STRUCTURALSTEELEDUCATIONALCOUNCIL

TECHNICALINFORMATION& PRODUCTSERVICE

AUGUST 1999

Design of Reduced Beam Section

(RBS) Moment Frame Connections

by
Kevin S. Moore, James O. Malley, Michael D. Engelhardt
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

ABOUT T H E AUTHORS
KEVIN S. MOORE is a Design E n g i n e e r with Degenkolb E n g i n e e r s in S a n Francisco, Califor-
nia. He e a r n e d his M.S. degree at The University of Texas at A u s t i n w o r k i n g u n d e r th e direc-
tion of Dr. J. A. Y u r a a n d Dr. M. D. E n g e l h a r d t . While c o n d u c t i n g r e s e a r c h , Kevin a s s i s t e d
Dr. E n g e l h a r d t with m a t e r i a l testing for th e '~UT Tests," s o m e of th e first m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n
tests following t he 1994 Northridge e a r t h q u a k e . He was th e lead e n g i n e e r for a 5-stolry SMF
building utilizing RBS c o n n e c t i o n s c o n s t r u c t e d in S a n F r a n c i s c o a n d is a registered Profes-
sional E n g i n e e r in California.

J A M E S 0. MALLEY is a Senior Principal at Degenkolb E n g i n e e r s in S a n Francisco, Califor-

nia. He is t he Project Director for Topical Investigations of the SAC J o i n t V e n t u r e P a r t n e r s h i p .
The SAC J o i n t V e n t u r e w a s c r e a t e d to develop guideline d o c u m e n t s for t h e design, evaluation,
a n d repair of steel m o m e n t frame bui l d in g s in r e s p o n s e to th e d a m a g e c a u s e d by th e North-
ridge e a r t h q u a k e . J i m h a s b e e n involved with m a n y steel design a n d peer review projects,
i n c l u d i n g t he 5-story SMF building listed above. He is a m e m b e r of th e AISC C o m m i t t e e on
Specifications a n d Chair of t he Seismic S u b c o m m i t t e e a n d h a s a u t h o r e d n u m e r o u s p a p e r s on
steel design a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n t h r o u g h o u t h is career. He is also a r e g i s t e r e d S t r u c t u r a l Engi-
n e e r in California.

MICHAEL D. ENGELHARDT is a n a s s o ciate professor of Civil E n g i n e e r i n g at The University

of Texas at Austin. Mike t e a c h e s c o u r s e s on s t r u c t u r a l steel design at The University of Texas
a n d c o n d u c t s r e s e a r c h on seismic r e s i s t a n t steel framing. His previous w o r k i n c l u d e s m a j o r
c o n t r i b u t i o n s to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t a n d validation of eccentrically b r a c e d f r a m e s (EBFs). Mike
h a s b e e n a n active p a r t i c i p a n t in m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n r e s e a r c h since t h e 1994 Northridge
e a r t h q u a k e a n d h a s w o r k e d extensively on RBS r e l a t e d r e s e a r c h . Mike is a m e m b e r of AISC
T a s k C o m m i t t e e N u m b e r 113 on Seismic Design a n d is a registered Professional E n g i n e e r in
California.
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1
1.1 DESCRIPTION OF SMF ................................................................................. 1
1.2 BACKGROUND OF RBS ............................................................................... 2
. HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF RBS SMF CONNECTIONS ........................ 3
2.1 INITIAL RESEARCH ....................................................................................... 3
3. SUMMARY OF TEST RESULTS .............................................................................. 4
3.1 OVERVIEW OF TEST RESULTS FOR RADIUS CUT RBS SPECIMENS ........... 4
4. RBS DESIGN PROCEDURE FOR SMFS .................................................................. 6
4.1 RBS DESIGN ................................................................................................. 6
4.2 RBS SIZING .................................................................................................. 7
4.3 STEP-BY-STEP PROCEDURE ...................................................................... 10
4.4 ADDITIONAL DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
o RBS DESIGN EXAMPLE ....................................................................................... 18
6. PROCEDURES FOR ACCEPTANCE OF DESIGN BY BUILDING AUTHORITIES ...21
6. I C O M M U N I C A T I O N ....................................................................................... 21
6.2 METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................... 22
6.3 CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ................................................................... 22
. FABRICATION AND INSPECTION ISSUES ........................................................... 22
7.1 CUTTING AND GRINDING ........................................................................... 22
7.2 WELDING .................................................................................................... 23
REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 25
APPENDIX A ......................................................................................................... Ai

LIST OF FIGURES

1.1 PRE-NORTHRIDGE MOMENT CONNECTION DETAIL ................................................. 1

1.2 RADIUS CUT RBS MOMENT CONNECTION ............................................................... 2
2.1 TAPERED CUT RBS MOMENT CONNECTION ............................................................ 3
2.2 E X A M P L E O F L A B O R A T O R Y B E H A V I O R O F R A D I U S C U T R B S T E S T S P E C I M E N ..... 4
(A) DETAIL OF TEST SPECIMEN ........................................................................... 4
(B) RESPONSE OF TEST SPECIMEN ..................................................................... 4
4.1 MOMENT DIAGRAM AND BEAM GEOMETRY FOR RBS ............................................. 7
4.2 GEOMETRY OF RADIUS CUT RBS ............................................................................. 8
4.3 TYPICAL MOMENT FRAME BEAM WITH RBS CONNECTIONS ................................... 8
4.4 B E A M A T M I N I M U M S E C T I O N O F R B S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
4.5 F R E E B O D Y D I A G R A M B E T W E E N C E N T E R S O F R B S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.6 FREE BODY DIAGRAM BETWEEN CENTER OF RBS
AND FACE OF COLUMN FLANGE ............................................................................ 12
4.7 F R E E B O D Y D I A G R A M F O R C A L C U L A T I O N O F C O L U M N M O M E N T S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
4.8 C O M P A R I S O N O F T E S T R E S U L T S F O R C O V E R P L A T E D A N D R B S C O N N E C T I O N S 17
5.1 RBS DIMENSIONS ................................................................................................... 18
5.2 P O R T I O N O F E X A M P L E B E A M B E T W E E N R B S C E N T E R S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
5.3 CONNECTION DETAIL FOR DESIGN EXAMPLE ....................................................... 21
 DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
I. Introduction
W h e n s u b j e c t e d to a major e a r t h q u a k e , build-
ings designed to m e e t the design require-
m e n t s of typical building codes, s u c h as the
UniI'orm B u i l d i n g ~ C o d e (1997), are expected
to have d a m a g e to both s t r u c t u r a l a n d n o n -
s t r u c t u r a l elements. The s t r u c t u r a l design for
large seismic events m u s t therefore explicitly
consider the effects of r e s p o n s e beyond th e
elastic range. The "Special Moment Frame"
(SMF) steel building system is designed s u c h
t h a t t he c o n n e c t i o n s b e t w e e n t he f r a m e
beams and columns absorb substantial
energy a n d provide major contributions to the
d i s p l a c e m e n t ductility d e m a n d .
1.1 D e s c r i p t i o n o f SMF
A SMF lateral force resisting s y s t e m is often
preferred by building o w n e r s a n d a r c h i t e c t s
b e c a u s e this type of s y s t e m provides large
u n o b s t r u c t e d s p a c e s t h r o u g h o u t the build-
ing plan. This "open" layout offers the m o s t
flexibility for p r o g r a m m i n g the spaces as well
as a r c h i t e c t u r a l a p p o i n t m e n t s . For t he s e rea-
sons, steel buildings with SMF s y s t e m s are
quite c o m m o n in m a j o r c o m m e r c i a l a n d
instit ut i ona l s t r u c t u r e s . F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e
SMF s y s t e m is c o n s i d e r e d by m a n y to be one
of the m o s t ductile steel building s y s t e m s
available to the engineer. For this r e a s o n ,
SMF s y s t e m s have b e e n widely u s e d in a r e a s
of high seismicity.
SMFs are typically c o m p r i s e d of c o n n e c -
tions b e t w e e n wide flange b e a m s a n d
c o l u m n s w h e r e b e a m flanges are welded to
c o l u m n flanges utilizing complete joint pene-
tration welds. Figure 1.1 s how s a typical
u n r e i n f o r c e d design detail for a beam-to-col-
u m n c o n n e c t i o n u s e d in SMF s y s t e m s prior
to the 1994 Northridge e a r t h q u a k e . C o m m o n
practice prior to the Northridge e a r t h q u a k e
was to either bolt or weld the web to the col-
u m n s h e a r plate, a n d to weld the b e a m
flanges to the c o l u m n flange u s i n g a com-
plete joint p e n e t r a t i o n groove weld. Histori-
cally, de si gne rs have a s s u m e d t h a t b e a m
s h e a r is t r a n s f e r r e d to the c o l u m n by the
b e a m web c o n n e c t i o n a n d the m o m e n t is
t r a n s f e r r e d t h r o u g h t h e b e a m flanges.
Recent s t u d i e s by Lee (1997) a n d o t h e r s h a v e
d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t this a s s u m p t i o n is far dif-
ferent from the a c t u a l behavior.
~ ~--~ C.P~.70T-4
l I I : I . 7/8" A325-XBOLTS 1
Figure 1. I Pre-Northridge
Moment Connection Detail
In th e design of SMF c o n n e c t i o n s , t h e
e n g i n e e r m u s t set objectives for both load
a n d d e f o r m a t i o n capacities. Usually, the load
c a p a c i t y r e q u i r e m e n t is b a s e d on the plastic
m o m e n t of th e b eam. The c o n n e c t i o n m u s t
be strong e n o u g h to develop t h e s t r e n g t h of
the b e a m , t h u s r e d u c i n g th e risk of brittle
failure in the c o n n e c t i o n . Inelastic deforma-
tion c a p a c i t y is r e q u i r e d to a s s u r e ductility in
p r e d e t e r m i n e d locations w h e n s u b j e c t e d to
large d e f o r m a t i o n d e m a n d s .
After some of the p r o b l e m s observed in
SMF c o n n e c t i o n s after the Northridge e a r t h -
q u a k e , a c o m m o n p h i l o s o p h y h a s b e e n to
design the c o n n e c t i o n to r e m a i n n o m i n a l l y
elastic at the c o l u m n face, a n d force t h e
inelastic d e f o r m a t i o n of the frame to o c c u r in
a portion of the b e a m , a w a y from th e con-
nection. This p h i l o s o p h y is e x e c u t e d by u s i n g
a "capacity design" a p p r o a c h . The plastic
m o m e n t a n d a s s o c i a t e d s h e a r of the b e a m is
b a s e d on probable s t r e n g t h s of materials.
These m a x i m u m s t h e n b e c o m e t h e design
loads for the co n n ectio n . The c o n n e c t i o n of
the b e a m to th e c o l u m n flange is t h e n
d e s i g n e d u s i n g n o m i n a l m a t e r i a l properties.
Most post-Northridge c o n n e c t i o n d e s i g n s
locate t h e plastic h i n g e (where inel as t i c
 DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
d e f o r m a t i o n s a r e c o n c e n t r a t e d in t h e SMF
b e a m ) a w a y f r o m t h e c o l u m n flange t h r o u g h
r e i n f o r c i n g a s h o r t p o r t i o n of t h e b e a m n e a r
t h e c o l u m n . By i n c r e a s i n g t h e s t r e n g t h of t h e
b e a m in t h i s region, a plastic h i n g e will t e n d
to form j u s t a d j a c e n t to t h e r e i n f o r c e d por-
tion of t h e b e a m . T h e i n h e r e n t difficulty w i t h
utilizing a r e i n f o r c e d b e a m - c o l u m n c o n n e c -
tion is t h e i n c r e a s e d m a t e r i a l a n d l a b o r c o s t s
a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s c o n n e c t i o n a n d t h e SMF
s y s t e m as well as r e q u i r i n g w e l d s t h a t are
difficult a n d costly to m a k e a n d i n s p e c t .
1.2 Background of RBS
A n o t h e r type of c o n n e c t i o n d e v e l o p e d to force
the inelastic deformation away from the
b e a m - c o l u m n i n t e r f a c e is r e f e r r e d to as a
" R e d u c e d B e a m Section" c o n n e c t i o n (RBS) or
"dogbone". This c o n n e c t i o n relies o n t h e
selective r e m o v a l of b e a m flange m a t e r i a l
a d j a c e n t to t h e b e a m - t o - c o l u m n c o n n e c t i o n ,
typically f r o m b o t h top a n d b o t t o m flanges,
to r e d u c e t h e c r o s s s e c t i o n a l a r e a of t h e
b e a m . This r e d u c t i o n in c r o s s s e c t i o n a l a r e a
will r e d u c e t h e m o m e n t c a p a c i t y at a d i s c r e t e
location in t h e b e a m . V a r i o u s s h a p e s of
c u t o u t s a r e possible, i n c l u d i n g c o n s t a n t c u t ,
t a p e r e d c u t , r a d i u s c u t a n d o t h e r s . Figure
1.2 i l l u s t r a t e s a r a d i u s c u t RBS c o n n e c t i o n .
The L u x e m b o u r g - b a s e d steel m a n u f a c -
t u r i n g c o m p a n y , ARBED, h e l d a 1992 US
p a t e n t on t h e r e d u c e d b e a m s e c t i o n (RBS).
' A
~L~ - - . .
F i g u r e 1.2
Radius Cut RBS Moment Connection
2
Following t h e N o r t h r i d g e e a r t h q u a k e , t h e y
w a i v e d all p a t e n t a n d c l a i m r i g h t s a s s o c i a t e d
w i t h t h e RBS for t h e benefit of t h e p r o f e s s i o n .
This g r a c i o u s g e s t u r e allowed f u r t h e r devel-
o p m e n t of t h e c o n c e p t for u s e in p o s t - N o r t h -
ridge SMF b u i l d i n g s .
T h e s h a p e , size a n d l o c a t i o n of t h e RBS
all h a v e a n effect o n t h e c o n n e c t i o n d e m a n d s
and performance. Various shapes have been
t e s t e d a n d u s e d in n e w c o n s t r u c t i o n d u r i n g
t h e p a s t several y e a r s . Test p r o g r a m s h a v e
b e e n p e r f o r m e d to investigate s t r a i g h t c u t
(Plumier, 1997), t a p e r c u t (Chen, et.al. 1996)
a n d r a d i u s c u t ( E n g e l h a r d t 1997; T r e m b l a y ,
et.al. 1997; Popov, et.al. 1998) r e d u c e d b e a m
sections.
T h e RBS forces yielding a n d h i n g e f o r m a -
tion to o c c u r w i t h i n t h e r e d u c e d s e c t i o n of
t h e b e a m a n d limits t h e m o m e n t t h a t c a n be
d e v e l o p e d at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n . By
r e d u c i n g d e m a n d s on t h e b e a m flange groove
welds and the surrounding base metal
r e g i o n s , t h e RBS r e d u c e s t h e p o s s i b i l i t y of
f r a c t u r e s o c c u r r i n g in this v u l n e r a b l e region.
A l t h o u g h t h e RBS e s s e n t i a l l y w e a k e n s t h e
b e a m , its i m p a c t o n t h e o v e r a l l l a t e r a l
s t r e n g t h a n d stiffness of a steel m o m e n t
f r a m e is g e n e r a l l y q u i t e small.
T h e i n e l a s t i c d e f o r m a t i o n f o c u s e d in a n
RBS c o n n e c t i o n r e m a i n s in t h e r e d u c e d
b e a m s e c t i o n , w h i c h c a n be d e s i g n e d a n d
located such that minimal protective meas-
u r e s n e e d to be t a k e n at t h e c o n n e c t i o n of
b e a m to c o l u m n . The s m a l l e r m o m e n t g e n e r -
a t e d a t t h e face of t h e c o l u m n for a n RBS
c o n n e c t i o n , in a d d i t i o n to r e d u c i n g s t r e s s
levels on t h e welds, also offers s o m e a d v a n -
t a g e s in satisfying s t r o n g c o l u m n - w e a k b e a m
r e q u i r e m e n t s a n d in m i n i m i z i n g c o l u m n
d o u b l e r plate r e q u i r e m e n t s .
F a b r i c a t i o n a n d e r e c t i o n of t h e RBS c o n -
n e c t i o n avoids t h e a d d i t i o n of s t r e n g t h e n i n g
plates and special weldments that are
r e q u i r e d of m a n y p o s t - N o r t h r i d g e m o m e n t
c o n n e c t i o n s . C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e RBS c o n n e c -
tion is very c o m p e t i t i v e from a c o s t p e r s p e c -
tive. B e c a u s e of t h e c o m p e t i t i v e c o s t a n d
established performance based on extensive
t e s t i n g a n d a n a l y s i s , t h e RBS c o n n e c t i o n
a p p e a r s to be a c o s t effective, c o n s i s t e n t l y
p e r f o r m i n g c o n n e c t i o n for u s e in t h e s e i s m i c
d e s i g n of SMF b u i l d i n g s t r u c t u r e s .
 D E S I G N OFF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
. History of the Development
of RBS SMF Connections
A n u m b e r of significant events led to the cur-
r e n t e n v i r o n m e n t s u r r o u n d i n g SMF design
a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n methodologies. C o n c e r n s
over m a t e r i a l properties, c o n n e c t i o n geome-
try, design p a r a m e t e r s a n d weld quality are
j u s t a few i s s u e s w h i c h b e c a m e a c o n c e r n
after brittle failures were observed in SMF
m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s after the 1994 North-
ridge e a r t h q u a k e .
SMF s t r u c t u r e s were still being d e s i g n e d
a n d r e q u e s t e d by o w n e r s for all t he r e a s o n s
de sc ri be d earlier. The pre-Northridge con-
nection detail h a d b e c o m e a driving eco-
n o m i c factor for t he viability of t he SMF sys-
tem. To redesign m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s in a
SMF s y s t e m utilizing expensive c o n n e c t i o n
r e i n f o r c e m e n t t e c h n i q u e s m a d e this building
s y s t e m less competitive.
2.1 Initial Research
A significant a m o u n t of r e s e a r c h a n d t e s t i n g
on RBS m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s h a s a l r e a d y
b e e n c o m p l e t e d , a n d a d d i t i o n a l w o r k is
u n d e r w a y . Appendix A provides a listing of
tests on RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . The list i n c l u d e s
key f e a t u r e s of e a c h test, i n c l u d i n g m e m b e r
sizes a n d s t r e n g t h s , c o n n e c t i o n details, RBS
size a n d shape, a n d t he plastic rotation
achieved by e a c h test assemblage. As indi-
cated by t he d a t a - i n Appendix A, s u c c e s s f u l
tests have b e e n c o n d u c t e d on c o n s t a n t cut,
t a p e r e d c u t a n d r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s .
The t a p e r e d cut, s h o w n in Figure 2.1, is
i n t e n d e d to allow the section m o d u l u s of th e
b e a m to m a t c h the seismic m o m e n t g r a d i e n t
in the r e d u c e d region, t h e r e b y p r o m o t i n g
more u n i f o r m yielding within t he r e d u c e d
section. This is i n t e n d e d to create a reliable,
u n i f o r m hi ngi ng location. However, stress
c o n c e n t r a t i o n s at t he r e - e n t r a n t c o r n e r s of
the flange c ut m a y lead to f r a c t u r e at t h e s e
locations. After significant p l a s t i c rotation,
both the c o n s t a n t c u t a n d t a p e r e d c u t RBS
connections, have experienced fractures
within the RBS in some laboratory tests.
These fra c t ures have o c c u r r e d at c h a n g e s in
section within t he RBS, for example at the
3
m i n i m u m section of the t a p e r e d RBS. These
c h a n g e s of c r o s s - s e c t i o n i n t r o d u c e s t r e s s
c o n c e n t r a t i o n s t h a t c a n lead to f r a c t u r e
within th e highly s t r e s s e d r e d u c e d section of
the b eam.
I
~ ~= ~
F i g u r e 2. I
Tapered Cut RBS Moment Connection
The r a d i u s c u t RBS a p p e a r s to m i n i m i z e
stress c o n c e n t r a t i o n s , t h e r e b y r e d u c i n g t h e
c h a n c e s of a f r a c t u r e o c c u r r i n g within t h e
r e d u c e d section (Engelhardt, et.al. 1996).
Furthermore, test results indicate that
inelastic d e f o r m a t i o n s d i s t r i b u t e over tl~e
length of t h e r e d u c e d section. The r a d i u s c u t
is also relatively simple to fabricate.
Figure 2.2 s h o w s a n e x a m p l e of a labora-
tory test of a r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n . The
c o n n e c t i o n detail is s h o w n in Figure 2.2(a)
a n d t h e m o m e n t v e r s u s p lastic r o t a t i o n
r e s p o n s e is s h o w n in Figure 2.2(b). As is typ-
ical of m o s t r a d i u s c u t RBS tests, this speci-
m e n s h o w e d excellent p e r f o r m a n c e .
As s h o w n in Figure 2.2(a),.it is i m p o r t a n t
to n o t e t h a t m o s t RBS test s p e c i m e n s , in
addition to i n c o r p o r a t i n g the RBS, also incor-
p o r a t e d significant i m p r o v e m e n t s in w el d i n g
a n d in o t h e r detailing f e a t u r e s as c o m p a r e d
to th e p r e - N o r t h r i d g e c o n n e c t i o n . All speci-
m e n s w e r e c o n s t r u c t e d u s i n g w e l d i n g elec-
trodes t h a t exhibit i m p r o v e d n o t c h t o u g h -
n e s s as c o m p a r e d to t h e E70T-4 electrode
c o m m o n l y u s e d p rio r to t h e N o r t h r i d g e
earthquake.
The m a j o r i t y of s p e c i m e n s also incorpo-
r a t e d i m p r o v e d p ractices with r e s p e c t to
b a c k i n g b a r s a n d weld tabs. In m o s t cases,
b o t t o m flange b a c k i n g b a r s were removed,
b a c k g o u g e d a n d sealed with a fillet weld, a n d
top flange b a c k i n g b a r s were seal w e l d e d to
th e c o l u m n . Weld ru n -o ff t a b s w e r e r e m o v e d
in m o s t cases. In a d d i t i o n to w eld in g r e l a t e d
i m p r o v e m e n t s , m o s t s p e c i m e n s also incorpo-
 DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
~ ~ / B.U, bar to remain
---.--~"~J / ~ Remove weld tabs
40000 . '

~ "~'>~. . . . . . . i~'i"" Note: $1:~.~B4 I

i ~ ~ 45 ~ All field welds: E71T-8
r ~ ")(S~if~edd CVN = 20 20.-~
ft-lbs at -20 deg F)

~ ~ \-~W~,lg4

i
~ ~ ~ltS: 1" A325 9" C-C ~
' ~Holes: 1-1/16" DIA. J
E ~8" x 6" x 2'-6" /
~ Z ................. ~
....
~ ~ I k cleaned and ins~cted .,0000
~ R e a v e B.U. bar
IN k Remove ~ l d tabs
~8 i -20000
~oo
" 3'-4" Radius
~ ~ /Grind Smith .30000 I ~ Moment ~nd RotafJonComputed
v,lth Rs~pe~to Faca o~Col,~nn
5/1~ ~/ ~ / Grind Parallel to Beam Flange
/
~ ~ ~ 2.31" ~0000 I I I
.0.0~ .0.114 ,-0.03 -0.02 .0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
Total Plastic Rotation (radian)
~ ,~ ~
9" 27"

(a) Detail of ~ e s t S p e c i m e n (b) R e s p o n s e of T e s t S p e c i m e n

Figure 2.2 E x a m p l e of Laboratory Behavior of Radius Cut RBS Test S p e c i m e n

rated additional detailing improvements. in s a t i s f y i n g t h ~ s e q u a l i f i c a t i o n t e s t r e q u i r e -

Consequently, although the beam flange
cutouts are the most distinguishing feature
of t h e R B S c o n n e c t i o n , t h e s u c c e s s of t h i s
c o n n e c t i o n in l a b o r a t o r y t e s t s is a l s o likely
r e l a t e d to t h e m a n y o t h e r w e l d i n g a n d detail-
i n g i m p r o v e m e n t s i m p l e m e n t e d in t h e t e s t
s p e c i m e n s , i.e. t h e u s e of w e l d m e t a l w i t h
improved notch toughness, improved prac-
t i c e s w i t h r e s p e c t to b a c k i n g b a r s a n d w e l d
t a b s , u s e of c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s , etc.
3. Summary of Test Results
T h e t a b l e in A p p e n d i x A p r o v i d e s a l i s t i n g of
R B S t e s t d a t a . While t h i s list m a y n o t b e
e x h a u s t i v e or c o n t a i n e v e r y t e s t p e r f o r m e d
on RBS beam-column subassemblies
a n c i l l a r y t e s t i n g to s u p p o r t p e r f o r m a n c e , t h e
list d o e s p r o v i d e t h e r e a d e r w i t h a s u b s t a n -
tial a m o u n t of d o c u m e n t e d p e r f o r m a n c e c o n -
d i t i o n s for t h i s c o n n e c t i o n . T h e t a b l e a l s o
i n c l u d e s R B S t e s t s c o m p l e t e d u n d e r t h e SAC
P h a s e 2 r e s e a r c h p r o g r a m a s of m i d - 1 9 9 9 .
These test results have not been formally
p u b l i s h e d , b u t a r e i n c l u d e d b a s e d o n avail-
able test reports.
T h e AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural
Steel Buildings (1997) r e q u i r e q u a l i f i c a t i o n
t e s t i n g for S M F c o n n e c t i o n d e s i g n s . T h e t e s t
r e s u l t s r e p o r t e d in A p p e n d i x A m a y b e u s e f u l
m e n t s . A p p e n d i x S of t h e Seismic Provisions
for Structural Steel Buildings p r o v i d e s g u i d e -
lines on extrapolating test results beyond the
t e s t e d m e m b e r sizes.
A p p e n d i x A i n c l u d e s l i s t i n g s for 4 3 R B S
tests. This number does not include tests by
P l u m i e r (1997), or s h a k i n g t a b l e t e s t s b y
C h e n , Y e h a n d C h u (1996). A d d i t i o n a l t e s t s
h a v e a l s o b e e n c o n d u c t e d o n s p e c i m e n s in
w h i c h t h e R B S w a s p r o v i d e d in t h e b o t t o m
f l a n g e o n l y for u s e a s a retrofit m e a s u r e for
existing moment frame connections. These
RBS r e t r o f i t t e s t s a r e n o t r e p o r t e d in A p p e n -
dix A. I n f o r m a t i o n o n t h e t e s t s is a v a i l a b l e in
t h e AISC Steel Design Guide Series Twelve
(Gross, et.al. 1999).
or
3.1 Overview of Test Results for
Radius Cut RBS Specimens
T h i s s e c t i o n p r o v i d e s a n o v e r v i e w of t h e t e s t
d a t a l i s t e d in A p p e n d i x A for r a d i u s c u t R B S
t e s t s p e c i m e n s . T h e r e a r e 27 r a d i u s c u t R B S
t e s t s l i s t e d in t h e table. E x a m i n a t i o n of t h i s
d a t a i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s e c o n n e c t i o n s devel-
oped plastic rotations ranging from 0.029 rad
to b e y o n d 0 . 0 5 r a d . T h e s e r e s u l t s s u g g e s t
that the radius cut RBS connection can
develop large plastic rotations on a consis-
t e n t b a s i s . Also n o t a b l e is t h e fact t h a t a

4
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
large n u m b e r of r a d i u s c u t RBS c o n n e c t i o n s
have been tested u n d e r a variety of condi-
tions by a n u m b e r of different investigators,
a n d t h e r e h a s not b e e n a single test with
poor performance. This suggests t he c on n ec-
tion is quite r o b u s t a n d reliable.
The d a t a in Appendix A d e m o n s t r a t e s th e
possible u l t i m a t e failure m o d e s for the r a d i u s
cu t RBS connection. In m a n y tests, s p e c i m e n
s t r e n g t h g r a d u a l l y d e t e r i o r a t e d d u e to local
a n d lateral torsional buckling, a n d testing
w a s t e r m i n a t e d d u e to limitations of t he test-
ing e q u i p m e n t or test setup. However, a
n u m b e r of c o n n e c t i o n s have b e e n loaded well
p a s t the o c c u r r e n c e of local flange b u c k l i n g
within the RBS, a n d u l t i m a t e l y failed by low
cycle fatigue f r a c t u r e of t he RBS. Only one of
the 27 r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s experi-
e n c e d a f r a c t u r e at t he b e a m - t o - c o l u m n con-
nection. This s p e c i m e n , d e s i g n a t e d "DBBW-
C - B e a m 2" in Appendix A, f r a c t u r e d in th e
b e a m b o t t o m flange b a s e m e t a l a d j a c e n t to
the groove weld, with t he f r a c t u r e initiating
at t he weld a c c e s s hole. However, even this
c o n n e c t i o n developed 0.038 rad. of plastic
rotation prior to fracture.
Most of t h e r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s
h a v e b e e n tested p s e u d o statically, u s i n g a
loading protocol in w h i c h applied displace-
m e n t s are progressively i n c r e a s e d . However,
one s p e c i m e n ("S-l") w a s tested m o n o t o n i -
cally to failure. Two s p e c i m e n s ("LS-2" a n d
"LS-3") were tested u s i n g a loading protocol
i n t e n d e d to r e p r e s e n t n e a r s o u r c e g r o u n d
mot i ons t h a t c o n t a i n a large pulse. Finally,
two s p e c i m e n s ("S-4" a n d "SC-2") were t e s t e d
dynamically. The r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s
have pe rforme d well u n d e r all of t h e s e load-
ing conditions.
A wide r a n g e of b e a m sizes h a v e b e e n
tested with t he r a d i u s c u t RBS. The s m a l l e s t
b e a m listed in Appendix A is a W530x82
( C a n a d i a n designation) w h i c h is r o u g h l y
equivalent to a W2 lx50. The heaviest b e a m
tested is a W36x300. All c o l u m n s for r a d i u s
cut RBS tests have b e e n W14 sections. Most
of the c o l u m n s have b e e n sized to provide for
a very strong p a n e l zone, a l t h o u g h a small
n u m b e r of tests h a v e i n c l u d e d m o d e r a t e
p ane l zone yielding. No tests h a v e b e e n con-
d u c t e d on s p e c i m e n s with very w e a k p an el
5
zones. However, s u c h tests will be c o m p l e t e d
d u r i n g 1999.
Of the 27 r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s
listed in Appendix A, t h e r e are no r e p o r t e d
cas es of weld fracture. B e a m flange groove
welds for all r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s have
b e e n m a d e by t h e self s h i e l d e d flux co red arc
welding p r o c e s s (SS-FCAW) u s i n g electrodes
with a m i n i m u m specified CVN t o u g h n e s s of
20 ft.-lbs, a t - 2 0 F. Three different electrode
d e s i g n a t i o n s h a v e b e e n u s e d in t h e s e tests:
E71T-8, E70TG-K2, a n d E70T-6. For one of
th e r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s , details of t h e
b a c k i n g b a r s were n o t reported. However, for
the r e m a i n i n g 26 s p e c i m e n s in w h i c h back-
ing b ar details w e r e reported, th e b o t t o m
flange b a c k i n g w a s r e m o v e d a n d t h e top
flange b a c k i n g w a s left in place. For t h e
majority of t h e s e s p e c i m e n s , th e top flange
b a c k i n g w a s seal w e l d e d to t h e face of t h e
c o l u m n , a l t h o u g h t h e s e seal welds were n o t
provided in four s p e c i m e n s (WG-1 to WG-4).
Note t h a t only o n e of t h e 27 r a d i u s c u t RBS
s p e c i m e n s u s e d cover plates at th e b e a m - t o -
c o l u m n c o n n e c t i o n as a s u p p l e m e n t to t h e
RBS.. The r e m a i n i n g 26 s p e c i m e n s u s e d no
s u p p l e m e n t a l rein fo rcin g m e a s u r e s (cover
plates, ribs, etc.) at th e c o n n e c t i o n .
D i m e n s i o n s of th e RBS c u t s for t h e 27
r a d i u s c u t s p e c i m e n s vary over a fairly small
range. The d i s t a n c e from t h e face of th e col-
u m n to th e s t a r t of t h e RBS c u t (designated
as L 1 in Appendix A) r a n g e d from 50 to 75%
of th e b e a m flange width. The l e n g t h s of t h e
c u t s (designated as LRB S in Appendix A)
h a v e varied from 74 to 82% of th e b e a m
depth. The a m o u n t of flange w i d t h r e m o v e d
at th e m i n i m u m section of th e RBS (desig-
n a t e d as FR in Appendix A) h a s v a r i e d from
38 to 55%.
Two types of web c o n n e c t i o n details h a v e
b e e n u s e d for r a d i u s c u t RBS test s p e c i m e n s :
a welded a n d a bolted detail. In th e w e l d e d
detail, th e b e a m web is w e l d e d directly to t h e
c o l u m n flange u s i n g a c o m p l e t e j o i n t p e n e -
tration groove weld. For th e bolted detail,
fully t e n s i o n e d h i g h s t r e n g t h bolts are u s e d .
Approximately h a l f t h e s p e c i m e n s h a v e u s e d
the bolted detail, a n d half t h e w e l d e d detail.
The d a t a i n d i c a t e s no significant difference in
p e r f o r m a n c e for r a d i u s c u t s p e c i m e n s .
 D E S I G N O F REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

B e a m lateral br a c i ng details h a v e also 4. RBS D e s i g n Procedure for

varied a m o n g t he r a d i u s c u t RBS s p e c i m e n s . SMFs
Of the 27 s p e c i m e n s , seven are r e p o r t e d to
have provided a b r a c e at the RBS. For th e
The following sections co n tain r e c o m m e n d a -
r e m a i n i n g 20 s p e c i m e n s , t he lateral br ace
tions for th e design of n e w r a d i u s c u t RBS
w as typically f u r t h e r a w a y from t he RBS
m o m e n t connections. Bas ed on the suc-
placed n e a r the point of load application.
cesses outlined above, a n d the preference of
Finally, of t h e 27 r a d i u s c u t s p e c i m e n s
e n g i n e e r s designing n e w SMF s t r u c t u r e s , t h e
listed in Appendix A, six were tested with a
design meth o d o lo g y p r e s e n t e d h e r e i n focuses
composite c o n c r e t e floor slab. For S p e c i m e n s
on t h e r a d i u s c u t RBS shape. Globally
"SC-1" a n d "SC-2," a o n e - i n c h gap w a s inten-
i m p o r t a n t design p a r a m e t e r s s u c h as p a n e l
tionally left b e t w e e n the face of t h e c o l u m n
zone participation, b e a m s h e a r a n d overall
a n d the slab, in a n a t t e m p t to minimize com-
frame drift are a d d r e s s e d as p a r t of th e rec-
p o s i t e a c t i on. For S p e c i m e n s "DBBW-C
o m m e n d e d procedure. Many important
B e a m s 1 & 2" a n d "DBWW-C B e a m s 1 & 2,"
a s p e c t s of m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n design are
no s u c h gap wa s provided. No d e t r i m e n t a l
applicable a n d m u s t be c o n s i d e r e d w h e n
effects of the slab were observed in a n y of
designing SMF RBS connections. The RBS
t h e s e tests. In s o m e tests, the investigators
design meth o d o lo g y s h o u l d be p e r f o r m e d in
n o t e d t h a t t he slab e n h a n c e d overall energy
c o n j u n c t i o n with available test r e s u l t s as
dissipation by delaying b e a m instability. Note
p a r t of th e justification of th e design proce-
t h a t for all composite s p e c i m e n s , no s h e a r
dure.
s t u d s were placed in the region of t he RBS or
The initial p a r t of th e S M F / R B S design is
b e t w e e n t he face of the c o l u m n a n d t he start
to d e t e r m i n e the configuration of th e m o m e n t
of the RBS.
frames, th e typical b ay sizes, p l a n d i m e n -
As d e s c r i b e d above, a r a t h e r wide r a n g e of
sions a n d frame locations. Many of t h e s e
conditions h a s b e e n investigated in RBS test-
r e q u i r e m e n t s are d e t e r m i n e d by o t h e r s ,
ing compl e t e d to-date. Testing of RBS con-
n e c t i o n s is c o n t i n u i n g u n d e r t he SAC pro- (architects, o w n e r s , developers), b u t t h e
engineer s h o u l d influence t h e s e d ecis i o n s
g r a m a n d for specific building c o n s t r u c t i o n
b a s e d on s o u n d design practices. One ex am-
projects. The r e a d e r is e n c o u r a g e d to r e m a i n
ple w o u l d be to c o n s i d e r th e b ay size if a
a b r e a s t of this data, as it b e c o m e s available.
SMF/RBS s y s t e m is to be utilized. B e c a u s e
Even t h o u g h m a n y variables have a l r e a d y
of the high m o m e n t g r a d i e n t ratio a s s o c i a t e d
b e e n investigated in RBS testing, t h e r e are a
with sh o rt bays, m o r e b e a m flange removal
n u m b e r of conditions t h a t have received less
in RBS c o n n e c t i o n s will be r e q u i r e d for s h o r t
attention. These conditions, w h e n t h e y arise
bay f r a m e s t h a n long b ay frames. In addi-
in design, s h o u l d be a p p r o a c h e d with c a u -
tion, b e a m sizes m a y be affected. With proper
tion since d a t a is lacking in t h e s e areas. In
g u id an ce, th e e n g i n e e r c a n s u p p l y informa-
s u c h cases, additional testing m a y be war-
tion t h a t will help th e a r c h i t e c t develop a
r a n t e d . For example, no r a d i u s c u t RBS con-
r a t i o n a l , efficient b u i l d i n g d esig n . U p o n
n e c t i o n s to t he w e a k axis of a wide flange col-
d e t e r m i n a t i o n of the basic s t r u c t u r a l p a r a m -
u m n have b e e n tested, a l t h o u g h d a t a for
eters, the e n g i n e e r c a n begin th e m e m b e r
some ot he r RBS c o n n e c t i o n s to t he c o l u m n
a n d c o n n e c t i o n design process.
w e a k axis a re available (see S p e c i m e n s
"COH-3" a n d "COH-4" in Appendix A). No
s p e c i m e n s with deep c o l u m n s have yet b e e n 4.1 RBS Design
considered. F u r t h e r , no tests on s p e c i m e n s
with very w e a k p a n e l zones have b e e n con- The e n g i n e e r will begin th e design of t h e
d u c t e d . F u t u r e r e s e a r c h is u n d e r w a y to s t r u c t u r e by d e t e r m i n i n g th e force level a n d
a d d r e s s t h e s e a n d other issues. drift limits to be i n c o r p o r a t e d as p a r t of t h e
design. These p a r a m e t e r s are typically set by
a model building code s u c h as th e Uniform
Building Code (1997) or, in the f u t u r e , the

6
 DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
International Building Code. O n c e t h e force
level is d e t e r m i n e d b a s e d o n site c o n d t i o n s ,
s t r u c t u r a l s y s t e m , s e i s m i c i t y of t h e region
a n d t a r g e t drift limits, t h e e n g i n e e r c a n begin
t h e d e s i g n of t h e s e i s m i c s y s t e m u s i n g t h e
AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
Buildings {1997).
B a s e d on t h e r e q u i r e d d e s i g n p a r a m e t e r s ,
t h e e n g i n e e r will d e t e r m i n e t h e b e a m a n d
c o l u m n sizes r e q u i r e d to m e e t drift limits,
etc. It is i m p o r t a n t t h a t t h e e n g i n e e r r e m e m -
b e r t h a t t h e f r a m e is l e s s stiff d u e to t h e RBS
d e s i g n , t h a n a "typical" n o n - R B S SMF.
After p r o p e r b e a m - c o l u m n sizes h a v e
b e e n d e t e r m i n e d for t h e f r a m e , t h e RBS
d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e s h o u l d b e f o l l o w e d to
develop t h e p r o p e r flange r e d u c t i o n to pro-
d u c e t h e d e s i r e d p e r f o r m a n c e . M a n y of t h e
design steps a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s parallel
i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d in r e p o r t s r e f e r e n c e d at
t h e e n d of t h i s d o c u m e n t .
T h e s t r e n g t h of t h e b e a m at t h e m i n i m u m
s e c t i o n of t h e RBS m u s t satisfy c o d e r e q u i r e -
m e n t s u n d e r all a p p l i c a b l e l o a d c o m b i n a -
t i o n s i n c l u d i n g gravity, w i n d , a n d o t h e r l o a d s
a p p r o p r i a t e for t h e s t r u c t u r e u n d e r c o n s i d e r -
ation. B e a m sizes in typical S M F s a r e n o r -
m a l l y g o v e r n e d by c o d e specified drift limits.
Consequently, even with a reduction in b e a m
m o m e n t d u e to t h e a d d i t i o n of t h e RBS, t h e
s t r e n g t h of t h e m o d i f i e d f r a m e will often be
s a t i s f a c t o r y for all l o a d c o m b i n a t i o n s . In
s o m e c a s e s , a m i n o r i n c r e a s e in b e a m size
may be needed.
T h e a d d i t i o n of RBS c u t o u t s will r e d u c e
t h e stiffness of a steel m o m e n t f r a m e . This
r e d u c t i o n in stiffness, a l t h o u g h g e n e r a l l y
q u i t e small, m a y affect t h e ability of t h e
f r a m e to satisfy c o d e specified drift limits. A
r e c e n t s t u d y b y G r u b b s (1997) e v a l u a t e d t h e
r e d u c t i o n in elastic l a t e r a l stiffness of steel
m o m e n t f r a m e s d u e to t h e a d d i t i o n of r a d i u s
c u t RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . T h i s s t u d y s h o w e d
t h a t over a w i d e r a n g e of f r a m e h e i g h t s a n d
c o n f i g u r a t i o n s , t h e a v e r a g e r e d u c t i o n in stiff-
n e s s for a 50 p e r c e n t flange r e d u c t i o n w a s on
t h e o r d e r of 6 to 7 p e r c e n t . For a 40 p e r c e n t
flange r e d u c t i o n , t h e r e d u c t i o n in elastic
f r a m e stiffness w a s o n t h e o r d e r of 4 to 5 per-
cent. If t h i s r e d u c t i o n in stiffness is a con-
c e r n , drift c a n be c o m p u t e d in t h e u s u a l
m a n n e r u s i n g a m o d e l t h a t d o e s n o t explic-
7
itly a c c o u n t for t h e RBS, a n d t h e n i n c r e a s e d
b y t h e a m o u n t s n o t e d a b o v e to a c c o u n t for
t h e RBS c o n n e c t i o n s . Alternatively, a r e f i n e d
s t r u c t u r a l m o d e l , i n c l u d i n g t h e r e d u c e d stiff-
n e s s at e a c h c o n n e c t i o n d u e to t h e RBS, c a n
be d e v e l o p e d to c h e c k t h e stiffness of t h e
frame.
4.2 RBS Sizing
T h e l o c a t i o n a n d size of t h e RBS will d i c t a t e
t h e level of s t r e s s at t h e b e a m f l a n g e - c o l u m n
flange c o n n e c t i o n . T h e RBS s e i s m i c m o m e n t
d i a g r a m is p r e s e n t e d in F i g u r e 4.1 a n d indi-
cates the Nominal Capacity, the Probable
D e m a n d , a n d t h e N o m i n a l D e m a n d for t h e
RBS b e a m . Note t h a t M ' p RBS is t h e m a x i -
m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d at l~he face of t h e col-
u m n flange w h e n t h e RBS h a s y i e l d e d a n d
strain hardened under combined earthquake
a n d gravity loads. M' p RBS is d i r e c t l y influ-
e n c e d b y t h e P r o b a b l e i J e m a n d , a n d t h e loca-
tion of t h e RBS. M' P,RBS is l a t e r r e f e r r e d to
a s Mf in t h i s d o c u m e n t .
r--~
, \ I
r ...... ,~;~,~-~, .............................. i
,
~ ~,~as i
~--~,-,,~o~
Moment Diegrem
L~
~am , ~ y
F i g u r e 4. I M o m e n t D i a g r a m a n d
B e a m G e o m e t r y for R B S
T h e overall goal i n sizing t h e RBS c u t is to
limit t h e m a x i m u m b e a m m o m e n t t h a t c a n
develop at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n to v a l u e s i n
t h e r a n g e of a b o u t 85 to 100 p e r c e n t of t h e
beam's actual plastic moment. This
a p p r o a c h , in effect, l i m i t s t h e a v e r a g e m a x i -
m u m s t r e s s at t h e b e a m flange groove w e l d s
to v a l u e s o n t h e o r d e r of t h e a c t u a l yield
s t r e s s of t h e b e a m . E x p e r i m e n t s h a v e s h o w n
t h a t c o n n e c t i o n s d e t a i l e d in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

the recommendations provided below are
c a p a b l e of s a f e l y r e s i s t i n g t h i s level of
m o m e n t . As a p o i n t of c o m p a r i s o n , t e s t s o n
pre-Northridge moment connections without
RBS cutouts often show maximum moments
at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n of a b o u t 125 p e r -
c e n t of M~ or g r e a t e r (Popov, S t e p h e n 1972;
Tsai, PopoPv 1988; E n g e l h a r d t , H u s a i n 1993).
C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e a d d i t i o n of t h e R B S
c u t o u t s in t h e b e a m r e s u l t s in a s u b s t a n t i a l
The procedure also assumes the minimum
s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s of t h e b e a m is 50 k s i or
l e s s (Gr. 50 b e a m s ) , a n d t h a t t h e m i n i m u m
s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s of t h e c o l u m n is 50 k s i
or g r e a t e r (Gr. 50 or Gr. 65 c o l u m n s ) .
F i g u r e 4 . 2 s h o w s t h e g e o m e t r y of a r a d i u s
c u t RBS, a n d F i g u r e 4 . 3 s h o w s t h e e n t i r e
moment frame beam. The key dimensions
R = radius of cut
4c~+ d

r e d u c t i o n in m o m e n t a t t h e face of t h e col- 8c
umn.
M u c h of t h e d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d
below follows recommendations of t h e
Interim Guidelines: Evaluation, Repair, Modi-
fication and Design of Welded Steel Moment
Frame Structures (FEMA 267) (1995) a n d t h e C

Interim Guidelines Advisory No. 1, Supple-
ment to FEMA 2 6 7 (FEMA 267A) (1997), w i t h
s e v e r a l e x c e p t i o n s . M o s t s i g n i f i c a n t of t h e s e
e x c e p t i o n s is t h a t FEMA 2 6 7 A p l a c e s a limit
o n t h e m a x i m u m s t r e s s p e r m i t t e d a t t h e face
of t h e c o l u m n e q u a l to n i n e t y p e r c e n t of t h e
m i n i m u m s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s of t h e col-
u m n . F o r t h e c a s e of a n A 9 9 2 (A572 Gr. 50)
c o l u m n , t h i s r e s u l t s in a l i m i t of 4 5 ksi. T h i s
l i m i t w a s e s t a b l i s h e d to a d d r e s s c o n c e r n s
r e g a r d i n g t h e p o t e n t i a l for t h r o u g h - t h i c k n e s s
f a i l u r e s in c o l u m n f l a n g e s . T h e d e s i g n p r o c e -
d u r e l i m i t s t h e m a x i m u m s t r e s s at t h e face of
t h e c o l u m n to a v a l u e o n t h e o r d e r of t h e
a c t u a l yield s t r e s s of t h e b e a m . T h i s e x c e p -
t i o n to t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s of F E M A 2 6 7 A h a s
b e e n a d o p t e d for s e v e r a l r e a s o n s . First, s p e c -
i m e n s d e s i g n e d a c c o r d i n g to t h e p r o c e d u r e s
d e s c r i b e d h e r e i n h a v e p e r f o r m e d well in lab-
o r a t o r y t e s t s . S e c o n d , s a t i s f y i n g t h e 45 k s i
s t r e s s limit, w o u l d r e s u l t in l a r g e f l a n g e
c u t o u t s in m a n y c a s e s , or w o u l d r e q u i r e s u p -
p l e m e n t a l f l a n g e r e i n f o r c e m e n t s u c h a s cover
p l a t e s or ribs. F u r t h e r , r e c e n t l y c o m p l e t e d
r e s e a r c h c o n d u c t e d u n d e r t h e SAC P h a s e 2
p r o g r a m s u g g e s t s t h a t t h e p o t e n t i a l for
~1
I~ ~1 ~ --1
a b
Figure 4.2
Geometry of Radius Cut RBS
t h a t m u s t b e c h o s e n b y t h e d e s i g n e r a r e a,
t h e d i s t a n c e f r o m t h e face of t h e c o l u m n to
t h e s t a r t of t h e R B S c u t , b, t h e l e n g t h of t h e
RBS c u t , a n d c, t h e d e p t h of t h e R B S c u t a t
its m i n i m u m s e c t i o n . T h e r a d i u s of t h e c u t R
c a n be r e l a t e d to d i m e n s i o n s b a n d c b a s e d
o n t h e g e o m e t r y of a c i r c u l a r arc, u s i n g t h e
e q u a t i o n in Fig. 4.2. T h e a m o u n t of f l a n g e
m a t e r i a l t h a t is r e m o v e d a t t h e m i n i m u m
s e c t i o n of t h e R B S is s o m e t i m e s r e f e r r e d to
the percent flange removal w h i c h is c o m -
p u t e d a s (2c/bf.) x 100, w h e r e bfis the u n r e -
d u c e d f l a n g e v~idth of t h e beam~
In p a s t r e s e a r c h t e s t s , t h e d i m e n s i o n s a
and b have generally been chosen based on
t h e j u d g m e n t of t h e r e s e a r c h e r s . In g e n e r a l ,
these dimensions should be kept as small as
RBS
w = uniform beam gravity load ~ RBS II II

t h r o u g h - t h i c k n e s s f a i l u r e s is c o n s i d e r a b l y
less than previously thought, and that the
c u r r e n t limit of 4 5 k s i c a n m o s t likely be
i n c r e a s e d w i t h o u t p o s i n g a n i n c r e a s e in r i s k
__

~
~ ~.~_.1l.~r.! ~ ~ 1 I } I I t ~ ~ 1 t I } ~ l ~ l ~

i
'
,- ,n -~ ,n - ~

&4
~.!?..t.~.!.|~[~]

i
,, lla +~ " L' = distancebe~een ~nters of RBS ~ts ~a+ ~ ~
of f r a c t u r e i n i t i a t i o n . I ~
The design procedure assumes that a L : distance between column entedines
r a d i u s c u t R B S is p r o v i d e d in b o t h t h e t o p Figure 4.3
a n d b o t t o m f l a n g e s at t h e m o m e n t c o n n e c - Typical Moment Frame Beam with
t i o n at e a c h e n d of a m o m e n t f r a m e b e a m . RBS Connections

8
 D E S I G N O F R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
possible in order to m i n i m i z e the i n c r e a s e of
m o m e n t b e t w e e n the plastic hi nge located in
the RBS a n d the face of t_he c o l u m n .
The d i m e n s i o n a s h o u l d be large e n o u g h ,
however, to p e r m i t stress in t he r e d u c e d sec-
tion of the b e a m to s p r e a d uni f or m l y across
th e flange wi dt h at t he face of t he c o l u m n .
Similarly, the d i m e n s i o n b s h o u l d be large
e n o u g h to avoid excessive inelastic s t r a i n s
w i t h i n t h e RBS. B a s e d on a n e v a l u a t i o n of
s u c c e s s f u l p a s t tests, t he following sugges-
tions are m a d e for selecting t h e s e d i m e n -
sions:
(o.s to o.Ts) bf tl)
b ~ (65 to 0 . 8 5 ) d (2)
w h e r e by a n d d a r e t he b e a m flange w id th
a n d delSth. E x a m i n a t i o n of RBS test d a t a
i n d i c a t e s t h a t s u c c e s s f u l c o n n e c t i o n per-
f o r m a n c e h a s b e e n o b t a i n e d for a wide r a n g e
of v a l u e s for a a n d b. C o n s e q u e n t l y , a great
deal of precision in c h o o s i n g t h e s e values
does n o t a p p e a r justified a n d E q u a t i o n s 1
a n d 2 s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d a n a p p r o x i m a t e
guide.
The r e m a i n i n g d i m e n s i o n t h a t m u s t be
c h o s e n w h e n sizing t h e RBS is c, t h e d e p t h of
the cut. The value of c will control t he maxi-
m u m m o m e n t developed w i t h i n t h e RBS, a n d
therefore will control t h e m a x i m u m m o m e n t
g e n e r a t e d at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n . As n o t e d
above, t he final d i m e n s i o n s s h o u l d be c h o s e n
so t h a t t he m a x i m u m m o m e n t at t he face of
th e c o l u m n is in t h e r a n g e of a b o u t 85 to 100
p e r c e n t of t he b e a m ' s a c t u a l plastic m o m e n t .
At p r e s e n t , it is s u g g e s t e d to avoid utilizing
flange r e d u c t i o n s gr e a t e r t h a n a b o u t 50 per-
cent. Thus, t he va l ue of c s h o u l d be c h o s e n
to be less t h a n or e qua l to 0.25bf.
The basic a p p r o a c h t a k e n in "this proce-
d u r e is to c h o o s e p r e l i m i n a r y v a l u e s for a, b,
a n d c, t h e n c o m p u t e t h e m o m e n t at the face
of t h e c o l u m n , a n d c h e c k this m o m e n t
a g a i n s t t he limit n o t e d above. Some iteration
in the RBS d i m e n s i o n s m a y be n e e d e d to
arrive u p o n a satisfactory design. F u r t h e r
design c h e c k s are c o m p l e t e d u p o n satisfac-
tory sizing of the RBS.
The b e a m size will typically be c h o s e n for
drift r e q u i r e m e n t s , followed by some a m o u n t
of flange r e d u c t i o n . The designer m u s t exam-
ine the effect of all applied loads at t he RBS
9
location. It is possible t h a t b e a m size m a y
n e e d to be a d j u s t e d , a n d different RBS sizing
a n d location m u s t be d e t e r m i n e d , to m e e t all
design criteria.
This RBS sizing d e t e r m i n a t i o n is also
applicable w h e n retrofitting existing SMF
s t r u c t u r e s . Access is limited or impossible at
th e u p p e r flange of t h e b e a m , d u e to t h e
p r e s e n c e of a floor slab, so RBS modifications
typically o c c u r at t h e b o t t o m flange of t h e
m o m e n t b e a m only. If a c c e s s is available to
t h e top flange of t h e b e a m , it is r e c o m m e n d e d
to apply t h e RBS design m e t h o d o l o g y to both
flanges. There h a s b e e n a great deal of effort
a n d r e s e a r c h s p e n t on t h e u s e of RBS modi-
fications to existing SMFs. The AISC Design
Guide Series Twelve (1999) t h a t s u m m a r i z e s
this work, c o n t a i n s a significant a m o u n t of
i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g retrofit of SMFs utiliz-
ing RBS c o n n e c t i o n modifications. It is rec-
o m m e n d e d t h a t d e s i g n e r s u s i n g a n RBS
a p p r o a c h to retrofit a n existing SMF refer to
th e AISC d o c u m e n t prior to utilizing t h e
design m e t h o d o l o g y c o n t a i n e d h erein .
Upon selection of t h e b e a m - c o l u m n com-
b i n a t i o n to be utilized in th e SMF design a n d
t h e location, s h a p e a n d size of t h e RBS, fur-
t h e r c o n n e c t i o n design c h e c k s are r e q u i r e d
to e n s u r e t h e design will p erfo rm in a ductile
manner.
The first c h e c k s h o u l d be th e "Strong Col-
u m n - W e a k Beam" confirmation. This c h e c k
is i n t e n d e d to limit inelastic d e f o r m a t i o n s of
c o l u m n s o u tsid e of t h e i r p a n e l zone regions.
It is generally recognized t h a t c o l u m n yield-
ing is a n u n d e s i r a b l e m o d e b e c a u s e of t h e
possible effect on t h e c o l u m n , a n d in t u r n ,
th e global stability of t h e s t r u c t u r a l frame.
The AISC Seismic Design Provisions (1997)
outline a n a c c e p t a b l e d e s i g n level for t h e
b e a m / c o l u m n relatio n s h ip . As a m i n i m u m ,
this AISC proviso s h o u l d be met.
RBS c o n n e c t i o n d e s i g n m u s t also a d d r e s s
t h e p a n e l zone. The p a n e l zone is s u b j e c t e d
to large s h e a r forces as t h e b e a m s r e a c h their
full capacity. B a s e d on FEMA 267A (1997),
t h e p a n e l zone m u s t be s t r o n g e n o u g h to
develop at least 80% of t h e s h e a r s a s s o c i a t e d
with Mfl The p a n e l zone r e q u i r e m e n t s c a n be
m e t in one of two ways. O n e w a y is to provide
a c o l u m n w i t h a t h i c k e n o u g h web to resist
t h e r e q u i r e d s h e a r in a c c o r d a n c e with t h e
 DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

d e s i g n r e q u i r e m e n t s . T h e o t h e r w a y to s u p - STEP 2 Compute the plastic section modu-

ply s u f f i c i e n t p a n e l z o n e s h e a r r e s i s t a n c e is l u s a t t h e m i n i m u m s e c t i o n of t h e
to a d d d o u b l e r p l a t e s to t h e s e l e c t e d s e c t i o n . RBS.
D o u b l e r p l a t e s s h o u l d c o n s i s t of t h e r e q u i r e d
a d d i t i o n a l t h i c k n e s s of steel, a d d e d to o n e or F i g u r e 4 . 4 s h o w s a c r o s s - s e c t i o n of t h e
b o t h s i d e s of t h e c o l u m n web. F a b r i c a t o r s b e a m at t h e m i n i m u m s e c t i o n of t h e RBS.
i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e u s e of a h e a v i e r c o l u m n sec- b~
tion, i n s t e a d of d o u b l e r p l a t e s a n d o t h e r
labor intensive reinforcing details, may result
in a m o r e e c o n o m i c a l s t r u c t u r a l f r a m e .
T h e final d e s i g n c h e c k to be p e r f o r m e d o n
t h e s e l e c t e d b e a m - c o l u m n c o m b i n a t i o n is t h e "~'~"""''~P~ions cut from flange
d/2 ~ ~ tw
b e a m s h e a r . T h e m a x i m u m b e a m s h e a r is
d e v e l o p e d in t h e s e c t i o n of t h e b e a m b e t w e e n
t h e R B S a n d t h e c o l u m n f l a n g e face, w h e r e
PlasticNeutralAxis
g r a v i t y s h e a r a n d s e i s m i c s h e a r c o i n c i d e . At
t h i s l o c a t i o n , s h e a r c a p a c i t y of t h e b e a m sec-
t i o n n e e d s to b e c h e c k e d to e n s u r e t h a t t h e
d/2
b e a m will h a v e a d e q u a t e s h e a r c a p a c i t y after
/./.~Portions cut from flange
t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e in t h e b e a m d e v e l o p s d u e to
applied lateral loads. /
T h e following s t e p - b y - s t e p p r e s e n t a t i o n _ __ ~ ,~,'~t
~ ~.~
o u t l i n e s t h e R B S d e s i g n p r o c e d u r e r e l a t i n g to c c
t h e r e m o v a l of t h e b e a m f l a n g e a n d t h e Figure 4.4
c h e c k s r e q u i r e d to e n s u r e p r o p e r b e h a v i o r Beam at Minimum Section of RBS
and correlation with test and research
results.
B a s e d o n t h e d i m e n s i o n s s h o w n in t h i s fig-
u r e , Z R B S c a n b e c o m p u t e d a s follows:
4.3 Step-by-step Procedure

Z ~ s = Z b - 2 c t.f (d - t.f ) (3)

STEP 1 C h o o s e trial v a l u e s for R B S d i m e n -
s i o n s a, b, a n d c.
Where:
T h e trial v a l u e s for a a n d b s h o u l d b e
c h o s e n w i t h i n t h e l i m i t s of E q u a t i o n s 1 a n d ZRB S = plastic section modulus at min-
2. To e s t a b l i s h a trial v a l u e of c, a f l a n g e i m u m s e c t i o n of R B S
r e d u c t i o n of a b o u t 4 0 p e r c e n t is s u g g e s t e d
for t h e initial d e s i g n i t e r a t i o n . T h u s , c h o o s e c
~ 0 . 2 0 b f As n o t e d earlier, v a l u e s for c in = p l a s t i c s e c t i o n m o d u l u s for full
e x c e s s o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 0 . 2 5 b f a r e n o t rec- beam cross-section
ommended.

(1) (i.e. w i t h o u t f l a n g e c u t o u t s )
a (O.Sto 0.75) bf
b ~ (0. 6 5 to O. 85) d
o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s s h o w n in F i g u r e 4.4.

10
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

STEP 3 E s t a b l i s h t h e e x p e c t e d yield s t r e s s T h e f a c t o r of 1.15 in E q u a t i o n 5 a c c o u n t s

of t h e b e a m . for s t r a i n h a r d e n i n g , a n d is b a s e d o n s t r a i n
h a r d e n i n g v a i a e s m e a s u r e d in R B S t e s t s .
T h e e x p e c t e d yield s t r e s s for t h e b e a m
c a n b e d e t e r m i n e d f r o m S e c t i o n 6 . 2 of t h e STEP 5 C o m p u t e t h e s h e a r force a t t h e
AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel c e n t e r of t h e R B S c u t s a t e a c h e n d
Buildings (1997). A c c o r d i n g to t h e s e provi- of t h e b e a m .
sions:
T h e s h e a r a t t h e c e n t e r of t h e R B S c a n be
Fy e = Ry Fy (4) c o m p u t e d f r o m a free b o d y d i a g r a m of t h e
moment frame beam taken between RBS
c e n t e r s . S u c h a free b o d y d i a g r a m is illus-
where: t r a t e d i n F i g u r e 4 . 5 for t h e c a s e of a u n i -
f o r m l y d i s t r i b u t e d g r a v i t y l o a d w.
Fy e = expected yield stress f
R~BS RBS
I w = uniform b e a m gravity ~oad
l!.~.,~ ~ ~ t ~ I t t t t I t t I t ~ ~ I t I I I t t ~ t.!..!,{
= m i n i m u m s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s
. . . . . .

= r a t i o of e x p e c t e d to m i n i m u m RBSRBS! i RBS RBS

s p e c i f i e d yield s t r e s s i L' = distance between centers of RBS ' -I

Figure 4 . 5
= 1.5 for A 3 6 steel Free B o d y D i a g r a m B e t w e e n
Centers of RBS

= 1.1 for A 5 7 2 Gr. 50 a n d A 9 9 2 S u m m i n g m o m e n t s a b o u t e a c h e n d of

steel t h i s free b o d y d i a g r a m r e s u l t s i n t h e follow-
ing:
T h e v a l u e of F v e r e c o g n i z e s t h a t t h e
a c t u a l y i e l d s t r e n g t l ~ o f s t r u c t u r a l steel c a n
2MRBs wL'
significantly exceed the minimum specified V~S - L' + -~- (6a)
value.

STEP 4 Compute the maximum moment

e x p e c t e d at t h e c e n t e r of t h e RBS.
2 MRB s wL'
(5) V~O~S - L' 2 (6b)
MRB S = 1.15 ZRB S Fy e

where: where:

V R B S V' BS = s h e a r f o r c e a t t h e c e n t e r
MRB S = m a x i m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d a t of t h e R B S a t e a c h e n d
t h e c e n t e r of t h e R B S
of b e a m

ZRB S = p l a s t i c s e c t i o n m o d u l u s a t m i n - L' = distance between centers of

i m u m s e c t i o n of t h e R B S
RBS

e x p e c t e d yield s t r e s s of b e a m
W = uniformly distributed gravity
load on beam

11
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} M O M E N T F R A M E C O N N E C T I O N S

For gravity load conditions other than a

u n i f o r m load, t h e a p p r o p r i a t e a d j u s t m e n t M f = Mp,Bs + VRBs a + (7)
c a n e a s i l y be m a d e to t h e free b o d y d i a g r a m
a n d to E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6b.
Equations 6a and 6b assume that plastic where:
h i n g e s will f o r m a t t h e R B S at e a c h e n d of t h e
b e a m . If t h e gravity l o a d o n t h e b e a m is v e r y
= m a x i m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d at
large, t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e a t o n e e n d of t h e
t h e face of t h e c o l u m n
beam may move toward the interior portion
of t h e b e a m s p a n . If t h i s is t h e c a s e , t h e free
b o d y d i a g r a m in F i g u r e 4 . 5 s h o u l d be m o d i - allother variables as previous~
fied to e x t e n d b e t w e e n t h e a c t u a l p l a s t i c defined
h i n g e l o c a t i o n s . To c h e c k if E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d
6 b a r e valid, d r a w t h e m o m e n t d i a g r a m for Equation 7 neglects the gravity load on
t h e s e g m e n t of t h e b e a m s h o w n in F i g u r e t h e p o r t i o n of t h e b e a m b e t w e e n t h e c e n t e r of
4.5, i.e., for t h e s e g m e n t of t h e b e a m b e t w e e n t h e R B S a n d t h e face of t h e c o l u m n . T h i s
t h e c e n t e r s of t h e RBS c u t s . If t h e m a x i m u m s i m p l i f i e s t h e e q u a t i o n a n d i n t r o d u c e s little
m o m e n t o c c u r s at t h e e n d s of t h e s p a n s , error. If d e s i r e d , t h e g r a v i t y l o a d o n t h i s
t h e n E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6 b a r e valid. If t h e s m a l l p o r t i o n of t h e b e a m c a n be i n c l u d e d in
maximum moment occurs within the span, t h e free b o d y d i a g r a m a n d in E q u a t i o n 7.
a n d e x c e e d s Mp.e of t h e b e a m (see E q u a t i o n
8), t h e n t h e m o d i f i c a t i o n d e s c r i b e d a b o v e will STEP 7 C o m p u t e t h e p l a s t i c m o m e n t of t h e
be needed. b e a m b a s e d o n t h e e x p e c t e d yield
stress.
STEP 6 Compute the maximum moment
e x p e c t e d at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n . Mpe = Z b Fy e (8)

T h e m o m e n t at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n c a n
b e c o m p u t e d f r o m a free b o d y d i a g r a m of t h e where:
s e g m e n t of t h e b e a m b e t w e e n t h e c e n t e r of
t h e R B S a n d t h e face of t h e c o l u m n flange. Mpe = p l a s t i c m o m e n t of b e a m b a s e d
S u c h a free b o d y d i a g r a m is i l l u s t r a t e d in on expected yield stress.
F i g u r e 4.6.

STEP 8 C h e c k t h a t M f i s in t h e r a n g e of 85
RBS to 100 p e r c e n t of Mpe.

M.f ~ 0 . 8 5 to 1.0 (9)

m pe

- - Mf ....."~". VRBs MRBs If E q u a t i o n 9 is n o t s a t i s f i e d , m o d i f y t h e

v a l u e s of c a n d / o r a a n d b a s n e e d e d , a n d
~ ,
r e p e a t S t e p s 2 t h r o u g h 8. Note t h a t t h i s
I- b c h e c k o n m o m e n t at t h e face of t h e c o l u m n is
---N a +.-Z- s i m p l i f i e d for d e s i g n p u r p o s e s , b a s e d o n
more detailed analyses and past test results.
Figure 4.6 T h e a c t u a l force t r a n s f e r m e c h a n i s m a n d
Free Body Diagram Between Center of s t a t e of s t r e s s a n d s t r a i n at t h i s l o c a t i o n is
RBS and Face of Column Flange q u i t e c o m p l e x d u e to t h e c o n s t r a i n t g e n e r -
S u m m i n g m o m e n t s a b o u t t h e left e n d of a t e d by t h e c o n n e c t i o n to t h e c o l u m n flange.
t h i s free b o d y d i a g r a m r e s u l t s in t h e follow- For more detailed information on the issue,
ing: t h e r e a d e r is r e f e r r e d to (Lee, et.al. 1997).

12
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
STEP 9 Strong C o l u m n - W e a k B e a m C h e c k

To c h e c k s t r o n g c o l u m n - w e a k b e a m Z Mc = M c t + Me b (14)
r e q u i r e m e n t s , t he p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d in
FEMA 267A (1997) will be u s e d , with m i n o r Where:
modifications. The e q u a t i o n to be u s e d to
c h e c k t h i s r e q u i r e m e n t (from E q u a t i o n Vc = s h e a r force in t h e c o l u m n s
7.5.2.5-1 of FEMA 267A (1997)) is as follows: above a n d below th e c o n n e c t i o n

~ Z(F~c - J~) > 1.0 (10) Mct = column moment immediately

above c o n n e c t i o n
ZMc
where: Mcb = column moment immediately
below c o n n e c t i o n

plastic section m o d u l u s of th e d i s t a n c e from top of b e a m to

ht
c o l u m n s e c t i o n a bove a n d p o in t of inflection in th e col-
below t he c o n n e c t i o n u m n above t h e c o n n e c t i o n

YMc = m i n i m u m specified yield stress dc = d e p t h of c o l u m n

of t he c o l u m n
hb d i s t a n c e from b o t t o m of b e a m
to p o in t of inflection in th e col-
= axial s t r e s s in t h e c o l u m n u m n below t h e c o n n e c t i o n
above a n d below t he c o n n e c t i o n
db = d e p t h of b e a m
~VMc s u m of t h e c o l u m n m o m e n t s at
t he top a n d b o t t o m of t he p a n e l All o t h e r variables as previously defined.
z o n e c o r r e s p o n d i n g to t h e
d e v e l o p m e n t of M R B S at th e
c e n t e r of t h e RBS in t h e ~~i -,,~-.-.~VC
attached beams

Figure 4.7 s h o w s a free body d i a g r a m t h a t ht

c a n be u s e d to e s t i m a t e c o l u m n m o m e n t s Mct
w h e n c h e c k i n g E q u a t i o n 10. This free body
c u t s t he b e a m s at t he RBS c e n t e r s a n d c u t s
MRBS db
th e c o l u m n s at a s s u m e d points of inflection ~
(often t a k e n as m i d - h e i g h t of t he a d j a c e n t V
RBS
stories for design purposes). i Mcb
B a s e d on Figure 4.7, 'Mc c a n be esti-
m a t e d from t he following equations: I hb
, ,(de _,~
Z M R~s + (VR~s + V ~ s ) ~ - + a +
2J
V~ : (11)
ht + d b + hb l
I I
a+(b/2) d c a+(b/2)
Mct = Vch t (12)
Figure 4.7
F r e e B o d y D i a g r a m for
Mcb = Vch b (13)
Calculation of Column Moments

13
 D E S I G N O F R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) M O M E N T FRAME C O N N E C T I O N S
T h e a p p r o a c h p r e s e n t e d in FEMA 2 6 7 A M? = m a x i m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d at
(1997) a c c o u n t s for t h e d i f f e r e n c e in c o l u m n o p p o s i t e c o l u m n face
s h e a r forces above a n d below the connection,
whereas the simplified approach above
a s s u m e s t h e s a m e s h e a r force is p r e s e n t in All o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s p r e v i o u s l y d e f i n e d .
the columns above and below the connec-
T h e v a l u e of My c o m p u t e d a c c o r d i n g to
tion. A l t h o u g h t h e a p p r o a c h in FEMA 2 6 7 A
Equation 7 combines the, seismic moment
(1997) m a y b e s o m e w h a t m o r e a c c u r a t e , t h e
d u e to (2XMRBs)/L' w i t h t h e m o m e n t d u e to
c o m p u t a t i o n of Vc p r e s e n t e d in E q u a t i o n 11
g r a v i t y load. O n t h e s i d e of t h e c o l u m n o p p o -
a b o v e is s i m p l e r to i m p l e m e n t , a n d is still
site to t h a t w h e r e My is d e v e l o p e d , t h e
r e a s o n a b l y a c c u r a t e for initial d e s i g n p u r -
m o m e n t a t t h e face of" t h e c o l u m n will be
poses considering the numerous uncertain-
somewhat smaller since the gravity load
t i e s i n v o l v e d in t h e s t r o n g c o l u m n - w e a k
m o m e n t will o p p o s e t h e s e i s m i c m o m e n t .
b e a m d e s i g n p h i l o s o p h y . T h e r e a d e r is
T h i s s o m e w h a t s m a l l e r m o m e n t is c a l c u l a t e d
r e f e r r e d to S e c t i o n 7 . 5 . 2 . 5 of F E M A 2 6 7 A
u s i n g E q u a t i o n 17.
(1997) to i m p l e m e n t a m o r e a c c u r a t e c a l c u -
l a t i o n for Vc to b e u s e d i n t h e final d e s i g n
T h e s t r e n g t h of t h e p a n e l z o n e c a n b e cal-
check.
c u l a t e d a s follows:
S T E P 10 C h e c k P a n e l Z o n e
3bc t~
To c h e c k t h e c o l u m n p a n e l z o n e , t h e p r o - V = 0.55Fycdct 1 + dbdc--~~ (18)
c e d u r e u s e d in S e c t i o n 6 . 6 . 6 . 3 . 7 of FEMA
2 6 7 A (1997) will b e u s e d . T h i s s e c t i o n
requires that the panel zone have sufficient
s t r e n g t h to d e v e l o p t h e s h e a r force d e v e l o p e d where:
b y 0 . 8 'M/: B a s e d o n t h i s a p p r o a c h , t h e
p a n e l z o n e ' s h e a r force c a n b e c o m p u t e d a s V = panel zone shear strength
follows:

bc = w i d t h of c o l u m n f l a n g e
M'f = M ~ S + V ~ S a + (15)

tcf = t h i c k n e s s of c o l u m n f l a n g e
Mf= Mf+ M~r (16)
= t o t a l t h i c k n e s s of p a n e l z o n e
including doubler plates
o.8Z
Vpz - 0.8Vc (17)
0.95 d b All o t h e r v a r i a b l e s a s p r e v i o u s l y d e f i n e d .
Where:
S T E P 11 C h e c k B e a m S h e a r

Vpz p a n e l z o n e s h e a r force corre- T h e final d e s i g n c h e c k s h o u l d b e m a d e to

s p o n d i n g to t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of
80 p e r c e n t of t h e m a x i m u m
e x p e c t e d c o l u m n face m o m e n t s
m a x i m u m m o m e n t e x p e c t e d at
t h e face of t h e c o l u m n , c a l c u -
l a t e d a c c o r d i n g to E q u a t i o n 7
ensure that the beam has adequate capacity
for s h e a r a s s s o c i a t e d w i t h l a t e r a l a n d g r a v i t y
loads. This check combines the beam shear
associated with the plastic moment within
t h e R B S u s i n g E q u a t i o n 6a, c o m b i n e d w i t h
t h e p o r t i o n of gravity l o a d a d d i n g s h e a r to
the beam within the section between the RBS

14
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED BEAM S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
c e n t e r a n d the c o l u m n flange. This c a n be
c a l c u l a t e d u s i n g E q u a t i o n 19:
(/-/,)
W - -
2 (19)
VRBs q
2
4.4 Additional Design Considera-
tions
In addition to e s t a b l i s h i n g t h e d i m e n s i o n s of
the RBS cut, t h e r e are a n u m b e r of addi-
tional design a n d detailing f e a t u r e s t h a t m a y
significantly affect c o n n e c t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e
a n d e c o n o m y of this system. These items are
d i s c u s s e d below.
The p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d above for sizing
the RBS c u t p e r m i t s a r a n g e of a c c e p t a b l e
v a l u e s for t he d i m e n s i o n s a, b a n d c. Fabri-
cation can likely be simplified by s t a n d a r d i z -
ing t h e s e d i m e n s i o n s over a large n u m b e r of
b e a m s on a project. Making small c h a n g e s
on the RBS d i m e n s i o n s from b e a m to b e a m
is n ot likely to improve c o n n e c t i o n perform-
a n c e a n d m a y u n n e c e s s a r i l y i n c r e a s e fabri-
cation costs. The d e s i g n e r m a y wish to con-
sult with a fabricator before finalizing the
RBS d i m e n s i o n s to identify w a y s of r e d u c i n g
fabrication costs. For example, if the fabrica-
tor is m a k i n g RBS c u t s u s i n g a t o r c h
m o u n t e d on a guide with a fixed r a d i u s , th e
e c o n o m y of t he c o n n e c t i o n m a y be i m p r o v e d
by m a i n t a i n i n g a c o n s t a n t r a d i u s of c u t R
over a large n u m b e r of c o n n e c t i o n s .
The RBS c u t is n o r m a l l y m a d e by t h e r m a l
c u t t i n g in t he fabrication shop. The c u t
s h o u l d be m a d e to avoid nicks, gouges, a n d
other discontinuities. After t he c u t is m a d e ,
t h e surfa c e s h o u l d be g r o u n d , to aid in
r e d u c i n g t h e potential for f r a c t u r e s o c c u r r i n g
in the RBS at h i g h plastic rotations a n d low
cycle fatigue. The grinding s h o u l d be d o n e to
avoid p r o d u c i n g grind m a r k s p e r p e n d i c u l a r
to the b e a m flange, since they are p e r p e n d i -
cu lar to t he direction of principal stress.
These m a r k s c a n act as s t r e s s risers. Varia-
tions on grinding m e t h o d s m a y be possible to
r e d u c e fabrication effort.
Another c o n s i d e r a t i o n for design of RBS
m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s is welding. R e s e a r c h
15
c o n d u c t e d since th e Northridge e a r t h q u a k e
h a s d e m o n s t r a t e d th e i m p o r t a n c e of weld
m e t a l t o u g h n e s s in th e groove welds of seis-
mic r e s i s t a n t m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s (Kauf-
m a n n , et.al. 1996; Tide 1998 I. The AISC Seis-
mic Provisions (1997) r e c o m m e n d s th e u s e of
a filler m e t a l with a m i n i m u m specified ten-
sile s t r e n g t h of 70 ksi, ( a s s u m i n g a 50 ksi
base m a t e r i a l specified yield) a n d a m i n i m u m
specified CVN v a l u e of 20 ft.-lb, at -20 F.
Previous r e s e a r c h tests on RBS c o n n e c t i o n s
h a v e generally e m p l o y e d th e self-shielded
flux cored arc weld in g p r o c e s s (FCAW), u s i n g
E70TG-K2, E71T-8 or E70T-6 electrodes. All
of t h e s e electrodes provide a m i n i m u m spec-
ified CVN of 20 ft.-lb, at -20 F. A n u m b e r of
o th er FCAW electrodes are available t h a t pro-
vide this m i n i m u m CVN value. In addition,
s u c c e s s f u l tes ts on o t h e r types of c o n n e c -
tions h a v e e m p l o y e d t h e shielded m e t a l arc
welding {SMAW) p r o c e s s u s i n g a n E7018
electrode. The final choice of welding p r o ces s
a n d electrode is b e s t left to t h e fabricator.
Other factors, s u c h as t h e mixing of different
filler m e t a l s in t h e s a m e weld j o i n t m a y r e s u l t
in lower CVN v a l u e s for the c o m b i n a t i o n ,
t h a n for one of t h e filler m e t a l s alone. A
p a p e r w ritten on this subject, "The Effects of
I n t e r m i x e d Weld Metal on M e c h a n i c a l Prop-
erties" ( J o h n s o n , Q u i n t a n a 1998), m a y be
u s e f u l to th e e n g i n e e r w h e n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e
inter-mixing of weld filler metals .
At th e b e a m flange c o m p l e t e jo in t pene-
tration welds, it is r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t t h e
weld run-off t a b s be r e m o v e d at b o t h the top
a n d b o t t o m flanges, a n d t h a t th e edges of t h e
groove welds be g r o u n d smooth. The pre-
ferred final profile of t h e weld tab g r o u n d
s u rface is r a d i u s e d , to f u r t h e r r e d u c e t h e
possibility of f r a c t u r e at t h e s e locations. This
will minimize a n y p o ten tial n o t c h e s intro-
d u c e d by th e p r e s e n c e of t h e weld tabs, or by
d i s c o n t i n u i t i e s c o n t a i n e d in t h e weld m e t a l
within th e r u n - o f f regions. In addition, it is
r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t th e b o t t o m flange steel
b a c k i n g be r e m o v e d a n d a reinforcing fillet be
p l a c e d at th e b a s e of th e weld after the j o i n t
is b a c k g o u g e d to s o u n d metal. This require-
m e n t is i n t e n d e d b o t h to elimin ate th e n o t c h
effect p r o d u c e d by t h e steel backing, a n d to
p e r m i t better i n s p e c t i o n a n d u l t r a s o n i c test-
ing of th e weld. At t h e top flange groove weld,
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
it is r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t t h e steel b a c k i n g be
s e a l w e l d e d to t h e face of t h e c o l u m n u s i n g a
m i n i m u m size fillet weld, t y p i c a l l y a 5 / 1 6 " fil-
let. A n a l y s i s h a s i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h e n o t c h
effect of t h e s t e e l b a c k i n g is n o t a s s e v e r e at
t h e t o p flange, a n d t h a t w e l d i n g t h e steel
b a c k i n g to t h e c o l u m n f u r t h e r r e d u c e s t h e
n o t c h effect. F u r t h e r , d e f e c t s a r e l e s s likely
at t h e t o p f l a n g e w e l d s i n c e t h e g r o o v e w e l d
is n o t i n t e r r u p t e d by t h e b e a m w e b , a s it is a t
t h e b o t t o m flange.
M a n y r e s e a r c h e r s a n d d e s i g n e r s believe
that the weld access hole has an important
effect o n c o n n e c t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e . A l t h o u g h
c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h is a d d r e s s i n g i s s u e s r e l a t e d
to t h e w e l d a c c e s s hole, t h e r e a p p e a r s to b e
n o c o n s e n s u s a s of y e t o n t h e o p t i m u m size
and shape. Consequently, pending further
research, access hole geometry should con-
f o r m to t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s s h o w n in F i g u r e 5.2
of AWS D 1 . 1 - 9 8 (AWS 1998). T h e r e is n o
i n d i c a t i o n t h a t w e l d a c c e s s h o l e size, w i t h i n
t h e AWS limits, will a d v e r s e l y affect t h e p e r -
f o r m a n c e of R B S m o m e n t connections.
T h e r e f o r e , size a n d s h a p e of t h e a c c e s s h o l e
s h o u l d be left to t h e f a b r i c a t o r to c o n f o r m to
AWS r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s .
A n o t h e r i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t of w e l l - b e h a v e d
moment connections are the continuity
p l a t e s b e t w e e n t h e c o l u m n f l a n g e s . All of t h e
s u c c e s s f u l t e s t s o n R B S c o n n e c t i o n s for n e w
c o n s t r u c t i o n ( A p p e n d i x A) h a v e e m p l o y e d
c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s . H o w e v e r , n o R B S t e s t s to
d a t e h a v e o m i t t e d c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s , so it is
unclear under what conditions continuity
plates are actually required. Pending the out-
c o m e of f u r t h e r r e s e a r c h , it is r e c o m m e n d e d
t h a t c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e s be p r o v i d e d for all R B S
connections, with a continuity plate thick-
n e s s s i m i l a r to t h e b e a m f l a n g e t h i c k n e s s .
W e l d s t h a t a t t a c h a c o n t i n u i t y p l a t e to t h e
c o l u m n f l a n g e or web, s h o u l d be m a d e w i t h
a n e l e c t r o d e w i t h a r a t e d CVN of at l e a s t 20
ft.-lb, at -20 F. B a s e d o n e x p e r i m e n t a l
r e s u l t s , r e m o v a l of b a c k i n g b a r s f r o m c o n t i -
nuity plate welds, however, does not appear
to be n e c e s s a r y . W h e n w e l d i n g t h e c o n t i n u i t y
p l a t e s to t h e c o l u m n , w e l d i n g in t h e " k - a r e a "
of t h e c o l u m n s h o u l d be a v o i d e d (AISC
1997}.
All w e l d i n g s h o u l d be s p e c i f i e d to be in
c o n f o r m a n c e w i t h t h e l a t e s t e d i t i o n of AWS
16
D 1.1. A c c e p t a n c e c r i t e r i a for u l t r a s o n i c t e s t -
i n g of g r o o v e w e l d s is r e c o m m e n d e d to be in
c o n f o r m a n c e w i t h T a b l e 5.2 of AWS D 1.1-98.
Additional useful information on welding
m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s c a n be f o u n d in a n u m -
b e r of r e f e r e n c e s l i s t e d at t h e e n d of t h i s doc-
ument.
R e c e n t t e s t s h a v e s h o w n t h a t RBS c o n -
nections with bolted web details can meet the
r e c o m m e n d e d p l a s t i c r o t a t i o n d e m a n d s of
FEMA 2 6 7 (1995). H o w e v e r , it s h o u l d be
n o t e d t h a t at large r o t a t i o n d e m a n d s , t h e
b o l t e d d e t a i l a p p e a r s to be m o r e s u s c e p t i b l e
to f r a c t u r e i n i t i a t i n g n e a r t h e w e l d a c c e s s
hole. T h i s i s s u e is t h e s u b j e c t of f u r t h e r SAC
s p o n s o r e d r e s e a r c h . U n t i l m o r e definitive
g u i d a n c e is p r o v i d e d in t h e u p c o m i n g SAC
Guidelines, t h e e n g i n e e r s h o u l d c a r e f u l l y
consider required connection and SMF per-
formance when choosing a beam web con-
nection.
T h e m a j o r i t y of t h e w e l d e d w e b c o n n e c -
tion tests have utilized a complete joint pen-
e t r a t i o n (CJP) g r o o v e w e l d b e t w e e n t h e b e a m
w e b a n d c o l u m n f l a n g e over t h e full d e p t h of
t h e web. T h e s h e a r tab, w h i c h is w e l d e d to
t h e c o l u m n a n d b o l t e d to t h e b e a m w e b , is
still p r o v i d e d . T h i s s h e a r t a b s e r v e s s e v e r a l
p u r p o s e s . First, it a c t s a s b a c k i n g for t h e
C J P g r o o v e weld. S e c o n d , it c a r r i e s e r e c t i o n
l o a d s a n d h e l p s m a i n t a i n t h e f r a m e in a
p l u m b p o s i t i o n u n t i l w e l d i n g at t h e c o n n e c -
t i o n is c o m p l e t e d . S i n c e t h e s h e a r t a b is p r o -
v i d e d for e r e c t i o n p u r p o s e s only, it is r e c o m -
m e n d e d t h a t t h e d e s i g n of t h e s h e a r t a b b e
left to t h e f a b r i c a t o r . H o w e v e r , to e n s u r e t h a t
t h e s h e a r t a b d o e s n o t r e s i s t l o a d s in t h e
event that excessive plastic rotations cause
t h e w e b c o n n e c t i o n to f r a c t u r e , t h e d e s i g n e r
could consider indicating that the shear tab
be fabricated with short horizontal slotted
holes.
Traditionally the shear tab would be
w e l d e d o n b o t h s i d e s . H o w e v e r , w h e n utiliz-
i n g a w e b C J P weld, t h e "~backside" fillet w e l d
m a y p o s e p o t e n t i a l filler m e t a l m i x i n g a n d fit
up problems. The engineer should work with
t h e f a b r i c a t o r to g e n e r a t e a n a c c e p t a b l e
w e l d i n g s e q u e n c e . As a n a l t e r n a t i v e to a C J P
g r o o v e weld, t h e b e a m w e b c o n n e c t i o n c a n
also be m a d e u s i n g a h e a v y fillet w e l d e d
s h e a r tab. T h e s h e a r t a b is t y p i c a l l y w e l d e d
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
to the c o l u m n u s i n g either fillet welds or a
CJP groove weld. The s h e a r tab, in turn, is
t h e n welded to the b e a m web with fillet
welds. An example of s u c h a connection can
be found in "Moment Frame Connection
Development a n d Testing for the City of Hope
National Medical Center" (Zekioglu, et.al.
1997).
If the engineer chooses to u s e a bolted
web connection, all aspects of the c o n n e c t i o n
s h o u l d be d e s i g n e d to resist the full s h e a r
applied to the b e a m d u e to gravity a n d earth-
q u a k e loads. Short slotted holes m a y be uti-
lized to futher protect the s h e a r tab a n d
b e a m web from possz'bie excesive deflections
w h e n the c o n n e c t i o n in subjected to large
rotations as t h e s y s t e m u n d e r g o e s inelastic
action d u r i n g a n e a r t h q u a k e . It s h o u l d be
n o t e d t h a t s t r u c t u r a l steel erectors prefer
s t a n d a r d holes to slotted holes to aid in erec-
tion.
One of t h e m o s t d i s c u s s e d aspects of RBS
design, a n d one of the m o s t important, is the
s u p p l e m e n t a l lateral bracing required for
this system. FEMA 267A (1997) r e c o m m e n d s
t h a t a lateral brace be provided n e a r the
RBS. The following discussion p r e s e n t s an
analysis of test r e s u l t s t h a t did not have lat-
eral bracing provided n e a r the RBS.
Virtually all m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s t h a t
dissipate energy by yielding of the b e a m are
subject to varying degrees of b e a m instability
at large levels of inelastic rotation. This is
true both for reinforced c o n n e c t i o n s (cover
plates, ribs, h a u n c h e s , etc.) a n d for RBS con-
nections. This instability generally involves a
c o m b i n a t i o n of flange buckling, web buckling
a n d lateral torsional buckling a n d typically
results in deterioration of the b e a m flexural
strength, with i n c r e a s i n g inelastic rotations.
In the experience of some researchers, the
degree of instability a n d associated s t r e n g t h
deterioration for RBS c o n n e c t i o n s tested in
the laboratory have been no more severe, a n d
p e r h a p s s o m e w h a t less severe t h a n for m a n y
types of reinforced c o n n e c t i o n s . This is
d e m o n s t r a t e d by the connection test results
s h o w n in Figure 4.8.
This figure shows a plot of b e a m tip load
v e r s u s b e a m tip d i s p l a c e m e n t for two differ-
e n t test specimens. These two s p e c i m e n s
were virtually identical, except for the con-
17
nection detail. Both s p e c i m e n s were con-
s t r u c t e d w i t h t h e s a m e m e m b e r sizes
(W36xlS0 b e a m a n d W14x426 column) a n d
h e a t s of steel, a n d tested in the s a m e test
setup with identical m e m b e r lengths, identi-
cal m e m b e r e n d s u p p o r t conditions, a n d
identical lateral bracing. Both s p e c i m e n s
were s u b j e c t e d to the s a m e loading history.
The only difference was t h a t one s p e c i m e n
was c o n s t r u c t e d with a cover plated connec-
tion a n d the other with a n RBS connection.
Both s p e c i m e n s were provided with a single
b e a m lateral s u p p o r t n e a r the point of load
application.
250
Cover'Pla~ed Connectlon ~.______,~_
-~--~--,~ ~. ~.~ :~-~
200
150
RBS Connection
\'~
]
~ -
*~
~':~*
~ ~" ~
100 .
~ 50. _ _ _
~ o.
.~ -~0. - - - -
-100,
-150.
~ ~ '~"'~'~'({~:;e
-200,
-250
I
I , ,
-6 .~ -2
Displacement (inches)
Figure 4 . 8
C o m p a r i s o n o f T e s t R e s u l t s for
Cover P l a t e d a n d RBS C o n n e c t i o n s
As can be seen from Figure 4.8, t h e p e a k
s t r e n g t h of the RBS c o n n e c t i o n is less t h a n
t h a t of t h e cover-plated connection. This, of
course, is expected a n d is in fact a potential
advantage of the RBS in t h a t it r e d u c e s t h e
m o m e n t g e n e r a t e d at t h e c o n n e c t i o n a n d t h e
m o m e n t delivered to the column. After reach-
ing their p e a k strength, both c o n n e c t i o n s
exhibited s o m e s t r e n g t h deterioration d u e to
c o m b i n e d flange, web a n d lateral torsional
b u c k l i n g in t h e beam. Note however t h a t t h e
rate of deterioration is less for t h e RBS spec-
imen. In fact, at large inelastic deformations,
t h e RBS exhibits t h e s a m e s t r e n g t h as t h e
cover-plated connection. This c o m p a r i s o n
d e m o n s t r a t e s t h e observation m a d e above,
i.e., RBS c o n n e c t i o n s e x h i b i t n o m o r e
s t r e n g t h deterioration, a n d p e r h a p s some-
w h a t less deterioration t h a n reinforced con-
nections.
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS

T h e t e s t d a t a s u m m a r i z e d in A p p e n d i x A 5 RBS Design Example

i n d i c a t e s t h a t m a n y RBS c o n n e c t i o n t e s t s
have been conducted without an additional
Description of Design Example Project
l a t e r a l b r a c e at t h e RBS. T h e r e is n o i n s t a n c e
where an investigator reported unusually
C o m m e r c i a l Office B u i l d i n g / M e d i c a l
s e v e r e or u n a c c e p t a b l e s t r e n g t h d e t e r i o r a t i o n
Office B u i l d i n g
d u e to t h e a b s e n c e of a l a t e r a l s u p p o r t n e a r
L o c a t e d in S a n F r a n c i s c o , C a l i f o r n i a
the RBS. Futher, as discussed above,
Distance from Nearest Earthquake
s t r e n g t h d e g r a d a t i o n in t h e R B S is c o m p a r a -
F a u l t : ~ 9 k i l o m e t e r s (San A n d r e a s )
ble to t h a t s e e n in m a n y o t h e r c o n n e c t i o n
H i g h S e i s m i c i t y Z o n e w i t h Near F a u l t
t y p e s for w h i c h n o a d d i t i o n a l l a t e r a l b r a c i n g
Characteristics
is p r e s e s n t l y r e q u i r e d . C o n s e q u e n t l y , b a s e d
o n c u r r e n t l y a v a i l a b l e d a t a , a n a d d i t i o n a l lat-
Description of Design Example Frame
eral b r a c e at t h e R B S d o e s n o t a p p e a r n e c e s -
s a r y in o r d e r to a c h i e v e a c c e p t a b l e p e r f o r m -
Perimeter Moment Frames
a n c e . H o w e v e r , t h e d e s i g n e r s h o u l d still
Frame centerline dimensions:
a d h e r e to t h e n o r m a l c o d e p r o v i s i o n s for
story height = 13' - 0"
b e a m l a t e r a l s u p p o r t a n d for b e a m f l a n g e
bay width = 2 2 ' - 8"
a n d w e b s l e n d e r n e s s limits. L a t e r a l b r a c i n g
for b e a m s in S p e c i a l M o m e n t F r a m e s s h o u l d
Beam: W24x117
b e p r o v i d e d at a m a x i m u m s p a c i n g of 2 5 0 0
A 5 7 2 Gr. 50 (A992)
/FY, a s r e q u i r e d b y S e c t i o n 9 . 8 of t h e AISC
Fy b = 50 k s i
is~nic Provisions ( 1997}.
As d e s c r i b e d earlier, m o s t m o m e n t c o n -
Column: W14x311
nections show gradual strength degradation
A 5 7 2 Gr. 50 (A992)
at large levels of p l a s t i c r o a t a t i o n d u e to c o m -
Fy c = 50 k s i
b i n e d local a n d l a t e r a l t o r s i o n a l b u c k l i n g of
t h e b e a m . T h i s o c c u r s for t h e R B S a s well a s
Gravity load on beam:
for m o s t o t h e r c o n n e c t i o n t y p e s , a s illus-
(1.2D + .5L p e r
t r a t e d in F i g u r e 4.9. R e d u c i n g t h e l a t e r a l
Sect. 9 . 2 c of AISC Seismic Provisions):
s u p p o r t s p a c i n g in t h e r e g i o n of t h e p l a s t i c
h i n g e f r o m t h a t r e q u i r e d in S e c t i o n 9.8 of t h e
2 kips/ft (0.17 k i p s / i n )
A I S C Seismic Provisions m a y t h e r e f o r e
r e d u c e t h e r a t e of s t r e n g t h d e g r a d a t i o n for
G r a v i t y l o a d s a r e d u e to floor t r i b u t a r y
m o s t t y p e s of m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n s . F u r t h e r
l o a d s a s well a s e x t e r i o r wall l o a d s .
definitive recommendations and research
r e s u l t s will be p r o v i d e d in t h e u p c o m i n g SAC
Design typical interior moment
Guidelines.
c o n n e c t i o n of p e r i m e t e r f r a m e .
If a d e s i g n e r s h o u l d c h o o s e to p r o v i d e a
l a t e r a l b r a c e at t h e RBS, t h e b r a c e s h o u l d
n o t b e l o c a t e d w i t h i n t h e r e d u c e d s e c t i o n of R = radius of cut = 4c~+ b~

t h e b e a m . W e l d e d or b o l t e d b r a c e a t t a c h e - 8c

m e n t s in t h i s h i g h l y s t r a i n e d r e g i o n of t h e
b e a m m a y s e r v e a s f r a c t u r e i n i t i a t i o n sites.
C o n s e q u e n t l y , if a l a t e r a l b r a c e is p r o v i d e d , it
s h o u l d b e l o c a t e d at or b e y o n d t h e e n d of t h e
R B S t h a t is f a r t h e s t f r o m t h e face of t h e col-
u m n . If b r a c i n g is to be p r o v i d e d a s p a r t of
_1
the design, requirements and recommenda- I~
a
V l ~
b -- I

t i o n s c a n be g a t h e r e d f r o m d o c u m e n t s s u c h
a s FEMA 2 6 7 A (1997) a n d " F u n d a m e n t a l s of
B e a m B r a c i n g " (Yura 1993). Figure 5.1 RBS D i m e n s i o n s

18
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
Section Properties: From E q u a t i o n 5:

W24x117: MRB S = 1.15 ZRBS_Fy e

db = 2 4 . 2 6 in. = 1 15x218x55
bf = 1 2 . 8 0 in. = 13789 in-kip
fw = 0 . 8 5 in.
= 0 . 5 5 in. STEP 5 Compute the shear force at the
Zxb = 3 2 7 in. 3 c e n t e r s of the RBS at e a c h e n d of
W14x311: the beam
dc = 1 7 . 1 2 in.
bcf = 1 6 . 2 3 in. L'=L-dc-2 a+ = 2 7 2 - 1 7 . 1 2 - 2 7+ =222in.
tcf = 2 . 2 6 in.
tcw = 1.41 in.
Zxc = 6 0 3 in. 3 F r o m E q u a t i o n s 6 a a n d 6b:
2Me~s wL' 213789 0.17x222
STEP 1 C h o o s e t r i a l v a l u e s for R B S d i m e n - Vm~s - - - + - ~ =143kips
L' 2 222 2
s i o n s a, b a n d c

a -~'(0.5 to 0.75) b f V~s _ 2M~s wL'_ 213789 0.17222 =105kips

~ 6 in. t o 10 in. L' 2 222 2
Try: a = 7 in.
b ~ ( 0 . 6 5 to 0.85) d b
~ 16 in. to 21 in. Figure 5.2 s h o w s t h e s h e a r force d i a g r a m ,
Try: b = 19 in. t h e b e n d i n g m o m e n t d i a g r a m , a n d t h e free
c ~0.2 bf b o d y d i a g r a m t h e for t h e p o r t i o n o f t h e b e a m
~ 2 . 6 in. between RBS centers. Observe that the max-
Try: c = 2 . 7 5 in. i m u m m o m e n t o c c u r s a t t h e e n d s , i.e., a t t h e
c e n t e r s o f t h e R B S . If t h e g r a v i t y l o a d w e r e
STEP 2 Compute the plastic section modu- e x t r e m e l y large, c o m p a r e d to t h e m o m e n t
lus at t h e m i n i m u m section of t h e
RBS
143 105
F r o m E q u a t i o n 3:

V (kip)
ZRB S = Z x b - 2 c t f ( d b - t ~
= 327 - 2 x 2.75 x 0.85 x (24.26 - 0.85) 13789
= 218 in.3

STEP 3 Establish the expected yield stress

of t h e b e a m
M (kip-in)

F o r A 5 7 2 Gr. 5 0 s t e e l , R y = 1.1.

F r o m E q u a t i o n 4: -13789

~ REDS w= 0.17 kips/in. ~ RIBS

Fy e = R y F y b = 1 . 1 x 5 0 = 55ksi
Ii.,.l..i ~ I i ~ I i I I I I ~ t I t i i I I I t I ~ I i i.l..!j

STEP 4 Compute the maximum moment

143
. . . . . . . . t' "~05k
J ~
expected at the center of the RBS
,
L' ~ 222 in.

Figure 5.2
Portion of Example Beam
between RBS Centers

19
 DESIGN OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) M O M E N T F R A M E C O N N E C T I O N S
,

d e v e l o p e d d u e to a p p l i e d l a t e r a l l o a d s , t h e
c u r v e d p o r t i o n of t h e m o m e n t d i a g r a m c o u l d
drive t h e p l a s t i c h i n g e t o w a r d t h e c o l u m n ,
a w a y f r o m t h e RBS. T h i s e x a m p l e i n d i c a t e s
t h a t t h e gravity l o a d is n o t l a r g e e n o u g h to
form a plastic hinge within the span, away
f r o m t h e RBS. C o n s e q u e n t l y , t h e c a l c u l a -
t i o n s a b o v e for t h e m o m e n t a n d s h e a r forces,
at t h e R B S c u t s , a r e valid.
STEP 6 Compute the maximum moment
e x p e c t e d a t t h e face of t h e c o l u m n
> 1.0 ( E q u a t i o n 10)
ZMc
R e t u r n i n g to t h e e x a m p l e , a s s u m i n g t h a t
p o i n t s of i n f l e c t i o n in t h e c o l u m n s o c c u r at
t h e i r m i d - h e i g h t s , a n d a s s u m i n g a n axial
s t r e s s (fa) of 15 k s i in t h e c o l u m n s u n d e r
combined earthquake and gravity loading,
t h e following c a l c u l a t i o n s r e s u l t .
F r o m E q u a t i o n s 11, 12, 13 a n d 14:

F r o m E q u a t i o n 7:
h~ + d b + hb
Ms =Mees + Veas(a+ 2b-/=13789+ 143(7 + ~ ) = 16149in - kip

2 x 13789+ (143 + 105(17;12 + 7 + ~ )

STEP 7 C o m p u t e t h e p l a s t i c m o m e n t of
= 217kips
the beam based on the expected 156
yield s t r e s s

F r o m E q u a t i o n 8: Met = Vc h t
= 2 1 7 x (156 - 2 4 . 2 6 ) / 2
= 14294 in-kip
Mpe = Zxb Fy e = 3 2 7 x 55 = 1 7 9 8 5 i n - k i p
STEP 8 C h e c k t h a t Mfis in t h e r a n g e of 85 Mcb 14294 in-kip
to 100 p e r c e n t of Mpe
= 2 x 1 4 2 9 4 = 28588 in - k i p
F r o m E q u a t i o n 9:

Mf 16149 ~Zc(Fyc-.f~) -
2603(50-15)
= 1.5 > 1 OK
- -
- - - 0.90 OK ~M~ 28588
Mpe 17985

T h u s , t h e p r e l i m i n a r y d i m e n s i o n s a r e OK. STEP 10 C h e c k C o l u m n P a n e l Z o n e

Use: a = 7in. To c h e c k t h e c o l u m n p a n e l z o n e , t h e p r o -
c e d u r e d i s c u s s e d in S e c t i o n 4 will b e u s e d .
b = 19in.
c = 2 . 7 5 in.
Based on the example, the column panel
STEP 9 Strong Column-Weak Beam Check z o n e s h e a r is c o m p u t e d a s follows:

To c h e c k s t r o n g c o l u m n - w e a k beam Mf = 16149 in-kip ( E q u a t i o n 7)

r e q u i r e m e n t s , t h e p r o c e d u r e p r e s e n t e d in
FEMA 2 6 7 A (1997) will be u s e d , w i t h t h e F r o m E q u a t i o n s 15, 16 a n d 17:
m i n o r m o d i f i c a t i o n s n o t e d in S e c t i o n 4. T h e
final e q u a t i o n to b e u s e d to c h e c k t h i s 27Mf = Mf+ M:f
r e q u i r e m e n t (from E q u a t i o n 7 . 5 . 2 . 5 - 1 of = 16149 + 15522 = 31674 in-kip
F E M A 267A) is a s follows:
Mf=M~Bs+V~Bsa+ =13789+105 7+
,
=15522in - kip

i|1

20
 D E S I G N OF R E D U C E D B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} M O M E N T FRAME CONNECTIONS

Vez- 0.8z..,~'Mr 0.8Vc Vc - 0.8x31671 0.8x217= 926kips RBS flange r e d u c t i o n is approximately 43

0.95dt) 0.9524.26 percent. Consequently, it is expected t h a t t h e
inclusion of tlae RBS the b e a m s will i n c r e a s e
interstory drift by a b o u t 5 percent.
Panel zone strength is c o m p u t e d as fol-
S~e~c Abut
lows: ,~
From Equation 18: I /
~
~
. B.U. bar to remain
~ Remove weld tabs
IE 718"x 6" ~,.~,,.T-~-~'~"r-.~/ ~ IP
{B.S.) ~ I ! [ I / _1 16 ~ Weld B.U. bar Io coiutnn
- - N ~ l ~ . l I~ . ~ _ 5 .... .

= 0.55F~,~d~tIlL+ 3b~ft~d+d~t
1 ~ l / *~

I.t' i I w2,.,,7
~i I.I I'\i~, I g;-~'~-------------~,~,:,,d~,,,~,,~,,oo,~d,
tose~v a s b a c i~g C~,~ -- ~
I 3 x 16"23x (2"26)~] IZ . . . .ooo,0,.to
= 0.55xSOx17.12x1.41 1+ 24.26xlT.12xl.41J = 946 kips ,.]~,~ ,_~ ~ ~ \,~,~.~ : ~ columnand beam byfabdcato~.

II 5/16 \ cleaned and inspected

.

946 > 926 .'.No doubler plates r e q u i r e d =.o,o0,

Configure plate comes to \ ~
...... / .17Grind75" Radius
of column Smooth

STEP 11 C h e c k B e a m Shear ~ ~ J ~ 1 ~ 7.3"

2.75"
2.75"

From E q u a t i o n 19: 5/'I'~ NI welds: ET0

~lI groove welds: electrodes must be rat~;I for
' CVN of at teast 20 It-fos at -20 deg. F.
All weldingshall conformto AWS D1.1

w (l-l') /272~222/ Figure 5 . 3 C o n n e c t i o n D e t a i l for

V~ 4 2 0.17 - Design E~mple
' 2 143 = 145kips
2
6 Procedures for Acceptance
of Design by Building
V, = A,,,Fy = (0.55)(24.26)(5 O) = 667 kips > 145 kips Authorities

Continuity Plates The design of SMF building s y s t e m s require

t h a t the d e s i g n a c c o u n t for inelastic defor-
m a t i o n d e m a n d s on t h e connection. The
Use c o n t i n u i t y plates with a t h i c k n e s s
AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
a p p r o x i m a t e l y e q u a l to t h e b e a m flange
t h i c k n e s s . The b e a m flange t h i c k n e s s is 0.85
Buildings (1997), Section 9.2, p r e s e n t s t h e
r e q u i r e m e n t s for SMF structures. The RBS
inches. Therefore, u s e 7 / 8 " thick continuity
c o n n e c t i o n is a n o p t i o n t h a t c a n m e e t
plates (0.875"). C o n n e c t continuity plates to
r e q u i r e m e n t s set by building codes a n d con-
c o l u m n flanges u s i n g CJP groove welds, a n d
s e n s u s d o c u m e n t s . The following c o m m e n t s
the web u s i n g double fillet welds. The cor-
are i n t e n d e d to describe actions t h a t can be
n e r s of c o n t i n u i t y plates s h o u l d be config-
followed to help facilitate the p e r m i t t i n g
u r e d to avoid welding into the k - a r e a of the
process for a SMF building system.
column.

Beam Web Connection 6.1 Communication

C o n n e c t b e a m web to c o l u m n flange It is r e c o m m e n d e d t h a t early in the process,

u s i n g CJP groove weld over full d e p t h of web
(between weld access holes).
A drawing of a generic final c o n n e c t i o n
detail is s h o w n in Figure 5.3. The resulting
frame s h o u l d be c h e c k e d for all code speci-
fied s t r e n g t h a n d drift limits. Note t h a t the
the S t r u c t u r a l E n g i n e e r of Record c o m m u n i -
cate with t h e building official regarding t h e
proposed u s e a n d p e r t i n e n t a s p e c t s of t h e
RBS m o m e n t connection. The e n g i n e e r m a y
n e e d to provide b a c k g r o u n d d o c u m e n t a t i o n
to the building official if h e or she is unfamil-
iar with the design a n d terminology relating

21
 DESIGN OF REDUCED BEAM S E C T I O N (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
to the design. The u s e of this d o c u m e n t m a y
aid the building official in u n d e r s t a n d i n g the
design intent.
6.2 Methodology
Once t he building official u n d e r s t a n d s th e
design i n t e n t a n d s y s t e m behavior, it is
i m p o r t a n t to clearly state t he design m e t h o d -
ology to be u s e d early so t h a t a n y m i s u n d e r -
s t a n d i n g s c a n be avoided. This d o c u m e n t
p r e s e n t s a general design methodology, uti-
lizing s o m e simplifying a s s u m p t i o n s a n d
some of t he better a s p e c t s of m a n y different
design m e t h o d s . There are ot he r w a y s to
design a n RBS m o m e n t c o n n e c t i o n a n d SMF
s y s t e m t h a n t h a t r e p r e s e n t e d in this docu-
ment. If ot he r m e t h o d s are utilized, t h e engi-
n e e r s h o u l d be s u r e to clearly indicate the
m e t h o d u s e d a n d t he i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s t h a t
s h o w design c o m p l i a n c e with the governing
building code.
Any design m e t h o d o l o g y utilized s h o u l d
correlate well with other p u b l i s h e d m e t h o d s ,
test r e s u l t s a n d r e s e a r c h papers. Section 9.2
of the AISC Seismic Provisions require t h a t
the design be b a s e d on qualifying cyclic tests.
The table in Appendix A will help to satisfy
this r e q u i r e m e n t for t he RBS connection.
Any significant deviation from e s t a b l i s h e d
methodologies or tests s h o u l d be justified. It
is i m p o r t a n t to u n d e r s t a n d t h a t m a n y rec-
o m m e n d a t i o n s c o n t a i n e d in this d o c u m e n t
are b a s e d on e x p e r i m e n t a l r e s e a r c h. Design
e q u a t i o n s a n d RBS sizing v a l u e s are b a s e d
on s u c c e s s f u l r e s e a r c h , b o t h analytically a n d
experimentally. Therefore, a n y n e w design
e q u a t i o n s s h o u l d be c o m p a r a b l e to estab-
lished equations.
6.3 Construction Documents
After a design is complete, it is imperative to
convey t he information a c c u r a t e l y on con-
struc t i on d o c u m e n t s . While calculations are
i m p o r t a n t a n d describe t he final c o n s t r u c t e d
connection, c o n s t r u c t i o n d o c u m e n t s provide
direction to t he fabricator a n d erector. The
e l e m e n t s e x p r e s s e d on t he drawings will be
m o r e i m p o r t a n t to the final quality of the
design t h a n a n y calculation.
22
The d o c u m e n t a t i o n related to the RBS
c o n n e c t i o n s h o u l d be clear a n d concise, yet
provide e n o u g h detail for the fabricator to
properly i n c o r p o r a t e all the difficult a n d
i m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s of th e connection. The
information s h o u l d be s u c h t h a t a n y fabrica-
tor or erector c a n utilize the information pro-
vided, a n d c o n s t r u c t the final c o n n e c t i o n in
s u c h a m a n n e r t h a t the p e r f o r m a n c e will
directly correlate with the design intent.
I m p o r t a n t a s p e c t s of the design to be
i n c l u d e d in the d raw in g details are welding
details, RBS s h a p e a n d location, n o t e s
r e g a r d i n g grinding of the RBS after cutting,
s h e a r tab detail information a n d b e a m web to
c o l u m n flange c o n n e c t i o n details. It is rec-
o m m e n d e d to provide a set of n o tes specific
to th e RBS c o n n e c t i o n s , relating to welding
practices a n d c o n n e c t i o n c o n s t r u c t i o n proce-
d u r e s to help th e c o n t r a c t o r u n d e r s t a n d t h e
c o n n e c t i o n a n d th e i m p o r t a n c e it h a s on t h e
building s y s t e m p e r f o r m a n c e . Reference to
applicable portions of AWS D I.1 a n d other
AWS or AISC d o c u m e n t s s h o u l d be i n c l u d e d
in th es e n o tes to clearly state a level of
expected quality. This level of i n f o r m a t i o n
will also facilitate obtaining th e a p p r o p r i a t e
level of i n s p e c t i o n r e q u i r e d for this type of
connection.
7 Fabrication and I n s p e c t i o n
Issues
A n u m b e r of fab ricatio n a n d i n s p e c t i o n
i s s u e s are i m p o r t a n t to e n s u r e a well-con-
s t r u c t e d RBS connection. As d i s c u s s e d ear-
lier proper fabrication a n d erection of this
c o n n e c t i o n is a critical portion of th e sys-
t e m ' s p e r f o r m a n c e . If w e l d s are poorly
placed, the stress at w h i c h f r a c t u r e initiates
a n d p r o p a g a t e s is m u c h lower t h a n the
stress a t o u g h weld metal, placed with care,
c a n resist. Cu ttin g a n d grinding are critical
a s p e c t s of fabrication w h i c h m u s t be well
e x e c u t e d to p r o d u c e a high quality final con-
nection.
7.1 Cutting and Grinding
The c u t portion of both the c u r v e d RBS sec-
tion, as well as the p r e p a r a t i o n of th e e n d of
 DESIGN O F REDUCED BEAM SECTION (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
th e b e a m , n e e d s to be s m o o t h a n d free of
n o t c h e s . This s m o o t h n e s s is i m p o r t a n t for
r e a s o n s d i s c u s s e d earlier. Many fabrication
s h o p s have t he ability to m a k e virtually
n o t c h free t h e r m a l cuts. While this is a ben-
efit to r e d u c e t he n u m b e r of p e r p e n d i c u l a r
n o t c h e s , w h i c h m a y p r e s e n t stress risers,
small imperfections exist t h a t m a y affect con-
nection performance.
Therefore, it is i m p o r t a n t to clearly iden-
tify w h a t is the a d e q u a t e a m o u n t of m a t e r i a l
to remove (by grinding) from t he c u t surface.
FEMA 267A (1997) d i s c u s s e s a level of
a c c e p t a b l e surfa c e r o u g h n e s s value less t h a n
or equal to 1000 as defined in ANSI/ASME
B46.1. This level is difficult to d e t e r m i n e
w i t h o u t a significant a m o u n t of e q u i p m e n t
a n d expertise. Therefore, this d o c u m e n t rec-
o m m e n d s t h a t the t h e r m a l c u t s be g r o u n d
s m o o t h in the following m a n n e r : "It is impor-
t a n t t h a t t he p a t t e r n of a n y c u t s m a d e in the
flange be p r o p o r t i o n e d so as to avoid s h a r p
c u t corners. All c o m e r s s h o u l d be r o u n d e d to
minimize n o t c h effects a n d in addition, c u t
edges s h o u l d be c u t or g r o u n d to have a sur-
face r o u g h n e s s m e e t i n g t he r e q u i r e m e n t s of
AWS C4.1-77 class 4, or smoother."
The d e s i g n e r s h o u l d d i s c u s s the i n t e n t
with the fabricator a n d develop criteria for a n
a c c e p t a b l e m o c k - u p to be m a d e for r e f e r en ce
d u r i n g f a b r i c a t i o n i n s p e c t i o n s . The final
grinding t h a t t h e e n g i n e e r a n d fabricator
have agreed u p o n , s h o u l d be i n s p e c t e d by
the fabricator's r e p r e s e n t a t i v e as well as th e
owner's testing agency, to e n s u r e c o m p l i a n c e
with t he a c c e p t e d m o c k - u p .
M a n y b e a m s u s e d for SMF s y s t e m s are
large with t h i c k flanges a n d webs. S h e a r
p u n c h i n g holes in t h e s e t h i c k portions of th e
m e m b e r c oul d lead to localized d e l a m i n a t i o n
or tearing. In s i t u a t i o n s w h e r e hole diame-
ters are sma l l er t h a n t h e b a s e m a t e r i a l
t h i c k n e s s , t he d e s i g n e r m a y c o n s i d e r t h a t
holes r e q u i r e d for fabrication of e l e m e n t s a n d
portions of t he RBS b e a m be drilled r a t h e r
t h a n p u n c h e d . No r e s e a r c h r e s u l t s indicate
t h a t a r e d u c t i o n in c o n n e c t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e
is a t t r i b u t a b l e to p u n c h i n g holes in RBS
beams.
23
7.2 Welding
Welding is a very critical p a r t of th e proper
fabrication of this c o n n e c t i o n . A significant
a m o u n t of effort h a s b e e n m a d e to p r o d u c e a
beam with a r e d u c e d section modulus,
d e s i g n e d to y ield p r i o r to d e v e l o p i n g
m o m e n t s w h i c h deliver very high s t r e s s e s to
b e a m flange - c o l u m n flange welds. However,
if th e welding r e q u i r e d for this c o n n e c t i o n is
d o n e poorly, t h e s t r e s s at w h i c h brittle
behavior m a y o c c u r is m u c h lower t h a n t h e
e n g i n e e r expects. Good welds, u s i n g t o u g h
filler metal, will resist h i g h e r loads t h a n sur-
r o u n d i n g b a s e metal. Therefore, it is im p er a-
tive t h a t t h e w eld in g for this type of c o n n e c -
tion be of h i g h q u a l i t y , to p r o d u c e a
c o n n e c t i o n t h a t will p erfo rm as designed.
Any specific i s s u e s related to welds, s u c h
as weld profiles, s e q u e n c e , s u b m i t t a l of
m a t e r i a l s or certifications t h a t are consid-
ered i m p o r t a n t for c o m p l i a n c e of t h e fabrica-
tor's w o r k to m e e t t h e design intent, s h o u l d
be clearly s t a t e d in t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n docu-
m e n t s . I t e m s s u c h as p r e h e a t s h o u l d be
a d d r e s s e d in t h e project specifications a n d
c o n s t r u c t i o n d rawin g s . Typically, AWS will
a d e q u a t e l y a d d r e s s m o s t i s s u e s , a n d for n e w
d e s i g n will provide t h e f a b r i c a t o r a m p l e
direction to c o m p l e t e t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n in a
safe a n d h i g h quality m a n n e r .
The e n g i n e e r s h o u l d be clear in th e proj-
ect specifications a n d c o n s t r u c t i o n d r a w i n g s
t h a t filler m e t a l s sh all n o t be m i x e d in s u c h
a w a y as to p r o d u c e a CVN v alu e below t h a t
specified a n d r e q u i r e d for a single filler
metal. Most fabrication s h o p s p r e s e n t l y u s e
gas s h i e l d e d FCAW m e t h o d s for welds to
c o l u m n s a n d b e a m s . The erection crews,
especially w h e n w e l d i n g c o m p l e t e jo in t p en e-
t r a t i o n groove w e l d s , t y p i c a l l y u s e self
shielded FCAW. Also, t h e r e are different filler
m e t a l s u s e d for t h e flat position as well as
other positions. S o m e c o m b i n a t i o n s of filler
m e t a l s in th e s a m e j o i n t m a y p r o d u c e a com-
b in ed CVN value, w h i c h co u ld p r e s e n t "brit-
fie behavior". The e n g i n e e r s h o u l d carefully
review t h e i n f o r m a t i o n p r o v i d e d in "The
Effects of I n t e r m i x e d Weld Metal on M e c h a n -
ical Properties" (1998) a n d th e s u b m i t t e d
WPS prior to f a b r i c a t i o n to e n s u r e t h a t t h e
fabricator a n d erecto r are n o t c r e a t i n g a
 D E S I G N O F REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
potential problem by inappropriately mixing
filler metals.
P a r a m e t e r s should be set for quality con-
trol of shop welding a n d fabrication. The fab-
ricator m u s t have a n acceptable Quality Con-
trol (QC) procedure in place t h r o u g h o u t the
fabrication of the project. In addition, Quality
A s s u r a n c e m e a s u r e s s h o u l d be t a k e n to help
e n s u r e t h a t the QC procedure is being imple-
m e n t e d a n d followed. Typically QA or Verifi-
cation Inspection is provided by special
inspectors, hired by the owner. It is the
responsibility of the engineer to establish
inspection protocol, request a pre-fabrication
a n d pre-erection meeting, a n d i m p r e s s u p o n
the fabricator a n d erector the i m p o r t a n t
24
i s s u e s s u r r o u n d i n g the RBS c o n n e c t i o n
details a n d construction. Complete joint pen-
etration groove welds should be inspected by
a Level II qualified NDT inspector as defined
in the AWS D 1.1. Each joint should be ultra-
sonically tested a n d all welds associated with
the connection should receive c o n t i n u o u s
special inspection. Field inspection should be
sensitive to s u c h i s s u e s as weld preparation
a n d fit-up, weld profile a n d weld p a s s
sequence, b a c k - u p bar removal a n d grinding
of r u n - o f f tabs. The i n s p e c t o r s s h o u l d
develop a n acceptable protocol for inspection
a n d reports in regards to welding a n d con-
nection completion.
 D E S I G N OF REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS) MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
References Grubbs, K.V., "The Effect of the Dogbone
Connection on the Elastic Stiffness of
"AISC Initiates Research Into k Area Crack- Steel Moment Frames," M.S. Thesis,
ing," Modern Steel Construction, Vol. 37, Department of Civil Engineering, the Uni-
No. 9, September 1997, pp.23-24. versity of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas,
August 1997.

Blodgett, O., Funderburk, S., and Miller, D.,

"Fabricators' a n d Erectors' Guide to International Conference of Building Officials
Welded Steel Construction," The Lincoln (ICBO), The Uniform Building Code
(UBSC), April 1997.
Electric Company, Cleveland, 1997.

Chen, S.J., Yeh, C.H. and Chu, J.M, "Ductile
Steel Beam-to-Column Connections for
Seismic Resistance," Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 122, No. 11, November
1996, pp. 1292-1299.
Iwankiw, N., "Ultimate Strength Considera-
tions of Seismic Design of the Reduced
Beam Section (Internal Plastic Hinge),"
Engineering Journal, American Institute
of Steel Construction, Inc., Vol. 34, No. 1,
First Quarter 1997.

Engelhardt, M.D. and Husain, A.S., "Cyclic

Loading Performance Of Welded Flange - J o h n s o n , M., Quintana, M., '~The Effects of
Intermixed Weld Metal on Mechanical
Bolted Web Connections," Journal o f
Properties, Part III," Proceedings, Interna-
Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 119,
tional Conference on Welded Construc-
No. 12, December 1993.
tions in Seismic Areas, AWS, October
1998.
Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Z e k a n y ,
A.J. ,and Potyraj, T., ~The Dogbone Con-
Kaufmann, E., Xue, M., Lu, L., and Fisher,
nection: Part II." Modern Steel Construc-
J., "Achieving Ductile Behavior of
tion, August 1996.
Moment Connections," Modern Steel Con-
struction, Vol. 36, No. 1, American Insti-
Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany, tute of Steel Construction, J a n u a r y 1996.
A.J. ,and Potyraj, T., "Experimental Inves-
tigation of Dogbone Moment Connec-
Lee, K., Goel, S.C., Stojadinovic, B., "Bound-
tions," Proceedings: 1997 National Steel
ary Effects in Welded Steel Moment Con-
Construction Conference, American Insti-
nections," Research Report No. UMCEE
tute of Steel Construction, Chicago, May
97-20, December 1997.
1997.

Noel, S. N., "Reduced Beam Section Design

Engelhardt, M.D. and Sabol, T.A., "Reinforc-
for Seismic Retrofit of Steel Moment
ing of Steel Moment Connections with
Frame Connections," M.S. Thesis, Divi-
Cover Plates: Benefits and Limitations,"
sion of Structural Engineering, University
Engineering Structures, Vol. 20, No. 6, pp.
of California, San Diego, 1997.
510-520, 1998.

Plumier, A., "The Dogbone: Back to the

Gross, J., Engelhardt, M., Uang, C., Kasai,
Future," Engineering Journal, American
K., and Iwankiw, N., "Modification of
Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. 2nd
Existing Steel Welded Moment Frame
Quarter 1997.
Connections for Seismic Resistance,"
Steel Design Guide Series Twelve, Ameri-
can Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.,
Chicago, 1999.

25
 D E S I G N O F REDUCED B E A M S E C T I O N (RBS} MOMENT FRAME CONNECTIONS
Popov, E. and Stephen, R., "Cyclic Loading of
Full Size Steel Connections," Bulletin No.
21, American Iron and Steel Institute,
1972.
SAC Joint Venture, Background Reports on
Metallurgy, Fracture Mechanics, Welding,
Moment Connections and Frame Systems
Behavior, Published by the Federal Emer-
gency Management Agency, Report FEMA
288, 1996.
SAC Joint Venture, Interim Guidelines: Eval-
uation, Repair, Modification and Design of
Welded Steel Moment Frame Structures,
Published by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Report FEMA 267,
August 1995.
SAC Joint Venture, Interim Guidelines Advi-
sory No. 1 - Supplement to FEMA 267,
Published by the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Report FEMA 267A,
March 1997.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Build-
ings, American Institute of Steel Con-
struction, Inc., Chicago, April 15, 1997.
26
"Structural Welding Code - Steel," AWS D 1.1-
98, American Welding Society, Miami,
1998.
Tide, R., "Stability of Weld Metal Subjected to
Cyclic Static and Seismic Loading," Engi-
neering Structures, Vol. 20, Nos. 4-6,
April-June 1998.
Tsal, K.C. and Popov, E.P., "Steel Beam-Col-
u m n Joints In Seismic Moment Resisting
Frames", Report No. UCB/EERC - 88/19,
Earthquake Engineering Research Cen-
ter, University of California at Berkeley,
1988.
Yura, J.A., "Fundamentals of Beam Bracing,"
Proceedings, Structural Stability Research
Council Conference, "Is Your Structure
Suitably Braced?," 1993.
Zekioglu, A., Mozaffarian, H. and Uang, C.,
"Moment Frame Connection Development
and Testing for the City of Hope National
Medical Center," Proceedings; Structures
Congress XV, Portland, April 13-16, 1997,
American Society of Civil Engineers,
1997.
 APPENDIX A

Summary of Experiments on Reduced Beam Section Moment Connections for New Construction

Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details Op Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
Built-up W shape Built-up Box: SS-FCAW Bolted: Tapered cut 2.4 Fracture of beam
[1] YC-1 d=23.6", b~=l 1.8", 19.7"xl 9.7"x.79" E70T-7 7-7/8" A325 L1=2" flange initiating at weld
tf=0.79", tw=0.47" Lc = 87" No weld tabs used LRBS=I3.8" access hole
Lb=73" A572 Gr. 50 FR=20%
A36 steel Fy =56 ksi
Fy_f=40 ksi Fu =82 ksi
Fo.~=66 ksi
Fy.w=40 ksi
Fu.w=65 ksi
Tapered cut 2.9 Fracture of beam
[1] YC-2 L~=2" flange initiating at weld
LRBS=17.7" access hole
FR=25%
Tapered cut 4.1 Fracture of beam
[1] PC-1 L1=4.7" flange initiating at weld
LRBS=I5.7" access hole
FR=34%
Tapered cut 4.8 Fracture of beam
[1] PC-2 L1=4.7" flange initiating at weld
LRSS= 17.7" access hole
FR=42%
Tapered cut 3.8 Fracture of beam
[1] PC-3 L1=4.7" flange initiating at weld
LRss=I 7.7" access hole
FR=42%

I m~
Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details 0p Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
[2] DBT- W30x99 W14x176 SS-FCAW Bolted: Tapered cut 2.8 no failure; test stopped
1A-99- A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 E70TG-K2; 7-1" A325 L1=7.5" due to limitations in
176 L~= 138" Lc=168" backing bar removed LRBS=20.25'' test setup
Fy.w = 61.6 ksi Fy.w =55.6 ksi at bottom flange FR=45%
Fu.w = 82.8 ksi Fu.w =70.7 ksi
[2] DBT- W30x99 W14x176 Tapered cut 4.0 no failure; test stopped
1B-99- A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 L1=7.5" due to limitations in
176 Lb=138" Lc=168" LRBS=20.25" test setup
Fy.w = 51.5 ksi Fy.w =55.5 ksi FR=45%
Fu.w = 72.1 ksi Fu.w =71.8 ksi
[2] DBT- W36x150 W14x257 Bolted: Tapered cut 3.5 ' Fracture of beam top
2A-150- A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 9-1" A325 L1=9" flange near groove
257 Lb=138" Lc=168" LaBs=24" we d
F~.w = 60.2 ksi Fy.w =59.6 ksi FR=45%
Fu.w = 72.3 ksi Fu.w =75.2 ksi
[2] DBT- W36x150 W 14x257 Tapered cut 1.7 Fracture of beam top
2B-150- A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 L1=9" flange we d;
257 Lb=138" Lc=168" LRBS=24'' propagated to divot-
Fy.w = 62.9 ksi Fy.w =64.5 ksi FR=45% type fracture of
Fu.w = 83.1 ksi Fu.w =83.2 ksi column flange
[3,4] ARUP- W36x150 W 14x426 SS-FCAW welded Tapered cut 3.5 Flange fracture at
1 A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 E70TG-K2 (heavy shear L1=9" minimum section of
Lb=132" Lc=136" backing bar left in tab groove LABS=24" RBS
Fy.f =55.5 ksi place w/seal weld at welded to FR=44%
Fu4 =73 ksi top flange; column and top & bottom
Fy.w=62.5 ksi backing bar removed fillet welded flanges
Fu-w=77 ksi at bottom flange to beam reinforced with
web) vertical ribs
[3,4] COH-1 W27x178 W 14x455 Tapered cut 3.5
A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 L~=7"
Lb= 132" Lc=136" LABS=20"
Fy.f =44 ksi Fy.f =55 ksi FR=38%
Fu.f =62 ksi Fu4=84 ksi top & bottom
Fy.w=46 ksi Fy.w=54 ksi flanges
Fu-w=62 ksi Fu-w=86 ksi reinforced with
vertical ribs

A-2
Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details Gp Comments
Connection and Other (O/o)
Flange
Modifications
[3,4] COH-2 3.8
(~ = ~

[3,4] COH-3 W33x152 Wl 4x455 Tapered cut 3.2

A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 L1=9"
Lb=132" Lc=136" LRBS=26"
Fy.f=57.6 ksi Fy.f=55 ksi FR=43%
Fu.f=78.5 ksi Fu.f=84 ksi top & bottom
Fy.w=62 ksi Fyow=54 ksi flanges
Fu-w=84.5 ksi Fu-w=86 ks i reinforced with
Beam connected to vertical side
column web plates
[3,4] COH-4 4.0
~ =~

[3,4] COH-5 W33x152 1.8

|~
A572 Gr. 50
Lb=132"
F~4=62.8 ksi
Fu.f=86 ksi
F~.w=69.1 ksi
Fu.w=93.7 ksi
DB1 W36x160 Wl 4x426 SS-FCAW welded Constant cut 2.0 Flange fracture at
[5,6] L~=134" A572 Gr. 50 E71T-8 (beam web L1=9" RBS
Fy.f=54.7 ksi Lc=136" backing bar left in groove LRBS=I9.5"
Fu4=75.6 ksi place w/seal weld at welded to FR=40%
Fy.w=53.5 ksi top flange; column)
Fu-w=79.2 ksi backing bar removed
at bottom flange
[5,6] DB2 W36x150 W 14x426 Radius cut 3.0 Testing stopped due"
Lb=134" A572 Gr. 50 L1=9" to limitations of test
Fy.f=41.4 ksi Lc=136" L~Bs=27" setup
Fu4=58.7 ksi Fy.f=50 ksi FR=40%
Fy.w=47.1 ksi Fu4=74.5 ksi
Fu-w=61.8 ksi Fy.w=50 ksi
Fu.w=75 ksi

A-3
Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details ~p Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
[5,6] DB3 W36x170 W 14x426 Radius cut 3.8
L~=134" A572 Gr. 50 L1=9"
Fy.f =58 ksi Lc=136" LRBS=27''
Fu.f=73 ksi FR=40%
Fy,w=58.5 ksi
Fu.w=76.7 ksi
[5,6] DB4 W36x194 W 14x426 Radius cut 3.7
Lb=134" A572 Gr. 50 L1=9"
Fy.f =38.5 ksi Lc=136" LRBS=27"
Fu4 =58.6 ksi Fy4=50 ksi FR=38%
Fy,w=43.6 ksi Fu4 =74.5 ksi
Fu.w=59.8 ksi Fy,w=50 ksi
Fu.w=75 ksi
[5,6] DB5 W30x148 W 14x257 Radius cut 4.0 Testing stopped due
Lb=134" A572 Gr. 50 L1=5" to limitations of test
Fy.f =46.6 ksi Lc=136" LRas=25" setup; significant
Fu.f =64.5 ksi Fy.f =48.7 ksi FR=38% column panel zone
Fy.w=48.5 ksi Fu.f=69 ksi yielding
Fu.w=65.4 ksi Fy.w=49.4 ksi
Fu.w=66.2 ksi
[7] DB1 W36x135 W 14x257 SS-FCAW Not Radius cut 3.0 Testing stopped due
A36 Steel with 1-5/16" thk. E71T-8 Available L1=8" to limitations of test
Lb=134.5" cover plates (details of backing LRBS=28'' setup
(cover plates welded and weld tabs not FR=40%
across flanges of available)
W14x257 to form
box)
A572 Gr, 50
L~=132"

A-4
Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details 0p Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
[8] S-1 W530x82 (Canadian W 14x 120 SS-FCAW Bolted: Radius cut 9.0 Specimen loaded
Designation) A572 Gr. 50 E71T-8 5-1" A325 L1=4.7" monotonically; testing
d=20.8", bf=8.2", Lc=120" backing bar left in LRss=l 5.7" stopped due to
tf=0.52", tw=0.37" place w/seal weld at FR=55% limitations of test
wt.=54 Ib/ft. top flange; setup
Lb=142" backing bar removed
CSA G40.41-350W at bottom flange
steel
Fy.f =52.4 ksi
Fo.f=76.6 ksi
Fy.w=57.5 ksi
Fu.w=81 ksi
[8] (~
S-2A 3.6 Testing stopped due
to limitations of test
setup
[8] SC-1 3.4 Composite slab
included (6); testing
stopped due to
limitations of test
setup
[8] S-3 note statically applied
(8) simulated earthquake
loading (7); testing
stopped due to
reaching end of
simulated earthquake
loading; no connection
failure
[8] S-4 note dynamically applied
(9) simulated earthquake
loading (7); testing
stopped due to
reaching end of
simulated earthquake
loading; no connection
failure

A-5
Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details 0p Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
[8] SC-2 Note Composite slab
(9) included (6);
dynamically applied
simulated earthquake
loading (6); testing
stopped due to
reaching end of
simulated earthquake
loading; no connection
failure
[11] LS-1 W30x99 W14x176 SS-FCAW welded Radius cut 4.0 No connection failure
A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 E70T-6 (Beam web L1 = 7"
Lb = 141" Lc = 150" backing bar left in groove LaBs = 20"
Fy.f = 54.0 ksi Fy.f= 55.5 ksi place w/seal weld at welded to FR = 50%
Fu4= 71.9 ksi Fu4 = 74.0 ksi top flange; column)
Fy.w= 58.0 ksi Fy.w= 54.0 ksi backing bar removed
Fu.w= 74.8 ksi Fu.w= 73.1 ksi at bottom flange
(~
[11] LS-2 ~

+1.0 note (12)

/-5.0
[11] LS-3 -1.0/ note (12)
+5.0

[11] LS-4 4.0 No connection failure;

testing stopped due to
limitations of test
setup
[12] DBBW W36x150 W 14x398 SS-FCAW Bolted: Radius cut 4.0 No connection failure;
Beam 1 A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 E70T-6 10 - 1" A490 L1 = 9" test stopped due to
Lb = 141" Lc = 146" backing bar left in LaBS = 27" limitations of test
Fy.f = 54.3 ksi Fy = 53.0 ksi place w/seal weld at FR = 50% setup;
Fo.f = 68.8 ksi Fu = 73.0 ksi top flange;
Fy.w= 59.4 ksi (based on CMTR) backing bar removed see note (13)
Fu.w= 72.0 ksi at bottom flange
.
[12] DBBW 4.0

Beam 2
m

A-6
Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details Op Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
[12] DBBW- 5.0 Low cycle fatigue
C fracture in RBS;

Beam 1 see note (14)

[12] DBBW- 3.8 Fracture of bottom
C beam flange adjacent
to groove weld;
Beam 2 fracture initiated at
weld access hole;

see note (14)

[13] DBWW W36x150 W 14x398 SS-FCAW welded 3.5 No connection failure;
A572 Gr. 50 A572 Gr. 50 E70T-6 (Beam web test stopped due to
Beam 1 Lb= 141" Lc = 144" backing bar left in groove limitations of test
Fy.f= 54.3 ksi Fv = 53.0 ksi place w/seal weld at welded to setup
Fu.f = 68.8 ksi Fu = 73.0 ksi top flange; column)
Fy.w= 59.4 ksi (based on CMTR) backing bar removed see note (13)
Fu.w= 72.0 ksi at bottom flange
((
[13] DBWW 3.5

Beam 2
[13] DBWW 5.0 Low cycle fatigue
-C fracture in RBS

Beam 1 see note (14)

[13] DBWW 5.0 Low cycle fatigue
-C fracture in RBS

Beam 2

A-7
 Ref Spec. Beam Column Flange Welds Web RBS Details ~p Comments
Connection and Other (%)
Flange
Modifications
[14] WG-1 W33x201 W14x311 SS-FCAW Bolted: Radius cut 2.9 fracture of RBS at
A572 Gr. 50 A913 Gr. 65 E70TG-K2; 13-1" A490 L1 = 9.3" local buckle in RBS
Lb = 160.5" Lc = 152" backing bar removed LRBS = 25"
F~.f= 52.0 ksi Fy.f = 69.0 ksi at bottom flange FR = 54% see note (15)
Fu-f = 72.8 ksi Fu4 = 88.3 ksi
Fy.w= 51.5 ksi Fy-w= 68.0 ksi
Fu-w= 68.0 ksi F..w= 86.5 ksi
5/8" doubler plates
(A572 Gr. 50)
provided on each
side of column web
[14] WG-2 2.9 No connection failure;
test stopped due to
limitations of test
setup
1~
[14] WG-3 W36x300 W14x550 Bolted: Radius cut 3.5
A572 Gr. 50 A913 Gr. 65 20 - 1" A490 L1 = 10"
Lb = 159" Lc = 152" (2 rows of 10 Lass = 27"
F~.f = 56.0 ksi Fy.f = 67.0 ksi bolts each) FR = 51%
Fu4 = 72.9 ksi Fu4= 86.8 ksi
Fy.w= 56.7 ksi Fy.w= 68.1 ksi
Fu.w= 74.5 ksi Fu.w= 87.6 ksi
[14j WG-4 " " 4.5 "

Notes:
1. All specimens are single cantilever type, except DBBW, DBBW-C, DBWW, and DBWW-C
2. All specimens are bare steel, except SC-1, SC-2, DBBW-C and DBWW-C
3. All specimens subject to quasi static cyclic loading, with ATC-24, SAC or similar loading protocol, except S-1, S-3, So4, SC-2, LS-2 and LS-3
4. All specimens provided with continuity plates at beam-to-column connection, except Popov Specimen DB1 (Popov Specimen DB1 was provided with
external flange plates welded to column).
5. Specimens ARUP-1, COH-1 to COH-5, S-1, S-2A, S-3, S-4, SC-1, SC-2 and LS-4 provided with lateral brace near loading point and an additional
lateral brace near RBS; all other specimens provided with lateral brace at loading point only.
6. Composite slab details for Specimens SC-2 and SC-2:118" wide floor slab; 3" ribbed deck (ribs perpendicular to beam) with 2.5" ~oncrete cover;
normal wt. concrete; welded wire mesh reinforcement; 3.4"dia. shear studs spaced at 24" (one stud in every other rib); first stud located at 29" from
face of column; 1" gap left between face of column and slab to minimize composite action.

A-8
7. SpecimensS-3, S-4 and SC-2 were subjectedto simulatedearthquakeloadingbased on N10E horizontalcomponentof the Llolleo recordfrom the
1985 Chile Earthquake.For SpecimenS-3, simulatedloadingwas appliedstatically.For SpecimenS-4 and SC-2; simulatedloadingwas applied
dynamically,and repeatedthree times.
8. SpecimenS-3: Connectionsustainedstatic simulatedearthquakeloadingwithoutfailure. Maximumplastic rotationdemandon specimenwas
approximately2%.
9. SpecimensS-4 and SC-2: Connectionsustaineddynamicsimulatedearthquakeloadingwithoutfailure. Maximumplastic rotationdemandon
specimenwas approximately2%.
10. Tests conductedby Plumiernot includedin Table. Specimensconsistedof HE 260A beams (equivalentto W10x49)and HE 300B columns
(equivalentto W12x79).All specimenswere providedwith constantcut RBS. Beams attachedto columnsusing fillet welds on beam flanges and web,
or using a bolted end plate. Detailsavailablein Refs. 9 and 10.
11. Shakingtable tests were conductedby Chen, Yeh and Chu [1] on a 0.4 scale single story momentframe with RBS connections.Frame sustained
numerousearthquakerecordswithoutfractureat beam-to-columnconnections.
12. SpecimensLS-2 and LS-3 were tested using near field loadingprotocol.The specimenwas subjectedto peak pulsescorrespondingto 6% story drift
ratio. Loadingwas repeatedsix times for LS-2 and four times for LS-3. The specimenseventuallyfailed due to low cycle fatiguefractureat the
narrowestsectionin the RBS.
13. SpecimensDBBW and DBWW were cruciformt~,pespecimenswith beams attachedto each columnflange.
14. SpecimensDBBW-Cand DBWW-Cwere cruciformtype specimenswith compositefloor slab. Compositeslab details:
96" wide slab; 2" ribbed metal deck (ribs parallelto beam) with 3.5" toppingof normalweightconcrete;concretecompressivestrengthat time of
testing = 3600 psi for DBBW-Cand 6800 psi for DBWW-C;slab reinforcedwith #4 Gr. 60 bars in each direction;3.4"dia. shearstuds spacedat 12";
first stud locatedat 36" from face of column (at end of RBS).
15. SpecimensWG-1 to WG-4: Test report providedslightlyconflictingdata on locationalong length of beam wheredisplacementwas measured.Values
of plastic rotationreportedabove are basedon an estimatedlocationfor displacementmeasurements.

A-9
Notation:
Fy.f = flangeyield stress from coupontests
Fu_f = flange ultimate stress from coupontests
Fy_w = web yield stress from coupontests
Fu-w = web ultimate stress from coupontests
Lb = Lengthof beam, measuredfrom load application point to face of column
Lo = Lengthof column
L~ = distancefrom face of columnto start of RBS cut
EBBS = length of RBS cut
FR = Flange Reduction= (area of flange removed/originalflange area) xl00
(FlangeReductionreportedat narrowestsectionof RBS)
ep = Maximumplastic rotation developedfor at least one full cycle of loading, measuredwith respectto the face of the column (basedon occurrence
of fractureor based on end of loading)

References:
[1] Chen, S.J., Yeh, C.H. and Chu, J.M, "DuctileSteel Beam-to-ColumnConnectionsfor SeismicResistance,"Journalof Structural Engineering, Vol.
122, No. 11, November 1996, pp. 1292-1299.
[2] Iwankiw, N.R., and Carter, C., "The Dogbone: A New Idea to Chew On," Modern Steel Construction, April 1996.
[3] Zekioglu, A., Mozaffarian, H., and Uang, C.M., "Moment Frame Connection Development and Testing for the City of Hope National Medical Center,"
Building to Last- Proceedings of Structures Congress XV, ASCE, Portland, April 1997.
[4] Zekioglu, A., Mozaffarian, H., Chang, K.L., Uang, C.M. and Noel, S., "Designing After Northridge," Modem Steel Construction, March 1997.
[5] Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany, A.J. and Potyraj, T.J., "Experimental Investigation of Dogbone Moment Connections," Proceedings; 1997
National Steel Construction Conference, American Institute of Steel Construction, May 7-9, 1997, Chicago.
[6] Engelhardt, M.D., Winneberger, T., Zekany, A.J. and Potyraj, T.J., "The Dogbone Connection, Part II, Modem Steel Construction, August 1996.
[7] Popov, E.P., Yang, T.S. and Chang, S.P., "Design of Steel MRF Connections Before and After 1994 Northridge Earthquake," International
Conference on Advances in Steel Structures, Hong Kong, December 11-14, 1996. Also in: Engineering Structures, 20(12), 1030-1038, 1998.
[8] Tremblay, R., Tchebotarev, N. and Filiatrault, A., "Seismic Performance of RBS Connections for Steel Moment Resisting Frames: Influence of
Loading Rate and Floor Slab," Proceedings, Stessa '97, August 4-7, 1997, Kyoto, Japan.
[9] Plumier, A., "New Idea for Safe Structures in Seismic Zones," IABSE Symposium - Mixed Structures Including New Materials, Brussels, 1990.
[10] Plumier, A., "The Dogbone: Back to the Future," Engineering Journal, American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. 2nd Quarter 1997.
[11] Uang, C.M., Unpublished preliminary test reports for SAC Phase 2 RBS tests, University of California at San Diego, December 1998 and February
1999.
[12] Engelhardt, M.D. and Venti, M., Unpublished preliminary test reports for SAC Phase 2 tests, University of Texas at Austin, 1999. "
[13] Fry, G., Unpublished preliminary test reports for SAC Phase 2 tests, Texas A & M University, 1999.
[14] Unpublished report of connection proof tests for building construction project in southern California; project title withheld at request of building owner,
January, 1999.

A-10
 STRUCTURAL STEEL EDUCATIONAL COUNCIL
470 Fernwood Drive
Moraga, CA 94556
(925) 631-9570

SPONSORS

Adams & Smith Hoertig Iron Works PDM Strocal, Inc.

Allied Steel Co., Inc. Hogan Mfg., Inc. Reno Iron Works

Bannister Steel, Inc. Junior Steel Co. H.H. Robertson Co.

Baresel Corp. Lee & Daniel SME Industries

Bethlehem Steel Corporation McLean Steel, Inc. Southland Iron Works

C.A. Buchen Corporation Martin Iron Works, Inc. Stockton Steel

Butler Manufacturing Co. MidWest Steel Erection Verco Manufacturing, Inc.

G.M. Iron Works Co. Nelson Stud Welding Co. Vulcraft Sales Corp.

The Herrick Corporation Oregon Steel Mills

The local structural steel industry (above sponsors) stands ready to assist you in determining the most
economical solution for your products. Our assistance can range from budget prices and estimated tonnage
to cost comparisons, fabrication details and delivery schedules.

Funding for this publication provided by the California Iron Workers Administrative Trust.