Project Part -B Report

On
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS FOR ECONOMY
BETWEEN STEEL SLAB BASE AND GUSSETED
BASE
Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

BACHELOR OF ENGINEERING
in

CIVIL ENGINEERING
By
Mr. Abdul Mobin Abdul Khalik Ansari (13CE04)

Mr. Asjad Fazal Balbale (13CE11)

Mr. Shubham Santosh Ghadigaonkar (13CE14)

Mr. Vaishnav Anant Goregaonkar (13CE15)

Under the guidance of Prof. Hawelikar S. C.

Department of Civil engineering

Anjuman-I-Islam’s Kalsekar Technical Campus
Thana Naka, Khandagaon,New Mumbai 410206,
2016-2017
University Of Mumbai
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that Mr. Abdul Mobin Abdul Khalik Ansari (13CE04), Mr.
Asjad Fazal Balbale (13CE11), Mr. Shubham Santosh Ghadigaonkar (13CE14) and Mr.
Vaishnav Anant Goregaonkar (13CE15) has satisfactorily completed and delivered a
Project-B seminar report entitled, “Comparative Analysis for Economy Between Steel
Slab Base and Gusseted Base” in partial fulfillment for the completion of the B.E. in Civil
Engineering Course conducted by the University of Mumbai in Anjuman-I-Islam’s Kalsekar
Technical Campus, New Panvel, Navi Mumbai, during the academic year 2016-17.

Prof. Hawelikar S. C.
(Guide)

Dr. R. B. Magar Dr. Abdul Razak Honnutagi

(Head of Department) (Director)

i
 Approval for B. E. Project Part-B

This B. E. Project Part-B entitled “Comparative Analysis for Economy Between

Steel Slab Base and Gusseted Base” by Mr. Abdul Mobin Abdul Khalik Ansari (13CE04),
Mr.Asjad Fazal Balbale (13CE11), Mr. Shubham Santosh Ghadigaonkar (13CE14) and Mr.
Vaishnav Anant Goregaonkar (13CE15) is approved for the degree of Bachelor of
Engineering in Civil Engineering.

Examiners

1. ____________________

2. ____________________

Date:
Place: New Panvel

ii
 Declaration

We hereby declare that this written submission entitled “Comparative Analysis for
Economy Between Steel Slab Base and Gusseted Base” represents my ideas in my own
words and where other ideas or words have been included, I have adequately cited and
referenced the original sources. I also declare that I have adhered to all principles of academic
honesty and integrity and have not misrepresented or fabricated or falsified any data/fact in
my submission. I understand that any violation of the above will be cause for disciplinary
action by the Institute and can also evoke penal action from the sources which have thus not
been properly cited or from whom proper permission has not been taken when needed

Place: New Panvel Mr. Abdul Mobin Abdul Khalik Ansari

Date Mr. Asjad Fazal Balbale

Mr. Shubham Santosh Ghadigaonkar

Mr. Vaishnav Anant Goregaonkar

iii
 Acknowledgment

It is our privilege to express our sincerest regards to our project Guide, Prof.
Hawelikar S. C., for their valuable inputs, able guidance, encouragement, whole-hearted
cooperation and constructive criticism throughout the duration of our project.

We deeply express our sincere thanks to our Head of Department Dr. R. B. Magar and
our Director Dr. Abdul Razak Honnutagi for encouraging and allowing us to present the
project on the topic „Comparative Analysis for Economy Between Steel Slab Base and
Gusseted Base‟ in partial fulfillment of the requirements leading to the award of Bachelor of
Engineering degree.

We take this opportunity to thank all our Professors and non-teaching staff who have
directly or indirectly helped our project, we pay our respects and love to our parents and all
other family members for their love and encouragement throughout our career. Last but not
the least we express our thanks to our friends for their cooperation and support.

Mr. Abdul Mobin Abdul Khalik Ansari

Mr. Asjad Fazal Balbale

Mr. Shubham Santosh Ghadigaonkar

Mr. Vaishnav Anant Goregaonkar

(Semester-VIII, B.E. Civil)

AIKTC – New Panvel,

Navi Mumbai.

iv
 Abstract

Steel Column Bases are widely used in steel construction for relatively all columns.
Column bases are often used in steel buildings and providing economical solutions in cases of
large and heavy loads or in other words steel column bases varies in its thickness under
various loading conditions. Depending upon the loading conditions, the steel column bases
are classified as slab base and gusseted slab base. Since these sections often provide
sufficient flexural stiffness to resist bending of base plate and settlement of the column
without any extra provision. However, both the column bases are proved to be economical
based on the loading conditions which is included in this study. The ultimate capacity of
column bases mainly depends on the local behavior of the components, the global behavior of
the column as well as the internal forces in the connecting elements. Mainly while
considering designing of both column bases the designing procedure is same and it’s
observed that the selection of the column base plate depends upon the intensity of load,
thickness of the base plate and economy.

As per structure requirement as engineer we have to select any one of these two i.e.
either gusseted base or slab base. So our aim was narrowed towards the study of behavior of
these two column bases on various combinations of loading and thickness and accordingly
the cost of the bases on stability criterion as per IS800:2007. Also we have predicted the
thickness of bases on the basis of amount of loading. From the results and conclusions thus
obtained, we have tried to derive the suitability of the bases from economic point of view.

v
 Table of contents

Sr. Page
No.
Content No.
* Front Page
* Certificate
* Approval for B. E. Project Part-B
* Declaration
* Acknowledgment
* Abstract
1. Introduction 1
1.1 General 1
1.2 Slab base 2
1.3 Gusseted base 4
2. Literature review 6
3. Objective of the study 15
4. Methodology 16
4.1 Approach 16
4.2 MS Office Microsoft Excel 16
4.2.1 What is Microsoft excel? 16
4.2.2 Why it is being used? 17
4.2.3 What are its advantages? 17
4.3 Assumption for design 17
4.4 Design procedure 18
4.5 Sequence of Project Completion 18
4.6 Design steps 19
5. Results and Discussion 24
5.1 Square Slab Base 25

vi
 5.2 Rectangle Slab Base 28
5.3 H-Shaped Slab Base 31
5.4 Gusseted Base 34
5.5 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISHB 37
5.6 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISSC 39
5.7 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISWB 41
5.8 Snapshot of excel sheet 43
6 Conclusion 44
Future Scope 46
References 47
Publications 50

vii
 List of Illustrations

Sr. Page
Content
No. No.

1.1 Slab Bases 2

1.2 Types of Slab Bases 3

1.3 Bending of bases 3

1.4 Gusset base 4

5.1 Load vs. thickness for Square base 27

5.2 Load vs. thickness for Rectangle base 30

5.3 Load vs. thickness for H-shaped base 33

5.4 Load vs. thickness for Gusseted base 36

5.5 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISHB 37

5.6 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISSC 39

5.7 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISWB 41

5.8 Snapshot of Excel sheet 43

viii
 Chapter 1

Introduction

1.1 General
Column bases are structural elements used in the design of steel structures to transfer
the column load to the footings. Steel columns are normally supported over concrete blocks.
However, when the loads supported by these columns, are large and the bearing pressure of
concrete from below is insufficient to resist the loads, they may fail. Therefore, it is a normal
practice to distribute the column loads to steel base plates which are placed over these
concrete blocks.

In addition to transferring safely the column loads to the concrete foundation blocks, a
base plate also maintains the alignment of column in plan, verticality of the column and
controls the column and frame deflections. The column load is spread over large area on
concrete blocks. The intensity of bearing pressure on concrete is kept within the maximum
permissible bearing pressure.

In the column bases, intensity of pressure on concrete block is assumed to be uniform.

The column bases shall be of adequate strength, stiffness and area to spread the load upon the
concrete, masonry, other foundation or other supports without exceeding the allowable stress
on such foundation under any combination of the load and bending moments.

1
 The main problems in the design of the column base are to determine the size of the
plates and their thicknesses. The size is determined by the required bearing area on
foundation; and the required thickness is determined so that bending strength of the plate is
not exceeded. When the soil has very low bearing capacity, large concrete blocks may
become uneconomical and in such case grillage footing is provided.

Types of Column bases

1. Slab base
2. Gusseted base

1.2 Slab Base

Fig 1.1. Slab Bases

Slab bases are used where the columns have independent concrete pedestals. When
the column is subjected to only direct loads, the base can be designed by assuming pressure
from below. For small loads, a steel plate alone, shop welded to the column, can be used to
transmit the loads to the concrete pedestal. Such a base plate is called slab base.

A thick steel base plate and two cleat angles connect the flanges of the column to the
base plate. In addition to these, web cleats are provided to connect the web of the column to
the base plate. These web cleats guard against the possible dislocation of the column during
erection. The ends of the column and also the base plate should be mechanized so that the
column load is entirely transferred to the base plate.

2
 Area of base plate= (load of column)/ (permissible bearing stress in concrete)

Slab Bases are most suitable and economical for lightly loaded columns only. The
thickness of the base plate is designed from consideration of bending of the portions of the
base plate that extend beyond the column profile. In cases where the projections are large, or
the loads are heavy, or the moments are applied, the thickness of base plate may be reduced
by the use of vertical plates or stiffeners.

Fig 1.2. Types of Slab Bases

However if the loading on the slab base increases beyond its capacity the slab base
tends to bend towards its ends as shown fig 1.3. To prevent this bending an extra plate is
provided along its sides called as gusset plates. These type of bases are known as Gusseted
Base.

Fig 1.3.Bending of bases

3
1.3 Gusseted base:

When the load on the column section is too large or when the axial load is
accompanied by bending moments, usually a gusset base is provided. A gusseted base
consists of a base plate of reduced thickness, two gusset plates and cleat angles are placed on
flanges as shown in figure 1.4. The gusset plates and angles are placed on flanges with no. of
bolts, or a couple of welded gusset bases used commonly for moderate loads.

Fig 1.4.Gusseted Base

In case welded connections are used, gusset angles will not be required. Gusset
materials used in the base increase the bearing area, consequently reducing the thickness of
the base plate as compared to the slab base. Also, the gusset material supports the base plate
against bending and consequently results in still less thick base plate. This type of base may
be considered to be rigid.

The function and purpose of column base plates are to provide a spread and
distribution of column loads from the steel column to the concrete footing. The base plate
acts as an intermediate stress distributor in a similar way the concrete footing distributes load
from the footing to the softer soil below. When the column load contains a moment, the base
plate may require design to ensure uplift of the base plate does not occur which is achieved
by designing anchor bolts to resist the tensile forces.

A wide variety of base plate connection details are possible for the designer to
employ, particularly when detailing a connection required to resist both axial load and
moment.

4
 Base plates typically sit atop a concrete footing, although other possibilities such as
masonry, timber and stiff soil foundations may be possible. But we have considered concrete
foundations only.

Various categories of loading are possible on base plates which are conveniently
separated for analysis purposes. Each load scenario requires slightly different methods for
calculating stresses within the steel and concrete and requires attention to specific design
issues. However, due to time constraint, for the purpose of this project we are going to
consider axially applied loading only.

This load scenario involves the application of direct axial load to the base plate with
no corresponding moment in the column. As a result, stress acting on the base plate is
uniform over the surface and thus is the simplest case to analyze.

Under this load scenario, we are primarily concerned with sizing the base plate to
transfer a uniform load to the concrete that is low enough to prevent bearing failure of the
concrete footing. Additionally, we require a design check on the stress within the base plate
to ensure yielding of the base plate does not occur at the cantilever support of the base plate.

5
 Chapter 2

Literature Review

When load is applied with a wide flange column, the area between the column flanges
is often subjected to bending. So, on the basis of an analytical study, the author Fling R.S.
(1970) provides a minimum column base plate thickness for that case.
The author concluded that, for lightly loaded columns, the required plate dimensions are
approximately equal to or smaller than the overall cross-sectional dimensions of the column.
He also proposed the use of yield line theory and provided an equation that could calculate
the minimum thickness of the base plate. He assumed that plate bending was elastic and used
a factor of safety of 2.

The author Stockwell, F.W. (1975) developed design aids for the rapid selection of
base plates. Those design aids are included in the AISC Design Guide No. 1-Column Base
Plates. Two concrete compressive strengths (i.e., 3 ksi and 4 ksi) were considered for the
design. He also proposed a design procedure for lightly loaded columns. He assumed that
only the H-shaped portion of the base plate under the column was effective. He noted that the
assumed width of the strip was a matter of engineering judgment and should be highly
dependent on column size, base plate overhang, bearing stress, etc.

6
 In this study, the author Bird, W.R. (1976) presents a graphic approach to design,
providing rapid and accurate solutions for the design of steel bearing plates that could be
expanded to cover all column sections and loading conditions.

The author DeWolf, J.T. (1978) performed both experimental and analytical
studies on axially loaded column. A simple empirical design approach was developed on the
basis of the experimental results. The test results werealso compared with the allowable
bearing stresses estimated from the AISC Specification.

The author presented results of 19 tests of axially loaded base plates. Unreinforced
concrete cubes were used as pedestals, so additional confinement could be considered when
the pedestal was reinforced. It was found that; typical failure mode was an inverted cone
failure of the concrete under the base plate.

In order to predict the average bearing stress at failure, a simple empirical equation
was developed. This equation was a function of Concrete strength, Ratio of concrete to base
plate area, and Ratio of the distance between the edge of the loading plate and the plate
thickness.

The author concluded that the AISC Specification was conservative and a large factor
of safety is more safe and desirable for the design of base plates than for beams and columns.
It was also noted that the proposed method should not be used for lightly loaded W-shape
columns because the effects of base plate bending between the flanges are significant for
those cases.

In this study, the author Maitra, N. (1978) provided a graphical aid for the design of
base plates subject to moments. A triangular shape was assumed for the bearing stress
distribution under the base plate. The design aid is included in the AISC Design Guide No. 1
(DeWolf and Ricker, 1990).

The author DeWolf, J.T. et al. (1980) performed an experimental investigation to

review the design practice for steel column base plates subjected to axial loads and moments
in this study. Comparisons between the experimental outputs and the estimations from two
different design methods (i.e., the working stress method and the ultimate strength method)
were made.

7
 A total of 16 specimens were tested. The variables in the test series were anchor rod
size, base plate thickness, and load eccentricity. After the test the Author concluded that the
typical failure modes were Crushing of the concrete; yielding of the anchor rod; or Formation
of a plastic hinge in the base plate. When failure was governed by yielding of the anchor
rods, yielding occurred within the concrete, not in the threaded part.

The Author also concluded that when the anchor rod strength is relatively large, the
distance between the anchor rod on the tension side and the bearing zone on the compression
side is small. Also effect of the concrete confinement should be included in the
design.Increasing the base plate thickness can lead to decrease of the connection capacity due
to large bearing stresses under the base plate and consequent premature concrete (grout)
crushing.

The authors Thambiratnam, D.P. et al. (1986) conducted experiments to study the
behavior of base plates under the action of axial loads and moments by eccentric loading on
the column. Test results were compared with the predictions from the Working Stress
Method. In a total of 16 tests, the behavior of 12 distinct specimens was studied in depth. All
test specimens were arranged and the anchor rod was intentionally over-designed so that
yielding of the anchor rod would be avoided.

The Author observed that at the lowest eccentricity, cracking of the concrete
controlled the failure, while at other eccentricities the primary failure mode was yielding of
the base plate. The test results showed that the factor of safety of the specimens that failed by
yielding of the base plate, ranged from (1.09 to 1.89)

Except at the lowest eccentricity, the concrete block did not reach its limit state at
primary failure of the specimens. It was also observed that the critical section of the base
plate was the lateral section under the foot of the column face on the side of the load. On the
basis of the results, the authors noted that flexible base plates, loaded at high eccentricities,
could fail from yielding of the plate and might not always behave as predicted by
contemporary design practice.

The authors Penserini, P. et al. (1989) developed a mathematical model, which

determines the ultimate limit strength (ULS) of a column base connection, based on the limit
analysis method. Comparison with experimental results was made for “fixed” and “pinned”
connection cases.

8
 The authors Krishnamurthy, N. et al. (1990) studied steel base plates under vertical
eccentric loads. Effects of different base plate thicknesses and load eccentricities were
investigated using a two-dimensional linear elastic finite element analysis tool. Because of
the type of analysis, failure was defined as first yield in the connection. Computed results
were evaluated with the limited experimental data available. No strong agreement was
observed between the computed and measured results, but the authors indicated, however,
that the behavior patterns predicted by the finite element tool and those observed in the tests
were qualitatively similar. From the analytical study, the authors noted that the actual
behavior of steel base plates was considerably different from the assumed rigid plate behavior
implied in the design practice. The Author also concluded that the finite element method
could be a powerful tool for the study of column base plates under various loading conditions
and for the development of more realistic design methods.

In this study, the authors Igarashi, S. et al. (1992) investigated the mechanical
behavior of exposed type column base connections under repeated bending and shearing
forces applied to the top of the column with zero axial forces.

Four different anchorage specimens were tested: (1) hooked anchor rod with round
steel, (2) anchorage plate placed at the bottom of the round steel; specimen No. (3) Same as
in (2), plus 30% pretension in the anchor rod; and specimen No. (4) Threaded deformed bar
with anchorage plate.

Based on the experimental investigation, the authors noted that the type of anchorage
selected can significantly affect the rigidity and durability of the exposed type column base
connections when concrete foundations with a riser are used. The experimental results
showed that deformed bars (specimen No. 4) were most effective in enhancing the durability
of the connection.

The author Sputo, T. (1993) developed a design procedure for determining base plate
thickness under a round pipe column section.

The Author derived required thickness for a square base plate supporting a round pipe
column on the basis of a yield line theory. The author considered three different cases for this
study which was; Plate bending within the area enclosed by the column, bending of the base
plate outside the column; and lightly loaded base plate.
For each case, an equation for the calculation of the base plate thickness was provided.

9
 The author Chhabra, S. (1994) presented design tables to compare the base plate
dimensions provided by the AISC Manual, 8th and 9th Editions. The tables were generated
only for W14 column sections, A36 steel base plates and a 4.0 ksi concrete strength. A study
of these tables showed that, in the lower column size range, the 9th Edition method generally
produced lighter base plates than the 8thEdition. The author noted, however, that the 9th
Edition led to the same design as the 8th Edition the case of higher loads.

The authors Wald, F. et al. (1994) briefly summarized an experimental program for
the study of column base connection behavior under various loading conditions. Three
different sets of experimental studies were performed. In order to study the stiffness and
resistance that develops in column base connections, full-scale connection specimens
consisting of two or four anchor rods were tested. Component tests were performed with test
setup simulating the resisting mechanism on the tension and compression sides to investigate
the contribution of each connection element to the global connection response.

The authors Wald, F. et al. (1995) proposed a stiffness column base design model.
Based on the component method, it was derived to be compatible with stress design
methodology according to Euro code3, Annex L, and with the beam-to-column connection
stiffness prediction included in Annex J. The proposed design model was able to calculate a
moment-rotation curve for a given column base connection under constant axial forces. In
order to verify the accuracy of the proposed prediction model, the analytical estimations were
compared with published experimental observations. A parametric study was also conducted
to investigate the influence of main design variables on the column base connection behavior
under combined column axial loads and bending moments. These variables included
embedded length of rods, base plate thickness, concrete quality, and column axial force.

The authors Balnut, N. et al. (1997) discussed about the contribution of concrete,
column base, and anchoring rods on the column base connection behavior. Particularly for
the column base, two general factors that could significantly affect the connection
deformation capacity in the post-elastic range (i.e. instability and strain hardening effects)
were discussed in depth. A computer program named ROMB 96 (Rotation and Moment at the
column Base), which was developed based on the above approach, was introduced at the end
of this study and illustrated with two examples.

The author concluded that the column base connection should be capable of enough
post-elastic deformability if a plastic hinge at the column base was expected. Another major

10
conclusion of their study was that a weaker link in the connection should be located at the
column base rather than in the anchor rods.

The authors Adnay, S. et al. (2000) &Kontoleon, et al. (2000) presented an iterative
numerical method for solving frictional contact between a loaded elastic body and a rigid
obstacle. The method developed was based on the theoretical results of non-smooth
mechanics and intended to effectively simulate the frictional unilateral contact problem that
arises on a steel base plate connection. The proposed method was illustrated by means of a
numerical example of a two-dimensional finite element model of a column base connection.

The author Tamai, H. (2003) proposed a one-dimensional (cantilever) numerical

analysis model that could estimate resisting capacity of exposed-type column bases under
bending moments and variable column axial forces. Applicability and availability of the
numerical model was confirmed through cyclic loading tests on exposed-type column base
specimens. Influence of variable axial force on the rotational stiffness and ultimate moment
capacity of the column base were also investigated.

Comparisons between the analytical estimation and the experimental outputs yielded
the following several conclusions:
(1) The exposed-type column base tested showed approximately 50% of the elastic rotational
stiffness of the fixed column base.
(2) The variation of the column axial force can significantly affect the rotational stiffness and
the bending moment capacity of the exposed-type column bases.
(3) The increase of the column tensile axial force resulted in concentration of plastic
deformation in anchor rods and the deterioration of the bending moment capacity in the
connection.
(4) The proposed analytical method satisfactorily simulated the hysteresis characteristics of
the slip-type connection that resulted from the variation of the rotational stiffness and
bending moment capacity. This variation results from the change of the column axial loads
and from the plastic deformation of the anchor rod.

The authors Picard. et al. (1987) conducted an experimental study to determine the
value of the rigidity ratio at the column base (GL). They found that the flexural stiffness of an
exposed-type column base connection, which was generally considered as pinned condition,
had a very beneficial effect on column stability and frame response. In order to illustrate the

11
advantages of the actual column base restraints in analysis and design, a design example was
provided in this paper.

By the design example provided in this paper, the Authors showed that the calculated
column strength could be increased by up to 30% due to the change in the rigidity ratio.

In this paper, the authors Hon.et.al. (1988) presented experimental findings for pinned
column base connection behavior under axial and bending moment. The results demonstrated
the important role of base plate thickness and rod size in moment resistance and stiffness of
the connection, and the insignificant role of the grout layer and packing.

Several major findings in this experimental study were summarized:

(1) Larger base plate planar dimensions led to a slight increase in connection stiffness and
some mild increase in moment capacity, due to the longer resisting moment arm under the
base plate.

(2) The increase of the anchor rod size led to the increase of the connection stiffness.

(3) An increase in the column size resulted in an increase of the bending stiffness and the
moment capacity of the connection, provided that the base plate was the critical element in
the resisting mechanism.

The authors Thambiratnam, D.P., et .al. (1989) carried out three-dimensional finite
element analysis on exposed-type column base plate connections under column axial loads
and moments. For this numerical parametric study a special purpose analysis program,
FEABOC (Finite Element Analysis of Bolted Connections), was used. Twelve distinctive
specimens were analyzed, and the effect of the base plate thickness and eccentricity of the
loads on global connection responses was investigated. This study was focused on strain
distributions in the base plate. Lifting of the base plate is one of the phenomena that can be
easily seen from the experimental studies. After the bond between the anchor rod and the
concrete is broken, lifting of the base plate will certainly cause localized pressure
distributions under the base plate on the compression side. The FEABOC program was able
to provide a good simulation of this case. The authors noted that classical analytical methods
were unable to bring out these effects.

12
 The authors Targowski, R. et.al. (1993) conducted an experimental and numerical
study to identify the limit state of an unstiffened base plate connection for various column
sections, to investigate associated base plate yield line distribution, and to analyze the
unilateral contact between the base plate and the concrete foundation. Finite element analysis
was conducted to investigate the nonlinear behavior of base plates under pure column
bending and to predict the contact force distribution between the base plate and the concrete
foundation. Only the case of square column sections was studied. On the basis of analysis, the
authors concluded that, to investigate this problem more precisely it was necessary to change
the finite element model, especially in the contact region between the base plate and anchor
rods.

In this paper, the authors Ermopoulos, J.Ch. et.al. (1996a) proposed an analytical
procedure that could develop M- φ curve diagram of the column base connections under
combined axial and moment loads. In addition, they developed a simple formula that was
adequately accurate to the M- φ curves obtained by the analytical procedure.

The authors insisted that this formula, which describes a better approximation of the degree
of fixity in the column base connection, could be easily introduced in the equilibrium system
of any frame.

The authors Ermopoulos,J. Ch. et. al. (1996b) expanded their previous study (Ermopoulos
and Stamatopoulos, 1996a) to cyclic loading cases. M-φ curves for a given cyclic sequence
of loading were plotted and the accuracy of the results was verified based on comparisons
with existing experimental results. The authors proposed an analytical procedure that could
show the cyclic nonlinear responses of column base connections. By this study the authors
concluded that the proposed equations should be further verified for broader design
applications.

In this paper, the authors Ermopoulos,J. Ch. et. al. (1998) proposed a new
methodology, leading to an analytical model to describe the non-linear stress distribution
under base plates. Both elastic and elasto-plastic behaviors of the connection were covered by
this analytical model. Three different connection behavior models (rigid, semi-rigid, and
flexible) were proposed and a computer program was written to calculate unknown design
variables (i.e., the maximum compressive stress on the concrete, the width of the compressive

13
area, the tension force in the anchor rods, and the plastified part of the stress distribution
diagram).

Based on results of this analysis, the authors concluded that the proposed stress
distribution diagram provides a more accurate analysis which is closer to the actual
connection behavior, instead of the uniformly distributed bearing stress assumption.

The authors, Kallolil,J.J. et. al. (1998) performed an experimental study to investigate
the behavior of a shallowly embedded base plate-anchor assembly under several typical
loading conditions. Comparisons were made between the experimental results and the
estimations from the concrete beam analogy method for the design of the shallowly
embedded base plates.Throughout the experiment, it was observed that the ultimate failure in
the connection was triggered mainly by the yielding of the anchors and embedded base plates
before the concrete bearing pressure reached its critical value. Consequently, the authors
noted that the experimental values of the ultimate load and moment were lower than the
values obtained from the concrete beam analogy method. The authors concluded, however,
that the concrete beam analogy method could generally be acceptable for the design of the
embedded base plate.

14
 Chapter 3

Objective of the study

After studying above Literature review it’s found that very less research work has been
done on column bases using IS code 800:2007. While studying the same in curriculum a need
for proper constraints for selecting the type of column bases was felt. This unclear situation to
decide the parameters for selecting either gusseted base or slab base will be attempted to
solve through this project.

1. To establish a design procedure of gusseted base or slab base in a spreadsheet and

compare them at different load thickness ratio.
2. To compare structural and economic performance of the gusseted base or slab base of
same design at different load ratios, over a range of thickness.
3. To perform a parametric study of the variables that can affect the structural and
economical behaviour of columns bases.
4. To establish relation between load and thickness of column bases to select the suitable
column base for that loading condition
5. Comparison of results obtained from all types of columns bases.
6. Conclusion and recommendation on the loading and economical behaviour of column
bases.

15
 Chapter 4

Methodology

4.1 Approach
The literature to date deals with gusseted base and slab base is limited, as far as they
are analyzed together. To our knowledge, there is no literature that has compared the
structural performance with respect to the economy of gusseted base and slab base. Though
there are some research papers that compares different structures of column bases and some
papers compares the structural behaviour of these columns bases with different loading
conditions. But, they were done separately. In this approach the design procedure for
different gusseted bases and slab bases (considering only hot rolled channel section) showed
below will be completely designed in an excel spreadsheet and the comparison between the
different geometries of the column bases with respect to the cost will be shown graphically.

4.2 MS Office Microsoft Excel

4.2.1 What is Microsoft Excel?

Microsoft Excel is a software program produced by Microsoft Corp. that allows users
to organize, format and calculate data with formulas using a spreadsheet system. This
software is a part of the Microsoft office suite and is compatible with other applications in the
office suite.

16
4.2.2 Why it is being used?

Excel is a commercial spread sheet application produced and distributed by Microsoft

for Microsoft Windows and Mac OS X. It features the ability to perform basic calculations,
use graphing tools, create pivot tables and create macro programming language. Excel has the
same basic features as every spread sheet, which use a collection of cells arranged into rows
and columns to organize data manipulation. They also display data as charts, histograms and
line graphs.

4.2.3 What are its advantages?

1. Excel permits users to section data so as to view various factors from a different
perspective.
2. Visual Basic is used for applications in Excel, allowing users to create variety of
complex numerical methods.
3. Programmers are given an option to code directly using the Visual Basic Editor,
including Windows for writing code, debugging and code module organization.
We are using excel spread sheet because of the following reasons
 It is easily available
 It is low cost software tool
 Easy to use
 Very much compatible
 Gives us flexibility to use our data unlike other software

4.3 Assumptions for design

1. The material used in column and column base is assumed to be homogenous.

2. No imperfections were considered in these investigations.

3. No temperature effects are present.

4. Hot rolled I-sections are taken as main compression members.

5. Only I- sections dimensions are considered in the design of columns bases.

6. Grade of steel used will be Fe410.

7. Stress are assumed to be Fy=250N/mm2and Fu=410N/mm2throughout the design.

8. Only axially applied loading is considered.

17
 9. For site requirements, minimum projection of 50mm is provided for proper anchor
bolting

10. The strength of column is designed for atleast 1m height that will be maximum loading
for designing the slab base.

4.4 Design Procedure

As per standard IS 800:2007 code.

4.5 Sequence of Project Completion

This study was approached in the following sequence:

1. A literature survey was conducted which investigated the design and behaviour of
gusseted base and slab base and their parametric factors.

2. Review of recommendations on built up column from codes Bureau of Indian

Standard-800 (2007) and, hand book for structural steel. The literature survey also
gathered information on effects of load ratios on the grade and cost of steel.

3. Designing and making spread sheet using the MS Office Excel.

4. Comparison of results obtained from all column bases.

5. Conclusion and recommendation on the structural and economical behaviour of

gusseted base and slab base.

6. Final submission.

18
4.6 Design Steps

P=Factored Load

Bearing Strength of Concrete = 0.5 for slab base

=0.45 for gusseted base

L=Length of base plate in mm

B=Width of the base plate in mm

a=Bigger projection of base plate beyond column in mm

b= Smaller projection of base plate beyond column in mm

= Width of flange of column in mm

D=Depth of column section in mm

W=intensity of pressure from concrete under the slab base

= Partial safety factor

= Thickness of gusset plate

C= Critical Section Overhang

=Thickness of flange

=thickness of web

19
A) Slab Base

i. Square Base Plate

1. The area of the slab may be computed by,

A=
.

2. The side of the base plate is worked out,

L=B=√
3. The intensity of pressure ‘w’ from the concrete pedestal is determined by:
W=

4. a= ,

b=

5. The minimum thickness of the base plate is calculated by using,

< 2.5 ( − 0.3 ) <

20
 ii. Rectangular Base plate

1. The area of the slab may be computed by,

A=
.

2. For providing slab base with equal projection

(D + 2a) X ( +2a) =A
Provide suitable equal projection a with the help of above equation
3. L= D+2a
B= +2a
4. The intensity of pressure ‘w’ from the concrete pedestal is determined by:
W=

6. The minimum thickness of the base plate is calculated by using,

< 2.5 ( − 0.3 ) <

21
 iii. H shaped Base Plate

1. The area of the slab may be computed by,

A=
.

2. The overall dimensions of the base plate is worked out,

L=B=√
3. Calculation of Equal Projections 'C'
A= 2*((2*C+ )*(2*C+B)) + ((2*C+ )*(D-2*C- ))

4. Provide suitable projection C by calculation the equation in step 3 and calculate

using same equation
5. The intensity of pressure ‘w’ from the concrete pedestal is determined by:

W=

6. The minimum thickness of the base plate is calculated by using,

< 2.5 ( ) <

22
 B) Gusseted base

i. Bolted

1. The area of the base plate may be computed by,

A=
.

2. The dimension of the base plate parallel to web,

L= D +2( + leg length of angle + overhang(c))
3. The dimension of the base plate parallel to flange,
B=

4. The intensity of pressure ‘w’ from the concrete pedestal is determined by:
W=

5. BM at the critical section, M=

6. Design bending strength at the critical section,

.
M = = 45.45
.

7. Thickness of the base plate

M= 45.45

23
 CHAPTER 5

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

In this approach, the design procedure for different steel slab bases and gusseted bases
is completely done in an excel spreadsheet and the results of the differences between the
geometries of the steel slab bases and gusseted bases with respect to the variation in thickness
is shown graphically. The graphs that are formed below are showing the results that are
occurred while conducting this project. The testing was done for ISHB, ISSC, ISWB Channel
sections only and no other sections are considered for this project. In this chapter, the results
obtained for the analytical investigation on steel slab bases and gusseted bases are discussed
with the help of graphs,

24
5.1 SQUARE SLAB BASE
We can see that for ISHB section(Fig 5.1.1.), the thickness of the plate rises more than
40mm for M20 while M40 has relatively less thickness for higher loads i.e. 24mm. Grade
M40 has constant thickness till 2200KN (HB350). For higher loads i.e. from 1500KN
onwards, thickness is inversely proportional to the grade of concrete. Thickness is
approximately same for all grades of concrete up to 1500KN i.e. below 20mm.Then M45 and
M60 have identical thickness values throughout i.e. below 22mm. The thickness is
approximately same for M45 to M60 i.e. below 30mm. This is because as the grade increases
the bearing pressure increases and the required area of base plate decreases, due to which
overhang will also decrease therefore thickness is minimum.

It is observed that for ISSC sections (Fig 5.1.2.) , the thickness of the base plate is
inversely proportional to the grade of concrete. The thickness is almost constant throughout
for M40 i.e. 20mm. M20 grade has the maximum thickness i.e. 36mm for maximum load of
2500kN while M40 has the maximum thickness i.e. 22mm for maximum loading. Also we
can see that, M45 and M60 have identical thickness values for the base plate throughout. The
thickness does not exceed more than 25mm for grades M45 to M60. M55 grade has constant
thickness of 20mm till 2000kN whereas M60 and M45 give constant thickness from 1000kN
to 2500kN and both of them give the same (overlapping) thickness for different loads.

It is observed that for ISWB sections the thickness of the base plate is inversely
proportional to the grade of concrete from Fig 5.1.3. The maximum thickness for M20 grade
is almost 70 mm and for M40 is 40mm which is highly uneconomical. Then the thickness
values of M45 and M60 are identical throughout. The thicknesses for all the grades are
almost constant up to 1600kN. There is a sudden decrease in the thickness for WB500 due to
area constraint. Also for M60 grade (highest grade) the thickness is still 40mm which is
highly uneconomical.

25
Table 5.1 Thickness of square bases

Section D Bf Load Thickness ‘t’ in mm

‘P’
St20 St25 St30 St35 St40 St45 St50 St55 St60
HB150 150 150 750.0 18 16 18 20 20 20 20 20 20
HB200 200 200 1059.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB200* 200 200 1133.0 20 18 18 18 20 22 18 20 22
HB225 225 225 1234.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB225* 225 225 1339.0 20 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB250 250 250 1464.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB250* 250 250 1570.0 22 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB300 300 250 1685.0 26 20 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
HB300* 300 250 1806.0 28 24 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
HB350 350 250 1934.0 32 26 20 18 20 20 18 20 20
HB350* 350 250 2076.0 34 28 24 20 20 20 20 20 20
HB400 400 250 2222.0 38 32 26 20 18 20 20 18 20
HB400* 400 250 2363.0 40 34 30 24 20 20 24 20 20
HB450 450 250 2499.0 42 36 30 24 20 18 24 20 18
HB450* 450 250 2655.0 44 40 34 28 24 20 28 24 20
SC100 100 100 515.0 18 18 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
SC120 120 120 700.0 22 20 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC140 140 140 910.0 24 22 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
SC150* 152 152 1040.0 26 22 20 18 20 22 18 20 22
SC160 160 160 1164.0 26 24 22 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC180 180 180 1421.0 28 26 22 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC200 200 200 1711.0 32 28 24 22 20 22 22 20 22
SC220 220 220 2017.0 32 30 26 22 20 22 22 20 22
SC250 250 250 2456.0 36 32 28 24 22 22 24 22 22
WB150 150 100 426.0 16 16 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
WB175 175 125 582.0 18 16 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
WB200 200 140 780.0 22 18 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
WB200* 200 150 1446.0 36 34 32 28 26 24 28 26 24
WB225 225 150 928.0 26 22 18 18 20 20 18 20 20
WB250 250 200 1148.0 22 18 18 20 20 20 20 20 20
WB300 300 200 1352.0 28 22 20 18 20 20 18 20 20
WB350 350 200 1599.0 32 28 24 20 18 20 20 18 20
WB400 400 200 1876.0 40 34 30 24 20 18 24 20 18
WB450 450 200 2233.0 46 40 36 30 26 24 30 26 24
WB500 500 250 2720.0 46 40 32 28 22 18 28 22 18
WB550 550 250 3218.0 54 46 40 34 30 26 34 30 26
WB600 600 250 3828.0 66 60 54 48 42 38 48 42 38

26
Fig 5.1.1.Load vs. thickness for ISHB and Square base

Fig 5.1.2. Load vs. thickness for ISSC and Square base

Fig 5.1.3. Load vs. thickness for ISWB and Square base

27
5.2 RECTANGLE SLAB BASE
It can be studied that for ISHB sections the thickness for M30 and M40 is constant
throughout i.e. 18mm and 20mm respectively (From Fig 5.2.1.). The thickness ranges
between 15mm to 30mm. Further the thickness value for M45 and M60 is constant and same
throughout i.e. 22mm and the thickness value for M50 and M55 is constant and same
throughout i.e. 20mm.

It can be seen that for ISSC sections the thickness of the base plate is inversely
proportional to the grade of concrete from Fig 5.2.2. M40 grade has constant thickness of
20mm for all ISSC sections except for SC250 (2500KN). The thickness ranges from 18mm to
40mm respective to particular grade. Further the thickness values of M45 and M60 are
identical throughout i.e. 22mm. The thickness of 20mm for M55 grade is constant up to
2000kN and then it rises to 22mm. The highest thickness is 25mm for M50 grade at load
2500KN.

It is observed for ISWB sections the thickness for M40 grade is constant throughout
i.e. 20mm whereas for M30 grade concrete the thickness is constant i.e. 18mm up to
3200kN(From Fig 5.2.3.). Further the thickness value of M45 and M60 is constant
throughout i.e. 22mm, while M50 and M55 have constant thickness of 20mm throughout.

28
Table 5.2 Thickness of Rectangular base
Section D Bf Load Thickness ‘t’ in mm
‘P’
Rt20 Rt25 Rt30 Rt35 Rt40 Rt45 Rt50 Rt55 Rt60
HB150 150 150 750.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB200 200 200 1059.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB200* 200 200 1133.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB225 225 225 1234.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB225* 225 225 1339.0 20 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB250 250 250 1464.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB250* 250 250 1570.0 22 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB300 300 250 1685.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB300* 300 250 1806.0 22 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB350 350 250 1934.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB350* 350 250 2076.0 24 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB400 400 250 2222.0 22 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB400* 400 250 2363.0 24 20 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB450 450 250 2499.0 24 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
HB450* 450 250 2655.0 26 20 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC100 100 100 515.0 18 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC120 120 120 700.0 22 20 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC140 140 140 910.0 24 22 20 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC150* 152 152 1040.0 24 22 20 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC160 160 160 1164.0 26 24 22 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC180 180 180 1421.0 28 26 22 20 20 22 20 20 22
SC200 200 200 1711.0 30 28 24 22 20 22 22 20 22
SC220 220 220 2017.0 32 30 26 22 20 22 22 20 22
SC250 250 250 2456.0 36 32 28 24 22 22 24 22 22
WB150 150 100 426.0 14 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB175 175 125 582.0 14 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB200 200 140 780.0 16 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB200* 200 150 1446.0 30 26 24 22 20 22 22 20 22
WB225 225 150 928.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB250 250 200 1148.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB300 300 200 1352.0 18 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB350 350 200 1599.0 20 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB400 400 200 1876.0 22 16 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB450 450 200 2233.0 24 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB500 500 250 2720.0 24 18 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB550 550 250 3218.0 28 22 18 20 20 22 20 20 22
WB600 600 250 3828.0 34 28 24 20 20 22 20 20 22

29
Fig.5.2.1. Load vs. thickness for ISHB and Rectangular base

Fig.5.2.2. Load vs. thickness for ISSC and Rectangular base

Fig.5.2.3. Load vs. thickness for ISWB and Rectangular base

30
5.3 H-Shaped Bases
We can see that for ISHB sections, M40 grade has constant thickness of 24mm up to
2100kN and has maximum thickness value of 28mm for HB450(2700KN) from Fig 5.3.1.
The thickness for M35 grade is constant i.e. 22mm up to 1700kN, then, it increases as load
increases. The thickness value of M45 and M60 is constant throughout i.e. 26mm. M55 grade
has constant thickness (24mm) up to 2100kN and M50 has constant thickness (22mm) up to
1700kN.

It can be observed that for ISSC sections, the thickness of the base plate is inversely
proportional to the grade of concrete ( Fig 5.3.2.). The thickness ranges from 20mm to 40mm
for M20 to M40 corresponding to their loads and sections. Further the thickness value for
M45 and M60 (27mm) is constant up to 1700kN and then increases gradually. The thickness
of 25mm for M55 grade is constant up to 1400kN. The thickness for M50 grade is constant
i.e.22mm up to 1000kN.For all grades the thickness is below 40mm.

It can be studied that for ISWB sections, the maximum thickness for M20 is 48mm
whereas for M40 is 36mm(From Fig 5.3.3.). The thickness for M40 grade is constant (25mm)
up to 1900kN and then gradually increases. Similarly, M35 grade has constant thickness
(22mm) up to 1600kN and then increases gradually. M20 grade requires lowest thickness for
lowest load and vice versa. Further M45 and M60 have identical thickness values
(overlapping). For M50 grade for H-shaped thickness is low, therefore it is economical for
lower loads, afterwards thickness increases for higher loads and becomes uneconomical.

31
Table.5.3Thickness of H-shaped bases

Section D Bf Load Thickness ‘t’ in mm

‘P’
Ht20 Ht25 Ht30 Ht35 Ht40 Ht45 Ht50 Ht55 Ht60
HB150 150 150 750.0 22 20 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB200 200 200 1059.0 24 22 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB200* 200 200 1133.0 26 24 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB225 225 225 1234.0 24 22 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB225* 225 225 1339.0 26 24 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB250 250 250 1464.0 26 24 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB250* 250 250 1570.0 28 26 24 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB300 300 250 1685.0 28 26 24 22 24 26 22 24 26
HB300* 300 250 1806.0 30 28 26 24 24 26 24 24 26
HB350 350 250 1934.0 30 28 26 24 24 26 24 24 26
HB350* 350 250 2076.0 32 30 28 26 24 26 26 24 26
HB400 400 250 2222.0 34 30 28 26 26 26 26 26 26
HB400* 400 250 2363.0 36 32 30 28 26 26 28 26 26
HB450 450 250 2499.0 36 32 30 28 26 26 28 26 26
HB450* 450 250 2655.0 38 34 32 30 28 26 30 28 26
SC100 100 100 515.0 20 20 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
SC120 120 120 700.0 24 22 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
SC140 140 140 910.0 26 24 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
SC150* 152 152 1040.0 28 26 24 22 24 26 22 24 26
SC160 160 160 1164.0 30 28 26 24 24 26 24 24 26
SC180 180 180 1421.0 32 30 28 26 24 26 26 24 26
SC200 200 200 1711.0 34 32 30 28 26 26 28 26 26
SC220 220 220 2017.0 38 34 32 30 28 28 30 28 28
SC250 250 250 2456.0 40 38 34 32 30 30 32 30 30
WB150 150 100 426.0 18 20 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB175 175 125 582.0 18 20 20 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB200 200 140 780.0 22 20 20 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB200* 200 150 1446.0 34 32 30 28 26 26 28 26 26
WB225 225 150 928.0 24 22 20 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB250 250 200 1148.0 24 22 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB300 300 200 1352.0 26 24 22 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB350 350 200 1599.0 28 26 24 22 24 26 22 24 26
WB400 400 200 1876.0 32 28 26 26 24 26 26 24 26
WB450 450 200 2233.0 34 32 30 28 26 26 28 26 26
WB500 500 250 2720.0 36 34 30 28 28 26 28 28 26
WB550 550 250 3218.0 40 38 34 32 30 28 32 30 28
WB600 600 250 3828.0 48 44 42 38 36 34 38 36 34

32
Fig.5.3.1.Load vs. thickness for ISHB and H-shaped base

Fig.5.3.2.Load vs. thickness for ISSC and H-shaped base

Fig.5.3.3.Load vs. thickness for ISWB and H-shaped base

33
5.4 Gusseted base
From Fig 5.4.1. it can be observed that for ISHB sections, for M20 to M30 grade concrete
gives thickness ranging between 18mm to 30 mm, also their thickness is identical. It starts
from 18mm then remains constant for a while at 24mm till 1340KN, then there is a sudden
depression (i.e.22mm) at 1450KN, then it is constant till 1950KN.After that there is rise in
thickness till 30mm at 2000KN and then remains constant throughout. We can see that there
is regular fluctuation in thickness of gusseted base corresponding to their loading and
sections. For M35 to M60 thickness is identical which ranges between 24mm to 40mm. It
starts from 18mm then there is rise in thickness up to 30mm which remains constant till
1800KN, except at loads 1350KN, 1450KN, 1685KN & 1800KN, where thickness decreases
to 28mm. Then the thickness rises till 40mm for maximum loads.

It can be seen that for ISSC sections, thickness for grade M20 to M30 is identical.
Thickness ranges between 18mm to 30mm (Fig 5.4.2.). It starts from 18mm and rises up to
24mm at 1421KN, then it decreases to some extent at 1711KN.After that the thickness rises
up to 30mm for maximum loads. Also thickness for grade M35-M60 is identical. Thickness
ranges between 24mm to 40mm. It starts from 24mm and rises to 30mm at 900KN, then it
remains constant till 1711KN.After that it rises to 40mm for loading 2017KN and then
decreases up to 38mm at 2456KN.In short, there is regular increase in thickness of gusseted
base plate respective to the increasing load and sections.

It can be studied that for ISWB sections, thickness for grade M20 to M30 is also identical
from Fig 5.4.3.Thickness ranges between 18mm to 30mm.It starts from 18mm and is constant
up to 780KN, then thickness rises up to 30mm at 2233KN. After it remains constant
throughout. Also thickness for grade M35 to M60 is identical. Thickness ranges between
22mm to 40mm. It starts from 22mm and rises to 30mm at 1350KN, then thickness decreases
to 28mm at 1600 KN. Followed by rise in thickness to 40mm for maximum loads.

34
Table.5.4 Thickness of Gusseted Bases

Section D Bf Load Thickness ‘t’ in mm

‘P’
Gt20 Gt25 Gt30 Gt35 Gt40 Gt45 Gt50 Gt55 Gt60
HB150 150 150 750.0 18 18 18 24 24 24 24 24 24
HB200 200 200 1059.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
HB200* 200 200 1133.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
HB225 225 225 1234.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
HB225* 225 225 1339.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 28 28 28
HB250 250 250 1464.0 22 22 22 28 28 28 30 30 30
HB250* 250 250 1570.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
HB300 300 250 1685.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 28 28 28
HB300* 300 250 1806.0 22 22 22 28 28 28 30 30 30
HB350 350 250 1934.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 38 38 38
HB350* 350 250 2076.0 30 30 30 38 38 38 38 38 38
HB400 400 250 2222.0 30 30 30 38 38 38 40 40 40
HB400* 400 250 2363.0 30 30 30 40 40 40 40 40 40
HB450 450 250 2499.0 30 30 30 40 40 40 40 40 40
HB450* 450 250 2655.0 30 30 30 40 40 40 40 40 40
SC100 100 100 515.0 18 18 18 24 24 24 24 24 24
SC120 120 120 700.0 18 18 18 24 24 24 24 24 24
SC140 140 140 910.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
SC150* 150 150 1040.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
SC160 160 160 1164.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
SC180 180 180 1421.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
SC200 200 200 1711.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
SC220 220 220 2017.0 30 30 30 40 40 40 40 40 40
SC250 250 250 2456.0 30 30 30 38 38 38 38 38 38
WB150 150 100 426.0 18 18 18 22 22 22 22 22 22
WB175 175 125 582.0 18 18 18 24 24 24 24 24 24
WB200 200 140 780.0 18 18 18 24 24 24 24 24 24
WB200* 200 150 1446.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
WB225 225 150 928.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
WB250 250 200 1148.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
WB300 300 200 1352.0 22 22 22 30 30 30 30 30 30
WB350 350 200 1599.0 22 22 22 28 28 28 28 28 28
WB400 400 200 1876.0 24 24 24 30 30 30 30 30 30
WB450 450 200 2233.0 30 30 30 38 38 38 38 38 38
WB500 500 250 2720.0 30 30 30 38 38 38 38 38 38
WB550 550 250 3218.0 30 30 30 38 38 38 38 38 38
WB600 600 250 3828.0 30 30 30 40 40 40 40 40 40

35
Fig.5.4.1.Load vs. thickness for ISHB and Gusseted base

Fig.5.4.2.Load vs. thickness for ISSC and Gusseted base

Fig.5.4.3.Load vs. thickness for ISWB and Gusseted base

36
Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISHB
For M20 and M25 (fig.5.5.1 and fig.5.5.2),the thickness for all considered shapes of
base plate and gusset plate shows same behavior, till 1500KN, thus any one can be selected.
Later square shaped base plate gives very high thickness for maximum loading, due to high
projections obtained. Rectangular base plate gives least thickness among all at maximum
loading. In case of gusset plate, it shows better behavior then H-shaped and square, thus it
can be considered after rectangular section. From fig.5.5.3, for M30 the thickness for all
considered shapes of base plate and gusset plate shows same behavior till 1700KN, thus
anyone can be selected. Then rectangular is most preferable than others for maximum
loading. For M35, M40, M50& M55 (Fig 5.5.4, Fig 5.5.5, Fig 5.5.7, Fig 5.5.8) grade of
concrete, gusset shows very high thickness then others, due to area constraint. Considered
base plate shows almost same behavior, with less thickness, thus anyone among base plate
can be considered. In case of M45 and M60, rectangular & H-shaped gives constant thickness
throughout (i.e. 22mm & 26mm, respectively). Gusset shows very high thickness than others,
due to area constraint. Square gives preferable behavior for maximum loading condition.

Fig 5.5.1 Fig 5.5.2

Fig 5.5.3 Fig 5.5.4

37
Fig 5.5.5 Fig 5.5.6

Fig 5.5.7 Fig 5.5.8

Fig 5.5.9

38
5.5 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISSC
M20 and M25 (Fig 5.6.1 and Fig 5.6.2 ), the thickness for all considered shapes
of base plate and gusset plate shows same behavior, till 1500KN, thus anyone can be
selected. Gusset gives minimum thickness at maximum loading, thus is preferable.
Considered shapes of base plate gives high thickness, due to high projections obtained. For
M30, the thickness for all considered shapes of base plate and gusset plate shows same
behavior, till maximum loading, thus anyone can be selected. For M35 and M50, up to
700KN, all gives almost same thickness. Later, gusset gives high thickness for maximum
loading, due to area constraint. Square and rectangle gives preferable behavior. For M40 and
M55 (Fig 5.6.5 and Fig 5.6.8), rectangle base plate gives constant thickness throughout. Even
H-shaped gives constant thickness up to 1500KN, and then increases for maximum loading,
due to high projections obtained. For M45 and M60(Fig 5.6.6 and Fig 5.6.9), the thickness
for all considered shapes of base plate & gusset plate shows same behavior, till 700KN.
Rectangular and square base plate, gives constant thickness throughout, thus it is preferable.

Fig 5.6.1 Fig 5.6.2

Fig 5.6.3 Fig 5.6.4

39
Fig 5.6.5 Fig 5.6.6

Fig 5.6.7 Fig 5.6.8

Fig 5.6.9

40
5.6 Comparison for thickness for base and gusset plates for ISWB
From Fig 5.7.1, Fig 5.7.2 and Fig 5.7.3 i.e. M20, M25 and M30, the thickness for all
considered shapes of base plate and gusset plate shows same behavior, till 1500KN, thus
anyone can be selected. Later square shaped base plate and H-shaped base plate gives very
high thickness for maximum loading, due To high projections obtained. Rectangular base
plate and gusset plate gives least thickness among all at maximum loading. For M35 and M50
(Fig 5.7.4 and Fig 5.7.7), all plates give almost preferable thickness. Later gusset plate’s
thickness increases with increase in load, due to area constraint. Rectangular base plate gives
constant thickness throughout, thus it is preferable. Even square and H-shaped base plate
gives high thickness with increase in load, due To high projections obtained. For M40 and
M55, rectangular base plate gives constant thickness throughout. Gusset plate thickness
increases with increase in load. Even H-shaped base plate and square base plate gives
constant thickness up to 1900KN and 1400KN respectively. For M45 and M60 (Fig 5.7.6 and
Fig 5.7.9), rectangular gives constant thickness throughout, thus it is preferable. Even H-
shaped base plate and square base plate gives constant thickness up to.

Fig 5.7.1 Fig 5.7.2

Fig 5.7.3 Fig 5.7.4

41
Fig 5.7.5 Fig 5.7.6

Fig 5.7.7 Fig 5.7.8

Fig 5.7.9

42
5.8. Snapshot of EXCEL sheet

Fig 5.8.1. EXCEL sheet for square, rectangle and H-shaped base plate.

Fig 5.8.2. EXCEL sheet for welded and bolted gusset plate.

43
 Chapter 6

Conclusion

From many decades structures which are formed from steel became popular, but in
countries like India only industrial and commercial structures are made from steel, while
working with steel design it was found that very less work is available with steel and Indian
Standards Code which is updated in 2007, ie IS800-2007. Further it is difficult for a beginner
to select on from typical slab base and Gusseted base based on loading variations considering
economy and also IS code do not specify exact loading range to select appropriate one. So,
we decided to work on Column Bases. Typical slab base and Gusseted base design problems
were worked out with the help of Microsoft Excel, to check these slab base and Gusseted
base for economy by designing same for various loadings range. These all was carried out by
considering standard specifications provided by IS 800-2007 and grade of steel Fe410.

Ultimately the Thickness of column base mainly depends on the projection beyond
column exterior dimensions and bearing strength of concrete. Mainly while designing all four
types of slab base, procedure is same, and it’s observed that the gusset base offers higher
strength than that of the square, rectangular and H shaped base plate. As per structure
requirement as engineer we have to select any one of these base plates. Basically with
increase in load, thickness increases but at the same time if the concrete grade increases,

44
thickness reduces. In this study we have tried to study effect of load and concrete strength on
thickness of base plate. By creating a data sheet in excel we designed four types of base plate
for each type of Column section considering load equals to its design strength with one meter
column height. So our aim was narrowed towards the study of behaviour of these base plate
on various combinations of loading and grade of concrete criterion as per IS800:2007.

Further, the excel sheet that we have designed is also capable of helping the design
engineers to check thickness of slab base for various sections and loading conditions at a
glance. The obtained results will be presented in the form of tables and graphs. After getting
results we can conclude that,

a) Nearly up to 1200kN we can provide three basic base plate shape, i.e. Square,
rectangular and H shape
b) When load requirement goes on increasing its feasible to provide gusseted base for
more safety as it’s capable to bear eccentric loading.
c) Also it is observed that we can provide rectangular base plate effectively with
economy when column is subjected to centric loading above the load of 1200kN.
d) When bearing strength of concrete increases, the required area of base plate reduces
and it’s dimensions becomes less than size of column sections and it moves towards
zero projections, hence H-shaped base is preferred in such cases.
e) Also we can conclude that the thickness of base plate in case of gusset base does not
depends upon the required area of base plate, but it varies with respect to the smaller
leg of the gusset angle.
f) Due to this, there is no significant change in thickness of gusseted base when we are
changing grade of concrete from M20 to M30 ,M35 to M40, M45 to M60 in case of
ISHB sections. And in case of ISSC and ISWB same pattern is observed for the range
of M20 to M30 and M35 to M60.
g) As the grade of concrete increases, the thickness of slab base decreases.
h) In case of ISSC sections, as the section is square, there is no difference in value of
thickness for square and rectangular shape of bases.
i) With increase in loading conditions, the thickness goes on increasing constantly in
case of square base plate as the value of larger projection goes on increasing.
j) For ISWB section if we use square base plate, irrespective of any grade of concrete it
is highly uneconomical.

45
 FUTURE SCOPE

 Further study can be extended for various sections other than I section.

 Further the thickness can also be calculated by considering the projection while
designing.

 Same excel sheet can further be modified to calculate the thickness of gusseted base
subjected to eccentric loading.

 Further we can extend the same program in excel by adding calculation of welded
connection.

 Also study can be extended by increasing the grade of concrete above M60.

46
 REFERENCE

1. Adany, S., Calado, L., and Dunai, L. (2000). “Experimental Studies on Cyclic Behavior
Modes of Base-Plate Connections”,Proceedings of the Third International Conference
on theBehavior of Steel Structures in Seismic Areas (STESSA 2000), Montreal, Canada,
97-104
2. Balut, N. and Moldovan, A. (1997). “A Model for the Behavior of Column Base
Connections”, Proceedings of the Second Conference STESSA, Kyoto, Japan.
3. Bird, W. R. (1976). “Rapid Selection of Column Base Plates”,Engineering Journal,
AISC,Volume 13, No. 2, Second Quarter, pp. 43-47.
4. Chhabra S. J. (1994). “Column Base Plate Design Table”,Engineering Journal, AISC,
Vol. 31, No. 1, First Quarter, pp. 12-20.
5. DeWolf, J. T. (1978). “Axially Loaded Column Base Plates”,Journal of the Structural
Division,ASCE, Vol. 104, No. ST5, May, pp. 781-794.
6. DeWolf J.T. and Sarisley, E. F. (1980). “Column Base Plates with Axial Loads and
Moments”, Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 106, No. ST11, November,
pp. 2167-2184.
7. Duggal, S.K., “Limit State Design Of Steel Structures”, McGraw Hill Education Pvt.
Ltd., New Delhi, India.

47
8. Ermopoulos, J. and Michaltsos, G. T. (1998). “Analytical Modeling of Stress
Distribution under Column Base Plates,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research,
Vol. 46, No. 1-3, Paper No.136
9. Ermopoulos, J. and Stamatopoulos, G. (1996a). “Mathematical Modeling of Column
Base Plate Connections,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.
79-100.
10. Ermopoulos, J. and Stamatopoulos, G. (1996b). “Analytical Modeling of Column Base
Plates under Cyclic Loading,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 40, No.
3, pp. 225-238.
11. Fling R. S. (1970). “Design of Steel Bearing Plates”,Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol.
7, April,pp. 37-40. Hon, K.K. and Melchers, R.E. (1988). “Experimental Behavior of
Steel Column Bases” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 9, Paper No. 143,
pp. 35-50.
12. Igarashi, S., Kadoya, H., Nakashima, S., and Suzuki, M. (1992). “Behavior of Exposed-
Type Fixed Column Base Connected to Riser Foundation”,Proceedings of the Tenth
World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Madrid, Spain.
13. Indian Standard Code IS 800-2007, Bureau of Indian Standards, New Delhi, 110002,
India.
14. Kallolil, J. J., Chakrabarti, S. K., and Mishra, R. C. (1998). “Experimental Investigation
of Embedded Steel Plates in Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Engineering Structures,
Vol. 20, No. 1-2, pp. 105-112.
15. Kontoleon, M. J., and Baniotopoulos, C. C., (2000). “Computational Aspects on the
Frictional Unilateral Contact Problem Arising on Steel Base Plate
Connections”,Computers and Structures, Vol. 78, pp. 303-309.
16. Krishnamurthy, N. and Thambiratnam, D. P. (1990). “Finite Element Analysis of
Column BasePlates”,Computers and Structures, Vol. 34, No. 2, pp. 215-223
17. Maitra, N. (1978). “Graphical Aid for Design of Base Plate Subjected to
Moment”,EngineeringJournal, AISC, Vol. 15, No. 2, Second Quarter, pp. 50-53.
18. Penserini, P. and Colson, A. (1989). “Ultimate Limit Strength of Column-Base
Connections”, Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 14, pp. 301-320.
19. Picard, A., Beaulieu, D., and Perusse, B. (1987). “Rotational Restraint of a Simple
Column Base Connection,” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 14, pp. 49-57.
20. Sputo, T. (1993). “Design of Pipe Column Base Plates under Gravity
Load”,EngineeringJournal, AISC, Vol. 30, No. 2, Second Quarter, pp. 41-43.

48
21. Stockwell, F. W. Jr. (1975). “Preliminary Base Plate Selection”,Engineering Journal,
AISC,Vol. 12, No. 3, Third Quarter, pp. 92-99.
22. Tamai, H (2003). “Loading test on Exposed-Type Column Base Subjected to Cyclic
BendingMoment and Variable Axial Force”,Journal of Structural and Construction
Engineering, Transactions of AIJ, No. 567, pp. 149-156.
23. Targowski, R., Lamblin, D., and Guerlement, G. (1993). “Base plate Column
Connection under Bending: Experimental and Numerical Study,” Journal of
Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 27, pp. 37-54.
24. Thambiratnam, D. P. and Krishnamurthy N. (1989). “Computer Analysis of Column
Base Plates,” Computers and Structures, Vol. 33, No. 3, pp. 839-850
25. Thambiratnam, D. P. and Paramasivam, P. (1986). “Base Plates under Axial Loads
andMoments”,Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 5, pp. 1166-
1181.
26. Wald, F., Simek, I., and Seifert, J. (1994). “The Tests of the Column-Base
Components”, Proceedings of the First International Conference STESSA, Timisoara,
Romania.
27. Wald, F., Sokol, Z., and Steenhuis, M. (1995). “Proposal of the Stiffness Design Model
of theColumn Bases”,Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Connections
in SteelStructures, Trento, Italy.

49
 PUBLICATION

 Abdul Mobin Abdul Khalik Ansari, Asjad Fazal Balbale, Shubham Santosh
Ghadigaonkar, Vaishnav Anant Goregaonkar (2017). “Analysis of Steel Slab Base
and Gusseted Base for Economy”, International Journal of Novel Research and
Development (www.ijnrd.org), ISSN:2456-4184, Vol.2, Issue 4, April-2017, pp.101-
103.

50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57