Professional Documents
Culture Documents
In (g) the intersection of the chords falls on the centreline of the column, but
in (h) the vertical and diagonal forces cross on the column face. This
eccentricity will cause bending moment in the column.
Figure 12.8 shows various kinds of vertical (wall) bracing. Note that in Figure 12.8(c)
the slanted bracing element is itself braced by lattice members connecting it to a
similar element parallel to it.
Here we deal with angles, which are commonly used in lattice structures or bracing,
but also with channels and other profiles.
In some cases the diagonals or verticals in a truss or bracing members may have all
of their constitutive parts fully connected at their ends, such as in Figure 12.7 (d) and
(e), but as can be seen in all the other examples in Figure 12.1 to 12.9 (Figure 12.9 (g)
is another exception), only some of the parts are typically connected. In the case of
an angle, for example, only one of the legs is usually attached. In such a case shear
lag will occur. Figure 12.13 demonstrates this phenomenon where, in an angle, the
connecting bolts apply force only to one leg. The stress spreads to the other leg, but
not abruptly. By the time you get to the last bolt, quite a bit of the stress has found its
way into the other leg, but the stress in the connected leg is still higher than the
average stress in the whole angle. Only at some distance after the last bolt do we
reach a situation where the stress is reasonably uniform in the angle.
To ensure that the localised overstress of the connected leg will not cause failure,
Clause 12.3.3.2 of SANS 10162-1 requires that we work with an adjusted effective net
1
area Ane
:
If there at least 4 bolts in line (i.e. in the direction the force is applied):
(12.1)
(12.2)
where Ane = the net area of the angle, calculated as discussed in above.
10
(12.3)
Ane1 = 0, 85 Ane
(12.4)
Ane1 = 0, 75 Ane
(12.5)
where
Tr = Ag f y
(12.6)
Tr = 0,85A' ne f u
(12.7)
The requirements of Clause 12.3.3.3 can be explained with reference to Figure 12.15.
Ane1 = wt
(12.8)
If the connected leg only has welds along its sides, as shown in (c):
If L 2w : Ane1 = wt
(12.9)
(12.10)
If L < w : Ane1 = 0, 75 Lt
(12.11)
The other leg is connected only along its one edge, as shown in Figure 12.15 (d).
Let the length of this weld be L1. Then, according to Clause 12.3.3.3 (c):
If L1 w2 : Ane 2 = 1 w2 t
L1
(12.12)
(12.13)
x is, as shown in (d), the distance from the weld to the centroid of the unconnected
leg.
(12.14)
A channel would be treated the same way, except that the definitions of
connected both sides and connected on one side change, while some elements
may have to be disregarded see Figure 12.16.
12
Tr = Ag f y
(12.15)
Tr = 0,85Ane f u
(12.16)
13
Tables 12.1, 12.2 and 12.3 at the end of this chapter show the resistance of equal
and unequal angles when all these considerations are taken into account.
For members in compression the effective area is taken as the full area, except
where local buckling can play a role, i.e. in slender members. In other words, shear
lag is negated in compression members.
14
tension and shear block failure, but as described in 6.5 above, it is safe to only do a
check on the Whitmore width as shown in Figure 12.20 (a) :
Tu t p f y Lw
(12.17)
This simple check confirms that the gusset plate is strong enough against all tensile
effects, including tension and block shear failure.
15
The Whitmore section test is also applicable where in the case of a gusset that is
properly attached to strong members it goes outside the plate proper, as shown in
(b). However, where the 30 lines go outside the free edges of the gusset, as shown
in (c), Lw should be limited to the actual width of the plate at the end of the
connected element. This sketch also demonstrates that the Whitmore section
applies to welded joints just as it does to bolted joints.
It is important that gussets should not buckle in compression; in fact, the design of
the diagonals and verticals in trusses and lattice girders assumes that the gussets will
give a degree of moment support to the ends of these members. The acceptable
approach is to design the end part of the gusset as a column of width Lw, thickness
t pand effective length 0,6 times the longest of 1, 2and 3shown in (a).
A problem arises in a situation as shown in (d), where the Whitmore sections of the
various elements connected to the gusset overlap. The best approach to this
situation is to combine the forces in the elements and to work with a combined
Whitmore section. It is obviously always desirable to make the gusset as small as
possible and bring the elements in as close as possible. Note how this was achieved
in (e).
It is customary in American practice to check the moment resistance of gusset
plates against the forces acting on various sections through the plate. However, if
the Whitmore section approach is used, the gusset is made as small as possible, and
it is welded to a sturdy member such a check will not be needed. It is still necessary
to check the shear resistance in certain situations, such as on the line A-A in Figure
12.21.
16
Vu and
a moment
M u,
17
It is, of course, possible to do a detailed analysis of the joint, including the possibly
using finite elements, and to design each part of the connection properly, including
the connection of the gusset to the beam and to the column, and the beam to the
column. It would then be possible to handle any shear and bending moment in the
beam too, and to look at the attachment of the gusset and the beam to the
column as one connection. However, this is hardly practicable in a real design office
situation. Also, in most braced frames the moment and shear forces in the beam are
small.
Several approximate methods have been advanced and used over the years for
the analysis and design of these connections, and any one that satisfies the Lower
Bound Theorem (see 1.5 above) can be used. We will here discuss a Generalised
Uniform Force (GUF) Method based on earlier work by Larry Muir and William
Thornton, which approximates what happens in actual connections better than
most other approaches and thus yields economical connections.
The line of force in the brace crosses the centreline of the column at A, a
distance z
above the point O on the mid-height of the beam ( z
is negative if A
lies below O).
O is the centroid of the connection of the gusset to the column. Because we
assume that there will be no bending moment in this connection (and equilibrium
does not require it to) we can replace the whole connection with a hinge at C.
Similarly, theres a hinge at B, the centroid of the connection of the gusset to the
beam.
The beam is connected to the column with a hinge at E.
The horizontal component of Fu is resisted by an axial force in the beam. There
are no other horizontal forces acting on the beam.
The column resists the vertical component Fu and the moment because of any
Here it is assumed that the line of force of the brace is always above point E.
Figure 12.24 (c) shows free body diagrams for the column, beam and gusset.
From (b) we can say:
M 1 + M 2 = z Sin Fu
(12.21)
(12.22)
VE + VC = Fu cos
(12.23)
HC =
Fu ( z Sin + ec Cos )
eb + y C
(12.24)
H B = Fu Sin H C
(12.25)
VB =
H B eb
xB
(12.26)
VC = Fu Cos VB
(12.27)
H E = HC
(12.28)
VE = VB
(12.29)
We have all the information to design the connection. However, in practice there
can also be a horizontal force coming from a beam and/or brace on the other side
of the column (see also the discussion on transfer force under 12.6 below) and a
shear force in the beam because of loads applied along the span of the beam, as
shown in Figure 12.25.
In the case depicted in Figure 12.25(a) the connection of the beam to the column
at E
has to be designed for a larger force:
H E = H C Fu
(12.30)
H E = H C Fu Sin
(12.31)
Furthermore, there can be a shear force in the beam, as also shown in Figure 5.25, in
which case:
VE = VB Vu
(12.32)
Consider now the case where the beam and gusset are connected to the web of a
column, as depicted in Figure 12.26 (a). We can follow exactly the same approach
as before, with the points O and E coinciding. Equations (12.16) to (12.24) can be
used to determine the forces to be designed for, taking ec = 0 . Again, there will be
no moment in the beam.
Another option is to place the setting out point at the place where the top of the
beam meets the face of the column, as shown in Figure 12.27.
21
for a locally-applied bending moment equal to Vc Vub ec , while the couple acting
on the beam at X equals eb
H B.
The last situation to be considered is where the gusset is only connected to the
beam and not to the column, as shown in Figure 12.28 (a). This may be economical
where the force in the brace is relatively modest compared to the beam size.
VB = Fuv
(12.33)
H B = Fuh
(12.34)
M B = Fuv x B x
(12.35)
This implies that the gusset-to-beam joint must be designed to resist the vertical and
horizontal forces and the moment.
The beam (see free body diagram in (c)) must be designed for a vertical force
VB
22
Fu.
Assuming,
conservatively, that the gusset is at mid-height of the web, that the web acts as a
simply-supported beam between the flanges and that the force act over a width
equal to L g + 12t w , the moment per unit width of web equals.
M U1 =
Fu (h 2t w )
4(L g + 12t w )
(12.36)
M r1 =
t w2 f y
(12.37)
This implies:
Fu t w2 f y .
Lb + 12t w
h 2t f
(12.38)
The only case from Figure 12.10 that requires further discussion is that of the
boomerang gusset as shown in (e) and also in Figure 12.29 (a) below. A variation on
the theme is shown in (b). It can be shown that the force in the bracing is resisted
primarily in shear where the gusset is connected to the beam webs, with only a
minimal lateral force exerted on each web. This means that it is correct to assume,
as shown in the figure, that the components Fuxand Fuyof the force Fuare applied
as shear forces and that any other forces acting on the webs can be neglected.
23
A discussion of transfer forces is only relevant where the steelwork structural engineer
designing the structure as a whole is not the connection designer as well. This is
frequently the case in South Africa but it is important to note that the steelwork
structural engineer remains responsible for the adequacy of the design of the
connections even where the actual work is delegated to another entity. This means
the engineer must provide the connection designer with sufficient information to
design connections that are safe and economical.
In order for such delegated work to be successful the engineer must accurately
anticipate what connection types and geometries are likely to be used by the
connection designer. This will allow the engineer to provide relevant information
without unduly including extraneous and confusing data. The engineer can provide
the requisite information to the connection designer in one of two forms:
All the member forces for each load combination that can realistically act on
the structure can be provided.
The maximum forces in each member (tensile and compressive where
applicable) can be provided in addition to the controlling force(s) that must
be transferred through a joint.
The second option is typically more manageable for large or complex structures
where multiple load combinations may control the design of various members. In the
case of Figure 12.30 (b) for instance the only requirement besides the maximum
forces in the diagonals would be to say that a force of 240kN has to be transferred
to the chord.
One can find relatively more information on the concept of transfer forces in
American literature as compared to others. The concept can at times be
complicated to understand or difficult and tedious to apply in practice. However, it
is one of the most efficient and accurate ways of communicating forces to the
25
connection designer. Therefore it is not uncommon for large and complex projects
to use commercial software or in-house spreadsheets that calculate transfer forces
for common connection configurations.
Two more examples can be used to illustrate the concept of transfer forces.
The shear force
Vu in
However its value is not evident from maximum member forces alone.
not only on the maximum values of
Vu depends
(12.39)
This must clearly be the same as the forces on the right hand side:
(12.40)
We must design the connections on both the right and left of the column to resist
Fut
in addition to the other forces. The problem is of course that the maximum values of
all the forces don't necessarily occur in the same load case. But if we are given the
maximum forces in the members and the maximum value of the transfer force we
can design a safe and economical connection.
26
12.7
Examples
Example 12.1
What tensile force can we put on the angle below?
M20 Class 8.8 bolts
22 mm holes, punched
As = 935 mm2
f y = 355 MPa
kN
Br = br antf u
27
mm
kN
Tu Ant f u + 0,6Agv f y
Tu 0,9(935 0,5(22 + 2) )6 + 0,6 x0,9(3x70 + 35)6 x355 = 646
kN
Equation 6.5:
Tu Ant f u + 0,6Anv f u
Tu 0,9(935 0,5(22 + 2) x6)470 + 0,6 x0,9(3x70 + 35 3,5(22 + 2))6 x470 = 610
kN
mm2
Equation 12.6:
Tr = Ag f y
Tr = 0,9 x935 x355 = 299
kN
Equation 12.7:
Tr = 0,85Ane' f u
Tr = 0,85 x0,9 x791x470 = 284
kN
Thus Tr = 265 kN
Conclusion
The bearing resistance of the bolts controls. If the end distance was made more
than 35 mm (in fact, if it was made 37,5 mm) the shear lag resistance would control.
Example 12.2
Design the following welded connection:
28
Diagonals: 100x100x8 L
Horizontal chord: 150x150x10L
All 6 mm fillet welds.
kN > 300 kN
OK
Resistance of angle:
Connected leg fully effective.
Other leg:
L1 = 75 < 100
mm
Equation 2.11:
mm2
mm2
Equation 12.13:
kN
OK
Equation 12.14:
kN
OK
kN < 212 kN
mm2
OK
Conclusion
The diagonals and their attachment to the chord are stronger than required, but the
chord is just strong enough in shear, which demonstrates that this check should
always be performed.
29
Example 12.3
Check whether the connection below can carry the force of 35 kN in the brace.
Angles attaching boomerang gusset to beam web 70x70x6L with M20 bolts. A force
of 27 kN will be transferred in shear to the beam running in the vertical direction of
the paper, and 22,4 kN to the horizontal beam. These are small forces and the
cleats, bolts and beam webs will obviously be strong enough to carry them
Check resistance of gusset to buckling in compression:
Estimate L = 375
mm
mm2
10 3
I
r=
=
= 2,89
12 x10
A
mm
KL
= 97,3
r
From Table 4.3 in the Red Book:
Thus C r = 0,9 x2500 x155 = 349
Cr
= 155MPa
A
kN > 27 kN
OK
M u = 27 x0,21 = 5,67
kN.m
30
M r = Z e f y
Ze =
tb 2 10 x250 2
=
= 104167
6
6
mm3
kN.m > 5,67 kN.m
OK
Example 12.3
Design the gusset in the connection below.
kN > 1200 kN
OK
Equation 3.12:
kN >1200 kN
We need only check the Whitmore width, but will also do block failure.
Check tension and shear block failure:
Equation 6.4:
Tr = Ant f u + 0,6Agv f y
31
OK
Tr = 0,9(70 22)12 x470 + 0,6 x0,9 x2(4 x70 + 40)12 x350 = 1695
kN > 1200 kN OK
Tr = Ant f u + 0,6Anv f u
Tr = 0,9(70 22)12 x470 + 0,6 x0,9 x2(4 x70 + 40 4,5x22)12 x470 = 1590
kN
OK
mm
Equation 6.13:
kN > 1200 kN
OK
Check buckling of the gusset with the 1200 kN compressive force acting on it.
Stress on Whitmore width:
1400000
= 298
392 x12
MPa
L* = 280 mm
I
t3
r=
=
= 3,5 mm
A
12t
Cr
= 288MPa
A
Thus C r = 0,9 x 280 x12 x 288 = 871
kN
This is less than 1200 kN, so we have to increase the thickness of the gusset . A
check will show that 16 mm is adequate.
Design the welding connecting the gusset to the column.
Resolve the forces in vertical and horizontal components and apply them
where they intersect the weld line, as shown in the sketch. The welds are
subjected to the following forces:
32
kN.mm
Z weld =
1000 2
= 167000
6
mm2
Thus maximum vertical force per mm, noting that there is a weld each side:
fv =
1696
= 0,848
2 x1000
kN/mm
fh =
254000
= 0,76
2 x167000
Tan 1 =
kN/mm
0,76
= 0,896
0,848
, thus = 42 o
kN/mm
kN > 1200 kN
OK
Conclusion
Reflection on this example proves that, if such a connection is subjected to various
load cases, it would be impossible to design the connection properly if all the forces
were not given for each load case. However, if the maximum member forces are
given as well as the transfer forces Tu, Vuand M u the connection can be
designed.
Example 12.4
Determine the forces in the members, the cleated connections of the gusset to the
column and the beam to the column, and the welded connection of the gusset to
the beam in the following connection. Note that C is the centroid of the gusset-tocolumn cleat, and B the centroid of the gusset-to-beam weld, neither of which has
necessarily been shown to scale.
33
ec = 127 mm
eb = 203 mm
yC = 300 mm
x B = 300 mm
z = 50 mm
Couple acting on column because of connection:
Equation 12.21, plus eccentricity of shear force of 150 kN in beam:
kN.m
Horizontal forces:
On connection of gusset to column from Equation 12.24:
HC =
kN
Vertical forces:
On connection of gusset to beam from Equation 6.26:
34
kN
VB =
H B eb 254 0,203
=
= 172
0,3
xB
kN
kN
VE = VB Vu = 172 150 = 22
kN
H E = H C Fu = 90 100 = 10
kN
35
M24
45
90
8.8
Steel:
fy
MPa
Figure 12.30 Dimensions, details and symbols for bolted connections for
angles.
L=
L1 + L2
2
Other
angles:
f y = 355
Figure 12.31 Dimensions, details and symbols for welded connections for
angles.
36
37
38
39
40
41
42