Design Example for Beams with Web Openings

RICHARD L. KUSSMAN AND PETER B. COOPER

DUE TO the increasing cost of energy and the difficulty of branching out at right angles. For both architectural and
obtaining raw materials, economy has a high priority in all aesthetic reasons it is undesirable to run the HVAC system
aspects of design. In the design of multistory steel buildings, below the floor members, so they must penetrate them. It is
savings can be realized by passing ductwork for heating, also desirable to keep the HVAC system on a level plane,
ventilation, and air conditioning systems through steel floor thereby reducing installation costs by decreasing the number
beams, rather than under them. Not only does this practice of bends in the duct material. It is necessary to provide a duct
save in the overall height of the structure, along with all the area of 144 sq. in. with 1-in.-thick insulation on all sides.
related benefits in material savings, but it also saves in the Vertical positioning of the ducts used in this example are
cost of heating and air conditioning by enclosing less volume shown in Fig. 2. The corner radius was determined from
to be heated or cooled. Eccentric openings are of special recommendations for members subjected to fatigue loadings.2
interest because not all floor beams and girders are of the While structures designed by plastic methods are not subject
same depth at any given level. It is desirable to keep the to fatigue situations, these guidelines were used to provide a
ductwork on a relatively level plane to cut down on the cost reasonable basis for determining the corner radii of web
of fabricating bends. It is doubtful that it costs any more to openings. It is also possible that a slightly smaller opening
fabricate an eccentric opening in a steel beam than it does to could have been used to accommodate the duct. The use of a
fabricate a concentric opening. Thus, even more savings can smaller opening might, however, cause problems in the
be realized by using the eccentric opening. The addition of installation of the duct insulation and thereby increase costs.
reinforcement is also sometimes desirable so that a heaviér A liberal clearance was therefore provided in this example.
section is not required because of the opening. Design The floor system is to be designed to carry a live load of
formulas have been developed for beams with concentric and 100 psf3 and a dead load of 80 psf (50 psf for the concrete
eccentric web openings, both unreinforced and reinforced;1 slab and 30 psf for other dead loads). Using A36 steel and
the purpose of this paper is to illustrate the application of the AISC Specification4 for plastic design, along with current
these formulas in a typical design problem. research results, the locations where openings can be placed
along the length of the floor beams and girders will be
PROBLEM STATEMENT explored with the opening reinforcement varying as follows:
(1) no opening reinforcement is provided, (2)
A portion of the floor system supporting a concourse in a
multistory building is shown in Fig. 1. The floor system
consists of girders spanning from column to column, with
floor beams supported by the girders. The floor beams and
girders support a 4-in. concrete slab, which in turn provides
continuous lateral support to the top flanges of the floor
members. Moment connections are provided between the
columns and girders; therefore, the girder ends are assumed
to be fixed. It is further assumed that the columns are W14
sections and that the girder span is taken from column face to
column face. The floor beams are attached to the girders with
shear connections; simple supports are therefore assumed.
For architectural reasons the floor beams are limited to a 21-
in. depth.
The heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC)
ducts run parallel to the girders, with service ducts

Richard L. Kussman is Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of Civil

Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kans.
Peter B. Cooper is Professor of Civil Engineering, Dept. of Civil
Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kans. Fig. 1. Plan view of floor system

48
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 (a) Floor beam elevation at opening
Figure 2

(b) Girder elevation at opening

enough reinforcement is supplied to resist the maximum shear Calculation of Internal Beam Forces —The internal beam
force in the beam, and (3) the minimum reinforcement forces are described by the two expressions below, based on
required to develop the shear strength of the section is Fig. 3. These forces are plotted in Fig. 4 along with the
furnished. interaction diagrams for the floor beams.

FLOOR BEAMS V 64.2 − 3.67 x

=
Vp 206
Selection of Beam Section x

M 64.2 x − 184
. x2
=
Uniformly Distributed Load: Mp 576
x
w = (1.7)(12)(0.10 + 0.08) = 3.67 kips/ft
Design Moment: Opening Locations for Ar = 0—Calculate the interaction
M = (3.67)(35)2/8 = 562 kip-ft diagram coordinates, using formulas presented in the
Appendix, with Ar = e = 0:
Required Plastic Section Modulus:
Z = (562)(12)/36 = 187 in.3  3   2086
.  
2
12 
2
α =    1 −  = 0163
.
Try W21 × 82 (Z = 192 in.3 > 187 in.3):  16  9.5   20.86
Design Shear: 12
10.4  1 
2
V = (3.67)(35)/2 = 64.2 kips 12 
β=  1 −   = 0.288
Plastic Shear Force: . )  2086
(2)(712 .  1163
. 
Vp = (0.55)(36)(20.86)(0.499)
10.4  1  1  
2
= 206 kips > 64.2 kips
1+  −  
Use W21 × 82  M  .  4  2086
712 .  
  = = 0.911
Properties for Investigating Local Strength at the  Mp 0 1+
10.4
Opening (4)(7.12)

Opening Parameters:
 M  1 − 0.288
 
M  = = 0522
h = 6 in.; a = 9.5 in.; e=0 .
 p  1 1 + 10.4
Cross Section Properties:
(4)(712
. )
Af = (8.962)(0.795) = 7.12 in.2
Aw = (20.86)(0.499) = 10.4 in.2 12
V   1 2 2

  = 2 −
6   712
. 
 −  (0.288) 
2
Reference Values:
Mp = (192)(36)/12 = 576 kip-ft  Vp  1  2 2086
.   10.4  
Vp = 206 kips (see above) = 0158
.

49
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
 Fig. 3. Floor beam loading, shear, and moment diagrams

Fig. 5. Permissible opening locations for floor beams

The above coordinates are plotted to form the

approximate interaction diagram shown in Fig. 4 for Ar = 0.
As shown schematically in Fig. 5 and graphically in Fig. 4,
there are no positions along the beam where the opening can
be placed for Ar = 0. This is because all the points on the
internal beam force curve lie outside the failure envelope for
Ar = 0.

Opening Locations for Ar Large Enough to

Accommodate Maximum Beam Shear —The following
quadratic equation in Ar is obtained from the generalized
equation for (V/Vp)1 presented in the Appendix, with Ar ≤
(Ar)min:
AAr2 + BAr + C = 0
where
16α
A=
Aw (1 + α )
2

12
 2
V  
2
8α   2h 
B= 1 −  −   
(1 + α ) Aw  d  Vp  
 
2
2h   α   V 
2

C = 1 −    − 
 d   1 + α   V p 

Calculation of Ar:
Vmax/Vp = 0.312
(16)(0163
. )
A= 2
= 0.0207
Fig. 4. Floor beam interaction diagrams (10.4) (1163
. )

50
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 12 Opening Locations for ( Ar)min
. )  
2
(8)(0163 12 
B=  1 −  − (0.312) 
2
(9.5)(0.499)
. )(10.4) 
(1163 . 
2086  ( Ar ) min = = 2.74 in.2
3
= 0.0311
2
Use 1-Bar 3¾ × ¾ above and below the opening on
 12  (0163
. ) one side only.
C = 1 −  − (0.312) 2 = −0.0721
 .  (1163
2086 . )
(Ar = 2.81 in.2 > 2.74 in.2; br/tr = 5.0 < 8.5)
− B ± B − 4 AC
2
Calculation of interaction diagram coordinates using
Ar = formulas given in the Appendix with e = 0, Ar = 2.81 in.2:
2A
− 0.0311 ± (0.0311) 2 − (4)(0.0207)(−0.0721)
= 2.81  12  10.4  1  6  
2
(2)(0.0207) 1+  +  −  
 M .  20.86 712
712 .  4  2086
.  
= 126
. in.2   =
 Mp  0 10.4
1+
(4)(712
. )
Use 1-Bar 3 × 7 above and below the opening on = 108
.
16
one side only. 2.74
 M  1−
2 2 712
.
(Ar = 1.31 in. > 1.26 in. ; br/tr = 6.9 < 8.5)   = = 0.451
 M p  1 1 + 10.4
(4)(7.12)
Calculation of interaction diagram coordinates using
Note that in the above calculation for (M/Mp)1, the
formulas given in the Appendix with Ar = 1.26 in.2, ë = 0:
calculated value of (Ar)min was used in place of the area
. )  126
(2)(0163 .  10.4 of the bar chosen. This is because Ar is subtracted from
β =−  + ×
1163
.  7.12  (2)(712
. ) one in this equation, and logic tells us that more
12 reinforcement must increase the load carrying capacity of
 12 
2
1 .  
. )  126
(16)(0163
2
 1 −  −    a member, not decrease it. Therefore, the (Ar)min value
 .  1163
2086 . . ) 2  10.4  
(1163 calculated as above should be used to prevent overly
= 0.210 conservative results.
V 
  = 1 −
.  12  10.4  1  6  
2 12 
1+
126
+  −  = 0.425
      Vp  1  . 
2086
 M .  2086
712 .  712 .  4  2086
.  
  =
M  10.4 These coordinates are plotted on Fig. 4 to form the
 p0 1+
(4)(7.12) outside interaction diagram. With the reinforcing area set at
= 0.986 (Ar)min, the opening can be placed anywhere along the beam
as shown in Fig. 5.
.
126
 M 1− − 0.210
  = .
712 GIRDERS
= 0.449
 Mp 1 10.4
1+ Selection of Girder Section
(4)(7.12)
Load:
12
V   1 2 2  P = (3.67)(35) = 128 kips
  = 2 −
6   712
. 
 −  (0.210) 
2

 Vp  1  2 2086
.   10.4   Design Moment:
= 0.313 M = (128)(11.4)/2 = 730 kip-ft
Required Plastic Section Modulus:
These coordinates are plotted in Fig. 4 to describe the Z = (730)(12)/36 = 243 in.3
center interaction diagram. It should be noted that the
maximum shear in the beam is just within the failure Try W27 × 84 (Z = 244 in.3 > 243 in.3)
envelope of the diagram, as shown by the point on the Design Shear:
internal beam force curve corresponding to M/Mp equals V = 128 kips
zero. In the regions of higher moment, part of the internal
beam force curve falls outside the envelope, indicating that Plastic Shear Force:
the opening should not be placed in the areas shown in Fig. 5 Vp = (0.55)(36)(0.463)(26.69) = 245 > 128 kips
with Ar = 1.26 in.2 Use W27 × 84
51
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
Properties for Investigating Local Strength at the
Opening
Opening Parameters:
h = 6 in.; a = 9.5 in.; e = 3 in.
Cross Section Properties:
Af = (9.963)(0.636) = 6.34 in.2
Aw = (0.463)(26.69) = 12.4 in.2
Reference Values:
Mp = (244)(36)/12 = 732 kip-ft
Vp = 245 kips (see above)

Calculation of Internal Beam Forces —The internal beam

forces form a discontinuous curve described by the
expressions below, based on Fig. 6, with the appropriate
limits. This curve is shown in Fig. 7.

V 128 
= = 0522
. 
Vp 245 
 Limits: 0 ≤ x ≤ 114
. ft
M − 730 + 128x 
=  Fig. 6. Girder loading, shear, and moment diagrams
Mp
x
732 

V 
=0 
Vp 
 Limits: 11.4 ft ≤ x ≤ 17.4 ft
M 
= 0.997
Mp

where x is taken to be positive from the column face toward
midspan.

Opening Locations for Ar = 0—Calculation of interaction

diagram coordinates using formulas presented in the
Appendix with Ar = 0, e = 3 in.:
2 2
3  26.69   12 6 
αT =   1 − −  = 0157
.
16  9.5   26.69 26.69 
2 2
3  26.69   12 6 
αB =   1 − +  = 0889
.
16  9.5   26.69 26.69 
12
12.4  12 + 6 1 
2
βT =  1 −   = 0.296
(2)(6.34)  26.69  1157
. 
12
12.4  1 
2
12 − 6
βB =  1 −   = 0552
.
(2)(6.34)  26.69  1889
. 

12.4  1 ( 6) 2 + (2)(6)(3) 
1+  − 
 M 6.34  4 (26.69) 2  = 0867
  = .
 Mp  0 12.4
1+
(4)(6.34)
 M  1 − 0552
.
  = = 0.301
 M p  1 1 + 12.4
(4)(6.34) Fig. 7. Girder interaction diagrams

52
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 12 the vertical leg of the interaction diagram for Ar = 0. This
 VT   1 6 + 3  2  6.34  2 
  =  −  −  (0.296) 
2
indicates that a relatively large area of reinforcement is
 Vp  1  2 26.69   12.4   required to include these points in the failure envelope.
= 0.060
After some preliminary trials, try Ar = 1.88 in.2
12
 VB   1 6 − 3  2  6.34  2 
  =  −  − . )2 
 (0552
 Vp  1  2 26.69   12.4  Use 1-Bar 3 × 5/8 above and below the opening on

one side only.
= 0.266 (Ar = 1.88 in.2; br/tr = 4.8 < 8.5)
V  Calculation of interaction diagram coordinates using
  = 0.060 + 0.266 = 0.326 formulas presented in the Appendix with Ar = 1.88 in.2, e = 3
 Vp  1
in.:

The above coordinates are plotted to form the . )  188

(2)(0157 .  12.4
βT = −  + ×
approximate interaction diagram shown in Fig. 7 for Ar = 0. 1157
.  6.34  (2)(6.34)
There are no positions along the beam where the opening 12
 12 + 6 
2
1 (16)(0157 . )2 
. )(188
can be placed for the case where Ar = 0, since all points on 1 −  − 
the internal beam force curve lie outside the failure envelope,  26.69  1157
. . ) 2 (12.4) 2 
(1157
as shown in Fig. 5. = 0135
.

Opening Locations for Ar Large Enough to (2)(0.889)  188

.  12.4
βB = −  + ×
Accommodate Maximum Beam Shear —To determine the 1889
.  6.34  (2)(6.34)
reinforcing area required to reach the maximum beam shear, 12
 12 − 6  2 1 .  
. )  188
16(0889
2
a trial and error process is used, since the equations for  1 −  −   
eccentric web openings become quite unwieldy when the Ar  26.69  1889
. . ) 2  12.4  
(1889
term is isolated. = 0186
.
A brief examination of Fig. 7 will show that the V/Vp
values for the shear spans are a fairly large distance from .  12 
188
1+  
 M  6.34  26.69 
  = +
 Mp 0 1+
12.4
(4)(6.34)
12.4  1 (6) 2 + (2)(6)(3) − (3) 2 (0.463)(3) 2 
 − − 
6.34  4 (26.69) 2 . )(26.69) 2 
(3463
12.4
1+
(4)(6.34)
= 0.971
188
.
 M  1− − 0186
.
  = 6.34 = 0.348
 Mp 1 1+
12.4
(4)(6.34)
12
 VT   1 6 + 3  2  6.34  2 
  =  −  − . )2 
 (0135
 V p  1  2 26.69   12.4  
= 0147
.
12
 VB   1 6 − 3  2  6.34  2 
  =  −  − . )2 
 (0186
 V p  1  2 26.69   12.4  
= 0.376
V 
  = 0147
. + 0.376 = 0523
.
Fig. 8. Permissible opening locations for girders  Vp  1

53
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
(V/Vp)1 is greater than the maximum V/Vp ratio in the girders points on the internal beam force curve. However, it would
(0.522); therefore, the trial Ar is o.k. be uneconomical to try to include additional positions along
The above coordinates are plotted in Fig. 7 to describe the beam, since little is gained for a significant increase in
the interaction diagram for Ar = 1.88 in.2 It should be noted Ar.
that, while the maximum shear alone and shear along with
low moment are within the failure envelope, as the moment SUMMARY AND DESIGN DETAILS
increases some regions of the girder cannot accommodate the
opening, as shown in Fig. 8. The possible opening locations for the beams and girders are
summarized in Figs. 5 and 8, respectively. The positions
where openings can be placed are obtained graphically from
Opening locations for ( Ar)min Figs. 4 and 7, noting that where the internal beam forces fall
(9.5)(0.463) inside the failure envelope, an opening can be placed. On the
( Ar ) min = = 2.54 in.2 interaction diagram for the floor beams, Fig. 4, it can be seen
3
that if Ar were reduced from (Ar)min, the sloping portion of the
Use 1-Bar 3½ × ¾ above and below the opening on diagram could be brought closer to the internal beam forces.
one side only. Conversely, in Fig. 7, the interaction diagram for the girders,
(Ar = 2.63 in.2 > 2.54 in.2; br/tr = 4.7 < 8.5) a substantial increase in Ar over (Ar)min would provide a very
minor expansion in the possible locations of the opening. In
Calculations of interaction diagram coordinates using general, when concentrated loads are involved it would be
Appendix formulas with Ar = 2.63 in.2, e = 3 in.: difficult as well as uneconomical to provide sufficient
reinforcement to allow positioning the opening at any desired
2.63  12 
 M 1+  + location along the beam. Further restrictions are placed on
6.34  26.69 
  = opening locations in the girders, due to limited experimental
 Mp  0 12.4 data on web crippling in beams with web openings in the
1+
(4)(6.34) vicinity of concentrated loads and reactions. It is therefore
12.4  1 (6)2 + (2)(6)(3) − (3) 2 (0.463)(3) 2  recommended that the edge of the opening be a distance of at
 + −  least d/2 from the points where concentrated loads or
6.34  4 (26.69) 2 . )(26.69)2 
(3963
reactions are introduced unless bearing stiffeners are
12.4
1+ provided.2
(4)(6.34) The following suggestions for design details are provided
= 1007
.
to supplement the information in the example:
2.54 1. Bars were used on one side of the web only.
 M  1−
  = 6.34 = 0.403 a. This gives approximately the same results as
 Mp 1 1+ 12 .4 bars placed on both sides of the web.5
(4)(6.34) b. The reinforcement is cheaper to fabricate, since
welding is required on one side only.
Note that in the above calculation for (M/Mp)1, the 2. The reinforcing bars should be checked for:
calculated value of (Ar)min was used in place of the a. Weld compatibility with web.
reinforcing bar area. This is because Ar is subtracted b. The br/tr ratio.
from 1 in the equation, and logic tells us that more 3. The reinforcing bars should be extended beyond the
reinforcement must increase the load carrying capacity of edge of the opening:
a member, not decrease it. Therefore the (Ar)min value a. A sufficient length to develop the strength of the
calculated as above should be used to prevent overly bar in the welds.
conservative results. b. A minimum of 3 in.
4. The welds should:
V  12 a. Be in accordance with the AISC Specification.
  = 1 − = 0550
.
 Vp  1 26.69 b. Have a weld stress of 1.7 times the allowable
weld stress or less.
These coordinates are plotted in Fig. 7 to form the
interaction diagram for Ar = 2.63 in.2 With this area of ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
reinforcement, the center line of the opening can be up to 8.6 The material presented in this report was developed as part of
ft from the supports in the shear spans and anywhere in the the research supported by the National Science Foundation
center portion, as shown in Fig. 8. Grant GK-35762 and the Department of Civil Engineering at
If Ar were increased above (Ar)min, point 1 on the Kansas State University. This support is gratefully
interaction diagram would move upward to include more acknowledged.
54
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 NOMENCLATURE REFERENCES

1. Wang, T. M., R. R. Snell, P. B. Cooper Strength of Beams with

Af Area of one flange (bf × tf) Eccentric Reinforced Holes Journal of the Structural Division,
Ar Area of reinforcement above opening, also area ASCE, Vol. 101, No. ST9, Proc. Paper 11540, Sept. 1975.
2. Subcommittee on Beams with Web Openings of the Structural
of reinforcement below opening
Division Suggested Design Guides for Beams with Web Holes
(Ar)min Minimum area of reinforcement required to Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. ST11,
reach shear capacity of section Proc. Paper 8536, Nov. 1971.
3. Uniform Building Code 1973 Edition, International Conference
Aw Area of web (d × tw)
of Building Officials, Whittier, Calif., 1973.
M Moment at center line of opening 4. Manual of Steel Construction 7th Edition, American Institute of
Mp Plastic moment of section Steel Construction, New York, 1970.
5. Redwood, R. G. Tables for Plastic Design of Beams with
|M/Mp|x Absolute value of moment to plastic moment Rectangular Holes Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 9, No. 1,
ratio along beams and girders Jan. 1972.
(M/Mp)0, Coordinates of points on approximate interaction APPENDIX
(M/Mp)1 diagram
APPROXIMATE INTERACTION DIAGRAM
P Concentrated load EQUATIONS
V Shear force at center line of opening
Vp Plastic shear force of section The equations presented below are used to construct an
approximate interaction diagram similar to Fig. 9.1 Point 0 on
|V/Vp|x Absolute value of shear force to plastic shear the diagram has the coordinates [0,(M/Mp)0], Point 1 is
force along beams and girders described by [(V/Vp)1, (M/Mp)1], and the point on the V/Vp-
(V/Vp)1 Coordinate of point on approximate interaction axis is (V/Vp)1 from the origin. These equations are for the
diagram general case of a reinforced eccentric web opening. To obtain
(VB/Vp)1 Ratio of shear force in bottom tee section (VB) to equations for other, less general cases, Ar, e, or both Ar and
plastic shear force for point 1 on approximate e, are taken equal to zero as appropriate.
interaction diagram For e ≤ u:
(VT/Vp)1 Ratio of shear force in top tee section (VT) to
plastic shear force for point 1 on approximate Ar  2h  Aw  1 h2 + 2he 
1+  +  − 
interaction diagram  M Af  d  Af  4 d2 
  =
Z Plastic section modulus  Mp  0 A
1+ w
a One-half opening length 4 Af
bf Flange width For u ≤ e ≤ u + q + Ar/tw:
br Width of reinforcement  M
c Web thickness plus width of reinforcement (br +   =
 Mp  0
tw)
Ar  2h  Aw  1 h2 + 2he − e2 t we2 
d Beam depth 1+  +  − − 2
Af  d  A f  4 d2 cd 
e Eccentricity (distance between middepth of
A
section and mid-depth of opening) 1+ w
h One-half opening depth 4 Af
tf Flange thickness For e ≤ u + q + Ar/tw:
tr Thickness of reinforcement
 M
tw Web thickness   =
 Mp  0
u Distance from edge of opening to face of
reinforcement Ar  2h + 2e Ar  Aw  1 h2 + 2he 
1+  − +  − 
w Uniformly distributed load Af  d Aw  A f  4 d2 
A
x Coordinate defining positions along beams and 1+ w
girders 4 Af
α ,β Coefficients used in approximate design atw
( Ar ) min =
formulas with subscripts T and B to denote top 3
and bottom tee sections, respectively

55
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
 For Ar ≥ (Ar)min:
Ar
1−
 M Af
  = where the Ar value is ( Ar ) min
 Mp  1 A
1+ w
4 Af
V 2h
  = 1 −
 Vp  1 d
Figure 9 2α T  Ar  A
βT = −   + w ×
1+ α T  Af  2 A f
12
 2h + 2e 
2
1 16α T  Ar  
2
 1 −  −   
 d  1 + α T (1 + α T ) 2  Aw  
For Ar < (Ar)min: 

Ar
1− − βB 2α B  Ar  A
 M Af βB = −   + w ×
 
M  = A
1+ α B  Af  2 Af
 p 1 1+ w 12
4 Af  2h − 2e  2 1 16α B  Ar  
2
 1 −  −   
V  V  V   d  1 + α B (1 + α B ) 2  Aw  
  =  T  +  B 
V  V   
 p  1  p  1  Vp  1
2 2
 VT 
2 2 3  d  2h 2e 
1 h + e
2
 Af  αT =   1 − − 
  =  −  − βT  16  a   d
V  d
 p 1  2 d   Aw 
2
 VB 
2 2 2
1 h − e
2
 Af  3  d  2h 2e 
  =  −  − βB αB =   1 − + 
 Vp  1  2 d   Aw  16  a   d d

56
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION