Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 20 views

    Steel Interchange: Modern Steel's Monthly Steel Interchange Is For You!

    Uploaded by

    Andres Casado
    This document discusses questions about reinforcing an existing end-plate moment connection to accommodate an increase in design load. Adding square washers to the bolts is not recommended as it would not satisfy the structural models used in design guides. Using a stronger bolt grade or reexamining the load distribution assumptions are suggested alternatives to consider before pursuing more uncertain modifications. The experts provide guidance but note they cannot directly address contractual obligations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Steel Interchange: Modern Steel's Monthly Steel Interchange Is For You!

    Uploaded by

    Andres Casado
    20 views2 pages
    This document discusses questions about reinforcing an existing end-plate moment connection to accommodate an increase in design load. Adding square washers to the bolts is not recommended as it would not satisfy the structural models used in design guides. Using a stronger bolt grade or reexamining the load distribution assumptions are suggested alternatives to consider before pursuing more uncertain modifications. The experts provide guidance but note they cannot directly address contractual obligations.

    Original Description:

    SI-05-2017

    Original Title

    SI-05-2017

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document discusses questions about reinforcing an existing end-plate moment connection to accommodate an increase in design load. Adding square washers to the bolts is not recommended as it would not satisfy the structural models used in design guides. Using a stronger bolt grade or reexamining the load distribution assumptions are suggested alternatives to consider before pursuing more uncertain modifications. The experts provide guidance but note they cannot directly address contractual obligations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    20 views2 pages

    Steel Interchange: Modern Steel's Monthly Steel Interchange Is For You!

    Uploaded by

    Andres Casado
    This document discusses questions about reinforcing an existing end-plate moment connection to accommodate an increase in design load. Adding square washers to the bolts is not recommended as it would not satisfy the structural models used in design guides. Using a stronger bolt grade or reexamining the load distribution assumptions are suggested alternatives to consider before pursuing more uncertain modifications. The experts provide guidance but note they cannot directly address contractual obligations.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    If you’ve ever asked yourself “Why?

    ” about something
    related to structural steel design or construction,
    Modern Steel’s monthly Steel Interchange is for you!
    steel
    Send your questions or comments to [email protected]. interchange
    Camber and Specific Instructions to Another wrinkle is that even if the fabricator did take
    the Contrary exception to the camber requirement in the bid—and this
    The specification for a project requires camber to be mea- was agreed to contractually—the contract would likely be
    sured in the field in the stressed condition and not in the between the fabricator and their client. The issue would then
    fabricator's shop in the unstressed condition, as indicated have to be addressed relative to the contract between the
    in Section 6.4.4 of the AISC Code of Standard Practice fabricator’s client, the owner and the engineer of record. To
    (ANSI/AISC 303), available at www.aisc.org/standards. The answer your questions:
    specification then states that the fabricator will be respon- 1. Yes, this is the intent. However, the engineer has chosen
    sible for any repairs required to bring nonconforming not to conform to the intent of the Code, and you have
    beams into compliance with the specified camber. chosen to contractually accept this deviation. AISC rec-
    After the project was awarded, the fabricator issued a ommends that specifiers adhere to the Code unless there
    request for information (RFI) requesting the unstressed is a very good reason not to, but we have no authority to
    camber required so that the beam when installed would govern the contracts parties choose to enter into. The
    settle to the stressed camber noted in the contract docu- February 2017 article “Specific Instructions to the Con-
    ments. The RFI quoted the Commentary from Section trary” (available at www.modernsteel.com) provides
    6.4.4 of the Code to explain why the camber measurement further information.
    cannot be measured in the field in the stressed condition. 2. Yes. Section 1.1 of the Code states: “In the absence of spe-
    In his response, the structural engineer of record stated cific instructions to the contrary in the contract docu-
    that, per the contract, this determination must be made ments, the trade practices that are defined in this Code
    by the contractor. shall govern the fabrication and erection of structural
    I have several questions: steel.” The above-mentioned article provides a good dis-
    1. Since the Commentary to Section 6.4.4 states that cussion related to the proper use of specific instructions
    there is no way to inspect beam camber after the to the contrary.
    beam is received in the field (due to numerous fac- 3. Probably. This is likely a legal question, and we cannot
    tors), is it not the intent of Sections 3.1(e) and 3.1.5 provide legal advice. However, I believe it is common
    that the magnitude of camber specified in the struc- for contracts to allocate risk among the parties, even
    tural design documents be that which is measurable when the parties have limited control over the risks.
    for the purposes of fabrication? In the case of camber, the Commentary to the
    2. Does AISC permit the engineer to deviate from the Code lists several factors that are largely beyond any
    Code in this manner? party’s complete control. The structural engineer of
    3. Can the fabricator be held responsible for achieving record should in most cases have the most reliable
    a condition over which the fabricator may have little information related to many of these items—and
    control? likely the best ability to account for them. How-
    4. Is there any practical method of determining the ever, there is no party that can fully control all of
    unstressed camber that must be provided to ensure the potential effects, and some party must therefore
    that the stressed condition is within tolerance? assume the associated risk.
    4. No. This would require information and coordina-
    We cannot arbitrate or address contractual issues. This issue tion with the designer and contractor. As this is
    should have been addressed during contract negotiations. If uncommon, the approach taken in the Code is what
    there are no contractual exceptions to the camber require- we recommend.
    ment, then the fabricator must satisfy the requirement. Larry S. Muir, PE, and, Patrick J. Fortney, SE
    However, Section 7.13.13 of the Code requires the owner's
    representative for construction to verify plumbness, elevation Reinforcing an Existing End-Plate
    and alignment prior to the placement of other trade materi- Moment Connection
    als. We are assuming that the notation “stressed condition” The 3∕8-in. end plate of an existing connection (configured
    refers to the beam as erected prior to placement of finishes. similar to an end-plate moment connection) is not ade-
    Since you have agreed to measure the camber in the field, the quate for an increase in design load, based on checks from
    camber should be measured before other materials are applied commercially available connection design software. The
    to the beam by other trades. In the event that the owner's sur- connection has been defined as an end-plate moment
    vey identifies beam(s) not meeting the required camber, repair connection in the software model. The connection trans-
    work may be the fabricator's responsibility. fers modest moments and shears but also significant

     Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION


    steel interchange
    axial load. ASTM F3125 Grade A325-N bolts are pro- that only the bolts on the compression side of a moment
    vided. Can a square washer be used at each of the bolts end-plate connection resist shear. However, for your condi-
    to increase the thickness to meet the required thickness tion, where there is a modest moment and significant axial
    determined by the software? Are there better means of load, there may be no portion of the connection in com-
    reinforcing this connection? pression. Therefore, the bolts will be subjected to combined
    tension and shear. Though you have stated that the shear
    The answer to your first question is no. Adding a square loads are small, the increase from threads included (N) to
    washer at each bolt will not satisfy the assumptions likely threads excluded (X) might be enough to accommodate the
    made in the calculations. We cannot comment on what your increase in design load.
    software may be doing, but locally reinforcing the plate would A second option that may avoid costly fieldwork involves
    not satisfy the models presented in either AISC Design Guide reexamining the assumed distribution of force among the
    4: Extended End-Plate Moment Connections Seismic and Wind bolts. Design Guide 16 suggests a model for conditions
    Applications or Design Guide 16: Flush and Extended Multiple- where both axial loads and moments are applied. However,
    Row Moment End-Plate Connections (both are free downloads it only seems to address conditions where the moment is
    for AISC members at www.aisc.org/dg), which probably form the dominate load, unlike your condition. Many models are
    the basis of the checks used by your software. possible and you might find one that will make your exist-
    Adding the washers may have some effect on the strength ing condition acceptable—again avoiding costly fieldwork
    of the plate, but it will likely be small and difficult to quantify. and more uncertain structural models such as the square
    Theoretically, one could use the plate washers to modify the washer approach.
    yield lines used in Design Guides 4 and 16, which would result A second option would be to use a stronger bolt. Replacing
    in an increase in strength if the strength of the connection is the existing ASTM F3125 Grade A325 bolts with Grade A490
    controlled by the plate yield lines. The guides also provide bolts would increase both the shear and tensile design strength
    references to additional information on the models used. I am of the bolts. Again, using the threads excluded shear strength,
    not aware of anyone that has taken this approach and cannot where appropriate, will provide an even greater strength
    provide any definitive guidance on how to do so. You will have increase. Note that your proposed solution of adding square
    to rely on your own judgment. washers would involve, at the very least, removing the nut at
    Here are some other observations, in case you still wish to each bolt and installing the plate washer, so replacing the bolts
    pursue this option: may provide a much greater increase in strength with only
    1. Even if you used a reinforcing plate over the entire slightly more cost.
    connection, you still may not be correctly interpreting Bottom line, you may want to exhaust fixes that can be
    the condition. The models in the design guides assume accomplished with a pencil and a calculator before mobilizing
    a solid plate. Your software probably makes the same crews and equipment in the field. Effectively addressing existing
    assumption. Therefore the increased strength predicted conditions often requires a deeper understanding of the design
    is most likely based on the square of the total thickness. assumptions and the behavior of the systems involved. Off-the-
    If you do not adequately connect the reinforcing plate shelf software and “canned” design procedures may provide a
    to the original plate, then the strength increase would good starting point to evaluate the strength of connections, but
    result from the sum of the squares of the two thick- such approaches may not lead to an optimal solution.
    nesses, not the square of the sum of the thicknesses—a Carlo Lini, PE
    big difference.
    2. The ability to form yield lines at the edges of the rein-
    forcing plate will depend on several factors, including The complete collection of Steel Interchange questions and answers is available online.
    Find questions and answers related to just about any topic by using our full-text search
    the distance the reinforcing is extended beyond the capability. Visit Steel Interchange online at www.modernsteel.com.
    joint and/or that way in which is attached to the existing
    plate. This will further complicate the design.
    Larry Muir is director of technical assistance and Carlo Lini is staff engineer—technical
    Other approaches are possible and might provide a assistance, both with AISC. Patrick Fortney is a consultant to AISC.
    better solution.
    If you have assumed thin plate behavior (with prying), as Steel Interchange is a forum to exchange useful and practical professional ideas and
    described in the design guides, then the apparent deficiency information on all phases of steel building and bridge construction. Opinions and
    suggestions are welcome on any subject covered in this magazine.
    relative to the plate thickness might be addressed by changes
    The opinions expressed in Steel Interchange do not necessarily represent an official
    to the bolts. position of the American Institute of Steel Construction and have not been reviewed. It is
    The first and most economical option to explore simply recognized that the design of structures is within the scope and expertise of a competent
    licensed structural engineer, architect or other licensed professional for the application of
    involves a change in the design assumptions—potentially no principles to a particular structure.
    physical change to the condition at all. If you can confirm If you have a question or problem that your fellow readers might help you solve, please
    that the shear planes do not intersect the bolt threads in forward it to us. At the same time, feel free to respond to any of the questions that you
    the existing condition, then you could take advantage of have read here. Contact Steel Interchange via AISC’s Steel Solutions Center:

    this fact to increase the bolt strength. It is typically assumed 866.ASK.AISC • [email protected]

    MAY 2017

    You might also like