I

Bending Moment

\
s
o
3
|V I
Is
S \
\
& \
\
I z>
a
t
\
© l h
l

\
/ FLEXIBLE

L \
v
i
■S,

\
\

>
S\?
*» 4^ C
 Contents
1. INTRODUCTION PAGE
1.1 General 1
1.2 Concept 2
1.3 Forms of Construction 2
1.4 Connection Types 3
1.5 Arrangement of Manual 3
1.6 Computer Program “LIMCON 3

2. NOTATION 4

3. DESIGN OF CONNECTION ELEMENTS

3.1 Bolts and Bolt Groups 11
3.2 Welds and Weld Groups 22
3.3 Connection Components 34
3.4 Connected Members 36

4. DESIGN MODELS FOR CONNECTIONS

4.0 Introduction 41
4.1 Angle Seat Connection 45
4.2 Bearing Pad Connection 51
4.3 Flexible End Plate Connection 55
4.4 Angle Cleat Connection 61
4.5 Web Side Plate Connection 71
4.6 Stiff Seat Connection 79
4.7 Welded Beam to Column Moment Connection 85
4.8 Bolted Moment End Plate Connection 101
4.9 Welded Splice Connection 119
4.10 Bolted Splice Connection 129
4.11 Bracing Cleat Connection 145
4.12 Column Base Plate - Pinned Type Connection 153

5. COMMENTARY
5.0 Connection Characteristics 165
5.1 Angle Seat Connection 167
5.2 Bearing Pad Connection 172
5.3 Flexible End Plate Connection 173
5.4 Angle Cleat Connection 176
5.5 Web Side Plate Connection 180
5.6 Stiff Seat Connection 186
5.7 Welded Beam to Column Moment Connection 189
5.8 Bolted Moment End Plate Connection 201
5.9 Welded Splice 221
5.10 Bolted Splice 223
5.11 Bracing Cleat 227
5.12 Column Base Plate - Pinned Type 234
5.13 Bolts 253
5.14 Bolt Groups Loaded In-Plane 256
5.15 Welds 269
5.16 Weld Groups 273
5.17 Connected Members 284

6. REFERENCES 289

APPENDICES
A Design Aids - Bolts and Bolt Groups 300
B Design Aids - Welds and Weld Groups 312
C Gauge Lines for Sections 318
D Formulae for Section Properties of Single Web Coped I Sections 321
E Design Aids for Recommended Design Models 323
F Formulae for Section Properties of !-Section with Holes 327
G Projected Area of Overlapping Stress Cones for Anchor Bolt Groups 329
H User’s Guide for Computer Program “LIMCON” 331
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS iii
 Preface
This Manual details methods of design for a range of connections commonly used for structural steelwork in Australia.
The design models presented were originally developed as a necessary component of the AISC Standardized
Structural Connections and first published in 1978. The design models presented in the first three editions of this
Manual were used to generate the safe load tables for the range of standardized connections included therein, and
were in permissible stress format.
The first edition of this Manual was entitled ‘‘Part B” of the Standardized Structural Connections but became a text
book on the design of structural steel connections in its own right. The second edition of this Manual was retitled to
reflect this change in status and to reflect its usefulness more accurately. The title of the second edition has been
retained for subsequent editions. This Manual does, however, retain its role as the design verification for the AISC
Standardized Structural Connections.
This edition is written in limit state format in conformity with the Australian Standard for Steel Structures AS 4100
which is in limit state format. This is in contrast to previous editions which were based on the permissible stress
format of the then AS 1250 “SAA Steel Structures Code”.
Technically, this edition is similar to the third edition except for the change of format. A design model for the column
base plate connection has been added in this edition.

T. J. HOGAN
I. R. THOMAS

Authors TIM J. HOGAN

O' Tim Hogan is a Director of Stigter, Clarey and Partners - Consulting

I 1mj/j
'■>X

f
Engineers. His early experience was on bridge design and
construction with the N.S.W. Public Works Department and
subsequently as Development Engineer and then Engineering
Manager with the Australian institute of Steel Construction until 1980.
Consulting experience has included design and supervision of large
steel frame buildings, industrial buildings, mill buildings and composite
steel-concrete buildings. His published works deal primarily with the
areas of composite construction, steel connections and fabrication and
/
y / -A > erection of steel structures. He is a member of a number of Standards
Australia Committees dealing with steel and composite structures, and
is Co-Chairman of Committee BD/1-Steel Structures.

IAN R. THOMAS
Ian R Thomas, B.E.,Ph.D. (Monash) is Manager Engineering
Research at the BHP Research Melbourne Laboratories. He joined the
Laboratories in 1978 and prior to this spent six years as a design and
,»r development engineer with Johns Perry, Johns and Waygood
Structural Division. His published works deal primarily in the areas of
steel connections and fire engineering. He is a member of Standards
Australia Committee BD/1.

Editor ARUN A. SYAM

Manager Technical Services, AISC
Acknowledgments - The authors and editor would like to thank Mr Bruce Chapman (AISC), Mr Tim Wilkinson, the
staff from Engineering Systems Pty Ltd, Mr Alan Hosking (StrucMech Publishing), Dr Scott Woolcock (Bonacci
Winward), Mr Jose Zaragoza (AISC) who gave constructive comment on the technical and editorial content of this
publication. Special thanks is also extended to Mr Peter Clifford for drafting the figures and Mr Tony Edwards
(Redmark Pty Ltd) for his invaluable work in the production of this publication.

iv AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 GENERAL
In structural steel connections, there are two fundamental considerations:

(a) the designer requires a realistic estimate of connection strength in order that a connection will be safe and
economical;
and

(b) the connection must be detailed in such a way that it is economic to fabricate and erect, while recognising that
the detailing may have an important impact on the strength of the connection.

Any design model for assessing the strength of a connection must take account of the following four elements:

(i) the strength of the fasteners;

(ii) the strength of the connection components;
(iii) the strength of the connected member in the vicinity of the connection;
(iv) the strength of the supporting member in the vicinity of the connection.

Codes for the design of steel structures primarily deal with member design as a whole, rather than specifically
allowing for local effects, and provide only the basic information on fastener design. No code specifies a detailed
design procedure for any type of connection, leaving the assessment of how a connection behaves and how its
behaviour should be allowed for in design to the individual designer. This presents the designer with a formidable
task considering the large number of different connection types that may be encountered, each requiring individual
research and assessment.

AS 4100 “Steel Structures" (Ref. 34) states some minimum requirements for the design of connections, these
requirements (Clause 9.1.3) being that:

(a) The distributed design action effects are in equilibrium with the design action effects acting on the connection.
(b) The deformations in the connection are within the deformation capacities of the connection elements.

(c) All of the connection elements and the adjacent areas of members are capable of resisting the design action
effects acting on them.
(d) The connection elements shall remain stable under the design action effects and deformations”.

Additionally, AS 4100 requires that:

“Design shall be on the basis of a recognised method supported by experimental evidence”.

This Manual meets these requirements by providing a rational and recognised design model for a range of common
steel connections, each design model reflecting engineering common sense and known connection behaviour from
experimental data. The emphasis in this Manual is on practical design models whose assumptions are transparent
to the user. The models are related to current Codes of Standards Australia in respect of member and fastener design,
and member and fastener mechanical properties.

The philosophy of this Manual is the same as that espoused in Reference 10, being as follows:

(i) take into account overall connection behaviour, carry out an appropriate analysis in order to determine a
realistic distribution of forces within the connection;

(ii) ensure that each component or fastener in each action path has sufficient capacity to transmit the applied
action;

(iii) recognise that this procedure can only give a connection where equilibrium is capable of being achieved but
where compatability is unlikely to be satisfied, and therefore ensure that the connection elements are capable
of ductile behaviour.
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 1
Connections are considered in this Manual and in AS 4100 to consist of the following connection elements:
(i) fasteners (bolts or welds)
(ii) components (plates, gussets, cleats)
(iii) supported members
(iv) supporting members
all of whose design capacities must be evaluated in order to estimate the design capacity of a connection.

1.2 CONCEPT
This Manual is a specialist manual devoted to the design of connections in structural steelwork in accordance with
current Australian codes of practice, reflecting the current state of knowledge of connection behaviour from test
results. In some instances, the test evidence is sparse and in other instances the evidence is contradictory or
clouded. This Manual has been written by weighing the evidence to provide recommended design procedures and
providing a commentary to sustain the reasons for the choice of design model by the authors.
This Manual is intended to provide design models which give a realistic estimate of connection design capacity and
considerable effort has been expended in researching and developing simple, yet satisfactory, design models which
can be justified on the basis of the available research and current design practice. It is to be emphasised that for
some connections, the design models presented are not the only possible models — they happen to be the most
representative of the behaviour of an individual connection in the opinion of the authors. It is not intended to suggest
that other models may not give adequate connection capacity.
The connections dealt with are those presently in common use in Australia and reflect the types of connections
covered within the AISC Standardized Structural Connections. This Manual is used to generate the load tables for
connections within Standardized Structural Connections. (Ref. 1)
The design models contained within this Manual are considered to be applicable only to connections which are
essentially statically loaded. Connections subject to dynamic loads or in fatigue applications may require additional
considerations. Some of these considerations are noted Section 4.0.

1.3 FORMS OF CONSTRUCTION

AS 4100 allows for three forms of construction which relate to the behaviour of the connections. It then requires that
the design of the connections be such that the structure is capable of resisting all design actions, calculated by
assuming that the connections are appropriate to the form of construction of the structure or structural part. The
design of the connections is to be consistent with the form of construction assumed.
The three forms of construction are:
Rigid construction - For rigid construction, the connections are assumed to have sufficient rigidity to hold
the original angles between the members unchanged. The joint deformations must be such that they have
no significant influence on the distribution of the action effects nor on the overall deformation of the frame.
Semi-rigid construction - For semi-rigid construction, the connections may not have sufficient rigidity to hold
the original angles between the members unchanged, but are required to have the capacity to furnish
dependable and known degree of flexural restraint. The relationship between the degree of flexural restraint
and the level of the load effects is required to be established by methods based on test results.
Simple construction - For simple construction, the connections at the ends of members are assumed not to
develop bending moments. Connections between members in simple construction must be capable of
deforming to provide the required rotation at the connection; The connections are required to not develop a
level of restraining bending moment which adversely affects any part of the structure. The rotation capacity
of the connection must be provided by the detailing of the connection and must have been demonstrated
experimentally. The connection is then required to be considered as subject to reaction shear forces acting
at an eccentricity appropriate to the connection detailing.

2 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

1.4 CONNECTION TYPES
The types of connections covered in this Manual are:
FLEXIBLE CONNECTIONS (SIMPLE CONSTRUCTION)
— angle seat Sections 4.1/5.1
— bearing pad Sections 4.2/5.2
— flexible end plate Sections 4.3/5.3
— angle cleat Sections 4.4/5.4
— web side plate Sections 4.5/5.5
— stiff seat Sections 4.6/5.6
— bracing cleat Sections 4.11/5.11
RIGID CONNECTIONS (RIGID CONSTRUCTION)
— welded moment connection Sections 4.7/5.7
— bolted moment end plate connection Sections 4.8/5.8
SPLICES
— welded splice Sections 4.9/5.9
— bolted splice Sections 4.10/5.10
BASE PLATE
— column base plate (pinned) Sections 4.12/5.12
Attention is given primarily to applications involving rolled steel sections in orthogonal frameworks. This Manual does
not attempt to be exhaustive, and there are numerous miscellaneous types of connections and variations on the
above connection types which are not specifically dealt with. In some such cases, the principles given herein may
be applied subject to the limitations noted for the recommended design model for each connection.
The design models are basically applicable for the bolt types and weld types and sizes noted herein. The models
have been specifically developed with Grade 250 steel in mind for the members and the connection components but
should be capable of extension to Grade 300, Grade 350 and Grade 400 steel - though no test data is available for
these Grades. The design models are presented for a completely general detailing of each connection.

1.5 ARRANGEMENT OF MANUAL

Section 3 of the Manual presents some general design information required for all connections about bolts, bolt
groups, butt welds, fillet welds, fillet weld groups, connection components and connected members. Commentary
on this Section is contained in Sections 5.13 to 5.17 and some design aids are presented in Appendices A and B.
Section 4 of the Manual gives a recommended design model for each of the connections noted in Section 1.4,
together with a least one worked design example. A Commentary section accompanies each design model in the
correspondingly numbered sub-section in Section 5 (e.g. for a design model in Section 4.1 the corresponding
commentary is given in Section 5.1). The purpose of the Commentary is to explain the basis of the formulae in each
design model, to review the supporting literature and expand upon the reasons for the selection of the recommended
design model. Where appropriate, reference is made to test data.
Section 2 summarises the notation used throughout the Manual. Wherever possible, the notation is consistent with
that used in AS 4100.

jj
1.6 COMPUTER PROGRAM “LIMCON
The computer program LIMCON has been developed by Engineering Systems Pty Limited in association with the
Australian Institute of Steel Construction. The program runs on IBM-compatible PCs and has been designed to assist
in the design and checking of connections according to the method set out in this book. LIMCON is optionally
available with the book. Appendix H contains instructions for the installation and operation of the program.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 3

 2. NOTATION
• Units are kN, mm, mm2, MPa, kNm, mm4 unless otherwise noted.

• Notation is that used in Sections 3, 4 and 5 and Appendices of this Manual. Additional notation used in Section
5 is defined therein.
A = area of cross-section
Ac = minor diameter or core area of a bolt, as defined in AS 1275
= area of a flange subject to compression under a bending moment
Ag = gross area of a cross-section
Ah = area for steel base plate defined in Section 4.12.3
An = net area of a cross-section
Ans = net area in vertical direction - block shear failure
Ant = net area in horizontal direction - block shear failure
A0 = plain shank area of a bolt
= area defined in Section 4.12.3 for a CHS column
A pa = projected area of a failure cone in a concrete foundation
As = tensile stress area of a bolt, as defined in AS 1275
As = area of stiffeners
A, = area of a flange subject to tension under a bending moment
Atg = gross area in horizontal direction - block shear failure
A, = available bolt shear area
Avg = gross area in vertical direction for block shear failure
Aw = gross sectional area of a web
Awe = area of a column web
Aws = area of a load bearing stiffener comprising the area of the actual
stiffeners plus an area of web, as defined in AS 4100
A-,, A2 = areas defined in Section 4.12.2
a = distance from the top of a beam to the top hole in a connection to a beam web
ac = distance from the bottom of a plate or cleat connected to a beam web to the
bottom flange of the beam
= distance from bolt hole to edge of column flange - bolted moment end plate
3d = distance from bolt hole to root radius on column - bolted moment end plate
ae = minimum distance from the edge of a hole to the edge of a ply measured in
the direction of the component of a force plus half the bolt diameter
= distance from bolt centre-line to edge of plate - bolted moment end plate
= distance from anchor bolt centre-line to edge of concrete foundation
aec = value of ae in a supporting member
aeh = horizontal value of ae
aev = vertical value of ae
aex = horizontal value of a e
aexb = horizontal value of ae in a beam
aexi = horizontal value of ae in a component
aey = vertical value of ae
aeyb = vertical value of ae in a beam
aeyi = vertical value of ae in a component
ae1 “ ae8 = particular values of ae, defined as used
af = distance from bolt centre-line to face of flange - bolted moment end plate
afe = effective value of af - bolted moment end plate
ai = distance from centre of hole of edge of plate - bolted moment end plate
am = maxium distance of a1 and a2
a1i a2i a3 = distances defined in Sections 4.12.2 and 4.12.3
b = width generally
= width of a fillet weld group (see Table 3.2.7.1)
bb = bearing width defined in Sections 4.2 and 4.6
bba = defined bearing length in an angle seat connection
bbf = bearing width defined in Sections 4.1 and 4.6
bbw = defined bearing length in an angle seat connection
bes = stiffener outstand from the face of a web
bf = width of a flange

4 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 bfb = width of flange of a beam
bfC = width of flange of a column
b,0 = dimension defined in Section 4.12.4
bi = width of a component generally
bij = width of a bearing pad component
brc = width equal to web thickness plus twice the root radius of a rolled section
bs = stiff bearing length
= width of a shear key
bw = horizontal weld width in a bearing pad connection
= flange weld width
c = clearance
d = depth of a section
= depth of preparation for an incomplete pentration butt weld
= depth of a fillet weld group (see Table 3.2.7.1)
db = depth of a beam
dfC = distance between flange centroids
dc = depth of a column
de,d ew = specified depth of web in bearing pad connection (Section 4.2)
df = diameter of a bolt
dh = diameter of a hole
di = depth of a component
d;j = depth of a bearing pad component
d0 = outside diameter of a CHS section
dP = depth of a web panel
dw = diameter of a socket for tensioning a bolt
= depth of a shear key
dw = depth of a web
= remaining web depth of a coped section
d Wc = column section depth equal to the distance between the ends of fillets to the web
di = clear depth between flanges ignoring fillets or welds
d2 = twice the clear distance from the neutral axis to the compression flange
E = Youngs modulus of elasticity, 200 x 103 MPa
e = eccentricity
ec = design eccentricity of beam reaction off column
= centroidal distance in a fillet weld group
ed = eccentricity in a web splice
e0. ©v. ©w = eccentricities defined in Sections 4.1/5.1 and 4.2/5.2
ev = eccentricity defined in Sections 4.3, 4.4, 4.5
ea> eP = eccentricities defined in Sections 4.4, 4.5
Fx = design force on afillet weld group parallel to the group x-axis
= design force on afillet weld group parallel to the group y-axis
= design force on afillet weld group parallel to the group z-axis
fc = characteristic compression strength of concrete foundation at 28 days
f, = tensile strength used in design from AS 4100
fua = fu for an angle component
fub = fu for a bracing member connecting to bracing cleat
fuc = fu for a supporting member or column
fuf = minimum tensile strength of a bolt
= fu for a flange
fui = fu for a component
f„iUj = fu for a bearing pad
fup = tensile strength of a ply
fuw = nominal tensile strength of deposited weld metal used for design
= fu of a member web
fy = yield stress used in design
fya = fy for an angle component
f.yb = fy for the bearing interface of a bearing pad connection
f.yc = fy for a supporting member or column
fyf = fy for a flange

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 5

f.yd fy for a doubler plate
f„i
yi fy for a component
yj fy for a bearing pad component
f.ys yield stress of a stiffener used in design
f.yw yield stress used in design for member web
va average design shear stress in a web
f*
vrn
K/i maximum design shear stress in a web
second moment of area (generally)
bp polar second moment of area of bolt group about centroid of bolt group
bx second moment of area of bolt group about x-axis through centroid of bolt group
by second moment of area of bolt group about y-axis through centroid of bolt group
I of a pair of stiffeners or a single stiffener
w i of web of l-section alone
wp polar second moment of area of weld group about centroid of weld group
wx second moment of area of fillet weld group about x-axis through centroid of fillet weld group
wy second moment of area of fillet weld group about y-axis through centroid of fillet weld group
kc distance on a column section from outer face of flange to inner end of root radius
kf area of flange/total cross-sectional area
kh factor for different hole types (8.8/TF bolting category)
kmw proportion of the design bending moment transmitted by the web
kpr coefficient to allow for the additional bolt force due to prying
kr reduction factor to account for the length of a bolted or fillet welded lap splice connection
kw area of web/total cross-sectional area
ki - ke coefficients defined in Section 4.1.2
k7 - kn coefficients defined in Section 4.7.3.2
L length (generally)
U length of an angle seat
length defined in Section 4.S.2.3
Lb length in bracing cleat connection from last bolt to weld
Lc length of a cope
Ld length of embedment of an anchor bolt
L, effective length for a member or component subject to compression
distance from the top of a beam member to the top of a column member to
which it is rigidly connected
Le/r geometrical slenderness ratio
Lh length of horizontal outstanding leg in an angle seat connection
length of a hook in an anchor bolt
Li length of a bracing cleat component
L;I length of a bolted lap splice connection
Ls distance between points of effective lateral support
length of a stiffener
length of a socket used for tensioning bolts
Lv length of vertical leg in an angle seat connection
Lw length of a fillet weld in a welded lap splice connection
length of a fillet weld group generally
Lwx length in a fillet weld group which is assumed to receive force parallel to the x-axis of the weld group
Lwy length in a fillet weld group which is assumed to receive force parallel to the y-axis of the weld group
Lwz length in a fillet weld group which is assumed to receive force parallet to the z-axis of the weld group
LW1. LW2 lengths of web defined in Section 4.6
>b nominal member moment capacity
Mdm nominal capacity of a bolt group or fillet weld group which is only subject to
a couple applied at the centroid of the group
nominal section moment capacity
Msd nominal section moment capacity for a double web coped section at a connection
Msi nominal section moment capacity of a component
'so nominal section moment capacity for an uncoped member at a connection
■ss nominal section moment capacity for a single web coped section at a connection
■w nominal moment capacity of welded web
Mwd nominal moment capacity of web doubler plates
'wr nominal moment capacity of a weld in web in presence of axial force

6 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 = design bending moment on a connection
= design in-plane bending moment on a bolt group applied at the group centroid
= design bending moment on a column
■w = design bending moment on a web
= design moment on a fillet weld group about x-axis of the weld group applied at the group centroid
m; = design moment on a fillet weld group about y-axis of the weld group applied at the group centroid
= design moment on a fillet weld group about z-axis of the weld group applied at the group centroid
Nb = nominal capacity of bolt group in bracing cleat
Nc * nominal capacity of concrete foundation in compression
Ncc = nominal capacity of bracing cleat in axial compression
= nominal capacity of concrete in foundation resisting pull-out
Ncs « nominal strength of a stiffener in compression
Ndes = design capacity of steel base plate
Npb « nominal capacity of plate in bending - bolted moment end plate
Npc = nominal capacity of a flange splice plate in compression
Npt = nominal capacity of a flange splice plate in tension
Ns = nominal section capacity for axial load
= nominal section capacity of a compression member
= nominal capacity of steel base plate in axial compression or axial tension
Nt « nominal section capacity in tension
Nta = nominal capacity of bracing cleat in axial tension
N,b = nominal capacity of bolts at tension flange - bolted moment end plate
= nominal capacity of bracing cleat in block shear
= nominal capacity of an anchor bolt group in tension
Ntc = nominal capacity of bracing cleat component in axial tension
Ntf = nominal tension capacity of a bolt
Nti « minimum bolt tension at installation
N,s = nominal strength of a stiffener in tension
Nvs = nominal strength of a stiffener designed to resist excess shear force in a column
Nw « nominal capacity of a fillet weld group subject to axial force
= nominal capacity of a fillet or butt weld subject to axial force
Nwd * nominal capacity of web doubler plates subject to axial force
N* * design axial force on a connection, tension or compression
= design axial compression force on bracing cleat
N*
cm * design flange force at a compression flange due to bending moment
NS
cn = proportion of N* resisted by the compression flange
Ncs = design force on a stiffencer at the compression flange
Nf = proportion of N* resisted by a flange
'fC = total compression design force in a flange
NS = total tension design force in a flange
N* = design axial tension force on bracing cleat
N5 = design tension force on a bolt
Nf,
tm « design flange force at a tension flange due to bending moment
Nfn = proportion of N* resisted by the tension flange
Nfs = design force on a stiffener at the tension flange
N*
vs = design force on a stiffener due to shear
K = proportion of N* resisted by the web
n = total number of bolts in a line
nb = number of bolts in a bolt group or number of anchor bolts
nc = number of angle cleats in a connection (1 or 2)
ncw = number of bolts in connection not at tension flange - bolted moment end plate
nei = number of effective interfaces in an 8.8/TF category bolted connection
ng = number of lines of bolts at gauge sg
n, = number of shear planes with threads intercepting the shear plane
nP = number of bolts in a line at pitch sp
nt = total number of bolts in a connection
nx = number of shear planes without threads intercepting the shear plane
Q = first moment of area of a section
Qc = first moment of area of a section at a cope
Rb = nominal bearing capacity of a web

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 7

 Rbb = nominal bearing buckling capacity
Rby = nominal bearing yield capacity
Rc, Rd, RC2 = nominal capacity of a column adjacent to a beam compression flange
Rcs = nominal capacity of a stiffened column adjacent to a beam compression flange
Rs = nominal capacity of stiffened web on a column which is terminated near the stiffener
Rt. Rn. Rt2 = nominal capacity of a column flange adjacent to a beam tension flange
Rtd = nominal capacity of a column flange with doubler plates adjacent to beam tension flange
Rts = nominal capacity of a stiffened column flange adjacent to a beam tension flange
R* = design reaction
r = radius of gyration
= root radius of a section
r; = root radius of an angle in an angle seat connection
rb = root radius of a beam member
= root radius of a column member
rmax = maximum value of rn for all bolts in a bolt group
rr = radius to n’th bolt in a bolt group from the instantaneous centre of rotation
rs = radius of gyration of a stiffener
S = plastic section modulus
= plastic section modulus of an uncoped member
Si = plastic section modulus of a component
Ss = plastic section modulus of a single web coped member
s = spacing generally
= stiffener spacing
sg> sg1> sg2 = gauge of bolts in a bolt group
SP = pitch of bolts in a bolt group
SP9 = ratio equal to sg/[(np-1)sp]
t = thickness generally
ta = thickness of angle in angle seat connection
tb = thickness of bearing in a bearing pad connection
= thickness of bracing member connecting to bracing cleat
tc = thickness of a supporting member
td = thickness of a flange doubler plate
tf = thickness of a flange
tfb = thickness of flange of a beam
tfc = thickness of flange of a column
tg = thickness of grout under a column base plate
ti = thickness of a component
t,] = thickness of bearing pad component
= thickness of a ply or a packer plate
= thickness of thinner outside ply
ts = thickness of a stiffener
= thickness of a shear key
tt. tt1, tt2 = design throat thickness of a weld
t.w = thickness of web
twb = thickness of web of a beam
twc = thickness of web of a column
twd = thickness of a web doubler plate
t wm = minimum web thickness of connected webs
twi twi, tw2 = leg size of a fillet weld
Va-Vg = individual design capacities in shear for a connection each based on
a separate defined possible failure mode
vb = nominal capacity of a ply in bearing
= nominal shear buckling capacity of a web
vba = value of Vb for an angle
Vbe = value of Vb for a supporting member or column
Vb, = value of Vb for a flange
= nominal shear capacity of a bolt due to bearing failure on a component or supporting member
Vbh = value of Vb for a given horizontal end distance
Vbi = value of Vb for a component
Vbs = nominal capacity of a coped beam - block shear failure

8 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Vbv value of Vb for a given vertical end distance
Vc nominal capacity of a column in shear
Vcap design capacity defined in Section 4.1
Vdes design capacity of flexible connection
Vdf nominal capacity of a single bolt in shear - strength limit state
Vdh nominal capacity of a bolt or fillet weld group subject to in-plane horizontal shear only
Vdv nominal capacity of a bolt or fillet weld group subject to in-piane vertical shear only
Vdi-Vd5 nominal capacities for resisting shear force at a base plate (see Section 4.12.5)
Veh nominal capacity of a ply for a given horizontal end distance
Vev nominal capacity of a ply for a given vertical end distance
Vf nominal shear capacity of a bolt - strength limit state
V,b nominal capacity in shear of bolts - bolted moment end plate
nominal capacity of flange bolts - bolted splice - strength limit state
Vfn value of V} for the case of threads intercepting the shear plane
Vfs nominal capacity of flange bolts - bolted splice - serviceability limit state
Vfx value of Vf for the case of threads not intercepting the shear plane
Vk nominal shear capacity of shear key
Vmo Vvm for an uncoped section
Vms Vvm for a single web coped section
Vpv nominal capacity of plate in shear - bolted moment end plate
Vsf nominal shear capacity of a bolt - serviceability limit state
V, nominal shear capacity of a web with uniform shear stress distribution
Vv nominal shear capacity of a web
Vvd nominal shear capacity of web doubler plates
Vvm nominal web shear capacity in presence of bending moment
VUS nominal capacity of embedded anchor bolt subject to shear force
Vw nominal shear yield capacity of a web
nominal shear capacity of a web weld
Vwd nominal shear capacity for a double web coped member at a connection
nominal shear capacity of web doubler plates
V*wf nominal capacity of fillet weld to flange - combination bolted/welded splice
VVO nominal shear capacity for an uncoped member at a connection
Vws nominal shear capacity for a single web coped member at a connection
v* design shear force on a connection
design vertical shear force on a connection
Vb design bearing force on a ply at a bolt location
Vbh value of V* on a bolt group applied in-plane at the group centroid in a horizontal direction
V£v value of V* on a bolt group applied in-plane at the group centroid in a vertical direction
Vc design shear force on a column at a rigid connection
Vf design shear force on a bolt - strength limit state
Vh design shear force on a bolt due to design action Vbh
V*
mb design shear force on a bolt in a bolt group due to a couple applied at the group centroid
Vmh horizontal component of Vmb
v;mv vertical component of Vmb
Vn design shear force on n’th bolt due to applied actions
v;nm maximum value of
V,*res resultant design shear force on a bolt in a bolt group or on a base plate
% design shear force on a bolt - serviceability limit state
V*v design shear force on a bolt due to design action Vbv
V* vc design shear force at end plate-support interface
V*
vw design shear force on a web
Vx design shear force parallel to member major x-axis
V*y design shear force parallel to member minor y-axis
Vw nominal capacity of a fillet weld per unit length
VSw design force per unit length on a fillet weld
Vn design force per unit length of fillet weld - normal to fillet weld throat
V* resultant value of V* per unit length of fillet weld obtained by vectorial addition
*res
V pc

Vvi design force per unit length of fillet weld - longitudinal along fillet weld throat
vlt design force per unit length of fillet weld - transverse to fillet weld throat
value of V* per unit length parallel to x-axis of fillet weld group

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 9

 v; = value of V* per unit length parallel to y-axis of fillet weld group
vj = value of V* per unit length parallel to z-axis of fillet weld group
w1t w2 = terms defined for a stiffened column at the tension flange - bolted moment end plate
X = major principal axis coordinate
X = x coordinate of centroid of bolt/weld group
xe = x coordinate of instaneous centre of rotation relative to bolt group centroid
X, = x coordinate of n’th bolt in a bolt group relative to the bolt group centroid
y = major principal axis coordinate
y = y coordinate of centroid of bolt/weld group
Yc = distance from neutral axis to centre of compression flange
Ye = y coordinate of instantaneous centre of rotation relative to bolt group centroid
Yn = y coordinate of n’th bolt in a bolt group relative to the bolt group centroid
Yt = distance from neutral axis to centre of tension flange
z = elastic section modulus
Zb = section modulus for extreme bolt in a bolt group
Zc = effective section modulus for a compact section
Z( = effective section modulus of a section
= section modulus for extreme bolt in a bolt group for calculating component of
force to be resisted without plate tearout
Zeh = section modulus for extreme bolt in a bolt group for calculating horizontal
component to be resisted without plate tearout
Zei = effective section modulus for a component
Z ev = section modulus for extreme bolt in a bolt group for calculating vertical
component to be resisted without plate tearout
Zew = Ze for a web weld
z, = intermediate term used to calculate Zb for bolt group with two lines of bolts
Zs = elastic section modulus of a single web coped member
0 = angle of inclination of a beam member to a column
= angle between a diagonal web stiffener and horizontal stiffeners
= angle of preparation of an incomplete penetration butt weld
eE = beam rotation
em = rotation of a supported member
0, = angle to n’th bolt in a bolt group from the instantaneous centre of rotation
aa = compression member factor, as defined in Clause 6.3.3 of AS 4100
= compression member section constant, as defined in Clause 6.3.3 of AS 4100
Oc = moment modification factor for bending and compression
OCc = compression member slenderness reduction factor
«d = tension field coefficient for web shear buckling
Of = flange restraint factor for web shear buckling
OCv = shear buckling coefficient for a web
5b = moment amplification factor for a braced member
5m = moment amplification factor, taken as the greater of 5b and 8S
5P = moment amplification factor for plastic design
6S = moment amplification factor for a sway member
5 = compression member factor, as defined in Clause 6.3.3 of AS 4100
n = compression member imperfection factor, as defined in Clause 6.3.3 AS 4100
n = pi (-3.14159)
X = slenderness ratio
= plate element slenderness
Xep = plate element plasticity slenderness limit
A,ey = plate element yield slenderness limit
= modified compression member slenderness
= section slenderness
^sp = section plasticity slenderness limit
XSy = section yield slenderness limit
= slip factor
<t> = capacity factor

10 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 3- DESIGN OF CONNECTION ELEMENTS
3.1 BOLTS AND BOLT GROUPS

3.1.1 BOLT TYPES AND BOLTING CATEGORIES

TABLE 3.1.1

Details of bolt used

Bolting Strength Min. Bolt Min. Bolt Bolt Name Australian Remark
Category Grade Tensile Yield Standard
Strength Strength
(MPa) (MPa)

4.6/S 4.6 400 240 Commercial AS 1111 Least costly and most commonly
Bolt (Ref. 21) available is Grade 4.6 bolt.
Use Snug tightened.

8.8/S 8.8 830 660 High Strength AS 1252 Bolts are used Snug tightened.
Structural (Ref. 23) Now the most common
Bolt procedure used in flexible
connections in Australia.
/
8.8/TF 8.8 830 660 High Strength In both applications, bolts are
Structural fully Tensioned to the
Bolt — requirements of AS 4100. Cost of
8.8/T friction tensioning is an important
- type connection consideration in the use of these
AS 1252 bolting procedures.
(Ref. 23)
8.8/TB 8.8 830 660 High Strengh
Structural
Bolt
Bearing
type connection

In Australia a standard bolting category identification system has been adopted in AS 4100 for use by designers and
detailers. This system is summarised in Table 3.1.1.

The system of category designation identifies the bolt being used by specifying its strength grade designation (4.6
or 8.6) and identifies the installation procedure by a supplementary letter (S — snug; T—full tensioning to AS 4100).
For 8.8/T categories, the type of joint is identified by an additional letter (F — friction type, B — bearing type).

Category 4.6/S refers to commercial bolts of Strength Grade 4.6 conforming to AS 1111, tightened using a standard
wrench to a snug-tight condition.

Category 8.8/S refers to any bolt of Strength Grade 8.8, tightened using a standard wrench to a snug-tight condition
in the same way as for category 4.6/S. Essentially, these bolts are used as higher grade commercial bolts in order
to increase the capacity of connections, in practice, they are normally high strength structural bolts of Grade 8.8 to
AS1252, but any other bolt of Grade 8.8 would be satisfactory such as those to AS 1110.

Categories 8.8/TF and 8.8/TB (or 8.8/T when referring generally to both types) refer specifically to high strength
structural bolts of strength grade 8.8 conforming to AS 1252, fully tensioned in a controlled manner to the
requirements of AS 4100.

The use of the various bolting categories is discussed in Ref. 2 while the appropriate bolting category for each
connection type is identified in this Manual.

Generally, bolting categories 4.6/S and 8.8/S are used in flexible connections (Sections 4.1-4.6,4.11) while category
8.8/TB is used in rigid connections and splices (Sections 4.8 and 4.10). Category 8.8/TF is recommended only for
use in connections where a no-slip connection under serviceability loads is essential. 8.8/TF is the only bolting
category which requires consideration of the condition of the contact surfaces in a connection.

Design drawings and shop detail drawings should both contain notes summarising Table 3.1.1.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 11

3.1.2 DESIGN TO AUSTRALIAN STANDARD AS 4100
AS 4100 is a design code written in limit state format, in which two limit states might require consideration in the
design of bolted connections:
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE (requires consideration for all bolted connections)
SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE (requires consideration only for that class of connections
which are required not to slip under serviceability loads)
A commentary on AS 4100 is found in Ref. 35.
The provisions of AS 4100 regarding bolted connections for both limit states are summarised in Sections 3.1.3 and
3.1.4.

3.1.3 AS 4100 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS — STRENGTH LIMIT STATE

3.1.3.1 General
The strength limit state design provisions which apply for static load applications are found in Clause 9.3.2 of AS
4100. These provisions are summarised in Table 3.1.3.1. The design provisions follow directly from the strength of
bolts discussed in Section 5.13 and References 2 and 35.

TABLE 3.1.3.1
AS 4100 CLAUSE 9.3.2 PROVISIONS
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE-STATIC LOADS
Limit AS 4100 Design Requirement
State Clause

Bolt in 9.3.2.1 v; < 0Vf

Shear
V? = design shear force
Vf = nominal capacity in shear
= 0.62 fuf kr Av
4>= capacity factor = 0.8
f uf = minimum tensile strength of bolt (Table 3.1.1)
= 400 MPa Grade 4.6 to AS 1111
= 830 MPa Grade 8.8 to AS 1252
kr = reduction factor for bolted lap splice connections
(Section 3.1.3.2). For all other connections, kr = 1,0
Av = available bolt shear area (Section 3.1.3.3).
For a single bolt with single shear plane, threads
included, Av - Ac core area.
For a single bolt with single shear plane, threads
excluded, Av = A0 shank area.

Bolt in 9.3.2.2 N« < <j>Hxi

Tension
= design tension force
Ntf = nominal capacity in tension
— Asfuf
= capacity factor = 0.8
As = tensile stress area
Bolt in 9.3.2.3
Shear V*f 2 Ntf 2

and *Vf
+ <f> Ntf
< 1.0
Tension

Ply in 9.3.2.4 VJ < 4>Vb

Bearing Vb = design bearing force on a ply
Vb = nominal capacity of ply in bearing
V5 < 3.2 df tp fup (local failure)
— 3e ^p ^up (tearout failure)
<f> = capacity factor = 0.9
df = bolt diameter
tp = thickness of the ply
ae = minimum distance from the edge of a hole to the edge
of a ply in the direction of the component of force plus
half the bolt diameter
fup = tensile strength of the ply

12 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.1.3.2 Lap Splice Connections
As discussed in Section 5.13, bolted lap splice connections require a modification factor (kr) to be included when the
applied shear forces result in a large number of bolts in the joint. The strength of such a bolted connection is related
to the length of the joint by the relationship noted in Table 3.1.3.2(1). The length of the joint is Lj which is indicated in
Fig. 3.1.3.2.
Connections affected by the requirement for lap splice connections and for which kr may not be taken as 1.0 without
calculation using Table 3.1.3.2(1) are:
(i) bracing cleat (Section 4.11)
(ii) bolted flange splice (Section 4.10)
For all other connections in this Manual, kr = 1.0.
Values of kr for various bolt pitches and numbers of bolts in a line are given in Table 3.1.3.2(2).

TABLE 3.1.3.2 (1)

REDUCTION FACTOR FOR LAP CONNECTIONS (kr) Uj
JOINT L&NGTH
(n-l) Sp
Length Lj < 300 300 < Lj < 1300 Lj > 1300
mm

kr 1.0 1.075-Lj/4000 0.75

Fig. 3.1.3.2

TABLE 3.1.3.2(2)
VALUES OF kr FOR VARIOUS BOLT FITCHES

Values of kr for n of
sp 5 6 7 8 9
65 1.0 1.0 0.994 0.978 0.961 0.945
70 1.0 1.0 0.988 0.970 0.953 0.935
75 1.0 1.0 0.981 0.963 0.944 0.925
80 1.0 0.995 0.975 0.955 0.935 0.915
85 1.0 0.990 0.969 0.948 0.926 0.905
90 1.0 0.985 0.963 0.940 0.918 0.895
Notes: 1) n = total number of bolts in one line
2) sp — bolt pitch
3) Lj = length of bolted lap splice = (n - 1) sp

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 13

3.1.3.3 Shear Area
Bolted connections subject to shear may be either installed with the threads of the bolt crossing the shear plane or
with the plain shank of the bolt crossing the shear plane. The alternative arrangements are discussed in Ref. 2. In a
joint with a number of shear planes, some shear planes may cross the threaded part of the bolt while other shear
planes may cross the shank.

Clause 9.3.2.1 of AS 4100 recognises that the strength of the bolt across any shear plane is dependent upon the
available shear area of the bolt at that plane. It allows for all possible combinations by defining the shear area as

Av available bolt shear area

Ac + nx A0
where: Ac core area (see Appendix A)
A0 plain shank area (see Appendix A)
n, number of shear planes with threads intercepting the shear plane
nx number of shear planes with shank intercepting the shear plane

Usually either nn = 1 and nx = 0 when there are two plies and threads intercept the shear plane (thus giving Av = Ac)
OR nn = 0 and nx = 1 when there are two plies and the shank intercepts the shear plane (thus giving Av = A0).

3.1.3.4 Filler Plates

Where filler plates exceed 6 mm but are less than 20 mm in total thickness, the nominal shear capacity Vf specified
in Table 3.1.3.1 is required by Clause 9.3.2.5 of AS 4100 to be reduced by 15%. Filler plates greater than 20 mm in
total thickness should not be used as no design guidance is available in AS 4100.

3.1.4 AS 4100 DESIGN REQUIREMENTS SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE

3.1.4.1 General

Under certain conditions, a bolted connection which does not slip under the serviceability loads may be specified.
This type of connection is known as a friction-type joint and employs the 8.8/TF bolting category.

The no slip requirement applies for the serviceability limit state - it would be totally unrealistic to have no slip for the
strength limit state - though a separate check is also required by AS 4100 for the strength limit state. This design
check is carried out to the design requirements summarised in Section 3.1.3.

The design requirements of AS 4100 for 8.8/TF bolting category are summarised in Table 3.1.4.

With the bolt hole clearances permitted by AS 4100, the maxium amount of slip that can occur with a single bolt in a
single hole is 2-3 mm. In actual connections, as the number of bolts in a connection increases, so the potential for
slip decreases since the normal inaccuracies in fabrication and erection mean that some bolts in the connection are
most likely to be in bearing mode even before the connection is loaded.

Slip only needs to be restricted where such slip affects the serviceability or behaviour of the structure. Such instances
are rare and are mostly restricted to cases of continually reversing loading or fatigue loading.

3.1.4.2 Initial Bolt Tension

There can be considerable variation in the level of bolt tension possible, unless control is exercised over the bolt
installation procedure. The procedures within AS 4100 for bolt installation are intended to ensure that a reliable level
of installed bolt tension is achieved so that the design provisions against slip under serviceability load are themselves
reliable.

3.1.4.3 Hole Types

Different hole types - round, short slotted, long slotted and oversize - are permitted by AS 4100.

All of the hole types, except the standard round hole with 2-3 mm clearance, may cause a loss of clamping force in
the vicinity of the bolt because of loss of area due to the bigger hole. The clamping force is highly localised around
the hole and any loss of area has a significant effect on the tension achieved, which in turn affects the slip resistance
at the interface.

The factor for different hole types, kh, is intended to compensate for this effect, and varies from 0.70 to 1.00 according
to hole type (see Table 3.1.4).

14 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.1.4.4 Contact Surface Condition
The value of the slip factor, n, is highly dependent on the condition of the contact or faying surfaces. This slip
factor should be determined using a test procedure as laid down in Appendix J of AS 4100. The slip factor
used in AS 4100 for bare steelsurfaces is 0.35.

AS 4100 CLAUSE 9.3.3 PROVISIONS

SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE-STATIC LOADS

Limit AS 4100 Design Requirement

State Clause

Bolt in 9.3.3.1 V!sf ^ <£Vsf

Shear v; = design shear force-serviceability limit state
<i> = capacity factor = 0.7
vsf = nominal shear capacity—serviceability limit state
= M nei Nti kh
A = slip factor
= 0.35 for clean as-rolled surfaces or as determined by
testing in accordance with Appendix J of AS 4100
n„:
ei = number of effective interfaces
Nti = minimum bolt tension at installation (see Table A.3,
App.A)
kh = factor for different hole types
= 1.0 for standard holes
= 0.85 for oversize holes
= 0.85 for short slotted holes as permitted by AS 4100
= 0.70 for long slotted holes .

Bolt in 9.3.3.3 v:sf + n;

Shear & < 1.0
Tension $ Vs, $ N w
N*4
if design tension force-serviceability limit state
N nominal tension capacity of the bolt
Nti (see Table A.3, App.A)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 15

 3.1.5 BOLT GROUPS LOADED-IN-PLANE
For bolt groups subject to a combination of in-plane vertical shear, in-plane horizontal shear and in-plane
bending moment, general expressions governing the design of such bolt groups can be derived. A summary of
the governing expressions is given below, while a full derivation of the expressions is given in Section 5.14.
In certain instances, notably for a bolt group loaded by an eccentric vertical in-plane shear force, a term Zb
can be derived. Zb is, in effect, the number of effective bolts loaded in vertical shear in the bolt group and this
term can be used directly with the values given in Appendix A to determine the design capacity in eccentric
vertical shear for a given bolt group. Tables of Zb for values of bolt pitch (sp) and gauge (sg) can be derived-
for example in Appendix A where tables for sp = 70 mm and sg = 70, 90,140 mm are presented.

(a) Single Bolt Column (b) Double Bolt Column

«•

•5
Tt ■I
a —e- o.
o- a.
bv tT

•^
I*
bm bm
-o-
0. CL.
e c

«jggoU9a/
wb- np
0b = 2 Op
“*3 - °
Fig. 3.1.5

The governing equation is:- The governing equation is:~

"2 \/t * *
bin V bv “ 2
fV*bvl2 2 s. Vibv 2
.^Vdh <£Md m
+ < 1.0 bm
+ (f>bm
^Vdv. %/l + Spg ‘ >VdvJ ' |_(/>Mdm„ Mmd
*
where 0Mdm, $Vdh and <£Vdv are functions of Vf as + 2 "v|h bm vthl* <£ 1.0
+ .*V
follows: (See Section 5.14). V1 + Sp2g * L</>VdhJ ’ |_<£Md
m dh

4>vdn =np m) where 4>Vdv, <£Vdn. <£Mdm are functions of Vdf as

follows: (See Section 5.14).
0Vdv = nP {<f>V)
4>Vdv = 2np.(M)
npsp(np + 1)
$Mdir) = .(0Vf) for np # 1 0Vdh = 2np.(<£Vf)
6
0 for np = 1 g(nj - 1) + (sg/sp)2
~np sp m)
\7(nP - 1)2 + (sg/Sp)L
for np # 1
= Sg.(^Vf) for np = 1

spg
h.
(nP - 1)sp
where: V, = nominal capacity of a single bolt in shear-strength limit state (Section 3.1.3)
4> — 0.8

16 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

For the restricted case where V t bh 0 and Mh bm eV*bv, e = eccentricity of V bv from centroid of bolt group

then Vtv < Zb (<£V}) (Derivation in Section 5.14)

(a) Single Bolt Column (b) Double Bolt Column

Up 2np
Zb = for np # 1 Zb = for np 1
6e 2 Vfi + Z,]2 + fr/Spg]2
1+
_sp (np + 1)_ 2e/s g
where Z^
Zb = 0 for np = 1
1 +iaL±i
2
3 np - 1 [tr
Zb = 1 + 2e/s for np = 1
g

It is also necessary in bolted connections to check the components of forces acting towards the edge of a
component or supported member to ensure that end plate tearout or bearing failure will not occur. The
derivation of expressions to cover this situation may be found in Section 5.14. The equations derived may be
summarized as follows:
(a) Single bolt column (b) Double bolt column

DESIGN REQUIREMENTS

V*res V(V*v)2 + (V*b)2 ^ 0Vbf V*res = V(V*v + V*v)2 + (V*h)2 ^ 0Vbf

V bv ^ (0Vev) np V*bv ^ Zev (*VW) 2np

V*bv ^ Ze (<£Veh) np V bv ^ Zeb (<£Veb) 2np

WHERE

v* V* Vtbv
V =
v V*v = 2n
nP p

v£b = v*nbvs (n6e+ 1) np # 1 V^v =

2lbp
p p p
-0 np = 1 e(np - 1)sp
V£h - V*bv
2lbP
sp(np + 1)
Ze = np * 1 npS|

6e Ibp - 2
6 [(ng - 1) + 3(Sg/sp) ]
~0 np = 1
1
ev np * 1
1 + npesg
lb p
lp
Zeh — e(n - b1) s np * 1
p p

Z ev h.
_Sg + 2e
Zeh = 0

AND

<£Vbf = (f> 3.2 df tp fup

^>Vev = 4> 3ev Ip fup

<£Veb = 0 aeh tp fup

fup = tensile strength of ply
tp = thickness of ply
aev = vertical edge distance (Figs. 5.14.11, 5.14.13)
aeb = horizontal edge distance (Figs. 5.14.11,5.14.13)
<f> = 0.9
df = bolt diameter

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 17

3.1.6 BOLTED CONNECTION GEOMETRY TABLE 3.1.6.1
Minimum Edge Distance MINIMUM EDGE DISTANCES
Minimum edge distances from the centre of a bolt Nominal Sheared Rolled Plate; Rolled
hole to the edge of a plate or the flange of a rolled Diameter or Hand Machine Edge
section are specified in AS 4100 as follows:- of Flame Flame Cut, of a
1.75 df for sheared or hand flame cut edges Fastener Cut Edge Sawn or Roiled
df Planed Edge Section
1.50 df for machine flame cut, sawn or planed mm mm mm mm
edges
1.25 df for rolled edges or rolled sections 12 21 18 15
16 28 24 20
— where df is the nominal diameter of the 20 35 30 25
fastener. 24 42 36 30
Table 3.1.6.1 lists these minimum edge distances 30 53 45 38
for commonly used bolt diameters. 36 63 54 45
Maximum Edge Distance
AS 4100 specifies the maximum edge distance (b) For an outside line of fasteners in the direction
of the design force the lesser of 4tp + 100 mm,
from the centre of a bolt to the nearest edge. This is
and 200 mm.
limited to 12tp or 150 mm, whichever is the lesser,
where tp is the thickness of the thinner outer ply. Bolt Holes
Minimum Pitch of Bolts The diameter of bolt holes in bolted connections is
Minimum pitch of bolts is specified in AS 4100 to stipulated in AS 4100 to be larger than the bolt
diameter by either:-
be 2.5 times the nominal diameter of the bolt.
However, if it is intended to tension bolts with a 2 mm for M24 bolts or smaller
special tensioning tool, the minimum distance
3 mm for bolts larger than M24
between the centres of bolt holes shall be
appropriate to the type of tool used. 6 mm for holes in base plates

Maximum Pitch of Bolts In some applications, the use of slotted or oversize

holes may be justified in order to ease erection
Maximum pitch of bolts is stipulated in AS 4100 to
difficulties. The large oversize holes permitted in
be the lesser of 15tp and 200 mm where tp may be
base plates is to assist in column erection and is
taken as the thickness of the thinner outside ply.
related to the out-of-position of anchor bolts
However, in the following cases the maximum
permitted in AS 4100.
distances shall be:
AS 4100 also makes provision for the use of short
(a) For fasteners which are not required to carry and long slotted holes and oversize holes, and the
design actions in regions not liable to corrosion detailed provisions for such holes are summarised
the lesser of 32tp and 300 mm. in Table 3.1.6.2.

TABLE 3.1.6.2
AS 4100 PROVISIONS FOR SLOTTED AND OVERSIZE HOLES
(df = nominal bolt diameter)

Maximum Size (mm)

Hole Limitations
Type General M20 M24
Short Width: 22 26 May be used in shear connections. In friction-type joints, slots may
slotted di + 2 be used without regard to direction of loading. In bearing-type
Length: > 30 34 joints, slots must be normal to the direction of the load; bolts must
1.33 df or bear uniformly; joint cannot be eccentrically loaded. May be used in
df + 10 any or all plies of both types provided hardened washers or plate
(whichever is washers are used under bolt head and nut.
the greater)
Long Width: 22 26 May be used in shear connections, but only in alternate plies. In
slotted d, + 2 friction-type joints, may be used without regard to direction of
Length: > 50 60 loading. In bearing-type joints, slots must be normal to the direction
2.5 df of the load; bolts must bear uniformily and the joint cannot be
eccentrically loaded. Special washer or plate (s*8 mm thick) to
cover all exposed long slotted holes.
Oversize >1.25 df 28 32 May be used in any or all plies of bearing-type and friction-type
>df + 8 connections provided hardened washers or plate washers are
(whichever is installed over the oversize holes.
the greater)

18 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.1.7 EXAMPLES

3.1.7.1 Lap Splice Connection

Check a bolted splice in a 180 x 20 plate in the following configuration to ensure that it can transmit the
design tension capacity of the plate.

I0

N* zoj N*
JO
no 40 40 70
io

4*7

o— e ~o
-r

v
§—-~y ■e
4*7

Fig. 3.1.7.1

Plates: Grade 250 to AS 3678

Spliced Plate: 20 mm thick fy = 250 MPa fu - 410 MPa
Ag - 180 x 20 = 3600 mm2
An = 3600 ~ 2 x 22 x 20 = 2720 mm2
AS 4100, Clause 7.2 Nt < 3600 x 250/103 = 900 kN
Nt < 0.85 x 1.0 x 2720 x 410/103 - 948 kN
Design capacity <j>Ht =* 0.9 x 900 = 810 kN
Splice Plates: 2 No x 10 mm thick fy = 260 MPa fu = 410 MPa
Ag = 2 x 180 x 10 » 3600 mm2
An = 2 x (180 x 10 - 2 X 22 x 10) = 2720 mm2
Nt ^ 3600 x 260/103 = 936 kN
Nt ^ 0.85 x 1.0 X 2720 x 410/103 = 948 kN
Design capacity </>Nt = 0.9 x 936 = 842 kN > 810 kN
Bolts: M20 category 8.8/S in 22 mm diameter holes
grip = 40 mm bolt length = 70 mm (Ref. 2)
minimum plain shank length = 16.5 mm (Ref. 2)
Hence, threads intercept one shear plane, plain shank the other shear plane.
Design capacity of bolts in shear = $V{n + $Vfx = 92.6 + 129 = 221.6 kN (Table A.2.2)
Lj = 70 mm (first to last bolt, each side of splice location) hence, kr = 1.0
Plate Crushing and Tearout: df = 20 mm
Spliced Plate ae 40 mm fup = 410 MPa tp = 20 mm
Vb ^ 3.2 x 410 x 20 x 20/103 = 525 kN
^ 40 x 20 x 410/103 = 328 kN
Not critical since <£Vb (= 0.9 x 328 kN) > 0V,(= 221.6 kN)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 19

Splice Plates: ae = 35 mm fup = 410 MPa tp = 10 mm
Vb ^ 3.2 x 410 x 10 x 20/103 = 262 kN
^ 35 x 10 x 410/103 = 144 kN
<£Vb = 0.9 x 144 kN > 92.6 kN threads included DOES NOT CONTROL
= 129 kN = 129 kN threads excluded
Design Capacity on two shear planes per bolt = 92.6 + 129 = 221.6 kN
Total Design Capacity of 4 bolts each side of splice location = 4 x 221.6 = 886 kN
> 810 kN SATISFACTORY

3.1.7.2 Eccentric Connection Generating In-Plane Bolt Shear Forces

4*7
O
*

O
£
70
O O
70
o o
70
O O
4*>

V
*5*7 *?0 °)0
-I
10*7

J5-4.

x 8-

*
*?00 Powjf of application of V

Fig. 3.1.7.2

Design actions at bolt group centroid: V bv = V* kN

M bm = 0.5 V* kNm
Bolt group design parameters (after Section 3.1.5):- e = 500 mm

sp = 70 mm sg = 90 mm np = 4
90
spg = 0.4286
3 X 70
2 2spg
= 1.84 = 0.788 (Table A.10)
v1 + si: pg N/TTilpg
2 x 500/90
Zi = 2.761
x
1
0.42862
2x4
Zb = = 1.072
V3.7612 + (2.761/0.4286)2

20 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 Bolt Design Capacity: M20 bolts 8.8/S bolting category
grip = 15.4 + 8 = 23.4 mm From Ref. 2, 55 mm long bolt is shortest possible bolt
55 mm long bolt has minimum plain shank of 10 mm (<15.4) threads intercept shear plane
Vdf = 0Vfn = 92.6 kN (Table A.2.2)

Crushing on 8 mm ply, </>Vb = 189 kN (Table A.2.2) NOT CRITICAL

(Plate tearout assessed for components of bolt forces separately).
Using Section 3.1.5:-
Method (a) using Zb:- Vbv ^ Zb (<£Vf) = 1.072 x 92.6 = 99.4 kN
since Vbv = V* then V* 99.4 kN
Method (b) using interaction equation:- Vbh = 0
</>Vdv = 8 X 92.6 = 740.8 kN (Table A.10)
4>Mdm = 0.571 x 92.6 = 52.9 kNm (Table A.10)

r—i2 [
[740.8]
+ 0.788
V*
740.8
0.5V*
52.9
+
0.5V
52.9
^ 1.0

[V*]2 [1.8222 + 10.054 + 89.336] x 10"6 ^ 1.0

V* ^ 99.4 kN

backsubstituting to check:-

'99.4] 2
740.8
+ 0.788
99.4
l
740.8
49.7
52.9
+
[sf = 1.0 CHECKS

Now check end plate tearout of component forces using method in Section 3.1.5:-
4 x 702
Ibp — - 6 --[15 + 3 x (90/70)2] = 65 200 (Table A.10)

1 65 200
Zev ~
1 + 4 x 500 x 90 Zeh 500 x 3 x 70 X 4
65 200
= 0.266 = 0.155
Now vertical end plate tearout is not likely in either column or bracket, while horizontal end plate tearout will
occur in the 8 mm web of the channel member before occuring in column flange. Hence,
aeh = 50 mm, tp = 8 mm, fup = 410 MPa, $ = 0.9
0Veh = 0.9 x 50 x 8 X 410/103 = 147.6 kN
V* ^ Zeh.(0Veh) = 0.155 x 147.6 = 22.9 kN
V*bv = 2npV*v = 2 x 4 x 22.9 = 183 kN > V* DOES NOT CONTROL
500 x 90
V*v = V*bbv • = 0.345 Vt bv
130 400
V* = 0.125 V*bbv

V*h = vbbv 500 x 3 x 70 = 0.805 Vt,bv

130 400
0Vbf = 0.9 x 3.2 X 20 x 8 x 410/103 = 188.9 kN
V*res
£ (\/(0.125 + 0.345)2 + 0.8052) V bv < 188.9
Vtv ^ 202.6 kN DOES NOT CONTROL

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 21

 3.2 WELDS AND WELD GROUPS

3.2.1 WELD TYPES

Six types of welds are mentioned in AS 4100 (see Fig 3.2.1):
Complete penetration butt weld - a weld where fusion exists between weld metal and the parent metal throughout
the entire depth of the joint. A butt weld is one in which the weld lies substantially within the extension of the planes
of the surfaces of one or more of the parts joined.
Incomplete penetration butt weld - a butt weld where, by design, fusion does not extend throughout the full depth of
the joint.
Fillet weld - a weld of approximately triangular cross-section which is formed in the corner between the surfaces of
two components.
Plug weld - a weld made by completely or partially filling a circular hole in one component with filler metal, with the
filler metal fusing to the contiguous component exposed through the hole.
Slot weld - a weld made by depositing a fillet weld around the periphery of an elongated hole in one component so
as to join it to the surface of a contiguous component exposed through the hole.
Compound weld - a weld comprising a fillet weld superimposed on a butt weld.
More information on weld types may be found in AS 1101.3 and AS 2812 (Refs. 36,37).
AS 4100 restricts the use of plug and slot welds to applications where these welds either transmit shear in lap joints
or where they prevent buckling of lapped parts or where they join component parts of built-up members.
All the connections dealt with in this Manual use either fillet or butt welds.

9>)ZE
5
2 <7lZE

(a) Complete penetration butt weld (b) Complete penetration butt weld In
other than in a T-joint or a T-joint or corner joint
corner joint

HIE [

^IZE.s p
A

(c) Incomplete penetration butt welds

(d) Fillet welds (e) Compound weld

Fig. 3.2.1 Weld Types

22 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.2.2 WELD CATEGORIES
AS 4100 permits the use of two weld categories as follows:
SP - structural purpose
GP - general purpose
The difference between these weld categories lies in the level of permissible imperfections allowed by AS 1554.1
(Ref. 26). SP weld category has smaller permitted imperfections - and is accordingly more reliable - than category
GP. Once the permitted level of imperfections is exceeded the imperfections are classed as defects. These
categories of weld cannot be accepted under AS 1554.1 if the level of permitted imperfections is exceeded, unless
it can be demonstrated by a fracture mechanics assessment that the defects will not be injurious to the performance
of the structure.
The selection of weld category is at the discretion of the designer. In this Manual, the design models are presented
so as to allow either weld category, but it is expected that most welds will be weld category SP in practice.

3.2.3 STANDARD WELD SYMBOLS

Finish symbol
Preparation angle; included
Contour symbol angle of countersink
for plug welds
Root gap; depth of filling
for plug and slot welds
Length of weld
Design throat thickness -
Pitch (centre-to-centre
Depth of preparation; size or
strength for certain welds A spadng) of weld

Specification, process,
procedure or
R Site weld symbol

<0 >
other reference
S(D)/{ IU
o
co
L-P Arrow connecting
reference Nne to

T arrow side member

Tail
(Tail omitted
when reference
is not used)
(I Is
ix to
< }
of joint

Weld-all-around symbol

(N) Reference line

Number of spot or
projection welds
Basic weld symbol
or detail reference

Elements in this area remain as shown

when tail and arrow are reversed

Notes: 1. The letters CP in the tail of the arrow indicate a complete penetration butt weld.
2. The tail should be omitted if no reference T is required.
3. The size of a fillet weld shall be to the left of the symbol.
4. For an incomplete penetration butt weid, the design throat thickness shall
be to the left of the symbol. Where no design throat thickness is shown, a complete
penetration butt weld is assumed required.
5. Arrow side and other side welds are made the same size unless otherwise dimensioned.
6. Symbols only apply between abrupt changes in direction of welding unless governed by
the ’weid ai! round’ symbol or otherwise dimensioned.

Fig 3.2.3.1 Location of Elements

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 23

 BASIC WELDING SYMBOLS AND THEIR LOCATION SIGNIFICANCE
LOCATION PLUG OR BUTT WELDS
FILLET B^VFlT
SIGNIFICANCE SLOT SQUARE VEE U l
ARROW
SIDE > z < \
n~< -7<r< > 7T
/ >
*7
OTHER \N V ii_< >-* > Z>
SIDE X
BOTH NOT
SIDES USED ^7

SUPPLEMENTARY SYMBOLS BASIC JOINTS - IDEKTFICAJION OF ARROW SICE

WELD ALL SITE BACKING AND OTHER SIDE OF JOINT
ROUND WELD STRIP
BUTT JOINTS T-JOINTS
ARROW OF ARROW SIDE ARROW SIDE OF
WELOING SYMBOL / OF JOINT ARROW OF JOINT
> •7T—- •TV
i WELDING SYMBOL
CONTOUR 'sJ r-
1 . £‘
>
C--- .
>“*

FLUSH CONVEX CONCAVE K OTHER SIDE ( '-•T'->OTHER

W
OF jam -•^’SIDE Cf JOINT
CORfrgR JOINT
ARROW SIDE
OF JOINT ,n ARROW SIDE
DF JOINT A’ A JOINT
■"T-----------
f

> K~'^" [ ji'’

OTHER
. ..... OTL€R >H
f y

Sice of joint
LF'SDE OF JOINT
ARROW OF WELDING SYMBOL ARROW OF WELOING SYMBOL
LAP JOINTS
OTHER SIDE CF ARROW SICE MEMBER CF
JOINT ,.-r : ;; JONT
J

>~
ARROW e: ± OTICR
SIDE NUMBER
SIDE OF JOINT K OF JOINT
ARROW OF WELDING SYMBOL
EDGE- JOINT
ARROW SIDE OF.._
JOINT
>—it—"
7&A
r
ARROW OF WELDING
>> • 4 JOINT
SYMBOL
OTHER SIDE OF JOINT

Fig. 3.2.3.2 Basic Welding Symbols

s t
DTT* 20, > r.r.
6 250
6 2%o
SECTIONAL SKETCH OF WELD
6 15 0
la) (b) (c)
LENGTH OF FILLET WELDS 17V
100 ^
5Q.>r
I0(
5a
SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATION
/ 81/50-100 INCOMPLETE PENETRATION
SINGLE-V BUTTWELD
REGULAR INTERMITTENT FILLET
WELDS COMMENCING WITH A WELD
10a 75 50
TOQj 5o:~: I00
5i 1i
10a I00

L/100-50-l00 75 50
6 K 75-50-100
650-100
REGULAR INTERMITTENT FILLET STAGGERED INTERMITTENT WELDING
WELDS COMMENCING WITH AN UNWELDED
LENGTH.

Fig. 3.2.3.3 Basic Dimensioning Principles

24 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.2.4 SELECTION OF PREQUALIFIED WELDING CONSUMABLES

TABLE 3.2.4.1

Weld Metal Classification

Submerged arc — AS 1858.1
Steel Grade in Manual metal-arc AS 1553.1 (Ref. 25) (Ref. 29)
AS 3678
AS 3679 Flux cored — AS 2203 (Ref. 30)
Classification Grade Gas Metal Arc — AS 2717.1
(Ref. 31)

200, 250, 300 E41XX, E48XX 0 and 1 W40X, W50X

250L0 E41XX, E48XX 2 W402, W502
250L15, 300L15 E41XX, E48XX 3 W403, W503
350, WR350, 400 E48XX, E41XX 0 and 1 W50X, W40X
350L0, WR350L0 E48XX, E41XX 2 W502, W402
350L15, 400L15,
WR350L15 E48XX, E41XX 3 W503, W403

Note: See expanded version of this table in AS 1554

TABLE 3.2.4.2
STRENGTH OF WELD METAL

Weld Metal Designation fuw(MPa)

E41XX, W40X 410
E48XX, W50X 480

Note: fuw is the nominal tensile strength of the deposited weld metal used for design.

3.2.5 DESIGN OF BUTT WELDS - STRENGTH LIMIT STATE

COMPLETE PENETRATION BUTT WELD - AS 4100 Clause 9.7.2.7 requires that the design capacity is taken as
equal to the nominal capacity of the weaker part of the parts joined multiplied by the capacity factor (<£) of:
0.90 - weld category SP
0.60 - weld category GP
provided that the weld procedure is qualified in accordance with AS 1554.1.
To specify this type of weld on a drawing, the term "complete penetration butt weld" or the appropriate symbol from
AS 1101.3 is sufficient. The design throat thickness is then the size of the weld which is the minimum depth which
the weld extends from its face into a joint - that is the thickness of the thinner part.
INCOMPLETE PENETRATION BUTT WELD - AS 4100 Clause 9.7.2.7 requires that the design capacity shall be
calculated as for a fillet weld using a design throat thickness determined using Clause 9.7.2.3(b) of AS 4100.
The size of an incomplete penetration butt weld is a function of:
(a) the required design throat thickness
(b) the welding process
(c) the details of the weld preparation
and rather than specifying the size of such a weld on the drawings it is usual to specify the required design throat
thickness. This then allows the fabricator to produce the required weld by selecting the most advantageous
combination of welding process, weld preparation and welding position. The whole procedure must be qualified in
terms of AS 1554.1 before fabrication commences.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 25

3.2.6 DESIGN OF FILLET WELDS - STRENGTH LIMIT STATE

AS 4100 Clause 9.7.3.10 specifies that a fiiiet weld subject to a design force per unit length (kN/mm) shall satisfy:

v^ < 0V w

where: capacity factor 0.80 SP category fillet weld

0.60 GP category fillet weld
v, nominal capacity of fillet weld per unit length (kN/mm)
0.6 fuw t, kr
fuw nominal tensile strength of deposited weld metal
(see Table 3.2.4.2)
tt design throat thickness
kr = reduction factor to account for the length of a welded lap connection
1.0 for all connections in this Manual

The design throat thickness is the smallest dimension from the root of the weld to the hypotenuse of the triangular
weld profile, drawn perpendicular to the hypotenuse (see Fig. 3.2.6.1).

t-w qr<£ fillet wdd twi /

/
/
tbrttff 4blckrxz#£
t-w "tw2 I

(a) Equal leg fillet weld (b) Unequal leg fillet weld

IV
DaWQO 'Hiroort- -fhtckrxity? -for
\
\ Sootp panaAvcftion swdd<?
\ t>sj aurorTxrf'ic
\
^2 \
tt. = k, ♦

(c) Deep penetration fillet weld

Fig. 3.2.6.1

Advantage may be taken of the increased penetration achievable with a fully automatic welding process, in order to
reduce the size (but not the design throat thickness) of a fiiiet weld - 85% of the penetration being considered as
part of the design throat thickness (see Fig. 3.2.6.1(c)). The viability of the procedure must be demonstrated by
means of a macro test.

Tables of design capacity for SP and GP category fillet welds are given in Appendix B.

The design force per unit length (v£) is calculated as the vectorial sum of the design forces per unit length on the
effective area of the weld (AS 4100 Clause 9.7.3.10) where the effective area is the product of the effective length
and the design throat thickness (AS 4100 Clause 9.7.3.6).

26 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Accordingly, the vectorial sum of the design forces can be obtained from either:-
(a) the vectorial sum of three mutually orthogonal components related to the weld throat, these being:
— one normal to the fillet weld throat (v*)
— one transverse to the fillet weld throat {v^t)
— one longitudinal along the fillet weld throat (v*1)
so that v*es = Vv*2 + v *2 as in Fig. 3.2.6.2(a)
vt + V*,2
or
(b) the vectorial sum of three mutually orthogonal components each parallel to a weld group axis (x, y, z),
these being:
— one parallel to the fillet weld group x-axis (v*)
— one parallel to the fillet weld group y-axis (v*)
— one parallel to the fillet weld group z-axis (v*)
so that v*res 2 2
ri = VVx + Vy + V j
*2 as in Fig. 3.2.6.2(b)

V,n Vvt

// Vv
vi

Filial group

(a) Forces per unit length related to fillet weld throat

•s-V*vx
■6=“ X

V£
z
Fi group in x-y plane

(b) Forces per unit length parallel to weld axes (x, y, z)

Fig. 3.2.6.2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 27

 3.2.7 DESIGN OF FILLET WELD GROUPS-GENERAL SOLUTION
[For a derivation of this method, see Section 5.16] Restricted Cases of Forces on Weld Elements

Forces on Weld Elements For a fillet weld group loaded “out-of-plane” by a

common design action set of forces (F*, F*) and
The force per unit length of fillet weld in the x, y and design moment (M*), the previous equations reduce
z directions may be determined using the familiar to the commonly quoted expressions:-
expressions: (Fig. 3.2.7.1)
v* = 0
F*
rx M*.y
v* = F*/L wy
w Iwp
F* Mj.y
F* M*.x v* = j—— +
l-WZ
V
'wx
wp

* _ F| ^ Mlv m;.x
2L + Iwx Iwy /
w / Fz*
/
/
Y / ri.,
GENERAL- FILUT /*
WEU? GfZ-OUP
*
*
CENTnzOlO OF RUST
WEU? GROUP V F*
rx
Fig. 3.2.7.2 Fillet Weld Group Loaded
"Out-of-Plane”

WaP IN X-y PLANE For a fillet weld group loaded “in-plane” by a

z =o
zT common design action set of forces (F*, Fj) and
design moment (M*), the above equations reduce to
the commonly quoted expressions:-
Fig. 3.2.7.1 General Fillet Weld Group
F*
• X M*.y
where: " Uvx Iwp
F* M*.x
Lw = the total length of the weld; v* = +
Lwy 'wp / F*
'wxi 'wy = the second moments of area of the / *l
v* = 0 / Fi!
weld elements (treated as a line I
*|
element) about the x and y axes ~v /
/ *2 I
respectively;

wp = the polar moment of area of the weld

elements about the centroid of the
weld group (treated as a line element) it
Fig. 3.2.7.3 Fillet Weld Group Loaded "In-Plane
wx + I wy
Practical Fillet Weld Groups
Formulae for I wxi 'wy* 'wp for common weld groups are
Many fillet weld groups comprise lines of welds
given in Table 3.2.7.1.
parallel to the x and y axes. For such relatively
The above expressions can be slightly modified in regular fillet weld groups, the identification of
order to allow them to reflect realistic distributions of possible critical points is correspondingly more
the design force set (F*, F*, F*) between straightforward.
Y
components of the total length of the weld group, as
follows:- 2 I
f I
FJ M*.y +- 6
v*
V
=—
L WX 'wp
►X
F* M*.x
v* = - +
Vy L
wy Iwp 4 4-- 4-7
+ +
F* M*.y M*.x
i 9 Co
V? = +
lwx Iwy
Fig. 3.2.7.4 Possible Critical Points in Particular
where: Fillet Weld Group

Lwx Lwy i Lwz = the lengths of weld assumed to The possible critical points for a fillet weld group
receive the component forces consisting of lines of weld parallel to the x and y
along the individual x, y and z axes only are shown (numbered 1 to 8), in Fig.
axes respectively; 3.2.7.4.

28 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE 3.2.7.1
PROPERTIES OF COMMON WELD GROUPS TREATED AS LINE ELEMENTS
TYPE OF FILLET
WELD GROUP X y 1wx [ wy l wp
v

o d d3 d3
0
2 12 12
3

© d3 b2 d a3 .« d3
ad2 + T ~2 + -j + a (b - a)2 ad2 + -s- +
b d b2d a3 ..
2 2 For a = 0 5- + + a (b - a)2
d For a = 0
x
y
For a = 0
d3 b2 d
6 2 d3 b2 d
b 6 2

© bd2 a3 ,.
-g- + y+a(d~a)2
b3 bd2 a3 .,
— + j + a(d-a)2
,,

r |a.
b
2
d
2
For a = 0
6 +ab2

For a = 0 + T + ab!
d X
For a = 0
bd2 b3
bd2 3
2 6 +b
I-* 2 6

2
© a2 + b2 (2a + d) d a (d - y)2 + ^
d3 a3
+• a
a
x +
12 2
2 (a + b + d) 2 (a + b + d)
a. b3
d
For a = b For a = b + d (| - y)2 + by2 dX2 + TT7 + b
12 (M‘ wx + I wy
* b2 d For a = b For a = b
y
(2b + d) 2 d2 bi (b + 2d)
b
4 12
(6b + d) 3 (2b + d)

a3 2
© 2ab + b2 d + a (d - a) 2a (b - x)2 + dx2
2
2a + 2b + d 2
J: <X- 2
+ bd + d
3

2 12
+
2b3
12
+ 2b
b
2
x
2

wx wy
A x Fora »» 0 For a ^ 0
X
y
For a ** 0 For a » o
b* d
2b + d 2 d2 bf (b + 2d)
b (6b + d)
12 3 (2b + d)

©
b d d3 bd2 b3 db2 d3 bd2 b3 , db2
A 2 2 6+2 6*+ 2 6+2+6+2
3
y

© 7

d b d d3 b3 , d3 b3
bd2+~ bd + t +
3
2 2 3 ¥
b
r

Governing Design Equation

w*
V r.
res = V(v*)2 4- (V*)2 + (V*)2 < H w = <M0.6fuwtt) (Section 3.2.6)

Design Procedure
The design of any genera! fillet weld group subject to a general design action set (F*. F$, F*, M*. M*, M*) may
be obtained by evaluating the design action set (v*. v*. v*) using the equations given for evaluating the
property set (LWXl Lwyj LWZl lwx, l^, |wp) from Table 3.2.7.1 and substituting into the governing equation above,
checking that the governing inequality is satisfied, at each of the critical points (1-8).

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 29

 3.2.8 DESIGN OF FILLET WELD GROUPS—SPECIFIC CASES

3.2.8.1 Vertical Fillet Weld Groups

(Loaded Out-of-Plane)

tv
tw

£
lw *

Fig. 3.2.8.1

From Section 3.2.7:-

Weld Group Properties L&

Lwy — 2LW Lwz — 2LW wx ~
6
F* F* M*.( ± Lw/2)
Design Forces per unit length v? = 0 vj = v? = 2L
XT- +
2Lw w Lw3/6 /
Governing equation:- points 3, 4, 7, 8 (ref Fig. 3.2.7.4) (with vj = 0)

Vvj2 + V*2 ^ 0V w

It is demonstrated in Section 5.16 that:-

for F* = M* = 0 $Vdv = design capacity of fillet weld group subject to vertical shear only
= 2Lw.(0vw)
for F* = M£ = 0 </>Vdh = design capacity of fillet weld group subject to horizontal shear only
= 2Lw.(0vw)
for F* = F* = 0 0Mdm = design capacity of fillet weld group subject only to moment applied at weld
group centroid.
— 3 Lw-(0vw)
for F* = 0 F* = design shear force, e = eccentricity of F*
and
F* 2Lw.(</>vw)
M* = F*.e r y ^<

6e 2
1+
Lw

30 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 3.2.8.2 Horizontal Fillet Weld Groups
(Loaded “Out-of-Plane”)

LW
Fy
M*

tW
t
tw m

Fig. 3.2.8.2
From Section 3.2.7:-

Weld Group Properties LWy — 2 LW L*^y2 — 2W L WX Lwt2/2

* M*.{ ± t/2)
Design Forces per unit length V
* 0 * -- U.F
v? n* F*
2Lw 2Lw Lwt2/2

Governing equation:- points 1, 2, 5, 6 (ref. Fig. 3.2.7.4) (with v* = 0)

V v*2 + v *2
z <Mw

It is demonstrated in Section 5.16 that:- (terms as defined in Section 3.2.8.1)

for F* = M* = 0 </>Vdv 2Lw.(*vw)
for F* M* = 0 4^tJh = 2LW.(^>VW)
for Fj = F* =0 cf)Mdn\ = Lw.t.(^Vw)
for F* = 0, M*=F?.e Fj -• design shear force, e = eccentricity of F*
(0vw).2L w
F*
“y ^
<
4e2
1 + t2

DS'C/04-—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 31

 3.2.9 EXAMPLES

3.2.9.1 Box Section Fillet Welded to End Plate (Fillet Loaded Out-of-Plane)

Y
i

? 4-50 Yu. WEU? GKDUPCEt-n'ROIP

n ^OlcNrrj.
%5

4- •
X

J-7
t
5 Co

20?>

Fig. 3.2.9.1
Design Actions: F* = 0 F* = -450 kN F* = 0 Mj = 0 M* = 0
MJ = 90 kNm
90 000 kNmm
Weld Group Properties:
Lw = 2(305 + 203) = 1016 mm

If it is assumed that the vertical shear is primarily taken by the webs of the box section, then this vertical shear
must be assumed to be transferred through the vertical fillet weld only. Hence,
Lwy = 2 x 305 = 610 mm
d = 305 mm; b = 203 mm
i_ —
bd2 (Table 3.2.7.1)
‘WX O +
6 2
= 14.2 x 106 mm3
at points 1, 2, 3, 8 y = 152.5 mm
4, 5, 6, 7 y = -152.5 mm

Global set of design actions per unit length:-

v; = o
vj = -450 = -0.738 at points 3, 4, 7, 8
610
=0 at points 1, 2, 5, 6
90 000 x (±152.5)
vS- 14.2 X 106
= +0.967 at points 1,2, 3, 8 (y = +152.5)
= -0.967 at points 4, 5, 6, 7 (y = -152.5)

Resultant force per unit length:-

v*res = \/ (-0.738)2 + (±0.967)2
= 1.22 kN/mm

From Table B.1-SP weld category

8 mm E48XX fillet weld
<£vw = 1.30 kN/mm > vY res Satisfactory

32 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.2.9.2 Fillet Welded Bracket Loaded In-Plane

Y
215 160 M Using Section 3.2.7
and Table 3.2.7.1:- b = 275 mm; d = 300 mm
■Ci
6 >\:t2 ! b2
Weld Centroid: x =
\ 2b + d
\
* = 89.0 mm
* xWEbO GROUP
...S CSNTE.01P ^x Design Actions: F* = 0 F* = -180 kN F* = 0
600
§
*X M* = 0 M* = 0
r
M* = -180 X (275 + 175 - 89.0)
*5 0 = -64 980 kNmm
—>t777?7 177777777*?

Fig. 3.2.9.2

Weld Group Properties:

Lw = 2 x 275 + 300 = 850 mm
assume L wx — l-wy — I-wz = Lw = 850 mm
Iwp = I wx wy

3002 (6 X 275 + 300) 2753 (275 + 2 x 300)

Iwp +
12 3(2 X 275 + 300)
= 21.8 x 106 mm3 (also see Table B.6)
at points 1, 6: x = 275 - 89.0 = +186
y = ±300/2 = ±150
at points 2, 3, 4, 5: x = -89.0 y = ±150

Global design actions per unit length:

-M*,y -64 980 x 150
v* =
'wp 21.8 x 106
= +0.447 at points 1,2, 3 (y = +150)
= -0.447 at points 4, 5, 6 (y = -150)
F* M*.x -180 . -64 980 X 186
V* -
Vy “L wy
+ 850
-+
21.8 x 106
wp

= -0.767 at points 1, 6 (critical)

-180
850
+ -64980 x (-89.0)
6
21.8 X 10
= +0.054 at points 2, 3, 4, 5 (not critical)

Resultant force per unit length:- points 1, 6

v*res = V (±0.447)2 + (-0.767)2

= 0.888 kN/mm
From Table B.1—SP weld category
6 mm E48XX fillet weld
<Avw = 0.978 kN/mm > vt res Satisfactory

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 33

 3.3 CONNECTION COMPONENTS
3.3.1 GENERAL
Connection components (cleats, gusset plates, brackets) must have their strength assessed in order to
determine the strength of a connection as a whole. AS 4100 Clause 9.1.9 specifies that connection
components shall have their capacities assessed using the provisions of Sections 5, 6, 7 or 8 of AS 4100 as
applicable. AS 4100 Table 3.4 specifies a capacity factor of 0.90 for connection components.
The design capacities of connection components are derived in Sections 3.3.2-3.3.5 below.
A connection component is typically of rectangular cross-section (dj x ts) as shown in Fig. 3.3, with or without
a line of holes of diameter dh.

--- i;
X'O
rfiO
dh
Pp tiOlEfi AT <ho PITCH
o OF l3AMETOZ.dk

Fig. 3.3

3.3.2 DESIGN SHEAR CAPACITY

Since the shear distribution in a rectangular cross-section is non-uniform, Clause 5.11.3 of AS 4100 is
applicable. This specifies the nominal shear capacity (Vv) as:
2V.
Vv = ^ V,
1*vm
0.9 +
f *va

where
Vu « the nominal shear capacity of a web with a uniform shear stress distribution determined in
accordance with Clause 5.11.2
f vm, f*a = the maximum and average design shear stress respectively in the web determined by a rational
elastic analysis.

Now, for a rectangular section (d| x tf):-

Vu - Vw = O.eOfyiditt (Clause 5.11.4 of AS 4100)
V*Q V*
itvm — lb f*
1 va =
■ <Mj
tjdi3
12
q = t4£
8
b = tr

*1.5 ft vm
Hence, f *m = V f* = 1.5
dfti I va

2 V,
Vv = = 0.833 Vu = 0.50 fyj dj tr
0.9 + 1.5
0Vv = design shear capacity
- 0.9 Vv
= 0.45 fyj d j tj
2* V*, the design shear force

34 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

3.3.3 DESIGN MOMENT CAPACITY
The rectangular component is normally bent about its major axis and would be considered compact in most
connections. Thus Clause 5.2.1 of AS 4100 specifies the nominal moment capacity as:-
Ms = fy Ze
Clause 5.2.3 gives: Ze = lesser of S (= tfdj2/4) and 1.5 Z (=1.5 x tjdj2/6)
fyi tj di2 0.90 fyi tj dj2
Hence, Ms = ^ and <f>Ms = design moment capacity = = 0.225 fyi tj di2 > M*. the design
4
bending moment
Local buckling in fiexure is not normally a problem with connection components. Table 5.2 of AS 4100 does
not provide a plasticity slenderness limit for elements with compression at one edge and tension at the other
but both edges unsupported, which is the way most components are used. Usually attachment to a member
prevents local buckling of the component.

3.3.4 DESIGN CAPACITY IN AXIAL COMPRESSION

Usually, connection components are so short that only gross section yielding can occur without any local or
member buckling. Accordingly, Section 6 of AS 4100 specifies the nominal capacity as the nominal section
capacity given by Clause 6.2.1. as:-
Ns = kfAnfy
where
kf = the form factor given in Clause 6.2.2.
An = the net area of the cross-section, except that for sections with penetrations or unfilled holes that
reduce the section area by less than 100 (1 - [fy/(0.85fu)]}%, the gross area may be used.
Deductions for fastener holes shall be made in accordance with Clause 9.1.10.
In the absence of local buckling, kf may be taken as 1.0 while
An = Ag for all holes filled with bolts (which is the usual case) = d, t|
= (djtj - npdh) if holes are not filled and unfilled holes reduce gross area by more than
100 [1 - (fy/(0.85fu))]%
Then, cf>Ng = design capacity in axial compression
= 0.9 Apfyj > N*, the design axial compression force

3.3.5 DESIGN CAPACITY IN AXIAL TENSION

Clause 7.2 of AS 4100 specifies the nominal section capacity as the lesser of:~
Nt Agfyi and
N 0.85 ktAnft
where
Ag the gross area of the cross-section
fy the yield stress used in design
kt the correction factor for distribution of forces determined in accordance with Clause 7.3
An the net area of the cross-section, obtained by deducting from the gross area the sectional area of all
penetrations and holes, including fastener holes. The deduction for all fastener holes shall be made
in accordance with Clause 9.1.10 of AS 4100.
f, the tensile strength used in design.
For components in connections, a uniform force distribution usually applies for which k{ = 1.0.
Now, Ag = djtj and A, = djtj - npdhtj
so Nt < fyj dj tj, and
- 0.85 f^ (djtj - ^d^)
■' 0N| < 0.90 fy} djtj, and
< 0.765 fui (djtj - npdhtj)
and 0N| > N*, the design axial force in tension.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 35

 3.4 CONNECTED MEMBERS
3.4.1 GENERAL
For the design of some connections, an assessment is required of the design capacity of the supported
member in bending, shear, bearing, etc (in particular the flexible connections of Sections 4.1 to 4.6), while for
other connections it is useful to know the design capacity in shear or bending because the connection may be
designed for a selected proportion of the member capacity (such as for the connections in Sections 4.7 to
4.10). Sections 3.4.2-3.4.4 are not intended to be a summary of the design provisions at AS 4100 but are
intended to give a summary of the relevant design capacities in bending and shear of
uncoped sections — Section 3.4.2
single web coped sections — Section 3.4.3
double web coped sections — Section 3.4.4
for use in Sections 4.3 to 4.6 in assessing connected member strength locally at a connection.
Since the concern is the member strength locally at a connection, only section capacity is considered, not
member capacity.
For coped and uncoped sections the relevant design capacities are moment, shear (yield and buckling) and
bearing (yield and buckling). The nominal capacities are covered in Clause 5.2, 5.11, 5.12 and 5.13 of AS 4100.

3.4.2 UNCOPED SECTIONS

The nominal section moment capacity (Ms) is calculated as follows for beams that are not slender:-
Ms = fyZe (AS 4100, Clause 5.2.1)
where:- Ze = effective section modulus
- Zc if As A sp (Clause 5.2.3)
Asy As
=Z+ if Agp ^ As ^ A (Clause 5.2.4)
Asy - A sp (Zc - Z) sy

Z = elastic section modulus

S = plastic section modulus
Zc = effective section modulus for a compact section = [S;1,5ZJmin
Clause 5.2.2 specifies that for a section with flat compression plate elements, the section slenderness (As) shall
be taken as the value of the plate element slenderness (Ae) for the element of the cross-section which has the
greatest value of Ae/Aey~
where
b' fy
Ae =
t 250
Aey = the plate element yield slenderness limit (see Table 5.2 of AS 4100)
b = the clear width of the element outstand from the face of the supporting plate element or the clear
width of the element between the faces of supporting plate elements
t = the element thickness.
The section plasticity and yield slenderness limits (Asp) and (Asy) respectively shall be taken as the values of the
element slenderness limits (Aep) and (Aey) respectively given in Table 5.2 of AS 4100 for the element of the
cross-section which has the greatest value of Ae/A ey
Restricting consideration to hot roiled sections only, which are the most common connected member types
using connections covered by Sections 4.3 to 4.6:-
Aep = 9 for a flange outstand
= 82 for a web
Aey = 16 for a flange outstand
= 115 for a web
In terms of Clause 5.2.6 of AS 4100, for sections without holes, or for sections with holes that reduce either of
the flange areas by not more than 100 {1 - [fy/(0.85fu)]}%, the elastic and plastic section moduli shall be
calculated using either-
(a) (An/Ag) times the value for the gross section, in which An is the sum of the net areas of the flanges and the
gross area of the web, and Ag the gross area of the section; or
(b) the net section.

36 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

The design section moment capacity ($MS) is calculated from the nominal section moment capacity (Ms) and
the capacity factor (<£ = 0.9).
The shear stress distribution of I- and channel shaped sections can be assumed, in terms of Clauses 5.11.1
and 5.11.2 of AS 4100, to be approximately uniform.
Hence, provided the maximum panel depth to thickness ratio (dp/tw) satisfies-
dp 82
tw < fy
250
where dp = depth of web panel = d - 2tf
d = depth of a section
tf = thickness of flange tw = thickness of the web
the nominal shear capacity of the web (Vv) is determined as
Vv = Vw, the nominal shear yield capacity of the web
= 0.6fyAw
where Aw = gross sectional area of the web
= dptw (for welded sections)
= dtw (for hot-rolled sections)
If the above dp/tw inequality is not satisfied, then
Vv = Vb (*VW)
= avV w
2
82
where av = fy
Lltw 250

The design shear capacity of a web (<£Vv) is calculated from the nominal shear capacity of the web (Vv) and the
capacity factor (<f> = 0.9).
Therefore, for an uncoped section-
4> M
SO - 0.9 fy Z*
(^Vv0 - 0.54 fy dp tw
When a cross-section is subject to both shear force and bending moment simultaneously, AS 4100 Clause
5.12.3 provides that the nominal web shear capacity in the presence of bending moment be given by:-
Vv« = Vv for M* < Q.75(£MS; and

1.6M*
= Vv 2.2 -
m for 0.75(/>Ms </>M
SI

where
Vv = the nominal shear capacity of a web in shear alone = Vvo (noted above)
Ms = the nominal section moment capacity = Ms0 (noted above)
the design capacity being given by 0Vvrr„ where 4> = 0.9.

3.4.3 SINGLE WEB COPED (SWC) SECTIONS

The formulae quoted in Section 3.4.2 again apply for determining the nominal section moment capacity, except
that for a SWC section (which is a tee section):-
Xep = 9, for a flange outstand or web subject to either uniform compression or maximum compression at
unsupported edge, tension at supported edge
^•ey = 16, for flange outstand subject to uniform compression
= 25, for a web subject to maximum compression at unsupported edge, tension at supported edge
A possible design approach is to assume that local buckling is possible in the stem of the tee section due to
bending compression. However, coping is a local effect in connections over a short length with the usual full I-
section on one side and the connection on the other. Accordingly, it is considered reasonable to take the full
ee-section as effective locally at the connection, so that
Ze - [Ss; 1.5 Zs]min
where the plastic modulus (Ss) and the elastic modulus (Zs) of a single web coped section are given by
formulae in Appendix D.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 37

 LEM6TU OF
JINGLE WES’ COP&P «?&GTI ON iw

d 6BCTIOM AT WHICH
<L4--b^ ' PI^jOPC-CTE/7 CALCULATED dw dw+tf
X

W
v

Fig. 3.4.3

A tee shaped section such as a single web coped section will have a non-uniform shear stress distribution.
Using AS 4100 Clauses 5.11.1 and 5.11.3, the nominal shear capacity (Vv) is given by:-
2V,
Vv = ^ V,
f* vm
I V/
0.9 + f* va
I v/

where

Vu = the nominal shear capacity of a web with a uniform shear stress distribution determined in
accordance with Clause 5.11.2

f*m> f va = the maximum and average design shear stresses in the web determined by a rational elastic
analysis.

82
Now since dw/tw for all rolled sections to AS 3679, and using Clause 5.11.4 of AS 4100:-
vfy/250
Vu = Vw = 0.6 fy Aw = 0.6 fy dw t W

Now f vva —
v*
dwt w

V*.QC f vm Qc^w
and ft vm — so that
Ix-t w f*
I va

Formulae for Qc (first moment of area) and lx (second moment of area) for the SWC section of Fig. 3.4.3 may be
found in Appendix D.

The design capacities are hence:-

0MSS = 0.9 fy Ze
1.08 fy dw t w
0VWS = 0.9 Vv = sS 0.54 fy dw tw
0.9 + Qcdw/Ix
When a cross-section is subject to both shear force and bending moment simultaneously, AS 4100 Clause
5.12.3 provides that the nominal web shear capacity in the presence of bending moment be given by:-
V vm = Vv for M* ^ 0.75tf>Ms; and

1.6M*
= Vv 2.2 - for0.75</>Ms ^ M* < </>Ms
0MS

38 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

where
Vv = the nominal shear capacity of a web in shear alone = Vws above
Ms = the nominal section moment capacity = Mss above
the design capacity being given by 0V vm where <t> = 0.9.

3.4.4 DOUBLE WEB COPED (DWC) SECTIONS

■bw ki.a- or vvjo ^E^rrioM

dw
d ■ 7

2
dw dw d
2 d
2

>— N.A. OF UNC0P&I7 SECTION

Fig. 3.4.4
A double web coped section leaves a rectangular cross-section of web dw x tw. In Section 3.3, the design
moment and shear capacities for a rectangular cross-section of a component were derived and using these
results,

design moment capacity <j>Msd = 0.225 fytwd&

design shear capacity 0Vwd = 0.45 fy tw dw

When a cross-section is subject to both shear force and bending moment simultaneously, AS 4100 Clause
5.12.3 provides that the nominal web shear capacity in the presence of bending moment be given by:-
Vvm « Vv forM* < O.750MS; and
1.6M*
- Vv 2.2 - for 0.75(/>Ms Si
(j) Mg

where
Vv =s the nominal shear capacity of a web in shear alone = Vwd above.
Ms = the nominal section moment capacity = Msd above,
the design capacity being given by 0V vm where 4> = 0.9.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 39

 3.4.5 BLOCK SHEAR IN COPED SECTIONS
Block shear failure in coped supported members is discussed in Section 5.17. From this discussion, the
nominal capacity in block shear (Vbs) is given by

SWC SECTION

O
o.
Ay, - UOLP PIAMEJTfcR.
O'
tw rV/Ee>THlCKNE^j'7s O
of mu a_ £
ZDV/*? iy

Fig. 3.4.5.1

Vbs = 0.6 fy A vg + fu Ant

GREATER VALUE
= 0.6 fu A ns + fy Atg J

where:- A vg = [aev + (np - 1) sp] t w

Ans =A vg - [(np - 0.5)dh] t w

Ant = (^eh — 0.5dh) t w Atg — 3eh t w single column of bolts

= (aeh + sgi - 1.5 dh) t w = (Sg1 + aeh)t w double column of bolts
0Vbs is the design capacity in block shear, where <£ = 0.9

DWC SECTION

<)—

(np-iHp O- dw

a^x
alternate
FAILURE PATHS

Fig. 3.4.5.2

Vbs — 0.6 fy AVg + fu Ant

= 0.6 fu Ans + fy Atg
= 0.6 fy (A vg + ae2 tw) GREATER VALUE
= 0.6 fu (A ns + a 1 w - 0.5 dh tw) J
e2
where:- Avg, Atg, A ns Ant as defined above
0Vbs is the design capacity in block shear, where 0 = 0.9.

40 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 4, DESIGN MODELS FOR CONNECTIONS
4.0 INTRODUCTION

4.0.1 GENERAL

This Section gives the recommended design models for a variety of common connection types.

The twelve types of connection dealt with are:

Angle seat (4.1)

Bearing pad (4.2)
Flexible end plate (4.3)
Angle cleat (4.4)
Web side plate (4.5)
Stiff seat connection (4.6)
Welded beam-to-column moment connection (4.7)
Bolted moment end plate connection (4.8)
Welded splice (4.9)
Bolted splice (4.10)
Bracing cleat (4.11)
Column base plate - pinned type (4.12)

The approach adopted in this Section is to provide the following information for each connection:

• a general (but rationalized) detail of the connection:

• a recommended design model for the connection;
• a design example based on the model.
A commentary on the derivation of each of the recommended design models is contained in Section 5, in the
correspondingly numbered sub-section.

Several points should be made concerning the recommended design models presented in Sections 4.1 - 4.12:

(i) The models recommended are not the only design models to be advanced in the literature. It is not intended
to suggest that design models not complying with the recommended design model are necessarily incorrect.
(ii) It is acknowledged that alternative design models can be advanced which result in safe and serviceable
connections. Any alternative design model, however, must satisfy fully the laws of mechanics and the observed
behaviour of the connection under test, as required by AS 4100.
The recommended design models presented here are, In the opinion of the authors, the simplest realistic design
models which reflect the available research.
(iv) There is a clear need for more research on aspects of the behaviour of each connection dealt with here.

4.0.2 FORMS OF CONSTRUCTION

The three forms of construction permitted by Section 4 of AS 4100 have been mentioned in Section 1.3, as have the
connection design requirements of Clause 9.1.2 of AS 4100. It is to be noted that practical connections, such as
those in this Manual, are neither fully rigid nor completely simple, as discussed in Section 5.0. The onus is placed
on the structural steel designer to ensure that the actual behaviour of a connection does not have a deleterious effect
on the members of the steel frame and that the connection conforms to the requirements specified in AS 4100.

AS 4100 attempts to correct for the difference between assumed and real behaviour only in the case of simple
construction. In this particular case, AS 4100 recognizes that real flexible connections will actually transmit some
bending moment as well as the shear force for which such connections are designed.

These bending moments are conservatively neglected in proportioning the beams, since their magnitudes are at
present not reliably known, but they are accounted for in proportioning the columns through the application of AS
4100 Clause 4.3.4, which requires the line of action of a beam reaction to be taken at 100 mm from the face of the
column towards the span, or at the centre of bearing, whichever is the greater. Thus all building columns in practice
ecome beam-columns, being designed for at least this level of bending moment.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 41

Likewise, loss of rigidity in real "rigid" connections will cause a redistribution of bending moments in a frame which
may adversely affect some members.
In conformity with the requirements of AS 4100, it may be stated that:
(i) for simple construction (flexible connections), the following connections comply with the intent of AS 4100:
angle seat, bearing pad, flexible end plate, angle cleat, web side plate, stiff seat, bracing cleat.
(ii) for rigid construction, the following beam-to-column connections comply with the intent of AS 4100:
welded moment connection, bolted moment end plate connection.
It must be recognized that the assumed connection behaviour has a significant influence on frame analysis and
design.
For flexible connections, supports can be considered as either theoretically "stiff" or "flexible". As indicated in the
discussion in Section 5.0, no support is purely "flexible" (i.e. all beam end rotation is accommodated by movement
of the support) nor purely "stiff" (i.e. all beam end rotation is accommodated by deformation within the connection)
but rather lies somewhere between the two extremes. For example, the degree of column flange flexing which occurs
in a beam-to-column connection will, along with the deformation within the connection, determine the actual loads
on elements of the connection (bolts, welds, component). Unfortunately, at the present state of knowledge of
connection behaviour, it is not possible to quantify the situation for each individual connection.
In the design models given for "flexible" connections, no distinction is made between the two support types.

4.0.3 CONNECTION DESIGN MODELS

Clause 9.1.3 of AS 4100 nominates the basic requirements that any design model must have for the design of a steel
connection must have if the design model is to be acceptable. These requirements are as follows:
“Each element in a connection shall be designed so that the structure is capable of resisting all design actions. The
design capacities of each element shall be not less than the calculated design action effects.
Connections and the adjacent areas of members shall be designed by distributing the design action effects so that
they comply with the following requirements:
(a) The distributed design action effects are in equilibrium with the design action effects acting on the connection.
(b) The deformations in the connection are within the deformation capacities of the connection elements.
(c) Ail of the connection elements and the adjacent areas of members are capable of resisting the design action
effects acting on them.
(d) The connection elements shall remain stable under the design action effects and deformations.
Design shall be on the basis of a recognized method supported by experimental evidence.
Residual actions due to the installation of bolts need not be considered.”
All of the recommended design models in this Manual comply with the above principles and ail are based on
experimental evidence as required by this Clause, and is further explained within the Commentaries in Sections 5.1
through 5.12.

42 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

4.0.4 MINIMUM DESIGN ACTIONS ON CONNECTIONS
For the connections covered in this Manual, AS 4100 Clause 9.1.4 nominates that connections shall be designed at
the strength limit state for the greater of:
(a) the design action in the member; and
(b) the minimum design action effects expressed either as the value or the factor times the member design capacity
for the minimum size of member required by the strength limit state, specified in Items (i) to (vii) below:
(i) Connections in rigid construction - a bending moment of 0.5 times the member design moment capacity.
(ii) Connections to beams in simple construction - a shear force of 40 kN.
(iii) Connections at the ends of tension or compression members - a force of 0.3 times the member design
capacity, except that for threaded rod acting as a bracing member with turnbuckles, the minimum tension
force shall be equal to the member design capacity.
(iv) Splices in members subject to axial tension - a force of 0.3 times the member design capacity in tension.
(v) Splices in members subject to axial compression - for ends prepared for full contact in accordance with
Clause 14.4.4.2 of AS 4100, it shall be permissible to carry compressive actions by bearing on contact
surfaces. When members are prepared for full contact to bear at splices, there shall be sufficient fasteners
to hold all parts securely in place. The fasteners shall be sufficient to transmit a force of 0.15 times the
member design capacity in axial compression.
In addition, splices located between points of effective lateral support shall be designed for the design
axial force (N*) plus a design bending moment not less than the design bending moment (M*)
where
5N*LS
M*
1000
5 appropriate amplification factor 8b or 8S determined in accordance with Clause 4.4 of AS 4100
Ls distance between points of effective lateral support.
When members are not prepared for full contact, the splice material and its fasteners shall be arranged
to hold all parts in line and shall be designed to transmit a force of 0.3 times the member design
capacity in axial compression.
(vi) Splices in flexural members - a bending moment of 0.3 times the member design capacity in bending.
This provision shall not apply to splices designed to transmit shear force only.
A splice subjected to a shear force only shall be designed to transmit the design shear force together with
any bending moment resulting from the eccentricity of the force with respect to the centroid of the
connector group.
(vii) Splices in members subject to combined actions - a splice in a member subject to a combination of design
axial tension or design axial compression and design bending moment shall satisfy (iv), (v) and (vi)
simultaneously.
The action to be designed for is the.greater of the calculated design actions or the minimum specified in (i) to (vii),
as appropriate. The minimum is generally expressed as a factor times the design capacity (0RU) for the minimum
size of member required by the strength limit state. Hence, if a member is increased in size above the minimum size
for whatever reason (rationalization of member sizes, slenderness considerations), it is only necessary to use the
design capacity of the minimum size for the purpose of the Clause. For columns which may be subject to large
compressive forces and only minor tensile forces, any splice has to be designed for both the specified value for the
minimum member size required to resist the compression, and for the specified value for the minimum member size
required to resist the tension.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 43

4.0.5 FATIGUE AND DYNAMIC APPLICATIONS
It is intended that the design models given in the Manual are only applied to steel connections that are essentially
statically loaded. Connections subject to dynamic or impact loads or used in fatigue situations may require additional
considerations beyond those contemplated in the recommended design model. However, some suggestions as to a
method of proceeding in such cases are given below.
For steel floor systems supporting vibrating machinery and using FLEXIBLE connections, it is suggested that the
recommended design models contained in Sections 4.1 to 4.6 may be used unaltered PROVIDED THAT:
(i) 4.6/S bolting category is not used;
(ii) locking nuts are used in lieu of or in addition to the standard nut for 8.8/S bolting category.
(iii)8.8/TB bolting category is used in which case the full tensioning required with this procedure prevents the nut
loosening in service.
(iv) the bolts in the connections are only subject to shear force but not to direct tension force.
For bolted FLEXIBLE connections used in fatigue applications, but not subject to complete load reversal, it is
suggested that the recommended design models contained in Sections 4.1 to 4.6 may be used with some caution
PROVIDED THAT:
(i) 8.8/TB bolting category is used;
(ii) the bolts in the connections are only subject to shear force but not to direct tension force;
(iii) for connections using fillet welds, the strength of the fillet weld in fatigue is separately assessed using the
provisions of Section 11 of AS 4100.
For RIGID connections or SPLICES subject to vibration or in fatigue situations, the recommended design models of
Sections 4.7 to 4.10 should be augmented by reference to the provisions of Section 11 of AS 4100, especially in
respect of:
(i) bolted moment end plate connections in which the bolts are subject to tension including tension due to prying
action;
(ii) welded connections.
Relevant detail categories related to the connections included in this Manual are:
Detail Category 140 - base metal in bolted splice type connection
Detail Categories 112,90,80,71 - base metal at transverse butt welds at welded splices
Detail Categories 63,56,45 - base metal at overlapped welded joints
Detail Category 80 - fillet weld loaded in shear
Detail Category 100 - bolt in shear (8.8/TB bolting category only)
Detail Category 36 - bolt in tension (all bolting categories)

44 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE SEAT

4.1 ANGLE SEAT CONNECTION

4.1.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

i r
-a- i,
l T
T
RE^TRAINING I ZL J-
CLEAT &OPTP
I1"‘n "I ALTERNATIVE RESTRAINING
TO
-e •«*- !~r*i cleat PoemoN4?
i

r-O £ '7j
I*
>P 1___ i

10 /T
-fs»
GAP

OPTIONAL
bOUT OK. < o o ^ ancle <tEat
Vltw 10
^uppofct O O

Fig 4.1.1
DETAILING NOTES:
(1) The restraint cleat may be connected either to the web or flange of the supported member. The restraint cleat
usually has standard holes (22 mm diameter) which allow variations in beam depth due to rolling tolerances for
standard rolled sections to be accommodated. Only bolted restraint cleats are recommended.
(2) For a supported member section 250 mm deep and smaller, this connection is not recommended since the
restraint cleat is large in relation to beam depth. Alternative connections are considered more economic.
(3) The 10 mm standard clearance is a critical dimension. The design model is derived on the assumption of a 14
mm design clearance in order to provide for possible under-run on the beam length. Detailing short may affect
the design capacity.
(4) The angle seat may be bolted or welded to the support but not usually both.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 45

ANGLE SEAT
4.1.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL
;

iwb

C^IO KiOH bV
h~
s I4- peAion
4>
•> 1*>
y
rb
t
i i
/ /_J %
/
691 r«. /.
/
/ >
+ e /
z/ Jbk
/ /
/..
71
X
/
&K,
*
✓
a-svi’W2
-/

ta Vo.
Lu

Fig. 4.1.2 Connection Geometry

This connection is classified as a connection for simple construction in accordance with Clause 4.2 AS 4100.
Defining: fya = yield stress of angle seat component fua = tensile strength of angle seat component
fyw = yield stress of supported member web fuc = tensile strength of supporting member
dh = hole diameter df = bolt diameter
db = depth of supported member dw - web depth of supported member » db - 2t,b
vw = nominal capacity of fillet weld per unit length of fillet weld (Section 3.2.6)
4>vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length of fillet weld (Appendix B)
Design is based on:
V* = design shear force V^s, design capacity of the connection (also see Note (7)).
where, Vde9 = [Vcap; Vb; Vd]min for a bolted seat
= [Vcap; Vb; Ve]min for a welded seat
It is also a design requirement that: c + bs « U
Design Capacities of the Connection:
Web crippling capacity of Va — <f> (1 -25 fyw twb dbf) <f> - 0.9
supported member where bbf = bs + 2.5tfb
(AS 4100, Clause 5.13.3)
Web buckling capacity of Vb — 0 (bbw twb f. yw ac) ac - see Note 2
supported member where bbw = bM + dw/2 <t> = 0.9
(AS 4100, Clause 5.13.4)
fya l-a fa
Bending capacity of Vc = 4> <$> = 0.9
4 ev
outstanding leg of angle
where ev = c + bs/2 - (ta + ra) = eccentricity of design shear force, V*
Capacity of bolts in angle Vd = nb {<£ Vdf) <t> = 0.8
seat in shear (Section 3.1.3) where nb = number of bolts - usually 4
$ Vdf = design capacity of a single bolt in shear-see Note 3
2 Lv (0vw)
Capacity of weld to angle seat Ve = (Note 4)
and support (Section 3.2.8.1) 6 ew 2
1+
L
where ew = c + bs/2

46 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE SEAT
The stiff bearing length bs is determined from the expression for Va so that
V*
bs = 0.9 (1.25 f t ) - 2.5 tfb
yw wb

but must be such that c + bs < Lh and c + bs/2 > ta + ra (see Note 6)
The maximum capacity of the connection (Vcap) for any supported member is given when Va = Vc which leads to:

Vcap
^5 + V kf + 4 k6 where k5 = ^k4 + 2k1k3(kN) k6 = 2k1k2(kN)2
2
V,
bs = k, = 0.9 (1.25 fyw twb) (kN/mm)
k2 = 0.9 (fya La t|)/4 (kNmm)
k3 = ta + ra c (mm) k4 = 2.5 tfb (mm)

NOTES ON DESIGN MODEL:

(1) c is assumed to be 10 mm nominal, but 14 mm is used for design purposes in order to provide for possible
under-run on the beam length. AS 4100, Clause 14.4.5 gives a maximum under-run of 4 mm for beams
over 10 m long.
(2) Clauses 5.13.4 and 6.3.3 of AS 4100 define the bearing buckling capacity of the web using the
compression member slenderness reduction factor (ac), which is defined in Clause 6.3.3 of AS 4100.
Values of ac are tabulated in Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100 for various values of An and ab, where
2.5d 1 f yw
An =
tw 250,
ab = 0.5 (AS 4100, Clause 5.13.4)
(3) 0Vdf is the design capacity of a single bolt in shear for the strength limit state being given by
$Vd, = [0Vf; </>Vb]mjn
where 0V, = design capacity of a single bolt in shear (0 = 0.8)
0Vb = design capacity in bearing of a ply (0 = 0.9)
In this connection, 0Vdf = minimum of [0V,n OR 0V,X; 0Vba; 0Vbc]
where 0Vfn, 0Vfx — given in Appendix A for threads included or excluded from the shear plane
— threads should normally be assumed included in the shear plane (i.e. 0Vfn)
0Vba — related to local bearing or plate tearout in the angle seat component
= minimum of [0.9 x 3.2 d, ta fua; 0.9 x aevi ta fua]
0Vbc — related to local bearing or plate tearout failure in the supporting member
= minimum of [0.9 x 3.2 d, tc fuc; 0.9 x aeVi tc fuc]
tc = thickness of the supporting member
aevi = see Fig. 4.1.2
See also Note 1 of Section of 4.3 Flexible End Plate Connection (p 57) for bolt installation.
(4) Welds are fillet welds and, for economy, should be sized to be single pass welds if possible — this
generally means 6 mm or 8 mm fillet size, although some welding procedures will allow 10 mm single
pass fillet welds to be deposited. Check individual situations using 10 mm fillet welds with fabricators.
Welds would normally be weld category SP (0 = 0.8)
(5) Column design moment, M* = V*.(ec + dc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column flange
= v*-(ec + twc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column web
where: ec = design eccentricity of reaction off column face = bs/2 + c
S* 100 mm minimum (AS 4100, Clause 4.3.4)
dc = column depth (mm)
twc = column web thickness (mm)
(6) If c + b > L , then take b = L -
s h s h c.
lf c + bs/2 < ta + ra, then take bs = 2 x (ta + ra - c)
(?) Connection must be designed for a minimum design shear force of 40 kN.

CSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 47

 4.1.3 DESIGN
SPECIAL NOTE: This example uses dimensions and components adopted in Reference 1.

V- IZOkN

410 li& GJ2AD&290

200UG9J-S 4-403
4 * ZIO n>aio* f.yw~ ZGOKPcu (yja\>y
to"- '4-2
•flange 2*50 v-
f«.-4lO
<3KA0£ 2%
•4 100«7^^&
U&A
IOO
7*j

40 <3
IfK
4

-tx l‘50<3 0*<2 U£A

to, “ >2-0
UN £
Hz. 10-0 i!
-V- i 20 DIA .B0U"6> IN
<3RA0E2'?O
G5 ZZDIA.HOLEP?
TO
S-ftfa CATEGORY

ISO
IE.........—

Fig, 4.1.3

Design Parameters:
c = 14 mm (10 nom) L a 180 mm ta * 12.0 mm ra = 10.0 mm
f.ya = 260 MPa Lv -150 mm U = 90 mm 3@vi = 70 - 11 = 59 mm
f ua - 410 MPa tfb = 10.9 mm rb - 10.2 mm twb * 7.6 mm
dw = db = 403 2 x 10.9 = 381.2 mm f,yw = 260 MPa

Design Capacity of Connection:

k. = 0.9 x 1.25 x 260 x 7.6/103 = 2.223 kN/mm k3 = 12.0 + 10.0 - 14.0 = 8.0 mm
0.9 x 260 x 180 x (12)2
k2 - 1516 kNmm k4 = 2.5 x 10.9 = 27.25 mm
4 x 103
k5 = 2.223 x 27.25 + 2 x 2.223 x 8.0 = 96.145 kN k6 = 2 x 2.223 x 1516 = 6742 (kN)2
2
Vcap = Va = Vc = 96.145 + V(96.145) + 4 X 6742 = 143 kN
2
143
bs - 27.25 = 37.1 mm c + bs = 14 + 37.1 = 51.1 mm < Lh (= 90 mm)
2.223
c + bs/2 = 14 + 18.6 = 32.6 > ta + ra (- 12.0 + 10.0 = 22.0 mm)
bbf = 37.1 + 2.5 x 10.9 64.4 mm bbw 64.4 + 381.2/2 = 255 mm
2.5 x 381.2 260
kn x = 130 «c = 0.341 (Table 6.3.3{3) of AS 4100)
7.6 250
Vb = 0.9 x 255 x 7.6 x 260 x 0.341/103 = 155 kN
bba = 2x (10.9 + 10.2 + 12.0 + 10.0) 86.2 < 180 mm
Design capacity Vdes = min. of [143; 155] = 143 kN EXCLUDING FASTENER DESIGN CAPACITY

48 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE SEAT
BOLTED ANGLE SEAT

All bolts M20 in 22 dia. holes

Use 4 x 8.8N/S bolting category in vertical leg of angle seat (shop)
2 x 8.8/S bolting category in horizontal leg of angle seat
4 x 8.8/S bolting category in restraining cleat.
For 8.8N/S category 4>Vfn = 92.6 kN M20 bolt (Appendix A Table A.2.2)
Bearing of bolts on angle seat component
= min of [0.9 x 3.2 x 20 x 12.0 x 410/103;0.9 x 59 x 12.0 x 410/103] = [283;261]min = 261 kN
Bearing of bolts on column flange
= min of [0.9 x 3.2 x 14.2 x 20 x 410/103;0.9 x 59 x 14.2 x 410/103] = [335; 309]min = 309 kN
0Vd{ = [92.6; 261; 309]min = 92.6 kN
• vd = 4 x 92.6 = 370 kN
Vdes = [143, 370]min = 143 > V* = 120 kN Satisfactory

WELDED ANGLE SEAT

ew = 14 + 37.1/2 = 32.6
<£V = 0.978 kN/mm SP weld category
6 mm fillet
E48XX weld metal (Table B.1, Appendix B)

2 x 150 x 0.978
Vf = 179 kN
6 x 32.6 2
1+
150
Vdes = [143; 179]min = 143 kN > V* = 120 kN Satisfactory

ADDITIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS

Column Design Moment, M* - 120(100 + 210/2)/1000 = 24.6 kNm
since eG = bs/2 + c = 32.6 mm < 100 mm Use 100 mm minimum of AS 4100.
dc = 210 mm for 200UC59.5

I
I
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS
 [BLANK]

50
AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS
DSC/04—1994
 BEARING PAD

4.2 BEARING PAD CONNECTION

4.2.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

OPTIONAL PORTION**
OF FLANGE. FILLET" WELO
^ /T'")
\ ~fcp - O-4mm /^
: TO$U)T A A fcCQ'P. .*
PACKED,
(THICKER CMP .
40 PIN. ,2r
PLATE
COMPONENT 4
kaV ee 1*=>EP
H20 BOLT? /
IN UED). /
/ Fig. 4.2.1.1 Alternative ‘A’

°> HIM.
*? NOK- 3

/Lp = 0-4 rn 07
PH IN TOPUIT
AP KEOUJKCP

:
db ~
M20 ftxrp

PACKED 40 MIN.
Q-feB

20 MIN.

Fig. 4.2.1.2 Alternative's’

H 777 IV vv -n -rr

.2.

END PLATE
\ bprQ"4n7f77
1
V
:phim to puit '
I Ap R.CQ131KCP db
/'
s M20 ftOLTP
PACKER 40 MIN /,----
\
O-J ft
/ /t
VAK-ICP
&>£lNG
YV
1
/
PAP /
t Fig. 4.2.1.3 Alternative ‘C’
f
rr 7TT T»

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 51

 BEARING PAD
DETAILING NOTES:
(1) The connection may need to be shimmed to suit during erection. The connection detail consequently
includes provision for shims of 0-4 mm nominal thickness (4 mm being the maximum permissible under-
run in beam length permitted by Clause 14.4.5 of AS 4100). Shims will need to be holed to the same gauge
as the end plate.
The recommended design model in Section 4.2.2 assumes an under-run in beam length equal to the
maximum permissible value of 4 mm. Detailing for a larger under-run requires a modification to the
recommended design model.
(2) Component lengths are determined by design considerations. A minimum component length of 150 mm is
recommended for both end plate and bearing pad components.
(3) Sawn or machine flame cut edges are recommended at the bearing interface.
(4) Generally, the same component dimensions are used for both end plate and bearing pad.

4.2.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL

ii
tw
bi

0 WOMIWAU
4- DESIGN dw <ib .
dL 4c-

Ttfb
-I* di
1^1 *1 w

Fig. 4.2.2 Connection Geometry

This connection is classified as a connection for simple construction in accordance with Clause 4.2 of
AS 4100.
Defining: tb [til tj - 4]mil twb = beam web thickness
bb [bi, bjjmin fyw = beam web yield stress
fyb [fyii fyjJmii fyi = end plate yield stress fyj = bearing pad yield stress
d,i vertical weld length on bearing pad = bearing pad component length
bw horizontal weld length on bearing pad ^ bj
dew vertical weld length on end plate = de - tfb
vw nominal capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (Section 3.2.6)
0Vw design capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (Appendix B)
tw leg size of fillet welds
Design is based on determining Vdes, which involves determination of the minimum design capacity of the
design capacities (Va, Vb, Vc, Vd, Ve or Vf).
Then, Vdes S* V* design shear force on connection (also see Note (8)).
Design Capacities of the Connection:
Design Shear Capacity of Beam V, (0.6 fyw dew twb) 0 = 0.9 (AS 4100 Clause 5.11.4)
Web at End Plate
Design Bearing Capacity at Vb 0 (1.25 fyb tb bb) 0 = 0.9 (AS 4100 Clause 5.13.3)
Interface
Design Capacity of End Plate Vc 0 (fyi bi tj) 0 = 0.9 (AS 4100 Clause 6.2.1)
— Compression
Design Capacity of Bearing Pad Vd 0 [fyj bj tj, 0.5 fyj dj bj]mll 0 = 0.9 (AS 4100 Clause 6.2.1.
— Compression/Shear & Section 3.3).

52 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BEARING PAD
Design Capacity of Weld at
End Plate (Notes 2 and 7) Ve = (2 d ew + bj - twb) <l> v w (Section 3.2.6)
Design Capacity of Weld at
Bearing Pad (Note 7) v f = (2 d, + bw) 4> v w (Section 3.2.6)

NOTES ON DESIGN MODEL:

(1) dj and di are both recommended to be a minimum of 150 mm.
(2) The design capacity of any transverse welds across beam flange(s) has been included in Ve. If these
welds are not present then Ve = 2dew.^v w-

(3) Eccentricity of beam end plate reaction on bearing pad has not been considered in design. This
eccentricity varies from:

4- fortb = t| (i.e. tj < tj - 4) |

2
(see Section 5.2)
to 2 mm for tb = tj — 4 (i.e. tj > tj 4)J
(4) Use 2 x M20 bolts in 4.6/S or 8.8/S category through end plate and packer.
(5) Column design moment (M*) is given by the load eccentricity off the column face (ec), the designer must
assume ec to be at least 100 mm using AS 4100, Clause 4.3.4:
M* = V*(100 + dc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column flange
= V*(100 + twc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column web
where: dc = column depth (mm); twc = column web thickness (mm)
(6) For Alternative ‘A’, check that beam rotation is not so high as to cause the beam end to touch the bearing
pad. If the rotation is too high, the clearance will need to be increased above the 3mm minimum and 5 mm
nominal specified in Fig. 4.2.1.1.
(7) Welds are fillet welds and, for economy, should be sized to be single pass welds if possible-this
generally means 6 mm or 8 mm fillet size, although some welding procedures will allow 10 mm single
pass fillet welds to be deposited. Check individual situations using 10 mm fillet welds with fabricators.
Welds would normally be weld quality SP.
(8) Connection must be designed for a minimum design shear force of 40 kN.
(9) End plate depth (de) must be such that de ^ 0.30db in order to ensure that buckling of the supported
member web is avoided.

DSC/04—1994
AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 53
 BEARING PAD

4.2.3 DESIGN EXAMPLE

O t*rr> NOrAlNAl
4-mm 0£Al<3N
VS * l&OkN
l*JO *20 FLAT CAR v200 - 6KAPE 250
COUJHM
r AO
20OUGW 180
GRAPE 2*xO 5
20

CEAM: 4-10 UB 9V7 200

GRAPE. 2*50
1*50 * 20 FLAT 3AK * 200 GRAPE. 250

Fig. 4.2,3
Design Parameters
6 mm, E48XX fillet welds, 0vw = 0.978 kN/mm (Table B.1, Appendix B, SP weld category E48XX electrode)
2 x M20 bolts in 8.8/S category through end plate
t| - tj = 20 mm tb = 20 - 4 = 16 mm
bj = bj = 150 mm bb = 150 mm
fyw - 260 MPa twb = 7.6 mm tfb = 10.9 mm db = 403 mm
fyl - 250 MPa fyj = 250 MPa fyb = 250 MPa
d, - 200 mm dw - 403 - 2 x 10.9 381 mm
de * 180 mm
dj = 200 mm bw ~ 0
180 - 10.9 - 169 mm

Design Capacity of Connection

Va = 0.9 x 0.6 x 260 x 169 x 7.6/103 = 180 kN
Vb *= 0.9 x 1.25 x 250 x 16 x 150/103 - 675 kN
Vc = 0.9 x 250 x 150 x 20/103 = 675 kN
Vd = 0.9 x 250 x 150 x 20/103 = 675 kN - controls
or 0.9 x 0.5 x 250 x 200 x 150/103 = 3375 kN
Ve = 0.978 X (2 X 169 + 150 - 7.6) = 470 kN
Vf - 0.978 X 2 X 200 = 391 kN
de = 180 mm 3* 0.30 x 403 = 121 mm
Hence, Vdeg = [180; 675; 675; 675; 470; 391]min = 180 kN V* = 180 kN
Connection is satisfactory to carry design reaction.
Additionaf Design Considerations
Column design moment,
dc - 210 mm for 200UC59.5; ev = 4 + tj/2 = 4 + 10 = 14 mm — Use 100 mm min. (see Note 5)
M* = 180 x (210/2 + 100) x 10~3 - 36.9 kNm

54 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

4.3 FLEXIBLE END PLATE CONNECTION FLEXIBLE END PLATE
4.3.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

Y
tl GOf& length lc 4 LC COPCO)
ClF TgE^EKf)

[jj a.
a
4-
W 5p
&
9p
9>p w 9p
L Ta^, 4

1 a<n
il
Y Y
Fig. 4.3.1.1 Alternative ‘A’ Fig. 4.3.1.2 Alternative ‘B’
Uncoped and Single Web Coped Beams. Uncoped and Single Web Coped Beams
(End plate located towards top of beam). (End plate located towards bottom of beam).

It

cL
F

t-v^
%

ep
i\
IS
*

Fig. 4.3.1.3 Double Web Coped Beams

(Alternatives ‘A’ or ‘B’—Alternative ‘A’ Shown).

DETAILING NOTES:
(D Fabrication of this type of connection requires close control in cutting the beam to length and adequate consideration
must be given to squaring the beam ends such that both end plates are parallel and the effect of beam camber does
not result in out-of-square end plates which makes erection and field fit-up difficult. Shims may be required on runs of
beams in a line in order to compensate for mill and shop tolerances.
(2) The use of this connection for two sided beam-to-beam connections should be considered carefully. Installation of
bolts in the end plates can cause difficulties in this case. When unequal sized beams are used, special coping of the
bottom flange of the smaller beam may be required to prevent it fouling the bolts.
(3) Since the end plate is intended to behave flexibly, damage of the end plate during transport is not normally of concern
and may be rectified on site.
(4) For coped beams, the top of the end plate and the bottom of the cope cut should coincide.
(5)
Curvature of the end plate due to welding can usually be pulled out when installing the bolts.
(6)
Check end plate component width to ensure that it will fit between fillets of column section when connecting to
column web.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 55

 FLEXIBLE END PLATE
4.3.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL
';
:
bL
ti

4 O-
tlF &OLT j j.: i-*/ <*P ^ t- ^ >- cic-2
PAIR^
di
Hb BOLT'S '
= 2op • 4 >■

3«.i

Nof«/- cLa.-^ 1-5 <if

Lc ( if com?) 5a 3-<-3

Fig. 4.3.2.1 Connection Geometry

This connection is classified as a connection for simple construction in accordance with Clause 4.2 of
AS 4100.
Defining: fui = tensile strength of end plate component
fUc = tensile strength of supporting member
fyi = yield stress of end plate component sp = bolt pitch
fyw = yield stress of supported member web ae2 = sP - dh/2
dh = hole diameter aey ™ [ael! ae2Jmin

df « bolt diameter Lo = length of cope (if any)

vw = nominal capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (Section 3.2.6)
tf>vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (Appendix B)
t w • leg size of fillet welds
Design is based on determining Vdes, the design capacity of the connection, which is the minimum of the
design capacities (Va, Vb) Vc, Vd, VB, Vf).
The design requirement is then Vdes 5= V* (actual design shear force-see also Note (9)).

Design Capacities of the Connection:

Design Capacity of Weld to Web Va - <f>vw2d,
(Note 2)
Design Capacity of Bolts in End Vb - nb (0Vdf) where: nb = 2np
Plate 4>Vdf = design capacity of a single bolt in
shear — see Note 1
Design Capacity of End Plate V0 = 0(O.5fyj ti2dr) where: 4> = 0.9 (Section 3.3.2)
Component in Shear
Design Capacity of Beam Web Vd = <£(0.6 fyw twb d|) where: <f> = 0.9 (AS 4100, Clause 5.11.4)
in Shear at End Plate
Design Capacity of Coped Ve = 0V ws for single web coped beam (Section 3.4.3)
Section in Shear near = <?5>Vwd for double web coped beam (Section 3.4.4)
Connection
Design Capacity in Coped Vf = <£Mss/ev for single web coped beam (Section 3.4.3), see Note 3
Section in Bending near = <£Msd/ev for double web coped beam (Section 3.4.4), see Note 3
Connection (Note 3) where: ev = l_c + t-(

56 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 FLEXIBLE END PLATE

NOTES ON DESIGN MODEL:

(1) $Vdf is the design capacity of a single bolt in shear for the strength limit state being given by:
$Vdf = [0Vf; 0Vb]min
where </>Vf = design capacity of a single bolt in shear ($ = 0.8)
</>Vb = design capacity in bearing of a ply {<f> = 0.9)
In this connection, #Vdf = minimum of [0Vfn or <£Vfx; $Vbi; 0Vbc]
where 0Vfn; <£Vfx— given in Appendix A for threads included or excluded from the shear plane;
threads should normally be assumed included in the shear plane (i.e. 0Vfn)
0Vbi = minimum of [0.9 x 3.2 df t, fui; 0.9 x aey tj fui], related to local bearing or end
plate tearout in the end plate component
<£Vbc = minimum of [0.9 x 3.2 df tc fuc; 0.9 x ae2 tc fuc]. related to local bearing or plate
tearout failure in the supporting member
tc = thickness of supporting member to which end plate is bolted
For economy, either 4.6/S or 8.8/S bolting category is preferred. 8.8/TB category is uneconomic since it
has the same design capacity as 8.8/S and requires tensioning. 8.8/TF category is uneconomic and is not
recommended for other reasons (Section 5.3).
(2) Welds are fillet welds and, for economy, should be sized to be single pass welds if possible — this
generally means 6 mm or 8 mm fillet size, although some welding procedures will allow 10 mm single
pass fillet welds to be deposited. Check individual situations using 10 mm fillet welds with fabricators.
(3) For single and double web coped beams, the design bending moment at the cope location should not
exceed the design moment capacity of the coped section, assuming the end reaction acts at the end of
the plate (eccentricity of Lc + tj — Fig. 4.3.2.2).
Formulae for the design moment capacity of coped sections ($MSS or <£Msd) are given in Sections 3.4.3 or
3.4.4, as appropriate.

<2v CRITICAL SECTION

ti

Ia
<*« a, d

ti 0*7 6 <
V*

Fig. 4.3.2.2 Fig. 4.3.2.3

(4) In order to give a satisfactory connection “appearance”, it is recommended that the component length (dj)
vary from a maximum equal approximately to the clear depth between flanges (d-i) of the supported
member to a minimum of approximately half the beam depth.
(5) In order that supported member does not rotate so much that is touches the supporting member, the ratio
ti
~
a
> 0.030 or ^ < 33 should be satisfied although these limits may be varied (Fig. 4.3.2.3)
c ti
Check that beam rotation under design loads does not exceed 0.030 radians. Above this level of rotation,
cropping of the beam lower flange may need to be investigated (this can be expensive in fabrication cost)
or, alternatively, increasing the length of the end plate (thus effectively reducing the limit of ac/t| to say 20
or 25 as necessary). This is not likely to be of concern for double web coped beams.
The limit ac/tj ^ 33 is not applied to double web coped beams.
A discussion of the above provisions is contained in Section 5.3.
For SWC and DWC supported members, the edge of the end plate should align with the cope cut at the
top and bottom.

CSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 57

FLEXIBLE END PLATE
(6) Edge distance ae3 should be at least 1.5df. (Fig. 4.3.2.1)
(7) Column design moment (M*) is given by:—
M* = V*(100 + dc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column flange
= v*(100 + twc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column web
where: dc = column depth (mm); twc = column web thickness (mm)
Generally, the load eccentricity off the column face is less than 100 mm so that the minimum eccentricity
of 100 mm, as specified in AS 4100 Clause 4.3.4, is used.
(8) Where packers are inserted between the end plate and the support when shimming to length and where
such packers have a thickness >6 mm (which is unlikely), Clause 9.3.2.5 of AS 4100 requires that the
nominal shear capacity of the bolt (Vf) be reduced by 15%. The thickness of the packing must not exceed
20 mm (see Section 3.1.3.4).
(9) Connection must be designed for a minimum design shear force of 40 kN.
(10) The ratio of the bolt gauge (sg) to the end plate thickness (tj) should lie in the range 11-14 — see Section
5.3.

4.3.3 DESIGN EXAMPLE

SPECIAL NOTE: This example uses dimensions and components adopted in Reference 1.

4? 4? G
a 120
5WG 120
35
4
rV* = 200 kN -o-
o
100
70
70
Er-4*-
65

1*50 * & SQUARE E/DGE.

35 FLAT *210 LONG
_______I G.J2ADE 290

&I0U& 101 — 410 U& 53 7

GRADE 250 GRAtTE 250

Use 6 x M20 bolts in 8.8N/S category (np = 3, nb = 6)

Fig. 4.3.3

Design Parameters
410UB53.7 beam: twb = 7.6 mm fyw 260 MPa
6 mm, E48XX fillet welds, SP weld category, </>Vw 0.978 kN/mm (Table B.1, Appendix B)
dj = 3 x 70 = 210 mm bi 150 mm tj = 8 mm
ful = 410 MPa Lyi 260 MPa
aei = 35 mm sp = 70 mm dh = 22mm ae2 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm
aey = [35; 59]min = 35 mm
610UB101 supporting member web: twc = 10.6 mm fyc = 260 MPa fuc = 410 MPa
Bolts — M20 bolts in 8.8N/S category
<£Vfn = 92.6 kN (Table A.2.2, Appendix A)
0Vbi = 0.9 x 3.2 x 20 x 8 x410/103 = 189 kN (also see Table A.2.2)
or = 0.9 x 35 X 8 x 410/103 = 103 kN (also see Table A.2.2)
4>Vbc = 0.9 X 3.2 X 20 x 10.6 x 410/103 = 250 kN
or = 0.9 x 59 x 10.6 x 410/103 = 231 kN
Hence, </>Vdf = [92.6; 189; 103; 250; 231 ]min
= 92.6 kN

58 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 FLEXIBLE END PLATE
Design Capacity of Connection
Va = 0.978 x 2 X 210 = 411 kN
Vb 6 x 92.6 = 556 kN
Vc = 0.9 x 0.5 x 260 x 8 x 2 x 210/103 = 393 kN
Vd = 0.9 x 0.6 x 260 x 7.6 x 210/103 = 224 kN
Now from Section 3.4.3 for a single web coped (SWC) supported member:
0.9 x 1.2 fyw dw twb
Ve = 0V ws < 0.9 x 0.6 fyw dw twb
Qcd w
0.9 +
lx
dw = 403 - 65 - 10.9 = 327 mm twb = 7.6 mm fyw = 260 MPa bf = 178 mm tf = 10.9 mm
lx = 53.8 x 106 mm4
yc = 99.5 mm — on substitution into the expressions given in Appendix D
Qc = 216 x 103 mm3
Qcd w 216 x 103 x 327
= 1.313
lx 53.8 x 106
= 0.9 x 1.2 X 260 x 327 x 7.6
V, = 315 kN
103 X (0.9 + 1.313)
< 0.9 x 0.6 x 260 x 327 x 7.6/103 = 349 kN
Also from Section 3.4.3 and Appendix D:—
V, = Mss/ev = 0.9 fy Ze/ev where ev = 120 + 8 = 128 mm
ys = 43.8 mm on substitution into the expression given in Appendix D
hence, plastic neutral axis is in member web, i.e. ys > t, + r
Ze = [Ss; 1.5Z]min
Ss = 362 x 103 mm3
1.5Z = 1.5 x 53.6 X 106/(327 + 10.9 - 99.5) = 338 X 103 mm3
Ze = [362 x 103; 338 x 103]min = 338 x 103 mm
<t>Mss = 0.9 x 260 x 33 x 103/106 = 79.1 kNm
Vf = 79.1 x 103/128 = 618 kN
At the cope, the cross-section is subject to combined shear force and bending moment. From Section 3.4.3
M* = 200 x 128/103 = 25.6 kNm
< 0.75(tf>Mss) = 0.75 x 79.1 = 59.3 kNm
Hence Vvm = Vv = Vws above (no reduction in shear capacity due to presence of bending moment)
Hence, Vdes = [411; 556; 393; 224; 315; 616]min = 224 kN > V* = 200 kN
Connection is therefore satisfactory to carry the design reaction.

Additional Design Considerations

(1) Checking component length:
dj = 210 > beam depth/2 = 201 mm
(2) Check: ac = 403 - 100 - 140 - 35 = 128 mm
ac _ 128
= 16.0
ti 8
Q
0 < ~ < 33 Satisfactory, as rotation > 0.030 radians
M

With the bottom clearance available (from ac/tj = 16), the rotation could go up to 1/16.0 = 0.0625 radians
without the bottom flange touching the support.
(3) ae3 = (150 - 90)/2 = 30 = 1.5 d, Satisfactory

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 59

 [BUNK]

60
AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994
 ANGLE CLEAT

4.4 ANGLE CLEAT CONNECTION

4.4.1 CONNECTION DETAILS
2S5,a +’Lw/b
^93
^9

4.
♦ 4 4
♦ 4 4
4 C»p
4 ♦
4 <b?
♦ ♦
4 4 4

Fig. 4.4.1.1 Alternative‘A’.

Single line of bolts to beam web
Single or double angle cleats
Beam-to-column and beam-to-beam connections
Uncoped, Single and Double Web Coped Beams.

Sgi

a,
C©--- © 4
6p
4—4 4-0
Sp iyvc.
4—© 4
4—4
*P -4
9p
4—4 4

Fig. 4.4.1.2 Alternative^’ Fig. 4.4.1.3 Alternative ‘C\

Double line of bolts to beam web Single line of bolts to beam web
Single or double angle cleats Single or double angle cleats
Beam-to-column and beam-to-beam connections Beam-to-beam connections
Uncoped, Single and Double Web Coped Beams Uncoped Beams

DETAILING NOTES:
(1) Bolt holes are normally 2 mm larger than the nominal bolt diameter, in the supported member web and in
the leg connected to it, this diameter of hole will accommodate variations in supported member depth due
to standard rolling tolerances and provide erection tolerances after the supported member is cut to length.
(2) The use of this connection for two sided beam-to-beam connections should be carefully considered as the
installation of the bolts in the outstanding legs of the angle cleats can cause difficulties in this case. When
unequal sized beams are used, special coping of the bottom flange of the smaller beam may be required to
prevent it fouling the bolts.
(3) Angle cleat(s) dimensions and detailing must be checked to ensure that they will fit between the fillets of
the supporting member.

DSC/04 1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 61

 ANGLE CLEAT

4.4.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL

l c. Lc.

3^
-0---€>- 6pI ^•e -3XLi
*r
-e-e- -o-o—
~0~O_ ■ T- y_
Z&y
■ -$—€*— -0—0- -<±■0------ =
cU^

<1*1

*9' % Sg, ■
%l ^z
Uncoped Beam SWC Coped Beam DWG Coped Beam

oLz-G

-o- ,.9^g -*>—©■

O
vdl£G -v<9
‘ LEG.
Op BOLT* ■o- dj npW9s • a d? -e > Dp BOLT RoWe.7 a
LEG
EACH LEG (X ©C LEG. 0<^ i
•Zopeara -T
IEQ -O- -o-e-
Bjz,? ,3-e.?
«• 2-o.g

f»t * 2r.p SINGLE ANGLE.CLEAT*. - nfc = ^nP

DOUBLE ANGLE CLEATS - Ot 3 4-Op

?
NOTE.' Ot * TCfTALNUM&EK S^iLiisj
OF BOUDIN A
connection

*=-f aL&t-

Alternatives ‘A’ and ‘C’ Alternative ‘B’

Fig. 4.4.2.1. Connection Geometry
This connection is classified as a connection for simple construction in accordance with Clause 4.2 of AS 4100.
Angle components are assumed to be oriented such that:
(i) one leg of the angle cleat component (leg a) is attached to the supporting member through bolt group a,
(ii) the other leg of the angle cleat component (leg p) is attached to the beam web through bolt group p.
Defining: f yw yield stress of supported member web fyi = yield stress of angle cleat component
f uw tensile strength of supported fui - tensile strength of angle cleat component
member web trl thickness of angle cleat component
twb thickness of supported member web Sp = bolt pitch
fyc yield stress of supporting member df = bolt diameter
fuc tensile strength of supporting member dh - hole diameter
tC thickness of supporting member ae2 = sp - dh/2
ae2 sg2 “ dh/2
Lc length of cope (if any)
Design is based on determining Vdes, the design capacity of the connection, which is the minimum of the design
capacities Va, Vbl Vc, Vd, Ve. Vf, Vg.
The design requirement is then Vdes > V* (actual design shear force - also see Note (7)).
Va, Vb, Vc, Vd must be assessed differently depending on whether - single angle cleats OR
- double angle cleats are used.
Ve, Vf, Vg are assessed in the same manner for each case.

62 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE CLEAT
Double Angle Cleat
Design Capacity of Bolts ONE LINE OF BOLTS IN EACH CLEAT
in group a — Va [2np (4>Vdf); 2np (0Vba); 2np (<£Vbc)]mm IN SINGLE SHEAR.
connected to support
where:— 0Vdf = [0Vfn or <^>Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fui; 0.9 x 3.2 tc df fuc] min (NOTE 1)
0Vba = 0.9 &eyj tj fuj
aeyi = [3e3i 3ee]min
=
0Vbc 0.9 aec ^ fuc
aec = minimum vertical edge distance (including distance from centre of hole to
hole edge) in supporting member — usually ae3
Design Capacity of Bolts
in group ft — connected BOLTS IN DOUBLE SHEAR
to member web

FOR ALTERNATIVES
‘A’ and ‘C’
(single line of bolts to Vb = [2Zb (<£Vdf); 2np (0Vev); 2np Ze (</>Veh)] mil
supported member)
and np ^ 1
where:- 0Vdf = [*Vfh or 0V,X; 0.9 x 3.2 tj d, fui; 0.9 x 3.2 twb df fuw/2] min (NOTE 1)

Zb (SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)

\/l + (6e/?/sp(np + 1))2
e - sg1
P
0.9 aeyb twb f uw .
(/)Vev —

[ 2 > 0-9 aeyi tj fui

min

aeyi — [ae3; aee]min aeyb — [ae3l ae4]mii

0.9 aexb twb f uw .

0Veh = 2
0.9 aexi tj fui
min

aexi = ae7 ~ aexb ae1

Ze = (np + 1) sp/6ep (SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)

FOR ALTERNATIVE 'B’ Vb = [2Zb (</>Vdf); 4np Zev (c/>Vev); 4np Zeb (0Veh)]min for np ^ 1
(double line of bolts to
= [2Zb (0Vdf); 2np Zev (</>Vev)]min for np = 1
supported member)
where:- 0Vd, = [ (/>Vfn or 0Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fUj> 0.9 x 3.2 twb df fuw/2] min
2np
Zb (np * 1)
2ep/sg2 2 2ep/{Sg2 Spg) l2
1+

Zb
1 +1 nJL±l
3 np — 1 |_spg_
2
1 2
+ 1 +1
3 np - 1

nP
tu
(SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)
= 1)
1 + ?2£
sg2

Sc£
spg I bp — 1) + 3(sg2/sp)2] (np # 1)
(np 1) sp
ep - sg1 + Sg2 / 2
^bp 1
Zeh Zev
®/?(^p 1)spnp nP (np * 1)
gj Sg2
1+
I bp

Sg2
Zev (np = 1)
_sg2 + 2ep_
0.9 aeyb twb f uw. 0-9 aexb twb fuw.
<t>V
ev
2
0.9 aeyj tj fuj 4>Veh =
2
0.9 aeXj tj fUj
min _ min

aexi
~~ [ae2> ae7]min aexb [ae11 ae2] min

aeyi = aeyb = [ae3i ae4i ae5]mii

[ae3> ae6]min

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 63

ANGLE CLEAT
Single Angle Cleat
Note: np # 1 is only case considered.
1
Design Capacity of Bolts
in group a — Va [zb (0Vdf); np (0Vba); np (<£Vbc); np Ze (0Veh)J ONE LINE OF BOLTS IN
min SINGLE SHEAR
connected to support
n.
where:- Zb (SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)
\/l + (6e0,/sp(np + 1))2
e, - Sg3 for Alternatives ‘A’, ‘B’ and ‘C’

<M/df - |>f n or <£Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fui; 0.9 x 3.2tcdff uc

]min (NOTE 1)
0Vba = 0.9 aeyi ti fui </>Vbc — 0.9 aec tc fi
aeyi = [ae3, See]mi
aec = minimum vertical edge distance (including distance from centre of hole to
hole edge) in supporting member — usually a S3
</A/eh = 0.9 ae8 ^ fU(
Ze = sp (np + 1)/6ea SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A
Design Capacity of Bolts
in group /? — connected BOLTS IN SINGLE SHEAR
to member web

FOR ALTERNATIVES
‘A’ and ‘C’
(single line of bolts to Vb [zb (0Vdf); np(0Vev); npZe(0Veh)] min
supported member)
and np * 1
where:- 0Vdf - |>f n or 0Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fui; 0.9 x 3.2 twb df f
]
uw min (NOTE 1)

Zb Or (SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)

n/1 + (Se/j/Sp (np + 1))2 for np 94 1
eP = Sg1

0Vev = [o.9 aeyb twb fuw; 0.9 aeyi t, fui]mj|

aeyi = [ae3, aeg]mii aeyb — [Se3i ae4]min

0Veh = [o.9 aexb twb fuw; 0.9 aexi t, fui] min

aexi - ae7 aexb — ae1

Ze = (np + 1) Sp/Gep (SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)

FOR ALTERNATIVE ‘B’ Vb Zb (0Vdf); 2np Zev (0Vev); 2np Zeb (<£Veb)J for np ^ 1
min
(double line of bolts to
supported member) Zb (</>Vdf); np Zev (*VW)]min for np = 1

where:- </>Vd, = [^Vfn or </>Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fUj; 0.9 x 3.2 twb d, f
2np
uw
] min

Zb 2e^/sg2 2 2eg/(sg2 Spg) 12 (np * 1)

1+ 2
1 +
1 +i 3 n
p - 1 Lspg
! + 1 Qel±1s [—T
3 np — 1 L pg_
2
Zb (nP = 1) (SECTION 3.1.5 and APPENDIX A)
2eP
1+
Sg2
2
spg ep = sg1 + Sg2 / 2 bp - ^[(n? - 1) + 3(sg2/sp)2]
(nP 1)sp
tap
Zeh (SECTION 5.14 and APPENDIX A)
6e^(np -1)%

64 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE CLEAT
1 M
^ev
1+
nPeP sg2
(for np * 1)
_sg2 - 2ep ] (for np = 1)

I bp

0Vev = |^0.9 aeyb twb f uw ; 0.9 a, ,j fui] mil

0Veh = [o.9 aexb twb f uw ; 0.9 a* Mu.],*,

= aexb — [ae11 ae2]
aexi [ae2i ae7]min min

aeyi == [ae3l ae6]min aeyb = [ae3i ae4i ae5]min

Double and Single Cleats

Design Capacity of Angle Vc = 0 nc (0.5 fyi dj ti) where:- nc = 1 for single angle connection
Cleat(s) in Shear
= 2 for double angle connection
(Section 3.3)
0 = 0.90
(fvi t, d,2)
Design Capacity of Angle Vd = 0 nc eP ~ sgi for Alternatives A and C
4 e^
Cleat(s) in Bending
= Sg1 + Sg2/2 for Alternative B
(Section 3.3)
Design Capacity of Ve = 0V VO for an uncoped beam (Section 3.4.2)
Supported Member in
= 0V ws for single web coped beam (Section 3.4.3)
Shear
=
0 Vwd for double web coped beam (Section 3.4.4)
Design Capacity of Coped =
Vf 0 Mss/ ev for single web coped beam (Section 3.4.3)
Supported member in
= 0 Msd/ev for double web coped beam (Section 3.4.4)
Bending near
Connection where:- ev = Lc - aei + sgi (Note 2)
Design Capacity of Coped Vg = 0 Vbs (Section 3.4.5)
Supported Member in
where:- 0 Vbs is defined in Section 3.4.5
Block Shear
Avg, Ans is defined in Section 3.4.5
Atg = ae1 fwb for Alternatives A and C
= (ae1 agi)twb for Alternative B
Ant = (ae1 — dh/2)twb for Alternatives A and C
= (ae1 + Sgi — 3dh/2)twb for Alternative B
NOTES ON DESIGN MODEL:
d) 0 Vfn; 0 Vfx are given in Appendix A as bolt shear strength for threads included or excluded from the shear
plane respectively. Threads will normally be assumed to be included in the shear plane. The other terms
relate to local bearing failure in the angle cleat component or in the supported member web. For
economy, either 4.6/S or 8.8/S bolting category are preferred. 8.8/TB category is uneconomic as it has
the same design capacity as 8.8/S but requires tensioning. 8.8/TF category is uneconomic and is not
recommended for other reasons. (Section 5.4.)
(2) For single and double web coped beams, the design bending moment at the cope location should not
exceed the design moment capacity of the coped section, assuming the end reaction acts at the end of
the cleat (i.e. with an eccentricity of ev = Lc + sg1 - aei) — Fig. 4.4.2.2. Formulae for the design moment
capacity of coped sections (0 Mss or 0 Msd) are given in Sections 3.4.3 or 3.4.4, as appropriate.
(Lsj

*?9|- 3^2*1 Lc

r
I
I
I CRITICAL. ^EOTIOhl
i ■
.1

<Lci
V*
Fig. 4.4.2.2
S3
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 65
 ANGLE CLEAT
(3) The American Institute of Steel Construction (Ref. 16) recommends that the length of the angle cleat
component varies from a maximum equal to the depth between flanges to a minimum of half this
dimension in order to ensure adequate stiffness and stability. This requirement is similar to that
recommended for the flexible end plate in Note (4) of Section 4.3.2 and in Section 5.3. Consequently, for
the same reasons detailed in Section 5.3, it is recommended that the component length (dj) vary from a
maximum equal approximately to the depth between flanges of the supported member to a minimum of
approximately half the beam depth. In order that the supported member does not rotate so much that it
touches the supporting member, the ratio
Sgl - aei !c
^ 0.030 or ^ 33 (Fig. 4.4.2.3)
ac Sg1 — ae1

which owing to normal detailing in angle cleat connections is invariably easily satisfied. This is not of
concern for double web coped beams.

631-3^ 21<li

1
ia
?
di
Uy dl d

-4
^9 (

Fig. 4.4.2.3
A check must be made to ensure that beam rotation under design loads does not exceed 0.030 radians.
Above this level of rotation, the possibility of the supported member touching the support exists. If the
rotation 0E > 0.030 radians, first check that (Fig. 4.4.2.3):
3c 1
Sg1 - aei *
If this inequality is not satisfied, the simplest solution is to increase (sg1 - ae1) in Fig. 4.4.2.3 by adjusting
the gauge or the edge distance. This check is not likely to be of concern for the double web coped beams.
(4) Edge distance ae8 in the a leg of the angle cleat should be at least 1.5df.
(5) Column design moment (M*) is given by:—
M* = V* (ec + dc/2)/1000 kNm — connection to column flange
= V*(ec + twc/2)/1000 kNm — connection to column web
where: ec = ep but ^ 100 mm (AS 4100 Clause 4.3.4)
dc = column depth (mm)
twc = column web thickness (mm).
(6) Where packers are inserted between the a leg and the support when shimming to length and where such
packers have a thickness >6 mm (which is unlikely), Clause 9.3.2.5 of AS 4100 requires that the nominal
shear capacity of the bolt (Vf) be reduced by 15%. The thickness of the packing must not exceed 20 mm
(see Section 3.1.3.4).
(7) The connection must be designed for a minimum design shear force of 40 kN.
(8) The ratio of the supporting member gauge (2sg3 + twb) to the angle cleat thickness (tj) should lie in the
range 11-14.

66 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE CLEAT

4.3.3 DESIGN EXAMPLES

SPECIAL NOTE: These examples use dimensions and components adopted in Reference 1.

■n-
G6 .Vj ^5

I0O
76
4lOU& 6V7 -<(-
GRAPE 2*70 *70
H ►*
70
Y* * l&okw
V,?

w 66
-b- ICOxIOO-GEA
200 00 6*5-5 *2fcOL6.
GRAPE 2‘50 GRAPE 260
Fig. 4.4.3.1
Design Parameters
4 x M20 bolts in 8.8N/S category in each leg in 22 dia. holes df = 20 mm dh = 22 mm

Angle cleats dj = 280 mm nc = 2 ti = 6.0 mm fui = 410 MPa fyi = 260 MPa
sgi = 65 mm Sg3 = 65 mm ae6 = 35 mm sp = 70 mm ae7 = 35 mm
ae8 = 35 mm np = 4 ae3 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm ae8 > 1.5 df = 30 mm
410UB53.7: twb = 7.6 mm fuw = 410 MPa fyw = 260 MPa d = 403 mm
sg1 = 65 mm aei = 35 mm ae3 = 59 mm ae2 not relevant (single line)
ae4 not relevant as uncoped Lc - 0 ae5 not relevant (uncoped)
200UC59.5: fyC ™ 250 MPa tc = 14.2 mm fuc = 410 MPa
Bolts M20 bolts 8.8/S category threads included in shear plane
<£Vfn = 92.6 kN (Table A,2.2)
Design Capacity of Connection
Bolt Group a </>Vdf = minimum of:- 92.6 kN
Design Capacity 0.9 x 3.2 x 6.0 x 20 x 410/103 - 142 kN
0.9 x 3.2 x 14.2 x 20 x 410/103 = 335 kN
= 92.6 kN
aeyi = [59; 35] min = 35 mm aec = 59 mm
4> Vba = 0.9 x 35 x 6.0 x 410/103 = 77.5 kN
0 Vbc = 0.9 x 59 x 14.2 x 410/103 = 309 kN
Va = 2 x 4 x [92.6; 77.5; 309] min = 620 kN
Bolt Group fi <f> Vdf = minimum of:- 92.6 kN
Design Capacity
0.9 x 3.2 x 6.0 x 20 x 410/103 = 142 kN
0.9 x 3.2 x 7.6 x 20 x 410/(2 x 103) = 89.7 kN
= 89.7 kN
aeyi = [59; 35]mjn = 35 mm aeyb = 59 mm aeXj = 35 mm aexb = 35 mm
0Vev = minimum of;- 0.9 x 59 x 7.6 x 410/(2 x 103) = 82.7 kN
0.9 x 35 x 6.0 x 410/103 = 77.5 kN
= 77.5 kN
<f> Veh = minimum of:- 0.9 x 35 x 7.6 x 410/(2 x 103) = 49.1 kN
0.9 x 35 x 6.0 x 410/103 = 77.5 kN
49.1 kN
DSC/04. 1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 67
ANGLE CLEAT
For np — 4, eg = 65 mm, sp = 70 mm
np
Zb = for £ bolt group
"2
6eg
1+
_(np + 1)sp_

4
= 2.67 (see also Appendix A, Table A.5)
2
1 + "6 x 65~j
5 x 70

Ze = (np + 1)sp/6eg= 5 x 70/(6 x 65) = 0.897 (see also Appendix A, Table A.6)
Vb = minimum of:- 2 x 2.67 x 89.7 = 479 kN
2 x 4 x 77.5 = 620 kN
2 x 4 x 0.897 x 49.1 = 352 kN
= 352 kN
Cleat Design Vc = 0.9 x 2 x 0.5 x 260 x 280 x 6.0/103 = 393 kN
Capacity — Shear

Cleat Design
0.9 x 2 x 260 x 6.0 x (280)2
Vd = 847 kN
Capacity — Bending
4 x 65 x 103

Design Capacity Ve = 0.9 x 0.6 x 260 x (403 - 2 x 10.9) x 7.6/103 = 407 kN

410UB53.7 — Shear

As the supported member is uncoped, there is no necessity to calculate Vf or Vg

Hence, Vdes = [620; 352; 393; 847; 407]min = 352 kN > V* = 180 kN

Connection is therefore satisfactory to carry the design reaction.

Additional Design Considerations

(1) Column design moment, M*c; ec = 65 mm < 100 mm Use 100 mm minimum of AS 4100
dc = 210 mm for 200UC59.5
M* = 180 x (100 + 210/2)/l000 = 36.9 kNm
(2) Checking component length:
d| = 280 > beam depth/2 = 201 mm
ft
Checking: ac - 403 - 100 - 210 - 35 = 58 mm sgi - ae1 = 65 - 35 = 30 mm
a* 58
~30= 1.93
Sg1 — ae1
< 33 Satisfactory

Check beam rotation under design load-Note (3). Unlikely to cause supported member to touch
supporting member.

AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE CLEAT
Consider the same connection but to a beam and with a single angle cleat:-

V = 160 kM

. 120

66 l~
69

T 1O0

I no
T no
l
70

66

610 U6 lib 4-10 Ub -GRAVE.

66
GRAVE ICOxIOOxCEA J
66 X 2&0 LG.
GRADE -250

Fig. 4.4.3.2

Design Parameters: as before except single cleat only (nc = 1) and a@4 = 35 mm
610UB113 fyC = 260 MPa tc = 11.6 mm fuc = 410 MPa
Design Capacity of Connection
Bolt Group a 4> Vd( = minimum of:- 92.6 kN
Design Capacity 0.9 x 3.2 x 6.0 x 20 x 410/103 = 142 kN
0.9 x 3.2 X 11.6 x 20 X 410/103 = 274 kN
= 92.6 kN
^eyi — [59, 35]min — 35 mm aec = 59 mm
3
</> Vba = 0.9 X 35 X 6.0 x 410/10 = 77.5 kN
</>Vbc = 0.9 x 59 x 11.6 x 410/103 = 253 kN
(/>Veh = 0.9 x 35 X 6.0 x 410/103 = 77.5 kN
ea = 65 mm np = 4 sp = 70 mm
Zb = 2.67 (as before and as Table A.5)
Ze = 0.897 (as before and as Table A.6)
Va = minimum of:- 2.67 x 92.6 = 247 kN
4 x 77.5 = 310 kN
4 x 253 = 1012 kN
4 X 0.897 X 77.5 = 278 kN
= 247 kN
Bolt Group p <t> Vdf = minimum of:- 92.6 kN
Design Capacity 0.9 x 3.2 x 6.0 x 20 x 410/103 = 142 kN
0.9 x 3.2 x 7.6 X 20 X 410/103 = 179 kN
= 92.6 kN
aeyi = [59; 35]min = 35 mm aeyb = 59 mm aei = 35 mm aeb = 35 mm
0 Vev = minimum of:- 0.9 x 59 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 165 kN
0.9 x 35 x 6.0 X 410/103 = 77.5 kN
= 77.5 kN
</> Veh = minimum of:- 0.9 x 35 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 98.2 kN
0.9 x 35 x 6.0 X 410/103 = 77.5 kN
= 77.5 kN
Zb = 2.67 (as before) Ze = 0.897 (as before)
Vb = minimum of:— 2.67 x 92.6 = 247 kN
4 x 77.5 = 310 kN
4 x 0.897 x 77.5 = 278 kN
= 247 kN
DSC/04—1994
AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 69
ANGLE CLEAT
Cleat Design Vc = 0.9 X 1 x 0.5 x 260 x 280 x 6.0/103 = 197 kN
Capacity — Shear

Cleat Design
0.9 x 1 x 260 x 6.0 x (280)2
Vd = = 423 kN
Capacity—Bending 4 x 65 x 103

Design Capacity Ve = 315kN (from example in Section 4.3.3)

SWC 410UB53.7
—Shear

Design Capacity Vf = c/> Mss/ev where ev = 120 - 35 + 65 = 150 mm

SWC 410UB53.7
cf> Mss = 79.1 kNm (from example in Section 4.3.3)
—Bending
V, = 79.1 x 103/150 = 527 kN

At the cope location, cross-section is subject to combined shear force and bending moment — using results
from Section 3.4.3:
M* = 180 x 150/103 = 27.0 kNm
< 0.75 (0 Mss) = 0.75 x 79.1 = 59.3 kNm
Hence, Vvm = Vv = V ws No reduction in shear capacity due to presence of bending moment
Design Capacity Vg = 0.9 Vbs
Block Shear
AVg = [35 + 3 x 70] x 7.6 = 1862 mm2 Ans = 1862 - [3.5 x 22] x 7.6 = 1277 mm2
Atg = 35 x 7.6 = 266 mm2 Ant = [35 - 22/2] x 7.6 = 182 mm2
Vbs = maximum of:- (0.6 x 260 x 1862/103 + 410 X 182/103) = 365 kN
(0.6 x 410 x 1277/103 + 260 x 266/103) = 383 kN
= 383 kN
Vg = 0.9 x 383 = 345 kN
Hence, Vdes = [247; 247; 197; 423; 315; 527; 345]min = 197 kN > V* = 180 kN

Connection is therefore satisfactory to carry the design reaction.

Additional Design Considerations

(1) Checking component length:
dj = 280 > beam depth/2 = 201 mm
Checking: ac = 403 - 100 - 210 - 35 = 58 mm sgi - aei = 65 - 35 = 30 mm
ac 58
^ = 1.93
sgi aei 30
< 33 Satisfactory

Check beam rotation under design load—Note (3). Unlikely to cause supported member to touch supporting
member.

70 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WEB SIDE PLATE

4.5 WEB SIDE PLATE CONNECTION

4.5.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

V,
CL

4"
lit
ttt
^P IN tw
it
Sp l>
Frf
4

fpge flat
£AR. OZ PLATE
CtfMRDNENT

Fig. 4.5.1.1 - Alternative ‘A’

Single line of bolts to beam web
Beam-to-column or beam-to-beam connections
Uncoped, single and double web coped beams

% ^92

p:
Fl
• -ft-rO-'-e
O-
^p
U/

^p
rpO—O
6P

I
"0 4"'
-^0—0
^p 4—0
Si 2
^ODAKE ELSE FLAT
BAR OP PLATE
COM FOMENT
Fig. 4.5.1.2 - Alternative ‘B’
Double line of bolts to beam web
Beam-to-column or beam-to-beam connections
Uncoped, single and double web coped beams

DETAILING NOTES:

0) Bolt holes are normally 2 mm larger than the nominal bolt diameter. This diameter of hole in the supported
member web and the side plate will accommodate variations in supported member depth due to standard rolling
tolerances and provide erection tolerances after the supported member is cut to length.
( 2) In connections to column webs, a check must be made on the length of bolt to be used to ensure sufficient
clearance is available between the side plate and the inside of the column flange, to permit the bolts to be
installed.
(3) Erection clearances must be especially considered because of the necessity to angle beams into place during
erection. This consideration is most important for the case of a series of beams in the one row, all connected
between the same main supporting members.
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 71
 WEB SIDE PLATE
4.5.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL
^o Lc.

• -o—$>• •0--0-
cLga

•-O
a? o
'S,
■O—O-

-6—(hi <)—i Ki

■o- .3.
■3 <&$

3^i &<Ul 3.$,* 3,0,2. &!A 3to: 2.

53. Sgi S31 V %V

Uncoped Beam SWC Coped Beam DWC Coped Beam

$g\ 0kt7 % %2.&2,7

&
e ri
£ *
/
7-0
/
✓
/■
•( H- CL
0- O-
/ cii /
s tc
> b
<T o-_ t
tc / 7
C
Q_
,Z SLa# cLas?
/
-f •^•
CL
Cs
r
A 3JLCo /
cL&g,
U <b

0{ * 2ry
Note: nt = Total number of bolts in connection
ALTERNATIVE ’A’ ALTERNATIVE ’B’
Fig. 4.5.2.1: Connection Geometry
This connection classified as a connection for simple construction in accordance with Clause 4.2 of AS 4100.
Defining: f yw yield stress of supported member web fyi » yield stress of web plate component
f uw tensile strength of supported member web fui tensile strength of web plate component
twb thickness of supported member web tj = thickness of web plate component
sp bolt pitch df bolt diameter
dh hole diameter Lc = length of cope (if any)
ae2 Sg2 “ dh/2 ae3 =
v
s p - dh /2
e eccentricity of reaction = sg1 for Alternative A
as defined in Fig 4.5.2.1. = sg1 + sg2/2 for Alternative B
d\ depth of web plate component
vw nominal capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (Section 3.2.6)
4>vw design capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (Appendix B)
tw leg size of fillet

Design is based on determining Vdes> the design capacity of the connection, which is the minium of the design
capacities Va, Vb, Vc, Vd, Ve, Vf, Vg.
The design requirement is then Vdes ^ V* (actual design shear force - also see Note (6)).
Detailing Limitation: t, £ twb + 1.0mm
< 10 mm

72 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ANGLE CLEAT
Design Capacities of the Connection:
2 d, <f> vw
Design capacity of Va = (Section 3.2.8.1)
weld in shear ’6e~|2
1+
(see Note 5) di

Design capacity of bolt group connecting web plate to supported member web, Vb (from Section 3.1.5)

For Alternative ‘A’

(single line of bolts to Vb [zb (<£Vdf); np (0Vev); np Ze (<£Veb)] mm
supported member)
and np # 1
where:- ffldi - {^Vf or <f>Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fui; 0.9 x 3.2twbdff uw ] min (NOTE 1)

zb nP
(Section 3.1.5 and Appendix A)
2
6e
1+
sp(np + 1)_
e — Sg1

sP(np + 1)
Ze (Section 3.1.5 and Appendix A)
6e
<j>V
ev f ; 0.9 a,
[o-9 aeyb tvyb uw tj fui]min

a ftj f
^Veh = [°-9 3exb; 0.9twb ] uw exi ui min

-[
aeyb

aexb
] a i—
ae3» ae
4 min
aexi — ae7
6y 3e3;

For Alternative ‘B’ Vb Zb ($Vdf); 2np Zev ($Vev); 2np Zsb (<f>Veh)] min for np t* 1
(double line of bolts to
supported member) Zb (*Vdf); np Zev (<£Vev) mjn for np = 1

where:- 0Vdf = <£Vfn or 0Vfx; 0.9 x 3.2 tj df fui; 0.9 x 3.2twbd{f uw

]
min

2np
Zb ~ (nP * 1)
2e/sg2 2 2e/(s92 spg) 2
1+
1 n + 1 J_
1 + -k3 n p— 1 _Spg_
2
+ 1_ np + 1 1 l2
p 3 np — 1 Lspg_
2
(np = 1) (Section 3.1.5 and Appendix A)
2e
1+—
sg2

sg2
SP9 e = sg1 + sg2/2 Ibp — ^[(n| - 1) + 3(sg2/sp)2]
(np - 1)sp
Ib£
Zeh (np * 1)
e(np - 1)spnp
1
Zev (nP # 1) Zev = (np = 1)
n es 2 Sg2 + 2e_
1+ p g
lbp

0Vev j^0.9 aPyb twb fuw, 0.9 &eyi tj fui]mj

^Vgh = j^o.9 aexb twb fuw ; 0.9 a exii ti fui] min

a e yb
[a e3; ae4;ae5]min aeyj ae3l ae6
min

aexb J^aei; amine2] aexi ae2i ae7

min

©SC/04-1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 73

WEB SIDE PLATE
Design capacity of Vc = 0.45 fyi tf dj (Section 3.3.2)
web plate — shear
Design capacity of Vd = <£MSj/e where:- <£Msi = 0.225 fyi ti dj2 (Section 3.3.3)
web plate — moment
e is as defined under Vb
Design capacity of Ve = 0V VO for an uncoped beam (Section 3.4.2)
Supported Member
= <£Vws for a single web coped beam (Section 3.4.3)
in Shear
~ $Vwd for a double web coped beam (Section 3.4.4)
Design capacity of Vf = tf>Mss/ev for a single web coped beam (Section 3.4.3)
Coped Supported = 0Msd/ev for a double web coped beam (Section 3.4.4)
Member in Bending
where:- ev = L* - aei + sgl (Note 2)
Design capacity of Vg = 4>Vbs (Section 3.4.5)
Coped Supported
Member in
where:- <pVbs is defined in Section 3.4.5
Block Shear
Avg, Ans is defined in Section 3.4.5
Atg = ae1 tWb for Alternative A
= (ae1 + sg1)tWb for Alternative B
An j — (3e1 “ dh/2)twb for Alternative A
= (ae1 + Sgi - 1.5dh)twb for Alternative B
Additional Design Requirement
Nominal moment capacity of weld; Mdm > nominal moment capacity of web plate, Msi
. d? (0vw)
where Mdm - (Section 3.2.8.1)

fvitj d?
Msi - a <$>Msi — as defined above
4

NOTES ON DESIGN MODEL:

(1) 4>Vtn, 4Nfx are given in Appendix A as bolt shear design capacity for threads included or excluded from the
shear plane respectively. Threads will normally be assumed to be included in the shear plane with this
connection. The other terms relate to local bearing failure in the web plate component or in the supported
member web.
For economy, either 4.6/S or 8.8/S bolting category are preferred. 8.8/TB category is uneconomic as it
has the same design capacity as 8.8/S but requires tensioning. 8.8/TF category is uneconomic.
(2) For single and double web coped beams, the design bending moment at the cope location should not
exceed the design moment capacity of the coped section, assuming the end reaction acts at the weld line
(eccentricity of ev = Lc - aei + sgi — see Fig. 4.5.2.2).
Formulae for the design moment capacity of coped section (</>Mss or 0Msd) are given in Sections 3.4.3 or
3.4.4.
Lc

H- —
5-1-0-
■»

CfclTlCAL ^ECTIOS/
i
5l
::

%i

t <2a!

V*
Fig. 4.S.2.2

74 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WEB SIDE PLATE

(3) In order to give a satisfactory connection “appearance”, it is recommended that the component length (dj)
vary from a maximum equal approximately to the clear depth between flanges (d-,) of the supported
member to a minimum of approximately half the beam depth.

%
Sgi-3^1,
2, <2.1

/ ■ih
/; I

4 i 6

&o

0-5 ^ 4 dj ^ dl

Fig. 4.5.2.3

A check must be made to ensure that beam rotation under design loads does not exceed 0.020 radians.
This level of rotation is approximately the level which the connection can sustain within the assumptions
made in the recommended design model and the level is based on test observations. Above this level of
rotation, the possibility of the supported member touching the support exists. If the rotation is greater than
0.020 radians, check that (ref. Fig. 4.5.2.3):
ac
< 50
sgi - ae1
If this inequality is not satisfied, increase dimension (sg1 - aei) until it is satisfied.

(4) Column design moment (M*) is given by:—

M* = V*(ec + twc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column web
= V*(ec + dc/2)/1000 kNm connection to column flange
where: ec = e but must be 100 mm (AS 4100 Clause 4.3.4)
e is defined in Vb (above)
t wc = column web thickness (mm)
dc = column depth (mm)

(5) Welds are fillet welds and, for economy, should be sized to be single pass welds if possible — this
generally means 6 mm or 8 mm fillet welds, although some welding procedures will allow 10 mm single
pass fillet welds to be deposited. Check individual situations using 10 mm fillet welds with fabricators.
Welds would normally be weld category SP.

(6) Connection must be designed for a minimum design shear force of 40 kN.

DSC/04—1994
AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 75
 WEB SIDE PLATE
4.5.3 DESIGN EXAMPLE
SPECIAL NOTE: This example uses dimensions and components adopted in Reference 1.

5*2 lo 55 f
4- I
ICO G5

I 1C
70
Y* = ISO lew

Zoou
GRAPE 250
4-10 U& 55-7
GRAPE 250 20
1

5
55
I20«& ROLLED
CVCxC FLAT CAR.
-v ■J*-
-210 LONG i
GRAPE. 250

Fig. 4.5.3
Design Parameters

Web Plate d| =210 mm ti = 8 mm fyi = 260 MPa fui = 410 MPa

sg1 = 55 mm Sg2 = 70 mm sp = 70 mm ae6 = 35 mm
aa3 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm ae7 = 55 mm

For 410UB53.7 twb= 7.6 mm fyw = 260 MPa f, uw = 410 MPa

sg1 = 55 mm sg2 = 70 mm aei = 35 mm
since beam is uncoped, Lc = 0 and ae4 and ae5 are not relevant.
8mm, E48XX fillet welds, SP weld category 0vw = 1.30 kN/mm (Appendix B, Table B.1)
Bolt Group Alternative‘B’ double line of bolts
6 x M20 bolts 8.8N/S category (n, = 6, np = 3) 0Vfn = 92.6 kN (Appendix A, Table A.2.2)
d{ = 20 mm dh = 22 mm
ae2 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm ae3 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm

design eccentricity, e = 55 + 70/2 = 90 mm Alternative ‘B’

Bai 70
spg = 0.50
(np - 1)sp (3 - 1) x 70

2np
Zb (Section 5.14)
2e/sg2 -|2 2e/(sg2 spg) ~1 2
1+
1n
1 + ^3 •pn+ - 1
p
1

Id' +
1+
1 np + 1 12
3 • np - 1 Lspg_
= 2.72 on substitution (Also see Table A.8 of Appendix A)
b£
^eh
® (rip 1) sp np
= 0.713 on substitution (Also see Table A.9 of Appendix A)
1
^ev
np e sg2
[1 +
= 0.588
bp

on substitution (Also see Table A.9 of Appendix A)

76 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WEB SIDE PLATE
Detailing Limitation tj = 8 < twb + 1.0 = 8.6 mm
^ 10 mm 8 mm Plate Satisfactory

Design Capacity of Connection

Design Capacity 2 x 210 x 1.30
of Weld Group Va = 198 kN
Vi + [6 X 90/210]2
Design Capacity <£Vd{ = minimum of:- 92.6 kN
of Bolt Group 0.9 x 3.2 x 20 x 8 x 410/103 = 189 kN
0.9 x 3.2 x 20 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 179 kN
= 92.6 kN
Qeyi = 35 mm aeyb = 59 mm aexi = 55 mm aeXb = 35 mm
<£V
ev = minimum of:— 0.9 x 59 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 165 kN
0.9 x 35 x 8 x 410/103 = 103 kN
= 103 kN
<f>Veh - minimum of:- 0.9 x 35 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 98.2 kN
0.9 x 55 x 8 x 410/103 = 162 kN
= 98.2 kN
Vb = minimum of:- 2.72 x 92.6 = 252 kN
2 X 3 x 0.588 X 103 = 363 kN
2 x 3 x 0.713 X 98.2 = 420 kN
= 252 kN

Design Capacity of Vc = 0.45 x 260 x 8 x 210/103 = 196 kN

Web Plate — Shear

Design Capacity of - 0-225 x 260 x 8 x (210)2

0 Msi = 20.6 kNm
Web Plate — 106
Moment
Vd = 20.6 x 103/9Q = 229 kN

Design Capacity of Ve - 0.6 x 260 x (403 - 2 x 10.9) x 7.6/103 » 452 kN

410UB53.7 — Shear

As supported member is uncoped, there is no necessity to calculate Vf or Vg.

Hence, Vdes = [198; 252; 196; 229; 452]min - 196 kN > V* = 180 kN Satisfactory

Additional Design Requirement

C210)2 1?
Mdm x ~ = 23 890 kNmm = 23.9 kNm
o u.o
20.6
> MSj = = 22.9 kNm Satisfactory
0.9

Additional Design Considerations

(1) Column design moment, M* (Note 4)
®c = 90 < 100 mm Use 100 mm minimum of AS4100
dc = 210 mm for 200UC59.5
(100 + 210/2)
= 180 x = 36.9 kNm
103
(2) Checking component length:
d| = 210 > beam depth/2 = 201 mm
Checking: ac = 403 - 100 - 140 - 35 = 128 mm sgi - aei = 55 - 35 = 20 mm
ac 128
= 6.4
sgl 3el 20
< 50 Satisfactory
Check beam rotation under design load > 0.020 radians. (Note (3)).

PSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 77

 [Blank]

78 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 STIFF SEAT

4.6 STIFF SEAT CONNECTION

4.6.1 TYPICAL DETAILS

b •’ ' fc '•
*1 , 1

4 /
b'.

“A

b
i
; ::v
. £>
* IK
V *
& ,' b •

A t

6-
4

i-

■7

Fig. 4.6.1
P-SC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 79
STIFF SEAT
4.6.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL
Note: Connections of this type generally support members which are uncoped

+K/b
b<i be, :r

-1
•bp y/y
if y /
/_ >2-«5tp >2-5tp //
7 //

(a) End Support (b) Internal support

Fig. 4.6.2.1

This connection is classified as a connection for simple construction in accordance with Clause 4.2 of AS 4100.
Defining: fyw = yield stress of web Aw = area of web = (d - 2 tf)twb
bs = stiff bearing length tWb = web thickness
d2 = twice the clear distance from the neutral d = beam depth
axis to the compression flange tf = beam flange thickness
= d1 for a symmetrical section d-i = clear depth between flanges
tp = thickness of bearing packer
Design is based on determining Vdes, which involves determination of the minimum design capacity of the
design capacities (Va, Vb, Vc, Vd).
Design Capacities of the Connection
Design Shear Yield Capacity Va = <£VW = 0.54 fyw A w (Section 3.4.2)

Design Shear Buckling Capacity Vb = </>Vb = 0.54 av fyw Aw ^ V.

82 ~\2
where: ov =
(£)/ fj 'W
250 (Section 3.4.2)
Note:- if av > 1.0, only need to determine shear yield capacity as <£VW < 4>Vb
if av < 1.0, shear buckling controls design since </>Vw > t/>Vb
Design Bearing Yield Capacity Vc = 0Rby = 0-9 (1-25 bbf twb fyW) (AS 4100 Clause 5.13.3)
where: bbt = bs + 2.5 (tf + tp) END SUPPORT
= bs + 5.0 (tf + tp) INTERNAL SUPPORT
Design Bearing Buckling Capacity Vd =</>Rbb = 0-9 («c kf Awb fyw) (AS 4100 Clause 5.13.4)
where: k, = 1.0 since local buckling is not a design consideration
Awb = bb twb
bb = bbf + 0.5 d2 END SUPPORT
= t>bf + 1.0 d2 INTERNAL SUPPORT
ac = the member slenderness reduction factor
(Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100)
90 \2
=i1- 1

X \2
+ 1 + 7]
90
£=

80 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 STIFF SEAT
A An + aaG!b
V 0.00326(A - 13.5) ^ 0

[y)\I^[2m) = (2-5 d,/twb)V(fyw/250)

since Le/r 2.5 di /twb k, = 1.0
2100(An - 13.5)
«a
Ap - 15.3An + 2050
«b 0.5 (using the classification of “other section
in Table 6.3.3(1)of AS 4100)
Design Capacity of Connection Vdes — [Va; Vb; Vc; Vd]min
Design Requirement Vdes ^> R* (design reaction)
If Vdes < R*, then either web doubler plates can be added to the web by butt welding them to the flanges or a
load-bearing stiffener can be provided. If web doubler plates are provided, the above procedure is repeated
using a total web thickness equal to that of the original web plus web doubler plates.
If a load-bearing stiffener is provided, the design procedure is as follows. Note that the load-bearing stiffener
may be used together with intermediate stiffeners to the web, the first one spaced a distance s from the load-
bearing stiffener or may be used in isolation (in which case it is assumed that the web is unstiffened with
s > 3d!).
TIGHT FIT OR WEUP j

z NOT REQUIRED

77/7/A /
ZZ77 /
TIGHT FIT ORWELD T1GMT FIT OR WELD
/ /
(A6? 4100 Clai>*2. *5-14.4!) (A6? 4-IOO Oqi>*£
//

(a) Unstiffened Web (b) Stiffened Web

(i.e. without intermediate web stiffeners)

-U
Uw b<i*>
| 'fc-'wb

I (c) Stiffener Geometry

Fig. 4.6.2.2

15 ts
Geometry Limitation on Stiffener bes (AS 4100 Clause 5.14.3)
Vfys/250
bsw
where: b es stiffener outstand from the face of the web
Design Shear Buckling Capacity Vb 0.9 av(0.6 fyw Aw) if web is unstiffened, s > 3 d 1 (as for Vb above)
0.9 av ad a{ (0.6 fyw Aw) if web is stiffened, s < 3 d!
where: av, ad, af are defined in Clause 5.11.5.2 of AS 4100
Design Yield Capacity of Load-
Bearing Stiffener Ve Vc + 0.9 As fys (AS 4100 Clause 5.14.1)
where: As area of stiffeners in contact with the flange = 2 bswt;
but > 2 bests
f.ys yield stress of the stiffener

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 81

STIFF SEAT

Design Buckling Capacity Vf - 0.9 (ac kf Aws fyb) (AS 4100 Clause 5.14.2)
of Load-Bearing
Stiffener where: ac - as defined for Vd except always use ab = 0.5 for “other
sections” in Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100
and Le = 0.7 di if the flanges are restrained against rotation in the
plane of the stiffener by other structural elements
= d1 if either of the flanges is not so restrained
Aws = area of the stiffener together with a length of web on each
side of the stiffener not greater than the lesser of
(see Fig. 4.6.2.3) -
17.5 twb
and s/2
Vfyw/250

u
CHOP IF
Required
)
bap) twb

Lwi Lw2

Fig. 4.6.2.3

Section properties including Aws and r for the cruciform shape section of Fig. 4.6.2.3 must be calculated. From
Fig. 4.6.2.3,
Lwi = actual dimension but ^ 17.5 twb/\/fyw/250
LW2 = 17.5 twb / Vfyw/250 but ^s/2
Aws — 2 bes ts + (Lw1 + LW2) twb

r,
AWs
2 bis ts ^es T twb 2 Lwi t^,b LW2 ^wb
Is + 2 bes ts t + 12 +
12 2 12
ws
Design Capacity of Vg = 4d,Wvw)^ where: </>vw — design capacity of fillet weld per unit
,::iJesles
Weld to Web length (Appendix B)
(generally GP weld category)
Design Capacity of Vdes = [Vb;Ve;Vf;Vg]min
Connection
Design Requirement Vdes > R* (design reaction)

82 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 STIFF SEAT
4.6.3 EXAMPLE
Determine if a 530UB92.4 with a design reaction of 200 kN can satisfactorily sit on a support which provides
150 mm of stiff bearing length. No flange cover plate or web stiffening is used. Steel is Grade 250.

R* = 200 kN
ISO
WO Ufc 924
GRAPE. 290

// ////
/ NO COVER PLATE/
/ TO £7 EAT
/
/

Fig. 4.6.3

Design Parameters
530UB92.4: d 533 mm 15.6 mm twb = 10.2 mm fyw = 260 MPa
di 502 mm d2 502 mm 0.5 d2 = 251 mm
di/twb 49.2 Aw 501.8 x 10.2 = 5118 mm2
Support: bs 150 mm 0

Design Capacity of Connection

82 2
Since av = = 2.67 > 1.0 shear buckling capacity exceeds shear yield capacity
49.2 x \/260/250_
Design shear yield capacity V, 0.54 x 260 x 5118/103 = 719 kN
Design bearing yield capacity bw = 150 + 2.5 x 15.6 = 189 mm
Vc = 0.9 x 1.25 x 189 x 10.2 x 260/103 = 564 kN
Design bearing buckling capacity bb = 189 + 251 = 440 mm
2.5d1/twb = 2.5 x 49.2 = 123 = (U/r)
Xn = (123 x x/260/250) = 125
ab + 0.5
0.361 (Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100)
Vd = 0.9 x 0.361 x 1.0 X 440 X 10.2 x 260/103 = 379 kN
Hence, Vdes = [719; 564; 379]min = 379 kN > V* = 200 kN Satisfactory
Note: An example of the design of a beam with load-bearing stiffener may be found in Ref. 6.1.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 83

 [BLANK]

84 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.

4.7 WELDED BEAM TO COLUMN MOMENT CONNECTION

4.7.1 CONNECTION DETAILS
>iO
OR —fr-

n eu7 ^pucb
(^tCTiOy-i^) 49;4-io)

4-
Fig 4.7.1.1 Stub Girder Connection, Fully Shop Welded Beam Stub, Spliced on Site
—4,-
>IO
6%. —

ZT LOCATING

i 4-
or

r>
■ERECTION CLEAT
i. (VfttV A<*> e>ACfC/NC
:;
tfcj FOR WEX> WE-LP)
3
iS-

4.

Fig 4.7.1.2 Field Welded Moment Connection - Including Erection Cleat

NOTES: (1) The economics of field welding should be checked with the fabricator before it is specified.
(2) Flange weld preparation assumes the use of a backing strip which requires coping of beam web, This
should only be required to be removed in special circumstances.

£lO

LOCATING e01T5

:l
s'—V

r-— ejection cleat

imrt*

4
Fig 4.7.1.3 Field Welded Moment Connection - Using Fillet Welded Web Cleat(s)

NOTES: (1) The economics of field welding should be checked with the fabricator before it is specified.
(2) Flange weld preparation assumes the use of a backing strip which requires coping of the beam web.
This should only be required to be removed in special circumstances.
(3) This detail avoids accurate fitting up of girder web to column flange.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 85

WELDED MOMENT CONN.

FILLET WaPOoiE «5) /-fillet wai7 (mote 5)

(note- <b*) (mu$)
miu
rrrmtTn

' 7 ;• t

(a) tension stiffeners

-ftf -Af

. . >—
i-

(NOTE. ^ (NOTE »7) (mote 4) (note*?)

«<<* IXUlXU.fi
■rtrm.t r

VLEAK.
-fir

(b) compression stiffener (b) compression stiffener

N-

j'n
lu-ulu
uiiiuiilllir

\V
l '
<-
» 7 £ ■

nu.ui nujim xuiiAmJJim

rum u i mm Til mil H MIL

fit

(b) compression stiffener (c) shear stiffener

Fig 4.7.1.4 Column Stiffener Types

86 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.

Notes to Fig. 4.7.1.4:

0) The use of column stiffeners should be kept to a minimum, commensurate with design requirements, as
stiffeners are costly items in fabrication.

(2) All welding of stiffeners should be shop welding.

(3) Only tension stiffeners need be welded to the inside face of the column flange(s). Compression stiffeners may
be fitted against the inside face of the column flange.

(4) Fillet weld sizes on stiffeners should be 6 or 8 mm, to ensure single pass welds. Welds connecting stiffeners
to column web may be one-sided.

(5) Where tension stiffeners extend across the full column depth, the tension stiffeners should be fillet welded to
the column flange and only fillet welded to the column web where flange fillet welds have insufficient capacity
to transmit the design force in the stiffener. Where tension stiffeners extend only part way across the column
depth, welding to the column web is required.

(6) Compression stiffeners should be fillet welded to the column web.

(7) Tension and compression stiffeners need to be cropped to clear the column section fillet radius (Fig. 4.7.1.5).

(8) When diagonal shear stiffeners are used, it is recommended that horizontal stiffeners be fillet welded to the
column flange adjacent to the diagonal stiffener location, and then the diagonal stiffener is fillet welded at its
ends in the manner shown in Fig. 4.7.1.6. Fillet welding along the stiffener length may be introduced either to
increase weld capacity and/or to reduce the slenderness of the stiffeners.

(9) Where web doubler plates are used in lieu of shear stiffeners to strengthen the column web, these should be
butt welded to the column flange in the manner shown in Fig. 4.7.1.7.

A
A A
CftOP ABOUND
ift &UTT WELD
RADIUS
HORIZONTAL ^T
-7-? / s s
f£ /
y / y / /-?.r

A 5 HEAR /
A
/
A

Fig. 4.7.1.5 Fig. 4.7.1.6 Fig. 4.7.1.7

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 87

 "
WELDED MOMENT CONN.

4.7.2 DESIGN

4.7.2.1 General
This connection may be used in the following variations as a beam-to-column connection (Fig 4.7.2.1):
(i) one sided beam-to-column flange
(ii) two sided beam-to-column flange
(iii) two way, one sided beam-to-column flange plus one sided beam-to-column web
or two sided beam-to-column flange plus one sided beam-to-column web
(iv) four way, two sided beam-to-column flange plus two sided beam-to-column web.

OR &OX COLUMN O OR BOX COLUMN a OR BOX COLUMN a

/ OR CROCifORM v-J-.
—I

If

(i) (H) (iii) (iv)

Fig. 4.7.2.1
This type of connection is considered to be a rigid connection wherein the original angles between the members
remain unchanged during loading and the connection would be used in a frame where rigid construction was the
assumed form of construction (Clause 4.2 of AS 4100).
The design action effects at the connection could be determined from either:
(i) elastic analysis (Clause 4.4 of AS 4100) which could in turn be either —
(a) a first order elastic analysis with moment amplification (Clause 4.4.2 of AS 4100)
(b) a second order elastic analysis (Appendix E of AS 4100)
or
(ii) plastic analysis (Clause 4.5 of AS 4100)

Clause 9.1.2.1 of AS 4100 requires that the joint deformation be such that it has no significant influence on the
distribution of action effects nor on the overall deformation of the frame.

4.7.2.2. Design Actions

Applied actions at a connection are assumed to be those shown in Fig. 4.7.2.2.
a design bending moment about the x- axis
a design shear force V*
a design axial force N*

t
*
Nt m
£
•X
N/* N*
Q
V*
* db
v
M* V*vc.

N*cm

Fig. 4.7.2.2 Fig. 4.7.2.3

88 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.
Assumptions:- (i) the flanges transmit design flange forces due to moment M*. these comprising
N*,m - tension flange N*cm compression flange
For the design of the flange and web welds, the assumption is made that the proportion of
the bending moment transmitted by the web is kmw while the proportion of the bending
moment transmitted by the flanges is (1 - kmw).
However, for the assessment of the necessity for stiffeners and the design of the stiffeners,
it is conventional practice to assume that all the force above and below the neutral axis is
concentrated at the flanges which is equivalent to assuming that all the bending moment is
transmitted through the flange area.
Hence, two different values of design flange forces due to bending moment must be
calculated.
In order to determine the values of Ntm and N*m> the distribution of stress due to M* must
be known. The distribution may be one of the three shown in Fig. 4.7.2.4.

<(M> Nt, n* 4> Nt,

N?
t-2
nt ih
yt Yt
It
N*
Yc C2
1c
%
Nc,
<m N*a fff
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 4.7.2.4
The values of the forces Nf1t N*2, N*1, N*2 can be determined from first principles.
Then, for stiffener N*m = Nti + N*2
N cm = N*1 + N*2
for welds N*m = N*i
N *m = N*i
moment resisted by web M* = N*2y, + N*2 yc
moment resisted by flanges M* = Nti yft + N*t y,c

(ii) the web transmits the design shear force V*

(iii) the flanges and web transmit a share of the design axial force N*, the proportion taken by
each being proportional to their contribution to the total section area.

Design Actions
Signs of design actions are positive (+ ve) in the direction shown in Figs. 4.7.2.2 and 4.7.2.3.

Symmetrical Sections

Beam Normal to Column (Fig. 4.7.2.2)

N*ft = total design force in tension flange = N*tm + N*f
N*fc = total design force in compression flange = N*m - N*f
where: N*tm, N*cm
c N*f are obtained as described above or alternatively may be taken as:
for stiffener N*,m = N*m = M*/(db - tfb)
for flange weld N*m = N*m = (1 - kmw)M*/(db - tfb) if M* 0.9 fyZ (Fig. 4.7.2.4(a))
= 0.9 fyf x flange area if M* > 0.9 fyZ (Fig. 4.7.2.4 (b), (c))
N*f = N*(1.0 - kw)/2
N* = total design axial force on the web = kw N*
V* = total design shear force on the web
Mw = design bending moment on the web = k mw M* if M* 0.9 fyZ (Fig. 4.7.2.4 (a))
= M* - 2 x 0.9 fyf x flange area x yft if M* > 0.9 fyZ (Fig. 4.7.2.4 (a))

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 89

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.
Defining kw (area of the web)/(tota! cross-sectional area)
kf = (area of a f!ange)/(total cross-sectional area)
= (1.0 - kw)/2 for a symmetrical section
then Nw = proportion of N* resisted by the web = kw N*
N* = proportion of N* resisted by a flange = k? N*
Values of kw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections are contained in Appendix E of this
publication.
The proportion of the bending moment transmitted by the web is given by
Iw Iw
kmw
lw + If TOTAL

Values of kmw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections are contained in Appendix E of
this publication.
Beam Inclined to Column (Fig. 4.7.2.3)
For welds to flanges and web: use the above expressions
For assessment of stiffening requirements and design of stiffeners, use:
M*cos 9 V*
= + N*f cos 6 + sin 9 (N*—as defined previously)
(db - tfb)

M*cos 6 V*
N*ifc - N*f cos 6 —g- sin 6 V*VC = V*cos 6 - N*sin B
V u
(db - tfb)

%
£
.. *

V*
-"Aw
M dirp)
X
* di'rn) Ac
*
■j*
I
Ncm
*

Fig. 4.7.2.5
Unsymmetricai Sections

N*ft = total design force in tension flange = N*m + N* tn

N*,c =a total design force in compression flange = N*m + N*cn
V* = total design shear force on the web
N*n = proportion of design axial force N* in tension flange = N*(At/A)
N*n = proportion of design axial force N* in compression flange = N*(AC/A)
N£ = proportion of design axial force N* in web = N*(Aw/A)
A= total cross-sectional area = At + Ac + A w

N*m. N*m and Mw are calculated from first principles from Fig. 4.7.2.5
Minimum Design Actions
Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100 requires that this connection be designed for the following minimum design actions:
bending moment - 0.5 times the member moment capacity
No minimum requirement is placed on the simultaneously applied design shear force or design axial force. It is
suggested that the following minimum values might be used simultaneously with the above minimum design
bending moment:
shear force - 40 kN (as for beams in simple construction)
axial force - nil
The intention of this AS 4100 provision is to ensure that connections have a guaranteed minimum design
capacity with some inherent robustness.
90 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994
 WELDED MOMENT CONN.

4.7.3 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL

4.7.3.1 Beam to Column Welds

(a) Flange Weld

Lw
A—
*

r :
N*r N’t./
ft fc ft
■fir

fr

Full Penetration Butt Weld Incomplete Penetration Butt Weld,

Fillet Welds (generally tw 10)
Fig. 4.7.3.1
Design Requirement: — assuming that the flange weld transmits design forces and N*c only, then
0Nw > Nft and N?c (evaluated for flange weld in Section 4.7.2.2)
except that if Nift or N*c > 0.9 fyf b,b tfb then check that member design complies with Section 8 of AS 4100
and then set N$ and N*c equal to (0.9 fyf bfb t,b) for the purpose of weld design only and the weld must be SP
category.
Full penetration butt weld — 0NW = design capacity of butt weld = 0 fyt bfb tfb (AS 4100, Clause 9.7.2.7)
where: 0 = capacity factor
= 0.9 for SP weld category (ie flange design capacity equals weld design capacity)
= 0.6 for GP weld category
bfb = flange width of beam fyf = flange yield stress

Incomplete penetration butt weld — 0Nw as for fillet weld with design throat thickness being the same.
Fillet weld — 0Nw — 2 Lw (0vw) (Section 3.2.8.2)
where: Lw = weld length across flange, usually bf
0vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length (see Appendix B)
related to weld category (SP or GP)

(b) Web Weld

Design Requirement: — assuming that a fillet weld is used on each side of the web and that these transmit V*,
and M£ (evaluated for the web weld in Section 4.7.2.2).

Using Section 3.2.8.1 Vv*z2 + v*2 ^ 0vw

where: v* = N*/2LW + 3M*/I4,
v* = V*/2L w
Lw = weld length along web, usually (db - 2 tfb)
Design Requirement:- assuming that a butt weld is used and that this transmits V*, N£ and (evaluated for
the web weld in Section 4.7.2.2).
Weld length Lw = d-, clear depth between flanges assuming weld is full depth of web
AS 4100 Clause 9.7.2.7 requires that
design capacity = 0 x nominal capacity of the weaker of the parts joined
where: 0 = 0.9 SP weld category
= 0.6 GP weld category
Shear force 0VW > V*
where: 0VW = 0Vv for M* ss O.750M w
j (AS 4100 Clause 5.12.3)
= 0Vv[2.2 - (1.6 M*/0Mw)] for M* > O.750M w
0Vv = 0 x (0.6 fyw Lw twb) (AS 4100 Clause 5.11.4)
fyw = yield stress of connected web
twb = web thickness of connected web

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 91

WELDED MOMENT CONN.

Axial force <£NW > Nw

where <£NW = 4> x (fyw Lw W web in compression (AS 4100 Clause 6.2.1)
= minimum of:- 4> x (fyw Lw twb)
<f> x (0.85 fuw Lw twb)
fuw = tensile strength of connected web
}web in tension (AS 4100 Clause 7.2.1)

Bending moment <f>Mw > M£

where <£MW = 0 x (fyw Zew) (AS 4100 Clauses 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5)
Zew = S = twb !_£/4 for (compact web) Xs = d-,/twb < 82
= Z + [{115 - Xs)/(115 - 82)3 X [S - Z] for 82 < Xs ^ 115
= Z [115/A.S]2 for Xs > 115
Z - U U/6
'X = web element slenderness = (db - 2tfb)/twb

Bending moment and axial force

<£Mwr >
where <t>Mwr = <£MW(1 - Nw/0Nw) (AS 4100 Clause 8.3.2)

Design Requirement:- assuming a welded web cleat detail is used and that this transmits V*. N& and MS
(evaluated for the web weld in Section 4.7.2.2).
Where a welded web cleat detail is used (Fig. 4.7.1.3), the design of the cleat and welds proceeds as for
welded web splice plates (Section 4.9.4).

4.7.3.2 Necessity for Column Stiffening [Stiffener types are shown in Fig. 4.7.1.4]
(NOTE: The following recommendations apply only for connections to flanges of I section columns)

Defining: 4>Rt = design capacity of column flange adjacent to beam tension flange
</>Rc = design capacity of column web in beam compression flange region
fyc « yield stress of column flange or web as appropriate (fycf flange, fycw — web)
tfc « column flange thickness
brc - two + 2rc ~ distance from fillet edge to fillet edge across web
kc = distance on column section from outer face of flange to inner termination of root radius
= t{0 + r0
twc = column web thickness twb = beam web thickness
rc = column section root radius db = beam section depth
dc = column section depth dwc = column section depth between fillets
tfb = beam flange thickness = dc - 2kc

dc

kc dwc kc

t-WC twb
k-fc

brc* twc+2rc
Uc t>ZAMC DEPTH Sy
COLUMN! t HAUGt THICKKE^ tfy
k.c

Fig. 4.7.3.2.1

92 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.
(a) Tension stiffeners (Fig. 4.7.1.4) are required if > <£R,
where: </>R, = 0.72(tfbbrc + 7tfc) fycf
= k7 + k8 tfb
k7 = 5.04 fycf tfc k8 = 0.72 fyc, b rc (k7 and k8 are tabulated in Appendix E)
Stiffeners are proportioned to carry the excess design force, so that:
N*s = stiffener design force at tension flange
= [Nf5 - 0RJ for beam on one side of column Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(a)
= [N*t1 - 4>R,; Nft2 - </>Rt] max for beams on both sides of column — Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(b)
Note: If the beam tension flange is within a distance of bfc of the end of the column (ie Le < b,c in Fig.
4.7.3.2.3), it is recommended that a tension stiffener always be provided, irrespective of the above
calculation.
For the detail shown in Fig. 4J.3.2.3 an additional design requirement is that
0RS > Nft
where: <£RS = 0.9 (0.6 f, ywc fwc Ls + f uwc twc l-e)
f,uwc = tensile strength of column web

(b) Compression stiffeners (Fig. 4.7.1.4) are required if N*c > </>Rc = [<£Rc1; 0Rc2]mji
where: <f>Rc1 = 0.9 fycw twc (tfb + 5kc) = k9 + k10 t,b
0.9 x 10.8 tSc \/f^
0RC2 = k
11
dwr "
^9 — 4.5 fyCW twc kc
kio = 0.9 fycw twc (k9, k10 and kn are tabulated in Appendix E)

Stiffeners are proportioned to carry the excess design force, so that:-

N*s = stiffener design force at compression flange
= [N*c - 0RC] for beam on one side of column — Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(a)
= [N*d - 0RC; N?c2 - <£RC] max for beams on both sides of column — Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(b)

La,
* * ,Uln n I llli.
\J*
Ml v
c
V?
N*J
M* ,M

V? N?c nt Nf
fci
■V •AJ-

-4r
(a) (b)
Fig. 4.7.3.2.2 Fig. 4.7.3.2.3
Notes: (1) If the incoming beam compression flange is within 2.5kc of the end of the column, k10 should be
reduced to reflect the available column length on one side (Le — see Fig. 4.7.3.2.3) using the ratio
U + 2.5kc
5kc
If the compression flange is within a distance b,c of the end of the column, it is recommended that a
stiffener always be provided, irrespective of the above calculation.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 93

WELDED MOMENT CONN.

(2) The above expressions are based on actual test results of welded moment connections. It is also
possible to derive alternative design expressions for design bearing yield capacity and design
bearing buckling capacity using the provisions of AS 4100 in a similar manner as for the stiff seat
support connection in Section 4.6. These alternative design expressions are derived in Section 5.7.
</>Rci = design bearing yield capacity = 0.9 (1.25 bbftwcfycf)
where bbf = tfb + 5 tfc
0Rc2 = design bearing buckling capacity = 0.9 (ac kt Awcfycw)
where A wc = bbt wc

bb = bbf + 2 d2 d2 = twice the clear distance from

the neutral axis of the column
k, = 1.0
to the compression flange of
ac = see Section 4.6 the column
(3) If web doubler plate(s) of total thickness (twd) are used to strengthen the web, then the above
expressions for cj>Rc1 and <£Rc2 may be used to evaluate the design capacity of the thickened web by
substituting (twc + 0.5 twd) for twc in the above expressions.
(c) Shear stiffeners [Fig. 4.7.1.4] are required if:~
at tension flange N*ft + V* > 0VC for beam on one side of column—Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(a)
N*ft2
f - N*i ft1 + V* > 0VC for beams on both sides of column-Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(b)
at compression flange N*fC + V* > 0VC for beam on one side of column-Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(a)
N*.fc2 - N*fci + V*c > 0VC for beams on both sides of column-Fig. 4.7.3.2.2(b)
where: V * = design shear force in column taken as positive when it acts in same direction as beam
flange forces, as shown in Fig. 4.7.3.2.2, and negative when it does not.
</A/c = design capacity of column web in shear
= [0Va; 0Vb]min
</>Va = 0Vv = 0.9 (0.6 fywc Awc) </>Vb = av($Vv)
AWc = (dc — 2 tfC )t wc

2
82
«v = Note: if av S* 1.0 then $VC = </>Va
dWc f.
'ywc
twc 250 if av < 1 -0 then (/>VC = $Vb

Web stiffeners may be provided in two forms:

(i) as web doubler plates butt welded to the column flanges, in which case the design capacity $VC is
evaluated using the thickness of the column web plus that of the doubler plates (i.e. twc + twd).
(ii) as diagonal stiffeners, which are proportioned to carry the excess design force, so that
N*s = diagonal stiffener design force
= maximum of:— [N*tt + V*] - 0VC
[N*2 - NV + V*] - 0VC
[N*fC + V*] - </>Vc
[N*fC2 - N*fc1 + V*] - 0VC

(d) Additional Design Considerations

Additional design considerations which may require evaluation during design are discussed in the
Commentary-Section 5.7. Particular attention should be paid when axial or bending moment stresses
exist in the column.

94 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.

4.7.3.3 Design of Column Stiffeners

A A 4
COLUMN
WE6
t wc-

^°(Ub 9
j
4 A ■Aa

Fig. 4.7.3.3.1 Fig. 4.7.3.3.2

(a) Tension stiffeners Design requirement <£N,S > N*ts where N*ts is calculated in Section 4.7.3.2(a)
and: ^Nts = 0-9 fys As
fys = yield stress of stiffener
As = total area of stiffeners = 2 bes ts
(b) Compression stiffeners Design requirement Ncs > N*s where N*s is calculated in Section 4.7.3.2(b)
and: 0NCS = 0.9fysAs (terms as defined above-stiffener must
be welded to web over full length of
stiffener)
(Note: an alternative design expression based directly on the provisions of AS 4100 is derived in Section 5.7).
(c) Web doubler plates as stiffeners—see previous comments under Sections 4.7.3.2 (b) and (c)
(d) Diagonal shear stiffeners Design requirement 0NVS > N*s/cos 0
where N*s is calculated in Section 4.7.3.2(a)(ii)
and: 0 = angle between the diagonal stiffener and the
horizontal stiffeners (Fig. 4.7.3.3.2)
<pNvs = 0.9 fys As — for stiffener in tension
— for stiffener in compression provided
stiffener is welded to column web
along its full length (if not see
Commentary in Section 5.7)

4J.3.4 Column Stiffener Geometry

Clause 5.14.3 of AS 4100 requires that any load bearing stiffener satisfy
15 ts
be s ^
\/fys/250

Common practice is to also provide bes ^ ^ bw and ts s* y

4.7.3.5 Stiffener Weld Design

Fillet welds on stiffeners may be designed on one of two bases:
(i) same design capacity as stiffener
(ii) actual force to be transmitted by stiffener
Generally (ii) is recommended.
Welding of stiffeners usually involves the use of fillet welds for reasons of economy (see Commentary,
Section 5.7), and these are designed using the provisions of Section 3.2.6 for longitudinal shear force only.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 95

WELDED MOMENT CONN.
4.7.4 DESIGN EXAMPLES
Case (i) Beams connected to both column flanges

■v

COlfN
WOkN 150 WU
4
l&OkMrr?

440UB5V7
(1 I) 2IOIcMrr) ..

4JO UE>597
GRADE 250 GRAP&260

250 UG gfl-5
GKA0C25O

Fig. 4.7.4.1
Design Parameters [Detail to Fig. 4.7.1.2 field welded moment connection]
410UB53.7 bfb = 178 mm t,b = 10.9 mm db 403 mm
(Grade 250) fyb = 260 MPa (flanges and web) db - t,b = 392 mm Zx 925 x 103 mm3
250UC89.5 tfc = 17.3 mm twc = 10.5 mm rc 12.7 mm
(Grade 250)
kc = 17.3 + 12.7 = 30.0 mm brc = 10.5 + 2 x 12.7 = 35.9 mm dc 260 mm
fyc 250 MPa (flange), 260 MPa (web) dwc = 260 - 2 x 30.0 200 mm
Design M* = 180 kNm LH beam V* = 140 kN LH beam
Actions 210 kNm RH beam = 150 kN RH beam
N* = 0 both beams V* = 60 kN
Minimum Design Actions Section 4.7.2.2, Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100
minimum design bending = 0.5 x 0.9 x 260 x 1050 x 103/106 = 123 kNm Satisfied for both beams
moment
minimum shear force = 40 kN Satisfied for both beams
minimum axial force = nil
Derived Design Actions
N*,m = N*m = 180 x 103/392 = 459 kN LH beam
3
— stiffener design
= 210 x 10 /392 = 536 kN RH beam
0.9 fyZ = 0.9 x 260 x 925 x 103/106 = 216 kNm > M* = 180, 210 kNm for LH & RH beam
respectively
410UB53.7, kmw = 0.19 (Appendix E, Table E.2) (1.0 - kmw) = 0.81
N*m = N* cm = 0.81 X 459 = 372 kN LH beam
— weld design
= 0.81 X 536 = 434 kN RH beam
V* = 140 kN LH beam M* = 0.19 x 180 = 34.2 kNm LH beam
= 150 kN RH beam = 0.19 x 210 = 39.9 kNm RH beam
N *„ = N*(c = 459 kN stiffener — LH beam — N*ft = N*,c = 372 kN weld
= 536 kN design — RH beam — 434 kN design
Beam to Column Welds-design welds for RH beam
—full penetration butt welds to flanges, fillet welds to web, category SP
Flange welds- </>Nw = 0.9 x 260 X 178 x 10.9/103 = 454 kN
> N*tt and N*fc = 434 kN
full penetration butt welds, weld category SP Satisfactory
Web welds-Lw = 403 - 2 x 10.9 = 381 mm
v* = 3 x 39.9 x 103/3812 = 0.825 kN/mm
v* = 150/(2 x 381) = 0.197 kN/mm
x/v*2 + v*2 = 0.848 kN/mm
6 mm fillet weld using E48XX electrodes, category SP , </>vw = 0.978 kN/mm (Table B.1)
> 0.848 kN/mm Satisfactory

96 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.
Necessity for Column Stiffening-using Section 4.7.3.2
(a) Tension flange stiffening
k7 = 5.04 x 250 x 17.32/103 = 377 kN (see also Table E.3)
k8 = 0.72 x 250 x 35.9/103 = 6.46 kN/mm (see also Table E.3)
4>Rt = 377 + 6.46 x 10.9 = 447 kN
< N*ft = 459 kN LH beam
536 kN RH beam Stiffeners required at both flanges of column
Maximum stiffener design force at tension flanges = 536 - 447 = 90 kN
(b) Compression flange stiffening
k3 = 4.5 x 260 x 10.5 x 30.0/103 = 369 kN (see also Table E.3)
k10 = 0.9 x 260 x 10.5/10 3 = 2.46 kN/mm (see also Table E.3)
kn = 9.72 x V260 x (10.5)3/200 = 907 kN (see also Table E.3)
<£Rd = 369 + 2.46 X 10.9 = 396 kN
0RC2 = 907 kN
0RC = [396; 907] min = 396 kN
< N*c = 459 kN LH beam
536 kN RH beam Stiffeners are required for web
Maximum stiffener design force at compression flange = 536 - 396 = 140 kN
(c) Design of stiffeners at tension and compression flanges
15 x 6
Try 2 no. 90 x 6 flat bars as stiffeners bes = 90 ~ = 88.3
V260/250
As = 2 x 90 x 6 = 1080 mm2
fys = 260 MPa
4>Nts = 0NOS - 0.9 x 260 x 1080/103 = 253 kN
> 90 kN stiffener design force at tension flange
> 140 kN stiffener design force at compression flange
Stiffener welds-5 mm fillet weld, E48XX electrodes, GP category
—0vw = 0.611 kN/mm (Table B.2)
—across column flange at tension flanges, welded both sides of stiffener, allowing for
15 mm cropping
design capacity of weld = 4 x (90 ~ 15) x 0.611 - 183kN
> 90 kN stiffener design force at tension flange
—along web of column to resist stiffener design force at compression flange
welded both sides of two stiffeners
design capacity of weld = 4 x 200 x 0.611 = 488 kN
> 140 kN stiffener design force at compression flange
(d) Shear stiffening Vi = 60 kN
at tension flanges, resultant design shear force - 559 - 482 + 60 = 137 kN
at compression flanges, resultant design shear force = 559 - 482 + 60 = 137 kN
200UC89.5 satisfactory in shear by inspection.
No shear stiffeners required.

TO COLUMN RANGED

80
7?

IS
|---- 2/<90 *6 FLAT*.
dWc
mi/ii'iir

£SP>-5-£-------- '
to column we-b

Fig. 4.7.4.2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 97

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.

Case (ii) Beam connected to one column flange

Ar
*
Vcs100kK

V* 200 kN
r.
*
2*70 \)Cm M r24GkWfr>
GKADE250

4I0U& W1 -GZJ.QL 2*50

V*rlOOW
At
Fig. 4.7.4.3
Design Parameters [Detail to Fig. 4.7.1.2 field welded moment connection]
410UB53.7 bfb 178 mm tfb = 10.9 mm db 403 mm
(Grade 250)
fyb - 260 MPa (flanges and web) db - tfb = 392 mm Zx 925 x 103 mm3
250UC89.5 tfc = 17.3 mm twc = 10.5 mm rc 12.7 mm
(Grade 250)
kc - 30.0 mm brc = 35.9 mm dc 260 mm
fyc 250 MPa (flange), 260 MPa (web) dwc 200 mm
Design M* = 246 kNm V* = 100 kN
Actions
V* = 200 kN N* = 0
Minimum Design Actions Section 4.7.2.2, Clause 9.1.4 of AS4100
minimum design bending moment = 0.5 x 0.9 x 260 x 1050 x 103/106 = 123 kNm Satisfied
minimum shear force = 40 kN Satisfied
minimum axial force = nil
Derived Design Actions
N*tm = N*m = 246 x 103/392 = 628 kN-stiffener design
0.9 fyZ = 0.9 x 260 x 925 x 103/106 = 216 kNm < 246 kNm
For weld design: N*tm = N*m = 0.9 x 260 x 178 x 10.9/103 = 454 kN
M£ = 246 - 2 x 454 x 392/(2 x 103) = 68.0 kNm
V* = 200 kN
N*f, = N*fc = 628 kN—stiffener design
= 454 kN-weld design
Beam to Column Welds
Flange welds-flange design capacity = 0.9 x 260 x 178 x 10.9/103 = 454 kN
= N*ft and N*fc
therefore, use full penetration butt welds, SP category for which
design capacity of butt weld = design capacity of flange Satisfactory
Web welds Lw = 403 - 2 x 10.9 = 381 mm
v*z = 3 x 68.0 x 103/(381)2 = 1.406 kN/mm
v* = 200/(2 x 381) = 0.262 kN/mm
\/v*2 + v*y2 = 1.43 kN/mm
10 mm fillet weld using E48XX electrodes, SP category, <£vw = 1.63 kN/mm (Table B.1)
> 1.43 kN/mm Satisfactory
Alternatively, it may be more economic to use a butt weld to the web

98 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED MOMENT CONN.

Necessity for Column Stiffening—using Section 4.7.3.2

(a) Tension flange stiffening
k7 = 5.04 x 250 x 17.32/103 = 377 kN (see also Table E.3)
k8 = 0.72 x 250 x 35.9/103 = 6.46 kN/mm (see also Table E.3)
<t>R, = 377 + 6.46 x 10.9 = 447 kN
< N*ft = 628 kN Stiffeners required at flange of column
Stiffener design force at tension flange = 628 - 447 = 181 kN
(b) Compression flange stiffening
k9 = 4.5 x 260 x 10.5 x 30.0/103 = 369 kN (see also Table E.3)
k10 = 0.9 x 260 x 10.5/10 3 = 2.46 kN/mm (see also Table E.3)
k-11 9.72 x \/260 x (10.5)3/200 = 907 kN (see also Table E.3)
0Rd = 369 + 2.46 x 10.9 = 396 kN
0Rc2 = 907 kN
0RC = [396; 907] min = 396 kN
< N*fc = 628 kN Stiffeners are required for web
Maximum stiffener design force at compression flange = 628 - 396 = 232 kN
(c) Design of stiffeners at tension and compression flanges
Try 2 no. 90 x 6 flat bars as stiffeners
15 x 6
bes —■ 90 = 88.3
n/260/250
As = 2 x 90 x 6 = 1080 mm2
fys = 260 MPa
0Nts = </>Ncs = 0.9 x 260 x 1080/103 = 253 kN
> 181 kN stiffener design force at tension flange
> 232 kN stiffener design force at compression flange
Stiffener welds-5mm fillet weld, E48XX electrodes, GP category
— </>vw = 0.611 kN/mm (Table B.2)
— across column flange at tension flange, welded both sides of stiffener, allowing for
15 mm cropping
design capacity of weld = 4 x (90 - 15) x 0.611 = 183 kN
> 181 kN stiffener design force at tension flange
—along web of column to resist stiffener design force at compression flange
welded both sides of two stiffeners
design capacity of weld = 4 x 200 x 0.611 = 488 kN
> 232 kN stiffener design force at compression flange
(d) Shear stiffening V* = 100 kN
at tension flange, resultant design shear force = 628 - 100 = 528 kN
at compression flange, resultant design shear force = 628 - 100 = 528 kN
For universal column section, av > 1.0, hence </>Vc = 0Va
</>Vc = 0.9 x 0.6 x 260 x (260 - 2 X 17.3) x 10.5/103
= 332 kN (see also Table E.2)
< 528 kN Shear stiffener is required
Design force on inclined shear stiffener = (528 - 332)/cos0 = 402 kN = N^s

a-
'22t5

stiffener length = 403 x 2.05/1.79 = 462 mm

APPROX .RATlO_ m \2 05
PI MENTION*.

\
Fig. 4.7.4.4

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 99

WELDED MOMENT CONN.

15 X 12
Try 2 no. 90 x 12 flat bars as shear stiffeners b es = 90 < = 177
\/260/250
As = 2 x 90 x 12 = 2160 mm2
fys = 260 MPa
<t>vsN = 0.9 x 2160 x 260/103 = 505 kN
> 402 kN design force Satisfactory
As stiffener is in compression, stiffener must be welded full length for above expression to be valid.
Length of weld, Lw = 2.05 x 225 = 461 mm
Stiffener weld — 5 mm fillet weld, E48XX electrodes, GP category
— </>vw = 0.611 kN/mm (Table B.2)
— welded both sides of two stiffeners
design capacity of weld = 4 x 461 x 0.611 = 1126 kN Satisfactory
If only weld at mid-length (see Commentary in Section 5.7)
Minimum length of weld required = 402/4 x 0.611 = 165 mm Adopt 200 mm
Stiffener properties:—
90 x 123
I=2x = 25920 mm4 (each stiffener can buckle individually)
12
r = V25920/2160 = 3.46 mm
From Commentary, Le = 0.7 x 0.5 x (461 - 200) = 91
Le/r = 91/3.46 = 26
From Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100, for ab = 0.5, then ac = 0.937
Hence, stiffener design capacity = acc/>Nvs = 0.937 x 505 = 473 kN
> 402 kN design force Satisfactory

2./<90»G HAT*?
•hr

<9P

200
2/^Oy I2 FLAT'? |

-rrrr

2/<*D„6 FIXPt- T

Fig. 4.7.4.5

100 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE

4.8 BOLTED MOMENT END PLATE CONNECTION

4.8.1 STANDARD CONNECTION DETAILS

an

<v n---- OR f\
1y ■o—
i

On ~F

Fig. 4.8.1.1 End plate at Right-Angles to Fig. 4.8.1.2 End Plate at Apex
Column in Rigid Portal Frame

^-02
F

‘ MIM nt .

OK

-tv

Fig. 4.8.1.3 End plate at Knee Joint Fig. 4.8.1.4 End Plate at Knee Joint with or
in Rigid Portal Frame without Haunch in Rigid Portal
Frame-Incoming Member inclined to column

Note to Figs. 4.8.1.1-4: Only connections with 4 bolts placed symmetrically about the tension llange are considered
in this Manual. These connections are commonly called extended end plate connections.

DETAILING NOTES

(1) 8.8/T (fully tensioned) bolt category is used, with M20 or M24 bolts.

(2) Holes are 2 mm larger than the nominal bolt diameter.

(3) Fabrication of this type of connection requires close control in cutting the beam to length and adequate
consideration must be given to squaring the beam ends such that end plates at each end are parallel and the
effect of any beam camber does not result in out-of-square end plates which make erection and field fit-up
difficult. Shims may be required to compensate for mill and shop tolerances.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 101

BOLTED END PLATE

FlUCT WELD(WOTM) / FILLET W6LP(M0TE 5)

(ncteV)
'niiiii'® —
' zL (NOT^^) nrr mvrn

(a) tension stiffeners

----- V - “(NOTC *Z) (MOTE ^ (Mom^

■ Lt 1 1 ft > » > . . ■ ,1 ............. -
rjo ,u!)uaujw
rvr>rtti"t"t'»'vw
yrfr«Ti'Trrtw

CLEAR,

(b) compression stiffener (b) compression stiffener

i LI I limn
w.huuihhiv

'luuMirrrm"

(b) compression stiffener (c) shear stiffener

Fig. 4.8.1.5 Column Stiffener Types

102 A1SC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE

Notes to Fig. 4.8.1.5:

(1) The use of column stiffeners should be kept to a minimum, commensurate with design requirements, as
stiffeners are costly items in fabrication.

(2) All welding of stiffeners should be shop welding.

(3) Only tension stiffeners need be welded to the inside face of the column flange(s). Compression stiffeners may
be fitted against the inside face of the column flange.

(4) Fillet weld sizes on stiffeners should be 6 or 8 mm, to ensure single pass welds. Welds connecting stiffeners
to column web may be one-sided.

(5) Where tension stiffeners extend across the full column depth, the tension stiffeners should be fillet welded to
the column flange and only fillet welded to the column web where flange fillet welds have insufficient capacity
to transmit the design force in the stiffener. Where tension stiffeners extend only part way across the column
depth, welding to the column web is required.

(6) Compression stiffeners should be fillet welded to the column web.

(7) Tension and compression stiffeners need to be cropped to clear column section fillet radius. (Fig 4.8.1.6)

(8) When diagonal shear stiffeners are used, it is recommended that horizontal stiffeners be fillet welded to the
column flange adjacent to the diagonal stiffener location, and then the diagonal stiffener is fillet welded at its
ends in the manner shown in Fig. 4.8.1.7. Fillet welding along the stiffener length may be introduced either to
increase weld capacity and/or to reduce the slenderness of the stiffeners.

(9) Where web doubler plates are used in lieu of shear stiffeners to strengthen the column web, these should be
butt welded to the column flange in the manner shown in Fig. 4.8.1.8.

-4
w- W
t
V CKO? AROUND
<>
WTTWEIP
Horizontal stiffener.
Zl'Z / '/ =Z

A V w- STIFFEN ER.
,/
4

Fig. 4.8.1.6 Fig. 4.8.1.7 Fig. 4.8.1.8

(10) Where flange doubler plates are used to strengthen the column flange, these should be butt welded to the
column web in the manner shown in Fig. 4.8.1.9.

f[
Y--------

Fig. 4.8.1.9
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 103
 BOLTED END PLATE
4.8.2 DESIGN
4.8.2.1 General
This connection may be used in the following variations as a beam-to-column connection (Fig. 4.8.2.1):

(i) one sided beam-to-column flange

(ii) two sided beam-to-column flange
two way, one sided beam-to-column flange plus one sided beam-to-column web
or two sided beam-to-column flange plus one sided beam-to-column web
(iv) four way, two sided beam-to-column flange plus two sided beam-to-column web.

OR. CRUCIFORM
—i .
h~l IT

(i) (ii) (HI) (iv)

Fig. 4.8.2.1
This type of connection is considered to be a rigid connection wherein the original angles between the members
remain unchanged during loading and the connection would be used in a frame where rigid construction was the
assumed form of construction (Clause 4.2 of AS 4100).
The design action effects at the connection could be determined from either:
(i) elastic analysis (Clause 4.4 of AS 4100) which could in turn be either -
(a) a first order elastic analysis with moment amplification (Clause 4.4.2 of AS 4100) or
(b) a second order elastic analysis (Appendix E of AS 4100)
or
(ii) plastic analysis (Clause 4.5 of AS 4100)

Clause 9.1.2.1 of AS 4100 requires that the joint deformation be such that it has no significant influence on the
distribution of action effects nor on the overall deformation of the frame.

4.8.2.2 Design Actions

Applied actions at a connection are assumed to be those shown in Fig. 4.8.2.2, ie
a design bending moment about the x- axis M*
a design shear force V*
a design axial force N*
Assumptions: (i) The flanges transmit design flange forces due to moment M*, these comprising
N*tm - tension flange and N*Cm - compression flange .
For the design of the flange and web welds, the assumption is made
that the proportion of the bending moment transmitted by the web is kmw
(see Appendix E) while the proportion of the bending moment transmitted
by the flanges is (1 - kmw).
The proportion of the bending moment transmitted by the web is given by
lw lw
^mw =
lw + If iTotal
Values of kmw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections
are contained in Appendix E of this publication.

104 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE

t tfb
*•
Hfi.n> tft
&
v* iff)
■A

Ml N*
Vc.
X 4
J* M*J“?
*n* V*
V V/,
VC

*
kctr» NS
Crr7
yw
0 -0°
0*90°

TYPE A TYPE B

Wb
7
N?
trT7

V* /•
H* v4*.
£
V*vc Ncm

yv^-

TYPEC

Fig. 4.8.2.2 End Plate Connection Types

However for the assessment of the loads on the bolts, and on the end plate and for the assessment of
the necessity for stiffeners and the design of the stiffeners, it is conventional practice to assume that all
the force above and below the neutral axis is concentrated at the flanges which is equivalent to assuming
that all the bending moment is transmitted through the flange area. Hence, two different values of design
flange forces must be calculated.
(ii) The web transmits the design shear force V*.
(iii) For the design of the welds, it is assumed that the flanges and web transmit a share of the design axial
force N*, the proportion taken by each being proportional to their contribution to the total section area
Defining kw (area of the web)/(total cross-sectional area)
kf (area of a flange)/(total cross-sectional area)
(1.0 - kw)/2 for a symmetrical section
then Nw = proportion of N* resisted by the web = kwN*
N? proportion of N* resisted by a flange = kfN*
Values of kw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections are contained in Appendix E
of this publication.

For the design of the bolts and the end plate, it is assumed that the flanges transmit all of the design axial
force N*, the proportion taken by each being proportional to their contribution to the total section area.
This assumption is made because the bolts, which must transmit the axial force into the column, are
concentrated at the flanges.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 105

BOLTED END PLATE

Design Actions Signs of design actions are positive (+ve) in the direction shown in Fig. 48.2.2
In order to determine the values of N*m and N*m. the distribution of stress due to M* must be known.
The distribution may be one of the three shown in Fig. 48.2.3.

C 3 Nt, £k N*.t.

A. 1*
tg
%
1ft
% %
MCL 1c Hi=2 1c
H%2
X
<W|) N*,
ci fa1 Hici fa1
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 4.8.2.3
The values of the forces N*-,, N*2l N*i, N*2 can be determined from first principles.
Then for stiffener, N*m = Nh + HI
end plate, -
bolts H*c m = N*, + N*2

for welds — N?m - N«

Ncm = N*1

moment resisted by web M* = N^y, + N*2 yc

moment resisted by flanges M* = N« yft + N*i yfc

Symmetrical Sections N*m, N*m may be determined as described above or alternatively may be taken as
follows:
The design actions for the flange and web welds connecting the beam to the end plate should be determined
using Section 47.2.2.
The design actions for the design of the bolts, end plate and stiffeners may be taken from Table 48.2.2.
In Table 48.2.2:-— NH = total design force in tension flange
N*c = total design force in compression flange
V*c = total design shear force at end plate/column interface

TABLE 4.8.2.2
DERIVED DESIGN ACTIONS — SYMMETRICAL SECTIONS
FOR DESIGN OF BOLTS, END PLATE AND STIFFENERS

Type Nft
* v*
vvc
fe

N* M* N*
A +
V*
(db - tfb) 2 (db — tfb) 2

B
M* N* N*
COS 8 + -yCOS 8 cos 8 ~2~cos 8 V* cos 8 - N* sin 8
(db (db - tfb)
V* V*
+ ^-sin 8 - -^-sin 0

M*
C cos (cj) - 90) cos (<f> - 90) V* cos (<j> - 90)
(db - tfb) (db - t^)
+ N* sin (<*> - 90)
N*
+ cos (<f> - 90) - cos ((f) - 90)

V* V*
- ysm (<£ - 90) + sin (<f> - 90)

Note: See Fig. 48.2.2 for Type A, B, C End Plate Connection Types.

106 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE
Unsymmetrical Sections

Al In the expressions in Table 48.2.2 substitute as follows:—

Nu **i___/ N$ = total design force in tension flange = N*m + Nfn
V* N*c = total design force in compression flange = N*m - N*n
'A>/i
V* = total design shear force on the web
> t
\ N*(iva,dirb')
r* * N*n = proportion of design axial force N* in tension flange
■Av/2 = N* (At + Awl)/A
Ac,
/ N*n = proportion of design axial force N* in compression flange
Cm = N * (Ac 4- Aw2) / A
A = total cross sectional area

Fig. 48.2.4

Minimum Design Actions

Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100 requires that this connection be designed for the following minimum design actions:—
bending moment — 0.5 times the member moment capacity
No minimum requirement is placed on the simultaneously applied shear force or axial force. It is suggested
that the following minimum values might be used simultaneously with the above minimum design bending
moment-
shear force — 40 kN (as for beams in simple constructions)
axial force — nil
The intention of the AS 4100 provision is that connections have a guaranteed minimum design capacity with
some inherent robustness.

4.S.2.3 Connection Geometry

af = distance from bolt centre-line to face of flange
ae ® edge distance from bolt centre-line to edge of plate
df = nominal bolt diameter
'$£
ti = thickness of end plate
sg = bolt gauge
bfc = flange width of column
bj = width of end plate
bfb fei
bfb = flange width of beam
bt _
Geometry restrictions:—
(i) bj ss bfc Fig. 48.2.5
(ii) sg ss bfb - df but sg > 80 mm (M20 bolts)
^ bfc - 2.5 df 5= 120 mm (M24 bolts)
(iii) ae ss 30 mm (M20 bolts) ae > 36 mm (M24 bolts)
ae ^ 2.5 df
(iv) af as small as possible but s* df + La cot 0 angle <f> defined in Fig. 4.8.2.2
and > 0.5 ds + U cot 0
> 0.5 x washer dia. + weld leg length (Appendix A)
and only for air gun tensioning ^ 54 mm (M20 bolts), 65 mm (M24 bolts) (Appendix A)
where: La = 2.2 df + grip (actual bolt length)
ds = socket diameter = 50 mm M20 bolts 60 mm M24 bolts
Ls = socket length = 65 mm M20 bolts = 80 mm M24 bolts

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 107

BOLTED END PLATE

4.8.3 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL

4.8.3.1 Beam to End Plate Welds

(a) Flange weld

4A
LW
■*T

tw S8

N?
+C ft

4a

incomplete Penetration Butt Weld

Full Penetration Butt Weld Fillet Weld (generally tw < 10 mm)

Fig. 4.8.3.1
Design Requirement: assuming that the flange weld transmits design forces N*{ and N*c only
<£NW > N^ and N?c (evaluated for flange weld Section 4.7.2.2)
except that if N% and N*c > 0.9 fyt btb t{b
then set N$ and N*c equal to (0.9 fyf bfb tfb) for the purposes of weld design only and the weld must be SP
category.
Full penetration butt weld - <£NW = design capacity of butt weld = <Myfbfbtfb (AS 4100 Clause 9,7.2.7)
where: <f> - capacity factor
= 0.9 SP weld category (for which flange design capacity equals
weld design capacity)
* 0.6 GP weld category
bfb = flange width of beam fyj » flange yield stress
Incomplete penetration butt weld - <£NW as for fillet weld whose design throat thickness is the same
Fillet weld- = 2 Lw ($vw) (Section 3.2.8.2J
where: Lw = weld length across flange, usually bf
<£vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length of weld (see Appendix B)
(b) Web Weld
Design Requirement: assuming that fillet weld is used on each side of web and that these transmit /
V*. N£ and M« (evaluated for the web weld using Section 4.7.2.2)
Using Section 3.2.8.1 \/v*2 + v*z < <£vw
where: v* = N*/(2 Lw) + 3M*/L2
v* = V*/(2 Lw)
Lw = weld length down web, usually (db - 2tn,)
Design Requirement: assuming that a butt weld is used and that this transmits V*, Nw and (evaluated
for the web weld using Section 4.7.2.2)
Weld length Lw = di the clear depth between flanges assuming the weld is the full
depth of web
AS 4100 Clause 9.7.2.7 requires that
design capacity = <f> x nominal capacity of the weaker of the parts joined
where: <j> = 0.9 SP weld category
= 0.6 GP weld category
design web butt weld using Section 4.7.3.1(b)
(design provisions not repeated)

108 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE
4.8.3.2 Bolts
(Note: only bolted end plate connections with four bolts placed symmetrically about the tension flange are
considered in this design model-see Section 4.8.1)
Design Requirement: strength limit state, 8.8/TB and 8.8/TF bolting categories
<t>No, > Nft (Design actions evaluated using Table 4.8.2.2.)
</>Vfb > V*c
where 0Nlb = 4(0Ntf)/(1 + kpr) (Section 3.1.3)
0 = capacity factor = 0.8
Ntf = nominal capacity of a bolt in tension
</>Ntf = design capacity of a bolt in tension (see Appendix A)
kpr = coefficient to allow for the additional bolt force due to prying
= may be taken in the range 0.20 to 0.33 or may be calculated (see Section 5.8 for
methods of calculation or determination — The design example at Section 4.8.4
uses 0.30).
and </>Vfb = ncw ($Vbf) (Section 3.1.3)
n cw = number of other bolts in the connection not at the tension flange, along the web or
at the compression flange
<£Vd, = design capacity of a single bolt in shear for the strength limit state
(f) = capacity factor = 0.8 with Vf = nominal capacity of a single bolt in shear
= 0.9 with Vb = nominal capacity in bearing of a ply
In this connection, 0Vdf = [</>Vfn or 0Vfx; <*>Vbi; </>Vbc]min
where 0Vfn, $Vfx = are given in Appendix A for threads included in or excluded from the shear plane
threads will normally be assumed out of the shear plane but this must be checked
0Vbi = design capacity related to local bearing or end plate tearout in the end plate
component
= [0.9 x 3.2 df ti fUi; 0.9 x aey t| fui] min

$Vbc = design capacity related to local bearing or end plate tearout in the supporting
column
= [0.9 X 3.2 d,tcfuc; 0.9 X tb fuclmin

df = diameter of bolt aey = vertical end distance, if end plate tearout possible
ti = thickness of end plate tc = thickness of supporting member to which end plate
is bolted
fUi = tensile strength of end plate material
fuc = tensile strength of supporting member

4.8.3.3 End Plate

Design Requirements: strength limit state
(a) Flexure 0Npb > N*ft
fyi b, ti2
where 0Npb = 0.9 ^ (Section 3.3)
afe
fyi = yield stress of end plate component
bj, tj = as defined in Fig. 4.8.2.4
afe = effective design value of the distance af given in Fig. 4.8.2.5
< af (see discussion in Section 5.8)
(b) Shear > V*c
0Vph > NS, N*c
where 0Vph = 0.9 x (0.5 fyi bj tj) (Section 3.3)
4>Vpv = 0.9 x (0.5 fyi di tj)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 109

 \
BOLTED END PLATE
4.8.3.4 Necessity for Column Stiffening [Stiffener types are shown in Figure 4.8.1.5]
(Note: The following recommendations apply only for connections to flanges of I section columns.)
Defining:- <£Rt = design capacity of column flange adjacent to beam tension flange
4>Rc = design capacity of column web in beam compression flange region
fyc = yield stress of column flange or web as appropriate (fycf—flange, fycw—web)
tfc = column flange thickness dwc = column section depth between fillets
brc ~ twc + 2rc = dc ~ 2kc
kc = distance on column from outer face of flange to inner termination of root radius
- tfc + rc twb = beam web thickness
twc = column web thickness dh = bolt hole diameter
rc = column section root radius sp = bolt pitch
dc = column section depth sg = bolt gauge
tfb beam flange thickness 3d = (Sg — twc — 2rc)/2
ac = (bfc — Sg)/2 ai = (bj - Sg) / 2

4c, K
kc

bR;*

hi bfc

GOUJMN
rc , fcfi. BeAH fDBPTH db
L aAHfiE WICKME^ %

.kc

a*
of

4 Ar

Fig. 4.8.3.4.1

(a) Tension stiffeners (Fig. 4.8.1.5) are required if N ft > (f)R{ — [0Rti, <f)R\2]m\n
(2ac + sp - dh)
</>Rti — 0.90 fycf t2c 3.14 +
ad

3.14 (ad 4- a0) + 0.5sp ai

4>Rt2 - 0.90 fycf t2fc +4 N%
(ad + aj) (ad + a;)
Nff = maximum design bolt force in tension (may be taken as bolt proof load to provide increased
margin against bolt fracture).
Stiffeners are proportioned to carry the excess, so that:-
N*s = stiffener design force at tension flange
= (Nft - 4>Rt) for beam on one side of column—Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(a)
= [Nil - 0Rt; - ^Rt] max for beams on both sides of column—Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(b)

110 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE
Notes: (1) If incoming beam tension flange is within a distance of bfc of the end of the column, i.e. when
Le < bfC in Fig. 4.8.3.4.3, it is recommended that a stiffener always be used, irrespective of the
above calculation.
For the detail shown in Fig. 4.8.3.4.3 an additional design requirement is that
0RS > Nft
where: <f> Rs = 0.9 (0.6 fycW twc Ls + uwc
f twc L-e)
f,uwc = tensile strength of column web
(2) Also see items (c) and (g) below.
(3) Where tension stiffeners are provided, the capacity of the stiffened flange should be checked
see item (d) below
L*

•4- La,

VJ Nfc
(u V*
” C«
9
N*
—M ,rft (£
V*c
V s
>4 ’c Hr

-ft-

(a) <b)
Fig. 4.8.3.4.2 Fig. 4.8.3.4.3

(b) Compression stiffeners (Fig. 4.8.1.5) are required if N*c > <^»RC = [^>Rc1; ^Rc2]miri
where:- 0RO1 = 0.9 tycw twc (tfb + 5 kc + 2tj) = kg + kio(tfb + 2tj)
0.9 x 10.8 t%c Vy
0Rc2 = «k 11
dwc
kg = 4.5 fycw twc kc

kio = 0.9 fycw twc (kg, kio and kn are tabulated in Appendix E)
kn = 9.72 Vf^tSc/d wc
Stiffeners are proportioned to carry the excess, so that:
N*s = stiffener design force at compression flange
= (Nfc - 4>Re) for beam on one side of column—Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(a)
= [N*ci - 4>RC; N*C2 - 4>Rc] max for beams on both sides of column-Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(b)
Notes: (1) If incoming beam compression flange is within (2.5 kc + tj) of the end of the column, k10 should
be reduced to reflect the available column length on one side (Le—see Fig. 4.8.3.4.3) using the
ratio
Le + 2.5kc + 2tj
5kc + 2tf
If the compression flange is within a distance bfC of the end of the column, it is recommended that
a stiffener always be provided, irrespective of the above calculation.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 111

BOLTED END PLATE
(2) The above expressions are based on actual test results of moment connections. It is also possible
to derive alternative design expressions for design bearing yield capacity and design bearing
buckling capacity using the provisions of AS 4100 in a similar manner as for the stiff seat support
connection in Section 4.6. These alternative design expressions are derived in Section 5.8.

<£Rd design bearing yield capacity

0.9 (1.25 bbf twc fycf) where bbf tfb + 5 tfc + 2tj

0 R c2 design bearing buckling capacity

0.9 {<xc kf Awc fycw) where A wc bbt wc

bb bbf + 2 d2 (where available)

d2 twice the clear distance from the neutral axis of the

column to the compression flange of the column.

kf 1.0
ac see Section 4.6

(3) Also see items (c) and (g) below.

(4) Where compression stiffeners are provided, the capacity of the stiffened web should be
checked—see item (e) below.

(c) Check for overlapping stress regions in column web

Where there are no stiffeners, it is possible for the web tensile and compressive stress regions to overlap.
This is presumed to occur when:-

N*c Nft
> (db - tfb)t wc
0.9 f yc 0.9 f ycj

If this equation is satisfied, stiffeners are required, irrespective of the calculations in (a) and (b) above
(d) Stiffened Columns—Tension Flange Region

Where tension stiffeners of the conventional type shown in Fig. 4.8.1.5 are provided, it is recommended
that the strength of the stiffened flange of the column be checked. The stiffened column flange may be
considered satisfactory if (using the same formulation as in item (a) above):-

Nn < 0Rts
(2w2 + 2Wj dh) 1 1
where (j> Rts = 0.9fyc{tf| +
(2ad + 2ac — dh)
ad \wi + w2

Wi = Vad(ad + a7- 0.5 dh) other terms as defined in Fig. 4.8.3.4.1

w2 = (sp - ts - 2 tw)/2 ^ W!

ts = stiffener thickness tw = size of fillet weld connecting stiffener to flange

(= 0 if butt weld used).

Where this inequality is not satisfied, a larger column may be selected. Alternatively, flange doubler plates
can be provided to the column flange in the manner shown in Fig. 4.8.3.4.4. The stiffened column flange
may be considered satisfactory if (using the same formulation as in item (a) above):-

Nft < 0Rtd

tjjyd sp + 4ad + 1.25ac

where: 0Rld = 0.9 tfc fyc{ +
ad
td = thickness of doubler plates

fyd = yield stress of doubler plates

other terms as defined in Fig. 4.8.3.4.1

When both doubler plates and tension stiffeners are used, 0Rts may be evaluated using the expression given
above except that (tfc + td) is used in lieu of t{c in that expression.

112 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE
U

tTb

BUTT WEL-p*?yi
td
tfe

Fig. 4.8.3.4.4

It is generally suggested that (td + tfc) ^ tj and that the doubler plate is butt welded to the column web
(see Section 5.8, and Fig. 4.8.3.4.4).
(e) Stiffened Columns—Compression Region
Where compression stiffeners of the type shown in Fig. 4.8.1.5 are provided, it is recommended that the
strength of the stiffened web be checked. The stiffened web may be considered satisfactory if (using the
same formulation as in item (b) above):
N*c < 0R cs

where <f>Rcs = 0.9 As fys + 1.47 fycw t,c \/b,c t wc

As = area of stiffeners
fys = yield stress of stiffeners
other terms as defined in Fig. 4.8.3.4.1
(f) Shear stiffeners (Fig. 4.8.1.5) are required if
at tension flange Nft + V* > 0Vc for beam on one side of column-Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(a)
N*ft2 - Nlh + V* > 0VC for beams on both sides of column—Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(b)
at compression flange N*c + V* > 0VC for beam on one side of column-Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(a)
N *c2 - N*ci + V* > 0VC for beams on both sides of column—Fig. 4.8.3.4.2(b)
where:- V* = design shear force in column taken as positive when it acts in same direction as beam
flange forces, as shown in Fig. 4.8.3.4.2, and negative otherwise.
$VC = design capacity of column web in shear
= [<£Va; 0Vb]min for no bending moment in column. If bending moment is present, refer to
Appendix I of AS 4100.
0Va = <£Vv = 0.9 (0.6 f ywc AWc)
0Vb = av (0Vv)
AWc = (dc — 2 tfC) t wc

82 2
<2V =
dWc f■ywc
twc 250

Note:- if av > 1.0 then 0VC = $Va

if otv < 1.0 then <£VC = 0Vb
Web stiffeners may be provided in two forms:-
(a) as web doubler plates butt welded to the column flanges, in which case the design capacity <£VC is
evaluated using the thickness of the column web plus that of the doubler plates (i.e. twc + tWd)
(b) as diagonal stiffeners, which are proportioned to carry the excess design force, so that
N*s = diagonal stiffener design force
= maximum of:- (NS + V*) - c/A/c
(N ft2 - Nft-i + V*c) - <£VC
(N*c + V*) - 0VC
(N*c2 - N*c1 + V*) - 0VC

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 113

BOLTED END PLATE

(g) Additional Design Considerations

Additional design considerations which may require evaluation during design are discussed in Section 5.8.
4.8.3.5 Design of Column Stiffeners

■4b

COLO MM
wce>
t wc
*
b, 0

A Ah

Fig. 4.8.3.5.1 Fig. 4.8.3.5.2

(a) Tension stiffeners Design requirement: <£N,S > N*s where N*s is calculated as in Section 4.8.3.4(a)
where: tf>Nts = 0.9 fys As
fys = yield stress of stiffener
As = total area of stiffeners = 2 bes ts
(b) Compression stiffeners Design requirement: <£NCS > N*s where Nts is calculated as in Section 4.8.3.4(b)
where: (fiHcs ~ 0.9 fys As (terms as defined above-stiffener must
be welded to web over full length of
stiffener)
(Note: an alternative design expression based directly on the provisions of AS 4100 is derived in
Section 5.7).
(c) Web doubler plates as stiffeners-see previous comments under Section 4.8.3.4(f)
(d) Diagonal shear stiffeners Design requirement <?!>NVS > NVcos 0
where: 0 ~~ angle between the diagonal stiffener and the
horizontal stiffeners (Fig. 4.8.3.S.2)
<£NVS =s 0.9 fyS As—for stiffener in tension
—for stiffener in compression provided
stiffener is welded to column web
along its full length (if not see
Commentary in Section 5.7)

4.8.3.6 Column Stiffener Geometry

Clause 5.14.3 of AS 4100 requires that any load bearing stiffener satisfy
15 ts
bes ^
W250
1 hk
Common practice is to also provide bes > 3 bbf and ts s*

4.8.3.7 Stiffener Weld Design

Fillet welds on stiffeners may be designed on one of two bases:
(i) same design capacity as stiffener
(ii) actual force to be transmitted by stiffener
Generally, (ii) is recommended.
Welding of stiffeners usually involves the use of fillet welds for reasons of economy (see Commentary,
Section 5.7), and these are designed using the provisions of Section 3.2.6 for longitudinal shear force only.

AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE
4.8.4 DESIGN EXAMPLE

End Plate Detail

V
iOO kN -o- gfs
<*■
End plate is 200 mm x 25 mm rolled edge
-o-
s flat x 540 mm deep. (Plate component
could be substituted.)
[^0 RKt

2*50 ucefl-5 *2lOkWl77 o Bolts

GRAOE 2EO o Lfi

6 x M24 bolts in 8.8/TB category. Assume

4\0Ub5bl
-(SRADE.250 •O-
threads excluded from shear plane—bolt
\'
TOO'kN-
<b
MI length required is 85 mm for actual grip.
c> 17.3 + 25.0 = 42.3
M grip
'bo i+o 'bO
Assume tensioned with hand wrench and
nt>
not air gun.
200

Design Parameters
/.
410UB53.7: db ,= (453imm bfb = 178mm tfb = ryk&mm db - tfb *= 392 mrft
250UC89.5 tfc = 17.3 mm bfc =(^6/'mm twc - 10.5yim kc 30.0 mm
(Grade 250):
fyct = 250 MPa (flange) fycw = 260 MPa (web) rc =(12.7 rjjffn
brc = 10.5 + 2 x 12.7 = 35jj,mm dwc = 260 - 2 x 30.0 = 200 mm
Plate bi = 200 mm 256 mm = bfc tj ='^l^m dj = 540 mm
(Section 4.8.2.3) s = 130 mm 50'mm 3* 36 mm
ae 0 = 0°
(Grade 250) p
L2 = 2.2 x 24 + 42.3 = 95.1 mm 2.5 df = 50 mm <f> = 90°
s9 = 140 mm < 178 ~ 24 = 154 mm af 60 mm
» 120 mm ^ df - 24 mm since cot 0 = 0
fui = 410 MPa 3* 0.5 ds = 30 mm since col 0
*fyj - 250 MPa > 0.5 x 50 + 10 (max) 35 mm
Design Actions /!*)== 210 kNm V*<= 150 kN N* 0 kN
Type A connection in Table 4.8.2.2
Minimum Design Actions Section 4.8.2.2
minimum design bending moment = 0.5 x 0.9 x 260 x 1050 x 103/106 = 123 kNm Satisfied
minimum design shear force = 40 kN Satisfied
minimum design axial force = nil
Derived Design Actions to Flanges and Coiumn/End Plate Interface Table 4.8.2.2
Nft = 210 x 103/392 + 0 = 536'kN
N?c = 210 x 103/392 + 0 =• 536 kN
V*VC
V w 150 kN
V
Beam to End-Plate Welds—note that Derived Design Actions obtained using Section 4.7.2.2
—as for example (i) in Section 4.7.4 Nft = N*c = 434 kN (see page 96)
Flange welds-<£NW| design capacity = 0.9 x 260 x 178 x 10.9/103 = 454 kN
> N^ and N*c =(434^N
use full penetration butt welds/weld category SP Satisfactory
Web welds — Lw = 403 - 2 x 10.9 = 381 kN M£ = 39.9 kNm (example (i) in Section 4.7.4)
Vy = 1 2 x 381 = (0.197 kN/mm v* = 3 x 39.9 x 103/(381)2 - 0825 kN/mm
\/v*2 + v*y2 = 10.848 )cN/mm
6 mm fillet weld using E4£JXi electrod.es SP weld category, <£vw (0.978 I^N/mm (Table B.1)
■ .r
> 0.848 kN/mm Satisfactory

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 115

BOLTED END PLATE

Bolts (Section 48.3.2)

6 no. x M24 bolts in 8.8/TB bolting category, threads excluded from the shear plane
ct> Nt, =Wkh </>Vfx = 1,86 kN (Table A.2.2, Appendix A)
df =^24 mm dh =' 26 mm
Adopt prying factor kpr = 0.30 (Section 5.8)
</>Vdf = minimum of </>Vfx = 186 kN
= 0.9 x 3.2 x 24 x 25 x 410/103 = 708 kN (Plate tearout at bottom bolts
not likely) VA
= 0.9 x 3.2 x 24 x 17.3 x 410/103 = 490 kN
= 186 kN V/ J
4>Ntb = 4 x 234/1.30 = 720 kN > N£ = 536 kN V
4>Vfb = 2 X 186 = 372 kN > V*c = 150 RN Bolts satisfactory

End Plate (Section 4.8.3.3)

(a) Flexure afe = 60 - 24/2 = 48 mm

0Npb =
0.9 x 250 x 200 x (25)2
48 x 103
= 586 kN < N?J = 536 kN Satisfactory
<r
s>e-z
20G
(b) Shear </>Vpv = 2 x 0.9 x 0.5 x 250 x 200 x 25/103
=^1251^1
> V*c ~="150 kN Satisfactory
> N?J = N*c = 536 kN

Necessity for Column Stiffening (Section 4.8.3.4)

(a) Tension Stiffeners: ac = (256 - 140)/2 58 mm V>*/*
& X
ad = (140 - 10.5 - 2 x !\2.7)/2 = 52 mm
a, = (200 - 140)/2 =730 mm
N*n = 536/4 <734 kN
(2 x 58 + 130 - 26}J= 496 kN
4>R,i = 0.9 x x (17.3)2 x | 3.14 +
[ 52
?50
<AR,2 = 0.9 x |p x (17.3)2 x
3.14(52 + 58) + 0.5 x 130
[ (52 + 30) ] + 4 x 134 rj_5230+ 1
30J
= 533 kN

<t>Rt = [496; 533]min = 496 kN < N$ = 536 kN Tension Stiffeners are required
Maximum stiffener design force at tension flange = 536 - 496 = 40 kN
(b) Compression Stiffeners (see also Example in Section 4.7.4)

</>Rd = 0.9 x |p x 10.5 x (10.9 + 2 x 25 + 5 x 30.0) = 518 kN

or = 369 + 2.46 X (10.9 + 2 x 25) = 519 kN (k9 = 369, k10 = 2.46)

</>Rc2 = 9.72 x (10.5)3
x V260/200 = 907 kN (k„ = 907)
0RC = [518; 907]min = 518 kN < N?c = 536 kN Compression stiffeners are required
Maximum stiffener design force at compression flange = 536 - 518 = 18 kN

116 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED END PLATE

Design of Stiffeners at Tension and Compression Flanges

15 x 6
Try 2 no. 90 x 6 flat bars as stiffeners ^es — 90 — = 88.3
V260/250
As = 2 x 90 x 6 = 1080 mm2
fys = 260 MPa
0N,S = 0NCS = 0.9 x 260 x 1080/103 = 253 kN
> 40 kN stiffener design force at tension flange
> 18 kN stiffener design force at compression flange
Stiffener welds — 5 mm fillet weld, E48XX electrodes, category GP
— 0vw = 0.611 kN/mm (Table B.2)
— across column flange at tension flange, welded both sides of stiffener, allowing for
15 mm cropping,
design capacity of weld = 4 x (90 - 15) x 0.61 = 183kN
> 40 kN stiffener design force at tension flange
— along web of column to resist stiffener design force at compression flange, welded both
sides of two stiffeners
design capacity of weld = 4 x 200 x 0.611 = 488 kN
> 18 kN stiffener design force at compression flange

(c) Check for Overlapping Stress Regions — not required as column stiffeners are to be provided.

(d) Strength of Stiffened Column — Tension Flange Region Section 4.8.3.4(d)

ts = 6.0 mm tw = 5 mm
Wi = \/52 x (52 + 58 - 0.5 x 26) = 71.0 mm
w2 = (130 - 6.0 - 2 x 5)/2 = 57.0 < 71.0 mm
0.9 x 250 x (17.3)2 f(2 x 57.0 + 2 x 71.0 - 26) 1 1
0RtS —
103 52
+ 57.0 + 71.0 ) (2 X 52 + 2 x 58 - 26)

= 711 kN
> K = 536 kN Satisfactory

(e) Strength of Stiffened Column — Compression Flange Region Section 4.8.3.4(e)

As = 2 x 90 x 6 = 1080 mm2 fys = 260 MPa
0.9 x 1080 x 260 1.47 x 260 X 17.3 x V256 x 10.5 225
0R cs — +
103 103
= 596 kN
> N*c = 536 kN Satisfactory .205
R9| 405
(f) Shear Stiffening Section 4.8.3.4(f) i
V* = 100 kN 6

at tension flange, resultant design shear force = 536 - 100 = 436 kN

at compression flange, resultant design shear force = 536 - 100 = 436 kN ■Ar

For 250UC89.5 column, av > 1.0, hence 0VC = 0V a Fig. 4.8.4.2

0VC = 0.9 x 0.6 x 260 x (260 - 2 x 17.3) x 10.5/103
= 322 kN (see also Table E.2)
< 436 kN Shear stiffener is required
Design force on inclined shear stiffener = (436 - 332)/cos 0 = 213 kN
stiffener length = 403 x 2.05/1.79 = 462 mm

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 117

BOLTED END PLATE

15 x 8
Try 2 no. 90 x 8 flat bars as shear stiffeners bes = 90 < = 117.7
V260/250
As = 2 x 90 X 8 = 1440 mm2
fys = 260 MPa
<j>Nvs = 0.9 x 1440 x 260/103 = 337 kN
> 213 kN design force Satisfactory
As stiffener is in compression, stiffener must be welded full length for above expression to be valid.
Length of weld, Lw = 2.05 x 225 = 461 mm
Stiffener weld — 5 mm fillet weld, E48XX electrodes, GP category
— <£vw = 0.611 kN/mm (Table B.2)
— welded both sides of two stiffeners
design capacity of weld = 4 x 461 x 0.611 = 1126kN Satisfactory
If only weld at mid-length (see Commentary in Section 5.7)-
minimum length of weld required = 213/4 x 0.611 = 87 mm Adopt 125 mm
Stiffener properties:—
90 x (8)3
I=2x = 7680 mm4 (each stiffener can buckle individually)
12
r = V7680/1440 = 2.31 mm
From Commentary, L, = 0.7 x 0.5 x (461 - 125) = 118 mm
Le/r = 118/2.31 51
From Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100, for ab = 0.5, then «c - 0.802
Hence, stiffener design capacity = ac 4>MVS = 0.802 x 337 = 270 kN
>213kN design force Satisfactory

2/^0 «G> FLAT?

5
K“<*p

&-M24- KH TO CATECSOKY

2/<*0*8>FTAT9

NOTE-'- CHECH CLfAEANCe

FOK BOLT INSTALLATION
- 300*25 TX AT THI ^ BOLT
SMC PLAT£ LOCATION
TiTtm

2/90*0 FIAT*,

Fig. 4.8.4.3

118 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED SPLICE

4.9 WELDED SPLICE CONNECTION

4.9.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

■Single 'Aee. erection plate

AS racking 3a*. X
Vo* weft weld )

m ,/LOOTING ftGUS \f|t

-•4-6/s ftOLTJNG Tfff
: CA-feGOVZ-V
• IT
w, IMG 7>
I is. 4-G/S eOUTINQ
II CATEGORY
--

-WEB TOU&LEe.
: FLATEf?

u 1 ■fr IF-

Fig. 4.9.1.1 Welded Beam Splice Fig. 4.9.1.2 Welded Beam Splice
- Web Doubler Plates Fillet Welded - Complete Penetration Web Weld
- Complete Penetration Butt Weld to Flanges - Complete Penetration Flange Weld

ERECTION CLEAT
SERVES Af> BACKING
BAR-

I\ V l l
or. V
-®- -O-
OR
* 5T
-o—o-
TU . , 1 I
—COLP SAWN ENP^>
Vr
i 7^
''"WEB POUBLER
PLATES

Fig. 4.9.1.3 Welded Column Splice Fig. 4.9.1.4 Welded Column Splice
- Web Doubler Plates Fillet Welded - Complete Penetration Web Weld

AK6IX ERECTION
CLEAT
COLP SAWN
£L. /
enps Pr
rrJM

At -A*

Fig 4.9.1.5 Welded Column Splice - Cap Plate

DETAILING NOTES:
(1) The economics of field welding should be checked with the fabricator before it is specified.
(2) Flange weld preparation in beam splices assumes the use of a backing strip - which requires coping of beam web. The backing
strip should not normally be required to be removed.
(3) Details require accurate fitting up of member sections.
(4) A shop splice with full penetration welding without web plate is a detail used at the discretion of a fabricator and is not a detail in
use as a site connection.
(5) Column splices should be located in positions where access can be easily obtained for site welding - generally 500-800 mm above
floor level.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 119

WELDED SPLICE

4.9.2 DESIGN

4.9.2.1 General

Two elements of a welded splice are of interest

flange splice

• web splice

each of which requires separate design procedures (Sections 4.9.3 and 4.9.4 respectively).

Splices may be required to transmit shear force, axial force and bending moment simultaneously.

4.9.2.2 Design Actions

Applied design actions at a connection are assumed to be those shown in Fig. 4.9.2.1

a design bending moment about the x- axis

a design shear force V*
a design axial force N*

At ■*4-
b{

t
H* 6f
*
±
v*-
• t*
Symmetrical Section
1 '

At *r
■X

Ac Vc,
Design Actions at Splice Vc

Unsymmetrical Section

Fig. 4.9.2.1

120 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED SPLICE

Assumptions:— (i) The flange splice transmits axial forces due to the proportion of the bending moment
carried by the flange plus the proportion of the axiai force carried by the flange.
(ii) The web splice transmits the proportion of the bending moment carried by the web plus
the proportion of the axial force carried by the web plus the shear force.
(iii) The proportion of the axiai force transmitted by the web and by each flange is
proportional to the contribution each makes to the total cross-sectional area.
Defining kw = (area of web)/(total cross-sectional area)
= Aw/A
kf = (area of flange)/(total cross-sectional area)
= (1.0 - kw)/2 symmetrical section
= Af/A unsymmetrical section Af = At or Ac as appropriate
Values of kw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections are
contained in Appendix E of this publication.
In order to determine the values of the design actions, the distribution of stress due to M* must be known. The
distribution may be one of the three shown in Fig. 4.9.2.2.

%
Nci _ Nci N c<
—/ —r N*C2 N*
Cl
N Cl
,1* He
Hc
K
•ft te Ht
Nx
•t-2 Ht N
* 3ft
Ni, HI N’t,
Z
4*1
(a) (b) (C)

Fig. 4.9.2.2

Hence, force in tension flange due to moment, M* = NS

force in compression flange due to moment, = N&
moment resisted by web Mwm = Nca.yc + Nf2.yt

Design Actions Signs of design actions are positive (+ve) in the direction shown in Fig. 4.9.2.1

Symmetrical Sections

(i) Flange Splice: defining NS and N*c as the design flange forces to be transmitted by the flange splice.
tension flange N$ = NS bending only
- NS - kf N* bending + axial compression
= NS + kf N* bending + axial tension
compression flange N& - N*i bending only, members not in full contact
= NSf + kf N* bending + axial compression
members not in full contact
= NSf - kf N* bending + axiai tension
members not in full contact or
members in full contact with resultant tension
=0 members in full contact with no resultant tension.
NS and N£i may be determined as described above or alternatively may be taken as:—
(1 - kmw)M*
NS « NSf if M*ss0.9fyZ (Fig. 4.9.2.2(a))
(d - tf)
= 0.9 fyf x flange area if M* > 0.9 fy Z (Fig. 4.9.2.2(b), (c))
where the proportion of the bending moment transmitted by the web is given by:—
Iw Iw
kmw
Iw + If Itotal
Values of k mw for standard roiled universal sections and three plate sections are contained in Appendix E
of this publication.

DSC/04—1994 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 121

 WELDED SPLICE
(ii) Web Splice
VS
w V* shear force
NS
w axial force {tension or compression)
kwN* axial tension force or
members not in bearing contact - axiai compression force
0 members in bearing contact - axial compression force
'W Mwm + V*ed where e^ = 0 Details conforming to Figs. 4.9.1.2, 4.9.1.4
'wm obtained from first principles = as defined in Fig 4.9.4.2 for details conforming
or to Figs. 4.9.1.1, 4.9.1.3.
may be taken as kmw M* if M* < 0.9 fy Z or
M* - 2 x 0.9fyf x flange area x yft if M* > 0.9 fyZ

Unsymmetricai Sections Hi ’Cl

A
In a similar manner as for symmetrical sections:
V*
Nft N,1 ± j N* W
Ac N*(+v«# dirn)
Nfc NC1 + X N* X. X
w*
VW V* A = At + Ayy + Ac M* ^4 Vc dirn)
4+i 'At
K
A
~~ N*
A
NC2yc + N?2 yt + V*ed
N
A
iw ■ft

Fig. 4.9.2.3
Minimum Design Actions
Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100 requires that this connection be designed for the following minimum design actions:
bending moment 0.3=times theimember design capacity in bending
shear force - no requirement
axial tension ~ 0.3 times the member design capacity in tension
axial compression - for members prepared for full contact
0.15 times the member design capacity in axial compression
- for members not prepared for full contact
0.30 times the member design capacity in axial compression
Additionally, for splices located between points of effective lateral support, the splice connection shall be designed
for the design axial force (N*) plus a design bending moment (M*) equal to
8N*LS
M* =
1000
8= appropriate amplification factor 8b or 8S determined in accordance with Clause 4.4 of AS 4100
Ls distance between points of effective lateral support.

Where a splice is subject to both axial force and bending moment, the splice shall be desighed to simultaneously
satisffilBflnimEmpalOilllb^dirig moment and axial force giveh aboye. However, for a splice in a beam member
with no axial forcef it is'recommended that no minimum axial force be designed for.
Special notes:

0) For members assumed to be in full bearing contact, the ends of the member must be prepared in accordance
with Clause 14.4.4.2 of AS 4100. This specifies that the maximum clearance between the abutting surfaces
shall not exceed 1 mm and shall not exceed 0.5 mm over at least 67% of the contact area. Cold sawing of
members to length meets this requirement.
When members are prepared for full contact splices, compression forces in the flanges and the web may be
assumed to be transferred by bearing alone rather than through plates or connectors. If full contact is not
provided either plates or connectors must be used to transmit the compression force.
(2) The local coping of the spliced member web to allow full penetration butt welding of the flange is necessary in
order to produce satisfactory welds and cause no deleterious effect on statically loaded members. AS 4100
recognises that for members subject to fatigue the presence of cope holes does have a deleterious effect and
reduces the detail category accordingly for members with splices containing cope holes (see Section 11 of AS 4100).

122 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED SPLICE

4.9.3 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL-FLANGE SPLICE

4.9.3.1 Complete Penetration Butt Weld in Flange

N"W
fc N*ft

Complete Penetration Butt Welds

Fig. 4.9.3.1

Design Requirement:- assuming that flange welds transmit design forces N« and N& only
0NW > Nft and Nf*
except that if N« and N& > 0.9 fyf bf tf (due to the method of calculating flange force)
then Nft and N& is set equal to (0.9 fyf bf t{) for the purposes of weld design only and the weld must be SP
category.
Complete penetration butt weld-0NW = design capacity of butt weld = 0 fyf bf tf (AS 4100, Clause 9.7.27)
where:- 0 = capacity factor
= 0.9 SP weld category (for which flange design capacity equals weld
design capacity)
= 0.6 GP weld category
fyf = yield stress of flange
bf = width of flange
tf = thickness of flange

4.9.3.2 Incomplete Penetration Butt Weld or Fillet Weld in Flange

Nft:

U Lw-

=■ O'Swn
oepewwMs owwcu7ino
a PKOC£»e ANP AHOX-Or
?R«»ABAnCN OeEP.
6 « CCPrH cF Pf2£-PAEATIC>4
V

Fig. 4.9.3.2
Design Requirement:- assuming that weld has a design throat thickness of tt and a length of L w
0NW > Nh tension flange
> Nj£ compression flange
where 0 Nw = (0 vw) L w (AS 4100, Clauses 9.7.27, 97.3.10)
0vw = design capacity per unit length of fillet weld or incomplete penetration butt weld of design
throat thickness t, (see Appendix B)
Lw *£ bf
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 123
WELDED SPLICE

4.9.4 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL — WEB SPLICE

4.9.4.1 Weld Strength — Complete Penetration Butt Weld in Web

Weld length Lw = d-i clear depth between flanges assuming weld is full depth of web
Design Requirements:-AS 4100 Clause 97.2.7
design capacity = 0 x nominal capacity of the weaker of the parts joined
where: <j> = 0.9 SP weld category
0.6 GP weld category
Shear force 0VW > V* is design requirement
where 0VW = 0Vv for M* < O.750M wj (AS 4100, Clause 5.12.3)
= 0Vv[2.2 - (1.6M*/0MW)] forM* > O.750M w j
0Vv = 0 x (0.6 fyw Lw twm) (AS 4100, Clause 5.11.4)
f.yw = yield stress of connected webs
twm = minimum web thickness of connected webs
Axial force 0NW > N£ is design requirement
where 0NW = 0 x (fyW Lw twm) web in compression (AS 4100, Clause 6.2.1)
= minimum of 0 x (fywLwtwm) web in tension (AS 4100, Clause 7.2.1)
0 x (0.85 fuw Lw twm)
f uw = tensile strength of connected webs
Bending moment 0MW > M£ is design requirement
where 0MW — 0 X (fyw Zew) (AS 4100, Clauses 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5)
= compact web \s = d^t
20w S = twm L^/4 wm ^ 82
= Z + [(115 - k^/(V\5 - 82)] x (S - Z) 82 < \s< 115
- Z (115/AS)2 As > 115
2 - twm l2w/6
Bending moment and axial force
0Mwr > Mj is design requirement
where 0Mwr « 0MW(1 - N£/0Nw) (AS 4100, Clause 8.3.2)

4.9.4.2 Splice Plate Strength

Only applicable for details using web doubler plates — such as the details shown in Figs. 4.9.1.1 and 4.9.1.3 —
assuming use of two splice plates, one each side of web. Fig. 4.9.4.1 shows web doubler plate dimensions.
Note: The use of two web splice plates is preferred since this creates a symmetric load transfer with respect to
the plane of the web.

ti U
PLATED

Fig. 4.9.4.1

124 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED SPLICE
Design requirements:- where 0 = 0.9
Shear force 0Vwd > Vw is design requirement
where 0Vwd = 0Vvd
- 0Vvd [2.2 - (1.6M*/0Mwd)]
0Vvd = ^x2x (0.6 fyi d-( t,)
for M* sS O.750Mwd
for M* > O.750Mwd i (AS 4100, Clause 5.12.3)

(AS 4100, Clause 5.11.4)

= yield stress of splice plates
ti = thickness of splice plate
di = length of splice plate ^ d-i
Axial force 0Nwd > Nw is design requirement
where <£Nwd = 0 x 2 x (fyi di tf) web in compression (AS 4100, Clause 6.2.1)
=* minimum of 0 x 2 x (fyi dj tj) web in tension (AS 4100, Clause 7.2.1)
0 x 2 x (0.85 fui dj tj)
fui = tensile strength of splice plates
Bending moment 0Mwd > is design requirement
where 0MWd — 0 X 2 X (fyi Zei) (AS 4100, Clauses 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5)
Zei = Si - tj dj2/4 compact web Xs = dj/tj < 82
= Zr + [(115 - A.s)/(115 - 82)] x (Si - Zi) 82 < Xs ^ 115
= Zi(115/Xs)2 Xs > 115
Zj = tj dp/6
Bending moment and axial force
0Mwr > is design requirement
where 0Mwr = 0Mwd(1 - N£/0Nwd) (AS 4100, Clause 8.3.2)

4.9.4.3 Weld Strength — Fillet Weld to Web Plate

POINTS 1,2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ARE

POTENTIAL CRITICAL POINTS ON
THE WELD — SEE SECTION 3.2.7

lx x

4^PUC£

Nw Nw
i -f • • -<z FILLET WELP
v*
y w
n* Pbofilf
w
<&c
n*w
i*5
3 4- 2> WELPc.g.
A-
iWEU7C.g
dw

Fig. 4.9.4.2

Using Section 3.2.7 to define an action set (F*, F*, M*) in terms of (V£, N£, Mj) as defined in Section 4.9.2.2:—
(positive directions are indicated in Fig. 4.9.4.2)

Mz = M* = kmw M* + V* ed where all terms are as defined in Section 4.9.2.2

F? = K = kw N* FJ = V* = V*
ed = eccentricity of weld group centroid from centre of splice

DSC/04—1994 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 125

WELDED SPLICE

Both weld groups may be analysed using the method given in Section 3.2.7 by substituting into the governing
equation of Section 3.2.7 the following: (Note there are two weld groups, one per web doubler plate)

•4
t\v"<Zc.

Z.. &c.
♦ t +
4- 2. 4-

(bw)2 d3w
u
®c
2bw + d w 'wp
12
62 (bw)3 (bw + 2dw) l-wx — Lwy = d w
'wp — 12 3 (2bw + dw)
Nw M*dw
Lwx = Lwy = dw + 2b v* (points 3, 4)
w 2dw 4I wp

N* M*.d w V*
Vj (all points 1 to 6) v* (points 3, 4)
2Lwx 4 Iwp vy
2dw
V*
vw M*(b w ©c)
V*
vy + (points 1, 6)
2Lwy 2 Iwp
or

V* M* ec
(points 2, 3, 4, 5)
= 2L wy 21wp

Critical points are identified in Fig. 4.9.4.2 which corresponds to the critical points of Fig. 3.2.7.4.

Governing Design Equation

vis = ^(v£)2 + (v*)2 < 4> v w (Values of $vw are given in Appendix B)

126 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 WELDED SPLICE

4.9.5 DESIGN EXAMPLE

✓
2/l^O*c5 FLAT 8><
v ^50 LONG)
WE&CCOBU&Rft^ _|, 2 ACTUAL,

4-10 U& <5^-7

5^lif° 4lOU&'5'V7
G.RAO& 250 M<5 I! •40 GKAPE- 250
l!
CoZ ^
1*4- - 5 AO.ru M-
: JO PE#7lflN

Fig. 4.9.5.1
Design Parameters
410UB53.7 twb = 7.6 mm d = 403 mm tf -- 10.9 mm bf = 178 mm
fy, = 260 MPa kmw = 0.19 (see Appendix E, Table E.1)
130 x 5 flat ti = 5 mm bj = 130 mm dj = 350 mm fyi = 260 MPa

Design actions: V* = 90 kN N* = 0 M* = 140 kNm

Minimum Design Actions: Section 4.9.2.2 Member is Grade 250

minimum design bending moment = 0.3 x 0.9 x 260 x 1050 x 103/106 = 73.7 kNm Satisfied
minimum design shear force = nil
minimum design axial force = nil as it is a flexural member

Derived Design Actions: 0.9fyZ = 0.9 x 260 x 925 x 103/106 = 216 kNm > 140 kNm

(1.0 - 0.19) x 140 x 103

Flange Forces: N?t = K = (403 - 10.9) = 289 kN

Web: V* = 90 kN
N* = 0 kN
M* = 0.19 x 140 + 90 x ed = (26.6 + 90 x ed) kNm
Design Capacity of Connection
Welded Flange Splice — using complete penetration butt welds, weld category SP
0NW = 0.9 X 260 x 178 x 10.9/103 = 454 kN
> N« and N*c = 289 kN Satisfactory

Welded Web Doubler Plates —

Weld dimensions
y
effective lengths d w = 350 mm
of fillet on web
Z I
splice fillets bw = 65 - 5 = 60 mm
3 ' ’

602
ec = 7.66 mm
2 x 60 + 350
x
8 65 - 7.66 = 57.3 mm
ed
3

G3

Fig. 4.9.5.2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 127

WELDED SPLICE

Hence, M* = [26.6 + 90 x 57.3/103] = 31.8 kNm

Splice Plate Strength

Bending Moment dj/tj = 350/5 = 70 < 82
Zei = 5 x 3502/4 - 153 x 103mm3
Mwd = 0.9 x 2 x 260 x 153 x 103/106 = 71.7 kNm
> Mw = 31.8 kNm Satisfactory
Shear M* < 0.75 4>Mwd = 53.7 kNm
4>Vwd = (/)Vvd = 0.9 x 2 x 0.6 x 260 x 350 x 5/103 = 491 kN
> V* = 90 kN Satisfactory

Weld Strength:
Design Actions: F* = N* = 0
on Weld on
F* = -V* = -90 kN
Left hand side
* MJ = -31.8 kNm
3502 603 (60 + 2 x 350)
Iwp (6 x 60 + 350) + = 7.36 x 106 mm3 per weld group
12 3 (2 x 60 + 350)
Lwx =L wy = 350 + 2 x 60 = 470 mm per weld group
-31800 x ± 350
v* = 0 - = +0.38 kN/mm (points 1, 2, 3)
4 x 7.36 x 10®
= -0.38 kN/mm (points 4, 5, 6)
-90 31800 x (60 - 7.66)
v*y = + - -0.21 kN/mm (points 1, 6)
2 x 470 2 x 7.36 x 106
^________-31800
-90 x 7.66
= -0.079 kN/mm (points 2-5)
2 x 470 ~ 2 x 7.36 x 10e
By inspection, maximum value of v*re8 occurs at points 1, 6
v*,res = VMWTF021)5 - 0.43 kN/mm
4 mm fillet weld, E48XX electrode, GP weld category
tf*vw - 0.489 kN/mm (Table B.2 Appendix B)
> v* res =s 0.43 kN/mm SATISFACTORY

GATCGOpC?

rzl'b*%>«\T>0*5
PLATED
¥
XprCATCGOEyOP

Fig. 4.9.5.3

128 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE

4.10 BOLTED SPLICE CONNECTION

4.10.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

4.10.1.1 Splice in Flexural Members

nPi Boue
Op,SOWS
% gp, gOHf
£>pl Sp, ept furnace, roul&p 5p. 6fr l6p1
A^EM6l£
WITH NUT* o PtAT€^ro<5LiiT
to oui^ce
X T£> MATCH \
ir'
-o--- <r ■o—{>■

PLATER <>—O-
^P2 f PixnsftCK.
1----- - “ vr^l BOLLS? EPSE
R6LLD? EC£E FLAT4 lb 4iH T
-O—& ■o—o-
FLAT4 Tt>
-B^CH 4IPE0F
•ai
J N
^2
BACH 4IPE
WEB. —a ■o—o- OF WEB
5pa
i)—O- <>—<►

"5

%a

Fig. 4 .10.1.1 Bolted Moment Splice in Beam Fig. 4.10.1.2 Bolted Moment Splice in Beam
- Three Plate Flange Splice - One Plate Flange Splice
- Web Plate Each Side - Web Plate Each Side

c
f
n—(y
nATD?ojc r:: it—O *>?z
ftOUCP WGSu 3pZ
FLAT4 TCxJurr--
o—o
-EACH 41PE %L
OF VJEfO* O o.
Ci
<)—<►

Fig. 4.10.1.3 Boited Shear Splice in Beam

- Web Plate Each Side

£ PIXTE6 09- EOUEP ECGB

FLAT4
*■

—o-
PLATE? &OLLBP
■o—o-
V
LPG6 FLAT6 - 0GTH i
4IPE6 OF WE& 3>—o-
’2 tJ
ii—o-
-0—0-
a
%
iW ^2

Fig. 4.10.1.4 Combination Bolted and Welded Flange Splice

- One Plate Flange Splice
- Web Plate Each Side
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 129
 BOLTED SPLICE

4.10.1.2 Splice in Compression Members

Ar plats®> ok roll.es> v
' cA t
\ SCtfS RATIOS ANGLE V\ .PLATE* OR POLLED
l/ ePGEFLAT^TD
4urr
I 5r i /
6p»
^1- Sp.
VAR1E* c- -o- o
II I 11, l t ttttTTTT $91 i«

s.l*
<>■ -o-
Spi
‘pfl
Cs B
B*s ZDW4
ft- 0 pi iftoWs- spi
&5 ^&pE
4VHMC “RJCAL «9VMHCTRtCAL

a) with cap plate - unequal members (b) with web cleats - unequal members (c) with web cleats - equal members
(web cleats each side of web) (web cleats each side of web)
Fig. 4.10.1.5 Bolted Column Splice - Prepared for Full Contact

PLXtEAOt ROLLED
■pfcr -ECO& FLATftTO OlfTft A)'
?KX£^h TO MATCW
fga
1 &
.:_ 6f> £pi
—!-
IS. Spi Spi
c
-o- a
% 0 c $3‘
.. Spi
(U
Spt Spi
0 p2 RQWft c Dpi 20W4
e dSps.
^yrtrteTEiOL
SWM&TRICA.

(a) equal members (b) unequal members

(web cleats to each side of web) (web cleats to each side of web)

Fig. 4.10.1.6 Bolted Column Splice - Not Prepared for Full Contact

b -RATE* 02 ROLLED ~kt

epos FLAT’S? -
fSCTH ftlOE*
&
Z 5pi
Spi
i, H-O-€>—<»—€»■ Sp
Ji
<1—O-O-O-<►
S- ^92
-(H-O-O-O-o-
■4-
5- ■0—€»—0—0—O c
Spi
Spi
0. »P2Spa Spa ^2^
c »* c
PLATE* 02
eeoc.
f?p2j EC*A/4
rolled
nAT^TOftorr nP2i eow*
4r
■“i7

(a) Prepared for Full Contact (b) Not Prepared for Full Contact

Fig. 4.10.1.7 Combination Bolted and Welded Flange Splice in Column

130 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE
4.10.1.3 Splice in Tension Members

p?**oV*
HATEi^OE. PCLLEP
Js
st?
sH 3
WG& FLAT2?

nr
I
§#• a
j'

v/>
§3*

PLATE 9 C*L
fcO LL&OED5D
FLAT*?
5pi 6yi 9j, sP V %' %
(a) equal members (b) unequal members
(web cleats to each side of web) (web cleats to each side of web)
Hp, ecv^.
TLATE6 OK BXLEP Et*3EL
Pr'i^r* aw to $urr.

<h-A
PlATE/5 OK eOUEP
6P3E FL/TV 0cW 3
4K?E5 OF WE£> -&—o- £
■o—jy- SE 2J
o—ir 1 C

X!

Mel&i

(c) Combination Bolted and Welded Flange Splice

Fig. 4.10.1.8
4.10.1.4 Miscellaneous Connection
,rcp.goyt> £e *5^
fe fr«VAKI&? PLATE? OK (20LLEP
E-PSE FIAT6 70 50TT

* ©

0 $ 4
jfl-i

N PLATTE 02. KOXCP L£Gt TLAT5

■fcw bouep M3Lt> cleat
TO ‘WIT.
Fig. 4.10.1.9 Continuous Bolted Secondary Beam Connection
DETAILING NOTES:
(1) Where flange splice plates are used, assemble joints with nuts to outside of splice plate (Fig. 4.10.1.1). This arrangement is
recommended for ease of tensioning, since in universal sections sufficient clearance is not always available between flanges for a
standard air wrench.
(2) Where packers are required, these can be conveniently provided as hot rolled strip in thicknesses of 1.6, 2.0, 2.5 or 3.0 mm as
necessary, which are prepunched to match the holing on the splice plate component.
(3) Two web splice plates, one on each side of the web, are recommended for beam and column splices. This creates a symmetric
load transfer with respect to the plane of the web.
(4) Members can be prepared for full contact by cold sawing.
(5) The cap plate detail of Fig. 4.10.1.5(a) is usually reserved for column splices between members with significant differencesin
member depth.
(6) In order to accommodate out-of-alignment of member webs at a splice, the use of shims may be necessary.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 131

 BOLTED SPLICE

4.10.2 DESIGN

4.10.2.1 General
Two elements of a welded splice are of interest
• flange splice
• web splice
each of which requires separate design procedures {Sections 4.10.3 and 4.10.5 respectively).
Splices may be required to transmit shear force, axial force and bending moment simultaneously.

4.10.2.2 Design Actions

Applied design actions at a connection are assumed to be those shown in Fig. 4.10.2.1
a design bending moment about the x-axis M*
a design shear force V*
a design axial force N*

*
Nr*
Ife,

n* A
M*
H* N*

V*

Design Actions at Splice

L
W
w %
d X d x- 'X

'Ac. Yo

Symmetrical Section Unsymmetrical Section

Fig. 4.10.2.1

132 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE

Assumptions:- (i) The flange splice transmits axial forces due to the proportion of the bending moment
carried by the flange plus the proportion of the axial force carried by the flange.
The web splice transmits the proportion of the bending moment carried by the web plus
the proportion of the axial force carried by the web plus the shear force.
The proportion of the axial force transmitted by the web and by each flange is
proportional to the contribution each makes to the total cross-sectional area (Fig. 4.10.2.1):
Defining kw = (area of web)/(total cross-sectional area)
= Aw/A
kf = (area of flange)/(total cross-sectional area)
= (1.0 - kw)/2 symmetrical section
= A,/A unsymmetrical section Af = A, or Ac as appropriate
Values of kw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections are contained
in Appendix E of this publication.
(iv) The proportion of the bending moment transmitted by the web is given by
w Iw
kmw
lw + If Itotal
Values of k mw for standard rolled universal sections and three plate sections are
contained in Appendix E of this publication.
Design Actions Signs of design actions are positive (+ve) in the direction shown in Fig. 10.2.1.

Symmetrical sections

(i) Flange Splice: defining N*f, and N*,c as the design flange forces to be transmitted by the flange splice.

tension flange N*ft( bending only

(d - tf) J

F kmw)M.
(d - tf)
kf N* bending plus axial compression

= R1 - kmw)M* + k N* bending plus axial tension

f
L (d - tf)

compression flange N*,c '(1 ~ kmw)M bending only,

(d - t() members not in bearing contact

(1 ~ kmw)M*
+ kf N* bending plus axial compression,
(d - t() —members not in bearing contact

F - kmw)M*
(d - t,)
kf N* bending plus axial tension,
—members not in bearing contact
—members in bearing contact with
resultant tension
=0 members in bearing contact
with no resultant tension
(ii) Web Splice
Design for — V£ = V* shear force
for — Nw = axial force (tension or compression)
= kw N* axial tension force or
members not in bearing contact—axial compression force
=0 members in bearing contact-axial compression force
- M* = kmw M* + V*ed where ed = distance from centre of splice
to centroid of bolt group in
the member web

DSC/04—19942 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 133

 BOLTED SPLICE

Unsymmetrical sections

In order to determine the value of N*t, and N*fc, the distribution of stress due to M* must be known. The
distribution may be one of the three shown in Fig. 4.10.2.2
nCl* n£ MH Mo
M*C2 N*cz
N*
cz
4c 4o

NA % t2 %

c
Nfc N*tI Ni,
<^|

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 4.10.2.2
The values of the actions N*^ N*Cl MJ can be determined from first principles.
* tfe Ac In a similar manner for symmetrical sections:-
A
N*ft = N*{1 ± -^N*

V* A
N*fc = N*c1 T -^N*c

/ ---- X V* = V*
—- X
M* (4VC.divb^
At « = xN*
1 MS = N*c2yc + N*tzy, + V*ed
A = Ac 4- Aw + At
Fig. 4.10.2.3
Minimum Design Actions
Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100 requires that this connection be designed for the following minimum design actions:-
bending moment — 0.3 times the member design capacity in bending
shear force — no requirement
axial tension — 0.3 times the member design capacity in tension
axial compression — for members prepared for full contact
0.15 times the member design capacity in axial compression
— for members not prepared for full contact
0.30 times the member design capacity in axial compression
Additionally, for splices located between points of effective lateral support, the splice connection shall be
designed for the design axial force (N*) plus a design bending moment (M*) equal to
3N*LS
M* =
1000
6 = appropriate amplification factor <5b or $s determined in accordance with Clause 4.4 of AS 4100
Ls =s distance between points of effective lateral support.
Where a splice is subject to both axial force and bending moment, the splice shall be designed to
simultaneously satisfy the minimum value of bending moment and axial force given above. However, for a
splice in a beam member with no axial force, it is recommended that no minimum axial force be designed for.

SPECIAL NOTES:
(1) For members assumed to be in full bearing contact, the ends of the member must be prepared in
accordance with Clause 14.4.4.2 of AS 4100. This specifies that the maximum clearance between the
abutting surfaces shall not exceed 1 mm and shall not exceed 0.5 mm over at least 67% of the contact
area. Cold sawing of members to length meets this requirement.
When members are prepared for full contact splices, compression forces in the flanges and the web may
be assumed to be transferred by bearing alone rather than through plates or connectors, if full contact is
not provided either plates or connectors must be used to transmit the compression force.
(2) Column splices should be located in positions where access for the installation of the bolts is easily
obtained (see Section 5.10).

134 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE
NOTES ON BOLTING PRACTICE
(D Bolting category 8.8/TB is the usual category chosen for bolted splice connections. Category 8.8/TF is
only chosen when slip under serviceability loads must be limited. In practice, very limited slip will occur in
any bolted splice using 8.8/TB category containing at least two rows of bolts in the flange each side of the
splice location.
(2) Only one bolt category should be used in any bolted splice connection.
(3) Only one bolt diameter should be used for both the flange and the web splice. Bolt diameters are usually
either M20 or M24, larger bolt diameters being difficult to install and obtain the minimum bolt tension
specified in AS 4100 (see Ref. 2 also).
(4) The use of the three plate flange splice results in the flange bolts being loaded in double shear, which is
markedly more efficient from a design point of view and is favoured for larger members. It is more difficult
to erect and the one plate flange splice is generally preferred.
(5) Threads would normally be assumed included in the shear plane for both the flange and web splices,
although in thicker flanges threads excluded is practical. For the three plate flange splice, it is most
common to have threads intercept one shear plane and plane shank the other.

4.10.3 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL—Bolted Flange Splice

4.10.3.1 Bolts ng lines of bolts per flange, usually 2.
Design Requirement:- strength limit state 8.8/TB and 8.8/TF bolting categories
<M/fb > Nft tension flange flange forces calculated for
> N£ compression flange J strength limit force
where 0Vfb = ng np kr one plate flange splice (Section 3.1.3)
= 2 ng np kr (<£Vdf) three plate flange splice
np = number of bolt rows in a line at pitch sp
kr = reduction factor to account for the length of a bolted lap splice connection (Table 3.1.3.2(1))
4>Vdf = design capacity of a single bolt in shear
= [(£Vfn or <£Vfx; <£Vbt; <£Vbl] min
0Vfn, 0Vfx — given in Appendix A for threads included in (<£Vfn) or excluded from (<AVfx) the shear plane;
threads may be assumed to be included in or excluded from the shear plane according to
the thickness of the flange and the splice plate. It is usually most convenient to assume
threads are included in the shear plane. In the three plate splice, threads would normally
be included in one shear plane and excluded from the other in which case the average of
</>Vf{pand </>Vfx should be used
</A/bf = design capacity related to local bearing or end plate tearout in the spliced flange-see
Table 4.10.3.1
<£Vbi = design capacity related to local bearing or end plate tearout in the splice plate-see
Table 4.10.3.1
Design Requirement:- serviceability limit state 8.8/TF bolting category only used for bolted splices in which
slip under serviceability loads is to be limited
0Vfs > Ht tension flange flange forces calculated for
> Nf* compression flange J serviceability limit state
where 0Vfs ng np (*Vsf) one plate flange splice (Section 3.1.4.)
2 ng np (<?>Vsf) three plate flange splice
0Vsf design shear capacity of a bolt — serviceability limit state
given in Table A.2 of Appendix A for a slip factor n of 0.35
0.7 x (ju nei Nti kh) generally
M slip factor, equals 0.35 as rolled steel surfaces
otherwise based on test results obtained in accordancce with Appendix J of AS 4100
nei 1 (double shear in three plate splice taken care of in expression for <£Vfs)
Nti minimum bolt tension at installation, see Clause 15.2.5.2 of AS 4100
kh 1.0 for standard 2 or 3 mm clearance holes
0.85 for short slotted and oversize holes (see AS 4100 Clause 14.3.5.2)
0.75 for long slotted holes (see AS 4100 Clause 14.3.5.2)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 135

 BOLTED SPLICE
TABLE 4.10.3.1
VALUES OF 0Vb{ and 0Vbi
(use minimum value as appropriate)

Location One-plate Splice Three-plate Splice

Nft or N,* only Nft only NS or Nf* NS only

(til + tj2)
Splice 0(3.2 fui t| df) minimum of 0 3.2 fUj df minimum of
2
Component 0(ae1 fi fui) ae1 fui (til + tj2)
0 = 0.9 and 0
V bi given by 2
0(ae2 tj fUj)
and
ae2 fui (til + tj2)
0 2

Flange 0(3.2 fuf tf df) minimum of 0(3.2 fu, tf df) minimum of

0 = 0.9 0(ae2 tf fuf) 0(ae2 fuf ff)
Vbf given by and and
0(ae3 tf fuf) 0(ae3 fuf tf)

&LI .04.^
hn .fat 3**
rt H
1
t;i\
If

tf

where: ae2 = sp1 - dh/2 where: ae2 = sp1 - dh/2

dh = hole diameter dh = hole diameter
tii as ti2 usually

Notation:- fyf = yield stress of flange fuf = tensile strength of flange

fyj = yield stress of splice plate fui = tensile strength of splice plate
df = bolt diameter dh = hole diameter
b|, bn, bi2 = splice plate component widths
tj, tji,ti2 = splice plate component thicknesses i see Fig. 4.10.3.1

bf! Ui Note--. aener’a.Hy 3c>l.5^

Hole's Pg UPLX5 f?pi foCTRtW? <^4PLC£

K4 L;
(J

-0-

I Hip ^ | °LZ
tiu
<*■----------o-

2a-

Cop-I at 5pi)

ONE PLATE ^R-IC6 TLAN

Fig. 4.10.3.1

136 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE
4.10.3.2 Plates
Design Requirement- 0Npt > Nft tension flange
4>Npc > Nfc compression flange
where 0Npt = design capacity of flange plate in tension using AS 4100 Clause 7.2
(terms are as defined = for one plate splice, the minimum of:—
in Fig 4.10.3.1)
0.9 x fyi t( bi
0.9 x 0.85 fui tj (bj - ng dh)
= for three plate splice, the minimum of:—
0.9 x fyi (bn tj-j + 2 bi2 ti2)
0.9 x 0.85 fui [tM (bj-i - ng dh) + 2 ti2 (bi2 - 0.5 ng dh)]
0Npc = design capacity of flange plate in compression using AS 4100 Clause 6.2.1
assuming holes are filled with bolts and that k{ = 1.0
= 0.9 x fyi ti bj for one plate splice
= 0.9 x fyj (tji bii + 2 tj2 b[2) for three plate splice

4.10.4 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL-Combination Bolted and Welded Flange Splice

i-i.
C L
O

I
K •I
''mjrrT'r'r
Hz
It rrr

(a) One plate splice or (b) Inside plate of three plate splice
Outside plate of three plate splice
Fig. 4.10.4.1

4.10.4.1 Bolts
The bolted side of the combination bolted and welded flange splice is designed as for the all bolted flange
splice-see Section 4.10.3.1

4.10.4.2 Plates
The flange splice plates are designed as for the bolted flange splice connection—see Section 4.10.3.2

4.10.4.3 Fillet welds

Design Requirement:- $VWf > N*#andN*fc
where <£Vwf = 0vw (2 kr Lw + bf) for one plate splice (Section 3.2.6)
= <£vw (6 kr Lw + bji + 2 bj2) for three plate splice
0vw = design capacity of a fillet weld per unit length
(see Tables B.1 and B.2 of Appendix B).
kr = 1.0 for Lw < 1700 mm
= 1.10 - 0.06 Lw for 1700 < Lw < 8000 mm

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 137

BOLTED SPLICE

4.10.5 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL — Web Splice

4.10.5.1 Web Plates

Note: The use of two web splice plates is preferred since this creates symmetric load transfer with respect to
the plane of the web.

M hi
wee. <b?ucx. plate7

np2 BOW 9 Hole diameter. *-<4?

AT Sp2.
dl

Fig. 4.10.5.1

Design Requirements:- where: (f> = 0.9

Shear force 0Vwd > V* is the design requirement
where (/)Vwd = </>Vvd for M* 0.75 Mwd
(AS 4100, Clause 5.12.3)
= </>Vvd [2.2 - (1.6M*/Mwd)] for M* > 0.75 Mwd
</>Vvd = 0 x 2 x (0.6 fyi d| t|) (AS 4100, Clause 5.11.4)
fyi = yield stress of splice plates
ti = thickness of splice plate dj = length of splice plate < d 1

Axial force 0Nwd > Nw is the design requirement

where <t>Nwd = 0 x 2 x (fyi di t|) web in compression (AS 4100, Clause 6.2.1)
= minimum of:— (f> x 2 x (fyi di ti)
4> x 2 x [0.85 fui tj (di - np2 dh)]
web in tension (AS 4100, Clause 7.2.1)
fui = tensile strength of splice plates
Bending moment <£Mwd > is the design requirement
where 0MWd — </> X 2 X (fyj Zej) (AS 4100, Clauses 5.2.1, 5.2.3, 5.2.4, 5.2.5)
Zei = Si = tidi2/4 compact web Xs = dj/tj ^ 82
= Zi + [(115 - Xs)/(115 - 82)] x (Si - Zj) 82 < Xs ^ 115
= Z| (115/XS)2 Xs > 115
Zi = ti di2/6 based on gross section
Bending moment and axial force
<t>Mwr > M* is the design requirement
where </)M wr = 0Mwd(1 - Nw/</>Nwd) (AS 4100, Clause 8.3.2)

138 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE

4.10.5.2 Bolt Group in Web Splice Strength limit state only. Design for no slip under serviceability loads is
usually not a design criteria.
(assuming use of splice plates on each side of web and bolts in double shear)
(i) Single column of bolts — using Section 3.1.5 and Section 5.14 (np2 rows at pitch sp2 — Fig. 4.10.5.2(A))

Note:
Bout roRce>7 (1) np2 = 1 not permitted
(2) design actions on web
■^6-
Mw
!-#
W T ^ 2
. N» Vj, at bolt group c.g.
are positive in direction
Yl
!-.o
I 4.
w
NW
^'2 shown (after Fig. 4.10.2.1)
V*
vb if actions in opposite
c j«Ux. vthh direction use negative
r
value in equations.
Boltfoec&i

Fig. 4.10.5.2(A) Single line of bolts — bolt forces acting towards an edge
(actions on right hand bolt group in Fig. 4.10.5.2(A) positive in sense shown in Fig. 3.1.5)

(-M*/0Md m - N*/</>Vdh)2 + (-V*/tf>Vdw)2 < 1.0 is design requirement (Section 3.1.5)

np2(np2 + ~0Sp2
where, 0Mdm = 2(0Vf) > M* bolts in double shear, np2 ^ 1
6
0Mdm = 0 for np2 = 1
0Vdh = 2np (0Vf) > Hw

0Vdv = 2np m) > V*

0Vf = design capacity of a single bolt in single shear = [</>Vfn or Vfx, </>Vbi, 0Vbw]min

0Vfn, 0VfX — given in Appendix A for threads included (</>Vfn) or excluded (</>Vfx) from shear plane
(usually threads will be assumed included in both shear planes due to the
components and web being thin)

</>Vbi = 0.9(3.2fuitid{) for component of thickness t|

0Vbw = 0.9(3.2fuwtwd,/2) for member web of thickness t w

df = bolt diameter

Additional requirements — after Section 3.1.5 and Section 5.14 — for end plate tearout-

V*
v w
V* ^ 0.9(aey t| fui) where: 3ey — [3e6> ^e7]min
2n P2

V* ae6, ae7 — defined in Fig. 4.10.5.2(A)

v
2\l* = -JS-w< 0.9(ae7 tw fuw)
nP2 ae7 = Sp2 - dh/2

sp2 = bolt pitch in web plates

dh = hole diameter

for design actions on the web positive in the direction shown in Fig. 4.10.5.2(A) np2 # 1

-Vhb ^ V*b -N* 6M*

2+2
+ 2(n (n + 1)s ) < 0.9 (ae5 tj fui) bolt 2
2np2 p2 p2 p2

Yk v*b N* 6M*
+ 2n s (n + 1) < 0.9 (ae8 tj fui) where: aes = sg2 - dh/2 bolt 6
2 2 2np2 p2 p2 p2

N*
IN 6M*
VSb + V*b W

nP2
+ np2Sp2(np2
^ 0.9 (ae4 tw fuw) bolt 6
+ 1)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 139

BOLTED SPLICE
Double column of bolts — using Section 3.1.5 and Section 5.14 (np2 rows at pitch sp2 — Fig. 4.10.5.2(B))
(actions on right hand bolt group in Fig. 4.10.5.2(B) positive in sense shown in Fig. 3.1.5)

FORCER Note: design actions on web

K at bolt group c.g.

are positive in direction
-O- --( & shown (after Fig. 4.10.2.1)
Vmh I VHb Ymh A
4v
w
4
Spa
i;
* *mv ivL
bb if actions in opposite
direction use negative
9. value in equations.
<3<2.7 fvv*b
O
v*b v*b 'Cb.? Vhb
a** Vi
W1V
tv*
Fig. 4.10.5.2(B)

-V*l2
+ 2spg r-vj' w
+ -Mw 2
+
2 -K -M*
+
'_N*l2
I'Jw
< 1.0
0Vdv V1 + s£ P9 ^Vdv. <£Mm
d
<£Mm
d VTTsgP9 4>Vdb 0 M dm 4>V dh
is design requirement (Section 3.1.5)
where: 0Vdv = 4np(^Vf) <^Vdh = 4np(^Vf) (bolts in double shear)
(1 /3) (np2- 1) + (sa3/sp2)2
— 2np2 Sp2
V(np2 - 1)2 + (sg3/sp2)2
(m for nP2 # 1

= 2sg3(tf>Vf) for np2 = 1

sg3
spg
(nP2 ~ 1)sP2

<£Vf — as defined in Section (i) above.

Additional requirements — after Section 3.1.5 and Section 5.14 — for end plate tearout-
In Fig. 4.10.5.2(B) aeS ” Sg3 — dh/2 dh = hole diameter
ae8 - sp2 - 4/2

aey — [ae?; aeslmin

Sex ~ [ae5> ae6]min

From Section 5.14 bolt force due to design actions on bolt groups are given as:—
V*
Vw Nw
V*fa = VS
hb
4n P2 4n p2
M* s 23
V*
vmv (for np2 # 1) bp = [(nib- 1) + 3(sg3/sp2)2]
2 l bp
Mw (nP2 ~~ 1) sp2
v*b = 2 I bp
(for np2 * 1)

Vmh = 0 (for np2 = 1) Vmv = M*/sg3 (for np2 = 1)

and design requirements are:—
VJ, + V*v < 0.9 (aey tj fui) Vmh + Vmb ^ 0-9 (ae5 t| fui)
2(V*b + V*v) ^ 0.9(ae8twU 2(V*h + Vb*b) < 0.9 (ae4 tw fyw)
Vmh + V&, < 0.9 (aex tj fui)
2(Vmh + Vffb) ^ 0.9(ae5twfuw)

140 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE
4.10.6 MEMBER SECTION CAPACITY

4.10.6.1 Introduction
Locally at the connection, the section capacity may be affected by the presence of the bolt holes, as described in the
following sections. The member capacity remains unaffected by the presence of the bolt holes being based on the
properties of the gross section. (Section capacity and member capacity are as defined in AS 4100).

4.10.6.2 Member Subject to Bending

Clause 5.2.6 of AS 4100 requires that, if the area of holes in the flanges reduces the flange area by less than
[1- fy/(0.85 fu)], then the gross section may be used to determine the section moment capacity and no allowance for
the presence of holes is necessary.
If the loss of area in the flange due to holes is more than this value, then the net section should be used although AS
4100 does permit an alternative approach.

II
v
nh HOLES OFPIAMETfcR.
gross area of flange A, = bf tf area of holes Ah = nh dh tf
if Ah/A, < [1“fy/(0.85fu)] use gross section properties, and
if Ah/A, > [1- fy/(0.85fu)] use properties of section allowing for holes
Fig. 4.10.6.1
For the fully bolted splice, the net section is as shown in Fig. 4.10.6.2(a) and the relevant section properties are given
in Appendix F. For the combination bolted/welded splice, the net section is as shown in Fig. 4.10.6.2(b) and the
relevant section properties are given in Appendix F.
Since the provisions of AS 4100 do not require any deduction for bolt holes that are filled with bolts in a compression
member (see Section 4.10.6.3 below), it could be argued that no deduction need be made for bolt holes on the
compression flange of a member subject to flexure provided that the holes are filled with bolts. If this is assumed
then the appropriate net section is that shown in Fig. 4.10.6.2(b).

4.10.6.3 Member Subject to Axial Compression

Clause 6.2.1 of AS 4100 states that when bolt holes are filled with bolts, the net area may be taken as the gross area
- that is that no deduction is required for the presence of bolt holes.
Since all holes would normally be filled with bolts in either the bolted splice or the combination bolted/welded splice,
the gross area can be used to determine the nominal section capacity.

4.10.6.4 Member Subject to Axial Tension

Clause 7.2 of AS 4100 requires that the net area be obtained by deducting the sectional area of all the holes from
the gross area.
Hence, for the fully bolted splice, the net section is that given in Fig. 4.10.6.2(a) and the formula for the net area is
given in Appendix F. For the combination bolted/welded splice, the net section is that given in Fig. 4.10.6.2(b) and
the formula for the net area is given in Appendix F.

+=
oM I

(a) (b)
Fig. 4.10.6.2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 141

 BOLTED SPLICE

4.10.7 DESIGN EXAMPLE

Moment and Shear Splice Design

B5 no \*x>jI to.B5 I/IBO -12. FLAT BAR * BCO LG.

( £!OLTG AT 0)0 GAUGE >
10

■t

8o
50
w
ilt 4.^-1

A
+ \80 I
50
B5 10©
70
70
7o
NOTE.’.
M?0 eOUT-
C8> e>)T& CATEGORY')
4IOU&5B7 ©OLD 5-AWN BEAK
GPADE- 250 END AB4UME-D
Z; 22.
*
2/lBO-G FUTBAR^ 44 BO 45 I /160 -.12 TTAT CAR * BOO LG .
x *2 BO LONG (60LTB AT BO GAUGE>

Fig. 4.10.7.1

Design Parameters: Grade 250 steel member to AS 3679

410UB53.7: d = 403 mm bf = 178 mm tf = 10.9 mm t^b — 7.6 mm
(d - t,) = 392 mm dl^ = 381 mm fyf = fyw = 260 MPa

fuf = f uw = 410 MPa

kmw = 0.19 (See Table E.1)
Bolts: M20, 8.8/TB category d, = 20 mm np1 = 2 np2 =4 ng = 2
hole diameter, dh = 22 mm sg1 = sg2 = 90 mm sg3 = 90 mm c = 10 mm
Flange Splice Plates: bj = 180 mm t| = 12 mm fyi = 260 MPa fui = 410 MPa

Web Splice Plates: t, = 6 mm d, = 280 mm fyi = 260 MPa fui = 410 MPa
(2 no.)
Edge distances: Flanges ae0 = (180 - 90)/2 = 45 mm > 1.5d, = 30 mm
(Table 4.10.3.1)
aei = 35 mm ae2 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm
ae3 = (90 - 10)/2 = 40 mm
Web ae4 = ae3 = 40 mm ae5 = 45 mm
(Fig. 4.10.5.2(A))
ae6 = 35 mm ae7 = 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm
ae8 = 90 - 22/2 = 79 mm
Design Actions: M* = 80 kNm V* = 50 kN N* = 0 kN
Minimum Design Actions: Section 4.10.2.2

minimum design bending moment = 0.3 x 0.9 x 260 x 1050 x 103/106 = 73.7 kNm Satisfied
minimum design shear force = nil
minimum design axial force = nil as the splice connection is on a flexural member

142 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BOLTED SPLICE
Derived Design Actions to Flanges and Web
Flanges NS = (1 - 0.19) x 80 x 103/392 = 165 kN
Nfc = (1 - 0.19) x 80 x 103/392 = 165 kN
Web V* = 50 kN
N* = 0 kN
ed = distance from centre of splice to centre of bolt group = 90/2 = 45 mm
M* = 0.19 x 80 + (50 x 45/103) = 17.5 kNm
Bolted Flange Splice:
Bolts (Section 4.10.3.1)
4 no x M20 bolts per side of splice, 8.8/TB category, threads included in shear plane
0Vfn = 92.6 kN (Table A.2, Appendix A)
Lj = 70 mm from first to last bolt on each side of splice
kr = 1.0 (Table 3.1.3.2(1))
ng = 2 npi = 2

4>\Jbi = minimum of:— 0.9 x 3.2 x 410 x 12 x 20/103 = 283 kN (Table 4.10.3.1)
0.9 x 35 x 12 x 410/103 155 kN
0.9 x 59 x 12 x 410/103 = 261 kN
= 155 kN
<£Vbf = minimum of:- 0.9 x 3.2 x 410 x 10.9 x 20/103 = 257 kN (Table 4.10.3.1)
0.9 x 59 x 10.9 x 410/103 - 237 kN
0.9 x 40 x 10.9 x 410/103 = 161 kN
= 161 kN
0Vdf - [92.6; 155; 161]min - 92.6 kN
$Vfb 2 x 2 x 1.0 x 92.6 - 370 kN > NS « N?c - 165 kN Satisfactory
Plates (Section 4.10.3.2):
<£Npt ~ minimum of:- 0.9 x 260 x 180 x 12/103 - 505 kN
0.9 x 0.85 x 410 x 12 x (180 - 2 x 22)/103 = 512 kN
= 505 kN
> N*„ = 165 kN Satisfactory
4>Npc= 0.9 x 260 x 12 x 180/103 = 505 kN
> N*c = 165 kN Satisfactory
Bolted Web Splice:
Web Plates (Section 4.10.5.1)
Bending moment dj/tj = 280/6 = 46.7 < 82
Zei = 6 x (280)2/4 118 x 103 mm3
4>Mwd = 0.9 x 2 x 260 x 118 x 103/106 = 55.0 kNm
> = 17.5 kNm Satisfactory
Shear #/Iw < 0.75 (<£Mwd) - 0.75 x 55.0 = 41.3 kNm
<£Vwd = 4>Vvd = 0.9 x 2 x 0.6 x 260 x 280 x 6/103 = 472 kN
> V* = 50 kN Satisfactory

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 143

BOLTED SPLICE
Bolt Group in Web Splice Single Column of Bolts (Section 4.10.5.2(i))
4 no x M20 bolts per side of splice, 8.8/TB category, threads included in shear plane, bolts in double shear

4>Vfn = 92.6 kN (Table A.3.2, Appendix A) nP2 = 4 sp2 = 70 mm

<£Vbi = 0.9 x 3.2 x 410 x 6 x 20/103 = 142 kN

$Vbw = 0.9 x 3.2 x 410 x 7.6 x 10/103 = 89.7 kN

0Vf = [92.6; 142; 89.7]min = 89.7 kN

4>Mdm = 2 x 89.7 x 4 x 5 x 70/(6 x 103) = 41.9 kNm

> = 17.5 kNm Satisfactory

<£Vdv = 2 x 4 x 89.7 = 718 kN

> V* = 50 kN Satisfactory
Interaction (-17.5/41.9)2 + (-50/718)2 = 0.18
< 1.0 Satisfactory
Additional Requirements:-

aey — [35, 59]mjn — 35 mm

V*v = 50/2 x 4 = 6.25 kN < 0.9 x 35 x 6 x 410/103 = 77.5 kN
2V% = 12.5 kN < 0.9 x 59 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 165 kN
6 x 17.5 x 103
V£b 2 x 4 x 5 x 70
= 37.5 kN < 0.9 x 40 x 7.6 x 410/103 = 112 kN

V*b/2 - 18.75 kN < 0.9 x 45 x 6 x 41Q/1Q3 = 99.6 kN

< 0.9 x 79 x 6 x 410/103 = 175 kN

Satisfactory

$5 no °>o no. 'is

— l/l60 , LOMG
'9 1 / AT 'SO GAUSS
&-M20 EOLT<*, grfe/TB CATE&OfCf

kDO
■e
TO
70
r no
■v?
/
2/l6b<GRATBAES ■ j/ieO-lZfTAT&AR.
* 2&0 LG • BOLT'S AT '» GAUGE
S-M20 BOLTS 4*5 ®>0 4-5 6 mbo bolts, £>&/re> categor/
S-6/7B CATEGORY

Fig. 4.10.7.2

144 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BRACING CLEAT

4.11 BRACING CLEAT CONNECTION

4.11.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

tw

: ■

Fig. 4.11.1.1 Alternative ’A’ - Single line of Bolts to Brace and Cleat

■tw ■efe-

*5*2
*^

fit

j/*.

Fig. 4.11.1.2 Alternative ’B’ - Double Line of Bolts to Brace and Cleat

DETAILING NOTES:
(1) Bracing gussets should be detailed as rectangular shapes to reduce marking-off and cutting time.
(2) For isolated members, use square edge flat bars as connection components. Where several members frame
into the one point, use rectangular shaped plates.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 145

BRACING CLEAT

The following member types may be attached to the bracing cleat either directly or through another cleat attached
to the bracing member.
TABLE 4.11.1

Member Side Elevation Section Comments

Angle(s) Member design to AS 4100.
Bolt and cleat design to
Section 4.11.2 herein.

Rod Member design to AS 4100.

Bolt and cleat design to
I Section 4.11.2 herein.

Flattened Member design to AS 4100.

Tube Bolt and flattened end
-n- design to Section 4.11.2 herein.

Holiow Slot section not cleat.

cf) $
I
Sections - Member design to AS 4100.
Cleated ►— Bolt and cleat design to
Section 4.11.2 herein.

Hollow Member design to AS 4100.

Sections - "H Bolt design to Section 4.11.2
Tee Plate herein.
L Tee Plate design to
Reference 11.9,11.10..

Rolled Member design to AS 4100.

Section - Bolt design and cleat
. t i
Cleat Plate j. —; design to Section 4.11.2 herein.

4.11.2 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL

4.11.2.1 Assumptions
The assumptions are:
(1) Centre-line of bolt group, gusset and fillet weld group are assumed to coincide.
(2) The eccentricity "e" between the gravity axis of the bracing member and the centre-line of the connection should
be accounted for in the design of the bracing member by:
(i) either using Section 8 or Clause 7.3 of AS 4100 in the case of tension members; or
(ii) using Section 8 of AS 4100 in the case of compression members.
The gravity axis of the bracing member and the centre-line of the connection are not assumed to coincide. As
long as conventional gauge lines of the bracing member are used {see Section 5.11) to establish the centre-line
of the connection, this eccentricity (e) is neglected in the design of the connection (AS 4100, Clause 9.1.5).
ACCORDINGLY, THIS DESIGN MODEL SHOULD ONLY BE USED FOR STATICALLY LOADED MEMBERS.

146 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BRACING CLEAT
4.11.2.2 Connection Geometries

Bracks
mem exx.(f?y
OJt CLEAT
TO &1LACJUG
MEM&Efc %
Co

---- V
\ v*
Lw

Alternative ‘A’

60^
\7V
C^fS 3^3 • vy
0< CONNECTION
COMPONENT

CP

0 = angle of inclination of centre line

of bracing cleat to the horizontal

Alternative ‘B’
°f>K>
tw

A A
V L*/ ©• A

GRACING
MEMBEK.(V)
4 A
OK. CLEAT
TO &>RACtN£
MEM BEK-
/
A-
4^
-CONNECTION <V
COMTONENT

ft:

oA

Fig. 4.11.2

Note: Edge distance should be at least 1.5df. (df= bolt diameter)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 147

BRACING CLEAT
4.11.2.3 Design Actions
The design action on the bracing cleat, applied at the common centre-line of the bolt group, gusset and weld
group may be either:-
N* — if the design action is a tension force
N* — if the design action is a compression force
The minimum design axial force at the end of a tension or compression member is specified by Clause 9.1.4 of
AS 4100 to be:-
0.3 x member design capacity
except that for a threaded rod acting as a bracing member with turnbuckles, the minimum design tension force
must be equal to the member design capacity.

4.11.2.4 Bolt Group

Design Requirement:- irrespective of whether design force is tensile or compressive
0Nb > N* or N* as appropriate
where 0Nb design capacity of bolt group
nb kr </>Vdf (Section 3.1.3)
nb total number of bolts in the group
K reduction factor to account for the length of a bolted lap splice connection given by Table
3.1.3.2(1) but most often 1.0
0Vdf design capacity of a single bolt in shear-all failure modes considered
[<£Vfn; c/>Vbi; <j!>Vb2]mjn
0V„ design capacity for a single bolt in shear
given in Appendix A, threads assumed to be included in shear plane
$Vbi design capacity related to local bearing failure in the component or the connected material
[0.9 x 3.2 fui tj df; 0.9 x 3.2 fub tb df]min
</>vb2design capacity related to end plate tearout in the component or the connected material
oo (infinity) if the design force is compressive
= minimum of the following if the design force is tensile:-
0.9 ae1 fui tj 0.9 ae2 fub tb
0.9 ae2 fUi ti 0.9 ae4 fub tb
Additional design requirement is that ae3 3* 1.5 df
Terms are defined as follows:-
fui = tensile strength of component fub = tensile strength of connected material
tj = thickness of component tb = thickness of connected material
df = diameter of bolt dh = diameter of bolt hole
ae1, ae3, ae4 = end distances defined in Fig. 4.11.2
ae2 = (sp - dh/2) sp = bolt pitch

4.11.2.5 Weld Group to Support

Design Requirement:- irrespective of whether the design force is tensile or compressive
0Nw > N*, or N* as appropriate
where c/)Nw = design capacity of weld group
= 2 Lw (0vw) (Section 3.2.6)
Lw = length of weld to support-see Fig 4.11.2
= bj/cos 6
bj = width of component
d = angle between centreline of bracing cleat and horizontal axis-see Fig. 4.11.2
0vw = design capacity of a fillet weld per unit length (see Tables B.1 and B.2 of Appendix B)

148 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BRACING CLEAT
4.11.2.6 Cleat Component
Design Requirements:-
Axiai Tension 0Ntc > N* is the design requirement
where 4>N1c = design capacity of cleat component in tension
= [0Ntai ^Nttdmin
^>Nta = design capacity of cleat component in axial tension (AS 4100 Clause 7.2)
= minimum of:- 0.9 x bj tj fyi
0.9 x 0.85 x 1.0 x fui x (biti - ngdhtj)
bi = width of component fyi = yield stress of component
tj = thickness of component fUi = tensile strength of component
ng = number of holes of diameter dh across component at gauge sg
4>N{b = design capacity of cleat component in block shear (after Section 3.4.5)
= maximum of:- 0.9 x (0.6fyjAvg + fUi Ant)
0.9 x (0.6 fu! Ans + fyi Atg)
Single line of bolts Avg = gross area subject to shear = [aei + (np - 1 )sp]tj
(Fig. 4.11.2.6(a)) Atg = gross area subject to tension = ae3 tj
Ans = net area subject to shear = Avg - (np - 0.5) dh tj
An1 = net area subject to tension = A{g - 0.5 dh ti

&A
sf!S lo
X 5a
\sC
X

\ \

V5'

\
5
€
'3

(a) (b)
Fig. 4.11.2.6

Double line of bolts Avg = gross area subject to shear = 2[ae1 + (np - 1)sp]tj
(Fig. 4.11.2.6(b)) Atg = gross area subject to tension = sgtj
Ans = net area subject to shear = Avg - 2(np - 0.5) dh tj
Art = net area subject to tension = Atg - dhtj
Axial Compression 4>MCC > N* is the design requirement
where 4>Ncc = design capacity of cleat component in axial compression
- 0.9 ac Ns ^ 0.9 Ns (AS 4100 Clause 6.3.3 with 4> = 0.9)
Ns = nominal section capacity in compression (AS 4100 Clause 6.2)
~ bj tj gyj (taking kf = 1.0 and assuming all
holes are filled with bolts)
AS 4100 Clause 6.3.3 gives
ac = the member slenderness reduction factor
M2 + 1+77
90
€=

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 149

BRACING CLEAT

k = X.n 4- aaQ£b
77 = 0.00326(A - 13.5) ^ 0

kn

2100 (An - 13.5)

aa
- 15.3Xn + 2050
ab = the appropriate member section constant given in Table 6.3.3(1) or 6.3.3(2) of AS 4100
k{ = the form factor determined in accordance with Clause 6.2.2 of AS 4100.
For this connection:
U = 0.7 Lb kf =1.0
r = Lj/12 ab = 0.5 (other section description in Table 6.3.3(1)).

150 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BRACING CLEAT

4.11.3 DESIGN EXAMPLE

G>
&

• CENTRELINE. OF COHPONEMT

<\0 •30* * £

0)0* lOSOUARE^PSE
FLAT BAR.
22 OfA. HOLES. FOR.
M2O BOLT^ e>-&/*
aOUIMG CATEGORY
V-si-
\*p.
. »/ ICO * 7*? * 10 ISA
CONWEC-TEP THROUGH (OCs L£G .

Fig. 4.11.3

Design Parameters
Design Action Nf 150 kN
Angie Brace b, 100 mm b2 = 75 mm tb = 9.5 mm fyb 260 MPa
AS 1580 mm2 A, = 1580 - 1 x 22 x 9.5 1370 mm2 fub 410 MPa
a62 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm ae4 = 35 mm kt 0.85
Cleat bi 90 mm tf = 10 mm fyi - 260 MPa ful 410 MPa
d 30° Lw - 90/cos 30° 104 mm
Bolts 3 x M20 bolts, 8.8/S category, threads included in shear plane, np = 3
df = 20 mm dh = 22 mm sP = 70 mm
aei 35 mm w
ae2 70 - 22/2 = 59 mm ae3 = 45 mm
> 1.5 x 20 - 30 mm
Welds 6 mm fillet weld, both sides of cleat, Lw = 104 mm
weld category SP, E48XX weld metal
Minimum Design Action 0.3 x member design capacity
Member design capacity = minimum of:- (AS 4100, Clause 7.2)
0.9 x 1580 x 260/103 = 370 kN
3
0.9 x 0.85 x 0.85 x 1370 x 410/10 = 366 kN
= 366 kN
Minimum design action = 0.3 x 366 = 110 kN
< Nf = 150kN Satisfactory to design for 150 kN
Adopt Nf = 150 kN

Design Capacity of Connection

Bolt Group (Section 4.11.2.4) np = 3
4>Vfn = 92.6 kN (Table A.2.2, Appendix A)
kr = 1.0 (Table 3.1.3.2(1) with L; = 140 mm)
<£Vb1 = minimum of:—
0.9 x 3.2 x 410 x 10 x 20/103 = 236 kN
0.9 x 3.2 x 410 x 9.5 x 20/103 = 224 kN
= 224 kN

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 151

 BRACING CLEAT

(£Vb2 = minimum of:-

0.9 x 35 x 410 x 10/103 = 129 kN
0.9 x 35 x 410 x 9.5/103 = 123 kN
0.9 x 59 x 410 x 10/103 = 218 kN
0.9 x 59 x 410 X 9.5/103 = 207 kN
= 123 kN

0Vd{ = [92.6; 224; 123]min = 92.6 kN

0Nb = 3 x 1.0 x 92.6 = 278 kN > N*t = 150 kN Satisfactory

Weld Group (Section 4.11.2.5)

0vw = 0.978 kN/mm (Table B.1, Appendix B)
0NW = 2 X 104 x 0.978 = 203 kN > N*t = 150 kN Satisfactory

Cleat Component (Section 4.11.2.6)

Axial Tension
0Nta = minimum of:- 0.9 x 90 x 10 x 260/103 = 211 kN
0.9 x 0.85 x 1.0 x 410 x 10 x (90 - 22)/103 = 213 kN
= 211 kN
Avg = (35 + 2 x 70) x 10 = 1750 mm2
Atg = (45 x 10) = 450 mm2
Ans = 1750 - (3.0 - 0.5) x 22 x 10 = 1200 mm2
Ant = 450 0.5 x 22 X 10 = 340 mm2
4>Ntb = maximum of:— 0.9 x (0.6 x 260 X 1750 + 410 x 340)/103 = 371 kN
0.9 x (0.6 x 410 x 1200 + 260 x 450)/103 = 371 kN
= 371 kN
Ntc = [211; 371 ]min = 211 kN > N*t = 150 kN Satisfactory

152 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BASE PLATE

4.12 COLUMN BASE PLATE — PINNED TYPE CONNECTION

4.12.1 CONNECTION DETAILS

COMTONEMT
J=L TO^uvr
X
i
GROUT PAP

(T/PtCAL
r
V < TYPICAL
5e t
rrrrrrmr
tua
Trrrm
■

Tnr
tJjL. JUii ■

%
i,

Fig. 4.12.1.1 2-bolt base plate to Fig. 4.12.1.2 4-bolt base plate to
l-Section column l-Section column

.y. rtf lM^ .iitiJ-ui-i.

I-"'--
/

"O- f
7TTT

rrrrTT^r

—€ )*
»
-O-

Fig. 4.12.1.3 2-bolt base plate to Fig. 4.12.1.4 2-bolt base plate to
channel section column hollow section columns

LXGEMD : -o - anchor ecu lqcatiom

- WOLE-1^) ALLOV/ GROUT D3R£^

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 153

 BASE PLATE
DETAILING NOTES:

(1) A variety of recommended details for anchor bolts, including the provision of cored holes in the concrete base,
and the installation tolerances for anchor bolts, are discussed in Section 5.12.
(2) Generally, cast-in anchor bolts are category 4.6/S of diameter either M16, M20, M24 or M30.
Masonry anchors of diameter M16, M20, M24 may also be used.
Note that a minimum of two (2) anchor bolts is recommended.
(3) Preferred anchor bolt gauge (sg) and pitch (sp) are given in Reference 1.

(4) With this connection, over-welding is prevalent (the "weld all round” philosophy) and can be very expensive.
The details shown in Figs 4.12.1.1-4 can, if designed for light loadings, tend to the other extreme and some
fabricators may prefer to increase the amount of welding above that shown on the design drawings in order to
prevent damage during handling and shipping. There is usually a compromise possible between these
extremes. Another design consideration is the likelihood of a nominally "pinned” base being subjected to some
bending moment in a real situation.
(5) Column shafts with cold-sawn ends normally provide full bearing contact with the base plate.

Y LL LEVEL OF
Uh BASEPLATE
SHEAR K£y
7 7 7' '/'/' concrete;
e-wins
PLAN 6L0VATIOH

Fig. 4.12.1.5 Fig. 4.12.1.6

(6) Any horizontal (shear) force is resisted either:

(i) by the anchor bolts
(ii) by friction between the base plate and the concrete footing
(iii) by a shear key, which is usually a block welded to the underside of the base plate (see Fig. 4.12.1.5)
(iv) recessing the base plate into the concrete footing, or
(v) a combination of two or more of the above.

(7) Prior to erecting the column/base plate assembly, the level of the base plate area should be surveyed and shims
placed to indicate the correct level of the underside of the base plate (Fig. 4.12.1.6). For heavier column/base
plate assemblies, levelling-nut arrangements may be used in order to allow accurate levelling of the base plate
(see Refs. 12.1, 12.2).
(8) Hole sizes in base plates may be up to 6mm larger than the anchor bolt diameter (AS 4100, Clause 14.3.5.2).
Holes require a special plate washer of 4 mm minimum thickness under the nut if the bolt hole is more than 3
mm larger than the anchor bolt diameter.
(9) Base plate thickness should be a preferred plate thickness.
(10) Base plates should be provided with at least one grout inspection hole through which the grout will rise
indicating a satisfactory grouting operation.
(11) Anchor bolts are usually galvanised, even for an interior application, in order to avoid corrosion during the
construction period where the steel columns may stand for some time in the open air.
(12) The size and location of any permanent steel shims under the base plate should be shown on the drawings.
Temporary packers which are used for erection purposes until the underside of the base plate is grouted or
concreted should be left to the erector to detail.
(13) The minimum space between the underside of the base plate and the concrete foundation should be
25 mm for grouting
50 mm for mortar bedding
75 mm for concrete bedding
(14) Tolerances on anchor bolt positions and level of base plate should conform to the provisions of AS 4100
(Section 5.12).

154 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BASE PLATE
4.12.2 DESIGN

4.12.2.1 Design Actions

Pinned type column base plates may be subject to the following design actions (Fig. 4.12.2.1):

- an axial force, N*, either tension or compression

- a shear force, V*, acting in the direction of either principal axis or both
Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100, which considers minimum design actions, does not specifically mention minimum design
actions for column base plates but does require that:

- connections at the ends of tension or compression members be designed for a minimum force of 0.3 times
the member design capacity;
- connections to beams in simple construction be designed for a minimum shear force of 40 kN.
It is considered inappropriate for these provisions be applied to column base plates, since many columns are in
fact subject to bending moments at other locations which control the size of the member or are subject to flexural
buckling as part of a frame which also controls the size of the member.

■U-

K ip t

K* k
V* |V *
]

Axial Force plus Major Axis Axial Force plus Minor Axis
Shear Force Shear Force
Fig. 4.12.2.1
4.12.2.2 Connection Geometry
dc = depth of column section di depth of base plate component
bfc = flange width of column section bi width of base plate component
tfc = flange thickness of column section ti thickness of base plate component
twc = web thickness of column section fvi
yi
yield stress of base plate component
fc = characteristic compression strength of concrete at 28 days
a1f a2 = edge distances defined in Fig. 4.12.2.2 am = maximum of [ay, a2]
ai = (d| - 0.95 dc) / 2 a2 = [bi - 0.80 bfc] / 2
Ai = area of base plate component = bj dj
A2 = area of supporting concrete foundation that is geometrically similar to the base plate

bTc

r
i It
Vr*
w do
di O-Mtfe

a.i
bi,
Fig. 4.12.2.2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 155

 BASE PLATE

4.12.3 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL-AXIAL COMPRESSION

Design Requirement-
for column end prepared for full contact Ndes = mc; 0Ns]min ^ N*
for column end not prepared for full contact Ndes = [<£NC; <£NS; </>Nw]min
> N*
where: <f>Nc = design strength of concrete foundation in compression
= minimum of:-
A1 x <(> x 0.85 fe 'A2 <f> = 0.6 (AS 3600, Clause 12.3)
A1
At X <j> X 2 fc
(j>Ns = design strength of steel base plate in compression
= minimum of:-
0.9 x fyj x t? x At
2agi
0.9 x fyi x tj x Ah
2 a§
Ah = maximum of
N* N*
and where 4> = 0.6
0 X 0.85 fc'VA2/(bfcdc) <t> x 2 f'

^3 = i [(dc + M - V(dc + bfc)2 - 4 Ah]

4> Nw design capacity of fillet weld at base of column subject to axial compression in column
= (<£vw)l w

Lw = total length of fillet weld

<£vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length (see Appendix B)

c
bfc

dc di
<fe
di
6c di

t t

<dl

dc
L

Fig. 4.12.3

156 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BASE PLATE
The above expressions apply for l-section column members as in Fig. 4.12.3. For other sections—as in Fig.
4.12.3, the following expressions should be substituted:
Channel section a! = (dj - 0.95 dc)/2 a2 = (bi - 0.80 bfc)/2
a3 = [(2b,c + dc) - V(2bfc + dc - 8AH]/4)2
Ah as defined for l-sections
RHS/SHS section = (d| - 0.95 dc)/2 a2 = (bi - 0.95 bc)/2
a3 = [2(dc + bc) - V4(dc + bc)2 - 16AH]/8
Ah as defined for l-sections
CHS secions = (d, - 0.80 d0)/2 a2 = (b| - 0.80 d0)/2
d0 - Vd§ - 4 Ah/7r
a3 -
2
Ah = maximum of
N* N*
and where <£ = 0.6
(f) x 0.85 fcV^WAo </> X 2fc
Aq 7T do2/4

4.12.4 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL-AXIAL TENSION

Design Requirement:- Ndes = [<£NS; <£NW; </>Ntb]min ^ N*t
where: <£NS = design strength of steel base plate due to axial tension in column
0 x 4 bf0 fyi t2 n
x -rb when \[2 bf0 s$ dc
\J2 sg 2

</> x fy,(d§ + 2 b2M n

x —b when \J2 bf0 > dc
sg dc 2
</> = 0.9 dc = as defined in Fig. 4.12.4
nb = number of anchor bolts bf0, Jbf0 = as defined in Fig. 4.12.4
sg = gauge of anchor bolts (see Fig. 4.12.4), sg or sg/2 as defined in Fig. 4.12.4
0NW = design capacity of fillet weld at base of column subject to axial tension in column
= 0vw L w

Lw = total length of fillet weld around column section profile

0vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length (see Appendix B)
0Ntb = design capacity of anchor bolts-see Section 4.12.6

^9 *9/2. ^9 ^9
h I\ bt.

dc 4 4 dc 4- 4 + t 4 + c3c

nb -2 nfc>*l nfc>'2 nb-- 2

4- 4 4 t
4 4- 4-
4 4 4-
17b =4 nb = 2

Fig. 4.12.4

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 157

BASE PLATE

4.12.5 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL-SHEAR FORCE

Axial Compression and Shear Force

Design Requirements for resisting shear force by:
all columns relying on anchor bolts see Section 4.12.6________
all columns relying on friction alone 0Vd1 > V*res = n/V*2 + V*2
ail columns relying on friction plus 0Vd2 > V*
shear key to resist x-axis shear
all columns relying on friction plus $Vd3 > V*
shear key to resist y-axis shear
all columns relying on friction plus <£Vd4> V*
shear key to resist both x-axis </>Vd5> V*
and y-axis shear
for column end prepared for full contact Ndes [0NC; 0Ns]min > N*
weld to transmit shear force only (Section 3.2.7) V*res — \/v*2 + V*2 < </>v w

for column end not prepared for full contact Ndes [0NC; <£Ns]min > N*
for welds to column ends (Section 3.2.7) V*res \/v*2 + v*2 + v*2 < 0v w

where:- (f)Nc = as defined in Section 4.12.3

0NS = as defined in Section 4.12.3
V* = design shear force parallel to the major principal x-axis of the column member
V * = design shear force parallel to the minor principal y-axis of the column member
V*res = resultant design shear force
v*x = V*/L w = V y/LW v* = -N*/L
Lw = total length of fillet weld around column section profile
</>Vd1 = design shear capacity relying on friction alone
= <f> x fj, N* where 0 = 0.8
fx = coefficient of friction (see Fig. 5.12.11 in Section 5.12)
= 0.55 - for grouted conditions with the contact plane between the grout and the as-rolled
steel above the concrete surface (normal condition)
0.9 - concrete against as-rolled steel when the contact plane is the full base plate
thickness below the concrete surface (i.e. recessed)
0.7 for concrete or grout placed against the as-rolled steel surface with the contact
plane coincidental with the concrete surface
N* = design axial compression force in column member
0Vd2 = design shear capacity for resisting shear force along column member major principal x-axis
assuming combination of friction and shear key
= 0Vd1 + 0Vkx
0Vkx = design shear capacity of shear key perpendicular to column member x-axis (see below)
0Vd3 = design shear capacity for resisting shear force along column member minor principal y-axis
assuming combination of friction and shear key
= 0Vd1 + 0Vky
0Vky = design shear capacity of shear key perpendicular to column member y-axis (see below)
0Vd4 = design shear capacity for resisting shear force along column member x-axis when shear
forces are acting along both x-axis and y-axis assuming combination of friction and shear
key
V*
= 0Vd1 x
Vres + 0Vkx

158 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BASE PLATE
4>Vd5 = design shear capacity for resisting shear force along column member y-axis when shear
forces are acting along both x-axis and y-axis assuming combination of friction and shear
key
V*
= 0Vd1 x + 0Vky
V*
v
res

<£VkXl 0Vky = design shear capacity of a shear key (see Fig. 4.12.5) with $ = 0.9
= minimum of:-
0 x 0.85 fc' x (bs - tg) x ds
</) x dst| x f ys
2(bs + tg)
where fc = characteristic compression strength of concrete at 28 days
fys = yield stress of shear key steel
The weld of the shear key to the underside of the base plate must satisfy
v*res \/v*2 + v*y2 + v*z2 < 4>v w
where v* = force per unit length of weld due to shear force parallel to column member (principal) x-axis
= V*/Lw
v* = force per unit length of weld due to shear force parallel to column member (principal) y-axis
= V*y/Lw
v* = force per unit length of weld due to twisting by reactions from shear force
= M*y/Iwx + M* x/l wy

Lw = total length of fillet weld on shear key

'wx> 'wy see Section 3.2.7 and discussion in Section 5.12.1
M* V*y x 0.5 bs
M*y V* x 0.5 bs
</>v
w design capacity of fillet weld per unit length (see Appendix B)

ts
[4 M
z

M
Fig. 4.12.5

Axial Tension and Shear Force

Design Requirement:- after Section 4.12.4 ^des — [0N8i 0Ntb]min ^ N t

Shear is assumed to be resisted by the anchor bolts-see Section 4.12.6—or by a shear key (see above) or by
a combination of both.
For welds to column ends (after Section 3.2.7) v* res = Vv*2 + v*2 + v*2 4>vw
where v* = force per unit length of weld due to shear force parallel to column member (principal) x-axis
= V*/L w
v* = force per unit length of weld due to shear force parallel to column member (principal) y-axis
= V*y/L w

v* = force per unit length of weld due to axial tension

= N*,/L w
Lw = total length of fillet weld around column section profile
$vw = design capacity of fillet weld per unit length (see Appendix B)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 159

 BASE PLATE

4.12.6 RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODEL-ANCHOR BOLTS

Anchor Bolt Subject to Axial Tension
Design Requirements 0N,b > N*t
</>Ncc > 0N,b
where:- <f> N,b design capacity of the bolt group in tension = nb <£Nt,
nb number of anchor bolts in the group
<£N„ design capacity of a single anchor bolt = 0.8 As fuf (see Section 3.1.3 and Appendix A)
As tensile stress area of bolt fuf = minimum tensile strength of a bolt
0N cc design capacity of concrete in foundation resisting pull-out
0.80 x 0.33 A ps for all bolt types but hook bolts
0.80 x nb x 0.7 fc' df Lh for hook bolts
df diameter of hook bolt
Lh length of hook (see Fig. 4.12.6.1)
Aps = projected area of failure cone of concrete (see Section 5.12)
= 7r Lb for nb = 1 (isolated single bolt)
see Section 5.12 for bolt groups and bolts near edges of foundations
Ld = length of embedment (see Fig. 4.12.6.1)
minimum value of Ld = 12 d, Grade 250 rod or Grade 4.6 bolt to AS 1111
= 17 df Grade 8.8 bolt to AS 1252
fc = characteristic compression strength of concrete foundation at 28 days
Additional requirements on edge distance (see Fig. 4.12.6.1 and Table 4.12.6):-
fuf
ae > d, 6.0Vfj
> 5df Grade 250 rod or Grade 4.6 bolt to AS 1111
> 7d f Grade 8.8 bolt to AS 1252
> 100 mm

P. 6 V ^ .

U tVGtOf CONCRETE
FOUNDATION!

UD

Lb
Fig. 4.12.6.1

TABLE 4.12.6
DETAILING REQUIREMENTS FOR ANCHOR BOLTS
fuf = 400 MPa fc = 25 MPa

Bolt Dia Minimum Embedment (mm) Minimum Edge Distances (mm) ae Hook Length Lh
(mm) Ld Tension Shear and Combined > As tUf
Shear and Tension 0.7 fc d,
12 144 (Adopt 150) 100 144 (Adopt 150) 160
16 192 (Adopt 200) 100 192 (Adopt 200) 225
20 240 (Adopt 250) 100 240 (Adopt 250) 280
24 288 (Adopt 300) 120 288 (Adopt 300) 335
30 360 150 360 425
36 432 (Adopt 450) 180 432 (Adopt 450) 520

160 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BASE PLATE
Anchor Bolt Subject to Shear Force
Design Requirements:-
for shear force in direction of member x-axis 0Vf > V*x/nb
<£VUSX > <£Vf
for shear force in direction of member y-axis 0Vf > V*/nb
</>VUSy > <£Vf
for shear forces in both directions—satisfy both of the above requirements and
0Vf > V*res/nb
where v* \/* v* res
v Xi v yi V r = as defined in Section 4.12.5
<£Vf = design capacity of a single boit in shear (see Section 3.1.3 and Appendix A)
= 0.9 x 0.62 fuf A, Av = available bolt shear area
0VUS = design capacity of embedded bolt subject to shear force and close to an edge
shear force may be applied in direction of x-axis (x) or y-axis (y)
= 0.8 x 0.32 af
ae = distance from centre of an anchor bolt to a free edge, either in same direction as x-
axis (aex) or in same direction as y-axis (aey)—See Fig. 4.12.6.2. Minimum values of
edge distance are-see Table 4.12.6:-

>d fur
{
0.83V5
> 12 df Grade 250 rod or Grade 4.6 boit to AS 1111
> 17d f Grade 8.8 boit to AS 1252

■ wx»e*of
fouwpatioh

1©^
v*

fv®
Fig. 4.12.6.2

Anchor Boit Subject to Combined Tension and Shear Force

Design Requirements:- All the above criteria for the cases of tension and shear force must be satisfied and
additionally
VI _Njf
0Vf + <£N,f
< 1.0

where V*, - V*/nb for shear force in the direction of the member x-axis
= V*/nb for shear force in the direction of the member y-axis
- V*as/nb for shear force in both directions
(terms as defined in Section 4.12.5)
N*tf = N*/nb

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS

 BASE PLATE

4.12.7 DESIGN EXAMPLE

Design Parameters
Base plate to a 530UB92.4 column, geometry as shown below, subject to the following design actions:-
Axial compression and shear force N* = 90 kN V* = 25 kN acting parallel to member y-axis
Axial tension and shear force N*, = 110 kN V* = 80 kN acting parallel to member y-axis

S'bO Ut> *92- +

■400 GRADE. 2%

COIP9AWM ENJt?
OF COLUMN

O O
ido 230

o o

500
IX
-I
Fig. 4.12.7.1

Connection geometry dc = 533 mm bfc = 209 mm tfc = 15.6 mm twc = 10.2 mm

dj = 560 mm bj = 230 mm tj = 20 mm fyi = 250 MPa
sg = 130 mm sp = 400 mm fc' = 25 MPa
a! = [560 - 0.95 x 533]/2 = 26.8 mm <500 VIA

a2 = [230 - 0.80 x 209]/2 = 31.4 mm

am = [26.8;31.4] max = 31.4 mm A
A-, = 560 x 230 = 128 800 mm2
A2
assuming a 900 dia pier A2 = 700 x 450 = 315 000 mm2
concrete foundation (geometrically similar area taken for purposes of design).
Fig. 4.12.7.2
Design Capacity of the Connection
Axial Compression plus Shear Force (see Sections 4.12.3 and 4.12.5)
128 800 '315 000
</>Nc = minimum of:- x 0.6 x 0.85 x 25 x = 2568 kN
103 128800
128 800 x 0.6 X 2 x 25/103 = 3865 kN
= 2568 kN
90 x 103
Ah = maximum of:- = 3000 mm2
0.6 x 2 x 25
90 x 103
315 000
0.6 x 0.85 x 25 x = 4198 mm2
209 x 533
= 4198 mm2
a3 = H(533 + 209) - V(533 + 209)2 - 4 X 4198] = 2.85 mm
0.9 x 250 x (20)2 x 128 800
0NS = 5880 kN
2 x (31.4)2 x 103
0.9 x 250 x (20)2 x 4198
= 23 260 kN
2 x (2.85)2 x 103
Adopt 0NS = 5880 kN
Since end of column is cold sawn, axial compression is transmitted by bearing and not through the weld.
Assume that shear force is resisted by friction alone, and that base plate sits on a grout pad on top of the
concrete bored pier foundation with n = 0.55:
0Vd1 = 0.8 x 0.55 x 90 = 39.6 kN

162 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 BASE PLATE
For welding, assume that 5 mm fillet weld of weld category GP is provided along the web, 200 mm length each
side
Lw = 2 x 200 = 400 mm <£vw = 0.522 kN/mm (Appendix B, Table B.2)
</>vw Lw = 0.522 x 400 = 209 kN
Design Assessment: Axial Compression Ndes = [2568; 5880] min = 2568 kN
> N* = 90 kN
Shear Force parallel 0Vd1 = 39.6 kN > V* = 25 kN
to member y-axis
</>vw wL = 209 kN > V* = 25 kN
Satisfactory

Axial Tension and Shear Force (see Sections 4.12.4, 4.12.5 and 4.12.6)
b,0 209 mm \J2 x 209 = 296 < dc = 533 mm

N| _ 0.9 x 4 x 209 x 250 X (20)2 4

s
= 819 kN
yj2 x 130 x 103 X 2
Comparing with the method given additionally in Section 5.12
b, = (130 - 10.2)/2 = 60 mm be = 2 x 60 + 30 = 150 mm
0.225 x 150 x (20)2x 250 x 4
0N, = = 225 kN (seems conservative-not adopted)
103 X 60
For fillet weld, assume 5 mm fillet weld all round column profile, weld category GP (since whole section is
subject to tension).
</>vw = 0.522 kN/mm Lw = 2 x 209 + 2 x (209 - 10.2) + 2 x (533 - 2 x 15.6) = 1820 mm
v* = 0 v* = 80/1820 = 0.0440 kN/mm v* = 110/1820 = 0.060 kN/mm
v*es = \/o.04402 + 0.0602 = 0.075 kN/mm
< 0vw = 0.522 kN/mm Satisfactory
Design Assessment: Axial Tension Ndes = [819; 314] min = 314 kN {4>N,b—see below)
> N* = 110 kN Satisfactory
Shear Force resisted by anchor bolts (see below), weld satisfactory

Anchor Bolts 4 no. M20 anchor bolts Grade 4.6 with bolt head
Tension
0Ntf = 78.4 kN (Appendix A, Table A.2.1)
</>N,b = 4 X 78.4 = 314 kN
> N* = 110 kN Satisfactory
min Ld = 12 x 20 = 240 mm Adopt 250 mm
Aps 7r x 2502 = 196350 mm2 for isolated bolt

0NCC = 0,8 x 0.33 X \/25 X 196 350

= 259 kN for isolated bolt
103
> $N„ = 78.4 kN Satisfactory

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 163

 6UTUNE- or 2*30
AREA A,
AREA A
\
// Az
\
\
\ \
\ \ £
Y1.
/ / r-
x** i
\ /
\ y /
X
X
/
X
X
°)O0 DIA.
pieR.

<T7
\ A
\ X
\ / \ X
\ X \ X

40©
QCC> Pt A. PIER"

Fig. 4.12.7.3

Assessing projected plan area of the anchor bolt group shown in sketch using the method of Section 5.12 and
Appendix G
A-i = 7T x 2502 + 2 X 250 X (400 + 130) + 400 x 130 513350 mm2 (Fig. G.2)
1 400
sin it x 2502
400^ 400 2 x 250
deducting shaded area A2 2 x 250 x (Fig. G.3)
4 2 1800
- 70000 - 57955 = 12045 mm2
Aps s 513350 - 2 x 12045 = 489260 mm2
0.80 x 0.33 X V25 x 489260
0Ncc = 646 kN
103
> 0N{p = 314 kN Satisfactory
minimum ae > 5 x 20 = 100 mm
> 20 x 400 = 73 mm Adopt 100 mm Satisfactory
6 x V25
Shear
</>Vf = 44.6 kN threads included in shear plane (Appendix A, Table A:2.1)
> 80/4 = 20 kN Satisfactory
minimum ae > 12 x 20 240 mm
> 20 x 400 = 196 mm Adopt 240 mm approximately available
0.83 x V25

Combined Tension and Shear

V* = 80/4 = 20 kN N*t{ = 110/4 = 27.5 kN
<}>\lf = 44.6 kN </>Ntf = 78.4 kN
20 27.5
= 0.80 < 1.0 Satisfactory
44.6 + 78.4

AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5. COMMENTARY
5.0 CONNECTION CHARACTERISTICS
Fig. 5.0 illustrates typical moment-rotation characteristics for a variety of both “flexible” and “rigid” connections. It is
clear from this figure that no connection is either fully rigid (vertical axis) or truly pinned (horizontal axis) and it is also
apparent that whether a connection is “rigid” or “flexible” may well depend on the rotation which is imposed on it.
Although none of the connections are ideal pins, all of the flexible connections would be suitable for simple design
within the meaning of Clause 4.2 of AS 4100. Connections connect a “member” to a “support”. Similar to
connections, supports may be considered to be “flexible” or “stiff”, in the extreme. In practice, no support is purely
“flexible” (i.e. all beam end rotation is accommodated by movement of the support) nor purely “stiff” (i.e. all beam
end rotation is accommodated by deformation within the connection), but rather lies somewhere between the two
extremes.

4oo-

121(310

'bOO-
rtf'
0 &

t-
34
S is
u >6EKl-RI0D
z
u
ro 0-1-Tj
s:
m
(0
z
5

too
-... *
eTiff
>FLe«BtC
BOLTED Wfc& ANiitE. CLtAT
FLE-X 1&US* L&
0o
OOl 002 0O3> OOA 005 oo&
^ ^ ROTATION (RADIANS)

Fig. 5.0 Moment Rotation Characteristics of Typical Connections

in a truly flexible support situation, the laws of statics demand that the bolt or weld groups and the connection
components must resist the full effect of the bending moment and shear at the position of the connection.
If the connection is to a stiff support, parts of the connection may have reduced bending moments on them. However,
it must be realised that the other parts of the connection and the support must have compensating bending moments
on them. It is also possible that the bending moments involved may be greater than the nominal bending moment of
the flexible support case.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 165

The bending moment at the support is a function of the stiffness and strength of the support and of the beam, the
detailing and strength of the bolt and weld groups, and the stiffness and strength of the connection components.
Significant rotation may take place in the bolt group or in the connection components.
There are two extremes of behaviour possible with a stiff support situation:
(a) maintain a significant stiffness and strength throughout all elements of the connection;
(b) arrange that some element of the connection is rotationally flexible (while not impairing the load carrying
capability of the connection).
It is generally assumed that the angle seat, bearing pad, flexible end plate and the angle cleat connections can be
detailed into category (b). Care is, however, necessary in dimensioning the components for these connections to
ensure that as much flexibility as possible is achieved. Making the ‘flexible’ component too stiff places unnecessary
rotation requirements and bending moments on the other components and the support.
The web side connection nominally seems to fit into category (a). The weld is stiff and possesses little ductile
rotational capacity. The plate may be capable of significant rotation if a plastic hinge can form in it. The bolt group is
also capable of significant rotation and tests suggest that most of the rotation occurs in the bolt group. Obviously,
where the rotation occurs is a function of the relative stiffnesses and strengths of the components, and their
interactions.
A further complication is that it is possible to have two extremes of behaviour in the stiff support case:
(a) rotation capacity provided directly adjacent to the support (flexible end plate, flexible angle cleat);
(b) rotation capacity provided at a distance from the support.
Note that case (b) requires that the support and the components between the hinge and the support always be subject
to bending moments as well as shear.
Using the recommended design models of this Manual, the distinction between a stiff and flexible support is
accounted for in the formulation of the design model.
Another observation also should be made. In determining the design model to be adopted for a connection the
detailing practice, the effect of tolerances and the magnitude of the design capacities must all be considered.
Connection detailing practice differs between countries, as do the tolerances on the lengths of members, the
tolerances on the positioning of members and the design capacities in many of the connection elements. For
example, while Australian detailing practice is generally similar to US practice, the design capacities of bolts have
differed significantly in the past, with the Australian design values generally being much higher. At present, they are
approximately equivalent.
These factors may alter the significance of some aspects of any design model and consequently different design
models may be appropriate in different countries. This can also create problems with the analysis of results from
much of the research data, as the failure loads of the connection are often compared with the relevant design
capacities of the time rather than being compared with the measured strength of the individual components within
the connection.
It is very important to note that virtually all of the reported testing of connections has been carried out in the stiff
support situation. This is of some signifance in assessing the results and the reported connection behaviour, and is
another reason why there is no distinction in this Manual between a stiff and a flexible support condition in the
recommended design models for any flexible connection.

166 A1SC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.1 ANGLE SEAT CONNECTION
5.1.1 Derivation of Design Model

The design mode! given in Section 4.1.2 follows American practice (Refs. 16, 1.3). The basic assumption made is
that the beam reaction is transmitted to the angle seat over a bearing length of bSl the exact value of bs being a
function of the value of the reaction. McGuire (Ref. 15) comments that “the exact line of action of this reaction, the
location of the critical section (in the outstanding leg of the angle) in flexure, and the distribution of the total bending
moment along this section are highly indeterminate. For design they are generally fixed by assumption”.

The design capacity for web crippling (Va) comes directly from Clause 5.13.3 of AS 4100, being the bearing yield
capacity. The bearing width (bbf) used is based on Fig. 5.13.1.1 of AS 4100, as indicated in Fig. 5.1.1. below.

The design capacity for web buckling (Vb) comes directly from Clause 5.13.4 of AS 4100, being the bearing buckling
capacity. The bearing width (bbw) used is also based on Fig. 5.13.1.1 of AS 4100, as indicated in Fig. 5.1.1 below.

As required by Clause 5.13.4 of AS 4100, the slenderness ratio of the web is taken as 2.5 dw/tw and Clause 6.3.3 of
AS 4100 used to,determine the nominal capacity.

h£-i bbf
U -v
1

C^w !
25
Z
( 1 l
2 2-5
i •

NSimZALAXtt b0 J bb-f T
p"
bb 2
•~7!
V~
A
bbf = b%+
"1 = " '
bbw *
z
(a) Fig. 5.13.1.1(b) of AS 4100 (b) Dispersion of Force in
Angle Seat

Fig. 5.1.1

The design capacity of the outstanding leg of the angle in bending (Vc) is based on the derivation given in Section
3.3 of this Manual, while the design capacity of the bolts is based on Section 3.1.3, assuming that the bolts are loaded
in vertical shear only. Failure of the bolts in shear, local bearing and end plate tearout in both the vertical leg of the
angle and in the supporting member must be assessed.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 167

When the seat is bolted to the supporting member, the forces on the bolts are assumed to be primarily vertical
shearing forces, being traditionally designed on this basis (Refs. 10, 12, 15, 16) with the additional tensile
forces due to load eccentricity being neglected. The expression for Ve is based on this assumption.
For the welded seat, this eccentricity of the load is traditionally accounted for in design (Refs. 15, 16). The
eccentricity of the load on the weld is given by:-

ew = c +
bs
2
so that substitution into the expression for F* given in Section 3.2.8.1 for a vertical fillet weld group with
F* = 0, F* = Vf, M* = Vf.ew results in:-
2LV (<£vw)
Vf =
6ew 2
1+
Lv

American practice is to use a weld over the full depth of the seat with a return around the top corner, but the
present approach uses a full depth weld only. British practice is to also provide returns and to neglect the
eccentricity of the load, designing the welds for vertical shear only (Refs 10,12).

7
yT7 Ttg . „
/fCsection ******3
/ G* b&p c 2 to. +■ 0*566
la.

Figure 5.1.2 (Ref. 12)

The expressions for Va, Vb and Vc all depend on defining bs, the stiff bearing length. In Ref. 12, bs is fixed by
assumption, the assumption being shown in Fig. 5.1.2. An alternative approach (and the one adopted herein) is
to assume that the supported member web bearing yield capacity governs so that

bs = Va - 2.5 tfb Eqn 5.1.1

0.9 x (1.25 fyw twb)
This assumption is the common assumption made in many design methods (see 5.1.4 below).
The capacity of the connection is then assumed to occur when the reaction (V*) is the maximum that can be
accommodated by the outstanding leg of the angle seat in bending.
Thus Va = Vc - V cap

Now Vcap « Va = <M1.25fywtwb)(b8 + 2.5 tfb) = k, (bs + k4)

where:- ^ = <t> (1.25 fyw twb) in kN/mm k4 = 2.5 tfb in mm
so that bs = Vcap/k! - k4
and, Vcap = Vc = <f> (fya La t|)/4 ev = k2/ev so that ev = k2/V, cap

where:- k2 = <f> (fya La t|)/4 in kNmm

168 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ev = bs/2 + c - ta - ra = bs/2 - l<3 where k3 = ta + ra - c
bs = 2 k2/V cap + 2 k3
Equating the two expressions for bs results in:-
Vcap^ki — k4 = 2 k2/Vcap + 2 k3
which in turn reduces to a quadratic expression in the one unknown Vcap:-
(Vcap)2 — k5 Vcap — k@ = 0 where:- k5 = ki k4 + 2 ki k3
ke = 2 ki k2
k5 4- \/k§ H- 4~
the solution to which is:- V cap
2
from which the stiff bearing length is bs = VcaP/ki - k4
The stiff bearing length must satisfy the two constraints as follows:-
c + bs < Lh Thus if bs > Lh — c adopt bs = Lh - c
c + bs/2 3* ta + ra Thus if bs > 2 (ta + ra - c) adopt bs = 2 (ta + ra - c)

5.1.2 Additional Design Considerations

In order to attempt to increase the design capacity of the weld group (Vf), consideration can be given to
welding across the bottom toe of the angle-in the manner shown in Fig. 5.1.4.
For such a case, the design of the weld becomes more complicated than the simple expression for Vf given in
Section 4.1.2. Such a weld group may be readily analysed using the method of Sections 3.2.7 and 5.16 using
the action set:-
F* = 0 F y = -Vf F*z =* 0
M* = Vf.e w M* = M*z = 0 where ew = bs/2 + c
and determining which of the possible critical points (3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 of Fig. 3.27.4 and Fig. 5.1.3) controls the
capacity. A simple closed form solution for Vf of the type given in Section 4.1 is not readily obtained.

*1 \b

x-
7
a

Fig. 5.1.3
The rotational flexibility needed in order for this connection to comply with the requirements of AS 4100 for
simple construction is provided by the
— relatively thin outstanding leg of the angle;
— relatively thin web or top angles provided for stability only;
— bolt slip in the bolted stability angles;
— bolt slip in the bolts through the bottom flange of the beam

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 169

The only available research data on welded angle seat behaviour dates back to Lyse in 1935 (Refs 1.1, 1.2) who
offered the comment that "in general the failure of this type of connection was gradual and would cause excessive
deflection of the beam rather than a collapse of the structure".
No investigations of bolted angle seat connections are known to the authors.
Lyse’s test program involved the testing of two types of connections, viz —
(a) angle seats welded both sides of 200 mm plates and tested with point loads
(b) angle seat-to-column flange connections with the load applied through an l-section beam.
From these tests, the general mechanism of failure of the welded seat connections of type (a) above can be
summarised as occupying four phases:
(i)high stress (yield) at the fillet of the angle seat;
(ii)yield in the top of the vertical welds;
(iii)cracking of the welds from thetop;
(iv) finally, Lyse terminated the testing when the angle seat "refused to accept further load without excessive
deformation. Generally, the gap between the plate and the heel of the angle (seat) was 3/8 inch (9.5 mm) at
the conclusion of the test".
The tests of type (b) above indicated that the beam reaction was concentrated near the end of the beam causing "a
rapid increase in compressive stress at the junction of the flange and the web and subsequent yielding of the web
at low load. At the same time, the outstanding leg of the seat angle deflected downward under the action of this load.."
Further,"as the web yielded near the end of the beam it borrowed on the adjacent web and flange material for
assistance and the reaction tended to move outward thus increasing the deflection of the outstanding angle
considerably".
From this study, the American Institute of Steel Construction’s design procedure (Ref.16) was developed although
Lyse himself postulated a more involved design model. Lyse viewed the behaviour as occupying three phases, viz -
(i) owing to the reaction of the load on the angle, a vertical shear acts on the weld causing a downward deflection;
(ii) the outstanding leg bends downward and the vertical leg bends away from the column at the heel of the angle.
This causes a corresponding compressive reaction toward the toe of the vertical leg thus inducing an upward
frictional force which offsets part of the vertical load. For a short distance from the ends of the angle, the weld
restrains the vertical leg from bending outwards;
(iii) the angle acts as a short stubby beam, elastically restrained at the ends by the weld. This action causes a
greater deflection at the centre than at the ends.
Lyse also commented that -
"The beam flanges which are supported by the angle bend under the reaction and cause the reaction to be
concentrated on an area under the web. The amount of this bending is determined by the relative stiffness
of the flange and the outstanding leg. Since the flanges are also fastened to the outstanding leg, the two act
more or less as a unit and the state of stress in the outstanding leg is thereby affected".
Lyse and Schreiner suggested proportioning the vertical welds for vertical shear force only (ignoring the eccentricity)
but this is not the adopted practice at this time.
Roeder and Dailey (Ref.1.4) have reported recent tests on both stiffened and unstiffened angle seat connections.
They observed that web angles carried between 8 and 35% of the end reaction for connections which failed by web
crippling but that not enough data was available to warrant a less conservative design model than that presented in
the AISC (US) LRFD provisions (Ref. 16b). They also noted web buckling was an important failure mode for the case
where beams with thin webs were bearing on stiffened seats. They also noted that unstiffened seats can yield
adequately without fracture, rotating beyond that required to accommodate the end rotation of the beam which they
are supporting. They concluded that better design models for predicting the distribution of forces in the connection
are needed but that more research is necessary to develop these models.

170 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

As Blodgett (Ref.1.5) observes, the behaviour of this connection is quite complex. As the load comes onto the
supported member the beam deflects and its end rotates. This causes the outstanding leg of the supporting angle
to rotate downward which in turn, causes the point of contact to move outward. This increase in moment on the
outstanding leg causes more deflection until this leg takes the same slope as the supported member. The actual
point of contact is a function of the amount of supported member rotation and the thickness of the angle.
American practice with permissible stress design was to assume an angle of dispersion of 45 degrees from the stiff
seat length and an allowable stress of 0.75fy at the top of the web fillet. The value of bb used in design was obtained
by assuming that bending in the angle and web crippling at the top of the web fillet were simultaneously critical so
that this load gave the capacity of the connection. This method of design can be found in the AISC Manual (Ref.16a),
McGuire (Ref.15) and Blodgett (Ref. 1.5). A review of this method of design may also be found in Ref. 1.3.
Previous editions of this Manual proceeded on the same assumptions except that a 30 degree angle of dispersion
was used in line with AS 1250.
Garrett and Brokenbrough (Ref.1.3) detail the American approach to design for LRFD (equivalent to Limit State
Design). This design procedure is essentially the same as that presented in this Manual.
British practice (Ref.12) is to utilise a 45 degree angle of dispersion in the angle up to the top of the outstanding leg
in order to define the stiff bearing length. The force is then dispersed at 45 degrees for web buckling and at a slope
of 1:2.5 for web crippling. On the other hand, Ref. 10 proceeds in an identical fashion to American practice, but using
a 45 degree angle of dispersion, the stiff bearing length being defined by assuming the web reaches its web crippling
limit at the top of the root fillet.

"Lwb

12 NOMINAL b*
« i<b D£<WGN -1
Lb “7
45°
T
/. ZlZ7 +-F
/j
fa / ■ -xij- •'
/t
Lv
/
/ /
/-
V
La

Fig 5.1.4 American Design Assumptions

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 171

 5.2 BEARING PAD CONNECTION
The design of this connection is relatively straightforward as the recommended design model given in Section 4.2.2
indicates. Only brief comments on the equations for the terms Va through Vg are presented.

The expression given for Va can only be considered as an estimate at this stage. The transfer of shear from the beam
web is assumed to take place over a depth of dew, and it is further assumed that a shear stress distribution similar to
that in an I beam applies - see Fig. 5.2.1. The latter assumption requires further investigation.

A p> 6 p>
LIKELY ACTUAL-

A^UMEP
tr

<w \

A t> &b> AT &-£> AT A-A

Fig. 5.2.1 Shear Stress Distribution

The nominal shear yield capacity (Vw) from Clause 5.11.4 of AS 4100 has been used-based on the assumption of
a uniform shear stress distribution, in the expression for Va,

The expression given for the design bearing capacity (Vb) at the interface is derived from Clause 5.13.3 of AS 4100,
while the design capacity for the end plate in compression derives from the nominal section capacity given by Clause
6.2.1 of AS 4100 taking k, = 1.0. Likewise, the two expressions for the design capacities in compression and shear
of the bearing pad come from Clauses 6.2.1 and 5.11 of AS 4100 respectively.

The expressions for the design capacity of the fillet welds to the end plate (Ve) and the bearing pad (Vf) come directly
from Section 3.2.6 of this Manual. Mote that $vw is tabulated in Appendix B for standard fillet weld sizes in both SP
and GP weld categories.

It is pointed out in the Notes in Section 4.2.2, that the eccentricity of the beam plate reaction on the bearing pad has
not been considered. These eccentricities are summarised in Fig. 5.2.2. For typical practical situations, the
eccentricities are seen to be small in absolute terms.

4. DESIGN ASSUMPTION 4, DESIGN ASSUMPTION

tb
v* V

j£y

(0 tb = tj-4 tb = ti
o
ev = 4 + tb/2 = tj/2 + ©o ev = 4 + tb/2 = tj/2 + 0o

■V tb - tj
eo = 2 mm /. eo

w
^+ 2! = 2 2

ev = 4+ I
tb 4 + ti1 V% tb 4 + ti
= 2
Fig. 5.2.2
ev
- 4+y 2

The requirement of Clause 4.3.4 of AS 4100 that the beam reaction be assumed at a minimum eccentricity (ec) of
100 mm off the column face would appear to be a very severe requirement for this connection since practical
eccentricities would not exceed 30 mm. in addition, the connection has low restraint and is not likely to impart large
moments to the column. A minimum design eccentricity of 30 mm off the column face would seem more appropriate.

172 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.3 FLEXIBLE END PLATE CONNECTION
5.3.1 Derivation of Design Model

The design model recommended in Section 4.3.2 is based on one series of tests conducted by Kennedy (Ref. 3.1),
who reported "end plate connections can provide adequate shear connections when designed for shear oniy", a basis
of design which has been supported by testing in Australia on this connection (Refs. 40,41,42). Avery simple design
procedure, in which the end plate acts as a simple beam extension with no bending being induced in any element,
has been adopted in Section 4.3.2 based on this work. The American Institute of Steel Construction (Ref. 16) and
the British (in Refs. 10 and 12) adopt a similar design model.
In the recommended design mode! of Section 4.3.2, the design capacity of the weld of the end plate to the beam
web (Va) is based on the information in Section 3.2.8.1 assuming vertical shear only on the fillet weld. Likewise, the
design capacity of the bolts in the end plate (Vb) is derived from Section 3.1.5 assuming vertical shear acting at the
bolt group centroid. Possible failure modes of bolt shear, local bearing failure and end plate tearout are considered.
Ail the expressions used in Note 1 of Section 4.3.2 are discussed in Section 3.1.3. For end plate tearout, an end
distance of aey is used, representing the critical dimension considering tearout between holes or through the edge
of the end plate.
In Note (6) to the design model it is recommended that the horizontal edge distance on the end plate (ae3) be at least
1.5 df (df = bolt diameter) in order to allow for any horizontal forces which may occur as a result of connection
behaviour (see later discussion). Tests (Refs. 40,41,42) indicate that this is sufficient.
The capacity of the end plate in shear (Vc) assumes that failure, if it occurs, takes place on each side of the weld/web
interface and that it occurs by shear yielding. The design expression is based on that derived in Section 3.3.2 for a
rectangular section.
The expression for the shear capacity of the web at the end plate/web interface (Vd) has been derived by assuming
that a near uniform stress distribution applies at the interface and that therefore, the nominal capacity is given by
Clauses 5.11.2 and 5.11.4 of AS 4100 (See Fig. 5.3.1).

&A
> I>
» A^UMEP

—
; d/gAmw. s.

4 ;r a
/ LIKELY ACTUAL

A-A

Fig. 5.3.1 Shear Stress Distribution Assumed

The expressions for Ve and Vf deal with the strength of the section remaining after coping of the supported member.
Ve requires a check on the section shear strength in accordance with Section 3.4 while the expression for V{ derives
from equilibrium considerations of Fig. 4.3.2.2. Formulae for the shear and moment capacity of coped sections are
presented in Section 3.4 and Appendix D.

5.3.2 Additional Design Considerations

Flexible end plate connections will exhibit a wide range of connection flexibility depending on the connection
parameters such as plate thickness, plate depth, boit category, web thickness.
Rotational flexibility in the connection is required if the connection is to meet the requirements of AS 4100 for simple
construction. This is provided by:
- the use of a relatively thin end plate which deforms out of plane under applied rotation
- the use of snug-tightened bolts which allows the end plate to slip horizontally
- detailing a wide gauge between lines of bolts.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 173

 Touching of the beam lower flange against the support, even at quite high rotations, can be avoided by restricting
the distance between the lower edge of the end plate and the lower flange (ac in Fig. 5.3.2), since the centre of rotation
of the connection has been found to be very close to the bottom of the end plate. Cutting the end of the beam to
avoid touching the supporting member is not normally carried out and should be avoided because of the cost.
Kennedy reported that in all but one test, the rotation of the connection exceeded the beam yield line before touching
occurred (see Section 5.3.3).
The limitation on ac- Fig. 5.3.2 - comes directly from adopting a maximum design rotation of 0.030 radians. For this
situation, assuming rotation to take place about the bottom of the end plate:
ti a
'touching — > 0.030 or -< 0.33
ac ts

The recommendation for a minimum length of end plate of half the beam depth is somewhat arbitrary, although
several arguments can be advanced in favour of it. The intention is to give the connection a satisfactory "appearance"
- a somewhat subjective judgement. US practice is to generally provide dj of approximately half beam depth (Ref.
16). In addition, for Alternative ‘A’, this minimum end plate length requirement dovetails with the previous restriction
on ajt\ - both requirements tending to give similar end plate lengths.
US and Canadian practice is to use only 9.5 mm (3/8”) and 6 mm (1/4") end plates with gauges Msg" of 90 (3.5") and
140 (5.5") giving sg/tf ratios of:
9.5 mm end plate : 9.33 < Sg/tj < 14.67
6 mm end plate : 12 < Sg/t,- < 22.0
It is recommended that Sg/tj fimits of 11-14, which fall well within these limits, might be considered as a detailing
criterion. Australian practice (Ref.1) uses an 8 mm end plate and a gauge of 90 mm giving sg/tj = 11.3.
The use of 8.8/TF bolting category in this connection is not recommended since 8.8/TF is designed on a "no-slip"
basis. While this may be desirable in certain restricted instances in order to maintain beam levels, it also restricts the
horizontal slipping of the end plate, which is an inherent part of the connection’s "flexible" behaviour. This may result
in the development of high levels of restraint moment at the support.
When using this connection, some designers and detailers are concerned with possible damage to the thin flexible
end plate component during transportation of the beam. In order to overcome this perceived difficulty, the end
plate has sometimes been carried down to the bottom flange of the beam and welded to it (Fig. 5.3.3). It should
be noted that such a practice produces a very much stiffer connection than is desired - in effect, the lower
flange is either dose to or touching on the support from the beginning of rotation. This result is not to be
recommended for reasons explained above. The design model recommended in Section 4.3.2 may well need
modification if used for the connection shown In Fig. 5.3.3 depending on how stiff the resulting connection actually
is.
In fact, minor damage to the end pfate during transport is not significant and may be rectified on site without concern.
This comment reflects the fact that significant deformation takes place in the end-plate under load.

■t-L

a.

*>
4

etc
u

Fig. 5.3.2 Connection Geometry Fig. 5.3.3 Arrangement not

recommended

i 7A AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.3.3 Research Information

The main available research data on flexible end plate connections is that reported by Kennedy (Ref. 3.1).

The general behaviour of the connection, as reported by Kennedy, is shown in Fig. 5.3.4 from which it can be seen
this behaviour exists in two phases - viz.: (1) unhindered rotation of the connection; (2) lower beam flange bears
against support.

©E
li

^- .yi&lO &£Ari
T71 itwb * LINE-
/, Lowee. n-AM6C e>EAffj
/y asai t#?T surrszT
/
y*r /, PLAN He
~'h KOMEKTT' ROTATION
CURVE.

ELSVAT10K

©E

Fig. 5.3.4 (After Kennedy, Ref. 3.1)

As a result of his tests, Kennedy was able to make the following statements regarding this connection:

(i) "Since the rotational stiffness increased markedly when bearing on the column occurred, it would be desirable
for the curve to exceed the beam line before the flange comes into bearing. In one test, bearing occurred at the
beam line; in all other tests, the rotation exceed the beam line before bearing occurred. Thus the beam would
be carrying the yield moment before the lower flange hit the column and coping of the (beam) flange would not
be required to limit the development of higher moments."
"At least for the portion of the curves up to bearing on the flange, it appears that the rotational flexibility of the
connection limits the moment developable and hence the shear capacity of the connection is not appreciably
reduced."
"Considering the low ratio of the yield moment developed by these connections at the beam line, the standard
engineering practice of treating the connections as shear connections only appears to be justified."
(iv) "For a real beam with this type of connection, because of the flexibility of the end connection, the end moments
developed for a given shear will be small and the point of contraflexure is close to the supports."
Kennedy’s tests (Ref 3.1) concentrated on measuring the rotational strength, the stiffness and the rotation capacity
of this connection on a beam tested in cantilever mode. This was to determine the moment-rotation characteristics
of the connection. Kennedy did not attempt to measure the strength of the connection in vertical shear which is the
mode in which the connection is primarily used.

A rotation of 0.030 radians was generally below the level of rotation where the bottom flanges of Kennedy’s
experimental beams came into contact with the support. Likewise in Ref. 3.2, tests indicate that beams with a span
to depth ratio less than 20-22 connected to non-rotating supports can be expected to reach a midspan bending
moment of at least 98% of the plastic moment capacity before the bottom flange touches the supporting member.
The conclusion reached in Ref. 3.2 was again that end plate connections act as simple connections.

Testing in Australia (Refs. 40,41,42) in contrast has concentrated on examining the connection in shear with the ends
of the supported beam being free to rotate. These tests have indicated that the connection possesses sufficient
strength and ductility to justify the recommended design model, with adequate capacity, the measured failure loads
being well above the design capacity calculated using the recommended design model.

Bennetts et al (Ref. 40) carried out two tests, achieving a margin above the calculated design capacity of 1.29 and
1.40 on connections detailed so that failure occurred in the bolts. They concluded that imposed rotation seemed to
have little effect on the shear capacity of the connection.

Mansell and Pham (Refs. 41, 42) carried out seven tests on flexible end plate connections detailed in accordance
with Ref. 1 and obtained margins above the design capacity of 1.43 to 2.85, and observed that the fixity of the
connection was small. All the Australian tests noted that local yielding of the web occurs even at moderate load levels
and that most distress in the connection took place in this zone. This indicates the importance of the shear transfer
at the beam web-end plate interface. Investigations into this transfer process are required if a better expression for
Md is to be developed. Failures by cracking in the beam web in the area adjacent to the bottom of the weld were
observed and in all cases considerable extension of the bolt holes in the end plate was observed.

DSC/04'—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 175

 5.4 ANGLE CLEAT CONNECTION
5.4.1 Derivation of Design Model
The design model recommended in Section 4.4.2 is relatively simple with the angle cleat being considered primarily
as an extension of the beam.
Expressions for Va (bolt group a) and V& (bolt group/?) are derived on the following assumptions. A comparison with
assumptions made by other references is presented in Section 5.4.4.
For bolt group a in the single cleat case, the eccentricity of the beam reaction in this group has been allowed for in
the design model, while for the same bolt group in the double cleat case, no eccentricity is assumed for design
purposes. The capacity of the bolt group under the design eccentricity (ea) in the single cleat case is obtained using
the Zb term derived in Section 5.14.
For bolt group /3, two possibilities for design exist. As McGuire points out (Ref. 15), this boit group is eccentrically
loaded by the beam end reaction, but some references (Section 5.4.4) ignore this effect and design this bolt group
for vertical shear only. In this Manual, this eccentricity of beam reaction is designed for, thus leading to conservatively
designed connections, in practice, the bolt group is undoubtedly subject to a significant eccentric loading, but not
necessarily the full theoretical eccentricity. Some reduced "effective" eccentricity could be considered for use in
design but any value ought to be related to the stiffness of the supporting member and the detailing of the connection
and is thus impractical to evaluate in simple terms. The capacity of the bolt group under the design eccentricity ep is
obtained using the Zb term derived in Section 5.14.
The bolts in bolt groups a and (3 are assessed for strength on the following basis:

(i) shear strength of the bolts - <£Vfn for threads included in the shear plane,
- <£Vfxfor threads excluded from the shear plane,
local bearing failure due to the resultant bolt force, (limit of</>3.2t df fu)
limit on the component of force on a bolt of </>a6t fu in the vertical and horizontal directions. The procedure used
is to determine the components of the resultant force on the extreme bolt (horizontal and vertical) using the
method derived in Section 5.14, with the minimum relevant edge distance (aey vertically, aex horizontally) being
used in the expression for the design capacity in that direction. This criterion guards against plate tearout
(Sections 5.13 and 5.14) in either the angle cleat components or the supported member web. The distance to
an edge to be considered includes the distance from the centre of a hole to the edge of an adjacent hole.
The check on the end plate tearout recognises that the rotation of the beam results in the behaviour shown in Fig.
5.4.1, with components of the bolt shear force acting towards the edges. Such a check is recommended in Ref. 11
and is required by AS 4100. The upper bolts in the web tend to push out both the cleat and the supported web material
towards the end of the beam, while the lower bolts tend to push out material towards the toes of the angle cleats.
(Fig. 5.4.2).

Go
Q°
C
(

Deformation of web Deformation of seat

angle connection angle connection

Fig. 5.4.1
The expressions for Va and Vb follow directly from these considerations, noting that in the double angle cleat case
the bolts in group/? are in double shear.
The expressions for Vc and (both reflecting component strength) are taken directly from Section 3.3 for component
strength. Note that the gross areas are used whereas other references deduct for the presence of holes.

176 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

The expressions for Ve and Vf relate to the strength of the supported member in shear and bending and use
expressions for design shear and design moment capacity given in Section 3.4. Vf is only relevant to coped beams
and checks the bending strength at the end of the cope before the full section is restored, again using an expression
for design moment capacity derived in Section 3.4.
The expression for Vg is intended for design against the possibility of block shear failure in the web of the supported
member, a phenomenon first reported with double angle cleat connections by Birkemoe and Gilmor (Ref. 17.7). The
phenomenon of block shear failure is discussed in Section 5.17 and expressions for design are summarised in
Section 3.4.5. These expressions are used for Vg.
The checks on components of forces acting towards edges built into the expressions for Vb could guard against this
type of failure but it is considered prudent to include a check against block-shear failure also. Ref. 11 also suggests
both checks.

5.4.2 Additional Design Considerations

Angle cleat connections exhibit a wide range of connection flexibility depending on connection detailing parameters
such as cleat thickness, gauges, cleat depth, bolt category, supported member web thickness, and bolt group
geometry. Rotational flexibility in the connection is required if the connection is to meet the requirements of AS 4100
for simple construction. This flexibility is provided by:
- using relatively thin cleats (8 and 10 mm) so that local distortion of the cleats allows end rotation of the
supported member
- the use of snug-tightened bolts which allows the legs attached to the supporting member to slip horizontally
and allows slip in the bolts attached to the supported member web
- detailing so that the beam can rotate freely and not pivot on the supporting member.
The rotation capacity is governed largely by the deformation capacity of the angles which deform as shown in Fig.
5.4.1 while fastener deformation plays only a minor role (Refs. 11,4.1). Once yielding of the angle cleat component
occurs, the rotational flexibility increases.

1V93I&LE LOCATIONS OF
PLATE TEAROJT

{b
,o ROTATION

l <y
I

Fig. 5.4.2
The American Institute of Steel Construction offers three comments along the lines mentioned above: (Ref. 16)
(i) the inherent rigidity of this connection is a factor that the designer should be aware of and consider where critical
an arbitrary thickness limitation of 16 mm for the framing angles is suggested to ensure flexibility
connection angle lengths are recommended to vary from a maximum equal to depth between fillets of supported
member to a minimum equal to half this dimension.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 177

 '
Since the behaviour of flexible end plates and the outstanding legs of the angle cleats is basically similar (Kennedy,
Ref. 3.1), the remaining design checks on the angle cleat connection come directly from the design checks for the
flexible end plate connection. In particular, the following points have been explained in Section 5.3:
(i) the recommended minimum length of the angle cleat component
(ii) the restriction on the dimension ac
(iii) the check on beam rotation
(iv) the reason why 8.8/TF bolting category is not recommended. ;

5.4.3 Research Information

Testing of angle cleat connections has been conducted by Munse et al (Refs. 4.1, 4.2) and Lipson (Refs. 4.3, 4.4).
Kulak, Fisher and Struik have summarised this and other work in Reference 11, commenting that "experiments have
indicated that most of the rotation of the connection comes from the deformation of the angles; fastener deformations
play only a minor role. To minimise rotational resistance, the thickness of the angle should be kept to a minimum and
a relatively large gauge provided".
The testing by Munse et al and Lipson generally supports the design model recommended in Section 4.4.2. Australian
testing confirms this conclusion (see later).
Munse et al (Ref. 4.1) reported on tests of four double angle cleat connections to columns-three rivetted to a beam
web and high strength bolted to a column and one fully rivetted. Pertinent points, from the viewpoint of the
recommended design model, taken out of their summary of the results are:
(i) The AISC type flexible angle cleat connection, which is assumed for design purposes to behave as a simple
connection, provides some restraint against rotation (about 10% fixity with an 18WF50 at working stresses).
(ii) The rotation of the connections results primarily from the deformation of the angles. The elongation of the
fasteners, the deformation of the column and the slip between the connection parts have only a negligible effect
on the rotation.
(iii) The test connections failed by tearing of the angles without rupture of the fasteners.
(iv) During all of the tests, the separation of the connection angles from the column flanges caused the angle legs
fastened to the column flanges to pull in toward the beam webs. As a result, the legs of the angles were soon
bearing against the fasteners and causing deformations of the bolt holes and bending of the fasteners.
(v) The beam flange came into contact with the column flange at a rotation of 0.10 radians for a component length
equal to the recommended minimum of 0.6 times the beam depth.
Lewitt, Chesson and Munse (Ref. 4.2) reported on tests of rivetted and high strength structural (fully tensioned) bolted
double angle cleat connections to columns, attempting primarily to develop a standarized moment-rotation curve so
that these connections could be treated as semi-rigid for design purposes. Lewitt et al commented that:
"The simplification of assuming zero end restraint for flexible connections has meant that columns actually
have been subjected to moments which have not been taken into consideration in their design. Neglecting
these moments, as tests have shown...is unconservative especially at corners or other areas lacking
complete symmetry of framing and loading. There is no evidence, however, that this simplification has
resulted in any real concern over the adequacy of columns in actual structures joined by flexible-type
connections. However, the following question might be raised: Wilt the additional moment delivered to the
columns through the connections be significant enough to require consideration in the determination of the
total connection moment in column design?"
Lewitt et al made several important points from a design viewpoint in their conclusions:
(i) where slip occurs in the connection, particularly in the connection to the beam web, the restraint moment is
significantly reduced - seeming to support the view that 8.8/TF bolting procedure should not be used. 4.6/S
and 8.8/S snug-tightened bolted connections consequently should have minimum restraint
(ii) this slip occurred at a rotation which would be reached or exceeded in most structures at working loads
(iii) the indications were that the thicker the angle cleat, the stiffer the connection (mainly 9.5 mm thick angles were
tested).
Lipson’s tests of high strength structural bolted single angle cleats (Ref. 4.3) led him to the following conclusions of
relevance to the recommended design model:
(i) although all connections were loaded to values well beyond the slip loads for both legs in moment-shear tests,
and rotated through angles of about 0.05 radians in pure moment tests, it was impossible to fail any connection
completely. There was no case of bolts shearing, or of angles cracking, but in some cases the bolt holes were
visibly enlarged, and it was obvious that most angles were bent into the plastic zone at comparatively small
rotations
(ii) the AISC (US) method of calculation of that time produced safe designs

178 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 (iii) using a factor of safety of 1.65 and the maximum permissible rotation, the resulting connection rotation capacity
at yielding must be 0.033; the tests demonstrated that the connections had this rotation capacity.
Australian testing of this connection has been reported in Refs. 40 and 41. In these tests, the angle cleat connections
were tested in pure shear at the support face, in Ref. 40 it was reported that the angle cleat distorted appreciably
and local distortion occurred around the bolt holes and it was noted that the connection possesses sufficient ductility
to justify the type of model presented herein. Margins above the design capacity obtained with the recommended
design model were 1.21 and 1.86.
In Ref. 41, considerable elongation of the bolt holes was also observed with a failure through tearout at the bottom
bolt being reported in two cases (both with end distances in the beam web of 1.50 x bolt diameter) highlighting the
importance of the design procedure in the recommended design model to guard against this occurrence. Margins of
1.03 to 1.58 above the design capacity were achieved, the lower values being attained for the end tearout cases.

5.4.4 Other Design Models

Fundamentally, all other design models are similar to the recommended design model of Section 4.4.2 except that
there is not total agreement on the design eccentricity which should be used for the bolt groups as the table below
indicates.

REF NO. ECCENTRICITY USED IN DESIGN FOR

Double Angle Cleats Single Angle Cleats
Bolt Group a Bolt Group p Bolt Group a Bolt Group p
10 nil arbitary ecc full ecc full ecc
12 nil full ecc full ecc full ecc
15 nil nil full ecc nil
16 nil nil
19 nil full ecc
Sect 4.4.2 nil full ecc full ecc full ecc

Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) comment that "most web angle connections are checked only for their
shear-carrying capacity, that is, the relatively small amount of moment present is neglected... Fasteners are
assumed to be subject to shear forces only; the tensile forces introduced by deformation of the angles ... are
neglected. However, the effect of shear forces acting eccentrically should be included unless distances are small."

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 179

 5.5 WEB SIDE PLATE CONNECTION
5.5.1 Derivation of Design Model
The recommended design model treats the web side plate component as an extension of the web of the supported
member to which it is bolted, the web plate being subjected to a vertical shear force at the line where it is welded to
the supporting member. This is the behaviour for the case where the connection is made to a flexible support.
However, for the case of a stiff support, the web plate cantilevers from the support and the bolt group becomes in
effect a hinge point. Thus the connection element must be able to resist the following actions, according to
application:

SUPPORT WELD PLATE BOLT GROUP

Flexible V*only V*, V*e V*, V*e

Stiff V*, V*e V*, V*e V*only

Note: actions listed are design shear force, (V*), design bending moment (V*e, e = design eccentricity.)

Thus, in the worst case each connection element (weld, plate, bolts) must be capable of transmitting the design shear
force (V*) plus a design bending moment (V*e). Consequently, the recommended design model requires each
connection element to transmit the vertical shear reaction to the support while also transmitting a bending moment.
Since testing has indicated that a plastic hinge may form in the plate component at the weld, a requirement of the
recommended design model is that the nominal moment capacity of the weld exceed the nominal moment capacity
of the web side plate component.

The expression given in the recommended design model for the design capacity of the fillet welds (Va) is based on
the expression given in Section 3.2.8.1 for a vertical line of fillet weld subject to a vertical shear force and a bending
moment, the bending moment being considered as a vertical shear force at an eccentricity of e.

Likewise, the bolt group is considered as a bolt group subject to an in-plane eccentric shear force at an eccentricity
of e. Hence, the expression for the design capacity of the bolt group Vb involves consideration of the following:

(i) the bolt group being loaded in eccentric shear with the design capacity being derived using the method of
Section 5.14, this design capacity being limited by the bolt shear capacity and by bearing on the component
and on the supported member web;
(ii) end plate tearout at the most heavily loaded bolt being checked using the component of force in the vertical
direction with any end distances (including holes) in the vertical direction and the component of force in the
horizontal direction with any end distances (including holes) in the horizontal direction. The expressions on
which the design capacity are based are also derived in Section 5.14.
The expressions for the design capacities of the web side plate component in shear (Vc) and under moment (V^) are
taken directly from the expressions given in Section 3.3, being derived from the design moment capacity (0MSj)
divided by the eccentricity e.

The design capacity of the supported member in shear (Ve) and in bending for coped supported members only (Vf)
use the expressions derived in Section 3.4 and Appendix D, again assuming that the end reaction acts at the weld
line. The design capacity in block shear is intended to guard against the possibility of such a failure in the web of a
coped supported member. This phenomenon is discussed in detail in Section 5.17 and expressions for design
capacity are summarised in Section 3.4.5.

5.5.2 Additional Design Considerations

The web side plate connection lacks a number of contributing factors which provide ductility in the flexible end plate
and angle cleat connections. The ductility in this connection can only come from:

- shear deformation of the bolts

- hole distortion in the beam web and in the plate component as the bolts bear
- bending of the plate
- rotation of the plate and the beam around the bolt group.
It is considered that the available testing data indicate that sufficient flexibility is present from these sources for the
web side plate connection to qualify as suitable for simple construction terms of the requirements of AS 4100.

180 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

The additional design checks given in the recommended design model are identical to those specified for the
flexible end plate (Section 4.3) and the angle cleat (Section 4.4) connections. In particular, the following points
have been explained in detail in Section 5.3:-
(i) the recommended minimum length of the plate component:
the restriction on the dimension ac;
(iii) the check on beam rotation.

4o-

\X i
4-

Jl
in 4f

(a) Web side plate in line with column web. (b) Web side plate attached to column web.
Fig. 5.5.1
Where web plates are attached to column flanges in line with the web, as in Fig. 5.5.1(a), no particular
problems are involved with the transfer of shear and moment from the web plate into the column. However,
attaching the web plate to the web of a column, as in Fig. 5.5.1(b), or a beam requires consideration of the
resulting bending of the web of the column.
Abolitz and Warner (Ref. 5.6) presented a yield line analysis for estimating the nominal capacity of the web,
which provided a failure pattern which corresponded to the smallest failure load. Abolitz and Warner found
that the worst case was to assume the edges along the flanges were simply supported, in which case the
nominal moment capacity of the web of a column was given by
Mu « kmedi
where: k * shape factor of the collapse mechanism
2dci
di
+ + 2-s/l
Oaf
di = length of plate
dc{ = depth between column flange fillets
me = nominal elastic moment capacity per unit length of column web
t§
=f yc 6
tc = column web thickness
fy0 = column web yield stress.
Hoptay and Ainso (Ref. 5.7) carried out some testing of column webs with brackets attached in order to assess
the applicability and degree of safety of the Abolitz and Warner solution. They adopted a criterion that the
nominal moment capacity was reached when the maximum deflection became 2% of the shortest span.
Hoptay and Ainso confirmed that the flanges offer only a simple support for the web of the column, offering
little or no fixity to the web. They proposed defining the nominal moment capacity as the plastic, rather than the
elastic, moment capacity so that me becomes:

ms = f t|
yc 4

Hoptay and Ainso’s test results gave a collapse load very near the collapse load established by the 2%
deflection criterion, and so verified the Abolitz and Warner approach.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 181

Hoptay and Ainso noted that Warner and Abolitz had placed no restriction on the slenderness of the web panel and
noted that at higher levels of web slenderness, membrane effects rather than bending effects will control and that a
yield line analysis based only on bending deformations is inaccurate. Their tests covered web slenderness ratios in
the range 34-48.

Hopper et al (Ref. 5.8) have investigated webs with lower slenderness ratios (<15) and concluded that the
Abolitz/Warner yield line pattern does not develop but that the governing equation is nonetheless a reasonable
estimate of nominal capacity.

5.5.3 Research Information

Early research information was entirely due to McCormick and Lay (Ref. 5.9).

McCormick’s tests carried out on this connection have not unfortunately been fully reported. Asummary only of these
tests is given in Ref. 5.9. McCormick reported the following failure modes in his tests:

(a) reductions in effectiveness of torsional end restraint when using web copes - this is expected from the
discussion contained in Section 5.17.2;

(b) premature weld failure when a 6 mm fillet weld was used in a stiff support situation - 8 mm fillet welds performed
satisfactorily;

(c) bolt failure occurred when 4.6/S bolting category was used in a stiff support application.

Rotational bolt slip was observed in these tests although generally bolt slip under vertical and horizontal shear was
found to be minimal. McCormick however, recommended that faying surfaces be prepared as for 8.8/TF category
even when using 8.8/TB category. Following this philosophy removes one of the sources of rotational flexibility, and
is not recommended here.

McCormick claimed in Ref. 5.9 that whereas the use of the Simple Design Method and the provisions of Clause 6.4.1
of AS 1250 may be adequate for connections such as the flexible end plate, angle seat and angle cleat connections
- for which Clause 6.4.1 was really devised from testing - it may not be adequate for the web side plate connection
which needs additional provisions due to its generally "stiffer” behaviour, in short, he claimed that higher moments
may result in the column where a web side plate connection is used and a supplementary provision to Clause 6.4.1
needed to be developed using the Semi-Rigid Design approach. Clause 4.3.4 of AS 4100 is identical to Clause 6.4.1
of AS 1250, so the same comments apply to it.

McCormick also reported that a plastic hinge may develop in the web plate component at low levels of imposed
rotation in a stiff support situation at the weld line. Clearly, the upper limit to any moment at the weld line - and to
any moment which can be transmitted into the supporting member - is the nominal moment capacity of the web plate
component MSj. McCormick argued that satisfactory connection behaviour required that the nominal moment
capacity of the web plate MSj be less than that of the fillet weld group M^m (see Section 3.2.8.1). This requirement
was part of the recommended design model in previous editions, and has been included in the present design model
despite the fact that other testing does not indicate that it is an essential requirement.

Subsequently, some testing has been carried out in Australia which has been concentrated on typical
beam-to-column connections where the reaction on the connection is a vertical shear force and where the supported
member has been left free to rotate (Refs. 41-44).

These tests have indicated that the connection possesses sufficient ductility using 8.8/S bolting category to justify
the recommended design model of Section 4.5.

The testing by Pham and Mansell (Refs. 41,42) of five web side plate connections with two lines of M20 8.8/S bolts
was all carried out to stiff supports. They reported that considerable rotation of the beam occurred before the web
plate started to rotate together with the beam (due to pivoting on the web bolts). The failure of all the web side plate
connections was due to yielding of the plate under combined moment and shear.

Only the web plate suffered extensive deformation and only the holes to the line of bolts nearer the support showed
substantial elongation indicating the inner line of bolts carried the vertical shear force while the second line assisted
in resisting the moment. No damage to the bolts or weld was evident. Observed eccentricities were variable. The
measured failure loads compared to the design capacities using the recommended design model of Section 4.5 is
in the range of 2.3 to 5.1, with the weld strength controlling the design capacity in all cases, indicating the
recommended design model of Section 4.5 underestimates the weld strength.

182 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Further testing of this connection was undertaken by Pham (Ref. 43) involving nine tests of single and double fines
of bolts, 4.6/S and 8.8/S categories and 6 and 8 mm fillet welds. The 6mm fillet welds all led to ductile failure in the
welds first unless 4.6/S category bolts were employed in which case failure occurred through bolt shear and bolt
group unbuttoning. Concentration in these tests was on failure modes rather than connection behaviour. The results
of these tests suggested to Pham that a “simple” method of design might be adequate - this involved designing the
bolt group for vertical shear alone (without any eccentricity) but designing the web plate and the weld for eccentricity
of reaction in the manner of Section 4.5. It was claimed that this “simple” method was a “reasonable compromise”
and that it always gave the correct failure mode for the nine tests of the series. The authors prefer to stay with the
recommended design model of Section 4.5 for the present which is admitted to be conservative as noted by Pham.
Patrick et al (Ref. 44) tested four web plate connections made to 760UB beams using 8.8/S category bolts in single
and double lines of either 6 or 9 bolts. Two modes of failure were observed. The single bolt column connections both
failed by sudden shear failure of all bolts, the bolts being distorted and fractured across the core area. The bolt holes
in the web plates were locally deformed due to bearing and no damage to the weld was noted. The moment capacity
of the bolt group M0b was less than that of the plate Mop. The connection typically had moment-shear interaction for
the elements of the type shown in Fig. 5.5.2(a).
The connections with two lines of bolts failed by sudden shear fracture of the web plate through the edge of the bolt
holes adjacent to the support. Prior to failure, the plate was severely distorted in shear in the region between the line
of plate fracture and the weld, but there was no plate tearing prior to failure. Some cracking across the top of the
weld was noted but it did not progress. Upon removal, the bolts showed no observable shear distortion. The
connection typically had moment-shear interaction for the elements of the type shown in Fig. 5.5.2(b).
Patrick et al also noted that when the web plate began to deform significantly the bolt group was relieved of load -
this was noted as being a source of ductility in the connection and underlies the importance of checks on local bearing
and end plate tearout included in the recommended design model, particularly as local deformation of the plate from
bearing of the bolts is a source of ductility in the connection.

WEAK. FOZC& FORCE

/
/
BOLTOKOjjP
77 7
/ FAILURE / / /
/ TE4T
/ /
twr // REDOUT
/ /
/ h2 FAILURE
56 /
2
/,
FAILURE
/ k
ki <o/ /
/

-i
<?
X/ *5
<0 r
2 fc.
J

/
‘ /

/
/

Oi«4
&
E
2

(a) Single line of bolts (b) Double line of bolts

Fig. 5.5.2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 183

Testing of this connection has been reported in the United States (Refs. 5.1,5.2, 5.3). Richard et a! (Refs. 5.1,5.2)
primarily concentrated on evaluating the end moment generated by web side plate connections. They noted that the
sources of ductility for this connection are due to:

(i) bolt slippage

(ii) bolt deformation
(iii) plate and/or beam web distortion
(iv) plate and/or beam web out-of-plane bending.

They recommended designing the connection for a bearing mode of failure, circumventing the bolt shear and plate
tearout modes by suitable detailing of the connection. Such a procedure is not considered necessary.

A finite element analysis was used for studying the behaviour of the connection. From this study, they reported the
following.

(a) virtually all the ductility of the connection is due to the deformation of the bolt and distortion of the plate around
the bolt hole;
(b) under low loads, the outer bolt forces are nearly horizontal and give rise to the connection moment...As the load
is increased, the inelastic response of the connection causes the outer bolt force resultant to rotate towards a
more vertical position...observed from test specimens that the bolt holes were deformed and scored in a circular
fashion.
Experimental testing of beams with web plate end connection was undertaken by Richard et al, who reported that
"all beams were loaded to at least 1.5 times the working load (on the beam) and in ail cases the connection performed
satisfactorily by exhibiting no significant distortion or distress."

Richard et al proposed a design procedure for the connection which is not dissimilar to the one given in Section 4.5.
The following points of difference are:

(i) the web plate is matched to ± 1/16 in (± 1.6 mm) of the thickness of the supported beam web;
(ii) plate tearout is prevented by empirical rules; bolts are loaded in vertical shear only;
(iii) the design eccentricity (e^) is determined by an empirical formula which is related to the total depth of the bolt
group (see Fig. 5.5.3);
(iv) the design moment on the weld group is V* (e^ + sgi) - see Fig. 5.5.3;
(v) the plate is designed for the same moment as the weld group.

V*

4-
m DEPTH
i -
OF BOUT GftODP

9gi

BEAM MOMENT17IAGRAt-l

ls».

Fig. 5.5.3

AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 In Reference 5.2, the design procedure was extended to connections using A307 bolts (=4.6/S category). The same
design procedure was recommended except that connection ductility was to be provided by using slotted holes either
in the beam web or in the side plate.
The necessity for slotted holes was subsequently revised by the authors provided that the beams are statically loaded
and provided that the deformation of the extreme bolt is limited.
Steiner et al (Ref. 5.3) investigated one-sided beam-to-beam flexible support connections involving web plates and
reported noticeable yielding and deformation of the supporting member webs with local overstressing in the member.
Effects noted include top flange twisting, web buckling below the web plate and web buckling behind the connection
position. They concluded that the supporting member behaves flexibly when the ultimate strength of the web plate
connection is reached and that a three-ratio interaction formula may be used to carry out a design assessment.
The interaction formula recommended applies for single sided, single plate connections joining beams to girder webs.
The conclusions and the design assessment are very concerned with the twisting and local buckling of the supporting
member rather than the connection components themselves.
Ref. 5.4 reports tests on non-composite beams connected to web plates using tensioned bolts in round and slotted
holes. Essentially, no difference in behaviour was detected and the design method of Ref. 5.1 was reported as being
confirmed. The reference also reports an analytical study on composite beams with both shored and unshored
construction supported by web plates off main girders. A new method of determining the design eccentricity (e<j) was
proposed and again the design method of Ref. 5.1 was recommended for both applications.
Ref. 5.5 reports experimental research in which the web plate connections were subject to a realistic combination of
applied shear force and rotation. Tensioned bolts were used, 9.5 mm plates and 6 mm fillet welds. Test specimens
failed due to shear fracture of the bolts after significant permanent deformations. Minor yielding of the weld was noted,
although one test failed by simultaneous bolt and weld fracture. Permanent bearing deformations were detected in
both plate and supported member web and in some tests, noticeable shear yielding of the plate was apparent.
An empirical formula was suggested in order to determine the design eccentricity, the test set-up being of the rigid
class. The tests confirmed that the rotational flexibility comes in part from the bolt hole deformations and the authors
recommend that the plate thickness be limited to bolt diameter/2 + 2 mm. The authors claim that the welds
experienced a shear force plus a small moment and the authors argue that the welds should be designed to be
stronger than the plate so that the plate yields before failure of the welds. The authors recommend that the shear
force on the welds be taken as the shear capacity of the plate, not the design shear force, and to achieve this the
size of the welds only needs to be in the range of 0.75 -1.0 times the plate thickness. The authors propose a detailed
design procedure based on these five tests.

5.5.4 Other Design Models

The American Institute of Steel Construction Manual (Ref. 16) does not contain design recommendations on this
connection, but both Ref. 11 and Ref. 5.10 recommend the design model in Ref. 5.1, as outlined above.
British practice (Ref. 10) is to design the bolts for vertical shear force only, and the welds and the web plate for both
shear and bending moment, the design moment for both being given by the greater of V*e (e as defined in the
recommended design model of Section 4.5) and the moment capacity of the bolt group as limited by their bearing
capacity.
Later British practice (Ref. 19) used a connection design procedure which designs the bolt group for eccentric shear
equal to e, checks web shear in the supported member on the net section, checks block shear even in uncoped
sections and designs the web plate for both shear and bending, the latter for an eccentricity of e. The weld is simply
assessed for shear strength without any eccentricity and a local buckling check is carried out on long plates.
The authors of Ref. 5.5 propose their own design procedure. A number of parameters must be satisfied, generally in
line with their testing and the following design capacities are assessed:
(i) shear failure of bolts - for an eccentricity equal to the distance from the bolt line to the weld line;
- alternatively, a value obtained from a formula derived from their test results may be used;
yielding of the gross area of the plate;
fracture of the net area of the plate;
(iv) weld failure - the weld is designed for the combined effects of the shear force and a moment, the eccentricity
being taken as the greater of the distance from the weldline to the bolt group centre and an empirically derived
value;
(v) bearing failure of web or plate - limited solely by maintaining edge distances equal to 1.5 df.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 185

.
5.6 STIFF SEAT CONNECTION :
Stiff seat connections require an assessment of the design capacity of the supported member web in shear
and the design capacity of the web to sustain a concentrated reaction, which involves checking both bearing :
•''5
yield and bearing buckling capacities. Ail design assessments are carried out using the provisions of AS 4100.
:
AS 4100 Clause 5.11 deals with the shear capacity of a web and for an approximately uniform shear stress ■

distribution - such as in an I or channel section supported member - the nominal shear capacity is given by:-
(a) The shear yield capacity if dp/tw < 82/(\/fy/250), where the nominal shear yield capacity is given by
Vw = 0.6 fy A w
This the expression used for Va in the recommended design model.
(b) The shear buckling capacity if dp/tw > 82/(VV250 ). where the nominal shear buckling capacity
depends on whether the web panel is stiffened or unstiffened. For rolled universal sections or channels
and three-plate sections without intermediate stiffeners, the web is unstiffened and so the nominal ■

capacity is given by
V = av V w
This is the expression used for Vb in the recommended design model.

For a three-plate girder with intermediate stiffeners, it would be normal to use a load-bearing stiffener or
end-post at the support. Depending on the value of av either Va or Vb needs to be assessed.

AS 4100 Clause 5.13 deals with compressive bearing action acting on the edge of a web and it specifies the
dispersion into the web shown in Fig. 5.6.1 in general terms, which transform into the dispersions shown in
Fig. 5.6.2 for the particular case of the stiff seat connection.

h 2*5 l
i
^2
2

■BJ-
Keoim. bj>
Axi*?

Z (a) Interior bearing force

2-5 i
<$2 I 1
2

*>0
N60TCAL AXI^
bb

bbf -V

(b) End bearing force

Fig. 5.6.1 Dispersion of force through flange and web (as Fig. 5.13.1.1 of AS 4100)

186 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 ✓
\

k2

Z
1 bw - bs + 2-5 (tf +tp)
2^7 4
bb ' bfcf + 2'^ (V + (p)

y / >/ tr
i,
/
/

(a) End Support

ts> &
i
\

2
2

Z->3
CS Z3
4
"7.7..7.. 7' ip
V A
V A
V A
be, bbf = b5 + ^(Lf +tf)
H * byf t-dz
(b) Internal Support

Fig. 5.6.2

The nominal bearing yield capacity (R^) is equal to 1.25 bbf tWb fy which is multiplied by a capacity factor of 0.9 to
give Vc in the recommended design model.

The nominal bearing buckling capacity (R^b) is obtained using Section 6 of AS 4100, using an area of bb x tWb and
a slenderness ratio (Lg/r) of 2.5 d-|/tWb. In Section 6 of AS 4100, the curve for % = 0.5 is used as this application most
logically falls under the classification of “other sections" in Table 6.3.3 (1) of AS 4100. A kf of 1.0 is used as local
buckling of the section web is not a design consideration. This is the basis of expression for in the recommended
design model.

Tables to assist in the design of this connection are available (Ref. 6.2).

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 187

The stiff bearing length for steei-to-steel connections is given by Fig. 5.6.3 — which is based on Fig. 5.13.1.2 of AS
4100. In stee!-to-concrete or steei-to-masonry connections, the stiff bearing length is self evident.

4-

t /~\ <:
Jk
K
pq
i: \ 2.
t

Figure 5.6.3 Stiff bearing length on flange

(as Fig. 5.13.1.2 of AS 4100)

If the design reaction exceeds the design capacity of the connection, the options available are either to reinforce the
web with web doubler plates and reanalyse the connection with the thickened web or to provide a load-bearing
stiffener.
AS 4100 Clause 5.14 specifies the design procedure for load-bearing stiffeners and the recommended design model
follows this Clause. Initially, the web shear buckling capacity is assessed using the expression for Vb as described
above. Shear yield is no longer of concern. For a rolled section or a three-plate section without intermediate web
stiffeners, the web is considered as unstiffened, but if intermediate web stiffeners are provided such that s < 3di then
the web is considered as stiffened.
The expressions for Ve and Vf derive directly from AS 4100 Clause 5.14. in assessing Vf using Section 6 of AS 4100,
at * 0,5 is used as the stiffened web falls under the category of “other section” in Table 6.3.3 (3) of AS 4100.

188 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.7 WELDED BEAM-TO-COLUMN MOMENT CONNECTION
Structurally, the simplest rigid beam-to-column moment connection is the welded moment connection, although it is
a connection which does require precision in fabrication and fit-up. This connection must have the required strength
as well as meeting inelastic rotation requirements, in some cases a high degree of ductility and resistance to local
buckling are necessary.

5.7.1 Derivation of Design Model

Design Actions
The assumptions used in Section 4.7.2.2 regarding the evaluation of design actions on the elements of the
connection are assumptions commonly made in a number of other references (Refs. 15,16,18). Two different values
of flange force due to bending moment are calculated — one for the design of the welds, one for the assessment of
stiffening. The assumptions are justified on the basis of the available evidence from tests and the satisfactory
behaviour of connections in service. There is ample evidence (Refs. 7.1-7.17) that suggests connections designed
using the assumptions of Section 4.7.2.2 are able to develop the section moment capacity of a beam section, and
tests have shown that beams only butt welded at the flanges can develop the section moment capacity.

Beam to Column Welds

The design capacities of welds to both flanges and webs are taken directly from the provisions of AS 4100 as
explained in:
Section 3.2.5 — butt welds
Sections 3.2.6 and 3.2.8 — filiet welds

Necessity for Column Stiffening

Areas of the column which require checking and which may require subsequent stiffening are:
(i) The column web adjacent to the compression flange of the beam which may cripple or buckle
(ii) The column flange which is subject to bending action due to the beam flange forces—this effect is most serious
in the region stressed by the beam tension flange
(iii) The column web which may be subject to large shear forces when the moments in two beams at an interior
connection differ by a large amount, or when a one-sided beam-to-column moment connection is encountered.
These large column shears are due to the imbalance of the bending moments and the capacity of the column
web to support these shears must be checked.
Design methods recommended in Section 4.7.3.2 regarding areas (i) and (ii) above have been derived from
experimental testing — specifically that reported in Reference 7.2 — which are summarised in Refs. 15 and 17.
The need for shear stiffening of the column web is checked using a procedure suggested in References 17 and 7.1
for the case where no axial load is present in the column (see later discussion on this aspect).

Beam Tension Flange Region

The design approach for the tension flange region is that given in Reference 7.2.
The mechanism of failure in this region is as follows:
"a column flange acts as two plates, each of which is fixed along three edges and free along the other together with
a central rigid portion, the whole being loaded by the beam tension flange. The load remains more or less uniformly
distributed until the “plates” reach their ultimate carrying capacity. At this stage, the “plates” deflect at their outer
edges causing excessive strain in the central portion of the butt weld, in the column flange adjacent to the weld and
in the column fillet. Failure then occurs by cracking in one of these regions”. (Ref. 7.2)

FIXSP

r fa. - We - brc.
b,* UNE. 10 A P ^ ~r 2
dp fc>b » - brc.
Wb jbbl
re
*1 h FREE = IZtfe

7 l G

CENTRAL
ElGlP
PORTION
i V*
Ur;*
N be. N-Fix&P
frtJ&^CKlFTc INPJCATC^
6U&«LRIPr& IMPfCATC?
COLUMN

° c1
COLUMN FLAN3E

Fig. 5.7.1 (after Ref. 7.2)

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 189

Figure 5.7.1 illustrates the action of the column flange in the tension region of the connection. The column
flange can be considered as acting as two plates both of type ABCD. The beam flange is assumed to place a
line load on each of these plates. The effective length of the plates dp is assumed to be 12tfc and the plates are
assumed to be rigidly fixed at the ends of this length of plate. The piate is also assumed to be fixed at the
column web. Analysis of this plate by means of yield line theory (Ref. 7.2), leads to the result that the nominal
capacity of this plate is
Ru1 — Glfy tf
C C

where: C, = variable parameter f yc = yield stress of column flange

tfC = column flange thickness
For the wide flange columns and beams examined in Reference 7.2, Ci was found to vary within the range 3.5
to 5.0. Taking 3.5 as a lower bound—
Ru1 = 3.5fyctfc
Since two such plates are involved (one each side of the column web), the nominal capacity of the plates is-
Ru1 — 7fyc"tfc
The force carried by the central rigid portion (tfb x brc) is—
Ru2 = fyctfb'drc
so that Rt = nominal capacity of column flange adjacent to beam tension flange = Rui + RU2
~ fyc (ffb brc "E Ttfc) (Eqn. 5.7.1)
In order to be somewhat conservative, Rt is reduced to 80% of the value in Eqn. 5.7.1, so that for no stiffening
to be considered and allowing for a capacity factor of 0.9 as required by AS 4100:-
N*fl ^ 0.72 (tfb brc + 7tfc)fyc = 4>Rt (Eqn. 5.7.2.)
which is the expression given in Section 4.7.4.2 when assessing the necessity for stiffeners in the tension
region.
To enable design aids to be presented in Appendix E, equation (5.7.2) can be rewritten as:-
N*fj ^ <f>Rt = k7 + ks t^ where:- k7 = 5.04fyctfc k8 = 0.72 fyc b re

Beam Compression Flange Region

The design approach developed below is that given in Reference 7.2.
This analysis idealizes the beam as placing on the compression region of the connection a concentrated force
at the level of the beam flange. The force from the beam web on the column is neglected.
The critical item in this region in an unstiffened connection is the crippling of the column web. From
experimental evidence (Ref. 7.2), a conservative estimate of the strength of the compression region of a
connection can be obtained by assuming that the resistance supplied by the column web in resisting the beam
flange is Ru3 - fyctwc(tfb + 5kc).

2*

* /^z
Nfc tffe*5kc
BEAM
rt
COMPRESSION
FLANGE.
COLUMN!- COLUMN WE&
FLANGE. -! -b- -V-

Enp or flange filist

Fig. 5.7.2 Analysis of Compression Region of Connection-

Idealized Approach (after Ref. 7.2)
This implies that, as shown in Fig. 5.7.2, there is a distribution of stress on a 2.5:1 slope to the end of the flange
fillet on the column “k-iine” so that the resistance of the column web is equivalent to a uniform resistance
supplied over the length (t{b + 5kc).

190 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Hence, for a connection without stiffeners,
Rc = nominal capacity of column web subject to compression
= fyc twc(tfb + 5kc) (Eqn. 5.7.3)
For no stiffening to be considered—
N*fc ^ fyctwc(tfb + 5kc) = Rc (Eqn. 5.7.4)
This expression is multiplied by a capacity factor of 0.9 (as given in Section 4.7.3.2) for assessing the necessity
for stiffeners in the compression region.
To enable design aids to be presented in Appendix E, equation 5.7.4 can be rewritten as:-
N fC ^ <f>Rc = kg + k-,0 tfb where:- kg 4.5 fyc two kc k-IO = 0.9 fyc two

A second limit is given in Section 4.7.3.2 for the compression region and is based on the work of Chen and
Newlin (Ref. 7.9). This limit is included in the current AISC Specification (Ref. 16) and is intended to avoid the
possibility of column web buckling.
Chen and Newlin developed their formula to reflect the contribution of the column flanges in providing lateral
support to the web panels due to the high bending stiffness of the flanges in their own plane. In most cases,
this support may be assumed to be simple because of the observed early yielding near the junction of the web
and the flange.
Chen and Newlin assume from their observations that the load from the incoming beam acts on a square panel
of dimensions dwc x dwc (where dwc = dc - 2kc). For a simply supported plate, the critical elastic buckling
stress is:—
Ncr 7tE 1 33 400
f.oc in imperial units
dwc twc 3(1 - v2) (dwc/twc)2 (dwc/tWc)2
which is a theoretical lower bound for Grade 250 steel, so that
33400 tl wc
NCr ^ d
(imperial units)
wc

For varying fyc, this theoretical lower bound becomes from test results:

4100tJc
Ncr < (imperial units: twc, dwc in inches: fyc in ksi; Ncr in kip),
dwc
which can be converted to metric units to give
1Q.8t&0
Ncr (fyc in MPa: twc, dwc in mm; Ncr in kN) (Eqn. 5.7.5)
dwc

This result has been validated by test results by Chen and Newlin (Ref. 7.9) and Huang et al (Ref. 7.5).
Applying a capacity factor of 0.9 (from AS 4100) to Eqn. 5.7.5 gives the expression in Section 4.7.3.2
10-84
N*c ^ 0.9 x = kn in Appendix E
dwc
Stiffeners are not required if both of the specified limits are not exceeded-if either is exceeded, it is
recommended that stiffeners be provided.
It is possible to carry out an assessment as to whether stiffeners are required using an alternative approach to
assessing the need for column web stiffening in the compression region, derived directly from the provisions of
AS 4100, specifically—
Clause 5.13.3 of AS 4100 — designing against column web crippling
Clause 5.13.4 of AS 4100 — designing against column web buckling
The methodology is that used for stiff seat connection — as explained in Section 5.6 — with the load
dispersion in two directions. This approach proceeds as follows:-

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS

 -if

^2

^+2-tL*5tfe

bfe | hL
2-5 ^Z

Fig. 5.7.3

AS 4100 Clause 5.13.3 Design bearing yield capacity 0 Rby 0Rc-i = 0.9(1.25 bbft wc fycf)
where bbf tfb + 5 tfC (see Fig. 5.7.3)
AS 4100 Clause 5.13.4 Design bearing buckling capacity 0 Rbb <j> RC2 = 0.9 (#c kf Awo fycw)
where k{ 1.0 (see explanation in Section 5.6)
Awc bbt wc

bb bbf + 2 d2 (see Fig. 5.7.3)

Shear Stiffening
The method for designing for out-of-balance shear in the column at the connection as given in Section
4.7.3.2(c) is based on a determination of the design shear capacity of the column section using the provisions
of AS 4100 and is a method proposed in Reference 17 and 7.1. Fielding and Huang (Ref. 7.1) have also
proposed a modification to account for the presence of axial force In the column and the effect this has on the
shear strength of the column.
In effect, this modification for the design case of Section 4.7.3.2(c) requires that 0VC be modified to
0VC [1 - (N*/0Ns)a] (see Section 5.7.2.3). This equation is supported by Krawinkler et al (Ref. 7.7), at least for
N*/0Ns ^ 0.50.
The basis of these design equations is the assumed limit condition of full yield in the column web. Even under
substantial axial load, Fielding and Huang feel that the basis is conservative, as there is a reserve of strength
due to the support provided by the flanges and any stiffeners to the web panel, and strain hardening of the web
panel.
if diagonal stiffeners are provided, they are generally provided across the compression diagonal.
It is assumed that the vertical shear force V* from the beam web is transferred directly into the flange of the
supporting column.

Design and Welding of Stiffeners

The design capacity of stiffeners—tension, compression, diagonal shear—is the design section capacity given
in AS 4100. In the case of tension stiffeners-at the tension flange or in diagonal shear stiffeners-the design
capacity comes from Clause 7.2 with the assumptions that there are no holes so that yield on the gross section
controls design as there can be no fracture through any net section and that for most steels fy is always less
than 0.85 fu. In the case of compression stiffeners-at the compression flange or in diagonal shear stiffeners in
compression—the design capacity comes from Clause 6.2.1 with the assumption that k{ = 1.0, which is true if
the geometry limit of Clause 5.14.3 of AS 4100 is observed. In general, the stiffener at the beam compression
flange is continuously welded to the web of the column and likewise for any diagonal stiffener in compression.
In cases where this is not so, Clause 6.3 of AS 4100 must be used in lieu of Clause 6.2.1 since the slenderness
ratio of the stiffener is no longer zero. The effective length of the stiffener may then be taken as:-

192 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 (i) diagonal stiffener welded at ends only
Le = 0.7 x actual length of stiffener
r = \/lst/A st
lst = second moment of area of stiffeners about weak axis = 2(bestf/12)
Ast = area of stiffeners = 2bests
(ii) diagonal stiffener welded at ends and at mid-point of its length (100mm minimum length of weld, both
sides)
Le = 0.7 x 0.5 x actual length of stiffener
r = VUt/A St
lst = second moment of area of stiffeners about weak axis = 2(best|/12)
As1 = area of stiffeners = 2bests
When using Clause 6.3.3 for welded compression stiffeners, it is recommended that ab be taken as 0.5 (“other
sections” in Table 6.3.3(1)) with kf = 1.0.
Conventional practice is to fillet weld stiffeners to the column, although in the case of tension stiffeners which
must be welded to the column flanges, a butt weld may be used in lieu of a fillet weld. Fillet welds are more
economical. The tests on which the recommended design model is based do not make clear whether fillet or
butt welds were used on stiffened columns and so the more economical fillet welds are always to be preferred.
As is indicated in the recommended design model, the stiffeners are designed for the excess of the design
force over the design capacity. An alternative formulation is to use Clause 5.14.1 of AS 4100 for the case of
compression stiffener design, in the manner used in Section 4.6.2, as follows.

4
17
/
/ b<£«>
/

f <5 £ S55S&1 *
j
V

Wc

Iwf

<7

Fig. 5.7.4
Design Shear Buckling </>Rby = 0.9 av (0.6 fywAw) if web is unstiffened, s > 3d-, (AS 4100 Clause 5.11.5)
Capacity - cev t*d at (0.6 fyw Aw) if web is stiffened, s < 3 d-i
where: av, ad, a{are defined in Clause 5.11.5.2 of AS 4100
Design Yield Capacity <£Rsy = 0Rby + 0.9 As fys (AS 4100 Clause 5.14.1)
of Load-Bearing Stiffener where: As = area of stiffener in contact with the flange = 2bests
fys = yield stress of the stiffener
<£Rby = design bearing yield capacity defined previously
Design Buckling Capacity 0Rsb — 0-9 (<*c kf Aws fyb) (AS 4100 Clause 5.14.2)
of Load-Bearing Stiffener where: ac = as defined for Vd in Section 4.6 except always use
ab = 0.5 for “other sections” in Table 6.3.3(3) of AS 4100
An = 0.7 d-, if the flanges are restrained against rotation in the
plane of the stiffener by other structural elements
= df if either of the flanges is not so restrained

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 193

Section properties including Aws and r for the cruciform shape section of Fig. 5.7.4 must be calculated. :

From Fig. 5.7.4, .

Lw1 = actual dimension but ^ 17.5 tw/vfyW/250
Lw2 = 17.5 WV250 but ^ s/2
Aws = 2bests + (Lw1 + LW2) t wc = area of the stiffener together with a length of web on each side of the .
stiffener not greater than the lesser of (see Fig. 5.7.4): ••i

17.51wc
and s/2 \
Vfyw/250
1st
r .
A St ■:

2 bis ts bes + twc ^ bwi t^c LW2 tie

1st =
12
+ 2 bes t8
2
+ 12
+ 12

No alternative formulation is available for tension stiffeners in AS 4100.

A web doubler or reinforcing plate may be used to enhance the capacity of the column web to resist
compressive force from a beam flange or to resist shear force. The following limitations on web doubler plates
are taken from Ref. 12 and are based on European research:-
(i) total length of web doubler plate = db + 2 dsd (Fig. 5.7.5)
where dSd = [dc; 12tfc] max and to be provided top and bottom
(ii) thickness of web plate twd ^ t wc (column web thickness)
< 1.41 wc

(iii) width of web plate bd s* 40 twc but ^ d wc (column section depth between fillets)
(iv) fillet welds to top and bottom edges as Fig. 5.7.5.
(v) butt welds to column flanges as Fig. 4.7.1.7.
Ref. 12 also recommends that in the evaluation of increased web strength in compression only half twd is
assumed effective due to deformation of the plate during welding and due to eccentricity of the doubler plate
relative to the web, while in shear the full twd is assumed effective due to the development of a diagonal
tension band in the shear zone which is unaffected by these factors. These recommendations are followed in
Section 4.7.

c. Ctiimsz- PLATE

tVMS-
4 '

6b ^
BEAM \WSB DOUBLES. . *—COLUMN
PLATE

1
&0TT m\
WLLP
COLUMN
^ FLEET WELD

‘c.

Fig. 5.7.5

194 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.7.2 Additional Design Considerations Affecting the Need for Stiffening of the Column

5.7.2.1 Qualifications to Design Expressions

The expressions developed above are due to Graham (Ref. 7.2). The tests conducted by Graham et alia as part
of their investigations are also reported in Reference 7.2.
In comparing their test results with their analytical predictions, Graham commented as follows:
(i) the use of the design criterion represented in Eqn. 5.7.3, which assumes a stress distribution on a 2.5:1
slope, is conservative;
(ii) Eqn. 5.7.2 appeared conservative.
In developing their design criteria and investigating their suitability, Graham placed several qualifications on
the final expressions:-
(i) Beams and columns are members of the wide flange series listed in the AISC (US) Manual;
(ii) Beams are connected to both column flanges and may or may not be connected to both sides of the
column web such that approximately equal moments are applied on opposite sides of the column;
(iii) Connecting welds are so designed and executed that they are as strong as, or stronger than, the parts
connected.
The Australian range of universal sections is similar to the US wide flange range so that item (i) above is
complied with.
Graham also pointed out that-
(i) in developing the criterion for the compression region-
(a) the effect of the column axial load;
(b) the effect of the tension region of the connection on the compression region;
(c) the effect of the compression from the beam web;
—have been neglected, although they state that “column axial load has negligible effect whereas the
stress concentration caused on the tension and compression regions are so far apart that any interaction
would be small, if the tension region of the connection does not fail then we can assume that its effect on
the compression region is negligible. The compression from the beam web does have some effect.. ”
(ii) in developing the criterion for the tension region-
fa) the effect of the column axial load;
(b) the effect of the compression region of the connection on the tension region;
—have been ignored.
For similar reasons to those in (i), both of these effects should be negligible according to Graham.
For the compression region, Graham et al also mentioned two alternative approaches to the one they
recommended with the strength of the compression region assessed using an angle of dispersion 2.5:1, these
being:-
(i) a plastic analysis approach—using an angle of dispersion of 3:1 on one side with the uniform stress in the
web taken to the level of the neutral axis of the beam on the other side.
(ii) a modified plastic analysis approach—using an angle of dispersion of 3.5:1 on both sides.
For the tension region, Mair (Ref. 7.10) has suggested, based on limited tension testing of tabs welded to
flanges of I-sections, that the Graham et al limit is only valid for steels with fy/fu of 0.6 and that some
modification should be made for other steels. Australian steels of interest have fy/fu in the range 0.6-0.7.
Graham’s tests concentrated on the ability of the connection to allow the beam to develop its full section
moment capacity. Reference 17 notes that no systematic research has been undertaken to connections which
are designed to transmit less than the section moment capacity.
The tests described in Reference 7.2 and the work in Reference 7.4 are somewhat limited in that:-
(i) all are concerned with “interior” connections, not near the end of the column;
(ii) the columns considered were basically UC sections;
(iii) the beams and columns tested were ail hot-rolled sections.
These limitations should be borne in mind when assessing the applicability of the test results and the design
recommendations given herein.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 195

 PI

Other tests (Refs 7.5, 7.8, 7.16) do confirm the satisfactory nature of the expressions in the recommended
design model.

5.7.2,2 Sherbourne’s Modifications

Sherboume (Ref. 7.4) has also conducted some investigations into the behaviour of his connection, primarily
by the use of finite element techniques. Test results from Graham (Ref. 7.2) plus other work were critically
reviewed by Sherboume and attempts were made to model the test arrangements using finite elements. On the
basis of these studies, Sherboume proposed modifications to the design equations of Graham.
For unstiffened two-sided connections, Sherboume proposed using a wider dispersion slope of 3:1 in lieu of
2.5:1 in the compression region leading to a different version of Eqn. 5.7.3—
= fyc twc (tfb "t" 6Kc)

which equation was claimed by Sherboume to still lead to conservative results.

Unstiffened one-sided connections are treated differently by Sherboume due to the high shear stresses
induced in the coiumn web by asymmetrical beam loading. Sherboume proposed establishing a correlation
between the ultimate strength of the column web and the web area resisting shear. This leads to a simple and
conservative design rule in lieu of Eqn. 5.7.3 based on a yield stress in shear of fyc/\/3 = 0.577 fyc:-

fyc
<j)Rc = dctwc
V3
where dc = depth of the column section;
Sherboume considers that it is only necessary to check the shear capacity of the unstiffened web and that
checking web strength for resisting normal forces is redundant.
Sherboume also considers (unlike Graham) that some allowance should be made for axial load in the column.
He points out that Graham applied an axial column load of 40% of the yield load and in concluding that this
level of axial load had a negligible effect on column web strength they also assumed that the conclusion holds
for all values of axial loads. Due to the biaxial nature of the stress in the column web, Sherboume argues that
increasing axial load has a detrimental effect on the capacity of the column web. He proposes the use of a
“strength reduction factor" on 0RC to compensate for this. Sherboume (like Graham) gave no consideration to
the influence of bending stresses in the column. This is discussed in more detail under Section 5.7.2.3.
Sherboume also argues that the effectiveness of any stiffener in a two-sided connection is only half that
assumed by Graham, primarily because the addition of the stiffener causes a shift in the actual failure location.
For stiffened exterior connections, Sherboume considered that the high shear stresses generated deserve
special attention, in particular if the web is shown to require strengthening. Where inclined diagonal stiffeners
in compression are provided, Sherboume proposes the following equations for assessing the strength of the
connection:-
Ast cos 0 Ast cos 0
if « 1.0 then V sw = Vc 1.0 +
dctwc dc twc
Ast COS 0
if >1.0 then Vsw = 2Vc
dc twc
where: A** = area of diagonal stiffener Vc = nominal shear capacity of web
6 = defined in Fig. 4.7.3.3.2 = 0.6 fyc Aw
Vsw = nominal capacity of stiffened web used with 4> = 0.9 to give the design capacity.
In a separate paper (Ref. 7.19), Sherboume and Murty advance an alternative formulation for the strength of a
column web based again on a finite element study and some experimental results. They suggest that the
nominal yield load of a column web can reasonably be given by:- (imperial units)

kc \2 1 /bfctf£
Ns — 2twckG fycw -f 0.4
t wc 3 V dctwc
while the buckling load is given by:- (imperial units)
Ac fyc ^
NOC — for (dc - 2tfc) < 50t wc
500 fyew
Aq fyc E
for (dc - 2tfc) > 50t wc
50 dc - 2tfc f yew
t wc

196 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5.7.2.3 Effect of Axial Load in the Column
The tests conducted by Graham (Ref. 7.2) were carried out with an axial load of 40% of the squash load
applied to the column (Ref. 7.4). They reported that-
“In both the two and the four-way tests the column axial load had little effect on the strength and rotation
capacity of the connection. The columns showed no particular signs of distress when subjected to an
axial load of 1.65 times working load. Further, at the end of each test, with the final beam loads still
applied, twice the column working load was applied with no evidence of marked distress in the column”.
As noted, Sherbourne would recommend a “strength reduction factor (a)” to Rc to allow for this influence of
axial compressive load. This factor is given by-
a = 1.00 - 0.5 (N*/0Ns) - 0.5 (N*/0Ns)2
where, a = strength reduction factor by which Rc is to be multiplied
N* = design axial force in the column
Ns = nominal section capacity of the column = Acfyc 4> = 0.9
This “strength reduction factor” should be applied to both Sherbourne’s expressions for Rc—see Section
57.2.2.
Fielding and Huang (Ref. 7.1) have discussed and investigated the effect of axial force on the capacity of the
column web to resist shear. The analysis presented in Section 4.7.3.2(d) dealing with the necessity to shear
stiffen the column web ignores the influence of axial force and assumes the column web has the same
strength under the column squash load as under no axial load. Using the von Mises yield criterion, they
developed the following expression which considers the influence of axial force—

N* 2 3r2
$NS
+ < 1.0

where, N* = design axial load in the column

Ns = nominal section capacity of the column = Acfyc 0 = capacity factor = 0.9
- N£ - V*
r= (These items are defined in Section 47.3.2)
dc twc
Shear stiffeners should be provided when the left hand side of the above inequality exceeds 1.0. The
satisfactory nature of this expression was validated by a single test conducted by Fielding and Huang (Ref. 7.1)
on column sections with tension and compression stiffeners.
Krawinkler et a! (Ref. 7.7) suggest that for N*/0Ns < 0.50 their test results and their finite element analysis
indicate that the ultimate shear strength of a web panel according to von Mises yield criterion is:-

Ty = n/3
f.yew
iRir
For the design of joints, Krawinkler et al suggest that the shear stress in the column web caused by
AM* (=M* - Ml) — see Fig. 47.3.2.2— can be computed as

AM*ax
(1 - p) ignoring a term allowing for the bending resistance of column flanges (small for
db
'T’max — thin flanges)
(dc - tfc) t wc

Vcdb
where: p =
AM*
if r max Ty then general yielding of the panel will not occur and shear stiffeners are not required unless
stiffness requirements dictate otherwise. If rmax > r doubler plate stiffeners should be provided such that
_ Tmax
t =“
*d lwc
ry

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 197

5.7.2.4 Effect of Eccentric Stiffeners
Graham (Ref. 7.2) conducted simple tests of stiffened compression regions with eccentric web stiffeners not in
line with the line of application of the force. In these tests, stiffeners with eccentricities of 50 mm provided
about 65% of the stiffening action of the concentric stiffener, while at eccentricities of 100 mm the stiffeners
provided less than 20% of the concentric stiffening action. Stiffeners with still greater eccentricities had
virtually no effect. Sherbourne and Murty (Ref. 7.19) comment that the effectiveness of stiffeners with increased
eccentricity declines less dramatically than this.

5.72.5 Four-way Connections

Graham’s (Ref. 7.2) limited tests on four-way connections to I column sections led him to the conclusion that
the stiffening action provided by the two beams framing onto the column web strengthened the connection
more than it was weakened by the consequences of the triaxial stresses. These tests were performed under an
axial load of about 40% of the squash load and a symmetrical moment condition-one unlikely to be achieved
in many practical connections.
Graham recommended that the design of four-way connections of the beam to the column flange should be
designed as in a two-way connection, as if the beams framing into the column web were not present.

5.7.2.6 Effect of Bending Moment in the Column

Bending moment in the column will introduce tensile or compressive stresses in the column flanges and web
to which beams are rigidly connected. The influence this has on the strength of the column web and on the
strength of the column flange In the vicinity of the beam tension flange has not been investigated.
No design recommendations can be made at this time.

5.72.7 Interaction Between Tension Region and Compression Region in Unstiffened Columns
No investigations have been reported of interaction between tension and compression regions in unstiffened
webs. This was one factor neglected by Graham (Ref. 7.2).
Grundy, Thomas and Bennetts (Ref. 8.11) have proposed a design equation in connection with rigid moment
end plates which is recommended for use. Using this approach, interaction is presumed to occur in an
unstiffened column when, after conversion to limit state terms-
fc N
t- ft > (db ~ tfb) t wc
f
<l> fyc 4> yc
If this inequality is satisfied, stiffeners should then be provided.

5.7.2.8 Connections at Top of Columns

Where beam-to-column connections are provided near the end of a column it is recommended that at least a
top column stiffener be provided-Fig. 47.3.2.3. Special provisions for this situation are noted in Section
47.3.2.3.

5.72.9 Effect of Laminations in Column Flange

Macdonald (Ref. 7.18) has investigated the effect of a discontinuity (in the form of a lamination parallel to the
rolling direction and located at the column flange mid-thickness) could have on the strength of a welded
moment connection. The column flanges tested had been rejected after rolling due to the laminations which
extended for 10%-50% of the width, and these were subject to pull-out tests, i.e. tension being applied to the
flanges through plates butt welded to the flange. Macdonald also carried out finite element studies of the
region.
Macdonald concluded that the maximum allowable width of lamination which still permitted the connection to
develop the yield strength of the plate was 50 mm for Grade 250 materials. Failure in such cases was not by
extension of the lamination and permitted the attached plate to attain its yield stress. Larger laminations
caused a reduction in the connection strength.

198 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5.7.2.10 Witteveens Modifications
In Ref. 7.17, Witteveen et al have reported on research on unstiffened welded moment connections which
cannot transmit the full plastic moment of the in-coming beam, the aim being to restrict design to the use of
unstiffened columns.
As such, the paper gives the limits on the strength of unstiffened columns, subject to the following limitations:
(i) I section columns and beams only;
(ii) braced frames only;
(iii) fy ss 260 MPa only;
(iv) static loading only.
The strengths given by Witteveen are as follows:- (notation as in Section 5.7.1, capacity factor of 0.9 to be
applied)
Tension — fyc (tfb hrc + 7 tf2c) for flange yielding or excessive flange deformation
or R, = fyc (tfb + 5kc) t wc for web yielding
Compression Rc = fyc twc (tfb + 5kc) as Rc in Section 5.7.1
Shear Vc = 0.58 fyc twc (dc - 2tfc) compared to Vc = 0.60 fyc twc (dc - 2tfc) in Section 4.7.3.2(c)
Interaction Interaction of failure modes in an unstiffened column can be allowed for by determining an
ultimate compression force ratio as follows:-
f
kcu = 1.25 - 0.5 ^ ^ 1 -0 and Rc effective = kcuRc
f.ycj
N* M*
where f cu +
(stresses in column section)
Ac Zc
Flange Weld Because the stress distributed is not uniform in the tension flange of the beam, due to the
relative flexibility of the column flange compared to the relatively rigid column web area, the design of the weld
at the beam flange should reflect this non-uniformity.
Accordingly, Witteveen proposes that the effective length of the weld be taken as:~
LW = 2t wc + 7tfc bfc
provided: tw ^ 0.5 tpb tw « fillet weld leg dimension
fib 1 -2 tfc

otherwise: Lw = t wc
ni
t- 2rc -i- -—1

It is also required that Lw > 0.7b,b otherwise stiffeners must be used at the tension flange in order to assure
sufficient rotational capacity due to yielding of the beam flange.

5.7.2.11 Connections to Column Webs

Tests of welded beam-to-column web connections have been conducted (Refs. 7.12-7.14) involving a variety
of connection details. These tests have examined the yield line mechanism proposed by Stockwell (Ref. 7.11)
and found that with some details the yield line mechanism is not fully developed due to early fracture of
material or fracture of the column web. All tests were with beams on one side of the column web only, resulting
in large column web deformations. No firm design recommendations have been advanced from these studies
and many of the details employed would not be used in Australia for reasons of economy. Details are available
that will develop the full section moment capacity of the beam, but the out-of-plane deformation that results
significantly reduces the stiffness of the connection. Recommendations on suitable details to avoid brittle
behaviour may be found in Ref. 7.15, these recommendations being intended to ensure that sufficient inelastic
deformation and rotation capacity exists.

5.7.2.12 American LRFD Specification

The American Institute of Steel Construction LRFD Specification (Ref. 16b) Chapter K contains design
guidance'on webs and flanges with concentrated forces.
The flange design strength in bending due to a tensile load is <f> Rn where
<t> = 0.9 Rn - 6.25 fyf t^
where Rn is directly comparable to the expression for Ru in Section 5.7.1 of 7fyf t2,, which is used in the
recommended design model. The expression for Rt used in the recommended design model includes an
additional term for the stiff central portion after Graham (Ref. 7.2), as explained in Section 5.7.1.

DSC/04—1994 A1SC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 199

The design strength of the web against local web yielding is essentially that given in Section 5.7.1 for Rc, using
again an angle of dispersion of 2.5:1 as in the recommended design model.
Compression buckling of the web is controlled by the Chen and Newlin (imperial units) expression given in
Section 5.7.1, from which the metric version used in the recommended design model is derived.
Hence, the three main criteria for determining whether column stiffeners are required are essentially the same
or marginally different to those of the recommended design model.
However, the Specification also has a design requirement for columns with web panels subject to high shear
which is marginally different to the method given in the recommended design mode!. In terms of Fig. 5.7.6,

design strength of column web in shear = 0VC = (0.7 fycw dc twc) where <f> = 0.9 (which can be compared to
expression used for Vc in design model of 0.9 [0.6 fycw twc (dc - 2 tfc)]
(Ml + M*2)
and this must be greater than (Fig. 5.7.6), total shear on column =
0.95 db
- v*v c.

It is believed that this design criterion will give a similar result to that in the recommended design model.

dc

v£
•V
*
1 y? 0-9*dfe db

c- V*

Fig. 5.7.6

200 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.8 BOLTED MOMENT END PLATE CONNECTION

5.8.1 Introduction

Bolted moment end plate connections are a common form of connection in rigid construction, being used as
beam-to-column connections in regular rectangular steel framed structures and as ridge and knee connections in
portal framed industrial buildings.

These connections come in a variety of forms, namely (see Fig. 5.8.1):

extended end plate, with four or eight bolts at the tension flange, no plate stiffeners;

(b) as (a) but with end plate stiffeners;

(c) flush end plate connection where the end plate does not extend beyond the flange of the supported member -
these connections are most often used in simple or semi-rigid construction.

(a) Unstiffened (4 Bolts) (b) Stiffened (4 Bolts) (c) Flush End Plate

(a) Unstiffened (8 bolts) (b) Stiffened (8 bolts)

Fig. 5.8.1

The most efficient way to transfer moment in an end plate connection is the extended end plate connection, since
for the same bending moment the flush end plate is required to be considerably thicker.

A considerable amount of research has been undertaken on the various forms of this connection (see Refs. 8.1 -
8.42) and an extensive bibliography may be found in Ref. 8.24. However, most research has been concerned with
the extended end plate without end plate stiffeners and the T-stub connection of Fig. 5.8.2 which is regarded as
analogous to the extended end plate connection. Less research is available on the nominal capacity of the supporting
member due to the local effects of the end plate connection, but enough is known to be able to formulate design
recommendations.

Only the extended type of end plate connection without plate stiffeners is included, namely one with a pair of bolts
above the beam tension flange and one pair below. Either one or two pairs of bolts are used on the compression
flange. This type of connection is assumed to act as shown in Fig. 5.8.3(a). The moment is resisted by flange
compression and tension forces, with the compression force being resisted by bearing and the tension force being
resisted by the four top bolts. The bottom bolts are assumed to act in resisting shear.

In addition, the bolts at the tension flange are subject to a "prying action" effect which increases the force on these
bolts (Fig. 5.8.3(b)), Nq being the prying force.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 201

 *4144MB

(a) (b)
Fig. 5.8.2 Fig 5.8.3

5.8.2 Alternative Design Models

A number of design models have been proposed over the years for this connection, some dealing only with the design
of the end plate/boits/welds while others dealt with the complete connection and included provisions for the
assessment of the capacity of the supporting member.

Amongst the design models considered as a basis for the recommended design model of Section 4.8 were:

(i) the design models used in the first and second editions of this Manual which were generally similar to that in
the Seventh Edition of the American Institute of Steel Construction "Manual of Steel Construction" (Ref. 16);
(ii) the design model developed by Krishnamurthy (Refs. 8.15 - 8.18), which has been subsequently followed in
American practice in the Eighth Edition of the AISC "Manual" and the LRFD edition (equivalent to limit states
design method) of the AISC "Manual". This model is also recommended by Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11)
and Murray (Ref. 8.24);
an Australian model proposed by Grundy et ai (Refs. 8.10, 8.11) and used in the third edition of this Manual;
(iv) a British model derived from the work of Mann and Morris (Refs. 8.20,8.22,8.31) and used by Horne and Morris
(Ref. 8.13) and Holmes and Martin (Ref. 13);
(v) a European model from Witteveen et al (Ref. 8.34) and Zoetmeijer (Ref. 8.35), elements of which were used
for the recommendations on the strength of the supporting column in the third edition of this Manual;
(vi) a model derived from Agerskov (Ref. 8.1 - 8.4) and Kennedy et al (Ref. 8.19) which has not been adopted
elsewhere.
The selection of a recommended design model comes down to personal preference and that recommended in
Section 4.8 takes elements from both (iii) and primarily (iv).

Alternative (i) was discarded on the basis that it was now a dated model overtaken by subsequent testing and
because it has been abandoned by the AISC (US).

The model advanced by Krishnamurthy has a number of attractions, especially as it superseded model (i) in the AISC
(US) Manual and because it results in much thinner end plates than other models. Krishnamurthy has advanced the
radical notion that no prying action need be allowed for in design and there is some questioning of his approach by
other researchers (Ref. 8.17). In particular, the thinner end plates which result raise the question as to whether the
resulting connections are indeed "rigid" or "semi-rigid". Krishnamurthy concedes that "the decrease in end-plate
thickness...will frequently be accompanied by some reduction in connection rigidity. Under circumstances where
deformations can be critical, the influence of such increased connection flexibility on the overall behaviour of the
structure may need review." (Ref. 8.16).

For the rigid form of construction, AS 4100 requires that the connections have "sufficient rigidity to hold the angles
between the members virtually unchanged irrespective of load" and since this connection is used almost exclusively
as a rigid connection in Australia, method (ii) has not been adopted.

Additionally, the Krishnamurthy design model is essentially a method for allowable stress design even though it is
used as well for LRFD design in America. By Krishnamurthy’s own admission, the assumption of zero prying force
inherent in the design model may not be true at the strength limit state.

Alternative (v) has a similar approach to that of alternative (iv) while giving different design expressions, while
alternative (vi) deals only with the capacity of the end plate/boits/welds leaving the question of the capacity of the
supporting column unresolved.

Consequent to adopting the recommended design model, the connection on the compression side of the beam
functions more or less as a bearing pad, with attention in design being directed at checking the tension region of the
connection.

202 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.8.3 Background Comments

One primary focus of interest is the assumption to be made regarding the end plate behaviour in the tension region
and how this might affect the design model.
The effect of end plate thickness has been clearly explained by Grundy in Refs. 8.10, 8.11 and relevant parts of these
references are quoted below:
“The connection behaviour is one of two types, depending mostly on the thickness of the end plate and its bending
capacity in relation to the strength of the bolts, if a thin plate is used, design is based upon the plastic deformation
of the plate, involving yield lines (Fig. 5.8.4(a)), using Sherbourne’s methods (Refs. 7.2, 7.4, 8.30). Typically, the
design assumes equal bolt tensions at B and D resisting the tension flange force. The prying force at A is statically
necessary, and it is frequently disregarded even though it can be large. The prying force must be added to the bolt
load, and in many cases it leads to the strength of the joint being controlled by premature bolt failure”.
“Premature bolt failure is a brittle type of failure, and undesirable, but even if it is avoided, the connection frequently
fails in a brittle manner. The plastic approach assumes a ductility in the end plate which is not necessarily available.
In considering the flange-to-end plate connection as aT-connection, the connection between web and end plate and
the continuity of the end plate to the bottom flange of the beam are disregarded. During collapse, by the formation
of a yield line mechanism in the end plate, the end-plate-to web junction CF remains straight (Fig. 5.8.4(a)) leading
to a very complex mechanism. The effective tension transmitted from the flange into the column web is not balanced
equally between B and D as derived from a simple T-connection, but weighted towards D. The beam web tends to tear
away from the end plate at D, or a fracture occurs in the end plate at C, where a state of large triaxial strain exists”.

A
B B

i ;

(a) ‘Thin’ End Plate (b) ‘Thick’ End Plate

Fig. 5.8.4 End Plate Deformation Characteristics
“It is noteworthy that British practice favours the ‘thin’ plate using a plastic design approach with double curvature in
the end plate from B to C, with corresponding yield lines, but reducing or ignoring the theoretical prying force required.
The bolt sizes therefore appear to be less than those required by statics. Nevertheless, tests (Ref. 8.30) have shown
the connections to be satisfactory, and the connections are economical compared with designs using elastic
principles”.
“The British practice allows a connection which cannot transmit the full plastic moment of the beam. This is accepted
because the connection is presumed ductile, with all the deformation occurring in the end plate. It could be argued
that the connection is simply flexible, so that it attracts less moment for transmission than a rigid frame analysis would
theoretically ascribe to it. The required structural capacity is attained by moment redistribution”.
“Although the ‘thin’ end plate connection tends to fail in a brittle manner, in spite of design assumptions of ductility,
the ‘thick’ end plate which tends to be used in empirical and ‘elastic’ design, complete with prying action, leads to a
connection which is still ultimately ‘brittle’ through sudden bolt failures, or occasionally brittle failure of the end plate.
Curiously, although the prying action is considered, it is usually less severe than for ‘thin’ end plates. Some existing
formulae for prying force...lead to quite unrealistic cases. If the end plate is thick enough, there is enough strength
in it for the beam to undergo an almost rigid body rotation about the bottom flange F (Fig. 5.8.4(b)) stretching the
bolts and eliminating the prying action altogether. This action is critically sensitive to bolt ductility”.
"it appears possible to design an end plate and bolt system which provides a moment capacity greater than the
section moment capacity of the beam being connected. Under these circumstances the brittle characteristics of the
joint are much less important, since it cannot occur while a plastic hinge is forming in the beam. If this philosophy is
ysed, it must be recognised that the plastic hinge must form a finite (and sometimes significant) distance away from

the column. A plastic collapse load analysis should take this into account, and the high moment gradients that occur
should also be considered, since these lead to the moment transmitted at the interface being higher than the section
moment capacity of the beam".

is important to note that this connection represents a situation where the bending spans are of the same order of
magnitude as the plate thickness itself and the simple theory of bending is not applicable.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 203

The difficulty with this connection is that the exact transfer of load is very complex and is influenced by the relative
dimensions and strengths of the bolts, the end plate and the supporting column. Measurements during testing clearly
indicate that the distribution of bolt forces changes with the level of the applied moment and is also dependent on
the level of the initial bolt tension at installation and on the relative stiffnesses of end plate and supporting column.
The connection is highly indeterminate and any design model can only reflect the realities of testing as well as
possible, while remaining relatively simple to use and hopefully transparent to the user.

Any design model must examine the following for it to be a complete design method:

(i) yielding or fracture of the bolts;

yielding or fracture of the weids;
yielding (usually not fracture) of the end plate usually by a two-dimensional pattern of yield lines rather than a
one-dimensional pattern;
(iv) yielding or excessive deformation of the column flange adjacent to the tension flange of the supported member;
(v) buckling, crippling or yielding of the column web adjacent to the compression flange of the supported member;
(Vi) shear yielding of the column web.

5.8.4 Derivation of Design Model

The basic assumptions of the recommended design model are:

(a) the flange forces in tension and compression are assumed to be independent and are designed for separately;

(b) the end-plate design and bolt selection is independent of the size and type of column section and indepe ndent
of whether the bending moment is transferred through the column or into the column;

(c) an allowance is made for prying action;

(d) the end plate attains its full section moment capacity, and is bent in double curvature;

(e) the connection is designed for the calculated maximum design actions through the joint

The recommended design model given in Section 4.8.3 follows the following procedure:

(1) Evaluate design forces on the connection

The calculation of the design actions is carried out using the formulae given in Section 4.B.2.2, which are similar to
those used for the welded moment connection in Section 4.7.2. The beam moment is replaced by a couple whose
forces act at the centroid of the beam flanges.

The major distinction from the assumptions made with the welded moment connection is that all the axial force must
be assumed to be transmitted through the bolts at the flanges, and in the absence of bolts, down the supported
member web. The expressions given for the flange forces reflect this change by splitting the axial force N* between
the flanges in proportion to their areas or equally in the case of a symmetrical section.

The expressions given in Section 4.8.2.2 are those also given in References 8.10 and 8.11. These assumptions are
commonly made in a number of references. Again, the web is not assumed to transmit any bending moment but this
is understandable in this connection as ultimately all the forces must go into the supporting column through the bolts
at the flanges.

There is ample evidence that connections designed using the assumptions of the design model are able to develop
the section moment capacity of the supported member.

In Section 4.8.3, it has been assumed that variations in end plate type (either Type A, B or C - Fig. 4.8.2.2) are
amenable to a single design process once design actions have been evaluated using the equations of Section 4.8.2,
these equations being derived from statics. This procedure owes much to one suggested by Grundy in References
8.10 and 8.11.

As Grundy points out, most of the available published data deal with Type A connections, most commonly with beams
on each column flange. Very little has appeared on Type B connections, while some is available for Type C
connections but with the two members in a straight line (butt splice connection) rather than inclined as in Fig. 4.8.2.2.

204 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

k.
(2) Beam to End Plate Welds
The design capacities of the welds to both the flanges and the web of the supported member are taken directly from
the provisions of AS 4100, as explained in:
Section 3.2.5 - butt welds
Sections 3.2.6 and 3.2.8 - fillet welds
(3) Bolts
The two most practical sizes of bolt for use in 8.8/T category in this connection are M20 and M24 - any larger sizes
may involve difficult tensioning procedures on-site. Generally using 8.8/TB category in preference to 8.8/TF will be
more economical, and in practice, 8.8/TB joints will slip very little.
The location of bolts at the beam tension flange is critical to connection performance - generally they should be as
close to this flange as possible commensurate with maintaining sufficient clearance for installation. Some further
recommendations on this aspect are made after consideration of the influence of prying on bolt loads. After an
allowance is made for bolt prying - see discussion on this aspect later - bolt strength is evaluated by assuming that
the bolts at the tension flange resist only the force in the tension flange, while the rest of the bolts in the connection
- both at the compression flange and along the web - resist the shear force at the end plate/supporting member
interface. These assumptions are not universal to all design models but they are the most common, these being
assumptions made in References 8.10, 8.11, 8.13, 8.16, 8.20, 8.24, 8.34, 16. Previous editions of this Manual, as
well as References 11,12, assumed that the bolts at the tension flange also carried their share of the design shear
force.
Using these assumptions, the design capacities of the bolts are readily determined using the provisions of AS 4100
as explained in Section 3.1.3 and Appendix A.
A review of research on prying action is presented in detail later. The view taken here is that the exact determination
of the level of prying force is not possible at this time, that measured levels of prying force have never exceeded 40%
for T-stub tests, that prying is generally thought to be lower in extended end plate type connections and that the level
of accuracy of test measurements is not high, all of which justifies only an estimate of the level of the prying force at
this time.
The suggestion in the recommended design model that a simple approach of allowing a 20 to 33% increase in the
bolt tension force for prying is considered sufficiently accurate for most purposes. A 20% allowance is suggested in
Refs. 8.10 and 8.11 and has been used in previous editions of this Manual, while 33% allowance is suggested from
British practice in Refs. 8.13 and 8.20. Krisnamurthy suggests nil allowance, while later in this Section a variety of
formulae are suggested for possible use.
(4) End Plate
Most analyses of the end plate consider bending in the end plate in one-dimension and either assume that the end
plate bends in double curvature between the bolt line and the flange weld - with a sagging yield line at the line of the
bolts and a hogging yield line at the weld as in Fig. 5.8.5 - or that the end plate only bends in single curvature (which
leads to a thicker end plate).

bi

y\BU> UN&
yiELp UNE.

34
Sit,

Fig. 5.8.5

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 205

Assuming one-dimensionai yielding and double curvature—as in Refs 8.6, 8.10, 8.11, 8.30—and using
Fig. 5.8.6
maximum bending moment = 0.5 Nft x af/2
since the flange force N*t is assumed equally divided between the bolts above and below the flange.

</
tut N
X
% Mmox <U
K
----O- -4
SLf 1
•o-- <>■

zN*t

(a) (b) (c) (d)

Fig. 5.8.6

The nominal section moment capacity of the end plate is given by:- fyi bj tj2/4
Hence, for the strength limit state and including the capacity factor (<t>) of 0.9 from AS 4100, the design criterion
becomes:-
0.9 x fyi bj t|2/4 2* 0.5 N£ x af/2
OR
fvi biti2
<f>Npb = design capacity of plate in bending = 0.9
3f
> N?, Eqn 5.8.1

This analysis of end plate strength ignores the prying force Nq—thus is not statically consistent with the bolt
strength model. Some references include Nq in the plate strength formulation as well as assuming only single
curvature bending of the end plate, which would lead to a different formulation to that presented.

‘h

4fc
+
fc>t
Fig. 5.8.7

Two-dimensional yield line analyses have been attempted by some investigators. Surtees and Mann (Ref. 8.31)
proposed the yield line pattern shown in Fig. 5.8.7 and suggested the following formula for end plate
thickness:-
N*t
ti2>
2b,
fyi —+ ^
L®p ®g_
which when changed to the above format and with a capacity factor of 0.9 included becomes the following
design criterion:-
2bj
<2>Npb = 0.9 fyi tj2 ^ > NT, Eqn 5.8.2
bp sgJ
L
Packer and Morris (Ref. 8.29) found that a simpler formula gave a better estimate of the required plate
thickness, this formula being:-
Nfca,
ti2 ^
fyr (bi - dh)

206 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

which when changed to the above format and with a capacity factor of 0.9 included becomes the following
design criterion:-
(b, - dh)
0Npb = 0.9 fyj tj2 Eqn 5.8.3
af

Mann and Morris (Ref. 8.20) recommend that the work done in deforming the plate compensates for the loss of
plate strength due to the presence of holes in the Packer and Morris formula so that they suggest the simpler
formula
N*t af
t,2 > fyj bj

which when changed to the above format becomes the same as the one-dimensional result at Eqn 5.8.1.

Packer and Morris further suggested that Eqn 5.8.2 represents an upper bound to the thickness required while
Eqn 5.8.3 represents a lower bound.

Eqn. 5.8.1 has been used as the design criterion in the recommended design model of Section 4.8.

Mann and Morris (Ref. 8.20) report that the formulation presented gives an end plate thickness which allows a
test beam to develop fuil moment capacity without the plastic deformations within the connection inhibiting the
joint strength or rotation capacity, citing Ref. 8.29 in support of this. They restrict connection geometry as follows:
bj ** 9df, sg 5df, sp ** 6df, ae > 2.5df where df is the bolt diameter. Some of the geometry restrictions given
in Section 4.8.2.3 come from this reference with the rest coming from Refs 8.10 and 8.11.

Mann and Morris also offer the useful rule of thumb that the end plate thickness (tj) should lie in the range
df < t| < 1.2 df

where df is the bolt diameter, simply from a consideration of actual connections for the normal range of beam
members and using Eqns 5.8.2 and 5.8.1.

There is evidence from Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) and Krishnamurthy (Ref. 8.16) that the bolt force does
not act at the centre of the bolt as proposed in the above formulation. As a result of flexural deformations in the
end plate, the bolt force acts somewhere between the bolt axis and the edge of the bolt head, as shown in Fig.
5.8.8 (from Ref. 11). This decreases the distance ae to an effective lever arm afe.

Kulak, Fisher and Struik propose using a deduction of half the bolt diameter to account for this giving:

9fe = a< d</2

which they claim is reasonable as long as ae < 1.25 af.

Krishnamurthy (Ref. 8.16) proposed, on the basis of finite element studies and test results, an effective lever
arm given by:
afe - af 0.25df - tt

where tt is throat size of fillet weld (only) connecting the beam to the end plate (tt = 0.70 tw where tw is the
equal fillet weld leg size).

British practice (Ref. 12) is to use:

afe = af for butt welds
= af - t w for fillet welds

Any one of the above expressions for afe may be used or afe may simply be taken as af in ail cases if desired.

Bahia et al (Ref. 8.5) reject the above argument, because, from their test, reducing the value of af did not fit the
deformed shape of the T-stub at failure. They in fact argued that the ultimate moment capacity at the hinge
adjacent to the flange weld was not limited to the conventional value of the plastic moment capacity but
increased beyond this value. Zoetemeijer has suggested (Ref. 8.35) a value as high as 4/3 Mp.

DSC/04 1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 207

 I
—h /
i
&<L<L
Pl^TSl&UnoM or CONTACT
Pjee^UKE BETWEEN
t-^tub and bolt heap
a. <2-
T—E EXULTANT FO£C£
o bolt ^ac^d^>i-25a.f
z^=&f-kdf

Fig. 5.8.8

The following observations regarding the above should be made:-

(a) Agerskov {Refs 8.1, 8.3) rejects the mechanism approach used in the recommended design model, which
assumes that plastic hinges form at the bolt line and at the toe of the flange/end plate weld, in favour of an
approach which the yield load on the connection is assumed to occur when the yield moment is reached
at the toe of the fillet. Ail additional load beyond this point is assumed to be carried by strain hardening at
the flange/end plate weld although the moment there remains unchanged.
(b) Observations by Agerskov (Refs 8.1, 8.3) which support elements of the recommended design model are:-
(i) his tests show that the bolt loads around the tension flange may be considered to be uniformly
distributed;
(ii) his tests showed that the end plate connections could be designed at T-stub connections meaning
that the more extensive literature on T-stub connections may be used for formulating a design model
for end plate connections.
(c) Agerskov argues that with thick end plates separation takes place before yielding of the end plate occurs
at the toe of the weld, while with thin end plates yielding occurs before separation. He argues that other
treatments of the connection assume that a mechanism will form with hinges at the bolt line and at the
weld, but his results show that this is unlikely to occur. He would therefore not agree with the
recommended design model which proceeds on the premise of two plastic hinges in the end plate.
Additionally, his analysis allows for coincident shear and bending in the end plate while the recommended
design model does not. His method is to calculate a yield moment in the end plate at the toe of the fillet,
which he admits gives some reserve of strength due to subsequent strain hardening in this area. His
intention is to limit the plastic deformations in the end plate.
(d) Agerskov argues (Ref. 8.2) against reducing values of aB and a{ by some fraction of the bolt diameter.
(e) Agerskov argues (Ref. 8.2) against the use of a fixed value for the level of prying force because the
behaviour is dependent on a number of parameters.

(f) Witteveen et al (Ref. 8.34) suggest an equation for end plate strength which matches the one selected in
the recommended design model except that, instead of using bj (actual end plate width), they would use
an effective width given by
be = Sg + 4 3f + 1.25 ae if sg < 4 a{ + 1.25 ae
= 8 af + 2.5 ae if sg > 4 af + 1.25 ae
^ bf
They also propose different expressions for the force in each bolt to the one used here according to
which of three failure modes occur, these being: fracture of the bolts with no prying, bolt failure with yield
lines in the end plate near the flange weld, yield lines develop in the end plate near the bolts and the weld
(as used here).
(g) Kennedy et al (Ref. 8.19) propose an alternative procedure which is built around three possible scenarios
(i) thick plates with no prying;
(ii) thin plates with the level of prying related to the moment capacity of the end plate;
(iii) intermediate plates which require a complicated procedure to determine bolt force, prying and end
piate thickness;

208 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

*
(5) Check the need for column stiffeners
It is necessary to check the need for column stiffeners at the location of the beam compression flange and at
the location of the beam tension flange, since:
— at the beam compression flange, crippling or buckling of the column web may occur,
— at the beam tension flange, excessive yielding and distortion of the column flange may result in failure
of the column flange or web.
Since many joint geometries and boundary conditions exist in practice, the problem is extremely complex and
no completely satisfactory approach is currently available.
Often the requirements developed for evaluating column strength and stiffening requirements for welded
beam-to-column connections (Sections 4.7 and 5.7) are used. Since the concentrated forces are more
localized in welded connections, this practice should result in a conservative design.
In the compression flange region, the same general approach used for the welded beam-to-column
connection has been adopted for the recommended design model (see Section 5.7).
A modification that has been adopted for the bolted moment end plate connection is that N*c is assumed to be
distributed on a 2.5:1 slope to the “k-line” of the column based on an initial length at the column face of
(tft> + 2ti)—Fig. 5.8.9. This is a modification of the Graham et al approach used in Section 5.7, being suggested
by Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) and one recommended in Refs 8.11,8.13 and 8.20.

i kft
■A-
u

I
T %
tft>
K-
til
i/

■fif-

Fig. 5.8.9

Hence for a connection without stiffeners, as in Section 5.7 and applying a capacity factor of 0.9:-
N*c <£Rc1 = 0.9 fycw twc (tfb + 2t| + 5kc) for no stiffening (Eqn 5.8.4)
= kg 4- k1() (tfb + 2t|)
where (as in Section 5.7):- k9 = 4.5 fvcw twc kc k10 = 0.9 fycw twc (tabulated in Appendix E)
To avoid the possibility of web buckling when column stiffening is not present, the Chen and Newlin limit from
Ref. 7.9 is recommended for use with the rigid moment end plate in addition to the welded moment connection
(see discussion in Section 5.7 on this limit) which results in, after applying a capacity factor of 0.9:-
10.8 t^c \/fycw .
Nfc < 4»Roa = 0.9 x n for no stiffening (Eqn. 5.8.5)
------- d--------
Stiffeners are not required if both the specified limits are not exceeded-if either one is exceeded, it is
recommended that stiffeners be provided.
It is possible to carry out an assessment as to whether stiffeners are required Ming ana!®?Pra«ch to
assessing the need for column web stiffening in the compression region, derived directly from the provisi
AS 4100, specifically-
Clause 5.13.3 — designing against column web crippling
Clause 5.13.4 — designing against column web buckling
The methodology is that used for stiff seat connection ■as explained in Section 5.6—with the load dispersion
in two directions. This approach proceeds as follows:-

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 209

 6q_
✓ *
/

X
cf2
\
Ho s
2-5
i i

Ho 4

Fig. 5.8.10

AS 4100 Clause 5.13.3 Design bearing yield capacity 4> Rfay —<t> Rci — 0-9 (1.25 bfaf twc fycf)
where bbf t(b + 2ti + 5tfc (see Fig. 5.8.10)
AS 4100 Clause 5.13.4 Design bearing buckling capacity Rbb = 4> Rc2 = 0.9 (ofc kf Awc fycw)

where kf 1.0 (see explanation in Section 5.6)

Awc bbt wc
bb = bbf + 2 d2 (see Fig. 5.8.10)
Tests on unstiffened beam-to-column connections by Tarpy and Cardinal (Ref. 8.32) confirmed that the Chen
and Newlin design criterion (Ref. 7.9) for buckling of column webs at the compression flange in welded
connections also applied for end plate connections. From a parametric study using finite elements, they
proposed their own criterion for the necessity or otherwise of stiffeners at the tension flange. Their criterion is
derived from a regression analysis of the results of their parametric study.
Hendrick and Murray (Ref. 8.12) conducted an experimental and analytical study of the compression flange
region and proposed the following expression for the strength of the column web under compression load
applied through an end plate subject to a bending moment, after applying a capacity factor of 0.9;-
<£RC ■” 0.9fycw twc (tfb + 6 kc + 2 tj + 2 tw) where tw = fillet weld size of flange to end plate.
This criterion follows directly from the one used for welded moment connections in Section 4.7 due to Graham
et al (Ref. 7.2). They also recommended the use of the Chen and Newlin column web buckling criterion used in
the recommended design model for the welded moment connection in Section 4.7.
For the beam tension flange region, the same approach may be used for this connection as was recommended
for the welded moment connection, with the exception that the stiff central portion (tfbbrc in Eqn. 5.7.1 and Fig.
5.7.1) is discounted. Unlike in the welded moment connection, this central rigid portion is not attached directly
to the end plate and the end plate will tend to deflect away from it.
Using the same approach as in the welded moment connection (but discounting the rigid portion tfbbrc) gives:
Nft < 0.90 x 0.80fyCf x 7tfC = 5.04fycft£ for no stiffening
Packer and Morris have carried out a detailed analysis of the column in the tension region (Ref. 8.29), deriving
theoretical expressions for column strength supported by experimental evidence, as has Zoetemeijer (Ref.
8.35). Packer and Morris’ proposals are supported for use in design in Refs. 12, 8.29, 8.13 while Grundy et al
(Ref. 8.11) offer an alternative. The recommended design model uses Packer and Morris’ proposals.
Packer and Morris (Ref. 8.29) have studied the tension region of end plate connections and postulated various
collapse mechanisms in both the end plate and the column flange in this region. By application of yield line
theory, equations for the strength of the column flange have been developed and these have been validated by
some limited testing. Equations for the strength of stiffened column flanges have also been developed and
validated. Five tests of unstiffened column flanges and three tests of stiffened flanges were carried out.

210 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 4c

) II*
Oe

♦ ro
b,
%
X

*%r %
n * a /2 I 11 ^
2Nft CLc
&i

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 5.8.11

The design recommendation of interest from Packer and Morris’ work is the yield load for the column flange
(Rt1) which they give as-in terms of the notation of Fig. 5.8.11 —
(2ac + sp dh)
Rt1 - fycftfe 3.14 + (Eqn. 5.8.6)

where: ac = (bfC - sg)/2 3d = (sg - t wc - 2rc)/2

This equation is derived assuming a yield line pattern shown in Fig. 5.8.12(b) with double curvature in the
column flange.
An alternative mode of failure assumes that failure occurs due to a combination of bolt fracture and flange
yielding, giving the yield line pattern of Fig. 5.8.12(a). The maximum force which can be supported by the
flange (R^) is then given by:-
3.14 (ad + ac) + 0.5 s P 3i
Rta fycf 4 -I- 4 (Eqn. 5.8.7)
(ad + a,) (ad + a,)
where: 3i (bi Sg)/2
N« maximum bolt force (which is suggested to be taken as the bolt proof load to provide a safety
margin against bolt failure).

b-Pc bfc

""s\
m O
\
\ 'O
©
/A<-
O
aa

o- © o
Qc-4Q<}
W1>
\y/i lJPw/i Q6
v

ad Qc

% Oc CLc

(a) (b)
Fig. 5.8.12

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 211

The lower value [Rt1; R{2Jmjn is taken as Rt—■the nominal capacity of the unstiffened column flange-and
indicates the mode of failure by which the column flange will fail.
Hence the design requirement becomes, after the introduction of the capacity factor </> = 0.9:-
Nft ^ 4>Rt = [0Rii;0Rt2jmn for no stiffening
If N*t > <^>Rt2 but < 0Rt1, then increasing bolt size may help. Otherwise, the flange must be stiffened.

(6) Design with Stiffened Columns

The check for overlapping stress regions in the column web where no stiffeners are provided, is one
suggested by Grundy et al (Refs 8.10, 8.11).

(7) Design Capacity of Stiffened Columns

Like the welded beam-to-column connection, column stiffeners are usually proportioned to simply carry the
excess concentrated force that the column web or flange is unable to support. The design procedure for
stiffened columns is different to that for the welded beam-to-column connection in one respect, as expressions
are available for the strength of the stiffened column in both the compression and tension regions. The
stiffeners have to be also proportioned so that the strength of the stiffened regions exceeds the applied design
actions
For the stiffened column web in the compression region, Mann (Refs 8.13, 8.20) suggested the nominal
capacity of the stiffened column as:
Res = As1yS + 1.63fyCWtfC \/bfc t wc (Eqn. 5.8.8.)
where: As = area of web stiffeners (other terms as before)
fys = yield stress of stiffeners
The design requirement becomes <£RCS 5= N*c so that after the introduction of the capacity factor <j> = 0.9
N*c ^ 0.9 (As fyS + 1.63 fycw tfc Vbfctwc) = 0.9 As fys + 1.47fycw tfcVb^t wc (Eqn. 5.8.9)
For the tension region, Packer and Morris (Ref. 8.29) suggest that the nominal capacity of the flange with
conventional stiffeners (Fig. 5.8.13(a)) is given by>

(2w2 + 2Wf dh) -F 1 1

Rts fycf tfc +
Wf w2
j ^2ad + 2ac - dhJ (Eqn. 5.8.10)
ad
where: Wi Vad(ad + a, 0.5dh)
w2 = (sp ts - 2tw)/2 (Fig. 5.8.13)
and W2 « Wi (other terms as defined before).

A"
Plf
i^p
Mt i
.Ji
\r ispl .

.Hi'T

(a) Conventional stiffener (b) Flange doubler plates

Fig. 5.8.13

212 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 The design requirement becomes, after the introduction of a capacity factor <f> = 0.9:-
N** < Rls
This equation does not lead to a closed form solution for As,—the area of stiffeners-but Ref. 8.13 suggests the
simple rule of thumb that
Ast = bfb tb which is usually rather more than required
In lieu of conventional stiffeners, Zoetemeijer (Ref. 8.35) suggests the use of flange doubler plates as shown in
Fig. 5.8.13(b) for which the nominal capacity of the stiffened flange is given by:—

n "*9, , t§fvd"l + 4ad + 1.25ac

Htd - tfc Tycf + ~2— -------------------------------- (Eqn. 5.8.11)
ad
The design requirement becomes, after the introduction of a capacity factor <£ = 0.9:-
N*t ^ 0 Rtd
A useful rule-of-thumb is to make (td + tfc) $= tj (end plate thickness).
If stiffening fails to achieve <f> Rts or <f> R{d > N*t then a heavier column section is indicated.
It is not clear from Zoetemeijer whether the doubler plate should be welded to the column but Australian
practice is to run a butt weld between the doubler plate and the web (Fig. 5.8.14). The fabrication required for
the doubler plate is less than for the conventional stiffener.

tfc

*4
$UTTWE1X>
r0

Fig. 5.8.14

No formula can be recommended for the case where both doubler plates and conventional stiffeners are used,
but it is suggested that Eqn. 5.8.10 be used by substituting (tfc + td) for tfc as a reasonable approach.
Moore and Sims (Ref. 8.23) have studied experimentally the influence of flange doubler plates on the strength
of a column flange. Essentially, this study was a follow-up to the studies by Zoetemeijer (Ref. 8.35), Mann and
Morris (Ref. 8.20) and Packer and Morris (Ref. 8.29). They concluded that doubler plates are an effective means
of increasing the yield load of extended end plate connections but that the design expression for strength
derived by Zoetemeijer overestimates the yield load by up to 60%, the actual strength being a function of the
length of the backing plate. In their tests, there is no evidence that the doubler plates were welded to the
column flanges.
(8) Shear Stiffeners
The necessity for shear stiffening of the column web is assessed in an identical manner to the welded beam-
to-column connection.
The method for designing for out-of-balance shear in the column at the connection as given in Section
4.8.3.4(f) is a method proposed in References 17 and 7.1. Fielding and Huang (Ref. 7.1) have also proposed a
modification to account for the presence of axial force in the column and the effect this has on the shear
strength of the column.
In effect, this modification for the design case of Section 4.8.3.4(f) requires that Vc be modified to
Vc [1 - (N*/Ny)2]. This equation is supported by Krawinkler et al (Ref. 7.7), at least for N*/Ny ^ 0.50.
The basis of these design equations is the assumed limit condition of full yield in the column web. Even under
substantial axial load, Fielding and Huang feel that the basis is conservative, as there is a reserve of strength
due to support provided by the flanges and any stiffeners to the web panel, and strain hardening of the web
panel.
If diagonal stiffeners are provided, they are generally provided across the compression diagonal.
It is assumed that the vertical shear force V* from the beam web is transferred directly into the flange of the
supporting column.

-.v,:

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 213

 (9) Design and Welding of Stiffeners
The design capacity of stiffeners - tension, compression, (diagonal) shear - is equal to the design section capacity ;•
given in AS 4100. !n the case of tension stiffeners - at the tension flange or in diagonal shear stiffeners - the design .5
capacity comes from Clause 7.2 with the assumptions that there are no holes so that yield on the gross section
controls design as there can be no fracture through any net section and that for most steels fy is always less than
0.85 fu. In the case of compression stiffeners - at the compression flange or in diagonal shear stiffeners - the design
capacity comes from Clause 6.2.1 with the assumption that k* = 1.0, which is true if the geometry limit of Clause ::
5.14.3 of AS 4100 is observed. In general, the stiffener at the beam compression flange is continuously welded to
the web of the column and likewise for any diagonal stiffener in compression. In cases where this is not so, Clause
6.3 of AS 4100 must be used in lieu of Clause 6.2.1 since the slenderness ratio of the stiffener is no longer zero. The
effective length of the stiffener may then be taken as that explained in detail in Section 5.7.1.

(10) Additional Design Considerations

;
The following additional design considerations discussed in Section 5.7 might also be considered for the bolted end
plate connections: ■

5.7.2.2 Sherbournes modifications;

5.7.2.3 effect of axial load in the column;
.1
5.7.2.4 effect of eccentric stiffeners;
5.7.2.5 four way connections;
5.7.2.6 effect of bending moment in the column;
5.7.2.8 connections at tops of columns.
Additionally, consideration should be given to the following:
:

Column Web in Tension

Refs. 12, 8.13 and 8.20 suggest a check on the column web as well as the column flange in the tension zone,
although Ref. 8.13 concedes that the column web is rarely critical.

The requirement suggested is that N*, < 0 Rtw where:

< 0.9 (Sp + S.Sa^) fycw

or 0.9 (7.0 3(1 twc fycw)

These expressions assume a 60% dispersion of tensile load from each bolt.

Limitations on the Recommended Design Model

Considering the available test data and the comments of the authors of the papers on which the recommended
design model is based, the model ought strictly be limited to beam sizes 530UB and smaller, with 4 bolts in the tension
region of the extended end plate type of connection shown in Section 4.8.1.

Witteveen’s Modifications

Witteveen et al (Ref. 8.34) have undertaken a different yield line analysis on the supporting column to that
recommended herein and have proposed three formulae for checking the strength of the column flange at the tension
flange.

They also proposed that, for checking the column web at the compression flange, a wider effective width than is used
for the welded moment connection is justifiable. Reference 8.34 should be consulted for details of these proposals.

American institute of Steel Construction LRFD Manual

The AISC (US) LRFD Manual (Ref. 16b) determines the strength of the column in the same manner as for the welded
moment connection, except that the dispersion through the end plate thickness is allowed for at the compression
flange in the same manner as the recommended design model. The AiSC LRFD method in discussed in Section
5.7.2.12.

214 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5.8.5 Discussion of Prying Force
Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) suggest that the level of the prying force is influenced by:
(i) the stiffness of the T-stub flange
(ii) the stiffness of the fastener
(iii) magnitude of the clamping force
(iv) bolt grip (minor effect only)
(v) number of lines of fasteners
(vi) stiffness of the support,
the major factors being (i), (ii), (v) and (vi).
The mechanism of prying can be described in the following manner - Fig. 5.8.15. Considering a T-stub under tensile
load, the contact pressure between the T-stub flange and the base will be reduced and additional prying forces
develop in the general region of the flange tip (Fig. 5.8.15 (a)), increasing the tensile force in the bolts.
For a stiff (ie. thick) T-stub flange, only small deformations of the T-stub flange occur and consequently only low
prying forces develop (Fig. 5.8.15 (b)). For a more flexible flange, initially the external tension reduces the contact
pressure between the flange and the base until separation occurs at the bolt line and bending in the outer portions
of the T-stub flange develops prying forces. Subsequent yielding of the fasteners and/or the T-stub flange may permit
an increase in applied tension with only a small increase in the bolt force - because of plastic redistribution the prying
force reduces (Fig. 5.8.15 (c)). In short, the level of prying may depend on the level of the tension force.

applied Fsece
e&PASATON AT
Hopr unc.
/r£ViN<s force
£
£ / k /
=J
/
FRyiMO / fS-YI NG FORCE.
/
FORCED
\II
BO IX
/
/ \I
FORCE
Amjep load AfWEP UWD

(a) Mechanism of Joint (b) Bolt Load - Applied Load (c) Bolt Load - Applied Load
Deformation in T-Stub connection Relationship for Stiff T-Stub Flange Relationship for Flexible T-Stub Flange

Fig. 5.8.15

As Nair et al point out in Reference 8.26, the prying force is relatively large at low loads and decreases as the load
on the connection approaches the ultimate load because near ultimate, bolt yielding permits the connected flange
to move away from the support thus reducing the prying force. Krishnamurthy (Refs. 8.15 - 8.18) has the opposite
view suggesting that at “working loads” prying doesn’t exist at all.
Nair et al argue that in the early stages of loading, increases in the applied force are balanced largely by a decrease
in the precompression between the connected plies and the increase in the bolt tension is small - see Fig. 5.8.15.
The ratio of the increase in bolt tension to the decrease in precompression depends on the relative stiffness of the
bolt and the connected parts. As the load on the connection is increased, they argue, the precompression decreases
until it becomes zero and the connected parts separate, at which stage there is no prying and the bolt force equals
the applied force.
To say the least, precise evaluation of the effect of prying is very complicated and, at present, a purely analytical
approach is out of the question.
Various studies on the subject have been undertaken, these usually involving an analytical model which is empirically
modified using experimental results (Refs. 11,8.1,8.9, 8.10, 8.14, 8.25, 8.26). Only a brief summary of these can
be given here.

Studies on prying in end-plates are unfortunately limited and many design procedures adopt the (conservative)
procedure of assuming the end plate can be considered as an equivalent T-stub connection in the manner suggested
,n Pig. 5.8.16. Substantially more research has been conducted on the T-stub connection subject to tension loads.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 215

 CCN^IPEPEP A<b
eauivAi^Mr
4h

•4\

A—v-
Fig. 5.8.16 Assumed Design Equivalents
It should be pointed out at the start that this modelling device is conservative (in that it overestimates the prying)
since:
(i) any restraining influence from the end plate area along the beam web and from the beam web itself is ignored;
(ii) welding of the end plate to the beam flange tends to cause it to dish so that no uniform bearing of the end plate
occurs and a gap around the edges results.
Douty and McGuire (Ref. 8.9) investigated prying in both T-stub and end plate connections. They developed a
simplified model for a T-stub connected to a support (Fig. 5.8.16), assuming that:
(i) the T-stub flexes as shown in Fig. 5.8.17 (b);
(ii) the support is infinitely stiff;
(iii) prying forces, N£, are assumed to act as line loads at the ends of the spans, ae (Fig. 5.8.6 (d)), as long as the
plate remains in contact;
(iv) bolt clamping loads, Nti are highly localised;
(v) single curvature bending of T-stub flange occurs.
Their simple model considered the properties of the bolts and of the connected material, as well as the geometry of
the connection. By developing expressions for the deformation of the middle surface of the T-stub flange, for the bolt
elongation and for the local expansion of the T flange, in the region of the bolt, they were able to derive an equation
for the prying force at both low and high levels of ioad. These formulae were subsequently presented for use as
design formulae. ■
■ZNfi

u 6
—^51 ^
___r-a*-.
A

I n*l IInt-l A. Ik. wUf

u NtL
%
(a) (■»
Fig. 5.8.17 Simplified Model of Prying Action Used by Douty & McGuire (Ref. 8.9)
For plastic design and static loading; they suggest the formula:

1
2 30 ae a;2 Ab .N1Hu (Ab « area of the bolt, other
n; = terms as defined above)
®a ib. + 1
a{ 3af +
+ 6a wtl
a zA
e f b

in which is the external force per bolt at the plastic design load.
As a result of a limited series of tests of isolated T-stub connections, Douty and McGuire commented that "the
agreement between the tests and the approximate theory was sufficiently good to lend support to the analytical model
as the basis for developing a design method". Douty and McGuire also carried out three tests on fully assembled
T-stub beam to column connections again reporting that "almost ail bolt tensions ... were measured to be equal to
or less than the values calculated using the simplied analytical model". The approach is claimed to be conservative
- over-estimating the prying force.

216 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

The ASCE adopted this approach in its publication on Plastic Design (Ref. 17) except that, because of the complexity,
several variables were evaluated to establish their significance. This study showed that prying action could be
approximated with reasonable accuracy using
3af
N*q= [
8ae 20
]NJ, (terms as defined by Douty & McGuire)

The approximation is usually a conservative estimate of the prying force for all bolt diameters.

Douty and McGuire also conducted a total of seven tests on end-plate connections, only one being of the
configurations used in Section 4.8.1 with bolts extending beyond the tension flange. From this they concluded that
the tension part of the end-plate "behaved somewhat like a T-stub, with some modification resulting from the
presence of the beam web and remaining part of the butt plate". They recommended that for design purposes "the
bolts and part of the end plate symmetrical about the tension flange of the beam may be treated as an equivalent
T-stub connection and proportioned to develop the force in the beam flange, using the methods proposed previously
for regular tee connections".

Of the design texts, only References 15 and 17 adopt this model of prying.

Probably the most widely used design relationship for the evaluation of levels of prying force was developed by Nair,
Birkemoe and Munse as a result of an experimental and analytical study conducted at the University of Illinois (Refs.
8.25, 8.26). This study was concerned only with isoiated T-stub connections. The experimental part involved the
testing of just 16 T-stubs back-to-back with 4 bolts in each connection, while the analytical part involved the use of
the finite element method to investigate back-to-back T-stub connections as well as T-stubs bolted to a rigid base.

In this study, the prying force could not be measured directly in the 16 connections tested experimentally, but was
determined by comparing the behaviour of bolts in T-stub connections with that of similar bolts in concentrically
loaded single-bolt connections not subject to prying. The measured bolt tension in the T-stub under applied tension
load was compared with the measured tension in single bolt connections under the same applied tension.

The results of both the numerical analysis and the testing were used to develop equations for the computation of the
prying force in bolted T-connections. Initially, a simplified model was used to formulate equations relating the prying
force with the geometric parameters and these formulae were then modified to reflect the results obtained using both
the finite element analysis and the test results.

For tensioned ASTM A325 bolts - equivalent to high strength structural bolts used in 8.8/T category - the following
formula was found to agree closely with the results of the finite element analyses and tests (notation is defined in
Fig. 5.8.18):
TO] 100 aj d2f - 18wt t2
>0
LN*h J
70ae d2f + 21w,t2
?N4i
Wt = length of flange tributary to each bolt
&0UUW6 (total length of the flange, measured
a* 2mm parallel to the web, divided by the
number of rows of bolts).

kill Lemstw
Wt
d, = bolt diameter.
I
ia. If ae > 2tf, use ae = 2t}
N*
% %

Fig. 5.8.18 (After Ref. 8.25)

Several comments by Nair et al on this work deserve mention here:

(i) An assumption of the method is that the bolts are the critical elements. Consequently, "judicious application of
the preceding formulae is essential since in many instances the proportions of the connections are such that
flanges ratherthan bolts are the critical element. In such case, the prying formulas will give erroneous and often
overconservative results" (Ref. 8.26).
It was concluded that the analysis accurately determined the behaviour of the bolts, both at ultimate and at
lower levels of loading. Comparison of analytical and test results with values of prying predicted from the
equations showed that the agreement was close, particularly when the prying was high (Ref. 8.25).
(iii) Douty and McGuire’s suggested relationship did not agree with the results of the tests and analyses as well as
the relationship suggested (Ref. 8.25).
DSC/0^—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 217
In discussing this work, Krishnamurthy (Ref. 8.27) suggests that the practice of treating an end plate in the tension
region as an equivalent T-stub has "been shown by experience to often result in overdesign”, the magnitudes of
prying forces in end plates being "highly dependent on the beam flange and web dimension that the T-stub analysis'
does not include". Additionally, “unlike the behaviour of a tee-stub connection which is symmetric about the T web
no symmetry is available in plate behaviour on the two sides of the beam (tension) flange. The equivalent beam
flange force is divided unequally between the two bolted regions of the end plate for each flange, i.e. on the beam
side and the projection beyond". Krishnamurthy reiterates Nair’s warning in (i) above that "the empirical coefficients
... would apply only to the T-stub connections within the range investigated”. The range is summarised below but
also especially note that Nair only considered 19 mm (3/4") bolts.
3e 25-45 (tests) 24-117 (F.E. Analysis)
sg 76-152 (tests)
at 27-97 (tests) 27-97 (F.E. Analysis)
ti 27 (tests 19-51 (F.E. Analysis)
wt 114 (tests) 57-140 (F.E. Analysis)
Measured ratios of Nq/N*f ranged from 0.07 to 0.37, calculated ratios from 0 to 0.57.
Fiesenheiser and Dudek (Ref. 8.27) make much the same point as Krishnamurthy, including the fact that
"unbelievable results are achieved when the formulae are applied in many practical cases". They point out that "the
unusually thick material required to develop the bolt force when the equation is used makes its use questionable ..
. The research reported is apparently only a step toward a solution of the problem and we suspect it is not sufficiently
comprehensive”.
In commenting on these discussions, Nair et al (Ref. 8.28) emphasised their comments in (i) above regarding the
limits of applicability, and agreed with Krishnamurthy that the use of the equations for end-plate connections "may
indeed yield overconservative designs".
Two other (more complicated) approaches to this problem have been proposed by Agerskov (Refs 8.1 - 8.4) and by
Kato and McGuire (Ref. 8.14).
Agerskov's approach is different to Douty and McGuire’s and Nair et al in that he rejects their models which assume
a mechanism formed with plastic hinges at the bolt line and at the toe of the fillet of the T-stub. Agerskov’s method
is involved and will not be repeated here. Agerskov compares the results obtained with his approach with test results
and with results produced by the Douty and McGuire and Nair et al approaches, claiming a better correlation. This
claim is based on only seven test results and perusal of his paper indicates his theory is no better than Douty’s for
three cases but better for the other four cases. Nair’s theory gives the worst correlation with Agerskov's test results
generally overestimating the test results. Considering Its complexity and the fact that only seven results are available
for direct comparison, the use of Agerskov’s approach in design at this stage cannot be justified. Subsequent studies
(Ref. 8.3) are claimed by Agerskov to validate his proposals.
Krishnamurthy in commenting on Agerskov’s approach (Ref. 8.2) states:
.’’The method suggested by the author incorporates valuable extensions of the continuum mechanics
principles proposed by previous researchers. But every such extension increases the number and variety
of pertinent parameters: each then involves several new assumptions and approximations. Typically,
somewhere along the long and complicated path to the final answer, the effects of the approximations need
to be lumped or adjusted to reflect some observed behaviour, thus effectively wiping out the originally precise
and detailed formulations".
Krishnamurthy’s own approach (Ref. 8.18) follows exactly the same course, nonetheless.
Kato and McGuire’s approach (Ref. 8.14) is not dissimilar to Agerskov’s and results in an expression for four different
cases of connection behaviour. They claim that their test results, when compared with theoretical predictions, gives
"rather good” correlation both for yield strength and ultimate strength.
The cases examined by Kato and McGuire were:
(a) separation does not occur before ultimate strength of end plate is reached
(b) separation occurs in range from yield to ultimate strength of end plate
(c) separation occurs in range from elastic limit to yield strength of flange
(d) separation occurs before end plate reaches its elastic limit.
The equations derived may be of theoretical interest but are very involved for normal design use.
They note that, as with other design methods, reduced levels of prying occur with thicker flanges but that other end
plate dimensions have an effect also.

218 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

A more radical approach has been suggested by Krishnamurthy (Refs. 8.15, 8.16, 8.18, 8.27). Krishnamurthy used
finite element studies to examine the behaviour of the end plate in the tension region. He argued that "the
pretensioning of the bolt compresses the plate region under and around the bolt head or nut and tends to curl the
plate outward at its free edge, eliminating or postponing the prying force that is assumed to develop" (Ref. 8.18). The
finite element analysis was claimed to show that prying action, although present, was very slow in developing and
very mild in its adverse effects even when fully developed in connection with tensioned bolts. This was confirmed by
photoelastic tests. Consequently, he argued for its omission from design considerations.
Krishnamurthy (Ref. 8.15) from his analytical studies noted two points of sharp divergence from current thinking,
namely:
(i) that the prying force was a pressure bulb not a concentrated force which shifted towards the edge of the plate
as load increased; consequently, he argued that plate moments are much below the levels predicted by the
tee-hanger analogy
(ii) the outer row of bolts takes a larger fraction of the tensile load than the inner row because of web participation
in the plate bending unless the web is thin or has yielded.
A model reported in Ref. 8.33 and originating in the Netherlands should be mentioned. The approach is basically an
equilibrium one which results in an expression of the form:

is _ Sa af
(1 + Sa)_ ae
tfu

where a — generally is a function of the ratio of moment/unit width at bolt centre-line to flange moment
at web face
= 0 for single curvature,

= 1 for double curvature

8 = ratio of net area (at the bolt line) to gross area (at the web face) of the flange
ae,af = as defined in Fig. 5.8.18.
Bahia et al (Ref. 8.5) reported on four tests of tee-stub connections from which they suggested yet another alternative
formula for determining the prying force. Using measured bolt forces and prying forces, they deduced an
out-of-balance moment and from their tests they concluded that the plastic moment of resistance was not limited to
the conventional value of Mp « Sfy but increased above this value due to the deflection of the end plate and strain
hardening.

All of the foregoing research means that it is very difficult to recommend a suitable design formula. At this stage the
available information suggests that a suitably conservative, but not overly conservative, approach to end plate design
for prying is to use an allowance of 20 - 30% as being sufficiently accurate. Otherwise any one of the methods
reviewed here might be used subject to the limitations noted by the authors for their method.
Other design references - as opposed to the research references discussed before - adopt the following approaches
for design:

(i) References 8.10 and 8.11 recommend the use of aflat value of 20% to account for the effects of prying;
British practice in References 12,13, 8.13 is to use an allowance of 33% to account for the effects of prying;
American practice began with the use of Douty and McGuire’s proposal (see Ref. 17), then moved to the use
of the Nair et al method in the seventh edition of the AISC (US) Manual (Ref. 16). Subsequently, they moved
in the eight edition to the use of the formula in Ref. 8.33 after a recommendation of same in the first edition of
Reference 11. Subsequently, they are now using the method due to Krishnamurthy.
(iv) Kulak Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) recommend the formula of Ref. 8.33 in their first edition, probably due to Struik
but in their second edition have recommended the Krishnamurthy method.
(v) McGuire mentions only the Douty and McGuire formula, which is understandable as this was the only one
available when the book was written in 1968.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 219

 5.8.6 Tests of End Plate Connections

Testing of full scale end plate connections has been reported in the following references:

Bahia et al - Ref. 8.5

Bailey - Ref. 8.6
Beedle and Christopher - Ref. 8.7
Douty and McGuire - Ref. 8.9
Grundy et al - Refs. 8.10, 8.11
Morris and Newsome - Ref. 8.22
Moore and Sims - Ref. 8.23
Packer and Morris - Ref. 8.29
Sherbourne - Ref. 8.30
Surtees and Mann - Ref. 8.31
Tarpy and Cardinal - Ref. 8.32
As it is not practical to summarise these tests here, the original reference should be consulted for full details of the
tests and the results and observations.

5.8.7 Variations on Four Bolt Extended End Plate

5.8.7.1 General

As indicated in Section 5.8.1, the recommended design model covers only an extended end plate with four bolts at
the tension flange and no stiffening to the end plate. Most of the available research quoted herein only deals witt
such end plates.

It is possible to have the following variations on this basic type as follows:

(i) provide eight bolts at the tension flange;

(ii) provide stiffening to the end plate;
(iii) use a flush end plate rather than an extended end plate.

5.8.7.2 Eight bolts at tension flange

Eight bolts at the tension flange will require a column flange width of at least 320 mm approximately, meaning that it
is only a practical proposition for 310UC or fabricated three plate column sections.

Design guidance is available in Refs. 8.10, 8.11,8.24 but essentially the design model recommended here may be
used with the expression for the design capacity of the bolts adjusted to reflect the presence of eight rather than four
bolts at the tension flange.

5.8.7.3 Stiffened end plates

Generally, stiffeners are introduced in order to reduce the end plate thickness in connections required to transmit
large bending moments. In general, they are uneconomic as it is usually cheaper to use a thicker end plate than to
stiffen a thin end plate and they certainly ensure a failure mode in the bolts rather than, the end plate.

The most common application would be in eight bolt end plate connections of large capacity and design guidance/
may be found in Refs. 8.24, 8.36, 8.37. Reference 8.38 deals with the column flange strength at such connections.

5.8.7.4 Flush end plate connections

Flush end plate connections (Fig. 5.8.1) are usually designed as either simple or semi-rigid construction rather than
as rigid construction. Most measurements of the moment-rotation behaviour of this type of connection place typical
designs in the semi-rigid construction category. In order to transmit the same bending moment, thicker end plates
and stronger bolts are required.

Within these restrictions, research and design information may be found in Refs. 8.39 - 8.42.

220 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.9 WELDED SPLICE
No systematic research of the behaviour of welded splices is known and guidance on their design is limited to
References 10,15 and 18.

The assumptions made in deriving the design actions in Section 4.9.2 are that:

(i) flanges resist their proportion of the design bending moment and design axiai force
(ii) the web resists its proportion of the design bending moment and design axial force plus ail the design shear
force
(iii) the eccentricity of the design shear force in the web is equal to the distance from the centre of the splice to the
centroid of the weld group on each side.
The expressions for the evaluation of the design flange forces NJt, N*c given in SectioiJPIlllfen are based on the
following premises:

(a) The design bending moment resisted by the flanges is (1- kmw) M*, kmw M* being assumed to be resisted by
the web splice. kmw is equal to the second moment of area of the web divided by the second moment of area
of the whole section (see Appendix E);
(b) Each flange resists kfN* of the design axial force, kwN* being resisted by the web. kw is the ratio of the web area
to the total cross-sectional area, and kf is the ratio of the area of one flange to the total section cross-sectional
area.
The design method recommended in Section 4.9.3 for flange splices follows conventional procedures, and the origin
of the design provisions are noted in Section 4.9.3, where it is seen that the provisions of AS 4100 are used.

in the recommended design model for the web splice (Section 4.9.4), the design actions are obtained as for a bolted
web splice and the determination of the expressions for the design actions is discussed in Section 5.10. in
determining the design bending moment on the web (Mw), the design shear force is considered to be at an
eccentricity of ed to the weld group centre of gravity. Other aspects of interest in the design of web splices are also
discussed in Section 5.10.

The fillet weld group used around web splice plates may be loaded by design actions comprising in-plane bending
moment, shear force transverse to the member longitudinal axis and axial force. This fillet weld group may readily
be designed using the method given in Section 3.2.7 and explained in Section 5.16. Guidance on the design actions
and weld group properties for use in this method is given in Section 4.9.4.3.

The design of the cap plate detail of Fig. 4.9.1.5 is best handled by reference to specialised texts such as Reference
18.

As indicated in Section 4.9.2.2, the special case of an additional design bending moment where a splice in a column
does not occur at a laterally supported location must also be assessed. Fortunately, most welded splices are located
very near to floor level (Fig. 5.9.1) - primarily because of welding access requirements -and the check is not normally
of concern since lateral restraint is usually available at floor level, and the additional design bending moment
specified by Clause 9.1.4 of AS 4100 need not be designed for.

O-

Flg. 5.9.1 Fig. 5.9.2

PSC/04—1994 AISC; DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 221

The old practice of staggering the location of web splices with respect to the flange splice location is no lonn.
employed, and never used solely for design reasons.
However, staggering the location of flange and web splices as in Fig. 5.9.2 does help in providing temporary support
and location during welding - this is easier to achieve with fabricated sections than with rolled sections where
stripping-out as in Fig. 5.9.2 is difficult.
Popov and Stephen (Ref. 9.1) have investigated welded column splices with a lack of fit at the splice interface. Such
lack of fit may be caused by errors in the end preparation, the inaccuracy of the erection or the inclination of the
erected column. A gap of 1 mm is permitted even in a splice for which full contact is assumed and columns have a
permitted out-of-plumb. Popov and Stephen deliberately manufactured columns with a gap at the splice, gaps up to
1.6 mm were not shimmed while gaps above this and up to 6 mm were shimmed. Gaps were introduced about each
principal axis in different tests. Incomplete penetration butt welds were used to effect the splices.
Popov and Stephen demonstrated that the lack of fit had no significant effect on column strength provided that gaps
over 1.6 mm were shimmed and welded to maintain members in alignment. Only columns with a slenderness ratio
of 30 were tested - for higher L/r ratios member buckling may affect this conclusion. Hayes (Ref. 9.2) investigated
riveted column splices with imperfections and arrived at similar conclusions.
Popov and Stephen have also investigated the tensile capacity of incomplete penetration butt welds in splices and
concluded that welded splices made in large columns perform satisfactorily although they exhibit little ductility (Ref
9.3).
In a column splice prepared for full contact, Stetina(Ref. 9.4) argues that shear force in a column splice due to lateral
wind load can be resisted both by the friction on the contact surfaces and by the flange splice connection.
Consequently, he argues that web splice plates can be omitted unless the shear force is large enough to warrant
such plates. Good practice in Australia is to provide web splice plates irrespective.

222 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5.10 BOLTED SPLICE
5.10.1 Design Actions
The assumptions made in deriving design actions in Section 4.10.2 are that:
(i) theg^hge]if3lice plates resist their proportion of the desigmbendihg mdment and design axial force
(ii) the~^teiiic;e plates resist their proportion of the design bending moment and design axial force plus ail the
deiigff® ear'lofce'
(iii) the eccentricity of the design shear force in the web is equal to the distance from the centre of the splice to the
centroid of the bolt group on each side.
The expressions for the evaluation of the flange forces Nj, Nj. given in Section 4.10.2 are then based on the following
premises:
(i) The design bending moment resisted by the flanges is (1 - kmw) M*, kmwM* being assumed resisted by the web
splice. kmw is the second moment of area of the web divided by the second moment of area of the whole section
(see subsequent derivation in
(ii) Each flange resists kfN* of the design axial force, kwN* being resisted by the web. kw is the ratio of the web area
to the total cross-sectional area, while k* is the ratio of the area of one flange to the total cross-sectional area.
(iii) The section is assumed to be the gross cross-section with no holes deducted on the tension flange (see later
discussion). In assessing the strength of the component(s) on the tension flange, allowance is made for the
presence of holes. This assumption is common to most references, Ref. 11. Hence, the flange splice plate and
the flange splice bolts are designed for a total flange force due to a moment of (1 - kmw) M* and an axial force
of kfN*.
The web splice is designed for-
(i) the proportion of the design bending moment on the web at the splice (= kmw M*)
(ii) the design shear force at an eccentricity of sg/2 from the bolt group centroid
(iii) a proportion of the design axial force (= kw N*).

Past experience and the available literature indicate that the recommended design model leads to satisfactory
behaviour in practice - at least under static loads.
It should be noted that there is not complete agreement on the design actions for which the web splice should be
designed, as Table 5.10.1 indicates.

TABLE 5.10.1
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDED DESIGN ACTIONS FOR WEB SPLICES

Reference Design Actions

Design Eccentricity of Design Splice for Proportion
Shear Force of Design Moment on Section
Sgl/2 sgi Zero
10 YES NO NO NO
11 NO YES (both) YES NO
12-METHOD 1 YES NO NO NO
12-METHOD 2 YES NO NO YES
15 NO NO YES YES
10.3 YES NO NO YES
10.4 NO YES NO NO
10.5 YES NO NO YES

••
;:'

■V
>/
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 223
 5.10.2 Flange Splice

The recommended design method for the flange spKcej^Section 4.10.3 follows conventional procedures, using th.,
design provisions of AS 4100 as noted in Sectionj||jf§3^

The design of the flange splice is that of a lap joint subject to in-plane forces with noseeceritficitpPlate strength is
based on the provisions of AS 4100, with allowance (in accordance witliAS^lOpjJor the presence of holes bein'a
made when assessing the design capacity of the flange splice plates. The bolts are designed for in-plane shear force
using the guidance in Section 3.1, including the correction for lap joints embodied in AS OOTancIThe provision for
design against end plate tearout discussed in Section 5.13.

Generally, “one-plate'’ splices are preferred for reasons of economy and aesthetics. However, for heavy flanges
"three-plate" splices may be required in order to reduce the number of fasteners (by providing a double shear
condition) and to reduce the individual splice plate thicknesses.

Some references and specifications suggest that if the centroid of the cover plates does not coincide with the centroid
of the flange, provision should be made in the design of the (splice) plates for this eccentricity. This provision is
theoretically correct.

However, conventional practice is to ignore this eccentricity, provided that the centroid of their (flange splice plates)
cross section coincide as nearly as possible with that of the cross-section of the element spliced. Such eccentricity
does not affect the nominal capacity at the tension flange (though deformation may occur), but it does affect the
nominal capacity at the compression flange, as explained below.

There is no question that in a simple lap joint (of the type shown in Fig. 5.10.2 (a)), eccentricity of loads can lead to
deformation as shown in Fig. 5.10.2 (b) - necessitating the eccentricity of the forces in the plates being considered
in design calculations. However, as Kulak, Fisher and Struik point out in Reference 11, in contrast to the simple lap
joint, a beam flange splice with only one top cover plate (ie a "one-plate'’ splice - Fig. 5.10.2 (c)) provides a restraining
diaphragm (the web) that restricts the rotation and out-of-plate displacement of the joint. Because of both the
symmetry of the shearing planes and this diaphragm action of the web, significant bending of the splice plates does
not occur even though eccentricity appears to exist.

Consequently, the design model recommended in Section 4.10.3 ignores the effect of any load eccentricity in both
"one-plate" and "three-plate" flange splices.

(a)

(b) (c)

Fig. 5.10.2

Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) report that static tension tests of lap joints with restraint against out-of-plane
deformation behave essentially as symmetric butt joints, with the capacity being exactly one-half of that in a symmetric
butt joint where the bolts are in double shear. Additionally, an unbuttoning effect was observed and, as noted
elsewhere, AS 4100 accounts for this effect by the use of the kr factor in the expression for the nominal bolt capacity
in shear given in Section 3.1.3 of this Manual.

224 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5.10.3 Web Splice
The design of the web splice also follows conventional procedures, the nominal capacities of the splice plates being
assessed using the provisions of AS 4100. The bolt group is designed using the procedure for a bolt-group loaded
by in-plane shear forces in two directions and an in-plane moment, developed in Section 5.14 and summarised in
Section 3.1.5. The additional checks on components of forces on the extreme bolts acting towards an edge is
designed to guard against tearout in the spliced member web or the splice plates and follows from a procedure
developed in Section 5.14.
Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) recommend that two web splice piates, one each side of the web, be provided
since this creates a symmetric load transfer with respect to the plane of the web and also produces the more efficient
double shear plane on the web bolts.

5.10.4 Other Considerations

4
4 13
4 %
*4
<r

Fig. 5.10.3

Most column splices are located at convenient heights above floor beams (Fig. 5.10.3). The advantages of such
positioning of splices is that it not only allows easy access for bolt installation but also locates the splice at a position
where high restraint is likely.
Splices in columns introduce the possibility of transferred compressive forces by bearing rather than through cover
plates, and fasteners. This requires the abutting surfaces of the members to be prepared for full contact splices in
accordance with AS 4100, and then the only requirement is that sufficient cover piates and fasteners be provided in
order to effectively hold the connected member in place. The requirements for full contact splices are specified in
Clause 14.4.4.2 of AS 4100 and are not difficult to achieve in practice with cold saw cutting being the most common
and economical method of achieving this.
If the axial load in the column remains entirely compressive then adherence to this provision is ail that is required. If
resultant tension can occur, then the splice must be separately designed for this condition using the recommended
design model.
For column splices, subject to axial compression only and prepared for full contact, British practice (Refs. 12, 19) is
tflL

TOprovide a flange splice plate on each side of the splice location of a length equal to at least the column flange
width or 225 mm whichever is greater
00 provide a flange splice piate whose width is at least equal to the column flange width
provide a flange splice plate whose thickness is at least equal to the greater of 1/2 the column flange thickness
or 20 mm
I (iv)provide a web splice plate whose depth is at least 1/2 the column section depth
§v) extensive use is made of IS bolting category.
Similar criteria are also applied to column splices not prepared for bearing.
Some references would suggest staggering the location of web and flange splices but practice dictates that this is
uaily avoided in order to simplify erection. It is also not necessary - as tests have demonstrated, at least for splices
•subject to static loading.
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 225
5.10.5 Research Information
Few tests of bolted splices are reported, although Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) summarise some.
An extensive series of tests were conducted by Douty and McGuire (Ref. 10.1). In their tests, beams with flan,
ge
holes (but no splice plate) and beams with a flange splice (one plate on the outside of the flange) were tested ina
uniform moment region. In the beam with holes only, the presence of the holes did not significantly affect the
attainment of the moment capacity of the section due to the material strain-hardening in the vicinity of the holes.
The beam splice tests used flange splice plates but no web splice plates and the observed moment capacity was
again approximately equal to the gross section moment capacity, leading Douty and McGuire to conclude that flange
splices alone can be assumed to transfer the applied bending moment.
Kulak, Fisher and Struik (Ref. 11) also report that the moment capacity of a section is not affected by the reduction
in cross-section caused by the bolt holes unless the ratio of the net section to the gross section of the flanges is less
than fy/0.85 fu. This is the provision contained in Clause 5.2.6 of AS 4100.
They also recommend that the flange splice plates in the tension region be treated as tension members - also a
provision contained in Clause 9.1.7 of AS 4100.
Yura et al (Ref. 10.2) have investigated bolted beam splices, in which filler plates are added under the flange splice
plates to make up a difference in thickness, being inserted between the cover plate and the spliced flange. It was felt
that there could be a reduction in strength due to additional bending in the connecting bolts and tests were undertaken
to investigate this effect. The test specimens were designed to fail the bolts.
These tests revealed a reduced slip load even for fillers up to 6 mm in thickness but no reduction in ultimate load
capacity up to 6 mm. Up to a 20% reduction in slip load was noted for filler plates of 25 mm thickness with a 15 0/

reduction in ultimate load.

AS 4100 attempts to account for this effect in Clause 9.3.2.5 which requires a 15% decrease in nominal bolt capacity
for filler plates which exceed 6 mm in thickness but are less than 20 mm. No correction is made for reduced slip
coefficient for the bolt serviceability limit state with 8.8/TF bolting category.
The thicker fillers were also noted as giving increased joint flexibility and deformation - which is to be expected due
to bending in the longer bolts. Yuraet al noted that their findings only relate to compact joints less than 760 mm long.
Green and Kulak (Ref. 10.6) note that the two assumptions for the design of the web splice bolts (eccentricity being
based on either the distance between bolt centroids (sg2) or on the distance between the splice centre and one bolt
group centroid (sg2/2)) have not been tested experimentally nor verified analytically. They conclude that the measured
angles of deformation of the web bolt holes indicate that the bolt force directions are consistent with the assumption
that the shear force acts at the centre of the web splice. Green and Kulak concluded that the best agreement with
test results is obtained by using the method proposed by Kulak et al (Ref. 11) as long as the load-deformation results
from testing in a tension test rig are used rather than those from a compression test rig. The best agreement is
obtained by using the ultimate strength design method, load-deformation results from tension testing and the
assumption that the shear force acts at the centre-line of the splice. According to Green and Kulak, the assumption
that the shear force acts at the centroid of the opposite bolt group led to inconsistent and conservative results,.
Kulak et al (Ref. 11) have proposed a rational procedure based on a simple equilibrium approach on a free-body
diagram taken by cutting the member through one set of web bolts. They found no particular relationship between
the eccentricity of the shear force and the centroid of either bolt group on each side of the splice centre-line. As Green
and Kulak (Ref. 10.6) point out, strictly the moment at the centroid of each bolt group must be different as they are
at different locations on the member, being separated by a distance equal to the distance between the instantaneous
centres of rotation of each bolt group. The critical bolt group is the one at the location with higher bending moment.
If no bending moment is present, then each bolt group is subject to a moment equal to the shear force times the
distance from the splice centre-line to the instantaneous centre of rotation of either bolt group.

226 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.11 BRACING CLEAT

5.11.1 Derivation of Design Model

Most studies of bracing connections do not consider the simple isolated bracing connection dealt with in Section
4.11, but deal with the more involved cases of two or more members connected to the same gusset plate. However,
the isolated bracing connection forms a significant proportion of the total number of bracing connections used, it also
forms the basis of a design method for the more involved bracing connections.

The basic assumption made in the recommended design model is that the centre-lines of the bolt group, weld group
and gusset plate coincide, although the recommended design model of Section 4.11 is readily modified if this is not
the case.

AS 4100 Clause 9.1.5 states that:

"Members or components meeting at a joint shall be arranged to transfer the design actions between the
parts and, wherever practicable, with their centroidal axes meeting at a point. Where there is eccentricity at
joints, the members and components shall be designed for the design bending moments which result. . .
Eccentricity between the centroidal axes of angle members and the gauge lines for their bolted end
connections may be neglected in statically loaded members, but must be considered in members and
connection components subject to fatigue loading."
Since the assumption is made in the design model that the gravity axis of the member and the centroidal axis of the
member coincide, apart from angle members, there is no eccentricity on the bracing cleat itself. In the case of angle
members, the eccentricity between the gauge line of the angle and the centriodal axis of the member need not be
designed for with statically loaded angles under Clause 9.1.5, such non-uniformity of force distribution being allowed
for in the member design provisions of Clause 7.3 of AS 4100.

Slight eccentricities between the centroidal axes of members and the centroidal axes of connection cleats have, in
any case, long been ignored as having a negligible effect on the static strength of members (see Ref. 16b).

For all the members but single angles shown in Table 4.11.1, the centroidal axis of the member, the centroidal axes
of the cleat attached to the member, and the centroidal axis of the cleat to the support generally coincide in one plane
and in the other plane the eccentricity involved is only the thickness of the cleats as in Fig. 5.11.1.

o
o
I a

Nil eccentricity in this plane Small eccentricity in this plane

Fig. 5.11.1

Strictly, this small eccentricity should be allowed for in terms of Clause 9.1.5 of AS 4100, both in the design of the
member and the bracing cleats, but is not allowed for in the recommended design model.

The Commentary to the AISC Specification (Ref. 16) states that:

"Slight eccentricities between the gravity axis of singie-and double-angle members and the centre of gravity
of their connecting rivets or bolts have long been ignored as having negligible effect upon the static strength
of such members. Tests have shown that similar practice is warranted in the case of welded members in
statically loaded structures. However, the fatigue life of single angles, loaded in tension or compression, has
been shown to be very short".
This is noted in the commentary to AS 4100 (Ref. 35). Following these recommendations, the design model ignores
this minor eccentricity and accordingly is only valid for bracing members which are subject to static loads.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 227

 The recommended design model of Section 4.11 is based on the following assumptions:
(i) there are no eccentricity effects to be considered
(ii) the component is only loaded axially
(iii) the weld is only designed to transmit shear force transverse to the throat and shear force longitudinal
to
the throat, with no bending moment
(iv) the bolts are loaded in shear and assumed to be uniformly loaded except when the joint is very long, in
which case non-uniformity of load is accounted for using the provisions of Section 3.1.5.
The formulae presented in Section 4.11.2 reflect these assumptions and are self-explanatory, with the
following exceptions:-
(1) the weld group is designed using the method of Sections 3.2.7 and 3.2.8 for a vertical fillet weld group with
F* = T V* Fz = ± V* M* = 0 V$ = N* cos 6 V* = N* sin 6
from which
v* + V*/2L w v* = ± Vj?/2U v* = 0
substituting into the governing equation (Section 3.2.7) of V(v?)2 + (vj)2 + (v?)2 < 0v W

V£ + V2 ^ 4U (<£vw)2
or (N*)2 cos2 6 + (N*)2 sin2 6 < 4L& (4>vw)2
Hence member design force N* < 2LW (4>vw) or 4>Nv, = 2Lw(4>vw) ^ N*
(2) The block shear design provisions for the bracing cleat are based on those contained in Ref. 16b, which
are in turn based on the test results of Refs 11.7, 11.8. Two possible block shear strengths are calculated,
these being (see Fig. 5.11.2):-
(i) fracture on the net tensile section along with shear yielding on the gross section at right angles
(ii) fracture on the net shear area combined with yielding on the gross tensile area.
The design criterion is the one that produces the larger capacity because, as is argued in Ref. 16b, block
shear is a fracture or tearing phenomenon, not a yielding phenomenon, and the correct nominal capacity
is the one in which the fracture term is larger than the yielding term.
(3) Local buckling of the cleat component in axial compression is evaluated using Section 6 of AS 4100, with
the effective length of the cleat taken as 0.70 Lfa after Refs 10.5 and 11.12 (which actually use a factor of
0.65) on the assumption that the cleat is a short column fixed at both ends for which AS 4100 Table 4.6.3.2
suggests a member effective length factor of 0.7 for fixed/fixed supports.

/
/
✓ o—o—
SHEAR.
/

t -~o

5HEAR.
/
A

J \-r
TENSION

Fig. 5.11.2

228 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.11.2 Members with Common Gusset

21
VF*
A
*

A I?
4-

Fig. 5.11.3 Bracing Connections

Current methods of design for gusset plates with several members framing in {Fig. 5.11.3) are based on simple
elastic methods using elementary concepts which experience has shown produce satisfactory results.
For bracing connections where two or more members frame in at a single point, a single gusset plate may be
used to transfer the forces in the members. Such gusset plates are usually subjected to bending moments,
shear forces and axial forces while the forces in the bracing members are transferred into the gusset through
the bolts in the end of the bracing member.
As Kulak et al (Ref. 11) indicate, substantial variations in the nominal capacity exist in the design of gusset
plates due to the assumptions involved and a “correct" method Is not presently available. Despite the
shortcomings of the present approaches, they continue to be used because experience with these methods
have resulted in gusset plates that have provided satisfactory performance and behaviour with no known
failures or cases of adverse behaviour.
Blodgett {Ref. 18) notes that, if the connecting gusset is very flexible and offers no restraining action at the end
of the member, the member must be designed for the effect of the eccentric forces whereas the connection
need not be. He notes that If the connecting gusset is rigid, then the opposite applies. The situation invariably
Is that the gusset is flexible and the connection is consequently designed on the basis of neglecting any
eccentricity. Blodgett offers the following reasons for this:
(i) the eccentricity is not large and the reduction in strength due to actual eccentricity is also not large
(ii) tests indicate a much smaller reduction in strength due to actual eccentricity than theory would indicate
(iii) member design rules reduce member strength to account for any eccentricity at the ends and this
reduction is more severe than for the connection. Accordingly, member failure is more likely than
connection failure.
One simple design procedure (Ref. 11.1) assumes that the gusset plate acts as beam, with various sections
through the plate being checked in order to arrive at the governing criterion. All bolts connecting a member to
the gusset plate are assumed to be equally loaded. This method has been considered questionable on a
number of grounds (Refs 11,11.2).
Whitmore (Ref. 11.2) investigated the stress distribution in gusset plates and concluded that the distribution of
stresses obtained from the beam formula method was inaccurate, particularly at the edges of the gusset plate.
Whitmore concluded that the maximum normal stress in a gusset plate at the end of a member could be
estimated with sufficient accuracy for routine design by assuming that the force in the member was distributed
uniformly over an area equal to the gusset plate thickness x effective width. The effective width used is
defined in Fig. 5.11.4.

DSC/04 1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 229

 BSAOMG MEMBER.

30°
Gimzr RATE \ <*■

1 ..>* I
<> \
/

imCTNl WltTTW
v” «

Fig. 5.11.4 Whitmore Effective Width Concept Fig. 5.11.5

The design recommendation by Whitmore fits easily into the design model of Section 4.11 since the
component strength can be readily evaluated by using be for bi in the expressions for plate strength. If
Whitmore’s method of deriving an effective width results in overlapping in an involved connection, it is
recommended that effective widths so obtained be reduced to avoid such overlapping (Fig. 5.11.5).
An elastic analysis by Vasarhelyi using the finite element method (Ref. 11.3) and another by Struik reported in
Reference 11, confirm that such an elementary analysis is adequate for most cases. Vasarhelyi comments that
if geometry or load conditions are significantly different from routine, an analysis by finite element methods
should be used. This is impractical for routine design.
Whitmore’s criterion was supported by analytical models constructed using finite element methods by Richard
et al (Ref. 11.6), the results of the models being compared with full scale tests. Richard et al also proposed an
alternate ultimate design concept based on a modified “block shear” criterion and they presented an initial
development of the approach.
Bjorhovde and Chakrabarti (Ref. 11.7) report on tests of three full size gusset plates tested to failure in which
tearing was observed in the last row of bolts (i.e. a “block-shear” type of failure in the gusset plate) as well as
gusset plate buckling. Their conclusions were as follows:
(i) the primary cause of failure was a tear across the bottom holes in the gusset plate. This was noted to be in
agreement with the Whitmore criterion;
(ii) the type and location of the gusset plate boundaries combined with the load transfer into the plate have
important secondary effects of plate buckling and associated out-of-plane bending;
(iii) plate buckling appears to be a significant criterion in the development of a design model;
(iv) the findings of the tests were in acceptable agreement with the Whitmore concept of designing gusset
plates.
Hardash and Bjorhovde (Ref. 11.8) have developed the block-shear model in more detail. Their block shear
model assumes that the ultimate shear resistance is developed along the bolt group boundaries with tension
resistance being supplied across the last bolts in the group. The model seems most applicable to two or more
lines of bolts rather than a single line and reflects test results where a tensile tear occurs across the last row of
bolts. The Hardash and Bjorhovde model attempts to include as many parameters as possible and was
supported by an extensive programme of testing. A detailed design model is proposed and a recommended set
of equations developed which give the nominal ultimate resistance of a gusset plate loaded in tension. Their
study needs widening into compressive plate gusset connections and the situation of multiple members
framing into one gusset plate before becoming a general design procedure.

230 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 The Bjorhovde and Chakrabati tests showed failures due to block shear occurred before the failure load
predicted by the Whitmore criterion thus suggesting the use of the Whitmore criterion may lead to an
overestimation of the nominal capacity. Kulak et al (Ref. 11) review other sources which suggested that a block
shear failure may be the critical criterion for the design of gusset plates and suggest that both the block shear
and the Whitmore criteria be checked when designing gusset plates.
Kulak et al (Ref. 11) note that most of the research on the failure of gusset plates has concentrated on the
behaviour of gusset plates subject to tensile rather than compressive forces. In short, they note that no tests or
analyses are available for gusset plates loaded in compression and suggest that the possibility of local
buckling needs to be examined. They suggest that “at the present time, this can only be done on the basis of
engineering judgement supplemented by the current state of knowledge of forces delivered to gusset plates by
members loaded in tension”. Some testing subsequent to the publication of their book assists in this area.
Yamamoto et al (Ref. 11.13) carried out an experimental investigation of gusset plates welded to the webs of
box-section chord members such as occur in heavy trusses. Under axial force they postulated an effective
width concept similar to that of Whitmore, but rather than a simple dispersion of 30 degrees proposed a
formula relating the effective width to the width and depth of the gusset which they claimed provided a more
conservative estimate than the Whitmore estimate. They also examined the behaviour of such gussets under
bending moment.
In a subsequent paper, Yamamoto et al (Ref. 11.14) examined the buckling strengths of similar gusset plates.
They postulated that the buckling strength (Foc) could be expressed as

Foc =
!ii
b\2/fy
t E
where k = buckling constant which depends on the boundary conditions
= 0.276 for simple supports which correlates well with test results
They also noted that considerable reserve capacity existed after the local buckling took place.
Gross (Ref. 11.15) undertook an experimental study of gusset plate connections generally of the type used in
very heavily braced frames involving braces connected to beams and thence to columns. Richard’s method
(Ref. 11.16) was used as the basis for the design of the gusset plate attachments.
Gross concluded that the Whitmore criterion appeared to be a good indicator of the general yielding of the
gusset plate and that buckling of the gusset plate under a compressive loading could be estimated using the
Whitmore section and taking a unit strip and treating it as a column. Gross proposed an effective length factor
of 0.5 rather than the 0.65 used in Refs 19 and 11.12 because Gross believed that a fixed/fixed boundary
condition was closely approximated. Gross also examined the Hardash and Bjorhovde (Ref. 11.8) and
AISC(US) methods of predicting the nominal capacity for block shear failure and concluded that the AISC(US)
method predicted the gusset tearout capacity very closely.
It is recommended for a gusset plate with multiple members connected to it that the Whitmore criterion be
used to divide the gusset up into zones attached to each member (as shown in Fig. 5.11.5) and each member
and its zone of gusset be designed using the recommended design model of Section 4.11.2.

5.11.3 Connection of Gusset to Supports

Bracing members subjected to tension loads, with the connection plate welded to the flange or web of a
column or beam, involve the additional consideration concerning the ability of the supporting member to
satisfactorily receive the applied force.
Where the gusset plate is attached to a flange in line with the column web (Fig. 5.11.6(a)) no special provision
is required. When the gusset plate is attached across a flange (Fig. 5.11.6(b)), the procedures detailed in
’

Section 4.7.3 for the flange area of a welded moment connection may be employed, according to whether the
force is tensile or compressive in the bracing member.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 231

Os’-.
 ■*4-
4

4 i

-*v

L / J
i

(a) (b)
Fig. 5.11.6

For a connection to the web of a column or beam, elastic design procedures are available to assess th<*
strength of the web, at least when tensile forces are applied to the gusset.
One method is an elastic method suggested by Blodgett {Ref. 18), while another is a yield line approach
proposed by Kapp (Ref. 11.4). These methods have been reviewed by Anand and Bertz (Ref. 11.5) who have
also undertaken finite element studies of the problem.
The essential parameters for the solution of the problem are given in Figure 5.11.7.

£c i- L-
484 b,
©
*
d\ mmmmmt&P"*

i bo

Fig. 5.11.7

Blodgett’s simplified elastic analysis (Ref. 18) assumes that the design tensile force produces a uniform stress
which decreases linearly from the end of the plate for a distance equal to 12tc. Hence, the design force per unit
width of web is given by:
N*
n* =
(Li + 12tc)
By assuming that the flanges provide no restraint, a unit width of the web can be analysed as a simply
supported beam with a concentrated load at midspan.

Therefore, *
max ~

M* n*d 1 4
max. fb = g max X
^ f. yc
4 1 x t§
Hence, the maximum tension force that a web can sustain is given by, after applying a capacity factor <t> = 0.9
0-9 fyC t|
Ndes (Li + I2tc)
di

Blodgett’s approach is very simplified and has some obvious limitations which are discussed in Ref. 11.5. The
method is also applicable if the bracing force is compressive.

232 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 Kapp’s analysis is an upper-bound yield line solution, two solutions being given as follows:

L,
plate element assumed fixed at flanges N„ = fyo t§ ^ + 4-y/l+ (t,/2bc)

plate element assumed not fixed at flanges Nu = + 2V2 + (t,/b0)

These expressions are nominal capacities for mechanisms selected by Kapp. The design capacity is obtained
by applying a capacity factor of 0.9.
Anand and Bertz reviewed both methods and based on some limited experimental and analytical evidence
from finite element studies concluded that (Ref. 11.5):
(1) Initial yield loads predicted using Blodgett’s analysis provide reasonably accurate estimates of yield
loads. The yield loads are low in magnitude and web deflections remain small.
The Blodgett method provides safe and conservative values for design loads but is needlessly
conservative where the magnitude of the deflections is not of concern.
(2) Although the yield line theory of Kapp is not strictly applicable to the problem-largely because
membrane action rather than bending action prevails as the main behaviour mode-it does lead to
conservative estimates of the utimate strength of the web. However, the deflections at the ultimate load
are very large and local buckling failure in the web may result.
It is recommended that the Blodgett method be considered for use in evaluating the web strength of such
connections. If the web strength is insufficient for the purpose, web stiffeners or doubler plates could be used.
The weld connecting a gusset plate to a support, where two or more members frame in at a single point, is
readily analysed. For the case of Fig. 5.11.8(a), where all forces meet at the centroid of the weld, the loading
system results in no resultant force on the weld due to joint equilibrium. It is suggested that the weld be
designed in such cases for a horizontal force of N2 and a moment of (N2 x 100 mm) as a minimum moment
allowing for some out-of-balance of forces in actual use.
For the case of Fig. 5.11.8(b), where all the forces meet at the centroid of the supporting member, a moment
equal to (Nfo - N 3e3) acts on the weld.
In both cases, the method of Section 3.2.7 may readily be used to analyse the weld group, for the actual
resultant design actions.
Bracing connections in very heavy beam-column construction are discussed in detail in References 10.5,
11.12,11.15 and 11.16.

*
IH

(V
Nf
.'iff
<2
w* ■ ^ I&2I 2
WELP^
CENTfZOlD

' N* • '-{VN*
N*

(a) (b)

Fig. 5.11.8

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 233

5.12 COLUMN BASE PLATE-PINNED TYPE
5.12.1 Derivation of Design Model
The recommended design model given in Sections 4.12.3-4.12.6 is based on the recommendations of DeWoif
as detailed in Refs 12.3 and 12.4, with some additional material from Stockweil (Refs 12.6,12.7).

Axial Compression
The recommended design model is that of the AiSC(US) Manual (Ref. 16b), modified to suit Australian Codes
AS 3600 (Ref. 38) and AS 4100 (Ref. 34).
The design bearing strength of the concrete is taken from AS 3600, Clause 12.3 using the capacity factor from
AS 3600 of 0.6, which is multiplied by the area of the base plate to give the design capacity <£NC. The areas At
and A2 are as defined in AS 3600. The larger the concrete area A2l the greater the confinement and the larger
the design capacity <£NC. The loss of bearing area due to the presence of the anchor bolt holes is normally
ignored (Ref. 12.3).
The design strength of the base plate assumes that the plate behaves as a rigid plate. Three different
assessments are made, each due to a different source.
The first assessment governs when the dimensions of the base plate (dj x bj) are much greater than those of
the column (dc x bfc) and is an assessment that has been part of the AISC(US) Manual (Refs 16a, 16b) over
many editions. The axial load is assumed to be concentrated over an area of 0.95 dc x 0.80 bfc (see Fig.
5.12.1) and the base plate is assumed to bend about the edges of this area as a cantilevered plate. The
governing design capacity is based on the longest cantilever length am, being the maximum of dimensions a 1
and a2, with the design capacity per unit width being given from AS 4100 as:-
0 fyi Si = 0.9 x fyi x tj2/4
so that:-
Ns a2m
x^0,9x fyi x tj2/4
bjdj

0.9 x fyi x ti2 x bs dj 0.9 x fvi x t2 x An

giving:- Ns ~

I bTc

tl
Ji 4 0*516C di

T
(a) Assumed Bearing Stress

OTTiCAL SECTION
IN NPING am

f*
tp
i
rK (b) Critical Sections

(c) Determination of Moment

Fig. 5.12.1

234 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

For column base plates where the plate dimensions (dj x bf) are very similar to those of the column (dc x b}C),
the dimension am approaches zero so that the previous expression for Ns becomes very large. The critical
section is now between the column flanges, adjacent to the column web (Ref. 12.3). Two approaches have
been advanced for this case-one due to Fling (Refs 12.5 and 12.7) as used in Refs 12.1 and 12.11 and one
due to Stockwell and Murray (Refs 12.6, 12.7 and 12.8). Stockwell (Ref. 12.7) discusses both methods and
indicates that they give similar results.
The Stockwell/Murray method is recommended by DeWolf in Refs 12.3 and 12.4 and is used in AISC(US)
Manual (Ref. 16b). The assumption made in this method is that the pressure distribution is not uniform under
the base plate, but rather is confined to an area in the immediate vicinity of the web (see Fig. 5.12.2), a region
approximated by a H-shaped area characterised by the dimension a3 in Fig. 5.12.2.
The H-shaped bearing area (AH) is taken as the larger of
N* N*
and where 4> = 0.6
<t> X 0.85 n VAj/(bf0 dc) 4> x 2 fc

m-

zzz zzz r Uo/Q.

/
/
dc
✓

tz:
kc/z

Fig. 5.12.2

The area AH is given by (Fig. 5.12.2):-

AH - 2 bfc a3 + (dc - 2 a3) x 2 a3 = 2 bfc a3 + 2 d0 a3 - 4 a§
Knowing the area AH from the above equations, allows the above expression to be solved for a3 as a function
of Ah, dc and bfc.
The distance a3 for the cantilevered section is then calculated from
a3 = l [(d0 + btc) - V(dc + bfc)2 4 Ah]
Proceeding as before,

Ns a§
x ~ < 0.9 x fyi x ti2/4
Ar
giving:-
0.9 x fyj x ti2 x A H
Ns =
2a§
Another method due to Fling (Ref. 12.5) assumed that yield lines occur in the base plate as shown in Fig.
5.12.3. Using Fig. 5.12.3, two parameters are defined
kc = (dc - 2tfe)/[0.5 (bfe - twc)] = ch/bes

kfap = 3 1 1
4 + 4 (kc)2 2 kc
and the required plate thickness (tj)—in limit state terms-is given as (Ref. 12.11)

ti S* 0.43 blc kbp 0.6 x 0.85 fc

0.9 fy, x (1 - kbp2)

DSC/Q4—1994 A1SC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 235

 This method clearly assumes simultaneous crushing of the concrete foundation and yielding of the steel ba
plate, which may not occur especially for lightly loaded base plates. Stockwell (Ref. 12.7) notes that it giv 6
plate thicknesses slightly greater than the Stockwell/Murray method. It has not been included in the
recommended design model of Section 4.12.3.

n S.

s faerr
V
n
M
rl FAST IE
n
d. H
indicate '/\eu?uN&>

Hi

tan o

Fig. 5.12.3

All of the foregoing applies to an I-section column, which is the predominant section type discussed in the
literature. However, Ref. 12.3 discusses the application of the principles used in the above development for
I-sections to hollow section members. What follows for channel-sections, RHS and CHS sections is based on
Ref. 12.3.
Channel-section—Fig. 5.12.4
a1 - (dr - 0.95 dc)/2 a2 = <b| - 0.80 bte)/2
Ah — 2bfc a3 + (dc — 2 a3) a3
(2bfe + dc) - V(2bfc + dc)2 8 AH
from which it can be shown that a3 -
4
where AH is defined above for I-sections, as a function of N%.

bL
<LX

<Kdc M

a,
<3,2

Fig. 5.12.4

RHS-section—Figure 5.12.5
= (ds - 0.95 dc)/2 a2 = (bj - 0.95 bc)/2
Ah = dc bc - (dc - 2 a3) (bc - 2 a3) = 2 (dc + bc) a3 - 4 a§

2(dc + b„) - V4(dc + b0)2 - 16 Ah

from which it can be shown that a3 —
8
where AH is taken as the larger of

m and
N*
x 2f;
where = 0.6
4> x 0.85 f' VA2/(bcdc)

236 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 bl

4-t
.3-*
di. 4. 0-55de
M
M 1/1
M M
i

a.*
a2
Fig. 5.12.5

CHS~section—Fig. 5.12.6
a! = (di - 0.80 d0)/2 a2 = (b-, - 0.80 d0)/2
Ah = 7r(d§ - d§)/4 where d3 = d0 - 2 a3
= 7T (4 do a3 - 4 a§)/4
d0 - Vd§ - 4 Ah/7t
from which it can be shown that a3 = 2
where AH is taken as the larger of
N*c N*
and where = 0.6
<f> x 0.85 f'c Va^Ta <t> x 2fc
and A0 = ?rd§/4

a.*.

u 4 0*4, 4

at
.
■

OfcJo 3-2

Fig. 5.12.6

if the end of the column is prepared for full contact in accordance with Clause 14.4.4.2 of AS 4100, then axial
compression may be assumed to be transferred by bearing. If the end of the column is not prepared for full
contact, then welds of sufficient strength must be provided. Weld strength is assessed using Section 3.2 of this
Manual. :

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 237

 Axial Tension
There is very little information in the available literature discussing the design of column base plates for tl I
case of uplift or axial tension. The exception is DeWolf in Ref. 12.3, who relies on the proposals of Murrav •
Ref. 12.8. yin

Murray notes that three possible methods of analysis suggest themselves for the analysis and design of the
column base plate, nameiy:-
classical plate bending solutions
finite element analysis
yield line analysis
Murray opted for the yield line method of analysis, following similar analysis done by Blodgett (Ref. 12.10). The
yield line pattern suggested by Murray’s analysis is that shown in Fig. 5.12.7, comprising three lines radiating
from the centre of the web of the I-section, one line perpendicular to the web and two lines at an angle. Murray
concluded that the required plate thickness was given by

for y/2 bic ^ dc n/2N s Sg

ti = for a capacity factor 0 = 1.0
4 bfc fyi

NS Sg dc
for y/2 bfc > dc ti =
fy, (d| + 2 bfc)

These expressions have been used in the recommended design model by re-expressing them in terms of Ns

o bV
2
7K
/ \
/
/
/ Q \
\
L
ht b

<Vz dc/z
y - & (bwz)
^ dc/2.

//
loni'4 //
X / /
//
^c/2

b* b

Fig. 5.12.7

Note that these expressions have been derived for a base plate connected to an I-section column with two
only anchor bolts. The expressions were validated by Murray using limited experimental results. For I-section
columns with two pairs of bolts-as is commonly used on the larger I-section members-no information is
available but it is believed to be reasonably valid that if the yield line centred at each bolt does not overlap (as
in Fig. 5.12.8(a)) then the same equations can be used for each anchor bolt pair and the result summed. This is
suggested in the recommended design model. Even if they do overlap (as in Fig. 5.12.8(b)), it is assumed that
the error in simply multiplying the expression for Ns for one bolt pair by a factor of 2 to allow for two bolt pairs
will not be large. This is also suggested in the recommended design model. This assumption needs to be
validated bytesting.
For channel-section, RHS and CHS columns no guidance is available but it is suggested that the same failure
mechanism might be applicable-in the manner shown in Fig. 5.12.9—so that the same equations might be
applied in the absence of any other guidance. This assumption also needs to be validated by testing.

238 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

f

\I/ t 7
\ ?. /

l
\

/
/ \ /
T \

/,
/ \

\ /?\ \ \
*f ' \ / / \
r-.i- V A. /___ I

YlELP \JHS9

(a) (b)

Fig. 5.12.8

bfe/2 bfo/2 ,bfe/2

l“l
/ \
\ \ / \
\ s /
4 G dc
/ \
\ / \
s / \

Fig. 5.12.9

For the suggested method for other than I-sections to be valid, the length of the yield lines must be similar to
that for I-sections in Fig. 5.12.7, that is bfc/2. Redefining that length as b{c/2 (so as to distinguish it from the
actual half flange width for an I-section), it is suggested that the same equation may be used for all sections by
rewriting the equation in terms of bf0 rather than bfc, where bf0/2 (and hence b{0) may be defined as shown in
Fig. 5.12.9.
The only alternative to the method proposed by Murray for I-sections-and herein extended to other
sections-is to assume that the tension in the anchor bolts spreads out to act over an effective width of plate
(be), so that that effective width of plate acts as a cantilever in bending. Reference 12,11 suggests a 45 degree
angle of dispersion-as in Fig. 5.12.10.

The design moment is then M* = ~ x bt

Nt
nb
where N* = design tension force on column member
nb = number of anchor bolts
The design moment capacity of the plate whose effective width is be is then
0.9 x betj2 x fyj
Ms =
4

so that Ns = 0.225 x beh2 x fyi x ^

For the case of tension in the column member, the welds connecting the column to the base plate must have
sufficient strength. Weld strength is assessed using Section 3.2 of this Manual.

/
t /
/
i

bt
X3,
/
bl

Fig. 5.12.10

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 239

 Shear
Horizontal shear force may be assumed to be resisted either:-
(i) by the anchor bolts
(ii) by friction between the base plate and the concrete footing
(iii) by a shear key, which is usually a block welded to the underside of the base plate
(see Fig. 5.12.11)
(iv) recessing the base plate into the concrete footing
(v) a combination of two or more of the above.
1
Some authors do not recommend that shear be resisted by the anchor bolts. Ricker (Ref. 12.2) specifically
notes that “anchor bolts should not be used to resist shear forces in a column base”. The main reason he
gives for this recommendation is that the bolts have a low bending resistance and that if a plate eases
sideways to bear against a bolt, bending is induced in the bolt which acts as a cantilever with a lever arm
equal to the grout thickness plus an additional distance should the concrete foundation crush locally. While for
cases of axial compression, it is perfectly possible to resist shear force by methods (ii) and (iii), for the case of
uplift, method (ii) is clearly not feasible.
DeWoif (Ref. 12.3) argues that shear can be resisted by the anchor bolts, but he does point out that when using
oversize holes in the base plate, bearing of the anchor bolts against the hole sides is unlikely—or at least it is
unlikely that all bolts bear uniformly at the same time. He notes that other researchers have recommended that
no more than two (2) bolts be assumed to resist shear force or that the assumption be restricted to "small"
shear forces. He suggests that a more reliable method of shear transfer through the anchor bolts can be
achieved by welding the nuts to the base plate or by providing special washers with normal size holes (bolt
dia + 2 mm) which fit over the oversize holes and are weided to the base plate.
For the case of axial compression, shear is readily resisted by friction. De Wolf suggests (Ref. 12.3) that, based
on the AISC(US) LRFD Specification (Ref. 16b), the coefficient of friction be taken as (Fig. 5.12.11):-
0.9 — concrete against as-roiled steel when the contact plane is the full base plate thickness below the
concrete surface (i.e. recessed)
0.7 — for concrete or grout placed against the as-rolled steel surface with the contact plane coincidental
with the concrete surface
0.55 — for grouted conditions with the contact plane between the grout and the as-rolled steel above the
concrete surface (normal condition)
A capacity factor of 0.8 is used with these values of the coefficient of friction in the recommended design
model.

4 w

U
AC = 0-3 Aju* on M =0-55

Fig. 5.12.11

With the shear key method, shear force is transferred through the shear key acting as a cantilever and bearing
against the concrete surface-no bearing being assumed against the grout-see Fig. 5.12.12. The bearing
capacity is based on Clause 12.3 of AS 3600. Bearing is assumed uniformly distributed over the depth of
embedment into the concrete and the shear key sized for bearing and bending as a cantilever. The shear
strength is not assessed since DeWoif reports that it does not govern.
For axial compression, the shear key is normally assumed to resist the part of the design shear force that
cannot be resisted by friction.

240 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 Hence, the recommended design model of Section 4.12.5 assumes that shear is resisted:-
0) for axial compression, by friction or if insufficient design capacity is available then by the anchor bolts or a
combination of friction and a shear key; in the latter case any anchor bolts are merely locating devices as
friction and/or a shear key should stop the anchor bolts ever coming into bearing;
for axial tension, by the anchor bolts (see Sections 4.12.6/5.12.4) or by a shear key.

V*

z k
<-
Vk

..qb* 0 65

Fig. 5.12.12

The design shear capacity when relying on friction alone is then given by:—
4> x ix N* where 4> — 0.8
N* - design axial compression force
For the shear key arrangement shown in Fig. 5.12.12, three failure possibilities need to be evaluated:-
(i) bearing failure-based on a failure stress of 0.85 f'c over an area of ds x (bs - tg)
(ii) bending failure of the lug, acting as a cantilever
The shear force (Vk), assumed acting at the centre of the distribution, gives a bending moment of
Vk x [t„ + 0.5 (bs - ta)l = Vk [0.5 (bs + tg)]
while the bending resistance is given by
; 0 x dstffys/4
:•
..
so that equating the two

••• ct? x ds tf f 2*
Vk =
2 X (bg + tg)
failure of the weld joining the shear key to the base plate, which is assessed using Section 3.2.7,
proceeding as follows.
. For the case where shear force is applied parallel to both principal axes—as in Fig. 5.12.13—the design
actions in terms of Section 3.2.7 are as follows:-
F* = V* Fy ~ Vy F* = (-) if axial compression
= (+) if axial tension
=* VJ X 0.5 (bS + tg) M* = V* x 0.5 (bs + tg) =0
If a shear key is provided to resist shear force in one direction only then the weld shape is rectangular—as in
ng. 5.12.14(a)-and the relevant properties are given in Table 3.2.7.1. If a shear key is provided to resist shear
force in two directions—as in Fig. 5.12.14(b)—then the weld profile is as shown in Fig. 5.12.14(b) and the
relevant section properties are:-
U - 2d S1 + 2 ds2 wx = 2d|1/12 + (ds2 - bs1) x b|2/2
wy = 2 dl2/12 + (d S1 - bs2) x bii/2

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 241

 A
(,

y-
V*y
V*
yx
n y

i
x y - ^/2
x'o*y
Fig. 5.12.13
b5,
b$
X
/////
S /
/ /
/ / / '
7
/ *■ <is.
/ / ^/ - y y-^y. $ ' S s s

/ ✓ 'V
'Z
/ ' 4 '
/ <■
TTY / 77 /
/
»
////"/"/ r d
/ ' / '
/ ' /
7 /? 7 ? /’I 77>

(a) (b)
Fig. 5.12.14

5.12.2 Alternative Design Models

As indicated earlier, the DeWolf design proposals which form the basis of the recommended design model for
axial compression, axial tension and shear are the most comprehensive currently available. They also
represent current and past American practice.
The only alternative design guidance available is from British sources. The British limit state design code
8S5950:Part 1:1985 presents some basic information on the design of column base plates but this
information is restricted to the case of axial compression. The BS 5950 guidance can be summarized as
foilows:-
— nominal bearing pressure between baseplate and support may be determined assuming a linear
distribution of pressure
— for concrete foundations the bearing strength may be taken as 0.4 fcu where fcu is the characteristic
concrete cube strength at 28 days
— an empirical method of design may be used where for concentric compression force the required base
plate thickness is given by
fori, H, [, [] or RHS section columns
ti = V2.5 w (a2 - 0.3 b2)/fyP
where w = pressure on underside of the base plate assuming uniform distribution
a = greater projection of base plate beyond column
b = lesser projection of base plate beyond column
fyp = design strength of plate
for solid round or circular columns
ti = Vw dp (dp - 0.9 d)/(2.4 fyp)
where dp = length of side of base plate, not less than 1.5(d + 75) mm
d = diameter of the column section
This design procedure is discussed in Refs. 10,12,13 and 19. Ref. 19 makes the comment that the empirical
formula “takes account of the two-way bending present in the (base) plate. Caution must be exercised in the
use of the formula. It should not be used for bases to universal beams as for these sections the plate bending
stresses are not determined at the critical locations”. Ref. 19 then goes on to quote the Stockwell/Murray
method discussed in Section 5.12.1 and used in the recommended design model.

242 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Ref. 10 concedes that although the empirical method of BS5950 leads to adequate designs for traditional
construction, as is amply demonstrated by experience, the method is strictly restricted to UC sections. Ref. 10
again cites the Stockwell/Murray method for UB and hollow section column members. Ref. 13 has a similar
approach.
Consequently, there is virtually no alternative comprehensive design model to that presented by DeWolf and
recommended in this Manual.
Reference 10 does offer some comments regarding resistance to shear forces. Specifically, it notes that it is
common and successful industrial practice to use anchor bolts of pinned-base portals to resist the shear
forces. The Reference suggests the foilowing:-
(i) if shear force is less than 20% of the axial load, then no special provisions are required
(ii) for higher levels of shear force, it suggests that great attention be paid to ensuring good grouting under the
base plate and around the anchor bolts using a mix of minimum shrinkage
p) excessive clearance between the anchor bolts and the holes in the base plate should be avoided
(iv) columns will show some horizontal deformation. In order to avoid this, the reference suggests transferring
the shear force by either
— direct bearing of the base plate onto concrete by recessing
— using a pocket base
— tying the steel columns
DeWolf (Ref. 12.3) presents a brief review of design methods suggested in the relevant literature, the review
covering the aspects of
— axially loaded base plates
— base plates with bending moments and axial force
— anchor bolts under tension
— shear loads

5.12.3 Research Information

DeWolf (Ref. 12.3) presents a review of the research available on column base plates covering the topics of:-
— axially loaded columns
— axial load plus bending moment
— anchor bolts for tension
— shear loads
This review is quite comprehensive and will not be repeated here. Reference 12.3 should be consulted for
details.
References 12.8 and 12.9 relate most directly to the recommended design model of Section 4.12.

5.12.4 Anchor Bolts

General
There are two general types of anchor bolts used with base plates to steel columns, namely:-
(i) cast-in place bolts
(ii) drilled-in bolts
A variety of drilled-in bolts are used, including those inserted into drilled holes and epoxied into place and
masonry and expansion anchors of various types, many of both varieties being proprietary bolts whose
installation and design is governed by manufacturers’ specifications. Reference 12.22 contains information on
these types of anchor bolts.
Different varieties of cast-in anchor bolts are shown in Fig. 5.12.15, virtually ail varieties being manufactured
rom rod. Hook bolts are often used although DeWolf (Ref. 12.3) notes that such bolts may fail by straightening

end pulling out of the concrete and DeWolf recommends that their use be restricted to column bases subject
10 ax*sl compression.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 243

 I
it
3 e
ill # t: i i

nuL&r
weip* fc.

d=d
square plate

(a) Hooked Bar (b) Bolt with (c) Threaded Rod (d) Threaded rod (e) U-bolt
head with Nut with plate washer
Fig. 5.12.15

A more positive anchorage is achieved using the other varieties such as the bolt with nut, the U-bolt or the bolt with
plate. Ref. 12.24 notes that only a bolt head or nut is necessary to achieve a positive anchorage. The failure
mechanism is then one of pull-out of a cone of concrete radiating outwards at 45 degrees from the head of the nut
or bolt. The use of a washer or plate at the ends only spreads out the cone at the nut/head and in practice does not
add substantially to the strength of the anchorage (Ref. 12.3). If a nut, washer or plate is used, it should be welded
to the rod at the bottom end.

All five varieties shown in Fig. 5.12.15 are suitable for small to medium size structures for anchor bolts up to 30 mm
in diameter. Larger structures tend to require more elaborate anchor bolt systems. The system shown in Fig. 5.12.16
(a) provides extremely good flexibility for the erection of the columns especially where large diameter bolts are used.
The system shown in Fig. 5.12.16 (b) is very costly but may be justified in special applications (the bolt has a specially
forged head which drops through the slot in the plate and is then rotated into position). This system shown in Fig.
5.12.16 (c) is also very costly and is restricted in use to very large frames particularly where high strength (rather
than grade 250) anchor bolts are used.

(a) gajL
(b) 52S
- m — pack to prevent HGR&&
OF CONCXETE. REMOVE. PfliQ% !■

TO <5eODT7N<5

' & t
■\*i * a •
<b ■
* PIPE bLZE'/Z
‘-Pipe LEO/E

-WELD VA4HER.T0BOLT 4QUAIZE,

/ vim
JL /•SQUARE PLATE-
=r (OAPUji E CLEARANCE HOLE) t
---- HUT
-i NUT RE-TAINCR. *—_4HR0iJP
o 6 PACKIWC, O r

column
BASEPLATE 4LOT/W PLATE
d i §:i
(C) •i
ACC&& PfT .bolt heap
• d •
6210*36. e&AH4
en&eopep in
FOOTINGS
F—

fc.=r = j±±L am
eg: og:

Fig. 5.12.16

AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 The recommended design model of Section 4.12.6 is restricted to the types shown in Fig. 5.12.15. To ensure that
the bolt centres match the nominated centres and the hole centres drilled in the base plate, the bolts are often caged
into a group as shown in Fig. 5.12.17. Also useful is the provision of cored holes-(see Fig. 5.12.18)-usually formed
by using polystyrene which allow the adjustment of anchor bolt positions once the concrete is cast in order to exactly
match the hole centres in the base plate. Anchor bolt centres must comply with the tolerances set out in Clause 15.3.1
of AS 4100-see Fig. 5.12.19.

Projection
4 ,

6-
u
2

fcuf *-■
u
:
oA
o o <4
i .. LLLLJ •-
TiCKWtlD lOmm
BAR-5TO

. O F01M
CM
CtQE,.bOT*CKf, 6

Fig. 5.12.17 Fig. 5.12.18

©©©© © &

6FEC1FIEP PIM6M-SION G IN EVERY BoT NrfT ARtATEK TRAM ± ‘SS'OYERAIU

.
MAX.PDflATlON
••

..

, 7£
.
MAX.CSJ/IATIOK tG If
.
•^ANCHOR B01T<7 COUJriN OFFSET FROM
MAX. PCVlATlOKiG MAIN column UHE-
MAX- PEVIATION tG—r
£ AKCHOE TO ■*- ■i ■

i'b
' -

t*b
4 GRIP

PETAIU OF OFF-CENTRE LOCATION

or anchor eom

unless omEewiAE^pecinep pimensioms ;h HiLunerae^

Fig. 5.12.19 Tolerances in Anchor Bolt Location in AS 4100

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 245
References 12.2 and 12.20 present a discussion of a number of practical aspects of the use of anchor boll
and should be referred to if problems arise on site. Ref. 12.20 deals generally with aspects of desio S
installation, anchorage, corrosion of anchor bolts, bedding and grouting as well as the responsibilities of all'
parties in the construction process. No firm recommendations are made on design however.

Tension on Anchor Bolts

The first most detailed guidance on the design of anchor bolts was provided by the American Concrete
Institute Committee 349 in 1976 in Ref. 12.21. These recommendations continue to be used in publications
such as Ref. 12.11, although this reference also uses Ref. 12.22. This guidance recommended the nominal
capacity against pullout of an anchor to be based on a tensile strength of 4 ^VfjT (fc in psi as is used therein)
acting over an effective area which is the projected area of a stress cone radiating out at 45 degrees from the
bottom of the anchor. Reference 12.21 also addresses the design requirements for side cover as well, a.
modified version of these recommendations was published as Reference 12.22 in 1981.
Reference 12.3 provides a separate design method for hooked bolts and for bolts with nuts. It is not stated in
Ref. 12.3 but it is assumed herein that the procedure for bolts with a nut also applies to bolts with the bolt head
embedded or with a plate washer embedded.
In the case of the hooked anchor bolt, Ref. 12.3 suggests that the nominal capacity in tension of the embedded
bolt be given by:—
Nth = 0.7f'cdfL* (f'c in MPa)
where 4 is the length of the hook. This is used with a capacity factor of 0.8 in the recommended design mode.
Ref. 12.3 recommends that hooked anchors only be used where there is no specified design force on the
bolts—that is for bolts in base plates subject to compression only. Since failure can occur by straightening and
pulling out, Ref. 12.3 also recommends that the hook be long enough to develop a minimum force equal to half
the tensile capacity of the anchor bolt. This recommendation has been followed in the recommended design
model of Section 4.12.5.
The recommended design model for anchor bolts with a nut or bolt head or plate washer given in Section
4.12.5 is one recommended by DeWolf in Ref. 12.3, based in turn on the proposals of Marsh and Burdette (Refs
12.24, 12.25). In this model, failure is assumed to occur when either the bolt fractures (handled by the
provisions of AS 4100 Section 9) or when a cone of concrete surrounding the bolt separates from the rest of
the concrete foundation—as in Fig. 5.12.20. The cone is assumed to radiate at an angle of 45 degrees and
tensile failure is assumed to occur at an average stress of 4VfjT (where f'c is in psi) or 0.33V?T where fc is ii
MPa
Following Marsh and Burdette (Ref. 12.25), the nominal capacity is taken as the component of the failure stress
in the direction of the applied load multiplied by the surface area of the failure cone. This is simplified by using
a projected area, the circular surface determined by the failure plane in Fig. 5.12.20, and applying the full
failure stress of 0.33\/fT to this area. Hence, the nominal failure load of the concrete cone is given by:-

Ncc - 0.33VJT Aps where A ps ■ft­ L§ for an isolated bolt, being the projected area
which is used in the recommended design model with a capacity factor of 0.8 to give the design capacity.

u
7
\
4?/
\
\ / U
/
\ /
\
failure.
PLANE

PROJECTED SURFACE

Fig. 5.12.20

The alternative approach is to assume that the nominal capacity is equal to the average failure stress of
0.33\/fT multiplied by the surface area of the cone. The method used by Marsh and Burdette, and followed
here, is conservative.

246 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

In any case, from statics the same failure stress of 0.33\/fT can be applied to the projected (plan) area. As
noted in Ref. 12.24, experimental studies have generally verified the satisfactory nature of this method, showing
it to slightly underpredict the nominal pull-out strength.
Ref. 12.3 notes that the use of cored holes-such as shown in Fig. 5.12.18—should not reduce the anchorage
capacity based on the failure cone, provided that the cored hole does not extend near the bottom of the bolt—
a situation avoided if the dimensions shown in Fig. 5.12.18 are followed.
If reinforcement in the foundation is extended into the area of the failure cone, then additional strength will be
realised in practice since the nominal capacity of the failure cone is based on the strength of unreinforced
concrete. No suitable method for allowing for the additional strength due to the presence of reinforcing is
currently available.
As indicated in Ref. 12.24, the ideal anchorage is one which is ductile, which requires that the nominal
capacity of the concrete exceeds the strength of the anchor. This is achieved by providing sufficient
embedment of the anchor, a requirement that is embodied in the recommended design model of Section
4.12.5.
For multiple anchorages separate failure cones may overlap while for anchor bolts near the edge of a
foundation the failure cone may intersect an edge of the foundation. An allowance must be made in both cases
as the area Aps will be reduced for each bolt. These situations and the appropriate areas are illustrated in Fig.
5.12.21 which is taken from Refs 12.3 and 12.25. The most comprehensive coverage of multiple bolt
anchorages is that given in Reference 12.24 by Marsh and Burdette, which is reproduced at Appendix G.
(Note: the inverse cosine term listed in the equations within Fig. 5.12.21 are in degrees and not radians.)

\ u
/
2 [cos"’
9 $
Shaded
Area =-
360°
+ | V^fTF
e

/ "7
\ y / 16

(a) Two intersecting Failure Cones

No simple formula-see Appendix G

2 \

(b) Four Intersecting Failure Cones

16 ] * U + u
sk u

2 [cos 1 {atJjn-LS
Area = Ld---------------------- ------------------------
, s.VL,ri p~
+
360° 2 "4
Circle Sector Triangle
(c) Failure Cone Near An Edge

Fig. 5.12.21

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 247

Consequently, for an anchor bolt group, the nominal capacity of the concrete is obtained by applying \\^
failure stress of 0.33\/fjT to the projected (plan) area of the group. This effective area accounts for a reduction
in area due to the overlapping of the failure cones.

Shear on Anchor Bolts

For the case of shear force applied to an anchor bolt, the transfer of shear occurs by bearing on the
surrounding concrete, and the shear force tries to bend the bolt away. This bending causes the concrete
ahead of the bolt to crush or spall near the surface. Tests have shown that a wedge of concrete (Fig. 5.12.22)
may spall off particularly if a base plate is not present to confine the concrete under it—such as the case of an
isolated bolt. The presence of a base plate restricts the concrete wedge from moving since it tends to try and
lift upward if left free without a base plate. This upward movement cannot occur if the base plate is present.

APPLIED
APPLlEt? *>HEA£
COMCEETe WEDGE
n
■>

a..

a a^

u FAILURE
etPE naour

Fig. 5.12.22 Fig. 5.12.23

Ref. 12.26 identifies four possible failure modes for an anchor bolt subject to shear force, namely:-
(i) concrete failure with wedge cone
(ii) concrete failure without wedge cone
(iii) concrete failure with pull-out cone
(iv) shear failure of the anchor bolt
Provided the embedment is sufficient, failure mode (iii) will not occur while the failure with wedge cone can be
prevented with sufficient edge distance and/or reinforcement in the concrete.
For the case where a grout pad exists between the base plate and the concrete, the grout pad allows bending
deformation of the anchor bolt to occur under the shear force. The lateral deformation of the bolt leads to
tensile stress in the bolt but this is generally insufficient to cause pullout (Ref. 12.2).
Ref. 12.25 argues that the shear strength of an anchor bolt is a function of both the capacity of the bolt in shear
and the distance between the plane of the applied shear and the concrete surface. The most efficient
distribution of load occurs if the plate is embedded in the concrete.
Ref. 12.25 considers that there is not enough data available to quantify precisely the shear strength of an
individual anchor bolt through a base plate, much less a group of anchor bolts. Ref. 12.25 recommends a
procedure for permissible stress design only based on experience rather than test results.
Ref. 12.25 notes that the shear capacity is limited by inadequate edge distance if the shear force acts towards
that edge (Fig. 5.12.23) wherein failure occurs by splitting off a half cone of concrete. The recommendations of
Ref. 12.21 are recommended to guard against this type of failure, such recommendation being considered to
be conservative.
From test data, Ref. 12.26 concluded that the ACl formula (Ref. 12.21) was the most appropriate. This formula
assumes the concrete failure surface to be a semi-cone of height equal to the edge distance and an inclination
of 45 degrees with respect to the concrete edge (see Fig. 5.12.23). The shear capacity of the anchor bolt is
calculated on the basis of the tensile strength of the concrete over the projected area of the semi-cone
surface. This results in the following expression for the nominal capacity:
Vus = 0.322 a\ VfjT
A similar but slightly modified formula has also been proposed in Ref. 12.22. No guidance is available for
calculating the nominal shear capacity of anchor bolt groups. The authors of Ref. 12.26 concluded that the
above expression represented a lower bound to their test results.

248 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 PKXTECTEP AREA Top OF (Xa.
OF WER3E ODW& CCNCREJ£ eLCCK

pC- 4? CU
ANCWOE BOX

^ItZiAWEP
anchor eotr A*£A Ola.

oc oL*46° Oa

AKCHoF- eccr^

Fig. 5.12.24 (from Ref. 12.26)

For groups of anchor bolts, the authors of Ref. 12.26 tried the same formula, using the effective area from
overlapping failure cones but found that this approach can be unsafe particularly for large edge distances. If
there is no overlapping of failure cones, the approach is satisfactory. In this case, the nominal capacity is
related to both the edge distance and the bolt spacing but no definitive design recommendation could be
made. For example, the authors noted that the nominal capacity of a two bolt group may only be 60% more
than that of a single bolt for the same edge distance.

Shear and Tension on Anchor Bolts

For anchor bolts subject to both shear force and tension force, Ref. 12.23 notes that most other references
suggest the use of a parabolic interaction equation-such as is normally used for conventional bolts as in
AS 4100—for the design of the anchor bolts. Shipp and Hanlger in Ref. 12.23 suggest that the total area of
anchor bolt required should be the sum of that required to resist tension and that required to resist shear. They
argue that the shear force causes a bearing failure near the concrete surface and translates the shear load on
the anchor bolt into an effective tension load by friction, so that the bolt must have enough tension capacity to
resist both effects. This rationale is followed in the recommended design model.
Ref. 12.24 notes that for an anchor bolt subject to both shear force and axial tension, design difficulties exist
because the interaction of shear and tension is not understood. They note that a straight line interaction
relationship is generally assumed—this method requiring the total steel bolt area be obtained by adding the
area required for shear force and the area required for tension. Ref. 12.24 notes that this approach is
conservative but is warranted since test data concerning combined shear and tension are lacking for most
anchors.

Edge Distances, Embedment, Bolt Spacing

3eWolf (Ref. 12.3) and Shipp and Haniger (Ref. 12.23) recommend the following guidelines for bolt embedment
and edge distance for bolts subject to tension:-

Anchor Bolt Material Minimum Embedded Length Minimum Embedded Edge Distance
Grade 250 to AS 3679
or Grade 4.6 to AS 1111 12 x bolt dia 5 x bolt dia but > 100 mm
Grade 8.8 to AS 1252 17 x bolt dia 7 x bolt dia but >100 mm

Although the recommendations on embedded length are conservative (Ref. 12.3), they have been adopted for
he recommended design model in Section 4.12.5.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 249

The minimum edge distance is intended to prevent the development of a conical failure surface between th
anchor bolt and the edge of the concrete, similar to the pull-out of a cone of concrete when the anchor bolt 6
subject to direct tension (Fig. 5.12.25). Is

p //
4h°
/
'biovv-oirr
\• comc
\
\
FAILURE »•\
^DeF^CE

Fig. 5.12.25

Ref. 12.23 also recommends the following minimum values for anchor bolts subject to shear:

Anchor Bolt Material Minimum Bolt Spacing Minimum Edge Distance

Grade 250 to AS 3679
or Grade 4.6 to AS 1111 16 x boltdia 12 x boltdia
Grade 8.8 to AS 1252 24 x boltdia 17 x bolt dia

References 12.21 and 12.22 also provide recommendations for minimum edge distances for both tensile and
shear loads on an anchor bolt. These expressions have been coverted to metric units in Ref. 12.11. For lateral
loads acting towards a free edge, the edge distance is recommended to be such that the concrete failure
strength—which is based on a uniform tensile strength of 0.33tf> f'c acting on an effective area defined by
projecting a 45 degree half cone to the free edge from the anchor bolt centreline at the shear plane-exceeds
the nominal shear strength of the bolts. This leads to an edge distance of

ae = d, fuf
0.83 y/Vc
which for grade 4.6 bolts (fuf = 400 MPa) and f'c = 25 MPa reduces to 9.8df. This compares to 12df
recommended by Ref. 12.23.
For tensile loads, the minimum edge distance is required at the anchor head in order to confine the lateral
bursting force generated by the load transfer from anchor bolt to concrete. This force is taken as 25% of the
tensile capacity of the bolt in Refs 12.21,12.22 and 12.11. The requirement then reduces to an edge distance of

f uf
ae = df
6.0 Vfi
which for grade 4.6 bolts (fuf = 400 MPa) and Vc = 25 MPa reduces to 3.6df. This compares to 5df
recommended by Ref. 12.23.
The recommended design model contains both criteria—Refs 12.23 and 12.22.

250 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 5.12.5 Design of Base Plates Subject to Bending Moment
Two approaches are suggested in the literature for the design of a base plate subject to an axial force and a
bending moment, these being:-
(i) one based on an assumption of elastic behaviour
(ii) one based on assumed failure criteria.
Only limited test data is available, the best known experimental work being due to DeWoif and Sarisley (Ref.
12.12) and a series of papers by Thambiratnam and Paramasivam (Refs 12.13-12.15). DeWoif and Sarisley
concluded that either of the two design methods could be used satisfactorily for the design of base plates
covered by the limited range of their experimental work. Thambiratnam and Paramasivam compared their
results only with the elastic method.
DeWoif (Ref. 12.3) presents a comprehensive coverage of the problem and comments that design methods
generally assume that the concrete foundation and the anchor bolts reach failure simultaneously though this
may not be true in practice. DeWoif also comments that, at this time, there are insufficient guidelines to
ascertain whether such assumptions are correct.
Consequently, no recommended design model is presented in this Manual for base plates subject to both axial
force and bending moment.
The suggested course of action with such base plates is to consult Reference 12.3 or one of the following
design references which do present some design recommendations:-

Refs 12.3,12.4 — an elastic method which does not assume that plane sections remain plane-the
method is claimed to be consistent with test results specifically those of DeWoif and
Sarisley.
Ref. 10 — an elastic method based on the “questionable” assumption that plane sections remain
plane (no experimental justification is given for the method)
— an alternative “effective areas” concept is also suggested based on that used for
axially loaded base plates
Refs 12,13 — a simple elastic method is presented which is restricted to cases of small bending
moment which do not result in net tension

5.12.6 Other Considerations

Some investigations of the degree of fixity provided by column base plates and of the moment-rotation
characteristics of the base plate have been reported by Melchers et al (Refs 12.16-12.18) and Richard and
Beaulieu (Ref. 12.19).
.
Reinforcement of the concrete foundation is really part of the design of the foundation and does not fall within
the scope of this Manual. The following comments-taken from Refs 12.21 and 12.22—are useful in relation to
■-
the anchorage of the anchor bolts into the foundation.
, When embedment depth or edge distance or both is insufficient to fuiiy develop the strength of the anchor bolt
or doesn’t comply with the recommendations herein, reinforcement should be provided in order to intercept
potential failure planes. The reinforcement must be sized and oriented in order to restrict the propagation of
/'.
> cracking should it occur and the guidance given in AS 3600 should be followed in the design. It is most
important that any reinforcement be fully developed-as defined in AS 3600—on both sides of the potential
crack. Refs 12.21 and 12.22 suggest the detailing shown in Figs 5.12.26-5.12.28.

v-
-

,
-

&SC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 251

 TE*4«$(0N
I FORCE
T

\
iin
u \ N/
/
g>*TH&PlAMB!R.
OF TWO HAlRFil i
T
y\
m * KDKtFbTaceHC MT

PEVetOPMEMF;*
. hr
0 * 4A
4
#
' '£-•*'. > -4

LENGTH FROH A
A<*%00 6’ \/

.* / Ft)TENT7AL
\
sM t v \
FAILURE.
fcN£

U3 MAGNUM PITTANCE-FROM
i/" N
3 ANCHOR. HEM? FOR
ReiNFORCEMC^fO &£
K
CON<5lPe*£P EFFECT/VE- • rA
■. ^

ra _U)
T
LOCATE LEGS OF HAiRTiN
\ .# -PEVEU3PMENT
LENGTH mn
Abyzco
RQNF0BC6MCNT IN TW(5
REGION

Fig. 5.12.26 Reinforcement for Fig. 5.12.27 Reinforcement for Shear Near an Edge of
Direct Tension (Refs. 12.21,12.22) Concrete Foundation (Refs. 12.21,12.22)

TENDON
FORCE

rpi
*r
. . * - ,
; * -• *• a
SflRAU
\ reinf't.
\
\

N
TbTENTiAU-
failure-
/
2DK&

/
V.
«2> .

Fig. 5.12.28 Reinforcement Against Bursting

of Concrete Foundation (Refs. 12.21,12.22)

252 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

All bolted connections are designed in Australia using a single code AS 4100 which is written in limit state format. A
commentary on the provisions of Australian Code AS 4100, which covers the design and installation of bolts, may
be found in Ref. 35. A detailed discussion on bolt strength and behaviour in bolted connections may be found in Ref.
11, while a commentary on Australian bolting practice may be found in Ref. 2.

The design provisions of AS 4100 for the strength and serviceability limit states are summarised in Section 3.1.

In any bolted connection, there are three modes of force transfer to be considered, these modes being:

(i) shear/bearing mode where the forces are perpendicular to the bolt axis and are transferred by shear and
bearing on the bolt and bearing on the ply material
(ii) friction mode where the forces are again perpendicular to the bolt axis but are transferred by frictional resistance
between the mating surfaces
(iii) axial tension where the forces to be transferred are parallel to the bolt axis.
Most connections in this manual have bolts which transfer load in the shear/bearing mode, with the exception of the
bolted moment end plate and the column base plate in which the bolts can be subject to both shear force and axial
tension.

The strength of bolts in all modes is discussed in detail in Refs. 2,11 and 35.

A bolt in shear/bearing mode (bolting categories 4.6/S, 8.8/S and 8.8/TB) bears against the sides of the bolt holes
and load is transferred by shear in the bolts and bearing on the connected plies. The shear strength of the bolt is
affected by the strength of the bolt material and by the available bolt area across the shear plane. Consequently, the
situation of whether plain shank or thread intercepts the shear plane affects the strength of the connection, as
discussed in detail in Ref. 2. In practice, it is very difficult to ensure that threads are excluded from the shear plane
in many practical connections for reasons discussed in Ref. 2, since the practice requires that the erector install a
bolt of the correct minimum length into the bolt hole and since the practice often leads to bolts of excessive length.
Most connections in this Manual - especially the flexible connections - are designed on the assumption that threads
will be included in the shear plane, as this assumption most accurately reflects the field situation and is a conservative
basis for design.

The failure in the connected plies may occur in one of two ways:

(i) local bearing failure

(ii) tear-out-failure of the plies behind a bolt
Failure occurs by end plate tear-out for connections in which the end distance (aQi or aQ2 in Fig. 5.13.1) falls below
3.2 times the bolt diameter, the end distance representing the length of ply which must fail in shear for failure of the
connection to occur. The end distance is defined in AS 4100 as "the minimum distance from the edge of a hole to
the edge of a ply in the direction of the component of force plus half the bolt diameter." Plate tear-out type failures
are observed in joints subject to a force which acts towards a free edge.

cL&i cLc^

V£< 4> aei tn f

P 'up
K
— <f> &e2 tp f(jp
Vb Vb* 2Vb

Fig. 5.13.1

Local bearing type failures involve a piling up of ply material in front of the hole around the bolt shank.

Clause 9.3.2.4 of AS 4100 contains expressions for the nominal capacity for both conditions and a commentary on
both failure modes may be found in Refs. 11 and 35.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 253

 Note that an edge may not only mean the physical edge of a connection component or a beam web or flange
but
may also include the edge of an adjacent hole (see Fig. 5.13.1), which reflects the fact that plate tear-out 1
theoretically possible between holes, although in practice boit centres are such that it is normally not observed 'S

in many cases, the appiication of Clause 9.3.2.4 of AS 4100 is relatively straightforward, as in Fig. 5.13,1 or Fi
5.13.2. However, in bolt groups components of force may act in many directions and satisfying Clause 9.3.2.4 is more
involved. These problems are discussed in Section 5.14. It is to be remembered that the provisions of Clause 9324
apply to connection components, connected members and supporting members as appropriate, each of which will
have different end distance and ply thickness.

^6-1

s.
vb* cos 8 <0ae1tpfup
a« v*fc9Ne- for
Vb*sin e < 4>ae2 tp fup

- $ae3 V 'up
vb* £ 0a e4 tp fup
6

4*

(a)

Total force on bolt group = V*

r?P box* Areax V*
Force per bolt, Vb < <f>V
b
-f- pitoh

tp fUp
np

o^a02 tp tp
lesser of
TEDG£

(b)

Fig. 5.13.2

For lap splice connections of the type shown in Fig. 5.13.3, in which the bolts are in shear/bearing mode, theoretical
and experimental studies have shown that the strength of the connection is limited by the length of the connection
(Refs. 11, 15, 13.1, 13.2, 13.3).
Conventional theories of bolted lap splice connection design assume that rigid plate theory applies and that all bolts
in the connection are equally loaded. However, the studies show that the longer the connection is, the Jess uniform
is the load distribution among the bolts in the connection, as long as the behaviour is elastic. As a connection is
loaded so that yielding of the plies or bolts or both occur, plastic deformations permit a redistribution of load resulting
in a more uniform load distribution - if the redistribution proceeds without premature failure of either bolts or plies.
AS 4100 Clause 9.3.2.1 uses a reduction factor kr to account for this effect, and the origin of the expression for kr is
explained in Ref. 35.
The only connections in this Manual of the lap splice type covered by this provision are the bracing connection
(Section 4.6), which is usually so short that kr = 1.0; and the bolted flange splice (Section 4.10), for which some
correction is required when the joint length exceeds 300 mm on one side of the splice location.

254 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 II
: i T
2 T
4-
2 1 1 I

Li
T
V 0- ^ ^ 0 V

Fig. 5.13.3 Lap Joint and Brace/Gusset Connection

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 255

 5.14 BOLT GROUPS LOADED IN-PLANE
AS 4100 Clause 9.4 specifies the assumptions which may be made in analysing a bolt group so that the des' <
actions on individual bolts in the group may be determined. °n
Clause 9.4.1 deals specifically with a bolt group subject to in-plane loading which generates shear forces, ;
only
on the bolts in the group. This clause restricts the design method to be used with the following assumptions"!
(a) The connection plates shall be considered to be rigid and to rotate relative to each other about a point
known as the instantaneous centre of the bolt group.
(b) In the case of a bolt group subject to a pure couple only, the instantaneous centre of rotation coincide!
with the bolt group centroid. f:
In the case of a bolt group subject to an in-plane shear force applied at the group centroid, th!
instantaneous centre of rotation is at infinity and the design shear force is uniformly distributed throughout
the group.
In all other cases, either the results of independent analyses for a pure couple alone and for an in-piane
shear force applied at the bolt group centroid shall be superposed, or a recognized method of analysis
shall be used.
(c) The design shear force in each bolt shall be assumed to act at right angles to the radius from the bolt to
the instantaneous centre, and shall be taken as proportional to that radius.
Note that the Clause permits the use of superposition under (b) and this method will be used extensively in this
Section.
Analysing a general bolt group to an in-plane design shear force (Vbv) at an eccentricity (e) from the bolt group
centroid, as in Fig. 5.14.1, leads to three equations which satisfy force and moment equilibrium, these being:-

lN<5TAWTANEO!J$ csntc
CENTO)!? OF BOLT OFgOTATlONAT^y^)
CPOUFAT ORIGIN
vK W r? AT
< Q^n t Jci")

y* °m> i
V,®
X bb

><e CL' " Xg.

(Zs

Fig. 5.14.1 Bolt Group Design Actions

£V*cosi9n + V*bv = 0 (Eqn 5.14.1)

£V*sin0n - V*bh = 0 (Eqn 5.14.2)
£V*rn + V*bv(e - xe) + V*bh.ye = 0 (Eqn 5.14.3)
In order to solve these equations the design shear capacity of the connection requires one further equation,
the form of this equation depends on the analysis method used.

256 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Various methods of analysis have been proposed for bolt groups including the “linear” or “elastic” method, the
“plastic” and “force/displacement” or “elastic/plastic” method. These can ail be developed from the centre of
rotation concept which forms the basis of Clause 9.4.1 of AS 4100.
The relationship between the force on a bolt and the component displacement may be thought of that as
shown in Fig. 5.14.2. “The linear” assumption assumes that the bolt force is linearly related to the displacement
and has the advantage that it leads to a closed form solution which is not available with any other assumption.
Typically, assumption (c) of Clause 9.4.1 of AS 4100 leads to a relation of form F* (bolt force) = k x r where k
is a constant and r is the distance from the centre of rotation to an individual bolt.

* 'PlA^TfC ASSUMPTION
U-

ACTUAL RESR2NSE: - FAMILY OFCUfcvFS

e (dlpcmpent ON US&FN? OF VAWABtes)
k
ML1 linear assumption'
DISPLACEMENT*

Fig. 5.14.2

Historically, rivet and bolt groups have been designed using the “linear” (elastic) method (Refs 10,11,15,14.1)
and tests have indicated that the method is generally conservative (Refs 10, 11). The method allows the
development of a closed form solution and is solvable by hand methods.
The “plastic” method of analysis assumes that all bolts not at the centre of rotation are deformed sufficiently to
become fully plastic and that all transmit the same force at failure of the group. The method requires an
iterative solution usually by computer, since it is not possible to solve Equations 5.14.1-5.14.3 explicitly, using
this assumption. References 14.2 to 14.6 discuss this method.
Other methods due primarily to Crawford and Kulak (Refs 14.7-14.9) have attempted to measure the
relationship between the relative displacement of the connected components and the force developed on the
bolt (this method is often termed displacement-compatability). They then use this relationship in solving
Equations 5.14.1-5.14.3. The method used to obtain a solution is again an iterative one, generally requiring the
use of a computer to provide a satisfactory solution. Unfortunately, the relationship between the relative
displacement and the bolt force is dependent on a number of factors including-
(i) the thickness of the connected components, and
(ii) the yield strengths of these components.
Because much of the deformation which occurs in realistic cases is due to bearing failure of the connected
material, no simple relationship or single definition of this relationship is available.
The Crawford and Kulak method relies on empirical results particular to each connection and bolt group
configuration and requires either iterative solution by computer or the availability of design aids for routine
design. The method has been adopted into the AISC(US) Manual (Ref. 16) and design aids as well as rapid
design methods are now available particularly for routine bolt group configurations.
There is usually not much difference in practical terms between the capacities obtained from the “plastic" and
“elastic/plastic” methods (Refs 14.11,14.4,14.5,14.10).
A study by Thomas et al (Ref. 14.14) compared calculated capacities of bolt groups with those measured in
actual tests. The study demonstrated that the “elastic” and “plastic” methods are equally consistent with the
’elastic” method slightly underestimating the strength of the bolt group, while the “plastic” method
overestimated the strength. This study also concluded that the Crawford and Kulak method failed to give any
significant benefits compared to either the “elastic” or “plastic” methods despite its more complex formulation.
The study recommended the continued use of the “elastic” or “linear” method of analysis for bolt groups.
The method used in this Manual is the “elastic” or “linear” method. This method is known from testing to give a
'ower bound solution to bolt group strength (Refs 14.1, 14.7, 14.8, 14.12-14.14) and is also recommended for
continued use in Refs 14.12,14.13,14.14. The AISC Manuals (Ref. 16) still use the linear method for bolt groups
‘Or which no solution is available by the displacement-compatability method.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 257

For the situation shown in Fig. 5.14.1, but with eccentricity e = 0, so that both Vbv and V bn act at the bolt
group
centroid, Clause 9.4.1 (b) of AS 4100 gives the result:-
V*
V* (= design shear force on a bolt due to action Vbv) = —
rib
V*
Vh (= design shear force on a bolt due to action Vbh) = ——
rib

nb = number of bolts in bolt group

For the situation shown in Fig. 5.14.1, but where only an in-plane torque (Mbm) is applied,
Clause 9.4.1 (b) of AS 4100 nominates that the instantaneous centre of rotation coincides with the bolt
group centroid so that xe = ye = 0. Noting that:-

sin 0, yn X;
cos 0,
r, r,
Eqns. 5.14.1-5.14.3 then become:-

=0 (Eqn. 5.14.1 A)
n

EV*n^a = 0 (Eqn. 5.14.2A)

*n

£V* rn = +MIbm (Eqn. 5.14.3A)

Clause 9.4.1 (c) of AS 4100 relates the design shear force on any bolt (V*) to the design shear force (V£b) on the
bolt furthest from the centre of rotation by the linear relationship

V*„ = /=- V£b

1
(Eqn. 5.14.4)
max

where: rmax = maximum value of r,

Vmb is the value of interest for design which can be found by substituting Eqn. 5.14.4 into Eqn. 5.14.3A giving
V* Vr2
Imk
f
1
'n = Mlbm
max

M bm rmax
or V*b =

Letting lbp = polar moment of area of bolt group =

= £(x£ "i* y*)
M bm rmax
then vSb (Eqn. 5.14.5)
lbp

258 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

*

V£b can be resolved into horizontal (V£h) and vertical components (V£v)—as in Fig. 5.14.3(a)-usinq Eqn
5.14.5:-

V£h = v*b sin 6 — \/* Ymax-

max — v mb • j. M*bm
ymax
(Eqn. 5.14.6)
h •
max 'bp

Xmax * Xmax
V£v = v*b cos 9 max = V*b. bm • (Eqn. 5.14.7)
rmax Ibp

V.mv ,, Vmb
vC
V4 mv
.+ V.

fcOLTGfcOJp &rm
CEHrmv 1
(a) (b)
Fig. 5.14.3

For the situation shown in Fig. 5.14.1, where Vbv is eccentric to the bolt group centroid by x = e and is acting
simultaneously with Vbh (through the centroid), the principle of superposition may be used (as permitted by
Clause 9.4.1(b) of AS 4100). That is, the effects of a torque (equivalent to Vbv.e in magnitude and direction)
acting on the bolt group are summed with the effects of Vbv and Vbh acting at the bolt group centroid so as to
simulate the situation in Fig. 5.14.1. Using Equations 5.14.1-5.14.4 and the principle of superposition, the
maximum design force on the extreme bolt in the group can be found by summation of the design shear forces
from each design action taken separately.
Using vectorial addition to obtain the resultant design shear force (VreS) on the extreme bolt-as in Fig.
5.14.3(b)-

v*res * \/(v*Tv*,)2 +>* + v*h)2

V*hbv Mbm Xmaxl2 V*bh
h M bm Ymax 2
(Eqn. 5.14.8)
nb 'bp nb 'bp

The same result can be obtained for all three design actions acting simultaneously on the bolt group, together
with the coordinates of the instantaneous centre of rotation (xe, ye) for the case of simultaneous actions,
without using superposition but using only Equations 5.14.1-5.14.4 as foliows:-

In Fig. 5.14.1:- cos 6 n

(Xn xe (yn - ye)
sin 6n
r„
l"n V(X^ - Xe)2 + (yn - ye)2

Equation 5.14.4 gives:- V* = 1 max

where V*nm = maximum value of V*

(- similar to V*es in previous formulation)

OSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 259

Eqn. 5.14.1 relates to vertical equilibrium and substitution of Eqn. 5.14.4 into it gives:-

rn cos 0, = -v*bv
* max
but since E rn cos 0n = E(xn - Xe) = -nb xe
V bv ^max
then xe = nb (Eqn. 5.14.9)
V*m
Likewise, Eqn. 5.14.2 relates to horizontal equilibrium and substitution of Eqn. 5.14.4 into it gives:-
V*
t^E rn sin 6 n = Vt bh
•max
but since E rn sin = £(yn - ye) = ~nbye
V bh *~max
then Ye = (Eqn. 5.14.10)
nbV*
Similarly, Eqn. 5.14.3 relates to moment equilibrium and substitution of Eqn. 5.14.4 into it gives:-
V*
T^Ern2 = -V*bv(e - xe) - V*fah.ye
' max

V*nm - [V bv (e ~ Xe) + Vbh ye] r max

Eh?
Now Er2 = E(xn - xe)2 + E(yn - ye)2
= -nb (x| + y I) + E(x2 + yn2)
Solving these equations gives (Ref. 13)
E(xn2 + yn2)
xe = - (Eqn. 5.14.11)
nbe
V*bh E (x2 + yn2)
ye = - (Eqn. 5.14.12)
Vtbv nbe

rvtbv + Vbv e x max 2 V*bh V bv Q ymax 2

V*
v nm M
nb
+ nb
h
+ (Eqn. 5.14.13)
E(Xn2 + yn 2). E(Xn2 + Vn2).
Eqn. 5.14.13 is a similar result to that in Eqn. 5.14.8 since:-
•bp “ E (x£ + y2)
The derivation of further simplified design expressions for bolt groups In this Section will proceed using the
method of superposition, particularly using Eqns. 5.14.6 to 5.14.8, as this is easier mathematically.

260 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

*
Single Bolt Column Loaded In-Plane

--it--

C£KfT130U? Of
O. EOLTGeOUF
vt <3-
Vlbb
a
1
&-
••

-a . Hb * TOTAL NUM&ER. ^ Op
OF BOLT<? r

Fig. 5.14.4

Defining:-
#Mdm = design capacity of a bolt group subject to a pure couple only
<£Vdv = design capacity of a bolt group subject to a vertical shear only
<£Vdh = design capacity of a bolt group subject to a horizontal shear only
<£Vdf = design capacity of a single bolt in shear-strength limit state = <f»V,
V{ = nominal shear capacity of a single bolt in shear-strength limit state
0 = capacity factor from AS 4100 = 0.8
np sg (njj 1)
■bx « second moment of area of bolt group about x- = (nP ** 1) (Ref. 16)
12
axis through centroid of bolt group
=0 («p = 1)
iby = second moment of area of bolt group about y- « 0
axis through centroid of bolt group
Ibp = polar second moment of area of bolt group = lbx + tby = I bx for a single bolt column
about centroid of bolt group
Then from above:-
VS = V*bv/np V*h = VWnP
M bm ^max _ M bm (np 1)sp
V£b =
[bp Ibp 2
Setting each in turn to the design capacity (</A/df) gives:-
$vdv = np(</>Vd,) — np(4>Vdf)
2I np ap (np ~i~ 1)
<£Mm
d (4>Vdf) = W>Vdf) (np * 1)
(np 1) sp 6
=0 (nP = 0)
Each of these design capacities represents the design capacity for each action acting by itself.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 261

 For a bolt group subject simultaneously to design actions (Vt>v> Vbh, Mtm). Eqn. 5.14.8 gives the maximuni
design action on the extreme bolt (V^s) as follows, which must not exceed 4>Vd?. Therefore,

vtbh + + rvt
M bm Ymaxl2 bv •vi bm ''insxy l2
V* res — n n
+ ^ <£Vdf
LP 'bp Lp bp

An alternative interaction equation written in terms of design capacities {<£Vdv, $Vdh, <£Mdm) can be derived t
follows:-

w* Vbv w* <^Vdj
Vv
since 0Vdv = np (</>Vdf), then np = <£Vdv/0Vdf
- — =nPv‘"’3v*

V* =
Vt
Vi
4>vdf
= bh- since <£Vdh = np (<£Vdf), then np = tf>Vdh/0Vdf
nP <£Vdh
M bm fop 1) Sp 0Vdf 2 lbp
= Mk bm • since <£Mdm = <£Vdf
21 bp <£Mdm (np - 1)sp

The vector sum of the forces on the extreme bolt gives (Fig. 5.14.5):-

V(V*)2 + (VS + Vmb)2 = resultant force, V* res < <£Vdf

which on substitution reduces to:-

*
V*bv? rvtbh + bm
2
1.0 (Eqn. 5.14.14)
0V dv0V dh 0Mdm.

y
• -e

<2- V*bv
CL
V*
mb
‘-O-
F*
& u <
Vv (tSo-f !,* ' BH
■~o~■
0.
c
L-

Fig. 5.14.5
•-0--
y
Fig. 5.14.6

IfVSh = 0 and M*m = Vbv-e (e = eccentricity of Vbv) as in Fig. 5.14.6:-

since <£Vdv = np (<£Vdf) then ^>Vdf = </>Vdv/np
npsp(np + 1)
since </>Md m (0Vdf) for np 5* 1
6

then <j> Md m
sp (°p + 1) (<£Vdv) for np # 1
6
=0 for np = 1

262 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Using these substitutions, Equation 5.14.14 reduces to:—
2
V*bv 2 V*bv.e
_<£Vdv
+ Wcvi.splnp + 1)/6_
1.0

vtbv 1.0
^Vdv ^ vT~+ [6e/sp (np + ljj2
np
Then, V*bv = since Vdv = npVdf
Vi + [6e/sp (np + 1)]2
^ Zb-(0Vdf) (Eqn. 5.14.15)

np
where Zb = 1or np # 1
V1 + [6e/sp (np + 1)]2
=0 for np = 1
Equation 5.14.15 allows a rapid assessment of the design capacity (Zb.0Vdf) of a single bolt column subject to
a shear force acting at an eccentricity (e).

Double Bolt Column Loaded In-Plane

y

tvl Q.

Y
~-<p—
•-O*-
CeUTROiD OF Wfc,
BOLT GKCUP
r •~e™ •
ca

t y
4 %* 2ar
- ic-m. NuM&es.
% dF&arcp

Fig. 5.14.7

Using terms as defined for a single bolt column, for a double bolt column:- nb = 2np
V* = Vbv/2np Vh = V*bh/2np
Setting each in turn to the design capacity (0Vdf) gives:-
^Vdv = 2np.(£Vdi) 4>\fdh = 2np.(0Vdf)
which represent the design capacity for vertical shear alone (#Vdv) or horizontal shear alone (4>Vdh).

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 263

 For the double column bolt group subject to a couple (M bm) alone:-
2npsg(ng - 1) _ npsg(ng - 1)
IbX
12 (np * 1)
(Ret. 8)
2 Sq (22 - 1)
Iby - (np # 1)
12 2 (Ref. 8)

Ibp Ibx 1" Iby f [sg(ng - 1) + 3 S|] (np # 1)

2Ibp -“ y Esgfng - 1) + 3 s2] (nP ^ 1)

Now, using Eqns. 5.14.6 and 5.14.7 with x max = sg/2 and ymax = (np - 1)sp/2:-
V£v = vertical design shear force on extreme bolt due to couple M bm
M bm •max
X 3 Sa
= M*hbm •n [s^(n2
'bp P D + 3 s2 ]
Vmh = horizontal design shear force on extreme bolt due to couple M £m
M bm • Ymax 3 (n 1) Sp
= Ml bm • n [s£(n2 -p1) + 3 s|]
bp P

The total design shear force on the extreme bolt due to moment M bm is obtained by the vectorial addition of
Vtv and V bh and this must not exceed <£Vd{.

Vmb - V(V*v)2 + (V*h)2 ^ <£Vdf

9[s| + (np - I)2 sf]
(M bm)2 < (<£Vdf)2
' s} [(n2 1) + 3 (Sg/Sp)2]2
In the limit:- setting M bm = <£Md m
n sp[§ (np - 1) + (sg/Sp)2]
0Mdm — (0Vd f). P
for n*p# 1
V(npp~~1)2 + (Sg/sp) a

An alternative interaction equation written in terms of design capacities (<M/dv, <£Vdh, <£Mdm) can be derived as
foliows:-
\/*
V* « pL = V * 0Vd{ since $Vdv = 2np{<f>Vdf) then 2np = $Vdv/</A/df
bv •
2np $Vdv
Vtbh 4>Vd,
V*h V*bh.4>V since <£Vdh = 2np(<£Vdf) then 2np <f>Vdh/</A/dj
2np dh

* 0Vd(
V^b = M bm ♦ similarly, as before for single column case
<f>Mmd
4>Vdf Spg
V£v = Vmb.sin d = Ml bm • (Fig. 5.14.8(a))
+ Spg
<£Vdf 1
V£h = V£b . cos 6 = M bm • + s2g (Fig. 5.14.8(a))

Taking the vector sum of the forces on the extreme bolt (Fig. 5.14.8(b)) and setting the resultant equal to the
design capacity in shear (<f>Vdf) gives:-
(V* + V*v)2 + (Vff + V*h)2 ^ (*Vdf)2
Substituting for V* V£v, V*. V£h gives:- for n # 1
2s £2 VIbv Mlbm Mlbm 2
V*bv 2 2 ~V*bh M*bm V*bh 2
.<£Vdv
+ <£Mm
+ <£Mm
+ + <^Vdh
< 1.0
V"! + S§P9 .0Vdv. d d \/l + Spg L^dhJ m

(Eqn. 5.14.16)

264 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 \

I---------o-
0 £

*
—a —©-■ C^p-0 T5
h 2
< —&
\i
—o—
'■N
I
0-
Ci o— +Jq. V*
eP3
3A vl rr>v/
J----------- t
s0/2
Vmb tan 8 =
(np - 1)Sp/2
sg

(np - 1)Sp
Fig. 5.14.8(a) = spg

—o <)—■

Vb V 'rnb
1 -o- o
v*
v
Jt
A*% 0_ <L

k1* hr o —o-- V*
bv
<
V*
rnv <\----
CL

<y- ■
Fig. 5.14.8(b)
<)—

Fig. 5.14.9

IfVbh = 0 and M bm = Vbv.e(e = eccentricity of Vpv) as in Fig. 5.14.9:-

since <£Vdv » 2 np(<£Vdf) then 4>Vdf — <£Vdv/2 np

H - 1) + ®a\
2
3 sP
since ^Mdm — 4^dt • ^p
\/(np - 1)2 + (Sg/Sp)2

(np + 1)(np - 1) s\^

+ 5a j
<£Vdv 3 Sp
2 np • ^p sp
(nP - 1)V1 Msg/iCnp^^Sp"])2

1 (np + 1)
+ sipg
1) Sp 3 (np - 1)
— 0Vdv.(n2p where s pg h
(np 1) sp
Vi + si pg

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 265

With Vbh = OandMdm = Vbv.e, Eqn. 5.14.16 becomes:-
\/*
V bv
12 2s £2 Vtbv V*bv-e V*bv.e 2
<^V(Jv
+ + ^ 1.0
Vi” + sjg L^Vdv. lm ‘/’Mdm

which on substitution for 0Mdm becomes:-

V*bv 2 4e.s £2 1 4e2 (1 + sgg)

,<£Vdv
1+
(np - 1) sD * 1 (np + 1)
+ 1 <1’0
+ sSpg 1 (np + 1)
3 (np - 1) sp (np - 1)2 + s lpg
3 (np - 1)
So
which on substituting for (np - 1) sp = -^-gives:-
spg

2 2
Vtv 2 2e/sg 2e/Spg.Sg
0Vdv_ 1+
1(np + 1) 1
+ 1(np + 1) 1
< 1.0
1+ 1+
3{np - 1)s2gJ 3(np - 1)s2g-

so that, V*bv ^ Zb(tfA/df) since Vdv = 2np(4>Vdf) (Eqn. 5.14.15)

2np
where Zb = for np 1
2e/sg 2e/(spg.Sg) 2
1+
1 (n + 1) j_ 1(np + 1) J_
1 + ^3 p 1+
(np - 1)|_sggj j 3(np - 1) LspgJ _

As before, Equation 5.14.15 allows a rapid assessment of the design capacity (Zb.<£Vdf) of a double bolt columr
subject to a shear force acting at an eccentricity (e).

Fornp = 1, a similar analysis proceeds as follows:-

Ibx = 0 lby = lbp ~ Sg/2
Mtm-Sa/2 *
bm
V£v = 2 V£h = 0
s /2 Sg

^>Mdrn — (<£Vdf).s '

g

w*
v v JLS£
vt vtbh
\/* __ _u
~g Vh - 2
* 2 \t* 2
V*bv M + V bh
Resultant bolt force = 2
+ 2
s<
or an interaction equation can be written by substituting
Vt
V* V*bv
Vv 2 = — = v*bv4>V
•
df
<£V
* 4>Vd{
VS = -f = vbh .<»V
dv dh

tf>vdf
Vtv = M bm • 0M v*h = 0
dm
2 2
Vtbv
so that + Mtbm
</>Vdv ' cf>Mmd
+ Vtbh
4>Vdh
^ 1.0 (Eqn. 5.14.17)

If Vbh = Oand Mbm = Vbv.e, since Vdv = 2(0Vdf)

Vtbv Vbv.e 2
_2(0Vdf) <£VdJ.Sg_
^ 1.0 so V*bv <
1 + 2e/sg’
(<2>vdf)
2
setting Zb = this becomes Vtv < Zb(0Vdf) (Eqn. 5.14.15) as before
1 + 2e/sg

266 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 Local bearing failure and plate tearout around bolts has been discussed in Section 5.13. The research on
which the design provisions contained in AS 4100 are based relate only to lap splice connections or end
connections in tension members where the design force acts perpendicular to the edge of the member or
component. The design force may act on the bolts between bolt holes or towards the ends of a component or
a supported member.
With bolt groups subject to in-plane moment, the design boit force does not act perpendicular to the edge but
rather at an angle towards it.
in Ref. 14.16 Hogan and Thomas suggested that the end plate tearout provisions also appiy to applications
involving bolt groups and that what must be considered is the component of force acting towards any edge,
this component being limited to:
4>3e tp fyp where 4> = 0.9
The use of force components perpendicular to any edge (including a bolt hole) is a convenient calculation
device. Thomas and Bennetts (Ref. 14.15) investigated this concept for connections with the force not
perpendicular to an edge and found that a better estimate of the lower bound can be obtained by using a
modified expression for the edge distance to bolt diameter ratio rather than the actual ratio in the line of the
force component. However, the use of the actual edge distance in calculations introduces only a small error
and will be used in this Section when considering bolt groups.
The results presented herein build on the previous derivations.

Single Bolt Column (np # 1)

vib
I * M
• —i *-
i >v
a- %
V’b, AM HOeiZONTVH-
eose DiwNct
d%
i 0.
Cs

»♦
v; &JV -amt V£ET(CAL
BOSE mTMiCZ

BQ5S

Fig. 5.14.10 Fig. 5.14.11

Considering the design shear forces on the extreme bolt (Fig. 5.14.10), the edge distance requirement for the
components of these forces become:-

Vertica! design shear, V* = ^ 0 (sp - dh/2) tp fup

np
^ aev tD fUD — <£V, ev

6
Horizontal design shear, V£b = Vbv.e ^ <t> 3eh tp fyp — <£Veh
np sp (np + 1)
npsp(np + 1)
Hence, Vbv « 4>aebtpfup.
6e

Letting Ze = -Ptrip + and </>Vgb — </>3eh tp fp

6e
Hence, V*bv < n„ «>Vev)
^ rip Ze (<£Veb)
Resultant design shear, V*res = V(V*)2 + (V*b)2 < <£3.2dftpfup = 4>Vbf
this provision being to provide against local bearing failure.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 267

Double Bolt Column

y Sa

f- vU YU
u

0-
f-
-4~
!Z-
Vi
S
tlV
I
V*v
V try/ 4
iP
3-tb
5
lh/l
ft­

's. --<r--
GP
v*vv

V*ov «Uv

ecGc
*5

Fig. 5.14.12 Fig. 5.14.13

Considering the design shear forces on the extreme bolt (Fig. 5.14.13), the edge distance requirement for the
components of these forces become:- for np # 1

= V|v + V*bves
Total vertical design shear = V* + V£,
2np 2l bp
^ 0aev tp fup
where aev — [3ev> (Sp dh/2)]mjn

(np — 1) s p
Total horizontal design shear = V£h = VbVe
2Ibp
^ <£3eh tp fup

where 3eh = [3ehi (Sg — ^h^2)]min

Resultant design shear, V*e8 = V(V? + V*l2 + (VSh)2 « 4> 3-2 df tp fup = </>VM
this provision being to design against local bearing failure.

V*bv n es
Now, VJ + V* 1+ p g
2np __ It»P _ ^ 4^ev ~ tp fup

V*h
bv
V* = ZevW>Vev) Hence, V£v < 2np Zev (<£Vev)
2np
1 1
where Zev *
np e sa 6esg
1+ 1+
Ibp s?f(n? - D + 3{sp/Sg)2]
1) e sp
Also, V*h = V *bv(n*P ^ $Veh — 0aeh tp fUp
2IP

V? = ^ zeh(^Veh) Hence, V£v < 2np Zeh (4>Veh)

p. sP [(ng 1) + 3 (Sp/Sg)2]
where Zeh =
©(np 1) sp np 6 e (np - 1)
Fornp = 1, proceeding as above:-
Vtbv V*bve 5:
* **
Total vertical design shear <pa* i I ev p Tup
2 b9

Resultant design shear, V* res

Vtbv
+ yLe<^ t(po.^df
f tp t = $V bf
up
2 Sg
Sg + 2e
NOW, V * + Vmv =V
4 * il ■ «( 2Sg
^ (f>Vev

Sg
•••V*bv < Zev(tf>Vev) where Zev = sg + 2e

268 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.15 WELDS
The design and detailing of the six types of weld listed in AS 4100 and Section 3.2.1 are extensively dealt with
in AS 4100 (Ref. 34) and its associated commentary (Ref. 35). Welding terms are covered by AS 2812 (Ref. 37)
and the symbols for welds to be used on drawings are contained in AS 1101.3 (Ref. 36).
Connections in this Manual use either complete or incomplete penetration butt welds or fillet welds.
Generally, it is expected that welds in connections in this Manual would be made with welds conforming to
weld category SP of AS 1554.1 because Structural Purpose welds are normally expected in structural
connections. However, the use of GP category welds is not precluded, although a lower capacity factor applies
for such welds (0.60 for GP, 0.80 for SP).
As required by AS 4100, all welding must comply with AS 1554.1 (Ref. 26).
Table 3.2.4.1 is based on Table 4.5.1 of AS 1554, Part 1 (Ref. 26) and matches weld metal strength and ductility
to base metal strength and ductility, when using any of the welding procedures complying with AS 1554, Part
1.
AS 4100 Clause 9.7.2.3 specifies the design throat thickness of a butt weld as follows:-
“(a) Complete penetration butt weld The design throat thickness for a complete penetration butt weld shall
be the size of the weld.
(b) Incomplete penetration butt weld The design throat thickness for an incomplete penetration butt weld
shall be as follows:
(i) Prequalified preparation for incomplete penetration butt weld except as otherwise provided in (iii), as
specified in AS 1554.1.
(ii) Non-prequalified preparation for incomplete penetration butt weld except as provided in (iii)—
(A) where Q < 60°... (d - 3) mm, for single V weld;
[(d3 + d4) - 6] mm, for double V weld.
(B) where Q > 60° ... d mm, for single V weld;
(d3 + d4) mm, for double V weld.
where
d * depth of preparation (d3 and d4 are the values of d for each side of the weld)
8 w angle of preparation.
(iii) For an incomplete penetration butt weld made by an automatic arc welding process for which it can
be demonstrated by means of a macro test on a production weld that the required penetration has
been achieved, an increase in design throat thickness up to the depth of preparation may be allowed,
if the macro test shows penetration beyond the depth of preparation, an increase in design throat
thickness up to that shown in Figure 9.7.3.4 (of AS 4100) may be allowed.”
For fuiiy-automatic arc welding processes, Clause 9.7.2.3(b)(iii) (of AS 4100) permits advantage to be taken of
the penetration achievable with such processes to reduce the size of the weld deposited, provided a macro
test demonstrates the viability of the procedure (see Fig. 5.15.1).

oxr=-4 <*JZE p.rr> it

0-3mm 0%-M?
GPECtriCP IN A4I554 ‘I

(a) Incomplete penetration butt (b) Incomplete penetration butt

weld made by other than a fully weld made by a fully
automatic process automatic process
Fig. 5.15.1 Design Throat Thickness

&SC/04—1994 AISC; DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 269

For the design of a fillet weld, AS 4100 Clause 9.7.3.10 specifies that the nominal capacity is based on a fa'I
stress of Q.6fuw in shear on the design weld throat (ti) which is assumed to be the failure plane (see Fig 515^
Considering the design actions in terms of force per unit length (v*. v*, v*1) on the fillet weld throat in r
5.15.2, a general form of a failure criterion may be written as (Refs 15.1 and 15.2)— IQ'

Vv*2 + kv(v'V + vV) ^»kw (0-6 fuwtt)

< 0kwv w

where
kv coefficient which varies according to the failure criteria used. /;
V* design force per unit length of weld normal to the plane of the fillet weld throat
w*v|
V design shear force per unit length of weld longitudinal to the plane of the fillet weld throat
V*vt design shear force per unit length of weld transverse to the plane of the fillet weld throat
<t> capacity factor
kw a factor to account for the failure criteria of a single weld element determined from test data.
In AS 1250-1972, the design criterion was based on a kv value of 1.0 (which results in a vectorial addition
method), while AS 1250-1981 used a kv value of 3 (which results in a von Mises failure criterion).
For Clause 9.7.3.10 of AS 4100, values of kv = 1.0 and kw = 1.0 were adopted based on the studies reported
in Refs 15.1 and 15.2. Accordingly, AS 4100 requires that the design force per unit length be the vectorial sum
of all design forces per unit length acting on the effective area of the fillet weld.

vt
Vn 17

Fig. 5.15.2 Design Actions on a Fiiiet Weld

Hence, if the design forces per unit length are resolved into three mutually orthogonal components relative to
the throat of the fillet weld-as in Fig. 5.15.2—then
v*res = vectorial sum of the three components, resultant design force per unit length

= VMfi (vtt)2 + W
0Vw
In many actual fillet welds, It is more convenient to define a fillet weld orientation with respect to three mutually
orthogonal axes, usually so that the fillet weld lies in the x-y plane-as in Fig. 5.15.3.

270 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 yy
7

V*x
x. /

•0^ X

Fig. 5.15.3 Design Forces per unit length parallel to weld group axes (x, y, z)

For this approach, three mutually orthogonal components of design force per unit length exist, being
one parallel to the fillet weld x-axis (v*)
one parallel to the fillet weld y-axis (v *)
one parallel to the fillet weld z-axis (v*)
so that v*res
< <£vw
Specifically, for a fillet weld subject only to longitudinal shear force-as in Fig. 5.15.4(a)-the design capacity
per unit length of fillet weld is given by:
0VW = <£fuw tt
and v*rres = v*i since v* - =0

X
I A V
X i

Vv/I
v7

(a) Fillet weld subject to longitudinal (b) Fillet weld subject to transverse
shear force shear force
Fig. 5.15.4

For a fillet weld subject only to transverse shear force-as in Fig. 5.15.4(b)-the design capacity per unit length
of fillet weld is also 1

<£>vw = <f>fuwtt

In this case, using components resolved with respect to the throat (as Fig. 5.15.2):
V*n « V*y/V2 v*vt = v*/V2 v*Vi = 0 (Fig. 5.15.5)
v*res = V(Vy/ V^)2 + (V*/V2)2 = V*y ^ 0V
W
Previous editions of this Manual-which used the von Mises failure criterion of AS 1250-1981—gave a 22%
increase in strength for fillet welds loaded only by transverse shear as compared to those loaded only
longitudinally. The method of vectorial addition-as used in AS 4100—gives equal strength for fillet welds
loaded in any direction.

07-i
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS
 V

Mv/ &
L

Fig. 5.15.5

Theoretical and experimental work indicates that longitudinally loaded fillet welds provide lower strength but higher
ductility than transversely loaded fillet welds (Refs. 15.3, 15.4). This is not reflected in the nominal capacity
expression of AS 4100 but the lower bound longitudinally loaded strength is used as a basis, together with an average
capacity factor, to give the design capacity. The increase in strength for transversely loaded fillet welds is variously
estimated at 13% (Ref. 15.3) to 44% (Ref. 15.4) but the decrease in ductility is a factor of 4 (Ref. 15.4).
As is argued in Ref. 13, the design method of AS 4100 involving the calculation of fillet weld force per unit length
using linear methods combined with vectorial addition of component forces is conservative, but the chosen value of
the capacity factor (4>) reflects this conservatism (Ref. 15.1). Any other combination of design criteria would involve
the use of a smaller capacity factor to arrive at essentially the same result.
For a detailed treatment of alternative methods of design of fillet welds, including the limitations of these methods,
Reference 10 should be consulted. No rigorous method with good agreement over the whole range of test results is
currently available. The most successful simplified analytical approach is that due to Kamtekar (Ref. 15.5).

272 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

5.16 WELD GROUPS
AS 4100 Clause 9.8 specifies the assumptions which must be made in analysing fillet weld groups. No mention is
made of a butt weld group because most usual connections involving a weld group are made using fillet welds.
AS 4100 Clause 9.8 deals with three types of fillet weld groups, as follows:
- weld group subject to in-plane loading (Clause 9.8.1)
- weld group subject to out-of-plane loading (Clause 9.8.2)
- weld group subject to both in-plane and out-of-plane loading (Clause 9.8.3)
and for each type of fillet weld group both a general and an alternative method of analysis are permitted. In this
Manual, it is convenient to use the general method for some connections but the alternative method for others. The
above three sub-clauses nominate the assumptions which must be made for the analysis of a fillet weld group in
order to determine the design force per unit length at any point in the fillet weld group. Once this design value is
determined, the fillet weld must satisfy the requirements of Clause 9.7.3.10 at all points in the group - the
requirements of this sub-clause are summarised in Section 3.2.6 and explained in Section 5.15.
The alternative method of analysis for all three loadings on fillet weld groups states that the design force per unit
length in the fillet weld group shall be determined by considering the fillet weld group to be an extension of the
member connected by the fillet weld group and by proportioning the design force per unit length to satisfy equilibrium
between the fillet weld group and the elements of the connected member. That is, an assumption is made about the
distribution of forces so that equilibrium is satisfied at the weld/member interface. Where this method is used in
individual connections in this Manual, it is noted and the assumptions made to derive the design forces per unit length
are also explained in the accompanying Commentary.
Clause 9.8.1.1 of AS 4100 deals specifically with a fillet weld group subject to in-plane loading which generates
in-plane shear forces on the fillet weld group. The Clause restricts the design method to be used to the following
assumptions:

(a) The connection plates shall be considered to be rigid and to rotate relative to each other about a point known
as the instantaneous centre of rotation of the weld group.
(b) In the case of a weld group subject to a pure couple only, the instantaneous centre of rotation coincides with
the weld group centroid.
In the case of a weld group subject to an in-plane shear force applied at the group centroid, the instantaneous
centre of the rotation is at infinity and the design force per unit length (v*) is uniformly distributed throughout
the group.
In all other cases, either the results of independent analyses for a pure couple alone and for an in-plane shear
force applied at the weld group centroid shall be superimposed, or a recognised method of analysis shall be
used.
(c) The design force per unit length «) at any point in the fillet weld group shall be assumed to act at right angles
to the radius from that point to the instantaneous centre, and shall be taken as proportional to that radius.
Note that the Clause permits the use of superposition under (b) and this method will be used extensively in this
Section. Also note the similarity in wording to that for bolt groups loaded in-plane - essentially the method for fillet
weld groups is identical to that for such bolt groups and the development in this Section will reflect this.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 273

In the general method of analysis, the nominal capacity of a welded connection with a constant size weldisi
by treating that connection as a weld group of unit thickness in isolation from the attached elements or assessed
members.

s s / y y // 4
/
y
/
/ F*
r X‘
v
/ *
V /
Mz

/77Tyy7TTy?

Fig. 5.16.1 Fillet Weld Group Loaded In-plane

If a connection at the end of a member is viewed as a weld group in isolation from that member (see Fig. 5.16.1),
then the nominal capacity of the weld group may be determined by either an elastic or an ultimate strength approach.
Both methods are based upon assumptions (a) and (b) of Clause 9.8.1.1, that is the rotation being assumed about
an instantaneous centre.
The elastic or linear method is the traditional approach to the assessment of the load capacity of a weld group. The
design force per unit length of weld is considered to be proportional to the distance from the instantaneous centre,
as in assumption (c) of Clause 9.8.1.1, quoted previously.
This method has been adopted in AS 4100 because reliability studies reported in Refs. 15.1 and 15.2 have indicated
that the method is sufficiently reliable, while having the virtue of being simpler to apply than the alternative methods
and being amenable to hand calculation.
The ultimate strength analysis of a fillet weld group has been described in Refs. 16.1, 16.2, 16.4. For this type of
analysis, the weld group is discretized into short elements of fillet weld. The load-deformation relationships
determined by testing are considered to describe the behaviour of each element. Although the weld forces are still
considered to act normal to the radius from the instantaneous centre, the magnitude of the force is not proportional
to the radius. The instantaneous centre should therefore be determined by trial and error. The ultimate load capacity
corresponding to the achievement of an ultimate displacement condition at some point in the weld group can then
be determined.
Swannell (Refs. 16.1, 16.2, 16.6 - 16.9) and Butler Pal and Kulak (Ref. 16.4) have discussed in detail ultimate
strength design procedures for fillet weld groups loaded in-plane, which use the instantaneous centre of rotation
approach but the same relationship (Butler, Pal and Kulak’s) between the force In the weld and the distance from the
instantaneous centre of rotation. Both Swannell and Butler et al have substantiated their design proposals by test
results.
The major disadvantage with the ultimate strength method is the necessity to solve the equations with an iterative
computer program, as hand solutions are impractical. Design charts have been derived to assist with standard forms
of fillet weld groups (Refs. 16b, 16.2, 16.6-16.9).
The 8th Edition of the AISC Manual (Ref. 16b) follows Butlers proposals and uses an instantaneous centre of rotation
approach, together with an inelastic load deformation relationship for each element. The difficulties with this approach
is that only a limited number of weld group configurations have been considered, a closed form solution is not
presented but the solution is obtained by iteration (usually by computer) and for practical design, design charts or
tables are essential.
Further development in this Section will be on the basis of the elastic or linear method.

274 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 Applying the provisions of Clause 9.8.1.1 of AS 4100 to the general fillet weld group of Fig. 5.16.2, the analysis
proceeds as follows (after Refs. 16.8,16.9):-

F¥
At/
*0,

CENTRE LQA.DF^INT F*
1*
OF ROTATION G<*.y2
(^p«yp)
'e
'M*

\J51D GROUP CENTROID

miETWELO OUTLINE IN X-Y

Pl/W£

Fig. 5.16.2

Letting Lw =* length of weld

ds - unit length of weld at point (xs, ys)
v* = force per unit length at point (xs, ys)

then, equilibrium requires that:-

F* - |(v*.ds.sin6s) (Eqn. 5.16.1)
F* - |(v*.d9.cos 0S) (Eqn. 5.16.2)
M* = |[v*-ds.sin 0s.(ys » yp)j + |[v*.ds.cos Mxs - *P)3 (Eqn. 5.16.3)

Noting that Clause 9.8.1.1(c) of AS 4100 specifies that v* = kw r8 where kw = constant of proportionality (in
units of force per unit length) and rs = radius from the instantaneous centre of rotation to length dS) and further
noting that
cos 0S - (xs - xe)/rs sin 0S =* (ys - ye)/rs

these expressions reduce to:-

F* = kw|(ys - ye)ds (Eqn. 5.16.1)
Fy = kw|(xs - xe)ds (Eqn. 5.16.2)
M* = kw|(ys - ye)(ys - yp) ds + kw |(xs - xe)(xs - xp) ds (Eqn. 5.16.3)

With the origin at the weld group centroid:-

|xsds = |ysds = 0 Sds = Lw = weld length
|x|ds = I wy Xy£d. = I wy

|x|ds + fyfd, = I wy + 'wx = I wp

where I WXi wy> 'wp are second moments of area of a weld group of unit throat thickness calculated about weld
group centroid.

:
,

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 275

Using these substitutions, the three equations of equilibrium may be re-written as:-
F x = — kw Lw ye
(Fqn. 5.16.1)
F y = — kw Lw Xe (Eqn. 5.16.2)
M* = kw [I wp + Lw(xe xp + ye yp)] (Eqn. 5.16.3)

Rearranging these equations gives explicit solutions for the three unknowns (xe, yer kw)
F*
xe = __ Lz (Eqn. 5.16.4)
kw L w
F*
” X
ye = - kw L w (Eqn. 5.16.5)

M*z + F* yp + F* xp
Kw — -------------------- :-------------- — (Eqn. 5.16.6)
'wp

Hence, the design force per unit length (v£) at any point (xs, ys) is given by:-
v* = kw r. where rs = V(xJ xe)2 + (ys - ye)2

which must be less than <£vw (design capacity per unit length).

An alternative method of solution is to apply the principle of superposition permitted in AS 4100 by Clause
9.8.1.1(b). For the weld group of Fig. 5.16.2, the applied design actions may be transferred to the weld group
centroid to give a design action set (F*. F *, M*0) where
M*zo = M*z + F*.yp - F*.Xp

From Clause 9.8.1.1 (b) of AS 4100, in-plane shear forces are uniformly distributed so that
v* = force per unit length in x-axis direction due to F*
- FVL w
v* = force per unit length in y-axis direction due to F*
= F*y/L W

For the pure couple (M*0) applied at the weld group centroid,
Xe ye ~ 0 and F*y ~ F* - 0
*
zo
then kw and r8 = Vxf 4- yi
'wp

with Vm ~ kw rs

Taking components of v£ parallel to the x~(v£x) and y-(v£y) axes gives (see Fig. 5.16.3):-
Ys _ M*z0 ys
Vmx = -Vm Sin 05 = ”'Vm. . — i
rs 'wp

V*my = +Vm COS 0s = +v£.^ = + Mto xs

rs Iwp

*6
v

V*
v ro*

&
j
cewnaotp

Fig. 15.6.3

276 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Hence, superposition of the results gives:-

F*x M*0 ys
total v* = (Eqn. 5.16.7)
Lw 'wp

F*y . M*Z0XS
v* - —
Vy -L + (Eqn. 5.16.8)
'wp

with the resultant force per unit length being given as:-

v*.res = VK)2 + (Vy)2

which must be less than <f>vw (design capacity per unit length).

Clause 9.8.1.2 of AS 4100 deals specifically with the fillet weld group subject to out-of-plane loading which
generates out-of-plane shear forces on the fillet weld group. The clause restricts the design method to be used
to the following assumptions:-

(a) The fillet weld group shall be considered in isolation from the connected element; and
(b) The design force per unit length in the fillet weld resulting from a design bending moment shall be
considered to vary linearly with the distance from the relevant centroidal axes. The design force per unit
length in the fillet weld group resulting from any shear force or axial force shall be considered to be
uniformly distributed over the length of the fillet weld group.
Clause 9.8.1.2 of AS 4100 does not specifically mention that superposition is permitted but the Commentary
(Ref. 35) states that the same comments as were made about Clause 9.8.1.1 apply. Superposition is thus
assumed to be permitted for out-of-plane loading in this Manual.

As with the analysis for in-plane loading, the weld group loaded out-of-plane is analysed by treating it as a
weld group of unit thickness and is considered in isolation from the member (Fig. 5.16.4). Once again, the
nominal capacity could be determined by either a linear or an ultimate strength approach. However, Clause
9.8.1.2 of AS 4100 specifically mentions a linear relationship for determining the design force per unit length in
the fillet weld resulting from the design bending moment. The same comments made earlier about the reasons
for AS 4100 using the linear method in relation to in-piane loading also apply for out-of-plane loading.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 277

 y
V
:iirj
/
%

"2L
r
W£U? GROUP
r*
rx

-X

£> ; m** CEWT0OID

flLLE-rWElD
GROUP ODTUKE
fM X-J/ PUKE

Fig. 5.16.4 Fillet weld group loaded out-of-plane

The ultimate strength method of analysis for out-of-piane loading was described by Dawe and Kulak (Ref. 16.3)
while Swannell’s later work has also extended to weld groups loaded out-of-plane (Refs. 16.9, 16.10).
Computer solutions or design charts are also necessary to use the ultimate strength method for out-of-plane
loading.
For out-of-plane loading, AS 4100 Clause 9.8.1.2 is quite specific in stating that for a fillet weld group subject
to moment the design force per unit length is related to distance from the weld group centroid. Accordingly, for
the weld group of Fig. 5.16.4, analogous equations to Eqns 5.16.7-8 can be written as follows:-
F**
vv*
xL
=- (Eqn. 5.16.9)
w

v* = — F*y
Vy (Eqn. 5.16.10)
~L w
F*2 . M*y for moment M* about
V* =L
+ x-axis as in Fig. 5.16.4
(Eqn. 5.16.11)
w !WX

F* M*yX for moment M* about

or
Lw 'wy y-axis (not shown)
Swanneil points out (Refs. 16.1, 16.2) that the instantaneous centre method for out-of-plane loading gives
identical equations to Eqns. 5.16.4-6 except that lwp is replaced by the second moment of area of the weld
group with respect to the centroidal axis in the plane of the weld group and normal to the plane of the applied
loads-that is lwx for design moment Mx about the x-axis and lwy for design moment My about the y-axis.
The resultant design force per unit length is:-
v*,es = V(v*x)2 + (V*F + (v*2)2
which must be less than </>vw (design capacity per unit length).

278 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 For a fillet weld group subject to both in-piane and out-of-plane loading simultaneously, Clause 9.8.3.1 of AS
4100 states that the design action shall be obtained using the previous methods for in-plane and out-of-plane
loading separately such that Clause 9.7.3.10 of AS 4100 is satisfied at all points, and the design shear forces
per unit length in different directions being combined using vectorial addition as explained in Section 5.15.
Hence, for the general fillet weld group of Fig. 5.16.5, subject to both in-piane and out-of-plane loading:

GENegAL. FILLET
WEU?
t fr
cektcoid _
or fillet
Y'/ELDGRCtJT

z.

z % WELP IN X-y PLANE-

Z*0

Fig. 5.16.5 General Fillet Weld Group

the general design expressions become-by combining Eqns. 5.16.7, 5.16.8, 5.16.9-11:-
„* _ n M*zy (Eqn. 5.16.12)
Vx ” L w Iwp
F*
r y M* x
V y=, UL 4,
w* + (Eqn. 5.16.13)
w 'wp

F* M* y M* x
V*z =
Lw
+ (Eqn. 5.16.14)
wx 'wy

where:-
v* v* and v* are the design forces per unit length in the x, y, z directions respectively on an elemental length
of weld. The x- and y-axes are the principal axes of the weld group and the z-axis is perpendicular to the weld
group and through the centroid.
F x, FF* are the design forces applied to the weld group in the x, y, z directions respectively.
M*, My, M* are the design bending moments applied to the weld group about the respective x, y, z axes, with
M* moments due to in-plane forces being determined relative to weld centroid location.
'wx and lwy are the second moment of areas of the weld group for a unit thickness of weld about the x- and y-
axes respectively. Iwp(~~ lwx + !wy) is the polar moment of inertia about the z-axis, and Lw is the total length of
weld. (Formulae for lWX) lwy, lwp for common weld groups are given in Table 3.2.7.1)
The authors suggest that the above expressions be slightly modified in order to allow them to reflect realistic
distributions of the force set (F*, F *, F*) between components of the total weld group, as follows:-

u* _ f X M*y
(Eqn. 5.15.15)
Vx " L wx 'wp

Ft M*zx
V*y =
Lwy
+ (Eqn. 5.15.16)
'wp

VWziwz+ __ M*yx (Eqn. 5.15.17)

'wx 'wy

where
i-WX> Lwy, L'WZ = the lengths of weld assumed to receive the component forces along the individual x, y and
z axes respectively;

'
;•

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 279

The resultant design force per unit length is:-
V* res V(v*)2 + (V*)2 + (v*z)2 (£cin. 5.16.18)
which must be less than <£vw (design capacity per unit length).
Unfortunately, it is not possible to easily ascertain
the critical point in a general weld group at which aY
Eqn. 5.16.18 may control the design and, in practice,
2
many individual points may need to be separately
checked. However, the number of points which need V
to be checked is normally limited in practical fillet
weld groups.
Many practical fillet weld groups comprise lines of
welds parallel to the x- and y-axes of the weld. For .7
such relatively straightforward fillet weld groups, the a
identification of possible critical points is
correspondingly more straightforward.
Fig. 5.16.6 Possible Critical Points in Particular
The possible critical points for a fillet weld group
Fillet Weld Group
consisting of lines of weld parallel to the x- and y-
axes only are shown (numbered 1 to 8) in Fig. 5.16.6.
In general, for such a fillet weld group, the possible
critical points are the extreme points on the weld in
each direction.
Examining two types of weld groups common to a number of connections in order to obtain simple closed-
form solutions for subsequent use gives the following:
(a) Two Parallel Vertical Welds Loaded Out-of-Plane
Consider the fillet weld group shown in Fig. 5.16.7
which is loaded by an out-of-plane moment (M*) and
design vertical (F*) and horizontal (F*) shear forces
acting at the weld group centroid. Fy
Weld group properties are: z
Lwx
Lw
l wy Uvz 2 Lw M
Iwx (Lw)3 (Table 3.2.7.1)
6
y
y*± points 3, 4, 7, 8 (4-ve at 3, 8, ■ve at 4, 7)

Design forces per unit length are (using Eqns. 5.16.15-17

and the above weld group properties: y
v* = 0
v* = F*/(2 Lw)
■ A- 7
F*z M* Lw/2
v*z =
2Lw + (Lw)3/6
at points 3, 8 (top)

F* M* Lw/2 Fig. 5.16.7

at points 4, 7 (bottom)
2L w (Lw)3/6
Governing equation-vectorial addition V(v*)2 + (v*)2 < <£v w

280 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Substitution of the appropriate design forces per unit length (v*, v*) in this equation enables the fillet weld
group to be rapidly designed for any action set (F *, F*, M*).
For F* = 0, M* = 0 since v* = 0, the design requirement reduces to v* ^ <£vw
Since v* = F */(2 Lw) then F * ^ 2 Lw (<£vw)
Hence, <£Vdv = design capacity of fillet weld group subject to vertical shear only = 2 Lw(0vw)
For F* = 0, M* = 0 since v* = 0, the design requirement reduces to v* « <f>vw
Since v* = F*z/(2 Lw) then F*z ^ 2 Lw(0vw)
Hence, <£Vdh design capacity of fillet weld group subject to horizontal shear only = 2Lw(<f>vw)
3M *
For F* = 0, F* = 0 since v* = 0 and v*z =
±TT
L
w

the design requirement reduces to v* ^ <£vw

-M* (<f>vw)
Hence, <£Mdm = design capacity of fillet weld group subject only to moment applied at the weld group centroid
= ^L3((£vw)
For F* = Q, M* = F*.e, e = eccentricity of F*

v* - ±JLF*y 3M* 3F*y.e

Vy
v* = ± -pr= ± -rV-
2L. L-W *-w

On substitution into the governing equation:-

'F*> f3F*el2
+ L2 *£ (0VW)2
2L, *-w

multiplying by 4L^ gives

(F'y)2(Lw)2 + 36 e2 (F*)2 ^ 4UW2
4L4 (4>vw)2
■■■ (Fy)2 <
L2 + (6e)2
2 Lw (<ftvw)
Hence, F* <
1+=
6ef
■w

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 281

(b) Two Parallel Horizontal Welds Loaded Out-of-Piane
Consider the fillet weld group shown in Fig. 5.16.8
which is loaded out-of-plane by a moment (Mt) and
design vertical (F*) and horizontal (Ft) shear forces tw
acting at the weld group centroid.
Weld group properties:- ,
Lwx = L
x
wy = Uz - 2L w
l 2
Lw t2 I
wx (Table 3.2.7.1)
2
y.
at points 1, 2, 5, 6 y = ± t/2
5
Uv
Fig. 5.16.8 X-y PlAHt
Design forces per unit length (using Eqns. 5.16.15-17 and the above weld group properties):
v* = 0
v*y = F*y/(2LW)
F* M*x(t/2) Ft
v* = —2- + at points 1,2 = + t-—
2L w Lwt2/2 Lwt

F*z M*x(t/2)
at points 5, 6 = Ft
2Lw Lwt2/2 w Lwt
Governing equation - vectorial addition (vt = 0)
V(v*j"a' +~{vt)2 < 0vw
For Ft = 0, Mt = 0 since vt = 0, the design requirement reduces to vt < <£vw
Since vt = Ft/2L w then Ft 2Lw(<£vw)
Hence, $Vdv = design capacity of fillet weld group subject to vertical shear only = 2Lw(<£vw)
For F*y - 0, M*x = 0 since v*y = 0, the design requirement reduces to vt «s <t>vw
Since vt = Ft/2L w then Ft c 2Lw(4>vw)
Hence, 0Vdh = design capacity of fillet weld group subject to horizontal shear only = 2Lw(^vw)
For Ft =* 0, Ft = 0 since v*y = 0 vt < <f>v w (as above)
*
, IVf.X
Since vt = hence Mt < Lwt(0vw)
u.t
Hence, <f>Mdni = design capacity of fillet weld group subject only to moment applied at weld group centroid
= Lwt(c/>vw)
For Ft 0, Mt = Fte (e = eccentricity of Ft)
F*
1V * Mt Fte
v*y = (at points 1, 2, 5, 6)
2Lw Vz “ * Ut "

On substitution into Ft l2 fFtel2

the governing equation:- |_2L w
+ ^ (<£vw)2
Ut
Expanding and multiplying by 4LJt2:-
(F*)2t2 + 4e2(F*y)2 =£ (rf»vw)2.4L2t2
4L2t2
Hence (F*y)2 ^ (4>vw)2( t2 + 4e2,

2Lw
Ft < (0vw)
>/1 + 4(e/t)2

282 A1SC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 [BLANK]

DSC/04—1994
AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 283
5.17 CONNECTED MEMBERS
5.17.1 GENERAL
All the recommended connection design models for flexible connections involve checks on the desin
capacities of the supported members in the vicinity of the connection. The design capacity checked is usuaN
the shear capacity and in the case of coped members, the bending capacity at the cope location. The
provisions of AS 4100 are used for assessing these capacities and the provisions contained in Section 3.4
are
largely self-explanatory.
So that the design capacities of coped beams do not control the design capacity of the connection it is
important that the length and depth of the cope must be kept as small as practical. AS 4100 requires that the
re-entrant corner at the cope be radiused to at least 10 mm (Clause 14.3.3).
The assumption made in Sections 3.4.3 and 3.4.4 for coped secions is that local buckling of the web, which is
in compression due to the bending moment induced by the end reaction, does not occur. This assumption is
made on the basis that the length involved is small (usually of the order of 100-150 mm) and that the stiffening
effect of the connection itself inhibits local buckling.
Ref. 12 contains the following guidance-of unstated origin-which is intended to ensure that local buckling of
the supported member web does not occur:-
(i) for SWC ends, the top of the end plate, angle cleat or web plate should be level or nearly so with the top of
the cope and the length of the cope (Lc) should be limited to (see Fig. 5.17.1 (i)) '
.
24 twb for the flexible end plate connection 1

sg1 + 24twb for the angle cleat connection

for DWC ends, the end plate or angle cleat or web plate should extend approximately the full depth of the
remaining supported member web and the length of the cope should be limited to (see Fig. 5.17.1 (ii))
15 twb for the flexible end plate connection
sgi + 15twb for the angle cleat connection
These limits apply for supported members of Grade 250 steel. Most practical copes should comply and most
standard copes in Ref. 1 do.

Lc Ip
M
bwb
c! tSvy
&

(i) SWC Members

%
L-c, Lp

c! w

t:
(li) DWC Members
dwt

u
I

Fig. 5.17.1

284 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

One study of local buckling in SWC coped beams has been reported by Cheng and Yura (Ref. 17.1). They point
out that the conventional equations used in Sections 3.4.3 and 3.4.4 may not give true stress distributions in the
coped region and that high stress concentrations may cause inelastic local web buckling. They also point out
that bending and shear produce high stress concentrations at the cope corner and that the interaction of these
effects is not addressed.
Cheng and Yura conducted a parametric study to establish the effects of stress concentration, cope length and
cope depth on local web buckling capacity using a plate buckling analysis program. They concluded that
calculating the moment at yield (My using My = fy l/y and the shear at yield (Vy) using Vy = fy dw tw will give a
lower bound to the inelastic local web buckling solutions obtained by them. They also noted that if d/tw is less
than 42 and Lc/d less than 2.0 then buckling is not critical and yielding will control. Their design
recommendations for SWC beams are as follows:-
k, k2 E tt2
M*y/I < fcr = (J*)2
12(1 - v2) IdJ
< f. yw
k, = 2 U/d for Lc/d < 1.0 k2 = 2.2 [dwt/Lc] 1.65
for U/dwt < 1.0
= 1 + Lc/d for L^/d >1.0 = 2.2[dwt/Lc] for U/dwt > 1.0
V*/dwttw ^ f, yw

5.17.2 TORSIONAL RESTRAINT

Coping of beam ends may reduce the elastic critical buckling moment of a laterally unsupported flexural
member.
Ref. 16 contains the note that “unusually long and deep copes or blocks in beams with thin webs may
materially affect the capacity of the beams” and Milek (Ref. 17.3) draws attention to this situation particularly for
copes in plate girders with thin webs. DuPlessis (Ref. 17.2) has carried out a limited range of tests which
support this advice.
For beams connected to plate girders through flexible end plate connections, and loaded with a central
concentrated load, duPiessis measured a 7% drop in elastic critical load for a SWC beam (with end plate
attached to the bottom flange) compared to an uncoped but otherwise identical beam. A SWC beam without
end plate attachment to the bottom flange showed a 30% drop in elastic critical load while a DWC beam
showed a 33% drop. Subsequently, a finite element study confirmed that a cope could reduce the elastic
critical load by 18% for the SWC case with plate attachment to the bottom flange and that this could be
approximated in design through a 10% increase in beam effective length.
Gupta (Ref. 17.4) used an approximate energy approach to confirm dePiessis’s results and concluded that
“coping may reduce the buckling strength significantly depending on the application” but particularly for the
beams of most concern-those with long spans unrestrained and coped.
In Ref. 17.5, Cheng et al. report on parametric studies undertaken to establish the effects of span length, cope
length, cope depth and web depth/thickness ratio on the elastic critical buckling moment of beams. This
parametric study is supported by testing (Ref. 17.6). Their design recommendations are that in order to
determine the elastic buckling capacity of a coped beam, the problem is treated as an interaction between the
buckling capacities of the cross-section at the cope and that of the uncoped beam. Equations are given for
this purpose.
In AS 4100, no specific guidance is given about the effect of web coping on the buckling capacity of an
laterally unrestrained beam, but it would be prudent to either perform a buckling analysis using Ref. 17.5
(permitted by Clause 5.6.4) or assume only partial restraint at the coped end when calculating the twist
restraint factor (kt) and the lateral restraint factor (kr) when using Clause 5.6.3. A kr value of 1.0 should always
be used for supported members connected by angle cleats or web plates only, whether the members are
coped or uncoped due to the lack of restraint to the top flange.

5.17.3 BLOCK SHEAR FAILURE

Tests on coped beams have indicated that a tearing failure mode can occur along the perimeter of the bolt
holes in a coped beam in the manner shown in Fig. 5.17.2. This type of failure is known as a “block shear"
failure.
The phenomenon of block shear web failure in the supported member was first reported by Birkemoe and
Gilmore (Ref. 17.7) on double angle cleat connections which were intended to be “bearing-critical” in terms of
the then 1978 AISC Specification. Subsequent testing (Refs. 17.8-17.11) has confirmed details of this type of
failure resulting in proposed design criteria. This type of failure is not restricted to coped ends of beams, being
also reported in gusset plates to which tension members are bolted (Ref. 17.11). The block shear failure mode
,s characterised by a tearing failure on one plane and a shear failure on a plane at right-angles to the first

Plane (Fig. 5.17.3).

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 285

 A,

06-Cu
f
6

IIW
KUPTURS SURFACE RUPTURE
SURFACE
1 f,u

Fig. 5.17.2 Fig. 5.17.3

Birkemoe and Gilmor's tests revealed tearing of the supported member web at the bottom bolt hole due to a
high bolt force on the bottom bolt, this type of failure occurring in an uncoped supported member. A similar
test on a coped member gave the failure surface shown in Fig. 5.17.2. Birkemoe and Gilmor postulated a
design mode! in which the resistance to block shear is provided by tensile resistance along plane B-B in Fig.
5.17.3, combined with shear resistance along plane A-A.

•A c
J

Mole pmmctk 9P
If-
Volume** -e --O—
nr=N6OFeOtX£flWs> V.,
o—
^&
,c
m...... «a»

Fig. 5.17.4

Using the Birkemoe and Gilmor formulation (Fig. 5.17.4):—

Shear area on plane A-A = tw[(aev 4- (np - 1)sp ~ (np - £)dh] = A sw

Tensile area on plane B-B = tw (aeh - =A tw

For a prediction of strength, Birkemoe and Gilmor suggest taking a shear strength of 0.60 x ultimate tensile
strength (fu). So that:-
Vu,t = 0.60 fu A sw 4- f„ Atw
The expression for VU|, applies for both the SWC and DWC supported members. However, the DWC supported
member may also fail by a straight vertical tearing (Fig. 5.17.4) for which VU|t is given by:—
VU|t = 0.60 fu A sv where Asv = tw(dw - npdh)
Subsequent studies of the phenomenon have been undertaken by Yura et al (Refs. 17.9, 17.10). Birkmoe and
Gilmor had only investigated a single line of bolts to the supported member web, and in Ref. 17.9 Yura et al
examined the problem with two lines of bolts to the supported member web. They found this type of failure in 8
tests out of i 2 conducted but for none of these tests did the block shear control the design-generally the end
distance formulation (identical to the one used herein) controlled, although the Kulak method of designing
eccentrically loaded bolt groups was used rather than the linear method used in this Manual (see Section 5.14
for a discussion of this aspect). They concluded that the Birkemoe and Gilmor formulation for a single line of
bolts overestimates the capacity for a double line of bolts. Slotted holes were found to be about 20% weaker
than standard holes in otherwise identical connections.

286 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

In Ref. 17.10, Yura and Rides extended the work with additional testing primarily on SWC beams All of these
connections failed in block shear, typical behaviour being that depicted in Fig. 5.17.5, yielding first occurring in
the web below the first line of bolts with fracturing then starting at the bottom horizontal line of bolts After
fracturing, the vertical shear force caused high flexural stresses to develop in the web. In some of the
connections, the web buckled at the cope despite top flange restraint.

^3 a*b

mews o
/
0
o
o
oB o

&3LT«a£
v

Fig. 5.17.5 (Ref. 17.10) Fig. 5.17.6 Revised Failure

Model for Block Shear (Ref. 17.10)

As a result of these studies and a finite element analysis of the web area, Yura and Rides proposed a revised
model, as shown in Fig. 5.17.6, with a triangular distribution of tensile stress along the horizontal plane with a
peak value of fu and a uniform shear stress distribution along the vertical plane equal to fy/\/3 which is
approximately 0.60 fy. Thus in this formulation:-
Vylt = 0.5 f(j Apet "i" 0.6 fy Avg
where: Anet = [{Sg + 3eh) "* 1.5 dh]ti AVg ~ [Sev + (np 1)Spjtw
Based on these more recent tests (Refs. 17.10,17.11) the AISC (US) LRFD Specification has adopted this more
conservative design mode! to predict block shear strength. The original Birkemoe and Gilmor model summed
the fracture strength on two perpendicular planes which implied that ultimate fracture occurred simultaneously
on the two planes. If fracture occurs on one plane first, then the total force must then be supported on the
perpendicular plane and tests (Refs. 17.10,17.11) suggest that it is reasonable to add the yield strength on one
plane to the fracture strength on the perpendicular plane. Therefore, two expressions for failure strength are
possible, one for each plane failing first.
Under this formulation, two possible block shear capacities can be calculated:-
(i) fracture (fu) on the net tensile section (A^) plus shear yielding (0.6 fy) on the gross section of the shear
planes (Avg)
(ii) fracture (0.6 fu) on the net shear areas (Ans) combined with yielding (fy) on the gross tensile area (Atg).
Hence, Vuit “ 0.6 fy Avg + fu Ant
= 0.6 fu Ans + fy Atg
where:- AVg = [aev + (np — 1)Sp]tw Atg — aeh tw
Ans = [Avg — (np — 1 /2)dh]t w Ant ~ (9eh ~ bp/2)t w
The expressions given in Section 3.4.5 are these expressions with a capacity factor of 0.9 from AS 4100 for
member design. Note that the AISC (US) Specification (Ref. 16) uses a capacity factor of 0.75.
The correct term to use is that for which fracture will occur first, since the phenomenon is one of fracture not
yielding. Hence, the proper limit is given by the expression for which the fracture term is larger than the
yielding term-when this is not obvious the correct expression is the larger of the two terms.
The previous edition of this Manual used the Birkemoe and Gilmore failure criterion.
As Birkemoe and Gilmor point out, detailing practice may be such that the block shear type of failure does not
occur but it appears prudent to check it at this stage. Marsh (Ref. 17.8) identified this problem from a purely
theoretical standpoint.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 287

 [BLANK]

288 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 6 ERENC
COMPLEMENTARY AISC PUBLICATIONS
1. Australian institute of Steel Construction, "Standardized Structural Connections", Third Edition, 1985.
(Note: Fourth edition to be published after publication of this Manual)
2. Firkins, A. and Hogan, T.J., "Bolting of Steel Structures", Third Edition, 1990.

GENERAL REFERENCES:
10. Owens, G.W. and Cheal, B.D., "Structural Steelwork Connections", Butterworths, London, 1989.
11. Kulak, G.L., Fisher, J.W. and Struik, J.H.A., "Guide to Design Criteria for Bolted and Riveted Joints", Second
Edition, John Wiley, New York, 1987.
12a Pask, J.W., "Manual on Connections for Beam and Column Construction", British Constructional Steelwork
Association, First Edition, 1982.
12b Pask, J.W., "Manual on Connections, Vol. 1 - Joints in Simple Construction", CONSTRADO, 1988.
13. Holmes, M. and Martin, L.H., "Analysis and Design of Structural Connections", Ellis Horwood Ltd,
Chichester, 1983.
14. Howlett, J.H., Jenkins, W.M. and Stainsby, R. (eds), "Joints in Structural Steelwork", Proceedings on
International Conference, Teeside Polytechnic, April 1981, Pentech Press, 1981.
15. McGuire, W., "Steel Structures", (Chapter 6 Connections), Prentice Hall, 1968.
16. American Institute of Steel Construction, "Manual of Steel Construction". 16a - Eighth edition, 1980.16b -
LRFD edition, 1986.
17. American Society of Civil Engineers, "Plastic Design in Steel - A Guide and Commentary", ASCE Manuals
and Reports on Engineering Practice No. 41, Second Edition, 1971, ASCE, New York.
18. Blodgett, O., "Design of Welded Structures", The James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, Fifth Printing,
1972.
19. Steel Construction institute/British Constructional Steelwork Association, "Joints in Simple Construction,
Volume 1: Design Methods", 1991.

STANDARDS AUSTRALIA:
20. AS 1110 - "ISO Metric Hexagon Precision Bolts and Screws", 1984.
21. AS 1111 - "ISO Metric Hexagon Commercial Bolts and Screws", 1980.
22. AS 1112 — "ISO Metric Hexagon Nuts, Including Thin Nuts, Slotted Nuts and Castle Nuts", 1980.
23. AS 1252 ~ "High Strength Steel Bolts with Associated Nuts and Washers for Structural Engineering", 1983.
24. AS 1275 - "Metric Screw Threads for Fasteners", 1985.
25. AS 1553 - "Covered Electrodes for Welding"
AS 1553.1 - "Part 1: Low carbon steel electrodes for manual metal-arc welding of carbon and
carbon-manganese steels", 1983.
26. AS 1554 - "SAA Structural Steel Welding Code"
AS 1554.1 - "Part 1: Welding of steel structures", 1991.
27. AS 1559 - "Fasteners - Bolts, Nuts and Washers for Tower Construction", 1986.
28. AS 1594-"Hot-rolled Steel Flat Products", 1992.
29. AS 1858 - "Electrodes and Fluxes for Submerged-arc Welding".
AS 1858.1 - "Part 1: Carbon steels and carbon-manganese steels", 1986.
30. AS 2203 - "Cored Electrodes for Arc-Welding".
AS 2203.1 - "Part 1: Ferritic Steel Electrodes", 1990.
31. AS 2717 - "Welding - Electrodes - Gas Metal Arc".
AS 2717.1 - "Part 1: Ferritic steel electrodes", 1984.
32. AS 3678 - "Structural Steel - Hot rolled Plates, Floor-Plates and Slabs", 1990.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 289

 33. AS 3679 - "Structural Steel"
AS 3679.1 - "Part 1: Hot rolled Bars and Sections", 1990.
AS 3679.2 - "Part 2: Welded Sections", 1991.
34. AS 4100 - "Steel Structures", 1990.
35. AS 4100 - Supplement 1 - "Steel Structures - Commentary", 1990.
36. AS 1101.3-"Graphical Symbols for General Engineering - Part 3 Welding and Non-Destructive
Examination", 1987.
37. AS 2812 - "Welding, Brazing and Cutting of Metals - Glossary of Terms", 1985.
38. AS 3600 - "Concrete Structures (Limit State Design)", 1988.

REFERENCES RELATED TO AUSTRALIAN TESTING OF STANDARDIZED CONNECTIONS

40. Bennetts, I.D., Thomas, I.R. and Grundy, P., "Shear Connections for Beams to Columns", Institution of
Engineers Australia, Metal Structures Conference, 1978, Proceedings, p. 70.
41. Mansell, D.S. and Pham, L, "Testing of Standardized Connections", Institution of Engineers Australia, Metal
Structures Conference 1981, Proceedings, p. 107.
42. Pham, Land Mansell, D.S., "Testing of Standardized Connections", Australian Welding Research, Voi. 11,
December 1982, p. 15.
43. Pham, L, "Strength of Web Side Plate Connection with Revised Standardized Web Side Plate", Australian
Institute of Steel Construction, Third Conference on Steel Developments, 1985, Proceedings, p. 44.
44. Patrick, M., Thomas, I.R. and Bennetts, I.D., "Testing of Web Side Plate Connections", Pacific Structural
Steel Conference, Proceedings, Auckland, N.Z. 1986, Vol. 2, p. 95. Also in Australian Welding Research,
AWRA, Dec, 1986, pp. 62-75.
SPECIFIC REFERENCES REFERRED TO IN THE COMMENTARY - SECTIONS 5.1 TO 5.17

ANGLE SEAT CONNECTION - 5.1:

1.1 Lyse, I. and Schreiner, N., "An investigation of Welded Seat Angie Connections", Welding Journal, Vol. 14,
No. 2, Feb. 1935, Suppl. p. 1.
1.2 Lyse, I, and Stewart, D., "A Photoelastic Study of Bending in Welded Seat Angle Connections", Welding
Journal, Vol. 14, No. 2, Feb. 1935, Supp. p. 16.
1.3 Garrett, J.H. and Brockenbrough, R.L, "Design Loads for Seated-Beam Connections in LRFD’, American
Institute of Steel Construction, Engineering Journal, Vol. 23 No. 2,1986, p. 84.
1.4 Roeder, C.W. and Dailey, R.H., "The Results of Experiments on Seated Beam Connections", Engineering
Journal, American institute of Steel Construction, Third Quarter, 1989, p. 90.
1.5 Blodgett, O., "Design of Welded Structures", The James F. Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, Fifth Printing,
1972.

FLEXIBLE END PLATE CONNECTION - 5.3:

3.1 Kennedy, D.J.L, "Moment-Rotation Characteristics of Shear Connections", American Institute of Steel
Construction, Engineering Journal, Vol. 6 No. 4, Oct. 1969, p. 105.
3.2 Van Dalen, K, and MacIntyre, J.R., "Behaviour of Clipped End Plate Connections", Proceedings, Canadian
Structural Engineering Conference (9th), Toronto 1984, Paper 4, pp. 1-19.

ANGLE CLEAT CONNECTION -5.4:

4.1 Munse, W.H., Bell, W.G. and Chesson, E., "Behaviour of Riveted and Bolted Beam-to-Column
Connections", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 85, No. ST3, March 1959, p. 29.
4.2 Lewitt, C., Chesson, E. and Munse, W., "Restraint Characteristics of Flexible Riveted and Bolted
Beam-to-Column Connections", Univ. of Illinois Engineering Exp. Station, Bulletin 500,1969.
4.3 Lipson, S.P., "Single-Angle and Single-Plate Beam Framing Connections", Canadian Structural Engineering
Conference. Proc (1st), University of Toronto, 1968, p. 141.
4.4 Lipson, S.L, "Single-Angle Welded-Bolted Connections", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103
No. ST3, March 1977, p. 559.

290 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

WEB SIDE PLATE CONNECTION - 5.5:
5.1 Richard, R.M., Gillett, P.E, Kriegh, J.D. and Lewis, B.A., "The Analysis and Design of Single Plate Framing
Connections”, Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 17 No. 2 1980 p 38
5.2 Richard, R.M., Kriegh, J.D. and Hormby, D.E, "Design of Single Plate Framing Connections with A307
Bolts", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vo!. 19 No. 4,1982, p. 209
5.3 Stiemer, S.F., Wong, H.H. and Ho, A., "Ultimate Capacity of Single Plate Connectors", Proceedings, Pacific
Steel Conference, Auckland, N.Z., 1986, Vol. 2 p. 117.
5.4 Hormby, D.E., Richard, R.M., and Kriegh, J.D., "Single Plate Framing Connections with Grade 50 Steel and
Composite Construction", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction Vol 21 No 3
1984, p. 125.
5.5 Astaneh, A., Call, S.M., and McMullin, K.M., "Design of Single Plate Shear Connections", Engineering
Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 26 No. 1, 1989, p. 21.
5.6 Abolitz, A.L and Warner, M.E., "Bending Under Seated Connections", Engineering Journal, American
Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 2 No. 1,1965, p. 1.
5.7 Hoptay, J.M. and Ainso, H., "An Experimental Look at Bracket-Loaded Webs", Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 18 No. 1,1981, p. 1.
5.8 Hopper, B.E., Batson, G.B. and Ainso, H., "Bracket Loaded Webs with Low Slenderness Ratios",
Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 22 No. 1,1985, p. 11.
5.9 McCormick, M.M. and Lay, M.G., "Steel Structures - Part 4, Connections", BHP Melbourne Research
Laboratories, Report MRL 39/2, Final Draft dated 25/02/1975.
5.10 American Institute of Steel Construction, "Engineering for Steel Construction", Chicago, 1984.

STIFF SEAT CONNECTION - 5.6:

6.1 Bradford, M.A., Bridge, R.Q. andTrahair, N.S., "Worked Examples for Steel Members-Limit States Edition
AS 4100 - 1990", Australian Institute of Steel Construction, 1990.
6.2 Australian Institute of Steel Construction, "Design Capacity Tables for Structural Steel", 1991.

WELDED BEAM-TO-COLUMN MOMENT CONNECTION - 5.7:

7.1 Fielding, D.J. and Huang, J.S. "Shear in Steel Beam-to-Column Connections", (Welding Research
Supplement), Welding Journal, American Welding Society, Vol. 50 No. 7, July 1971, p. 313-s.
7.2 Graham, J.D., Sherbourne, A.N. and Khabbaz, R.N., "Welded Interior Beam-to-Co!umn Connections",
American Institute of Steel Construction, 1959.
7.3 BHP Structural Steel Design Sheets, "Maximum Loads due to Bearing - Sheet 1.111981," Maximum Loads
due to (Local) Web Buckling - Sheet 1.121981", Need for Web Stiffeners at Connections - Sheet 6.21981",
"Design of Web Stiffeners at Connections - Sheet 6.4 1981."
7.4 Sherbourne, A.N., "New Developments in Steel Beam-to-Column Connexions", AISC Conference on Steel
Developments, Newcastle, 1973, p. 267.
7.5 Welding Research Council, Bulletin No. 188, Oct. 1973.
(1) "Behaviour and Design of Steel Beam-to-Column Moment Connections", J.S. Huang, W.F. Chen and
L.S. Beedle.
(2) 'Test of Fully-Welded Beam-to-Column Connection", J.E. Regec, J.S. Huang and W.F. Chen.
7.6 Fielding, D.J. and Chen, W.F., "Steel Frame Analysis and Connection Shear Deformation," Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Voi. 99 No. ST1, January 1973, p. 1.
7.7 Krawinkler, H., Bertero, V.V. and Popov, E.P., "Shear Behaviour of Steel Frame Joints", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 101 No. ST 11, November 1975, p. 2317.
7.8 Parfitt, J. and Chen, W.F., "Tests of Welded Steel Beam-to-Column Moment Connections", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 102 No. ST1, January 1976, p. 189.
7.9 Chen, W.F. and Newlin, D.E., "Column Web Strength in Beam-to-Column Connections", Technical Notes,
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 99 No. ST9, September 1973, p. 1978.
7.10 Mair, R.I., "Beam-to-Column Weld Efficiency in Steel Frames", BHP Tech. Bulletin, Vol. 22 (2), Nov. 1978,
p. 11.
7.11 Stockweli, F.W., "Yield Line Analysis of Column Webs with Welded Beam Connections", Engineering
Journal, American institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 11 No. 1, 1974, p. 12.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 291

7.12 Chen, W.F. and Rentschler, G.P., "Tests and Analysis of Beam-to-Column Web Connections", ASCE
Structural Division, National Structural Engineering Conference Proceedings, Methods of Structural
Analysis, Vol. n, 1976, p. 957.
7.13 Rentschler, G.P., Chen, W.F. and Driscoll, G.C., "Tests of Beam-to-Column Web Moment Connections"
Journal of Structural Division, ASCE, Voi. 106 No. ST5, May 1980, p. 1005.
7.14 Rentschler, G.P., Chen, W.F. and Driscoll, G.C., "Beam-to-Column Web Connection Details", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108 No. ST2, Feb. 1982, p. 393.
7.15 Driscoll, G.C. and Beedie, L.S., "Suggestions for Avoiding Beam-to-Column Web Connection Failure II

Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 19 No. 1,1982, p. 16.
7.16 Chen, W.F. and Patel, K.V., "Static Behaviour of Beam-to-Column Moment Connections", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 107 No. ST9, Sept 1981, p. 1815.
7.17 Witteveen, J., Stark, J.W.B, Biljaard, F.S.K. and Zoetemeijer, P., "Welded and Bolted Beam-to-Column
Connections", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Voi. 108 No. ST2, Feb. 1982, p. 433. .'
7.18 Macdonald, B.D., "Moment Connections Weakened by Laminations", Journal of the Structural Division, .,;
ASCE, Voi. 105 No. ST8, Aug. 1979, p. 1605. ■

7.19 Sherbourne, A.N. and Murthy, D.N.S., "Plastic Design of Beam-Column Moment Connections",
Proceedings, 5th Canadian Structural Engineering Conference, 1976, (Paper 12). ;
'
BOLTED BEAM-TO-COLUMN END PLATE CONNECTION - 5.8:
8.1 Agerskov, H., "High Strength Bolted Connections Subject to Prying", Journal of the Structural Division,
ASCE, Vol. 102 No. ST1, January 1976, p. 161.
8.2 Discussion on Reference 8.1 by Krishnamurthy, N., Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103 No.
ST1, January 1977, p. 299.
8.3 Agerskov, H., "Analysis of Bolted Connections Subject to Prying", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE,
Vol. 103 No. ST 11, Nov. 1977, p. 2145.
8.4 Agerskov, H., "Bolted End-Plate Connections in Steel Structures", in Bjorhovde, R. (Editor) Connections in
Steel Structures - Behaviour Strength and Design, Published by Elsevier, 1987, pp 52 - 59.
8.5 Bahia, C.S., Graham, J. and Martin, L.H., "Experiments on Rigid Beam-to-Coiumn Connections Subjectto
Shear and Bending Forces", Proc. Int. Conf. Joints in Structural Steelwork, Teeside Polytechnic, Pentech
Press, 1981, pp. 6.37-6.56.
8.6 Bailey, J.R., "Strength and Rigidity of Bolted Beam-to-Column Connections", Conference on Joints in
Structures, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, July 1970. (Also BISRA Report, British Steel Corp. 1970).
8.7 Beedie, L.S. and Christopher, R., "Tests of Steel Moment Connections", American Institute of Steel
Construction, Engineering Journal, Vol. 1 No. 4, Oct 1964, p. 116.
8.8 Bijlaard, F.S.K., "Requirements for Welded and Bolted Beam-to-Column Connections in Non-Sway
Frames", Proc. Int. Conf. Joints in Steel Structures, Teeside Polytechnic, Pentech Press, 1981, pp2.119-
2.137.
8.9 Douty, R.T. and McGuire, W., "High Strength Bolted Moment Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 91, No. ST2, April 1965, p. 101.
8.10 Grundy, P, Thomas, I.R. and Bennetts, I.D., "The Design of Beam-to-Column Moment Connections Using
End Plates and High Strength Bolts", AISC Second Conference on Steel Developments, May 1977,
Melbourne, Proceedings p. 76.
8.11 Grundy, P., Thomas, I.R. and Bennetts, I.D., "Beam-to-Column Moment Connections", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 106 No. ST1, January 1980, p. 313.
8.12 Hendrick, A. and Murray, T.M., "Column Web Compression Strength at End-Plate-Connections",
Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 21 No. 3, 1984, p. 161.
8.13 Horne, M.R. and Morris, L.J., "Plastic Design of Low Rise Frames", Granada, 1981, Chapter 5.
8.14 Kato, B. and McGuire, W., "Analysis of T-Stub Flange-to-Column Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 99 No. ST5, May 1973, p. 865.
8.15 Krishnamurthy, N., "Steel Bolted End-Plate Connections", 2nd International Conference on Finite Element
Methods in Engineering, Proceedings, University of Adelaide, Dec. 1976, Paper 23.
8.16 Krishnamurthy, N., "A Fresh Look at Bolted End-Plate Behaviour and Design", Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 15 No. 2, 1978, p. 39.
8.17 Discussions on Ref. 8.16 by Agerskov, McGuire, Krishnamurthy, Engineering Journal, American Institute of
Steel Construction, Vol. 16 No. 2,1979.

292 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

8.18 Krishnamurthy, N., "From Research to Design in End-Plate Connections", Preprints, Metal Structures Conf
(6th), t.E. Aust, Brisbane 1983, p. 170.
8.19 Kennedy, N.A. Vinnakota, S. and Sherbourne, A.N., "The Split Tee Anology in Bolted Splices and
Beam-Column Connections", Proc. Int. Conf. Joints in Structural Steelwork, Teeside Polytechnic Pentech
Press, 1981, pp. 2.138-2.157.
8.20 Mann, A.P. and Morris, J.L, "Limit Design of Extended End-Plate Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 105 No. ST3, March 1979, p. 511.
8.21 Discussion on Ref. 8.20 by Krishnamurthy and Closure by Authors, Vol. 106 No. ST2, Feb 1980 p 573
and Vol. 107 No. ST4, April 1981, p. 709.
8.22 Morris, L.J. and Newsome, C.P., "Bolted Corner Connection Subjected to an Out-of-Balance Moment-The
Behaviour of the Column Web Panel", Proc. Int. Conf. Joints in Steel Structures, Teeside Polytechnic,
Pentech Press, 1981, pp 6.3 - 6.21.
8.23 Moore, D.B. and Sims, P.A.C., "The Influence of Backing Plates on the Behaviour of Extended End-Plate
Connections", U.K. Dept. Environment, Building Research Establishment Note, No. 179/83,1983.
8.24 Murray, T.M., "Design Guide for Extended End-Plate Moment Connections", American Institute of Steel
Construction, Steel Design Guide 4, 1990.
8.25 Nair, R.S., Birkemoe, P.C. and Munse, W.H., "Behaviour of Bolts in Tee Connections Subject to Prying
Action", (Jniv. of Illinois, Dept, of Civil Eng. Struct. Research Series 353, Sept. 1969.
8.26 Nair, R.S., Birkemoe, P.C. and Munse, W.H., "High Strength Bolts Subject to Tension and Prying", Journal
of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vof. 100 No. ST2, February 1974, p. 351.
8.27 Discussion on Reference 8.26: Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 101 No. ST1, January 1975,
by Krishnamurthy, N., p. 335, and Fiesenheiser, E.l. and Dudek, R.A, p. 337.
8.28 Closure of Discussion on Reference 8.26 by Nair, R.S., Birkemoe, P.C. and Munse, W.H., Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 101 No. ST7, July 1975, p. 1608.
8.29 Packer, J.A. and Morris, L.J., "A Limit State Design Method for the Tension Region of Bolted Beam-Column
Connections", The Structural Engineer, Vol. 55 No. 10, October 1977, p. 446.
8.30 Sherbourne, A.N., "Bolted Beam to Column Connexions", The Structural Engineer, Vol. 39 No. 6, June 1961,
p. 203.
8.31 Surtees, J.O. and Mann, A.P., "End Plate Connections in Plastically Designed Structures", Conference on
Joints in Structures, Proceedings, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, July 1970.
Tarpy, T.S. and Cardinal, J.W., "Behaviour of Semi-Rigid Beam-to-Column End Plate Connections", Proc.
Int. Conf. Joints in Structural Steelwork, Teeside Polytechnic, Pentech Press, 1981, pp. 2.3-2.25.
8.33 Thornton, W.A., "Prying Action - A General Treatment", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel
Construction, Vol. 22 No. 2,1985, pp 67 - 75.
8.34 Witteveen, J., Stark, J.W.B., Bijlaard, F.S. and Zoetemeijer, P., "Welded and Bolted Beam-to-Column
Connections", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108 No. ST2, Feb 1982, pp 433 - 455.
8.35 Zoetemeijer, P., "A Design Method for the Tension Side of Statically Loaded Bolted Beam-to-Column
Connections", Heron, Vol. 20 No. 1,1974, Stevin Laboratory/IBBC Institute TNO (Joint Eds).
8.36 Murray, T.M. and Kukreti, A.R., "Design of 8-Bo!t Stiffened Moment End Plates", Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 25 No. 2,1988, pp 45-53.
8.37 Kukreti, A.R., Ghassemieh, M. and Murray, T.M., "Behaviour and Design of Large-Capacity Moment End
Plates", Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 116 No. 3, March 1990, pp 809 - 828.
8.38 Curtis, L.E. and Murray, T.M., "Column Flange Strength at Moment End-Plate Connections", Engineering
Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 26 No. 2,1989, pp 41 -50.
8.39 Mann, A.P. and Morris, L.J., "Significance of Lack of Fit - Flush Beam-Column Connections", Joints in
Structural Steelwork, Proc. Int. Conf. Teeside Polytechnic.Pentech Press, 1981, pp 6.22 - 6.35.
8.40 Zoetemeijer, P.f "Semi-Rigid Bolted Beam-to-Beam Column Connections with Stiffened Column Flanges
and Flush-end Plates", Joints in Structural Steelwork, Proc. Int. Conf. Teeside Polytechnic, Pentech Press,
1981, pp 2.99-2.119.
8.41 Phillips, J. and Packer, J.A., "The Effect of Plate Thickness on Flush End-Piate Connections", Joints in
Structural Steelwork, Proc. Int. Conf. Teeside Polytechnic, Pentech Press, 1981, pp. 6.77-6.92.
8.42 Jenkins, W.M., C.S. Tong and Prescott, A.T., "Moment-Transmitting Endplate Connections in Steel
Construction, and a Proposed Basis for Flush Endplate Design", The Structural Engineer, Vol 64A No. 5,
May 1986, pp 121 -132.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 293

WELDED SPLICE-5.9:
9.1 Popov, E.P. and Stephen, R.M., "Capacity of Columns with Splice Imperfections", Engineering Journal
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 14 No. 1,1977, p. 16.
9.2 Hayes, J.M., "Effect of Initial Eccentricities on Column Performance and Capacity", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Voi 83 No. ST6, Nov. 1957, paper 1440.
9.3 Popov, E.P. and Stephen, R.M., "Tensile Capacity of Partial Penetration Groove Welds", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 103 No. ST9, September 1977, p. 1721.
9.4 Stetina, H.J., "Are Tier Building Column Splices Designed?", Engineering Journal, American Institute of
Steel Construction, Vol. 5 No. 4, Oct. 1968, p. 144.

BOLTED SPLICE-5.10:
10.1 Douty, R.T. and McGuire, W., "High Strength Bolted Moment Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol 91 No. ST2, April 1965, p. 101.
10.2 Yura, J.A., Hansen, M.A. and Frank, K.H., "Bolted Splice Connections with Undeveloped Fillers", Journal
of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol 108 No. ST 12, Dec 1982, pp 2837 - 2849.
10.3 Bresler, B., Lin, T.Y. and Scalzi, B., "Design of Steel Structures", Second Edition, John Wiley, 1968.
10.4 CONSTRADO, "Steel Designers Manual", Fourth Edn., London, Crosby - Lockwood, 1972.
10.5 American Institute of Steel Construction, "Engineering for Steel Construction", 1986.
10.6 Green, D.L. and Kulak, G.L., "Design of Web-Flange Beam or Girder Splices", Struct. Eng. Report 148, Dept
of Civil Eng., Univ of Alberta, May 1987.

BRACING CLEAT-5.11:
11.1 Gaylord, E.H. and Gaylord, C.N., "Design of Steel Structures", McGraw-Hill, New York, 2nd Edition, 1972.
11.2 Whitmore, R.E., "Experimental Investivation of Stresses in Gusset Plates", University of Tennessee, Eng.
Exp Station Bulletin 16,1952.
11.3 Vasarhelyi, D.D., "Tests of Gusset Plate Models", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 97 No. ST2,
February 1971, p. 665.
11.4 Kapp, R.H., "Yield Line Analysis of a Web Connection in Direct Tension", Engineering Journal, American
Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 11 No. 2,1974, p. 38.
11.5 Anand, S.C. and Bertz, R.F., "Analysis and Design of a Web Connection in Direct Tension", Engineering
Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 18 No. 2,1981, p. 48.
11.6 Richard, R.M., Rabern, D.A., Hormby, D.E. and Williams, G.C., "Analytical Models for Steel Connections",
Proc. W.H. Munse Symposium: Behaviour of Metal Structures-Research to Practice", ASCE, 1983,p. 128.
11.7 Bjorhovde, R. and'Chakrabarti, S.K., "Tests of Full-Size Gusset Plate Connections", Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 111 No. 3, March 1985, p. 667.
11.8 Hardash, S.G. and Bjorhovde, R., "New Design Criteria for Gusset Plates in Tension", Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 22 No. 2, 1985, p. 77.
11.9 Kitipornchai, S. and Traves, W.H., "Design of Cap-Cleat Plate End Connections for Tubes", University of
Queensland, Dept, of Civil Engineering, Research Report No. CE68, Feb. 1986.
11.10 Kitipornchai, S. and Traves, W.H., "Welded-Tee End Connections for Circular Hollow Tubes", Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Voi. 115 No. 12, Dec 1989, pp 3155-3170.
11.11 Woolcock, S.T. and Kitipornchai, S. "Tension Members and Self-weight", Steel Construction, Australian
Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 19. No. 1, May 1985.
11.12 Thornton, W.A., "Bracing Connections for Heavy Construction", Engineering Journal, American institute of
Steel Construction, Third Quarter, 1984, pp. 139 -148.
11.13 Yamamoto, K., Akiyama, N. and Okumura, T., "Elastic Analysis of Gusseted Truss Joints", Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 111 No. 12, Dec 1985, pp 2545-2563.
11.14 Yamamoto, K., Akiyama, N. and Okumura, T., "Buckling Strengths of Gusseted Truss Joints", Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114 No. 3, March 1988, pp 575 - 590.
11.15 Gross, J.L., "Experimental Study of Gusseted Connections", Proceedings, AISC (US) National Steel
Construction Conference, Paper 11,1985.
11.16 Richard, R., "Analysis of Large Bracing Connection Designs for Heavy Construction", Proceedings, AISC
(US) 1986 National Engineering Conf., Nashville Tenn., Paper 31, 1986.

294 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

12.1 American Institute of Steel Construction, "Engineering for Steel Construction", 1986.
12.2 Ricker, D.T., "Some Practical Aspects of Column Base Selection", Engineering Journal, American Institute
of Steel Construction, Vol. 26 No. 3,1989, pp 81 - 89.
12.3 DeWolf, J.T., "Column Base Plates", American Institute of Steel Construction, Design Guide Series No 1
1990. (Publication also contains Ref. 12.2)
12.4 DeWolf, J.T., "Column Anchorage Design", American Institute of Steel Construction, National Eng Conf.,
New Orleans, Proceedings, Paper 15, April/May 1987.
12.5 Fling, R.S., "Design of Steel Bearing Plates", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction
Vol. 7 No. 2, April 1970, pp 37 - 40.
12.6 Stockweli, F.W., "Preliminary Base Plate Selection", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel
Construction, Vol. 12 No. 3,1975, pp 92-93.
12.7 Stockweli, F.W., "Base Plate Design", American Institute of Steel Construction, National Eng Conf,
Proceedings, Paper 49, April/May 1987.
12.8 Murray, T.M., "Design of Lightly Loaded Steel Column Base Plates", Engineering Journal, American Institute
of Steel Construction, Vol. 20 No. 4, 1983, pp 143 - 152.
12.9 DeWolf, J.T., "Axially Loaded Column Base Plates", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 104 No.
STS, May 1978, pp 781 - 794.
12.10 Blodgett, O., "Design of Welded Structures", The James F Lincoln Arc Welding Foundation, Fifth Printing,
1972, Section 3.3.
12.11 Woolcock, S.T., Kitipornchai, S. and Bradford, M.A., "Limit State Design of Portal Frame Buildings", Second
Edition, Australian Institute of Steel Construction, 1993.
12.12 DeWolf, J.T. and Sarisley, E.F., "Column Base Plates with Axial Loads and Moments", Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 106 No. ST11, Nov 1980, pp 2167-2184.
12.13 Thambiratnam, D.P., Paramasivam, P. and Krishnamurthy, N., "Experimental and Analytical Study on
Eccentrically Loaded Base Plates", Institution of Engineers Australia, 7th Metals Structures Conf., Papers,
May 1985, pp 138-142.
12.14 Thambiratnam, D.P. and Paramasivam, P., "Base Plates Under Axial Loads and Moments", Journal of
Structural Engineering, ASGE, Vol. 112 No. 5, May 1986, pp 1166-1181.
12.15 Thambiratnam, D.P. and Paramasivam, P, "Experimental investigation of Column Base Plates Under
Eccentric Loads", International Conference on Steel Structures, Singapore, 1984, Pre-prints, pp 311 -323.
12.16 Hon, K.K. and Meichers, R.E., "Initial Investigation of Column Base Behaviour", Pacific Structural Steel
Conf., Proceedings, Auckland 1986, Vol 2, pp 73 - 79.
12.17 Hon, K.K. and Meichers R.E., "Moment-Rotation Curves for Pinned Column Bases", The Structural
Engineer, Vol 65B No. 3, Sept 1987, pp 54-59.
12.18 Meichers, R.E., "Modelling of Column-Base Behaviour", in Connections in Steel Structures, Elsevier, 1988,
p. 150.
12.19 Picard, A. and Beaulieu, D., "Column Base Plate Connections", in Connections in Steel Structures, Elsevier,
1988, p. 252.
12.20 Concrete Society/British Constructional Steelwork Association/Constructional Steel Research and
Development Organisation, "Holding Down Systems for Steel Stanchions", 1980.
12.21 American Concrete Institute, "Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety Related Structures", ACI349 -1976,
Manual of Concrete Practice.
12.22 Cannon, R.W., Godfrey, D.A. and Moreadith, F.L., "Guide to the Design of Anchor Bolts and Other Steel
Embedments", Concrete International, July 1981, pp 28 - 41.
12.23 Shipp, J.G. and Hainger, E.R., "Design of Headed Anchor Bolts", Engineering Journal, American Institute
of Steel Construction, Vol. 20 No. 2,1983, pp 58 - 69.
12.24 Marsh M.L. and Burdette, E.G., "Multiple Bolt Anchorages: Method for Determining the Effective Projected
Area of Overlapping Stress Cones", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 22
No. 1,1985, pp 29-32.
12.25 Marsh, M.L. and Burdette, E.G., "Anchorage of Steel Building Components to Concrete", Engineering
Journal, American institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 22 No. 1, 1985, pp 33 - 39.
12.26 Ueda, T., Kitiporncahi, S. and Ling, K., "An Experimental investigation of Anchor Bolts Under Shear",
University of Queensland, Dept of Civil Eng., Research Report No. CE93, Oct. 1988.

DSC/04—1994 A1SC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 295

13.1 Fisher, J.W. and Beedie, L.S., "Criteria for Designing Bearing-Type Bolted Joints", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 91 No ST5, October 1965, p. 129.
13.2 Fisher, J.W. and Kulak, G.L. "Tests of Bolted Butt Splices", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vo! 94
No. ST 11, Nov. 1968, p. 2609.
13.3 Bendigo, R.A., Hansen, R.M. and Rumpf, J.L. "Long Bolted Joints", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE
Vol. 89 No. ST6, Dec. 1963, p. 187.

BOLT GROUPS-5.14:
14.1 Higgins, T.R., "Treatment of Eccentrically-Loaded Connections in the AiSC Manual", Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 8 No. 2, April 1971, p. 52.
14.2 Abolitz. A.L., "Plastic Design of Eccentrically Loaded Fasteners", Engineering Journal, American Institute
of Steel Construction, Vol. 3 No. 3, July 1966, pp 122- 132.
14.3 Shermer, C.L, "Plastic Behaviour of Eccentrically Loaded Connections", Engineering Journal, American
Institute of Steel Construction, Vol 8 No. 2, April 1971, p. 48.
14.4 Discussion on Reference 14.3 by G.L. Kulak and C.L. Shermer, Engineering Journal, American Institute of
Steel Construction, Vol. 8 No. 4, October 1971, p. 144.
14.5 Surtees, J.O., Gildersleeve, C.P. and Watts, C.J., "A General Tabular Method for Elastic and Plastic Analysis
of Eccentrically Loaded Fastener Groups". The Structural Engineer. Vol. 59A. No. 6, June 1981, pp. 202-
208.
14.6 Surtees, J.O. and Pape, B.D., "Bolt Force Distribution in Friction Grip Eccentric Shear Joints", Proc. Instn
Civil Engineers, Part 2, 1979, No. 67, Sept., pp 801 -816.
14.7 Crawford, S.F. and Kulak, G.L, "Eccentrically Loaded Bolted Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 97 No. ST3, March 1971, p. 785.
14.8 Kulak, G.L, "Behaviour of Eccentrically Loaded Connections", Canadian Structural Engineering
Conference, Proc. (2nd), University of Toronto, 1970 (Paper 9).
14.9 Kulak, G.L, "Eccentrically Loaded Slip-Resistant Connections", Engineering Journal, American Institute of
Steel Construction, Vol. 12 No. 2,1975, p. 52.
14.10 Orr, D.M., "The Strength of Eccentrically Loaded Shear Connections", Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, Vol. No. 1, Jan 1982, pp 3 - 9.
14.11 Rutenberg, A., "Nonlinear Analysis of Eccentric Bolted Connections", Engineering Journal, American
Institute of Steel Construction, Vol, 21 No. 4,1984, p. 227.
14.12 Bahia, C.S. and Martin, L.H., "Bolt Groups Subject to Torsion and Shear"., Proc. Instn Civil Engineers, Part
2, 1980, No. 69, June, pp 473 - 489.
14.13 Bahia, C.S. and Martin, L.H., "Experiments on Stressed and Unstressed Bolt Groups Subject to Torsion and
Shear", Proc. inter. Conf. on Joints in Structural Steelwork, Teeside Polytechnic 1981, Pentech Press, 1981,
pp. 1.17-1.36.
14.14 Thomas, I.R., Bennetts, l.D. and Elward, S.J., "Eccentrically Loaded Bolted Connections”, Papers, Third
Conference on Steel Developments Australian Institute of Steel Construction, Melbourne 1985, p. 37.
14.15 Thomas, I.R. and Bennetts, I.D., "Bearing Strength of Bolted Connections", Metal Structures Conference,
I. E. Aust., Newcastle, Preprints, 1981, p. 85.

WELDS-5.15:
15.1 Bennetts, l.D. and Pham. L., "Reliability Study of Fillet Welded Connections", Report No.
MRL/PS215/83/007. Melbourne Research Laboratories, BHP Co Ltd., August 1983.
15.2 Pham, L. and Bennetts, l.D., "Reliability Study of Fillet Weld Design", Civil Engineerng Transactions.
Institution of Engineers Australia, Vol. CE26 No. 2, May 1984, pp. 119 - 124.
15.3 Lay, M.G., "Fillet Weld Design Stresses in AS 1250", Proceedings, 23rd National Conference of the
Australian Welding Institute, Hobart, Sept, 1975, pp 87 - 92.
15.4 Butler, L.J. and Kulak, G.L., "Strength of Fillet Welds as a Function of Direction of Load", Welding Journal
Welding Research Council, Vol. 36 No. 5, May 1971, pp 231s - 234s.
15.5 Kamtekar, A.G., "A New Analysis of the Strength of Some Simple Fillet Welded Connections", Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 2 No. 2, June 1982, pp. 33-45.

296 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 mm

WELD GROUPS-5.16:
16.1 Swannell, P., "Analytical Techniques for Welded Connections Loaded In-Plane by Moment and Shear"
"Welding 1975", 23rd National Conference of the Australian Welding Institute, Hobart, Sept 1975 p 43
16.2 Swannell, P. and Skewes, I.C., "The Design of Welded Brackets Loaded In-Plane: Elastic and Ultimate Load
Techniques", University of Queensland, Dept, of Civil Engineering Report, Australian Welding Research
Association, Research Contract No. 46, February 1977.
16.3 Dawe, J.L. and Kulak, G.L, "Welded Connections Under Combined Shear and Moment" Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 100 No. ST4, April 1974, p. 727.
16.4 Butler, L.J., Pal, S. and Kulak, G.L, "Eccentrically Loaded Welded Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 98 No. ST5, May 1972, p. 989.
16.5 Hogan, T.J. and Thomas, I.R., "Fillet Weld Design in the AISC Standardised Structural Connections", Steel
Construction, Australian Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 13 No. 1,1979, p. 16.
16.6 Swannell, P. and Skewes, I.C., "The Design of Welded Brackets Loaded In-Plane: Elastic and Ultimate Load
Techniques", Australian Welding Research, AWRA. Jan, 1979. pp 28 - 59.
16.7 Swannell, P. and Skewes, I.C., "The Design of Welded Brackets Loaded In-Plane: General Theoretical
Ultimate Load Techniques and Experimental Programme", Australian Welding Research, AWRA, April 1979,
pp 55 - 70.
16.8 Swannell, P., "Design of Fillet Weld Groups (Subject to Static Loading)", Steel Construction, Australian
Institute of Steel Construction. Vol. 13 No. 1, 1979, pp 2 -15.
16.9 Swannell, P, "Rational Design of Fillet Weld Groups", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol 107 No.
ST5. May 1981, pp 789 - 802.

16.10 Swannell, P, "Weld Group Behaviour", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 107 No. ST5, May
1981, pp 803-815.

CONNECTED MEMBERS - 5.17:

17.1 Cheng, J.R. and Yura, J.A., "Local Web Buckling of Coped Beams", Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol.
112 No. 10, Oct 1986, pp 2314 - 2331.
17.2 de Plessis, D.P., "Lateral-Torsional Buckling of End-Notched Steel Beams", International Colloquium on
Stability of Structures Under Static and Dynamic Loads, Structural Stability Research Council & Others,
Washington DC, May 1977, New York, American Society Civil Engrs, 1977.
17.3 Milek, W.A., "A Cautionary Note on Beam Copes", Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel
Construction, Vol. 17 No. 3,1980, p. 72.
17.4 Gupta, A.K., "Buckling of Coped Steel Beams", Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 110 No. 9,
Sept, 1984, p. 1977.
17.5 Cheng, J.R., Yura, J.A, and Johnson C.P., "Lateral Buckling of Coped Steel Beams", Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114 No. 1, Jan 1988, pp 1 - 15.
17.6 Cheng, J.R. and Yura, J.A., "Lateral Buckling Tests on Coped Steel Beams", Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 114 No. 1, Jan 1988, pp 16 - 30.
17.7 Birkemoe, P.C. and Gilmor, M.I., "Behaviour of Bearing Critical Double-Angie Beam Connections",
Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 15 No. 4,1978, p. 109.
17.8 Marsh, C., "Tear-Out Failure of Bolt Groups", Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 105 No. ST10,
October 1979, p. 2122.
17.9 Yura, J.A., Birkemoe, PC. and Rides, J.M., "Beam Web Shear Connections: An Experimental Study",
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108 No. ST2, Feb, 1982, p. 311.
17.10 Ricles, J.M. and Yura, J.A., "Strength of Double-Row Bolted-Web Connections", Journal of the Structural
Division, ASCE, Vol. 109 No. ST1, Jan. 1983, p. 126.
17.11 Hardash, S.G. and Bjorhovde, R., "New Design Criteria for Gusset Plates in Tension", Engineering Journal,
American Institute of Steel Construction, Vol. 22 No. 2, Second Quarter, 1985, pp 77 - 94.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 297

 [BLANK]

298 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 APPENDICES
PAGE
A DESIGN AIDS - BOLTS AND BOLT GROUPS 300
B DESIGN AIDS - WELDS AND WELD GROUPS 312
C GAUGE LINES FOR SECTIONS 318
D FORMULAE FOR SECTION PROPERTIES OF SINGLE
WEB COPED l SECTIONS 321
E DESIGN AIDS FOR RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODELS 323
F FORMULAE FOR SECTION PROPERTIES OF I SECTIONS
WITH HOLES 327
G PROJECTED AREA OF OVERLAPPING STRESS CONES
FOR ANCHOR BOLT GROUPS 329
H USER'S GUIDE FOR COMPUTER PROGRAM ‘LIMCOM’ 331

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 299

 APPENDIX A
DESIGN AIDS — BOLTS AND BOLT GROUPS
(All dimensions in mm or mm2 as appropriate)

TABLE A.1.1
EFFECTIVE AREAS OF BOLTS
Areas
Nom. Desig­
dia. nation As k0

core tensile shank

df AS 1275 stress

12 M12 76.2 84.3 113

16 M16 144 157 201
20 M20 225 245 314
24 M24 324 353 452
30 M30 519 561 706
36 M36 759 817 1016

TABLE A. 1.2
DIMEHSIONS OF COmERCIAL BOLTS
(AS 1111 s AS 1112g AS 1237)
BOLT NUT WASHER

Nom. Thread Thread Shank Width Width Height Width Width Height of Outside Nominal
dia. pitch run-out dia. across across of across across normal dia. thickness
flats corners head fiats corners nuts
max. nom. max. nom. ave. max. nom. ave. max.

M12 1.75 8.75 12 18 21 8 18 21 11 24 2.5

M16 2.0 10 16 24 28 10 24 28 15 30 3
M20 2.5 12.5 20 30 35 13 30 35 18 37 3
M24 3.0 15 24 36 42 15 36 42 21 44 4
M30 3.5 17.5 30 46 53 19 46 53 25 4
M36 4.0 20 36 55 63 23 55 63 30 5

TABLE A.1.3
DIMEHSIORS OF HIGH STRENGTH STRUCTURAL BOLTS
(AS 1252)
BOLT NUT WASHER

Nom. Thread Thread Shank Width Width Height Width Width Height of Outside Nominal
dia. pitch run-out dia. across across of across across normal dia. thickness
fiats corners head flats corners nuts
max. nom. max. nom. ave. max. nom. ave. max.

M16 2.0 6.0 16 27 31 10 27 31 17 34 4

M20 2.5 7.5 20 32 37 13 32 37 21 39 4
M24 3.0 9.0 24 41 47 15 41 47 25 50 4
M30 3.5 10.5 30 50 58 19 50 58 31 60 4
M36 4.0 12.0 36 60 69 23 60 69 37 72 4

300 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE A. 1.4
DIMENSIONS OF WRENCHES
DIMENSIONS OF OPEN ENDED WRENCHES
FOR DETERMINING ERECTION CLEARANCES
4.6/S AND 8.8/S CATEGORIES
(All dimensions in mm or mm2 as appropriate) Clearance
Bolt
Y
Size
z X Y Z

12 40 34 22
x < 16 52 45 28
20 65 56 35
24 78 67 41
30 99 85 53
AF—dimension across flats 36 118 102 63
to suit bolt

DIMENSIONS OF SOCKETS-HAND WRENCHES

FOR DETERMINING ERECTION CLEARANCES
8.8/TF AND 8.8/TB CATEGORIES
40
Normal Sockets*
Clearance
Bolt
Size C D
AlD C
16 50 38 25

B 20 60 45 30
r-»
J3)°to60 24 57
50 to 400
EXTENSION BAR
50to75 CLEARANCE * Deep Length sockets are also available
with greater length but same diameter as
20to55 above. Bolt diameters above M24 cannot be
u, -ru^- UNIVERSAL
tensioned with a hand wrench.
15 to 20 JOINT

DIMENSIONS OF IMPACT WRENCHES

FOR DETERMINING ERECTION CLEARANCES
8.8/TF AND 8.8/TB CATEGORIES

B A

Normal Wrenches to 450 54

some to
Heavy Wrenches 600 65 A
All dimensions in mm.
^7
Normal Sockets*
Clearance
Bolt 7*
Size C D E ]A

16 50 38 25
20 60 45 30
24 80 57 35

* Deep length sockets are also available with greater length

but same diameter as above.
DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 301
 TABLE A.2.1
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE
COMMERCIAL BOLTS-
GRADE 4.6
4.6/S BOLTING CATEGORY
(fuf = 400 MPa, </> = 0.8)
Shear Values (Single Shear) Important Note on 4.6/S Bolting Category
Values for the threads excluded case are provided i
Threads Threads for the sake of completeness.
Bolt Axial included excluded
However, in practical structural bolting situations it
Size Tension in Shear from Shear
is never worthwhile considering 4.6X/S category
Plane — N Plane
—8.8N/S is always more economic.
0V,n 0Vfx
Note: 1) Bearing/Plate Tearout Design Capacity.
kN kN kN
For all reasonable combinations of ply thickness,
27.0 15.1 22.4 bolt diameter and end distance, the design capacity
M12
for a ply in bearing (</>Vb) exceeds both $Vfn and
M16 50.2 28.6 39.9 4>VfX.

M20 78.4 44.6 62.3

M24 113 64.3 89.7

M30 180 103 140

M36 261 151 202

<t> = 0.8
<f> = 0.8
4.6N/S 4.6X/S

threads excluded from shear plane j

threads included in,shear plane

200

M36

150

M30
N.
100

cn M24
<

50 a. \
*0

&6
W

0 1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
TENSION, N*
tf£ (kN)

Shear — Tension Interaction Diagram

302 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE A.2.2
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE
HIGH STRENGTH STRUCTURAL BOLTS GRADE 8.8
8.8/S, 8.8/TB, 8.8/TF BOLTING CATEGORIES
(fuf = 830 MPa)
Single Shear Plate Tearout in kN Bearing in kN

Bolt Axial Threads Threads 0Vb for tp & ae of: 0Vb for tp
Size Tension included excluded
in Shear from
tp = 6 tp tp = 10 tp = 12 6 8 10
Plane Shear
Plane
0V,n 0V fx

kN kN kN 35 40 45 35 40 45 35 40 45 35 40 45

M16 104 59.3 82.7 113 151 189

M20 163 92.6 129 78 89 100 103 118 133 129 148166 155 177 199 142 189 236

M24 234 133 186 170 227 283

M30 373 214 291 213 283 354

3e ^ Semin 1.5 df

0 = 0.8 0 = 0.9 0 = 0.9

0 = 0.8
8.8N/S 8.8X/S fup = 410 MPa fup = 410 MPa

Note: The above table lists the design capacity of a ply in bearing for Grade 250 (fup « 410 MPa) steel only. For
listings and guidance on design capacities for ply failure in other grades of steel refer to Table A.2.3.

threads excluded from shear plane

threads included in shear plane
300 \

M30
250 i t

t .
200

M24
150
*>-
M20
cr 100
<
LU
X
to M16
50 is.

0 A
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
,*
TENSION, (kN)
tf

Shear — Tension Interaction Diagram

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 303

 TABLE A.2.3
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE
DESIGN BEARING CAPACITY, <jMb
PLATE TEAROUT CRITERIA (Eqn. 9.3.2.4(2) of AS 4100)
tp Form Steel t,up MAXIMUM VALUE OF <£Vb (<f> = 0.9) In kN
mm Grade (MPa) 3, in mm
25 30 35 40 45 50 55 SO 65 70
6 P 400 480 64.8 77.8 90.7 103.7 116.6 129.6 142.6 155.5 168.5 181.4
6 P 350 450 60.8 72.9 85.1 97.2 109.4 121.5 133.7 145.8 158.0 170.1
6 P 300 430 58.1 69.7 81.3 92.9 104.5 116.1 127.7 139.3 150.9 162.5
6 P 250 410 55.4 66.4 77.5 88.6 99.6 110.7 121.8 132.8 143.9 155.0
6 S 350 480 64.8 77.8 90.7 103.7 116.6 129.6 142.6 155.5 168.5 181.4
6 S 250 410 55.4 66.4 77.5 88.6 99.6 110.7 121.8 132.8 143.9 155.0
8 P 400 480 86.4 103.7 121.0 138.2 155.5 172.8 190.1 207.4 224.6 241.9
8 P 350 450 81.0 97.2 113.4 129.6 145.8 162.0 178.2 194.4 210.6 226.8
8 P 300 430 77.4 92.9 108.4 123.8 139.3 154.8 170.3 185.8 201.2 216.7
8 P 250 410 73.8 88.6 103.3 118.1 132.8 147.6 162.4 177.1 191.9 206.6
8 S 350 480 86.4 103.7 121.0 138.2 155.5 172.8 190.1 207.4 224.6 241.9
S 250 410 73.8 88.6 103.3 118.1 132.8 147.6 162.4 177.1 191.9 206.6
10 P 400 480 108.0 129.6 151.2 172.8 194.4 216.0 237.6 259.2 280.8 302.4
10 P 350 450 101.3 121.5 141.8 162.0 182.3 202.5 222.8 243.0 263.3 283.5
10 P 300 430 96.8 116.1 135.5 154.8 174.2 193.5 212.9 232.2 251.6 270.9
10 P 250 410 92.3 110.7 129.2 147.6 166.1 184.5 203.0 221.4 239.9 258.3
10 S 350 480 108.0 129.6 151.2 172.8 194.4 216.0 237.6 259.2 280.8 302.4
10 S 250 410 92.3 110.7 129.2 147.6 166.1 184.5 203.0 221.4 239.9 258.3
12 P 400 480 129.6 155.5 181.4 207.4 233.3 259.2 285.1 311.0 337.0 362.9
12 P 350 450 121.5 145.8 170.1 194.4 218.7 243.0 267.3 291.6 315.9 340.2
12 P 300 430 116.1 139.3 162.5 185.8 209.0 232.2 255.4 278.6 301.9 325.1
12 P 250 410 110.7 132.8 155.0 177.1 199.3 221.4 243.5 265.7 287.8 310.0
12 S 350 480 129.6 155.5 181.4 207.4 233.3 259.2 285.1 311.0 337.0 362.9
12 S 250 410 110.7 132.8 155.0 177.1 199.3 221.4 243.5 265.7 287.8 310.0
16 P 400 480 172.8 207.4 241.9 276.5 311.0 345.6 380.2 414.7 449.3 483.8
16 P 350 450 162.0 194.4 226.8 259.2 291.6 324.0 356.4 388.8 421.2 453.6
16 P 300 430 154.8 195.8 216.7 247.7 278.6 309.6 340.6 371.5 402.5 433.4
16 P 250 410 147.6 177.1 206.6 236.2 265.7 295.2 324.7 354.2 383.8 413.3
16 S 350 480 172.8 207.4 241.9 276.5 311.0 345.6 380.2 414.7 449.3 483.8
16 S 250 410 147.6 177.1 206.6 236.2 265.7 295.2 324.7 354.2 383.8 413.3
20 P 400 480 216.0 259.2 302.4 345.6 388.8 432.0 475.2 518.4 561.6 604.8
20 P 350 450 202.5 243.0 283.5 324.0 364.5 405.0 445.5 486.0 526.5 567.0
20 P 300 430 193.5 232.2 270.9 309.6 348.3 387.0 425.7 464.4 503.1 541.8
20 P 250 410 184.5 221.4 258.3 295.2 332.1 369.0 405.9 442.8 479.7 516.6
20 S 350 480 216.0 259.2 302.4 345.6 388.8 432.0 475.2 518.4 561.6 604.8
20 S 250 410 184.5 221.4 258.3 295.2 332.1 369.0 405.9 442.8 479.7 516.6
24 P 400 480 259.2 311,0 362.9 414.7 466.6 518.4 570.2 622.1 673.9 725.8
24 P 350 450 243.0 291.6 340.2 388.8 437.4 486.0 534.6 583.2 631.8 680.4
24 P 300 430 232.2 278.6 325.1 371.5 418.0 464.4 510,8 557.3 603.7 650.2
24 P 250 410 221.4 265.7 310.0 354.2 398.5 442.8 487.1 531.4 575.6 619.9
24 S 350 480 259.2 311.0 362.9 414.7 466.6 518.4 570.2 622.1 673.9 725.6
24 S 250 410 221.4 265.7 310.0 354.2 398.5 442.8 487.1 531.4 575.6 619.9
25 P 400 480 270.0 324.0 378.0 432.0 486.0 540.0 594.0 648.0 702.0 756.0
25 P 350 450 253.1 303.8 354.4 405.0 455.6 506.3 556.9 607.5 658.1 708.8
25 P 300 430 241.9 290.3 338.6 387.0 435.4 483.8 532.1 580.5 628.9 677.3
25 P 250 410 230.6 276.8 322.9 369.0 415.1 461.3 507.4 553.5 599.6 645.8
25 S 350 480 270.0 324.0 378.0 432.0 486.0 540.0 594.0 648.0 702.0 756.0
25 S 250 410 230.6 276.8 322.9 369.0 415.1 461.3 507.4 553.5 599.6 645.8
28 P 400 480 302.4 362.9 423.4 483.8 544.3 604.8 665.3 725.8 786.2 846.7
28 P 350 450 283.5 340.2 396.9 453.6 510.3 567.0 623.7 680.4 737.1 793.8
28 P 300 430 270.9 325.1 379.3 433.4 487.6 541.8 596.0 650.2 704.3 758.5
28 P 250 410 258.3 310.0 361.6 413.3 464.9 516.6 568.3 619.9 671.6 723.2
28 S 350 480 302.4 362.9 423.4 483.8 544.3 604.8 665.3 725.8 786.2 846.7
28 S 250 410 258.3 310.0 361.6 413.3 464.9 516.6 568.3 619.9 671.6 723.2
32 P 400 480 345.6 414.7 483.8 553.0 622.1 691.2 760.3 829.4 898.6 967.7
32 P 350 450 324.0 388.8 453.6 518.4 583.2 648.0 712.8 777.6 842.4 907.2
32 P 300 430 309.6 371.5 433.4 495.4 557.3 619.2 681.1 743.0 805.0 866.9
32 P 250 410 295.2 354.2 413.3 472.3 531.4 590.4 649.4 708.5 767.5 826.6
32 S 350 480 345.6 414.7 483.8 553.0 622.1 691.2 760.3 829.4 898.6 967.7
32 S 250 410 295.2 354.2 413.3 472.3 531.4 590.4 649.4 708.5 767.5 826.6
36 P 400 480 388.8 466.6 544.3 622.1 699.8 777.6 855.4 933.1 1010.9 1088.6
36 P 350 450 364.5 437.4 510.3 583.2 656.1 729.0 801.9 874.8 947.7 1020.6
36 P 300 430 348.3 418.0 487.6 557.3 626.9 696.6 766.3 835.9 905.6 975.2
36 P 250 410 332.1 398.5 464.9 531.4 597.8 664.2 730.6 797.0 863.5 929.9
36 S 350 480 388.8 466.6 544.3 622.1 699.8 777.6 855.4 933.1 1010.9 1088.6
36 S 250 410 332.1 398.5 464.9 531.4 597.8 664.2 730.6 797.0 863.5 929.9
40 P 400 480 432.0 518.4 604.8 691.2 777.6 864.0 950.4 1036.8 1123.2 1209.6
40 P 350 450 405.0 486.0 567.0 648.0 729.0 810.0 891.0 972.0 1053.0 1134.0
40 P 300 430 387.0 464.4 541.8 619.2 696.6 774.0 851.4' 928.8 1006.2 1083.6
40 P 250 410 369.0 442.8 516.6 590.4 664.2 738.0 811.8 885.6 959.4 1033.2
40 S 350 480 432.0 518.4 604.8 691.2 777.6 864.0 950.4 1036.8 1123.2 1209.6
40 S 250 410 369.0 442.8 516.6 590.4 664.2 738.0 811.8 885.6 959.4 1033.2

Note: 1) Check also ply local bearing failure criteria.

2) For intermediate values of ae use linear interpolation.
3) For the “Form” column of the table, P = Plate; S = Section.
4) The “Steel Grade” is that complying with Table 2.1 of AS 4100.

304 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE A.3
SERVICEABILITY LIMIT STATE
HIGH STRENGTH STRUCTURAL BOLTS
GRADE 8.8
8.8/TF BOLTING CATEGORY
Slip factor, n = 0.35
Number of effective interfaces, n„ = 1
Capacity factor, <p = 0.7 — for bolt serviceability limit state
(Clause 3.5.5 of AS4100)
Bolt N«, Bolt Tension 4>N„ = 0VS< Design Capacity in Shear (kN) for
Size at Installation
1 kh = 0.85 kh = 0.7

kN kN STANDARD HOLES OVERSIZE HOLES LONG SLOTTED HOLES

(+2 or+3 mm) SHORT SLOTTED HOLES

M16 95 66.5 23.3 19.8 16.3

M20 145 101 35.5 30.2 24.9
M24 210 147 51.5 43.7 36.0
M30 335 234 82.1 69.8 57.5

Note: N« is given in Clause 15.2.5.1 of AS 4100.

Shear — Tension Interaction Diagram

kh * 1.0

100

90

80

70

z 60

50
« 'fr w
>
40
c:
<
2 30
i/l

<
20
0
10
^4
0
0 50 100 150 200 250
*
TENSION Ntf ( kN )

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 305

 BOLT GROUPS LOADED IN-PLANE
For bolt groups subject to a combination of in-plane vertical shear, in-plane horizontal shear and in-plane bending
moment, expressions governing the design of such bolt groups have been derived in Section 5.14.
Tables A.4 to A.15 present values of terms used in these design expressions, which may be used to assist in design
calculations.
In addition, in certain instances, notably for a bolt group loaded by eccentric vertical in-plane shear force, a term Zb
has been derived in Section 5.14. Zb is, in effect, the number of effective bolts loaded in vertical shear in the bolt
group and this term can be used directly with the values given in Tables A.2.1, A.2.2 and A.3 of this Appendix to
determine the design capacity in eccentric vertical shear for a given bolt group. Values of Zb for the standard pitch
(70 mm) and gauges (70, 90,140 mm) are presented in Tables A.5, A.8, A.11, A.14. Such values are only valid for the
dimensions assumed. Also useful in the same instances are terms Ze, Zev. Zeb which are used to check plate tearout
due to components of forces on the extreme bolts. Values of Ze, Zev, Zeh for the same parameters as Zb are
presented in Tables A.6, A.9, A.12, A.15.
in the following expressions, <£Vf = design capacity of a single bolt in shear — strength limit state (see Tables
A.2.1, A.2.2)
(a) Single Bolt Column The design requirement is given by
2
+ V*bv I < 1.0
V'bh 2
bm
+
</>Md
m <f>Vdh $Vdv

where, Mdm, Vdh and Vdv are tabulated as functions of Vf in

-e Table A.4. In Section 5.14, it is shown that—
0Vdh/t£V{ = 0VdV/(£Vf = np
X n s (n + 1)
U • -®~ 4> Mdm/<£Vf = p p p
6
for np # 1
s: =o for np = 1
Jbv IfVth = OandMtm = I/b/.e(e = eccentricity of Vbv)
Vbv Zb ($Vf) becomes the design requirement
-< Hibrn
where Zb is a function of e, sp and np and is tabulated in
Table A.5.
0-
C (Xutpov or in Section 5.14, it is shown that:
BoLTG03UF np
Zb « for np ^ 1
6e 2
1+
sp(np + 1)_
—0 for np = 1
V

Ob * Dr

In checking components of design force actings towards an edge, in the manner shown in Section 5.14, the
following term is also employed:-
sp(np + 1)
Ze = np ^ 1 (Table A.6)
6e
The second moment of area of the bolt group about the centroid of the bolt group (lbp) is given in Section 5.14 as
nps^(n2 - 1)
lbp —
12
and values of this term for sp = 70 and various values of np are given in Table A.4.

306 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE A.4
BOLT GROUP DESIGN CAPACITIES FOR
SINGLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sp = 70 mm
Note: Vdh) Vdtf and Vf are in kN
Mdm is in kN Ifap is in mm3
np 2 3 5 7 8 9
<£Vdh/4>Vt 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
^>Vdv/0Vf 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
<£Mdm/0Vf 0.070 0.140 0.233 0.350 0.490 0.653 0.840 1.05
ibp X 103 2.45 9.80 24.5 49.0 85.75 137 206 294

TABLE A.5
Z„ FOR SINGLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zb for np =
mm 2 3 5 6 7 8
0 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 6.00 7.00 8.00 9.00
10 1.92 2.93 3.94 4.95 5.96 6.96 7.96 8.97
20 1.74 2.76 3.78 4.81 5.83 6.84 7.86 8.87
30 1.52 2.52 3.56 4.60 5.63 6.66 7.69 8.72
40 1.32 2.28 3.30 4.34 5.39 6.43 7.48 8.51
50 1.15 2.05 3.04 4.07 5.12 6.17 7.22 8.27
60 1.01 1.84 2.79 3.80 4.84 5.89 6.95 8.00
70 0.894 1.66 2.56 3.54 4.56 5.60 6.66 7.72
80 0.802 1.51 2.36 3.29 4.29 5.31 6.36 7.42
90 0.725 1.38 2.18 3.07 4.03 5.04 6.07 7.13
100 0.661 1.27 2.02 2.87 3.80 4.78 5.79 6.83
110 0.606 1.17 1.87 2.68 3.58 4.53 5.52 6.55
120 0.560 1.75 2.52 3.38 4.30 5.27 6.27
130 0.520 1.01 1.64 2.37 3.19 4.08 5.03 6.01
140 0.485 0.949 1.54 2.24 3.02 3.88 4.80 5.76
150 0.454 0.891 1.45 2.11 2.87 3.70 4.59 5.53

TABLE A.6
Z. FOR SINGLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
Sp = 70 mm
e Values of Ze for np =
mm 2 3 5 6 7 8 9
10 3.50 4.67 5.83 7.00 8.17 9.33 10.5 11.67
20 1.75 2.33 2.92 3.50 4.08 4.67 5.25 5.83
30 1.17 1.56 1.94 2.33 2.72 3.11 3.50 3.89
40 .875 1.17 1.46 1.75 2.04 2.33 2.63 2.92
50 .700 .933 1.17 1.40 1.63 1.87 2.10 2.33
60 .583 .778 .972 1.17 1.36 1.56 1.75 1.94
70 .500 .667 .833 1.00 1.17 1.33 1.50 1.67
80 .438 .583 .729 .875 1.02 1.17 1.31 1.46
90 .389 .519 .648 .778 .907 1.04 1.17 1.30
100 .350 .467 .583 .700 .817 .933 1.05 1.17
110 .318 .424 .530 .636 .742 .848 .955 1.06
120 .292 .389 .486 .583 .681 .778 .875 .972
130 .269 .359 .449 .538 .628 .718 .808 .897
140 .250 .333 .417 .500 .583 .667 .750 .833
150 .233 .311 .389 .467 .544 .622 .700 .778

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 307

(b) Double Bolt Column

The design requirement is given by

v?v 2 + 2s PS V*bv M*bm M£m >
£ +
3 4>Vdv. V1 + Spg L^VdvJ L^Md m 4> Md
m

vtbh * V*bh 2
2 bm
x + + < 1.0
-0 0 V1 + Spg L^VdhJ L^>Mdm 0Vdh
£
<x 9*-‘70
f where Vdh, Vdv, Mdm and the functions of spg are tabulated as
vfr- •-0- -0 functions of Vf in Tables A.7, A.10, A.13.
H
< In Section 5.14, it is shown that:-

$ --0 0—■ 4>Vdh 2np(0Vf)

V%(>4 M •m t^Vdv 2np(4>Vf)
CM- ■-0-- £>-• 4>Mdm
npsp.
(1/3)(ng - 1) + (sg/sp)2
np 1
c
Vbv C6KH20IP Of 4>Vf '/Ob 1)2 + (Sp/Sg)2
ecu' (5Roop
-0-- -0- Spg
{np 1)sp
c£Mm
d
-0 —O 4>Vf = Sg np = 1

i?b - 2p^ &0iT5

= WLitf&SZ-OF eOuT9

IfV £>h = 0 and M *bm = V *bv e (e = eccentricity of V bv)

Vb„ ^ 2b(4>Vf) becomes the design requirement
where Zb is a function of e, sp, np, sg and spg and is tabulated in Tables A.8, A.11, A.14.
Formulae for Zb are derived in Section 5.14, as follows:-

2np 2np
Zb = for np s* 1
2e/s g 2 2e/(spg.sg) 2 V[1 + z,f + [Z-,/sP9]2
1+ + 1 np + 1 ~1 ~2
1 + 1 !k±4 -1 2 1+~
3 np - 1 |_SpJ . 3'nP ~ 1 Lspa„
where
2e/sg
1 np + 1 i 2
1+
3 np — 1 _spg_
2
Zb = for np = 1
1 + 2e/sg

In checking components of design force acting towards an edge, in the manner shown in Section 5.14, the terms
Zev, Zeh are useful and are given as foilows:-
1 bp
(see Tables A.9, A.12, A.15)
Zev
npesg (np * 1) Zeh
e(np ~ 1)npsp (nP * 1)
1+
tap
sg

sg + 2e (nP = 1)

Ibp ^[(nl 1) + 3(Sg/Sp)2] np # 1 (see Tables A.7, A.10, A.13)

q2
b9
np — 1 (see Tables A.7, A.10, A.13)
2

308 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE A.7
BOLT GROUP CAPACITIES FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
s„ = 70 mm sp = 70 mm
Note: Vdh, VdVl Vf are in kN
Mdm is in kNm IbP is in mm3

"p 1 2 3 5 7 8 9
0Vdh/<£V, 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
0Vdv/0Vf 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
0Mdm/0Vf 0.070 0.198 0.344 0.531 0.764 1.04 1.37 1.74 2.16
2/V1 + s3g 0 1.41 1.79 1.90 1.94 1.96 1.97 1.98 1.98
2Spg/Vl + Sn pg 2.00 1.41 0.894 0.632 0.485 0.392 0.329 0.283 0.248
Ibp x 103 2.45 9.80 26.95 58.80 110.25 186.20 291.55 431.20 610.05

TABLE A.8
Z„ FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
s9 = 70 mm sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zb for np =

mm 1 2 3 5 7

0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0

10 1.56 3.47 5.51 7.57 9.62 11.7 13.7 15.7 17.8
20 1.27 3.04 5.01 7.07 9.15 11.2 13.3 15.4 17.4
30 1.08 2.68 4.55 6.55 8.62 10.7 12.8 14.9 17.0
40 0.933 2.39 4.13 6.06 8.09 10.2 12.3 14.4 16.5
50 0.824 2.15 3.77 5.60 7.57 9.62 11.7 13.8 15.9
60 0.737 3.45 5.18 7.08 9.08 11.1 13.2 15.4
70 0.667 1.79 3.17 4.80 10.6 12.7 14.8
0.609 1.65 2.93 4.46 6.20 8.08 10.1 12.1 14.2
90 0.560 1.53 2.72 4.16 5.81 11.6 13.6
100 0.519 1.42 2.54 5.47 7.20 9.07 11.0 13.1
110 0.483 1.33 2.37 3.65 5.15 6.82 8.63 10.5 12.5
120 0.452 1.25 2.23 3.44 6.46 8.21 10.1 12.0
130 0.424 1.17 2.10 3.25 4.60 6.14 7.82 9.63 11.5
140 0.400 1.11 1.99 3.07 4.37 5.84 7.46 9.21 11.1
150 0.378 1.05 1.88 2.92 4.15 5.56 7.13 8.83 10.6

TABLE A.9
Z„, Z.h FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sg = 70 mm sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zev for np = Values of Zeb for np -
mm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 .778 .875 .928 .955 .969 .978 .983 .987 .990 7.00 6.42 7.00 7.88 8.87 9.92 11.0 12.1
20 .636 .778 .865 .913 .940 .957 .967 .975 .980 3.50 3.21 3.50 3.94 4.43 4.96 5.50 6.05
30 .538 .700 .811 .875 .913 .937 .952 .963 .970 2.33 2.14 2.33 2.63 2.98 3.31 3.67 4.04
40 .467 .636 .762 .840 .887 .917 .937 .951 .960 1.75 1.60 1.75 1.97 2.22 2.48 2.75 3.03
50 .411 .583 .720 .808 .863 .899 .922 .939 .951 1.40 1.28 1.40 1.58 1.77 1.98 2.20 2.42
60 .368 .538 .681 .778 .840 .881 .908 .928 .942 1.17 1.07 1.17 1.31 1.48 1.65 1.83 2.02
70 .333 .500 .647 .750 .818 .864 .895 .917 .933 1.00 .917 1.00 1.13 1.27 1.42 1.57 1.73
80 .304 .467 .616 .724 .797 .847 .881 .906 .924 .875 .802 .875 .984 1.11 1.24 1.38 1.51
90 .280 .437 .588 .700 .778 .831 .869 .895 .915 .778 .713 .778 .875 .985 1.10 1.22 1.35
100 .259 .412 .562 .677 .759 .816 .856 .885 .906 .700 .642 .700 .788 .887 .992 1.10 1.21
110 .241 .389 .538 .656 .741 .801 .844 .875 .898 .636 .583 .636 .716 .806 .902 1.00 1.10
120 .225 .368 .517 .636 .724 .787 .832 .865 .890 .583 .535 .583 .656 .739 .826 .917 1.01
130 .212 .350 .497 .618 .708 .773 .821 .856 .882 .538 .494 .538 .606 .682 .763 .846 .931
140 .200 .333 .478 .600 .692 .760 .810 .846 .874 .500 .458 .500 .563 .633 .708 .786 .865
150 .189 .318 .461 .583 .677 .747 .799 .837 .866 .467 .428 .467 .525 .591 .661 .733 .807

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 309

 TABLE A.10
BOLT GROUP CAPACITIES FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sg = 90 mm sp = 70 mm
Note: Vdhl Vdvi V{ are in kN
'dm is in kNm Ibp is in mm3

nP 1 2 3 5 7
</>Vdh/0Vf 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
<£Vdv/<£Vf 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 18
0Mdm/0V{ 0.090 0.228 0.382 0.571 0.804 1.08 1.41 1.78 2.20
2/VT+ s3g 0 1.23 1.68 1.84 1.90 1.94 1.96 1.97 1.97
2Spg/ \/l + S^g 2.00 1.58 1.08 0.788 0.612 0.498 0.419 0.361 0.317
Ibp x 103 4.05 13.0 31.75 65.20 118.25 195.80 302.76 444.00 624.46

TABLE A.11
Zb FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sg = 90 mm sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zb for np =

mm 1 3 5 7 8

0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0

10 1.64 3.50 5.49 7.53 9.57 11.6 13.7 15.7 17.7
20 1.38 3.09 5.00 7.02 9.08 11.1 13.2 15.3 17.3
30 1.20 2.76 4.56 6.51 8.55 10.6 12.7 14.8 16.9
40 1.06 2.48 4.16 6.04 8.03 10.1 12.2 14.3 16.4
50 0.947 2.25 3.82 5.60 7.52 9.54 11.6 13.7 15.8
60 0.857 2.06 5.20 7.05 9.01 11.1 13.1 15.2
70 0.783 1.90 3.25 4.84 6.61 8.51 10.5 12.6 14.7
80 0.720 1.76 3.02 4.51 6.20 8.04 12.0 14.1
90 0.667 1.64 4.23 7.61 9.50 11.5 13.5
100 0.621 1.53 2.64 3.97 5.50 7.20 9.03 11.0 13.0
110 0.581 1.44 2.48 3.73 5.19 6.83 8.60 10.5 12.4
120 0.545 1.35 2.34 3.52 4.91 6.48 8.19 10.0 11.9
130 0.514 1.28 2.21 3.33 4.66 6.16 7.82 9.59 11.5
140 0.486 1.21 2.09 3.16 4.43 5.87 7.47 9.19 11.0
150 0.462 1.15 1.99 3.01 4.22 5.60 7.14 8.81 10.6

TABLE A.12
Zev, Z.h FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sg = 90 mm sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zev for np = Values of Zoh for np =

mm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

10 .818 .903 .938 .959 .971 .979 .984 .988 .990 9.29 7.56 7.76 8.45 9.32 10.30 11.33 12.39
20 .692 .823 .883 .921 .944 .959 .969 .975 .980 4.64 3.78 3.88 4.22 4.66 5.15 5.66 6.20
30 .600 .756 .834 .886 .918 .940 .954 .964 .971 3.10 2.52 2.59 2.82 3.11 3.43 3.78 4.13
40 .529 .699 .791 .853 .894 .921 .939 .952 .961 2.32 1.89 1.94 2.11 2.33 2.57 2.83 3.10
50 .474 .650 .751 .823 .871 .903 .925 .941 .952 1.86 1.51 1.55 1.69 1.87 2.06 2.26 2.48
60 .429 .607 .716 .795 .849 .886 .911 .930 .943 1.55 1.26 1.29 1.41 1.55 1.72 1.89 2.07
70 .391 .570 .684 .769 .828 .869 .898 .919 .934 1.33 1.08 1.11 1.21 1.33 1.47 1.62 1.77
80 .360 .537 .654 .744 .809 .854 .885 .908 .925 1.16 .945 .970 1.06 1.17 1.29 1.42 1.55
90 .333 .508 .627 .721 .790 .838 .873 .989 .917 1.03 .840 .862 .938 1.04 1.14 1.26 1.38
100 .310 .481 .602 .700 .772 .823 .861 .888 .908 .929 .756 .776 .845 .932 1.03 1.13 1.24
110 .290 .458 .579 .679 .754 .809 .849 .878 .900 .844 .687 .706 .768 .848 .936 1.03 1.13
120 .273 .436 .558 .660 .738 .795 .837 .869 .892 .774 .630 .647 .704 .777 .858 .944 1.03
130 .257 .417 .538 .642 .722 .782 .826 .859 .884 .714 .582 .597 .650 .717 .792 .871 .953
140 .243 .399 .519 .625 .707 .769 .815 .850 .876 .663 .540 .554 .603 .668 .736 .809 .885
150 .231 .382 .502 .608 .693 .757 .805 .841 .869 .619 .504 .517 .563 .622 .687 .755 .826

310 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE A. 13
BOLT GROUP CAPACITIES FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
s, = 140 mm sp = 70 mm
Note: Vdh, Vdv> V, are in kN
Mdm is in kNm 1^ is in mm3

np 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
<£Vdh/4>Vf 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
2 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
0Mdm/0V{ 0.140 0.313 0.495 0.699 0.939 1.22 1.55 1.92 2.34
2/VI + sg9 0 0.894 1.41 1.66 1.79 1.86 1.90 1.92 1.94
2spg/ \/l + Sp pg 2.00 1.79 1.41 1.11 0.894 0.743 0.632 0.549 0.485
IhD x 103 9.80 24.50 49.00 88.20 147.00 230.30 343.00 490.00 676.20

TABLE A.14
Z„ FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sa = 140 mm sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zb for np

mm 2 3 5 7 8

0 2.00 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0

10 1.75 3.59 5.51 7.49 9.51 11.5 13.6 15.6 17.6
20 1.56 3.24 5.07 7.00 9.00 11.0 13.1 15.1 17.2
30 1.40 2.95 4.68 6.53 8.49 10.5 12.5 14.6 16.7
40 1.27 2.71 4.33 6.10 8.00 9.98 12.0 14.1 16.1
50 1.17 2.50 4.02 5.71 7.54 9.47 11.5 13.5 15.6
60 1.08 2.33 3.75 7.11 10.9 13.0 15,0
70 1.00 2.17 3.51 5.03 6,71 8.52 10.4 12.4 14.5
0.933 2.03 4.74 6.34 8.09 9.95 11.9 13.9
90 0.875 1.91 3.11 4.47 6.00 9.49 11.4 13.4
100 0.824 1.80 2.93 4.23 7.31 9.06 10.9 12.8
110 0.778 1.71 2.78 4.01 5.41 10.5 12.4
120 0.737 1.62 2.64 3.81 5.15 6.64 8.28 10.0 11.9
130 0.700 1.54 2.51 3.63 4.91 6.34 7.92 11.4
140 0.667 1.47 2.39 3.46 4.69 6.07 7.59 9.24 11.0
150 0.636 1.41 2.29 3.31 5.81 7.28 8.88 10.6

TABLE A.15
Zev> Z.„ FOR DOUBLE COLUMN OF BOLTS
sg = 140 mm Sp = 70 mm
e Values of Zev for np = Values of Zefl for np =

mm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2 3 5 6 7 8 9

10 .875 .946 .959 .969 .977 .982 .986 .989 .991 17.50 11.67 10.50 10.50 10.97 11.67 12.50 13.42
20 .778 .897 .921 .940 .955 .965 .972 .978 .982 8.75 5.83 5.25 5.25 5.48 5.83 6.25 6.71
30 .700 .854 .886 .913 .933 .948 .959 .967 .973 5.83 3.89 3.50 3.50 3.66 3.89 4.17 4.47
40 .636 .814 .854 .887 .913 .932 .946 .956 .964 4.38 2.92 2.63 2.63 2.74 2.92 3.13 3.35
50 .583 .778 .824 .863 .894 .916 .933 .946 .955 3.50 2.33 2.10 2.10 2.19 2.33 2.50 2.68
60 .538 .745 .795 .840 .875 .901 .921 .936 .947 2.92 1.94 1.75 1.75 1.83 1.94 2.08 2.24
70 .500 .714 .769 .818 .857 .887 .909 .926 .939 2.50 1.67 1.50 1.50 1.57 1.67 1.79 1.92
80 .467 .686 .745 .797 .840 .873 .897 .916 .931 2.19 1.46 1.31 1.31 1.37 1.46 1.56 1.68
90 .438 .660 .722 .778 .824 .859 .886 .907 .923 1.94 1.30 1.17 1.17 1.22 1.30 1.39 1.49
100 .412 .636 .700 .759 .808 .846 .875 .897 .915 1.75 1.17 1.05 1.05 1.10 1.17 1.25 1.34
110 .389 .614 .680 .741 .792 .833 .864 .888 .907 1.59 1.06 .955 .955 .997 1.06 1.14 1.22
120 .368 .593 .660 .724 .778 .820 .854 .879 .899 1.46 .972 .875 .875 .914 .972 1.04 1.12
130 .350 .574 .642 .708 .764 .808 .843 .871 .892 1.35 .897 .808 .808 .844 .897 .962 1.03
140 .333 .556 .625 .692 .750 .797 .833 .862 .885 1.25 .833 .750 .750 .783 .833 .893 .958
150 .318 .538 .609 .677 .737 .785 .824 .854 .877 1.17 .778 .700 .700 .731 .778 .833 .894

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 311

 APPENDIX B
DESIGN AIDS — WELDS AND WELD GROUPS

Weld Quality

Complete Penetration Butt Welds

GP (general purpose) 4> = 0.6 (Table 3.4 of AS4100)

Category GP may be selected where the weld is essentially statistically loaded and is not loaded
above 66.7% of the design capacity of a SP weld.

SP (structural purpose) <it> = 0.9 (Table 3.4 of AS4100)

Category SP shall be selected where a GP quality weld is not appropriate.

The cut-off value of 66.7% for this weld type is due to the ratio of GP to SP capacity factors (<£), ie.:
0.6/0.9 X 100 = 66.7%

Fillet Weld / incomplete Penetration Butt Weld / Plug or Slot Weld / Weld Group

GP (general purpose) = 0.6 (Table 3.4 of AS4100)

Category GP may be selected where the weld is essentially statistically loaded and is not loaded
above 75% of the design capacity of a SP weld.

SP (structural purpose) 4> - 0.8 (Table 3.4 of AS4100)

Category SP shall be selected where a GP weld quality is not appropriate.

The cut-off value of 75% for these weld types is due to the ratio of GP to SP capacity factors ie.:
0.6/0.8 x 100 - 75%

312 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE B.1
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE
Design icities of Equal Leg Fillet Welds Per Unit Length
Category SP, <j> = 0.8, k, = 1.0
Design Capacity per unit length
Weld Size of weld, <t> vw
(mm) (kN/mm)
Leg: tw Throat: tt E41XX/W40X E48XX/W50X
3 2.12 0.417 0.489
4 2.83 0.557 0.652
5 3.54 0.696 0.815
6 4.24 0.835 0.978
8 5.66 1.11 1.30
10 7.07 1.39 1.63
12 8.49 1.67 1.96
tt = tw/V2 fuw * 410 MPa fuw = 480 MPa

where: fuw = nominal tensile strength of the weld metal.

TABLE B.2
STRENGTH LIMIT STATE
Design Capacities of Equal Leg Fillet Welds Per Unit Length
Category GP, 4> = 0.6, kr = 1.0
Design Capacity per unit length
Weld Size of weld, 0 vw
(mm) (kN/mm)
Leg: tw Throat: t, E41XX/W40X E48XX/W50X
3 2.12 0.313 0.367
4 0.417 0.489
5 3.54 0.522 0.611
6 4.24 0.626 0.733
8 0.835 0.978
10 7.07 1.04 1.22
12 8.49 1.25 1.47
tt = tw/V2 fliw 410 MPa fuw = 480 MPa

where: f uw = nominal tensile strength of the weld metal.

Remarks on (equal) fillet weld leg sizes, tw:

1) for tw = 3-5 mm: Used for a minimum size fillet weld (ref. Table 9.7.3.2 of AS4100)
2) for tw = 6-8 mm: Sizes preferred for structural connections—single pass welds.
3) for tw = 10-12 mm: Not recommended for all cases-cannot be guaranteed as single pass welds. Check
with fabricator before specifying.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 313

 ?5

CO

TABLE B.3
PROPERTIES OF FILLET WELD GROUPS
TWO WELDS PARALLEL TO x-AXIS
b
WELDS IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE WELDS NOT IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE
b bd^ F*y = -F*
to = F* = —F* bd2 X
■y wp Iwx
O 2 6 2
F* — Fte M* - f*e 1 F*
D SL,
rn 8 a. Lwy — 2b Lwy = 2b x
CO v* = wp V* - Fy/L wy (3
Gi Lwx = 2b Lwx 2b=
y v * = F*/Uy + Mt.X/l Wp v* = M* • y/l wx y
O
■n
co b
-i VALUE OF lwp x 10s mm3 b VALUE OF lwx x 106 mm3
33
C d
O 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 d 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
c 50 0.083 0.164 0.292 0.482 0.750 1.11 I. 58 2.18 2.92 3.81 4.88 50 0.062 0.0940.125 0.156 0.188 0.219 0.250 0.281 0.312 0.344 0.375
75 0.161 0.281 0.448 0.677 0.984 1.39 1.90 2.53 3.31 4.24 5.34 75 0.141 0.2110.281 0.352 0.422 0.492 0.562 0.633 0.703 0.773 0.844
100 0.271 0.445 0.667 0.951 1.31 1.77 2.33 3.02 3.85 4.84 6.00 100 0.250 0.3750.500 0.625 0.750 0.875 1.00 1.12 1.25 1.38 1.50
8
Z
125
150
0.411
0.583
0.656 0.948
0.914 1.29
1.30
1.73
1.73
2.25
2.26
2.86
2.90
3.58
3.66 4.56 5.61 6.84
4.43 5.42 6.56 7.88
125
150
0.391
0.562
0.5860.781
0.8441.12
0.977
1.41
1.17 1.37
1.69 1.97
1.56
2.25
1.76 1.95 2.15 2.34
2.53 2.81 3.09 3.38
2 175 0.786 1.22 1.70 2.24 2.86 3.57 4.40 5.34 6.43 7.68 9.09
m 200 1.02 1.57 2.17 2.83 3.56 4.39 5.33 6.40 7.60 8.97 10.5
175 0.766 1.15 1.53 1.91 2.30 2.68 3.06 3.45 3.83 4.21 4.59
3 225 1.29 1.97 2.70 3.49 4.36 5.32 6.40 7.59 8.93 10.4 12.1
200
225
1.00
1.27
1.50 2.00
1.90 2.53
2.50
3.16
3.00 3.50
3.80 4.43
4.00
5.06
4.50 5.00 5.50 6.00
5.70 6.33 6.96 7.59
O 250 1.58 2.41 3.29 4.23 5.25 6.36 7.58 8.93 10.4 12.1 13.9 250 1.56 2.34 3.12 3.91 4.69 5.47 6.25 7.03 7.81 8.59 9.38
C/> 275 1.91 2.91 3.95 5.05 6.23 7.51 8.90 10.4 12.1 13.9 15.8 275 1.89 2.84 3.78 4.73 5.67 6.62 7.56 8.51 9.45 10.4 11.3
300 2.27 3.45 4.67 5.95 7.31 8.77 10.3 12.0 13.9 15.8 18.0 300 2.25 3.38 4.50 5.62 6.75 7.88 9.00 10.1 11.2 12.4 13.5
325 2.66 4.03 5.45 6.93 8.48 10.1 II. 9 13.8 15.8 18.0 20.3 325 2.64 3.96 5.28 6.60 7.92 9.24 10.6 11.9 13.2 14.5 15.8
350 3.08 4.66 6.29 7.98 9.75 11.6 13.6 15.7 17.9 20.3 22.9 350 3.06 4.59 6.12 7.66 9.19 10.7 12.2 13.8 15.3 16.8 18.4
375 3.54 5.34 7.20 9.11 11.1 13.2 15.4 17.7 20.2 22.8 375 3.52 5.27 7.03 8.79 10.5 12.3 14.1 15.8 17.6 19.3 21.1
400 4.02 6.07 8.17 10.3 12.6 14.9 17.3 19.9 22.6 25.5 28.5 400 4.00 6.00 8.00 10.0 12.0 14.0 16.0 18.0 20.0 22.0 24.0
425 4.54 6.84 9.20 11.6 14.1 16.7 19.4 22.2 25.2 28.3 31.6 425 4.52 6.77 9.03 11.3 13.5 15.8 18.1 20.3 22.6 24.8 27.1
450 5.08 7.66 10.3 13.0 15.8 18.6 21.6 24.7 27.9 31.3 34.9 450 5.06 7.59 10.1 12.7 15.2 17.7 20.2 22.8 25.3 27.8 30.4
475 5.66 8.53 11.4 14.4 17.5 20.6 23.9 27.3 30.8 34.5 38.3 475 5.64 8.46 11.3 14.1 16.9 19.7 22.6 25.4 28.2 31.0 33.8
500 6.27 9.45 12.7 16.0 19.3 22.8 26.3 30.0 33.9 37.8 42.0 500 6.25 9.38 12.5 15.6 18.8 21.9 25.0 28.1 31.2 34.4 37.5
525 6.91 10.4 13.9 17.6 21.2 25.0 28.9 32.9 37.1 41.4 45.8 525 6.89 10.3 13.8 17.2 20.7 24.1
O 27.6 31.0 34.5 37.9 41.3
C/> 550 7.58 11.4 15.3 19.2 23.2 27.4 31.6 35.9 40.4 45.1 49.9 550 7.56 11.3 15.1
O 575 18.9 22.7 26.5 30.2 34.0 37.8 41.6 45.4
8.29 12.5 16.7 21.0 25.4 29.8 34.4 39.1 43.9 48-9 54.1 575 8.27 12.4 16.5 20.7 24.8 28.9 33.1 37.2 41.3 45.5 49.6
O 600 9.02 13.6 18.2 22.8 27.6 32.4 37.3 42.4 47.6 53.0 58.5 600 9.00 13.5 18.0 22.5 27.0 31.5 36.0 40.5 45.0 49.5 54.0

CD Lwx — Lwy '

CD 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
4s» Lwy Lwx
 TABLE BA
PROPERTIES OF FILLET WELD GROUPS
TWO WELDS PARALLEL TO y-AXIS
WELDS IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE WELDS NOT IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE

b
b
y wx d3/6
y
F* Iwp — d3/6 + b2d/2
<2.
Lwy 2d x
6 x
'i F*
<2-
X'
6
y

F* = -F* * F*e
z F* = -F* M* F*e
V*x — M*. y/l wp v*
vy F*y/Lwy + M*.x/i wp V*y = Fy/L wy v*2 M*. y/l wx

VALUES OF lwp x 106 mm3 Lwy 'wx

d 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 (mm) 106 mm3

50 0.083 0.161 0.271 0.411 0.583 0.786 1.02 1.29 1.58

1.91 2.27 100 0.021
75 0.164 0.281 0.445 0.656 0.914 1.22 1.57 1.97 2.41
2.91 3.45 150 0.070
100 0.292 0.448 0.667 0.948 1.29 1.70 2.17 2.70 3.29
3.95 4.67 200 0.167
125 0.482 0.677 0.951 1.30 1.73 2.24 2.83 3.49 4.23
5.05 5.95 250 0.326
150 0.750 0.984 1.31 1.73 2.25 2.86 3.56 4.36 5.25 6.23 7.31 300 0.562
175 1.11 1.39 1.77 2.26 2.86 3.57 4.39 5.32 6.36 7.51 8.77 350 0.893
200 1.58 1.90 2.33 2.90 3.58 4.40 5.33 6.40 7.58 8.90 10.3 400 1.33
225 2.18 2.53 3.02 3.66 4.43 5.34 6.40 7.59 8.93 10.4 12.0 450 1.90
250 2.92 3.31 3.85 4.56 5.42 6.43 7.60 8.93 10.4 12.1 13.9 500 2.60
275 3.81 4.24 4.84 5.61 6.56 7.68 8.97 10.4 12.1 13.9 15.8 550 3.47
300 4.88 5.34 6.00 6.84 9.09 10.5 12.1 13.9 15.8 18.0 600 4.50
325 6.13 6.64 9.38 10.7 12.2 13.9 15.9 18.0 20.3 650 5.72
350 8.13 8.90 11.1 12.5 14.1 16.0 18.1 20.4 22.9 700 7.15
375 9.84 10.7 11.7 13.0 14.5 16.3 18.3 20.5 23.0 25.7 750 8.79
400 11.2 11.8 12.7 13.8 15.2 16.8 18.7 20.8 23.2 25.8 800 10.7
425 13.3 14.0 14.9 16.1 17.6 19.3 21.3 23.6 26.1 28.9 31.9 850 12.8
450 15.8 16.5 17.4 18.7 20.3 22.1 24.2 26.6 29.3 32.2 35.4 900 15.2
475 18.5 19.2 20.2 21.6 23.2 25.1 27.4 29.9 32.7 35.8 39.2 950 17.9
500 21.5 22.2 23.3 24.7 26.5 28.5 30.8 33.5 36.5 39.7 43.3 1000 20.8
525 24.8 25.6 26.7 28.2 30.0 32.2 34.6 37.4 40.5 44.0 47.7 1050 24.1
550 28.4 29.3 30.5 32.0 33.9 36.2 38.7 41.7 44.9 48.5 52.5 1100 27.7
575 32.4 33.3 34.6 36.2 38.2 40.5 43.2 46.2 49.7 53.4 57.6 1150 31.7
600 36.8 37.7 39.0 40.7 42.8 45.2 48.0 51.2 54.8 58.7 63.0 1200 36.0

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 315

CO
0)
TABLE B.5
PROPERTIES OF FILLET WELD GROUPS
BOX-SECTION WELD
WELDS IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE WELDS NOT IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE
b
d3 bd2 b3 db2 F*y = — F* d3 bd2
(/> Iwp Fy = -F Iwx
O — 6+2+6+2 6 2
b - F*e •x
O M* = Fte
;y
— Lwy = 2d
CO F* LWy = 2d Lw Lwy + Lwx
J___ Lwx = 2b
V*
Vy = £1 Lwx = 2b a. f*-
- X Lwy
o Lw LWy + Lwx 6
n M*z.y Ft M*zx M*.y
.3
V*
v x w* -
Vy = + V* =
Iwx ■'i
V> >wp Lwy 'wp

C b VALUES OF lwP x 10s mm3

O Lwy b VALUES OF lwx x 10s mm3 L,
C d 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 (mm) d 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 (mm)
50 0.167 0.326 0.562 0.893 1.33 1.90 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 100 50 0.083 0.115 0.146 0.177 0.208 0.240 0.271 0.302 0.333 0.365 0.396 100
O 75 0.326 0.562 0.893 1.33 1.90 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 150 75
O 0.211 0.281 0.352 0.422 0.492 0.562 0.633 0.703 0.773 0.844 0.914 150
z 100 0.562 0.893 1.33 1.90 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 10.7 200 100 0.417 0.542 0.667 0.792 0.917 1.04 1.17 1.29 1.42 1.54 1.67 200
Z 125 0.893 1.33 1.90 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 10.7 12.8 250 125 0.716 0.911 1.11 1.30 1.50 1.69 1.89 2.08 2.28 2.47 2.67 250
m 150 1.33 1.90 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 1 0.7 1 2.8 1 5.2 300 150 1.12 1.41 1.69 1.97 2.25 2.53 2.81 3.09 3.38 3.66 3.94
O 300
d 175 1.90 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 350 175 1.66 2.04 2.42 2.81 3.19 3.57 3.96 4.34 4.72 5.10 5.49 350
O 200 2.60 3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 400 200 2.33 2.83 3.33 3.83 4.33 4.83 5.33 5.83 6.33 6.83 7.33 400
I 225
250
3.47 4.50 5.72 7.15
4.50 5.72 7.15 8.79 10.7
8.79 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1
12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7
450
500
225
250
3.16 3.80 4.43 5.06 5.70 6.33 6.96 7.59 8.23 8.86 9.49
4.17 4.95 5.73 6.51 7.29 8.07 8.85 9.64 10.4 11.2 12.0
450
500
275 5.72 7.15 8.79 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 550 275 5.36 6.30 7.25 8.19 9.14 10.1 11.0 12.0 12.9 13.9 14.8 550
300 7.15 8.79 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 600 300 6.75 7.88 9.00 10.1 11.2 12.4 13.5 14.6 15.8 16.9 18.0 600
325 8.79 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 650 325 8.36 9.68 11.0 12.3 13.6 15.0 16.3 17.6 18.9 20.2 21.6 650
350 10.7 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 700 350 10.2 11.7 13.3 14.8 16.3 17.9 19.4 20.9 22.5 24.0 25.5 700
375 12.8 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 4Q.7 45.8 51.3 750 375 12.3 14.1 15.8 17.6 19.3 21.1 22.9 24.6 26.4 28.1 29.9 750
400 15.2 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 800 400 14.7 16.7 18.7 20.7 22.7 24.7 26.7 28.7 30.7 32.7 34.7 800
425 17.9 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 850 425 17.3 19.6 21.8 24.1 26.3 28.6 30.9 33.1 35.4 37.6 39.9 850
450 20.8 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 900 450 20.3 22.8 25.3 27.8 30.4 32.9 35.4 38.0 40.5 43.0 45.6 900
475 24.1 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 77.6 950 475 23.5 26.3 29.1 32.0 34.8 37.6 40.4 43.2 46.1 48.9 51.7
D 950
CO 500 27.7 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 77.6 85.3 1000 500 27.1 30.2 33.3 36.5 39.6 42.7 45.8 49.0 52.1 55.2 58.3 1000
O 525 31.7 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 77.6 85.3 93.6 1050 525 31.0 34.5 37.9 41.3 44.8 48.2 51.7 55.1 58.6 62.0 65.5 1050
o 550 36.0 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 77.6 85.3 93.6 102 1100 550 35.3 39.1 42.9 46.6 50.4 54.2 58.0 61.8 65.5 69.3 73.1 1100
575 40.7 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 77.6 85.3 93.6 102 112 1150 575 40.0 44.1 48.2 52.3 56.5 60.6 64.7 68.9 73.0 77.1 81.3 1150
600 45.8 51.3 57.2 63.5 70.3 77.6 85.3 93.6 102 112 122 1200 600 45.0 49.5 54.0 58.5 63.0 67.5 72.0 76.5 81.0 85.5 90.0 1200
co
CO Lwx 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
4*. Lwx 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
o
o
o
.£»
TABLE B.6
PROPERTIES OF FILLET WELD GROUPS
CO
CO C-SECTIOR WELD
WELDS IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE WELDS NOT IN THE PLANE OF THE FORCE
b
d2 b3 (b + 2d) F* = -F* d2
'wp = j2(6b + d) + Fy = -F* Lx = + d)
b 3 (2b + d)
= F*e m; - F*e X
y Lwy = d ✓
F* Lwy d Lw — Lwy -F Lwx
F*

El
X <Z>
<2,
V*
V V = Lwx = 2b F*
d -—X Lwx ~■ 2b Lwy
0)
o FyL. -i- Mt.x M*x.y
Lw LWy + Lwx
v* = -Mty/i wp v y
= _____

D •y L.wy fwp V* =
y
'wx
8!
0 b VALUES OF lwp x 106 mm3 Lwy b VALUES OF lwx x 106 mm3

O d 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300 (mm) d 50 75 100 125 150 175 200 225 250 275 300
T|
W
50 0.115 0.227 0.402 0.655 1.00 1.46 2.04 2.76 3.64 4.69 5.92 50 50 0.073 0.104 0.135 0.167 0.198 0.229 0.260 0.292 0.323 0.354 0.385
39 75 0.223 0.387 0.619 0.938 1.36 1.89 2.56 3.38 4.36 5.52 6.88 75 75 0.176 0.246 0.316 0.387 0.457 0.527 0.598 0.668 0.738 0.809 0.879
C
o 100 0.385 0.613 0.917 1.31 1.82 2.45 3.22 4.14 5.24 6.52 8.01 100 100 0.333 0.458 0.583 0.708 0.833 0.958 1.08 1.21 1.33 1.46 1.58
125 0-609 0.915 1.30 1.79 2.39 3.13 4.01 5.06 6.28 7.70 9.33 125 125 0.553 0.749 0.944 1.14 1.33 1.53 1.73 1.92 2.12 2.31 2.51
C
150 0.902 1.30 1.79 2.38 3.09 3.95 4.96 6.13 7.50 9.07 10.9 150 150 0.844 1.12 1.41 1.69 1.97 2.25 2.53 2.81 3.09 3.38 3.66
175 1.27 1.78 2.38 3.09 3.93 4.91 6.06 7.39 8.90 10.6 12.6 175 175 1.21 1.60 1.98 2.36 2.74 3.13 3.51 3.89 4.27 4.66 5.04
200 1.73 2.36 3.08 3.93 4.90 6.03 7.33 8.82 10.5 12.4 14.5 200 200 1.67 2.17 2.67 3.17 3.67 4.17 4.67 5.17 5.67 6.17 6.67
O 225
O 2.28 3.04 3.91 4.90 6.03 7.32 8.79 10.4 12.3 14.4 16.7 225 225 2.21 2.85 3.48 4.11 4.75 5.38 6.01 6.64 7.28 7.91 8.54
250 2.93 3.85 4.87 6.02 7.32 8.78 10.4 12.3 14.3 16.6 19.1 250 250 2.86 3.65 4.43 5.21 5.99 6.77 7.55 8.33 9.11 9.90 10.7
2 275 3.69 4.78 5.97 7.30 8.77 10.4 12.3 14.3 16.6 19.1 21.8 275 275 3.62 4.57 5.51 6.46 7.40 8.35 9.30 10.2 11.2 12.1 13.1
m 300
O 4.57 5.84 7.22 8.73 10.4 12.3 14.3 16.6 19.0 21.8 24.8 300 300 4.50 5.62 6.75 7.88 9.00 10.1 11.2 12.4 13.5 14.6 15.8
325 5.57 7.04 8.62 10.3 12.2 14.3 16.5 19.0 21.7 24.7 27.9 325 325 5.50 6.82 8.14 9.46 10.8 12.1 13.4 14.7 16.1 17.4 18.7
O 350 6.70 8.38 10.2 12.1 14.2 16.5 19.0 21.7 24.7 27.9 31.4 350 350 6.64 8.17 9.70 11.2 12.8 14.3 15.8 17.4 18.9 20.4 21.9
CO 375 7.98 9.89 11.9 14.1 16.4 19.0 21.7 24.7 27.9 31.4 35.2 375 375 7.91 9.67 11.4 13.2 14.9 16.7 18.5 20.2 22.0 23.7 25.5
400 9.40 11.6 13.8 16.3 18.9 21.7 24.7 27.9 31.4 35.2 39.2 400 400 9.33 11.3 13.3 15.3 17.3 19.3 21.3 23.3 25.3 27.3 29.3
425 11.0 13.4 15.9 18.6 21.5 24.6 27.9 31.4 35.2 39.2 43.6 425 425 10.9 13.2 15.4 17.7 19.9 22.2 24.5 26.7 29.0 31.2 33.5
450 12.7 15.4 18.2 21.2 24.4 27.7 31.3 35.1 39.2 43.6 48.3 450 450 12.7 15.2 17.7 20.2 22.8 25.3 27.8 30.4 32.9 35.4 38.0
475 14.6 17.6 20.7 24.0 27.4 31.1 35.0 39.1 43.5 48.2 53.2 475 475 14.6 17.4 20.2 23.0 25.9 28.7 31.5 34.3 37.1 40.0 42.8
500 16.7 20.0 23.4 27.0 30.8 34.8 39.0 43.4 48.2 53.2 58.6 500 500 16.7 19.8 22.9 26.0 29.2 32.3 35.4 38.5 41.7 44.8 47.9
525 19.0 22.6 26.4 30.3 34.4 38.7 43.2 48.0 53.1 58.5 64.2 525 525 18.9 22.4 25.8 29.3 32.7 36.2 39.6 43.1 46.5 50.0 53.4
550 21.5 25.4 29.5 33.8 38.2 42.9 47.8 52.9 58.4 64.1 7Q.2 550 550 21.4 25.2 29.0 32.8 36.6 40.3 44.1 47.9 51.7 55.5 59.2
575 24.2 28.5 32.9 37.5 42.3 47.3 52.6 58.1 64.0 70,1 76.5 575 575 24.1 28.2 32.4 36.5 40.6 44.8 48.9 53.0 57.2 61.3 65.4
600 27.1 31.7 36.5 41.5 46.7 52.1 57.7 63.7 69.9 76.4 83.2 600 600 27.0 31.5 36.0 40.5 45.0 49.5 54.0 58.5 63.0 67.5 72.0
to
Lwx 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 Lwx 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600
■vl
 APPENDIX C
GAUGE LINES FOR SECTIONS ^2

TABLE C.1
GAUGE LINES (mm) FOR WELDED SECTIONS
t 3

M20 M24
Section
Flange sgf1 Flange sgf2 Flange sgf1 Flange sgf2
WELDED BEAMS
1200WB455-392 140 90 280 420 140 90 280
1200WB342-278 140 90 280 140 90 280
1200WB249 140 90 140 90
1000WB322-258 140 90 280 140 90 280
1000WB215 140 90 140 90
900WB282, 218 140 90 280 140 90 280
900WB175 140 90 140 90
800WB 140 90 140 90
700WB 140 90 140 90
WELDED COLUMNS
500WC 140 280 420 140 280
400WC 140 280 140 280
350WC 140 140
Preference 1 2 1 2 1 2 1

,%W|

•i ► -@~

•i

-i -

<v

Web sgw
Section
M20 M24
WELDED BEAMS
1200WB 140 90 70 140 90 70
1000WB 140 90 70 140 90 70
900WB 140 90 70 140 90 70
800WB 140 90 70 140 90 70
700WB 140 90 70 140 90 70
WELDED COLUMNS
500WC 140 90 70 140 90 70
400WC 140 90 70 140 90 70
350WC 140 90 70 140 90 70
Preference 1 2 3 1 2 3

318 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 bgf

-pa ■V
■< f- -i 1—

■4 r-
Sgw
TABLE C.2 -< i-

■V
GAUGE LINES (mm) FOR UNIVERSAL SECTIONS
Flange sgf Webs gw

Section M20 M24 M20 M24

UNIVERSAL BEAMS
760UB244,220 140 90a 140 140 90 70 140 90 70
760UB197-147 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
690UB 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
610UB 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
530 UB 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
460UB 90 140 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
410UB 90 70 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
360UB, 310UB 90 70 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
250UB 70 90 70 90 140 70 90 140
200UB 70 70 90 70 90
180UB b 70 90 70 90
150UB b 70 70
UNIVERSAL COLUMNS
310UC283-198 140 90a 140 90 70 140 90 70 140
310UC158-96.8 140 90 140 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
250UC 140 90 140 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
200UC 140 90 140 90 90 70 90 70
150UC 90 70 90 70 70
100UC 60 b c c
Preference 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3

a- indicates that this gauge may be used only for 4.6/S and 8.8/S categories but not for 8.8/T categories due to insufficient clearance,
b— indicates that the flange will not accommodate this size of bolt.
c— indicates that the web will not accommodate two lines of bolts with a gauge of 50mm or more.

6gw

V
Q -L

-u-
53«

cZZ.
TABLE C.3 .-m- -t»-
-v
GAUGE LINES (mm) FOR TAPER FLANGE
BEAMS and CHANNELS
Flange sgi Webs gw

Section M1G M20 M24 M16 M20 M24

TAPER FLANGE BEAMS
125x65 b 50 50 c
100x45 b c c c
PARALLEL FLANGE CHANNELS
380x100 55 55 55 140 90 70 140 90 70 140 90 70
300 x 90 55 55 b 140 90 70 140 90 70 140 90 70
250 X 90 55 55 b 140 90 70 140 90 70 140 90 70
230 x 75 45 45 b 140 90 70 90 70 90 70
200 x 75 45 45 b 90 70 90 70 90 70
180x75 45 46 b 70 90 70 90 70
150x75 45 45 b 70 65 55
TAPER FLANGE CHANNELS
125x65 35 b b 50 C c
100x50 b b b c c c
75x40 b b b c c c
Preference 1 1 1 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

b— indicates that the flange will not accommodate this size of bolt.
c— indicates that the web wiii not accommodate two lines of bolts with a gauge of 50mm or more.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 319

 e—(5—e
1 %*»
TABLE C.4
GAUGE LINES (mm) FOR STRUCTURAL TEES cut
1-----
0—0

symmetrically from Universal Sections

Flange sgi Webs gw
Section M20 M24 M20 M24
TEES from
Universal Beams
380BT122,110 140 90a 140 140 90 70 140 90 70
380BT98.5-73.0 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
345 BT 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
305BT 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
265BT 140 90 140 90 140 90 70 140 90 70
230BT 90 140 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
205BT 90 70 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
180BT 90 70 90 90 70 140 90 70 140
155BT 90 70 90 70 70
125BT 70 90 50 c
100BT 70 c c
90BT b c c
75 BT b c c
TEES from
Universal Columns
155CT142-99.0 140 90a 140 70 60
155CT79.0-48.4 140 90 140 90 70 60
125CT 140 90 140 90 50 c
100CT 140 90 140 90 c c
75CT 90 70 90 c c
Preference 1 2 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 3

a- indicates that this gauge may be used only for 4.6/S and 8.8/S categories but not for 8.8/T categories due to insufficient clearance.
b— indicates that the flange will not accommodate this size of bolt
c- indicates that the web will not accommodate two lines of bolts with a gauge of 50mm or more.

1 5a*

i %’

TABLE C.5
GAUGE LINES (mm) FOR ANGLES
ID

Nominal sgi sg3 Bolt Nominal Sg3 Bolt

leg length leg length

200 75 75 120 M24 100 55 M20

150 55 55 90 M20 90 55 M20
125 45 50 75 M20 75 45 M20
65 35 M16
55 35 M16
50 30 M16

NOTES TO ALL TABLES OF GAUGE LINES:

1. The gauges given are suitable for general use in member detailing. When angles are used as components in
connections, gauge lines may be varied from the values given above in order to suit a particular connection.
2. The bolt diameters listed are the maximum that can be accommodated on the thickest angles of each leg length,
using either—
(a) high strength structural bolts with washers to AS 1252; or
(b) commercial bolts with ‘large series' washers to AS 1237.
For thinner legs and commercial bolts with 'normal series' washers, it may be possible to accommodate a larger bolt
diameter.

320 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 APPENDIX D
FORMULAE FOR SECTION PROPERTIES OF
SINGLE WEB COPED I SECTIONS
SINGLE WEB COPED (SWC) SECTION

iw

*5€CTl<DWAT WHICH
pgopeerie* caloji/tep dw dw-ft-T
r

W ■t-f

Fig. D.1

Plastic Section Modulus

(i) N.A. in web

£3
£w
w

r
V
bf fi

(bit, 4- 0.4292 r2 + (y„ - tf)tw)fy = (dw + t, - ys)twfy

dwtw 4 2tftw - b,tf - 0.4292 r2
•• ys = 2t w
> t, + r
(dw + tf - ys)
ss = bftf(ys - tf/2) + 0.4292 r2(y, - tf - 0.223r) + tw(ys - l,).^4> 4- (dw 4- tf - ys)t w•
2
(ii) N.A. in flange

iw
6
r

£y

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 321

 (bf.Ys)fy = (b,(tf - ys) + 0.4292r2 + dwtw)fy
bft, + 0.4292 r2 + dwt w
ys
2b(

Ss - bf.ys.|f +- bf(t{ + 0.4292r2(t{ - ys + 0.223r) + dwtw(tf + dw/2 ys)

Section Moment of Area lx

iW

dvy
X
r

*>r IV

Fig. 02

tl ud3
w w
lx + b{tf(yc 0.51,)2 + 0.0076 r4 + 0.4292 r2(yc t, - 0.223r)2 + + twdw(tf + 0.5d w yc)2
12 12
0.5 bft,2 + 0.4292 r2(t, + Q.223r) + dwtw(t, + 0.5dw)
yc = (Fig. D2 — N.A. in web)
bftf + 0.4292 r2 + dwt w

Elastic Modulus Z.
Zx min of:- lx/(dw + t, yc)
ix/yc

First Moment of Area Qc

Qc = first moment of area of section at cope
= Jy-dA
= bftf(yc - 0.5tf) + 0.4292r2(yc - t, - 0.223r) + tw(yc - tf)2/2

322 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 APPENDIX E
DESIGN AIDS FOR RECOMMENDED DESIGN MODELS
VALUES OF kw AND kmw — FOR USE IN SECTIONS 4.7-4.10
NOTES:
1. kw = (area of the web)/(total cross-sectional area)
kf = (area of a flange)/(total cross-sectional area)
= (1.0 - kw)/2
'w
2. Define, k mw
lw + Ip
where, I w = second moment of area of web area about x-axis
•F = second moment of area of flange area about x-axis
Using the notation of Fig. E.1
b 3
12 d - d?
d?iw/12 f
'w 'F

di d - 2tf
A = 2bftf + ditw
web area = ditw
dft*
12
kmw —
d?tw bi3
12 + f|[d - d?] a
1
bf d \3
1 4" 7~ —1
tw .di

Fig. E:l

TABLE E.1
VALUES OF kw AND kmw - WELDED SECTIONS
Section •w mw Section ‘W mw

1200WB 455 0.31 0.12 500WC 440 0.29 0.099

423 0.33 0.13 414 0.24 0.081
392 0.36 0.15 383 0.26 0.091
342 0.41 0.18 340 0.26 0.093
317 0.44 0.20 290 0.24 0.087
278 0.51 0.25 267 0.26 0.097
249 0.57 0.29 228 0.31 0.12
1000WB 322 0.38 0.16 400WC 361 0.30 0.10
296 0.41 0.18 328 0.23 0.076
258 0.47 0.22 303 0.25 0.085
215 0.56 0.29 270 0.25 0.087
900WB 282 0.29 0.11 212 0.26 0.092
257 0.32 0.13 181 0.30 0.12
218 0.37 0.16 144 0.30 0.12
175 0.46 0.21 350WC 280 0.22 0.065
800WB 192 0.31 0.12 258 0.23 0.073
168 0.36 0.15 230 0.23 0.076
146 0.41 0.18 197 0.22 0.071
122 0.49 0.23
700WB 173 0.30 0.12
150 0.35 0.14
130 0.40 0.17
115 0.45 0.21

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 323

 TABLE E.2
VALUES OF kw AND k mw ROLLED SECTIONS
Section W k mw Section ‘W k mw

760UB 244 0.45 0.20 310UC283 0.21 0.061

220 0.45 0.20 240 0.22 0.064
197 0.46 0.20 198 0.22 0.067
173 0.48 0.22 158 0.23 0.073
147 0.51 0.24 137 0.23 0.075
690UB140 0.46 0.21 118 0.23 0.078
125 0.49 0.23 96.8 0.24 0.080
610UB 125 0.44 0.19 250UC 89.5 0.22 0.071
113 0.45 0.20 72.9 0.22 0.073
101 0.48 0.22 200UC 59.5 0.23 0.077
530UB 92.4 0.45 0.20 52.2 0.23 0.076
82.0 0.47 0.21 46.2 0.24 0.080
460UB 82.1 0.41 0.18 150UC 37.2 0.25 0.083
74.6 0.42 0.18 30.0 0.25 0.085
67.1 0.44 0.19 23.4 0.30 0.110
410UB 59.7 0.40 0.17 100UC 14.8 0.27 0.078
53.7 0.43 0.19
360UB 56.7 0.38 0.15
50.7 0.39 0.16
44.7 0.42 0.18
310UB 46.2 0.33 0.13
40.4 0.35 0.14
250UB 37.3 0.33 0.13
31.4 0.37 0.15
200UB 29.8 0.32 0.12
25.4 0.35 0.14

bf

r
6 few

Fig. E.2

SYMMETRIC SECTION
did - 2tf
A 2 bft, + d!tw + 2 x 0.4292 r2
web area ditw + 2 x 0.4292r2

dft w d 2
lw + 2 x 0.4292 r2 x TT - 0.223r
12 2
d _ M2
If 2 b*
2 21
web area
kw
A
lw
kmw
lw + If

324 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 TABLE E.3
STIFFENER DESIGN CONSTANTS
ROLLED SECTIONS GRADE 250
as Beam or
as Column
Column
Rolled
Section t, d tw ■c brc dwc >7 •8 Kg ■10 kn 0VC
Grade 250
mm mm mm mm mm mm kN kN/mm kN kN/mm kN kN

760UB 244 31.3 781 19.3 47.8 52.3 686 1234 9.41 1038 4.34 1612 1872
220 28.3 776 17.4 44.8 50.4 686 1009 9.07 877 3.92 1180 1690
197 25.4 770 15.6 41.9 48.6 686 813 8.75 735 3.51 850 1515
173 21.6 762 14.3 38.1 47.3 686 588 8.51 613 3.22 655 1388
147 17.5 754 12.9 34.0 45.9 686 386 8.26 493 2.90 481 1252
690UB140 19.0 684 12.4 34.2 42.8 615 455 7.70 477 2.79 476 1081
125 16.2 678 11.7 31.4 42.1 615 331 7.58 430 2.74 408 1061
610UB125 19.6 612 11.9 32.3 37.3 547 484 6.71 450 2.79 482 957
113 17.3 607 11.2 30.0 36.6 547 377 6.59 393 2.62 403 900
101 14.8 602 10.6 27.5 36.0 547 276 6.48 341 2.48 341 852
530UB 92.4 15.6 533 10.2 28.3 35.6 477 307 6.41 338 2.39 349 719
82.0 13.2 528 9.5 25.934.9 477 220 6.28 288 2.22 282 669
460UB 82.1 16.0 460 9.9 26.2 30.3 408 323 5.45 303 2.32 373 595
74.6 14.5 457 9.1 24.7 29.5 408 265 5.31 263 2.13 290 547
67.1 12.7 454 8.5 22.9 28.9 408 203 5.20 228 1.99 236 511
410UB 59.7 12.8 406 7.8 23.0 28.2 361 206 5.08 210 1.83 207 417
53.7 10.9 403 7.6 21.1 28.0 361 156 5.24 187 1.78 191 407
360UB 56.7 13.0 359 7.9 23.2 28.4 312 213 5.09 214 1.85 247 369
50.7 11.5 356 7.3 21.7 27.7 312 173 5.19 185 1.71 195 341
44.7 9.7 352 6.9 19.9 27.3 312 123 5.11 161 1.61 165 322
310UB 46.2 11.8 307 6.7 20.7 24.5 266 182 4.59 162 1.57 177 267
40.4 10.2 304 6.1 19.1 23.9 266 136 4.47 136 1.43 134 243
250UB 37.3 10.9 6.4 18.5 21.6 219 156 4.04 139 1.50 188 210
31.4 8.6 252 6.1 16.2 21.3 219 116 1.43 162 201
200UB 29.8 9.6 207 6.3 17.2 21.5 172 121 4.02 127 1.47 227 166
25.4 7.8 203 5.8 15.4 21.0 172 79.7 3.93 105 178 153

310UC283 44.1 365 26.9 59.3 57.3 247 2254 9.49 1795 6.05 12140 1005
240 37.7 353 23.0 52.9 53,4 247 1790 9.61 1369 5.18 7564 862
198 31.4 340 19.2 46.6 49.6 247 1242 8.93 1007 4.32 4408 719
158 25.0 327 15.7 40.2 46.1 247 788 8.30 710 3.53 2412 587
137 21.7 320 13.8 36.9 44.2 247 593 7.96 573 3.11 1641 515
118 18.7 315 11.9 33.9 42.3 247 441 7.61 472 2.78 1068 464
96.8 15.4 308 9.9 30.6 40.3 247 299 7.25 354 2.32 616 385
250UC 89.5 17.3 260 10.5 30.0 35.9 200 377 6.46 369 2.46 907 332
72.9 14.2 254 8.6 26.9 34.0 200 254 6.12 271 2.01 498 272
200UC 59.5 14.2 210 9.3 24.4 29.7 161 254 5.35 265 2.18 782 237
52.2 12.5 206 8.0 22.7 28.4 161 197 5.11 212 1.87 500 203
46.2 11.0 203 7.3 21.2 27.7 161 159 5.19 181 1.71 380 186
150UC 37.2 11.5 162 8.1 19.1 23.3 123 173 4.36 181 1.90 673 158
30.0 9.4 158 6.6 17.0 21.8 123 116 4.08 131 1.54 363 129
23.4 6.8 152 6.1 14.4 21.3 123 60.6 3.99 103 1.43 289 119
100UC 14.8 7.0 97 5.0 17.0 25.0 63 64.2 4.68 99.5 1.17 311 58.3
Yield stress of flanges and webs:- 250 MPa thickness > 12 mm (Grade 250 steel to AS 3679.1)
260 MPa thickness ^ 12 mm

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 325

 TABLE E.4
STIFFENER DESIGN CONSTANTS
WELDED SECTIONS GRADE 300
as Beam or as Column
Column
Welded
Section If d lw
TC ‘C dwc k8 •9 k-io •11 4>VC
Grade 300
mm mm mm mm mm kN kN/mm kN kN/mm kN kN

1200WB 455 40.0 1200 16.0 40.0 1120 2258 3.23 864 4.32 616 2903
423 36.0 1192 16.0 36.0 1120 1829 3.23 778 4.32 616 2903
392 32.0 1184 16.0 32.0 1120 1445 3.23 691 4.32 616 2903
342 32.0 1184 16.0 32.0 1120 1445 3.23 691 4.32 616 2903
317 28.0 1176 16.0 28.0 1120 1106 3.23 605 4.32 616 2903
278 25.0 1170 16.0 25.0 1120 882 3.23 540 4.32 616 2903
249 25.0 1170 16.0 25.0 1120 882 3.23 540 4.32 616 2903
1000WB 322 32.0 1024 16.0 32.0 960 1445 3.23 691 4.32 718 2488
296 28.0 1016 16.0 28.0 960 1106 3.23 605 4.32 718 2488
258 25.0 1010 16.0 25.0 960 882 3.23 540 4.32 718 2488
215 20.0 1000 16.0 20.0 960 605 3.46 432 4.32 718 2488
900WB 282 32.0 924 12.0 32.0 860 1445 2.42 536 3.35 344 1728
257 28.0 916 12.0 28.0 860 1106 2.42 469 3.35 344 1728
218 25.0 910 12.0 25.0 860 882 2.42 419 3.35 344 1728
175 20.0 900 12.0 20.0 860 605 2.59 335 3.35 344 1728
800WB 192 28.0 816 10.0 28.0 760 1106 2.02 391 2.79 225 1272
168 25.0 810 10.0 25.0 760 882 2.02 349 2.79 225 1272
146 20.0 800 10.0 20.0 760 605 2.16 279 2.79 225 1272
700WB173 28.0 716 10.0 28.0 660 1106 2.02 391 2.79 259 1105
150 25.0 710 10.0 25.0 660 882 2.02 349 2.79 259 1105
130 20.0 700 10.0 20.0 660 605 2.16 279 2.79 259 1105
115 16.0 10.0 16.0 660 387 2.16 223 2.79 259 1105

500WC 440 40.0 480 40.0 40.0 400 2258 8.06 2016 10.08 26024 2419
414 40.0 480 32.0 40.0 400 2258 6.45 1613 8.06 13324 1935
383 36.0 472 32.0 36.0 400 1829 6.45 1452 8.06 13324 1935
340 32.0 514 25.0 32.0 450 1445 5.04 1008 6.30 5647 1701
290 28.0 506 20.0 28.0 450 1106 4.03 756 5.40 2993 1458
267 25.0 500 20.0 25.0 450 882 4.03 675 5.40 2993 1458
228 20.0 490 20.0 20.0 450 605 4.32 540 5.40 2993 1458
400WC 361 40.0 430 40.0 40.0 350 2258 8.06 2016 10.08 29741 2117
328 40.0 430 28.0 40.0 350 2258 5.64 1411 7.06 10201 1482
303 36.0 422 28.0 36.0 350 1829 5.64 1270 7.06 10201 1482
270 32.0 414 25.0 32.0 350 1445 5.04 1008 6.30 7261 1323
212 25.0 400 20.0 25.0 350 882 4.03 675 5.40 3848 1134
181 20.0 390 20.0 20.0 350 605 4.32 540 5.40 3848 1134
144 16.0 382 16.0 16.0 350 387 3.46 346 4.32 1970 907
350WC 280 40.0 355 28.0 40.0 275 2258 5.64 1411 7.06 12983 1164
258 36.0 347 28.0 36.0 275 1829 5.64 1270 7.06 12983 1164
230 32.0 339 25.0 32.0 275 1445 5.04 1008 6.30 9241 1040
197 28.0 331 20.0 28.0 275 1106 4.03 756 5.40 4898 891

Yield stress of flanges and webs:- 300 MPa thickness > 12 mm (Grade 300 steel to AS 3679.2)
310 MPa thickness ^ 12 mm

326 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 APPENDIX F
FORMULAE FOR SECTION PROPERTIES OF I SECTION WITH HOLES

SECTION WITH HOLES IN BOTH FLANGES

nh holes x dh diameter each flange

Defining:—
x d A = area of unholed section
lx = second moment of area about x-axis
of unholed section
Sx = plastic section modulus about x-axis
dtrr' IQ of unholed section
it
Fig. F.1

A holed section A - 2nhdhtf

fd - tf 2
lx holed section = |x - 2nhdhtf - 2

lx holed section
Zx holed section
d/2
d - tf
Sx holed section = Sx - 2nhdht{
2

SECTION WITH HOLES IN ONE FLANGE

nh holes x dh diameter bottom flange

Defining:—
X------ X (holed)
A = area of unholed section
d x (unboletd)
lx ~ second moment of area about x-axis
fa of unholed section
Sx = plastic section modulus about x-axis
ai IQ of unholed section

Fig. F.2

A.d/2 - nhdhtf.tf/2
Ybh yth = d - ybh
A - nhdht,
Ay = ybh - d/2
nhdhtf3 d - tf 2
lx holed section = lx - - nhdhtf - [A - nhdhtf]Ay2
12 2
ix holed section
Zx holed section
yth
top flange
!x holed section
Zx holed section
bottom flange ybh

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 327

 For plastic section modulus, di = d - 2tf
equating areas bftf + (d-! - ybp).tw = bftf - nhdhtf + ybpt w

cMw + nhdhtf
gives ybP —
2t w

bf
c
•tvv

□I I ED 4

Fig. F.3

Sx holed section = bftf(d-, - ybp + tf/2) + (di - ybP)2tw/2 + 4- (b, - nhdh)tf(ybp + tf/2)

328 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 APPENDIX G
PROJECTED AREA OF OVERLAPPIMG STRESS COMES
FOR ANCHOR BOLT GROUPS
(BASED ON REF. 12.24 — SEE SECTION 5.12)

As explained in Section 5.12, the capacity of an individual anchor bolt to resist pull-out when embedded in a
concrete foundation is related to the projected area of a cone, the cone starting at the bolt head at the
embedded depth Ld with an angle at the apex of 90 degrees approximately (see Fig. G.1). The projected area is
that area in plan view which is given by
A = 7T L§

/
r
\ /
\
\ /
/
u
\ /

Fig. G.1

When anchor bolts are placed close enough together so that their failure cones overlap, calculation of the
projected plan area of the anchor bolt group becomes more difficult. Ref. 12.24 provides a method of
calculating such areas and the method given in Ref. 12.24 is summarized here. Because of the larger number
of overlapping configurations that are possible, it is not practical to give a simple closed form solution for each
case. Rather, reliance is placed on a method by which an overall area is calculated and deductions are made
to allow for the areas which are cut off or don’t form part of any failure cone of any of the anchor bolts in the
group.
It is necessary to make a “to-scale” sketch of the anchor bolt group and the foundation, so that the plan-
projected area that is to be calculated is recognised. The effective plan-projected area can then be determined
by selecting which of the sub-areas identified here needs to be subtracted from the total enclosing area. (Note:
the following inverse sine and inverse cosines terms are in degrees.)

Total Enclosing Area (Fig. G.2) This is the base area from which other areas are subtracted as required.

a 1 SHADED AREA = tt L§ + 2Ld(x + y) + xy (Ref. 12.24)

Fig. G.2

Triangular Sub-area (Fig. G.3)

x
X
2 sin 1
SHADED AREA = 2Ld - i2 *x x 2Ld
Ld~ 7rL;
4 2 180°
(Ref. 12.24)

Fig. G.3

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 329

Diagonally Inscribed Square (Fig. G.4)

SHADED AREA = n/x2" + y2 - 2L§ (Ref. 12.24)

\A
1 A
\>y

\A

Fig. G.4

Interior Inscribed Square (Fig. G.5)

SHADED AREA = (x 2Ld)(y-2Ld) (Ref. 12.24)

lAs*
1
o
u
x

Fig. G.5

Circle Segment Deleted (Fig. G.6)

2 cos-1
{s Ld) y
SHADED AREA - ttL§ »
360
(Ref. 12.24)

y
&

Fig. G.6

The area calculations from the various sub-areas can be used to estimate the plan-projected area of a variety
of anchor bolt group configurations. An example of the use of this technique is illustrated in Section 4.12.7,
while other examples may be found in Ref. 12.24.

330 AiSC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

 APPENDIX H
USER’S GUIDE FOR COMPUTER PROGRAM “LIMCON 99

Introduction
LIMCON is the companion program to this book. LIMCON will assist you in the design and checking of any of the
connection types covered in the book. This appendix contains all the information required for the installation and use
of the program.
Easy to Use
LIMCON is menu-driven with pull-down menus. You enter data into screen “forms” where data is grouped and
displayed on context. Help information is provided for all data entry items. LIMCON can display and print 3D views
of connection details.
Convenient Output
LIMCON provides printed reports with all design values. Simple printer selection allows detail views to be printed
with most commonly used printer types.
Registered users may contact AISC or Engineering Systems for technical support.

Minimum Hardware Requirements

• IBM-compatible PC.
• PC-DOS or MS-DOS operating system.
• 640 Kb RAM {520 Kb free).
• Graphics capability (VGA recommended).
• Hard disk.
8 1.2 Mb or 1.44 Mb floppy disk drive.
8 A maths coprocessor is recommended (not applicable for 80486DX and Pentium computers).

installation
Place the original program diskette (either a 1.2 Mb or a 1.44 Mb diskette) in any appropriate floppy disk drive and
enter "A:INSTALL” (or “B:INSTALL” if you used drive B:). The automatic installation procedure will first ask for the
name of the hard disk drive and directory where you wish to install LIMCON and then will do all that is necessary to
install the program. During installation, the system configuration file CONFIG.SYS will be checked to ensure that the
FILES parameter is set to 20 or more.
LIMCON offers full path support. If you wish to run from a working directory which is not the LIMCON program
directory, simply add the name of the LIMCON program directory to the PATH statement.
If your program was supplied with a hardware lock, the device must be connected to the printer port or serial port for
successful operation of LIMCON.

NOTE
If your program was supplied without a hardware lock, you must recall LIMCON before transferring itto another
computer or installing an updated version. Place the original program diskette in the floppy disk drive and enter
“A:!NSTALL” (or “B:INSTALL” if you used drive B:) and then select “Recall LIMCON” on the menu which is
displayed.

Mouse
LIMCON supports the Microsoft mouse and others which are Microsoft-compatible. In order to use a mouse you must
install the “device driver” supplied with the mouse.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 331

Operation
Starting LIMCON
To start or recommence a particular job, enter the command LMC JOB where JOB is the job name. The LIMCON
main menu gives access to a series of pull-down menus containing all program functions including the entry of project
details, checking and design of connections and the printing of reports.

The Main Menu

Job Groups Design Print Exit

The main menu appears at the top of the screen. Each LIMCON function is performed by selecting an item from the
main menu. A “pull-down” menu is then displayed beneath the item giving a range of options for this item.

Selecting a Menu Item

A menu item may be selected by any of the following methods:
® Point at the item and “click” with the (eft mouse button.
• Press the <- and or T and i arrows keys until the desired item is “highlighted” and then press Enter.
• Press the “hot-key” character, shown as a capital letter in the menu item.

Returning to the Main Menu

You may return to the main menu by any of the following methods:
• Press Esc.
• Press the right mouse button.
• Select another item on the main menu.
« Click the mouse anywhere outside the main area.

The Job Menu

Project . .■ ...

Existing jobs
Job details

Existing jobs Display the list of existing jobs. Select any existing job to make it the current
job.
Job details Enter a new job name, the project description and the designer’s initials. The
job name is the name by which the LIMCON run is identified. The job name
must be between 1 and 8 characters in length and may contain any
combination of letters and numbers (no embedded blanks are permitted).
An existing LIMCON report can be printed by setting the job name and then
selecting the print function.

332 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

The Groups Menu
Groups
Weld group
Bolt group

Weld group Check a weld group. The weld type is selected from a list of shapes; single
or double vertical lines, single or double channels, full rectangle, I section or
circular section.
Bolt group Check an eccentrically loaded bolt group. The bolt group configuration is
defined by the number of rows and columns of bolts.

The Check and Design Menus

Check / Design
Flexible...
Rigid...
Stiff seat
Bracing
sPlices...
Base Plate

Flexible... Bolted angle seat

Welded angle seat
bearing Pad
flexible End plate
angle Cleat
web Side plate

Rigid... Welded beam/column

Bolted moment end plate
Haunched beam end plate

sPlices... Welded
Bolted

Both Check and Design give access to a sub-menu of standard connection types. The connection types are listed
in the associated menus.
The nomenclature used on input screens is that used in the corresponding diagram in this book. Typical output is
shown (for the bolted splice) in this appendix.
For some types of connection the number of variables is sufficiently large that the automatic design procedure may
have difficulty in achieving an “optimum” result. If this occurs, simply retry your preferred connection configuration
in Check mode.

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 333

 Print
directory of Reports
Print report
Delete report
Configure printer

directory of Reports Display the list of existing reports.

Print report Print the report for the current job.
Delete report Delete the report for the current job.
Configure printer Select the printer type (necessary for LIMCON to be able to produce graphics
on the printer) and set the page length. A variety of common printer protocols
is available. If your printer is not listed it will usually emulate one of the
standard printer types shown.

Exit program
return to Limcon

Exit program Confirm exit to DOS.

return to Limcon Cancels exit selection.

Each connection is described by entering data into a "screen form” which has been set out to simplify data entry by
its arrangement of items in logical groups and the provision of on-screen help information to describe the precise
input required. Default values are shown for each item on the form; the default values used (including values for
minimum design actions) are those used in the corresponding example in the AISC book, For some entries, such as
weld classification or bolt type, you may choose the required entry from a selection of the options available.
On each screen form, the functions F1: Accept and Esc:Abandon appear on the top line. Reports are displayed on
the screen in a report "window” and the functions available at that stage are shown on the bottom line of the window.
To select a function, either click on the required function with the mouse or press the corresponding key.
Move around the form by using the mouse or the arrow keys. Individual data items may be entered and changed as
required. Once all entries are correct, accept the entire screen with function F1 (the screen will also be accepted if
you press Enter on the last data item). On acceptance of the screen, computations will commence. In the case of
moment-resisting details where the elastic capacity is exceeded, an elasto-piastic analysis will be performed.
Once computations are complete a results “window” appears, displaying the design report which contains the input
data and computed values. You may scroll the report forwards and backwards in this window to view the complete
report. If the design or check is successful, you are offered options to revise the input data (function F6) or print the
report directly (function F7). For most details you may also generate a 3D view of the detail (function F8).
If the connection is inadequate the report window will offer options to revise the input or quit from the screen
altogether. If the preliminary geometric checks (performed only in check mode) have detected an error, warning
messages are reported and you may either continue with the computations or revise the input.

334 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS DSC/04—1994

Graphics Operation
When a 3D view is displayed on the screen, it may be added to the design report by pressing K or redrawn from a
different viewpoint by pressing V. You may return to the detail screen by pressing Q.
If you have restarted a job for which a report already exists, the first time that you select K you will be asked if you
wish to append to the existing report, if you choose not to append, the previous report is overwritten.
When you select option V, you will be asked for a new viewing direction in terms of the horizontal and vertical angles
in degrees. Specify an elevation with angles of 0° and 0° respectively, and end view with angles of 90° and 0°, and
a plan with 0° and 90°.

Output
Typical output from LIMCON is show below for a bolted splice.

LIMCON Version 1.30 March 1994 14-APR-94

17:17:52
Job ID : AISC
Project : BOLTED SPLICE
User : ABC
Connection : BOLTED SPLICE

4* +
4- +
4*
4- 4.

ZP~~—

Bl Sect : 410UB53.7 Gr: 250

Gap between ends: 10
Flanges : 310x170x12 Splice plates (ext). Gr/fy/fu: 250/260/410
8-M20 8.8/TB/N per., flange on 90 gauge at 70 pitch.
Web : 2/190x280x5 Splice plates. Gr/fy/fu: 250/260/410
8-M20 8.8/TB/N in 4 rows and 1 cols, each side.
Spacing: 110 across gap, 70 between rows.
Design Actions:
N*: .00 V*: 50.00 M*: 80.00
Minimum design actions: tension: 30% of phi.Ns
compression: 30% of phi.Ns
bending: 30% of phi.Ms
shear: 0 kN
Critical limit state : end web tearing cap.
phi.Ru/S* : 1.102 pass

DSC/04—1994 AISC: DESIGN OF STRUCTURAL CONNECTIONS 335