h a t w h e r e My is d e v e l o p e d , t h e m o m e n t a t t h e face of" t h e c o l u m n will be somewhat smaller since the gravity load m o m e n t will o p p o s e t h e s e i s m i c m o m e n t . T h i s s o m e w h a t s m a l l e r m o m e n t is c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g E q u a t i o n 17. T h 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 calc u l a t e d a s follows:
(18)
tcf
(16)
Vpz Where:
o.8Z
0.95 d b
0.8Vc
(17) 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 C h e c k B e a m S h e a r
Vpz
T h e final d e s i g n c h e c k s h o u l d b e m a d e to ensure that the beam has adequate capacity for s h e a r a s s s o c i a t e d w i t h l a t e r a l a n d g r a v i t y loads. This check combines the beam shear associated with the plastic moment within t h e R B S u s i n g E q u a t i o n 6a, c o m b i n e d w i t h t h e p o r t i o n of gravity l o a d a d d i n g s h e a r to the beam within the section between the RBS
14
(/-/,)
W -
2
2
(19)
VRB q s
4.4
Additional tions
Design
Considera-
In addition to e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e d i m e n s i o n s of the RBS cut, t h e r e are a n u m b e r of additional design a n d detailing f e a t u r e s t h a t m a y significantly affect c o n n e c t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e a n d e c o n o m y of this system. These items are d i s c u s s e d below. The p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d above for sizing the RBS c u t p e r m i t s a r a n g e of a c c e p t a b l e v a l u e s for t he d i m e n s i o n s a, b a n d c. Fabrication can likely be simplified by s t a n d a r d i z ing t h e s e d i m e n s i o n s over a large n u m b e r of b e a m s on a project. Making small c h a n g e s on the RBS d i m e n s i o n s from b e a m to b e a m is n ot likely to improve c o n n e c t i o n performa n c e a n d m a y u n n e c e s s a r i l y i n c r e a s e fabrication costs. The d e s i g n e r m a y wish to consult with a fabricator before finalizing the RBS d i m e n s i o n s to identify w a y s of r e d u c i n g fabrication costs. For example, if the fabricator is m a k i n g RBS c u t s u s i n g a t o r c h m o u n t e d on a guide with a fixed r a d i u s , th e e c o n o m y of t he c o n n e c t i o n m a y be i m p r o v e d by m a i n t a i n i n g a c o n s t a n t r a d i u s of c u t R over a large n u m b e r of c o n n e c t i o n s . The RBS c u t is n o r m a l l y m a d e by t h e r m a l c u t t i n g in t he fabrication shop. The c u t s h o u l d be m a d e to avoid nicks, gouges, a n d other discontinuities. After t he c u t is m a d e , t h e surfa c e s h o u l d be g r o u n d , to aid in r e d u c i n g t h e potential for f r a c t u r e s o c c u r r i n g in the RBS at h i g h plastic rotations a n d low cycle fatigue. The grinding s h o u l d be d o n e to avoid p r o d u c i n g grind m a r k s p e r p e n d i c u l a r to the b e a m flange, since they are p e r p e n d i cu lar to t he direction of principal stress. These m a r k s c a n act as s t r e s s risers. Variations on grinding m e t h o d s m a y be possible to r e d u c e fabrication effort. Another c o n s i d e r a t i o n for design of RBS m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s is welding. R e s e a r c h
15
16
-~--~--,~ ~.
RBS Connection
\'~
]
~
*~ -
~.~
:~-~
.~ -~0.
-
~ '~"'~'~'({~:;e
I
I
-2
Displacement (inches)
17
Column:
Gravity load on beam: (1.2D + .5L p e r Sect. 9 . 2 c of AISC Seismic Provisions): 2 kips/ft (0.17 k i p s / i n )
I~
V l ~
_1I --
18
From E q u a t i o n 5: MRB S
= 1.15 ZRBS_Fy e 1 15x218x55 13789 in-kip
db bf
fw
= = = = = = = = = =
2 4 . 2 6 in. 1 2 . 8 0 in. 0 . 8 5 in. 0 . 5 5 in. 3 2 7 in. 3 1 7 . 1 2 in. 1 6 . 2 3 in. 2 . 2 6 in. 1.41 in. 6 0 3 in. 3
=
=
STEP 5
Zxb
W14x311:
dc bcf tcf
tcw
L'=L-dc-2
a+
= 2 7 2 - 1 7 . 1 2 - 2 7+
=222in.
Zxc STEP 1
F r o m E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6b:
C h o o s e t r i a l v a l u e s for R B S d i m e n s i o n s a, b a n d c
to 0.75) b f ~ 6 in. t o 10 in. Try: a = 7 in. ~ ( 0 . 6 5 to 0.85) d b ~ 16 in. to 21 in. Try: b = 19 in. ~0.2 bf ~ 2 . 6 in. Try: c
-~'(0.5
V~s _ 2M~s
L'
wL'_ 213789
2 222
0.17222 =105kips 2
2 . 7 5 in.
STEP 2
Figure 5.2 s h o w s t h e s h e a r force d i a g r a m , t h e b e n d i n g m o m e n t d i a g r a m , a n d t h e free b o d y d i a g r a m t h e for t h e p o r t i o n o f t h e b e a m between RBS centers. Observe that the maxi m u m m o m e n t o c c u r s a t t h e e n d s , i.e., a t t h e c e n t e r s o f t h e R B S . If t h e g r a v i t y l o a d w e r e e x t r e m e l y large, c o m p a r e d to t h e m o m e n t
143
105
F r o m E q u a t i o n 3:
ZRB S = Z x b - 2 c t f ( d b - t ~
= 327 - 2 x 2.75 x 0.85 x (24.26 - 0.85) = 218 in.3
V (kip)
13789
STEP 3
F o r A 5 7 2 Gr. 5 0 s t e e l , R y = 1.1. F r o m E q u a t i o n 4:
-13789
Fy e = R y F y b = 1 . 1 x 5 0 STEP 4
= 55ksi
143
~ REDS
w= 0.17 kips/in.
~ RIBS
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
. . . . . . . .
L' ~ 222 in.
t' "~05k ~ J
,
DESIGN
OF
R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) M O M E N T F R A M E C O N N E C T I O N S
,
d e v e l o p e d d u e to 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 m o m e n t d i a g r a m c o u l d drive t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e t o w a r d t h e c o l u m n , a w a y f r o m t h e RBS. T h i s e x a m p l e i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e gravity l o a d is n o t l a r g e e n o u g h to form a plastic hinge within the span, away f r o m t h e RBS. C o 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 for t h e m o m e n t a n d s h e a r forces, at t h e R B S c u t s , a r e valid.
STEP 6
ZMc
> 1.0
( E q u a t i o n 10)
R e t u r n i n g to t h e e x a m p l e , a s s u m i n g t h a t p o i n t s of i n f l e c t i o n in t h e c o l u m n s o c c u r at t h e i r m i d - h e i g h t s , a n d a s s u m i n g a n axial s t r e s s (fa) of 15 k s i in t h e c o l u m n s u n d e r combined earthquake and gravity loading, t h e following 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:
F r o m E q u a t i o n 8:
Met
Mpe = Zxb Fy e = 3 2 7 x 55 = 1 7 9 8 5 i n - k i p
STEP
= = =
Vc h t
2 1 7 x (156 - 2 4 . 2 6 ) / 2 14294 in-kip 14294 in-kip
Mcb
= 2 x 1 4 2 9 4 = 28588 in - k i p F r o m E q u a t i o n 9:
Mf
- -
Mpe
~Zc(Fyc-.f~)
~M~
STEP
2603(50-15) 28588
= 1.5 > 1
OK
10 C h e c k C o l u m n P a n e l Z o n e
STEP 9
Mf
16149 in-kip
( E q 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:
Mf=M~Bs+V~Bsa+ =13789+105 7+
i|1
20
RBS flange r e d u c t i o n is approximately 43 percent. Consequently, it is expected t h a t t h e inclusion of tlae RBS the b e a m s will i n c r e a s e interstory drift by a b o u t 5 percent.
S~e~c
Abut
,~
I / IE 718"x 6" ~,.~,,.T-~-~'~"r-.~/ ~ {B.S.) ~ I ! [ I / ~ ~
- - N~l~.l
I~
. ~ _ 5 ....
l /
. B.U. bar to remain ~ Remove weld tabs IP _1 16 ~ Weld B.U. bar Io coiutnn
= 0.55F~,~d~tIlL+ 3b~ft~d+d~t 1
I 3 x 16"23x (2"26)~] = 0.55xSOx17.12x1.41 1+ 24.26xlT.12xl.41J = 946 kips 946 > 926 .'.No doubler plates r e q u i r e d ~i
,.]~,~
I.t' i
I w2,.,,7
*~
IZ ~
II
\,~,~.~
5/16
. . . .ooo,0,.to
of column
=.o,o0,
~ ~
STEP 11 C h e c k B e a m Shear
From E q u a t i o n 19:
5/'I'~ '
NI welds: ET0 ~lI groove welds: electrodes must be rat~;I for CVN of at teast 20 It-fos at -20 deg. F. All weldingshall conformto AWS D1.1
w (l-l')
V~ 4 2 0.17
/272~222/ 2 = 145kips
'
143
Continuity Plates
Use c o n t i n u i t y plates with a t h i c k n e s s a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l to t h e b e a m flange t h i c k n e s s . The b e a m flange t h i c k n e s s is 0.85 inches. Therefore, u s e 7 / 8 " thick continuity plates (0.875"). C o n n e c t continuity plates to c o l u m n flanges u s i n g CJP groove welds, a n d the web u s i n g double fillet welds. The corn e r s of c o n t i n u i t y plates s h o u l d be configu r e d to avoid welding into the k - a r e a of the column.
The design of SMF building s y s t e m s require t h a t the d e s i g n a c c o u n t for inelastic deform a t i o n d e m a n d s on t h e connection. The AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (1997), Section 9.2, p r e s e n t s t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s for SMF structures. The RBS c o n n e c t i o n is a n o p t i o n t h a t c a n m e e t r e q u i r e m e n t s set by building codes a n d cons e n s u s d o c u m e n t s . The following c o m m e n t s are i n t e n d e d to describe actions t h a t can be followed to help facilitate the p e r m i t t i n g process for a SMF building system.
6.1
Communication
It is r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t early in the process, the S t r u c t u r a l E n g i n e e r of Record c o m m u n i cate with t h e building official regarding t h e proposed u s e a n d p e r t i n e n t a s p e c t s of t h e RBS m o m e n t connection. The e n g i n e e r m a y n e e d to provide b a c k g r o u n d d o c u m e n t a t i o n to the building official if h e or she is unfamiliar with the design a n d terminology relating
21
6.2
Methodology
Once t he building official u n d e r s t a n d s th e design i n t e n t a n d s y s t e m behavior, it is i m p o r t a n t to clearly state t he design m e t h o d ology to be u s e d early so t h a t a n y m i s u n d e r s t a n d i n g s c a n be avoided. This d o c u m e n t p r e s e n t s a general design methodology, utilizing s o m e simplifying a s s u m p t i o n s a n d some of t he better a s p e c t s of m a n y different design m e t h o d s . There are ot he r w a y s to design a n RBS m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n a n d SMF s y s t e m t h a n t h a t r e p r e s e n t e d in this document. If ot he r m e t h o d s are utilized, t h e engin e e r s h o u l d be s u r e to clearly indicate the m e t h o d u s e d a n d t he i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s t h a t s h o w design c o m p l i a n c e with the governing building code. Any design m e t h o d o l o g y utilized s h o u l d correlate well with other p u b l i s h e d m e t h o d s , test r e s u l t s a n d r e s e a r c h papers. Section 9.2 of the AISC Seismic Provisions require t h a t the design be b a s e d on qualifying cyclic tests. The table in Appendix A will help to satisfy this r e q u i r e m e n t for t he RBS connection. Any significant deviation from e s t a b l i s h e d methodologies or tests s h o u l d be justified. It is i m p o r t a n t to u n d e r s t a n d t h a t m a n y reco m m e n d a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d in this d o c u m e n t are b a s e d on e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s e a r c h. Design e q u a t i o n s a n d RBS sizing v a l u e s are b a s e d on s u c c e s s f u l r e s e a r c h , b o t h analytically a n d experimentally. Therefore, a n y n e w design e q u a t i o n s s h o u l d be c o m p a r a b l e to established equations.
6.3
Construction Documents
After a design is complete, it is imperative to convey t he information a c c u r a t e l y on construc t i on d o c u m e n t s . While calculations are i m p o r t a n t a n d describe t he final c o n s t r u c t e d connection, c o n s t r u c t i o n d o c u m e n t s provide direction to t he fabricator a n d erector. The e l e m e n t s e x p r e s s e d on t he drawings will be m o r e i m p o r t a n t to the final quality of the design t h a n a n y calculation. 22
A n u m b e r of fab ricatio n a n d i n s p e c t i o n i s s u e s are i m p o r t a n t to e n s u r e a well-cons t r u c t e d RBS connection. As d i s c u s s e d earlier proper fabrication a n d erection of this c o n n e c t i o n is a critical portion of th e syst e m ' s p e r f o r m a n c e . If w e l d s are poorly placed, the stress at w h i c h f r a c t u r e initiates a n d p r o p a g a t e s is m u c h lower t h a n the stress a t o u g h weld metal, placed with care, c a n resist. Cu ttin g a n d grinding are critical a s p e c t s of fabrication w h i c h m u s t be well e x e c u t e d to p r o d u c e a high quality final connection.
7.1
th e b e a m , n e e d s to be s m o o t h a n d free of n o t c h e s . This s m o o t h n e s s is i m p o r t a n t for r e a s o n s d i s c u s s e d earlier. Many fabrication s h o p s have t he ability to m a k e virtually n o t c h free t h e r m a l cuts. While this is a benefit to r e d u c e t he n u m b e r of p e r p e n d i c u l a r n o t c h e s , w h i c h m a y p r e s e n t stress risers, small imperfections exist t h a t m a y affect connection performance. Therefore, it is i m p o r t a n t to clearly identify w h a t is the a d e q u a t e a m o u n t of m a t e r i a l to remove (by grinding) from t he c u t surface. FEMA 267A (1997) d i s c u s s e s a level of a c c e p t a b l e surfa c e r o u g h n e s s value less t h a n or equal to 1000 as defined in ANSI/ASME B46.1. This level is difficult to d e t e r m i n e w i t h o u t a significant a m o u n t of e q u i p m e n t a n d expertise. Therefore, this d o c u m e n t reco m m e n d s t h a t the t h e r m a l c u t s be g r o u n d s m o o t h in the following m a n n e r : "It is import a n t t h a t t he p a t t e r n of a n y c u t s m a d e in the flange be p r o p o r t i o n e d so as to avoid s h a r p c u t corners. All c o m e r s s h o u l d be r o u n d e d to minimize n o t c h effects a n d in addition, c u t edges s h o u l d be c u t or g r o u n d to have a surface r o u g h n e s s m e e t i n g t he r e q u i r e m e n t s of AWS C4.1-77 class 4, or smoother." The d e s i g n e r s h o u l d d i s c u s s the i n t e n t with the fabricator a n d develop criteria for a n a c c e p t a b l e m o c k - u p to be m a d e for r e f e r en ce d u r i n g f a b r i c a t i o n i n s p e c t i o n s . The final grinding t h a t t h e e n g i n e e r a n d fabricator have agreed u p o n , s h o u l d be i n s p e c t e d by the fabricator's r e p r e s e n t a t i v e as well as th e owner's testing agency, to e n s u r e c o m p l i a n c e with t he a c c e p t e d m o c k - u p . M a n y b e a m s u s e d for SMF s y s t e m s are large with t h i c k flanges a n d webs. S h e a r p u n c h i n g holes in t h e s e t h i c k portions of th e m e m b e r c oul d lead to localized d e l a m i n a t i o n or tearing. In s i t u a t i o n s w h e r e hole diameters are sma l l er t h a n t h e b a s e m a t e r i a l t h i c k n e s s , t he d e s i g n e r m a y c o n s i d e r t h a t holes r e q u i r e d for fabrication of e l e m e n t s a n d portions of t he RBS b e a m be drilled r a t h e r t h a n p u n c h e d . No r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s indicate t h a t a r e d u c t i o n in c o n n e c t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e is a t t r i b u t a b l e to p u n c h i n g holes in RBS beams.
7.2
Welding
Welding is a very critical p a r t of th e proper fabrication of this c o n n e c t i o n . A significant a m o u n t of effort h a s b e e n m a d e to p r o d u c e a beam with a r e d u c e d section modulus, d e s i g n e d to y ield p r i o r to d e v e l o p i n g m o m e n t s w h i c h deliver very high s t r e s s e s to b e a m flange - c o l u m n flange welds. However, if th e welding r e q u i r e d for this c o n n e c t i o n is d o n e poorly, t h e s t r e s s at w h i c h brittle behavior m a y o c c u r is m u c h lower t h a n t h e e n g i n e e r expects. Good welds, u s i n g t o u g h filler metal, will resist h i g h e r loads t h a n surr o u n d i n g b a s e metal. Therefore, it is im p er ative t h a t t h e w eld in g for this type of c o n n e c tion be of h i g h q u a l i t y , to p r o d u c e a c o n n e c t i o n t h a t will p erfo rm as designed. Any specific i s s u e s related to welds, s u c h as weld profiles, s e q u e n c e , s u b m i t t a l of m a t e r i a l s or certifications t h a t are considered i m p o r t a n t for c o m p l i a n c e of t h e fabricator's w o r k to m e e t t h e design intent, s h o u l d be clearly s t a t e d in t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n docum e n t s . I t e m s s u c h as p r e h e a t s h o u l d be a d d r e s s e d in t h e project specifications a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n d rawin g s . Typically, AWS will a d e q u a t e l y a d d r e s s m o s t i s s u e s , a n d for n e w d e s i g n will provide t h e f a b r i c a t o r a m p l e direction to c o m p l e t e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n in a safe a n d h i g h quality m a n n e r . The e n g i n e e r s h o u l d be clear in th e project specifications a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n d r a w i n g s t h a t filler m e t a l s sh all n o t be m i x e d in s u c h a w a y as to p r o d u c e a CVN v alu e below t h a t specified a n d r e q u i r e d for a single filler metal. Most fabrication s h o p s p r e s e n t l y u s e gas s h i e l d e d FCAW m e t h o d s for welds to c o l u m n s a n d b e a m s . The erection crews, especially w h e n w e l d i n g c o m p l e t e jo in t p en et r a t i o n groove w e l d s , t y p i c a l l y u s e self shielded FCAW. Also, t h e r e are different filler m e t a l s u s e d for t h e flat position as well as other positions. S o m e c o m b i n a t i o n s of filler m e t a l s in th e s a m e j o i n t m a y p r o d u c e a comb in ed CVN value, w h i c h co u ld p r e s e n t "britfie behavior". The e n g i n e e r s h o u l d carefully review t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d in "The Effects of I n t e r m i x e d Weld Metal on M e c h a n ical Properties" (1998) a n d th e s u b m i t t e d WPS prior to f a b r i c a t i o n to e n s u r e t h a t t h e fabricator a n d erecto r are n o t c r e a t i n g a 23
24
References
"AISC Initiates Research Into k Area Cracking," Modern Steel Construction, Vol. 37, No. 9, September 1997, pp.23-24. Blodgett, O., Funderburk, S., and Miller, D., "Fabricators' a n d Erectors' Guide to Welded Steel Construction," The Lincoln Electric Company, Cleveland, 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. Engelhardt, M.D. and Husain, A.S., "Cyclic Loading Performance Of Welded Flange Bolted Web Connections," Journal o f Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 119, No. 12, December 1993. Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Z e k a n y , A.J. ,and Potyraj, T., ~The Dogbone Connection: Part II." Modern Steel Construction, August 1996. Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany, A.J. ,and Potyraj, T., "Experimental Investigation of Dogbone Moment Connections," Proceedings: 1997 National Steel Construction Conference, American Institute of Steel Construction, Chicago, May 1997. Engelhardt, M.D. and Sabol, T.A., "Reinforcing of Steel Moment Connections with Cover Plates: Benefits and Limitations," Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp. 510-520, 1998. Gross, J., Engelhardt, M., Uang, C., Kasai, K., and Iwankiw, N., "Modification of Existing Steel Welded Moment Frame Connections for Seismic Resistance," Steel Design Guide Series Twelve, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., Chicago, 1999. 25
Grubbs, K.V., "The Effect of the Dogbone Connection on the Elastic Stiffness of Steel Moment Frames," M.S. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, the University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, August 1997. International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO), The Uniform Building Code (UBSC), April 1997. Iwankiw, N., "Ultimate Strength Considerations of Seismic Design of the Reduced Beam Section (Internal Plastic Hinge)," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., Vol. 34, No. 1, First Quarter 1997. J o h n s o n , M., Quintana, M., '~The Effects of Intermixed Weld Metal on Mechanical Properties, Part III," Proceedings, International Conference on Welded Constructions in Seismic Areas, AWS, October 1998. Kaufmann, E., Xue, M., Lu, L., and Fisher, J., "Achieving Ductile Behavior of Moment Connections," Modern Steel Construction, Vol. 36, No. 1, American Institute of Steel Construction, J a n u a r y 1996. Lee, K., Goel, S.C., Stojadinovic, B., "Boundary Effects in Welded Steel Moment Connections," Research Report No. UMCEE 97-20, December 1997. Noel, S. N., "Reduced Beam Section Design for Seismic Retrofit of Steel Moment Frame Connections," M.S. Thesis, Division of Structural Engineering, University of California, San Diego, 1997. Plumier, A., "The Dogbone: Back to the Future," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. 2nd Quarter 1997.
Popov, E. and Stephen, R., "Cyclic Loading of Full Size Steel Connections," Bulletin No. 21, American Iron and Steel Institute, 1972. SAC Joint Venture, Background Reports on Metallurgy, Fracture Mechanics, Welding, Moment Connections and Frame Systems Behavior, Published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report FEMA 288, 1996. SAC Joint Venture, Interim Guidelines: Evaluation, Repair, Modification and Design of Welded Steel Moment Frame Structures, Published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report FEMA 267, August 1995. SAC Joint Venture, Interim Guidelines Advisory No. 1 - Supplement to FEMA 267, Published by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Report FEMA 267A, March 1997. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc., Chicago, April 15, 1997.
"Structural Welding Code - Steel," AWS D 1.198, American Welding Society, Miami, 1998. Tide, R., "Stability of Weld Metal Subjected to Cyclic Static and Seismic Loading," Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, Nos. 4-6, April-June 1998. Tsal, K.C. and Popov, E.P., "Steel Beam-Colu m n Joints In Seismic Moment Resisting Frames", Report No. UCB/EERC - 88/19, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, University of California at Berkeley, 1988. Yura, J.A., "Fundamentals 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, American Society of Civil Engineers, 1997.
26
APPENDIX A
Summary of Experiments on Reduced Beam Section Moment Connections for New Construction
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
[1]
YC-1
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
Built-up Box: 19.7"xl 9.7"x.79" Lc = 87" A572 Gr. 50 Fy =56 ksi Fu =82 ksi
RBS Details and Other Flange Modifications Tapered cut L1=2" LRBS=I3.8" FR=20%
Op
(%)
2.4
Comments
[1]
YC-2
[1]
PC-1
[1]
PC-2
[1]
PC-3
Tapered cut L~=2" LRBS=17.7" FR=25% Tapered cut L1=4.7" LRBS=I5.7" FR=34% Tapered cut L1=4.7" LRSS= 17.7" FR=42% Tapered cut L1=4.7" LRss=I 7.7" FR=42%
2.9
Fracture of beam flange initiating at weld access hole Fracture of beam flange initiating at weld access hole Fracture of beam flange initiating at weld access hole Fracture of beam flange initiating at weld access hole
4.1
4.8
3.8
I m~
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
[2]
DBT1A-99176
[2]
DBT1B-99176
[2]
DBT2A-150257
[2]
DBT2B-150257
[3,4]
ARUP1
W30x99 A572 Gr. 50 L~= 138" 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.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
W14x176 A572 Gr. 50 Lc=168" 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"
RBS Details and Other Flange Modifications Tapered cut L1=7.5" LRBS=20.25'' FR=45% Tapered cut L1=7.5" LRBS=20.25" FR=45%
0p
(%)
2.8
Comments
4.0
Tapered cut L1=9" LaBs=24" FR=45% Tapered cut L1=9" LRBS=24'' FR=45%
1.7
SS-FCAW welded E70TG-K2 (heavy shear backing bar left in tab groove place w/seal weld at welded to top flange; column and backing bar removed fillet welded at bottom flange to beam web)
[3,4]
COH-1
W 14x455 A572 Gr. 50 Lc=136" Fy.f =55 ksi Fu4=84 ksi Fy.w=54 ksi Fu-w=86 ksi
Tapered cut L1=9" LABS=24" FR=44% top & bottom flanges reinforced with vertical ribs Tapered cut L~=7" LABS=20" FR=38% top & bottom flanges reinforced with vertical ribs
3.5
Fracture of beam top flange we d; propagated to divottype fracture of column flange Flange fracture at minimum section of RBS
3.5
A-2
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
(O/o)
3.8 3.2
Gp
Comments
[3,4] [3,4]
COH-2
(~ =
COH-3
W33x152 A572 Gr. 50 Lb=132" Fy.f=57.6 ksi Fu.f=78.5 ksi Fy.w=62 ksi Fu-w=84.5 ksi
Wl 4x455 A572 Gr. 50 Lc=136" Fy.f=55 ksi Fu.f=84 ksi Fyow=54 ksi Fu-w=86 ks i Beam connected to column web
=~
Tapered cut L1=9" LRBS=26" FR=43% top & bottom flanges reinforced with vertical side plates
[3,4] [3,4]
COH-4
~
4.0 1.8
COH-5
DB1 [5,6]
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 W36x160 L~=134" Fy.f=54.7 ksi Fu4=75.6 ksi Fy.w=53.5 ksi Fu-w=79.2 ksi W36x150 Lb=134" Fy.f=41.4 ksi Fu4=58.7 ksi Fy.w=47.1 ksi Fu-w=61.8 ksi
|~
SS-FCAW E71T-8 backing bar left in place w/seal weld at top flange; backing bar removed at bottom flange
2.0
[5,6]
DB2
W 14x426 A572 Gr. 50 Lc=136" Fy.f=50 ksi Fu4=74.5 ksi Fy.w=50 ksi Fu.w=75 ksi
3.0
A-3
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
[5,6]
DB3
[5,6]
DB4
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"
RBS Details and Other Flange Modifications Radius cut L1=9" LRBS=27'' FR=40%
~p
Comments
(%)
3.8
[5,6]
DB5
[7]
DB1
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 welded across flanges of W14x257 to form
3.7
4.0
Testing stopped due to limitations of test setup; significant column panel zone yielding
Not Available
3.0
box)
A572 Gr, 50 L~=132"
A-4
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
[8]
S-1
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 Fy.f =52.4 ksi Fo.f=76.6 ksi Fy.w=57.5 ksi Fu.w=81 ksi
(~
SS-FCAW E71T-8 backing bar left in place w/seal weld at top flange; backing bar removed at bottom flange
RBS Details and Other Flange Modifications Radius cut L1=4.7" LRss=l 5.7" FR=55%
(%)
0p
Comments
9.0
[8] [8]
S-2A SC-1
[8]
S-3
[8]
S-4
Testing stopped due to limitations of test setup 3.4 Composite slab included (6); testing stopped due to limitations of test setup note statically applied (8) simulated earthquake loading (7); testing stopped due to reaching end of simulated earthquake loading; no connection failure note dynamically applied (9) simulated earthquake loading (7); testing stopped due to reaching end of simulated earthquake loading; no connection failure
3.6
A-5
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
[8]
0p
(%)
Comments
SC-2
[11]
LS-1
W30x99 A572 Gr. 50 Lb = 141" Fy.f = 54.0 ksi Fu4= 71.9 ksi Fy.w= 58.0 ksi Fu.w= 74.8 ksi
SS-FCAW E70T-6 backing bar left in place w/seal weld at top flange; backing bar removed at bottom flange
~
Note Composite slab (9) included (6); dynamically applied simulated earthquake loading (6); testing stopped due to reaching end of simulated earthquake loading; no connection failure 4.0 No connection failure
[11] [11]
LS-2 LS-3
+1.0 note (12) /-5.0 -1.0/ note (12) +5.0 4.0 No connection failure; testing stopped due to limitations of test setup No connection failure; test stopped due to limitations of test setup; see note (13) 4.0
[11]
LS-4
[12]
DBBW Beam 1
W36x150 A572 Gr. 50 Lb = 141" Fy.f = 54.3 ksi Fo.f = 68.8 ksi Fy.w= 59.4 ksi Fu.w= 72.0 ksi
W 14x398 A572 Gr. 50 Lc = 146" Fy = 53.0 ksi Fu = 73.0 ksi (based on CMTR)
SS-FCAW E70T-6 backing bar left in place w/seal weld at top flange; backing bar removed at bottom flange
.
4.0
[12]
m
DBBW Beam 2
A-6
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
(%)
5.0
Op
Comments
[12]
DBBWC
Beam 1 DBBWC Beam 2
Low cycle fatigue fracture in RBS; see note (14) Fracture of bottom beam flange adjacent to groove weld; fracture initiated at weld access hole; see note (14) No connection failure; test stopped due to limitations of test setup see note (13)
[12]
3.8
[13]
DBWW Beam 1
W36x150 A572 Gr. 50 Lb= 141" Fy.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" Fv = 53.0 ksi Fu = 73.0 ksi (based on CMTR)
SS-FCAW E70T-6 backing bar left in place w/seal weld at top flange; backing bar removed at bottom flange
((
3.5
[13]
3.5
[13]
5.0
Low cycle fatigue fracture in RBS see note (14) Low cycle fatigue fracture in RBS
[13]
5.0
A-7
Ref
Spec.
Beam
Column
Flange Welds
Web Connection
[14]
WG-1
W33x201 A572 Gr. 50 Lb = 160.5" F~.f= 52.0 ksi Fu-f = 72.8 ksi Fy.w= 51.5 ksi Fu-w= 68.0 ksi
W14x311 A913 Gr. 65 Lc = 152" Fy.f = 69.0 ksi Fu4 = 88.3 ksi Fy-w= 68.0 ksi F..w= 86.5 ksi 5/8" doubler plates (A572 Gr. 50) provided on each side of column web
RBS Details and Other Flange Modifications Radius cut L1 = 9.3" LRBS = 25" FR = 54%
~p
Comments
(%)
2.9 fracture of RBS at local buckle in RBS see note (15)
[14]
WG-2
2.9
[14]
WG-3
[14j
WG-4
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 "
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
3.5
"
4.5
"
Notes: 1. All specimens are single cantilever type, except DBBW, DBBW-C, DBWW, and DBWW-C 2. All specimens are bare steel, except SC-1, SC-2, DBBW-C and DBWW-C 3. All specimens subject to quasi static cyclic loading, with ATC-24, SAC or similar loading protocol, except S-1, S-3, So4, SC-2, LS-2 and LS-3 4. All specimens provided with continuity plates at beam-to-column connection, except Popov Specimen DB1 (Popov Specimen DB1 was provided with external flange plates welded to column). 5. Specimens ARUP-1, COH-1 to COH-5, S-1, S-2A, S-3, S-4, SC-1, SC-2 and LS-4 provided with lateral brace near loading point and an additional lateral brace near RBS; all other specimens provided with lateral brace at loading point only. 6. Composite slab details for Specimens SC-2 and SC-2:118" wide floor slab; 3" ribbed deck (ribs perpendicular to beam) with 2.5" ~oncrete cover; normal wt. concrete; welded wire mesh reinforcement; 3.4"dia. shear studs spaced at 24" (one stud in every other rib); first stud located at 29" from face of column; 1" gap left between face of column and slab to minimize composite action.
A-8
7. SpecimensS-3, S-4 and SC-2 were subjectedto simulatedearthquakeloadingbased on N10E horizontalcomponentof the Llolleo recordfrom the 1985 Chile Earthquake. For SpecimenS-3, simulatedloadingwas appliedstatically.For SpecimenS-4 and SC-2; simulatedloadingwas applied dynamically,and repeatedthree times. 8. SpecimenS-3: Connection sustainedstatic simulatedearthquakeloadingwithoutfailure. Maximumplastic rotationdemandon specimenwas approximately 2%. 9. SpecimensS-4 and SC-2: Connection sustaineddynamicsimulatedearthquakeloadingwithoutfailure. Maximumplastic rotationdemandon specimenwas approximately 2%. 10. Tests conductedby Plumiernot includedin Table. Specimensconsistedof HE 260A beams (equivalent W10x49)and HE 300B columns to (equivalent W12x79).All specimenswere providedwith constantcut RBS. Beams attachedto columnsusing fillet welds on beam flanges and web, to or using a bolted end plate. Detailsavailablein Refs. 9 and 10. 11. Shakingtable tests were conductedby Chen, Yeh and Chu [1] on a 0.4 scale single story momentframe with RBS connections.Frame sustained numerousearthquakerecordswithoutfractureat beam-to-column connections. 12. SpecimensLS-2 and LS-3 were tested using near field loadingprotocol.The specimenwas subjectedto peak pulsescorresponding 6% story drift to ratio. Loadingwas repeatedsix times for LS-2 and four times for LS-3. The specimenseventuallyfailed due to low cycle fatiguefractureat the narrowest sectionin the RBS. 13. SpecimensDBBW and DBWW were cruciformt~,pespecimenswith beams attachedto each columnflange. 14. SpecimensDBBW-Cand DBWW-Cwere cruciformtype specimenswith compositefloor slab. Compositeslab details: 96" wide slab; 2" ribbed metal deck (ribs parallelto beam) with 3.5" toppingof normalweightconcrete;concretecompressive strengthat time of testing = 3600 psi for DBBW-Cand 6800 psi for DBWW-C;slab reinforcedwith #4 Gr. 60 bars in each direction;3.4"dia. shearstuds spacedat 12"; first stud locatedat 36" from face of column (at end of RBS). 15. Specimens WG-1 to WG-4: Test report providedslightlyconflictingdata on locationalong length of beam wheredisplacement was measured.Values of plastic rotationreportedabove are basedon an estimatedlocationfor displacement measurements.
A-9
Notation: Fy.f = flangeyield stress from coupontests Fu_f = flange ultimate stress from coupontests Fy_w = web yield stress from coupontests Fu-w = web ultimate stress from coupontests Lb = Lengthof beam, measuredfrom load application point to face of column Lo = Lengthof column L~ = distancefrom face of columnto start of RBS cut EBBS = length of RBS cut FR = Flange Reduction= (area of flange removed/originalflange area) xl00 (FlangeReductionreportedat narrowest sectionof RBS) ep = Maximumplastic rotation developedfor at least one full cycle of loading, measuredwith respectto the face of the column (basedon occurrence of fractureor based on end of loading) References: [1] Chen, S.J., Yeh, C.H. and Chu, J.M, "DuctileSteel Beam-to-Column Connections SeismicResistance," for 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
SPONSORS
Adams & Smith Allied Steel Co., Inc. Bannister Steel, Inc. Baresel Corp. Bethlehem Steel Corporation C.A. Buchen Corporation Butler Manufacturing Co. G.M. Iron Works Co. The Herrick Corporation
Hoertig Iron Works Hogan Mfg., Inc. Junior Steel Co. Lee & Daniel McLean Steel, Inc. Martin Iron Works, Inc. MidWest Steel Erection Nelson Stud Welding Co. Oregon Steel Mills
PDM Strocal, Inc. Reno Iron Works H.H. Robertson Co. SME Industries Southland Iron Works Stockton Steel Verco Manufacturing, Inc. Vulcraft Sales Corp.
The local structural steel industry (above sponsors) stands ready to assist you in determining the most economical solution for your products. Our assistance can range from budget prices and estimated tonnage to cost comparisons, fabrication details and delivery schedules.
Funding for this publication provided by the California Iron Workers Administrative Trust.