Modern

STEEL CONSTRUCTION

April 2018
More than 187,500 holes.

80-foot long railroad girder with

bolt holes drilled zero to 80 feet
within 1/32-inch. Bottom flange of girder.

Capacity. Precision. Efficiency.

We’re not afraid of the really big or really complex jobs. In fact,
we love them! That’s because we have highly skilled people
operating the very best equipment. Some are one-of-a-kind.

• Advanced Major Steel Bridge Fabrication

Certification with fracture critical & sophisticated
• Structural Steel Fabrication
paint endorsements
• Steel Plate & Sheet Metal
• The American Railway Engineering & Maintenance- Fabrication
• Miscellaneous Metals
of-Way Association (AREMA) Certification • Machining
• 140-ton lifting capacity with 31-foot hook height • Rolling & Forming Services
• Cutting Services
• High-definition plasma cutting with drilling & • Industrial Coatings
contour beveling capabilities • Industrial & Electrical Contracting
• Crane Rental & Trucking Services
• Heat-Bending Services
Call us at 800-782-2110 for a free quote. (Certified Bridge Fabricator –
Advanced)
www.greinerindustries.com
 April 2018
44

in every issue
departments
6 EDITOR’S NOTE
9 STEEL INTERCHANGE
12 STEEL QUIZ
62 NEWS
66 STRUCTURALLY
SOUND
resources
65 MARKETPLACE
& EMPLOYMENT

features columns
conference preview conference preview steelwise
28 Road to Recovery 44 BIM for Bridges and Structures 16 Are You Properly
BY HUSSAM MAHMOUD, PHD, AND PATRICK BY AARON COSTIN, PHD, AND JASON Specifying Materials?
MCMANUS, SE, PE, PHD STITH, SE, PE, PHD BY JONATHAN TAVAREZ
A look at resilience in steel buildings subjected to Bridging the information exchange chasm. As material specifications
earthquakes or other hazards. change and improve, so too can

conference preview
48 Balanced Design
BY ERIN SPAULDING
your steel-framed buildings.

business
32 Sturdy Spine A Seattle office building incorporates
castellated beams to balance high-seismic
BY BARBARA G. SIMPSON
Developing a design methodology for steel needs with green objectives.
26 Integrating Hygge
at Work
strongback braced frames. BY ANNE SCARLETT
conference preview
54 Seismic Matters
BY LARRY S. MUIR, PE
Try giving a warm welcome
to the Danish take on
A closer look at seismic design with AISC’s
36 Steel Specifications… Untangled!
BY JON BEIER, PE Steel Solutions Center.
contentment and coziness.

Project specifications for steel can help keep designs

grounded in reality while also serving as a guide. 61 Standing Safe and Strong
BY TOM SCHLAFLY
conference preview The upcoming Safety Stand-Down
provides a great opportunity to bring the
40 A Big Connection Between Small Towns
BY GREG HASBROUCK, PE topic of safety to the forefront and ensure
A new bridge between Iowa and Illinois signals another that it continues to be properly addressed
success for structural steel over the Mississippi River. year-round.

ON THE COVER:
A refreshing take on the typical midsize office building in Seattle’s very own center of the universe, p. 48. (Photo: Ryan Furth, Lewis Builders)

MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION (Volume 58, Number 4) ISSN (print) 0026-8445: ISSN (online) 1945-0737. Published monthly by the American Institute of
Steel Construction (AISC), 130 E Randolph Street, Suite 2000, Chicago, IL 60601. Subscriptions: Within the U.S.—single issues $6.00; 1 year, $44. Outside the
U.S. (Canada and Mexico)—single issues $9.00; 1 year $88. Periodicals postage paid at Chicago, IL and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Please send
address changes to MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION, 130 E Randolph Street, Suite 2000, Chicago, IL 60601.
DISCLAIMER: AISC does not approve, disapprove, or guarantee the validity or accuracy of any data, claim, or opinion appearing under a byline or obtained or
quoted from an acknowledged source. Opinions are those of the writers and AISC is not responsible for any statement made or opinions expressed in MODERN
STEEL CONSTRUCTION. All rights reserved. Materials may not be reproduced without written permission, except for noncommercial educational purposes
Printed on paper made
where fewer than 25 photocopies are being reproduced. The AISC and Modern Steel logos are registered trademarks of AISC. from a minimum of
10% recycled content.
4 APRIL 2018
 FICEP Innovates a
New Production Angle for the
Integrated Fabrication of Angles

See us at
NASCC 2018
Booth #1814

FICEP’s engineering team has once again pushed the envelope to introduce a new series of angle drill
lines that are as productive as many competitive angle punch lines. This extremely productive system
features high performance "Direct Drive" drill spindles for carbide tools. Each has a 6 position,
automatic tool changer with sub axis positioning (so both spindles are drilling even when the holes in
both legs are not in alignment). Typical connection angle productivity averages 20 holes per minute!
FICEP’s unique innovative features
• Sub axis positioning for processing holes in both legs simultaneously
• 6 position automatic tool changer
• Rack and pinion material positioning for
industry leading accuracy
• Automatic hole de-burring
• Heel and slot milling
• Programmable part marking
• Programmable notching
• No minimum gage line limitations
• Shearing or carbide sawing to length

When you need to tackle angle iron fabrication challenges, no firm offers more
diverse, productive and comprehensive solutions than FICEP. Let us show you
how we can drastically reduce your man hours per ton!

YYYƂEGREQTREQO
FICEP Corporation | 2301 Industry Court l Forest Hill, Maryland 21050 | (410) 588-5800 Fax (410) 588-5900
 editor’s note
Editorial Offices
130 E Randolph Street, Suite 2000
Chicago, IL 60601
312.670.2400
Editorial Contacts
EDITOR AND PUBLISHER
Scott Melnick
312.670.8314
melnick@modernsteel.com
SENIOR EDITOR
Geoff Weisenberger
312.670.8316
weisenberger@modernsteel.com
ASSISTANT EDITOR
Tasha O’Berski
312.670.5439
oberski@modernsteel.com
DIRECTOR OF PUBLICATIONS
Keith A. Grubb, SE, PE
IS MY DAUGHTER A MILLENNIAL? complain about their kids’ taste in music, 312.670.8318
grubb@modernsteel.com
Well, she certainly came of age in the fashion and haircuts?
PRODUCTION COORDINATOR
early years of the new millennium. But Countless business articles have been Erika Salisbury
she is the furthest thing possible from written about how older managers need 312.670.5427
salisbury@modernsteel.com
the stereotype of someone who is lazy, to adapt their management style to GRAPHIC DESIGN MANAGER
narcissistic and prone to jump from job accommodate this new generation. But is Kristin Hall
to job (as Time magazine defined the that really true? 312.670.8313
hall@modernsteel.com
entire generation back in 2013). Rather, Yes, society has become more casual,
AISC Officers
she’s a studious, successful, hardworking and as a result, so too has the workplace. CHAIR
young woman with a lot of close friends, However, it’s just as likely that a casual David Zalesne
and someone who volunteers for several workplace is desired by a 57-year-old VICE CHAIR
Jack Klimp
organizations and charities. manager who favors jeans while the
SECRETARY/GENERAL COUNSEL
And I don’t think she’s simply an outlier. 21-year old recent hire loves to dress David B. Ratterman
When I look around at the young people I more stylishly. PRESIDENT
see on a daily basis, they run the gamut. But whether you’re dealing with a Charles J. Carter, SE, PE, PhD
SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT
Some go through the day with a look of 70-year-old or a 30-year-old, don’t the Scott Melnick
bewilderment on their face while others same principles hold true? Shouldn’t VICE PRESIDENT
are driven towards action and success. you treat everyone with respect John Cross, PE
Some are very involved in social issues and politeness? Shouldn’t you help VICE PRESIDENT
Lawrence F. Kruth, PE
and some are more interested in the every employee and colleague reach
VICE PRESIDENT
latest fashions. When I look at my two their potential, to grow both in their Tabitha S. Stine, SE, PE
sons, they’re almost complete opposites professional and personal lives? VICE PRESIDENT
of each other. One is purely cerebral, the As Quiggin points out, “Much of the Mark W. Trimble, PE

other wants to hang out and play soccer or
hockey with his friends.
In a March 6 article in the New York
Times, John Quiggin pointed out that the
same stereotypes that we often apply to
apparent distinctiveness of the millennial
generation disappears when we look at
individuals rather than aggregates.”
When you look at your employees
and coworkers, don’t simply lump them
Editorial Advisory Panel
Caroline R. Bennett, PE, PhD,
University of Kansas
Keith R. Griesing, PE,
Hardesty and Hanover
Steve Knitter, Geiger and Peters

millennials (“they’ve been derided as lazy into some meaningless demographic Janice Mochizuki, PE, Arup
Dylan Olson, Olson Steel
and narcissistic or defended as creative category. Just as I treat my three kids as
and committed to social change”) are the individuals, we need to treat the people Advertising Contact
ACCOUNT MANAGER
same characteristics that older generations with whom we interact as individuals and Renae Gurthet
always prescribe for younger generations. maybe even embrace the concept of 231.995.0637
renae@gurthetmedia.com
Isn’t it a running joke that parents always hygge (see page 26).
Address Changes and
Subscription Concerns
312.670.2400
subscriptions@aisc.org

SCOTT MELNICK Reprints

Erika Salisbury
EDITOR 312.670.5427
salisbury@modernsteel.com

6 APRIL 2018
EXPERIENCE THE
VALUE OF

The SDS/2 suite of software

products are built to provide
value and save time for the
steel detailer during every phase
of a project.

SDS/2’s automation — in everything

from connection design to clean,
accurate drawings — reduces the time
UHTXLUHGWRȴQLVKHDFKDQGHYHU\MRERQ
time — and under budget.

Put simply, our core strengths of connection

design calculations and detailing can help
improve your bottom line.
Welcome to the New
Visit our website to learn more
about how SDS/2 is the software
solution for steel detailers.
1-800-443-0782 | sds2.com
(800) 475–2077 A subsidiary of MiTek, a Berkshire Hathaway Company
(949) 238–8900 © 2017 SidePlate, All Rights Reserved.
 If you’ve ever asked yourself “Why?” about something
related to structural steel design or construction,
Modern Steel’s monthly Steel Interchange is for you!
steel
Send your questions or comments to solutions@aisc.org. interchange
Note: Unless specifically noted, all AISC publications mentioned in for the single-brace condition, and this case might be viewed
the questions and/or answers are independent of the edition and can as a lower-bound estimate.
be found at www.aisc.org/publications. To avoid controversy and for my own peace of mind, I
would either add bolts or increase the bolt spacing at the gus-
Gusset-to-Column set-to-column connection such that more of the gusset is sup-
Connection and Line- ported and therefore more consistent with the typical buckling
of-Action Buckling checks. Ultimately, you must use your own judgment.
We are reviewing a connec- Larry S. Muir, PE
tion similar to what is shown Alternative Design Procedures
in Figure 1. We have con- In Part 10 of the AISC Steel Construction Manual, the
cerns about the stability of discussion of the extended configuration of the single-
the gusset. Is there a limit plate shear connection states: “The design procedure for
on the length of the free extended single-plate shear connections permits the col-
edge of the gusset at the umn to be designed for an axial force without eccentricity.
gusset-to-column portion of In some cases, economy may be gained by considering
a vertical brace connection alternative design procedures that allow the transfer of
(labeled a in Figure 1)? some moment into the column…”
Based on this statement,
There is no explicit limit on the free length of the gusset we have assumed a pin located
shown in Figure 1; this arrangement is not prohibited. We half the width of the column
have seen a significant number of similar details recently. Pre- flange plus 3 in. from the col-
sumably, the gusset-to-column connection is set high on the umn’s centerline indicated by
gusset in an attempt to reduce the couple, Hc , that resists the the red target superimposed
moment caused by the vertical component of the brace force, on the figure from the Man-
which is delivered eccentric to the column centerline. While ual (shown here as Figure 2).
this practice will tend to reduce the couple, it also may raise We have designed both the
other concerns. The checks used to determine the available beam and the column consis-
buckling strength of the gusset must consider the restraint tent with this assumption.
provided at the connection. The beams have been
AISC Design Guide 29: Vertical Bracing Connections—Analysis designed assuming a span
and Design and the Commentary to the Specification for Struc- between the assumed pins
tural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360) both recommend proce- (span = Lcen-to-cen – 2(bf /2 + 3
dures developed by Bo Dowswell (see “Effective Length Factors in.). The columns have been
for Gusset Plate Buckling” in the second quarter 2006 issue designed as beam-columns
of AISC’s Engineering Journal) and illustrated in the Design accounting for the eccentricity
Guide. Historically, the effective length factor, K, has often been (shown as a and e in Figure 2).
assumed to be 0.50. Both of these models assume significant We have also delegated
restraint at the gusset-to-column and gusset-to-beam interfaces. connection design—Option 3
Table C-A-7.1 of the Commentary to the Specification indicates in Section 3.1.1 of the Code
that 0.5 corresponds to the theoretical effective length factor, K, of Standard Practice for Steel
when both ends of the column are fixed against both rotation Buildings and Bridges (ANSI/
and translation. AISC 303)—specifying that
When the gusset-to-column connection is short relative extended single-plate shear
to the height of the gusset and/or located away from the cor- connections were to be used at
ner of the gusset, the typical assumptions related to effective all beam-to-column web con-
length should be reconsidered. I am not aware of a published ditions. The fabricator has designed the extended single-
guideline, but in practice I tended to limit the free length plate shear connections using the procedure in Part 10 of
to about 6 in. I am not aware of a document that provides the Manual. We are concerned that the beams, columns
guidance related to an appropriate effective length factor for and connections are designed using incompatible models.
conditions with large unsupported edges near the column. Is our concern valid? What could be done to avoid this
Dowswell recommends an effective length factor equal to 0.7 problem in the future?

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 9

 steel interchange
I believe your concern may be valid. The Manual does not
present of free-body diagram or directly describe the model
assumed. However, it does indirectly describe the assumed
distribution of moment in the connection. It states: “Deter-
mine the bolt group required… with eccentricity, e, where
e is defined as the distance from the support to the centroid
of the bolt group.” It also states: “The design procedure for
extended single-plate shear connections permits the column
to be designed for an axial force without eccentricity.” In addi-
tion, near the beginning of Part 10, the assumed (or typical)
model is also described: “…the ends of members with simple
shear connections are normally assumed to be free to rotate
under load. While simple shear connections do actually pos-
sess some rotational restraint (see curve A in Figure 10-1), this
small amount can be neglected and the connection idealized
as completely flexible. The simple shear connections shown
in this Manual are suitable to accommodate the end rotations
required per AISC Specification Section J1.2.” In my experi-
ence, this is the model commonly assumed in the design of
beam-to-column simple shear connections.
The issue here seems to be that the beams were not
designed as simply supported beams, which would result in the
moment diagram in Figure 3 (1). Instead, they were designed
as beams, which though not exactly typical fixed-end beams,
were subject to some flexural restraint at their ends resulting
in the moment diagram in Figure3 (2).
When connection design is delegated, the owner’s desig-
nated representative for design—generally the engineer of
record (EOR)—must provide any restrictions on the types of
connections that are permitted and data concerning the loads
sufficient to allow the selection, completion or design of the
connection details. Though the physical end of the supplied
wide-flange section falls somewhere between points A and
B in Figure 3, the end of the beam (the horizontal member
supporting the floor) in the model extends to point A, where
a moment exists in the bottom diagram (2). This moment,
along with the shear, should have been reported in the con-
tract documents.
Though simply reporting the moment may not have been
sufficient to convey the design intent, it would have likely
prompted questions from the engineer designing the connec-
tions. A better approach would have been to provide more
detailed information about your intent—perhaps including
a free-body diagram of the connection plate in addition to
the end reactions—since you were employing an alterna-
tive design procedure. In my experience, this sort of detailed
design guidance is often provided when delegating the design
of the steel elements of embed connections to concrete.
Though there was a miscommunication here, it is good to
see that the problem has been caught. The Code requires the
fabricator to “submit in a timely manner representative sam-
10 APRIL 2018
ples of the required substantiating connection information” to
the engineer. It requires the engineer to “confirm in writing in
a timely manner that these representative samples are consis-
tent with the requirements in the contract documents” or to
“advise what modifications are required to bring the represen-
tative samples into compliance with the requirements in the
contract documents.” This is required to catch such issues so
that they can be resolved between the EOR and the delegated
connection design engineer.
I assume that you have adopted the model based on the
idea that delivering a moment to the column will result in a
more economical structure or will help you satisfy project-
specific requirements. There are arguments that can be made
to support this position. By reducing the demand on the beam,
it may be possible to provide lighter or shallower beams. The
model will also tend to reduce the number of bolts that must
be field installed. However, in order to deliver the moment to
the column, you will likely also need to provide stiffeners at
the top and bottom of the single plate (rendering it no longer
a single-plate connection). The benefits described above may
be offset to some extent by the cost associated with the stiffen-
ers. Providing the stiffeners increases the fabrication costs but
may reduce the erection costs.
Larry S. Muir, PE
The complete collection of Steel Interchange questions and answers is available online.
Find questions and answers related to just about any topic by using our full-text search
capability. Visit Steel Interchange online at www.modernsteel.com.
Larry Muir is AISC's director of technical assistance.
Steel Interchange is a forum to exchange useful and practical professional ideas and
information on all phases of steel building and bridge construction. Opinions and
suggestions are welcome on any subject covered in this magazine.
The opinions expressed in Steel Interchange do not necessarily represent an official
position of the American Institute of Steel Construction and have not been reviewed. It is
recognized that the design of structures is within the scope and expertise of a competent
licensed structural engineer, architect or other licensed professional for the application of
principles to a particular structure.
If you have a question or problem that your fellow readers might help you solve, please
forward it to us. At the same time, feel free to respond to any of the questions that you
have read here. Contact Steel Interchange via AISC’s Steel Solutions Center:
866.ASK.AISC • solutions@aisc.org
Truly Constructible Models
Detail, Fabricate and Erect from a Single Source

“Three things prevented me from adopting

3D detailing ten years ago. First was the fear
of learning a new system, second was having
to earn a living while learning and third was
cost. If I had known then what I know now,
I wouldn’t have waited so long.”
- Doug Malm, Steel Detailing Services.
Trimble booth #1608
tekla.com/TrulyConstructible

TRANSFORMING THE WAY THE WORLD WORKS

 steel This month’s Steel Quiz is based on the May 2017 SteelWise article
“A Tale of Tearouts,” which can be found in the Archives section at
quiz www.modernsteel.com.

1 True or False: The limit state of bolt tearout has been
removed from the 2016 Specification for Structural Steel
Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-16, available at www.aisc.org/
specifications).
2 When one multiplies the least strength of any of the
bolts in a connection by the total number of bolts in the
connection, this typically conservative method has been
referred to as the:
a. KISS method
b. Create Flintstones designs method
c. Poison bolt method
d. Bolt supplier method
3 True or False: The Specification contains a requirement
on how to sum the individual bearing/shear strengths of
the bolts.
4 True or False: Tearout between bolt holes, in addition to
6 When determining the strength of a bolt group, how
many limit states need to be considered? Bonus points
for listing each limit state by name.
7 Determine the maximum permitted nominal strength,
R n, based on the strength of the bolt group for the
connection shown in Figure 1, below. Use Tables 7-1, 7-4
and 7-5 in the 15 Edition AISC Steel Construction Manual
(www.aisc.org/manual).
Figure 1 LQ)*UDGH$;EROWV
VWGKROHV
%ROW %ROW
5Q 5Q
bolt bearing, is a possible limit state. 3/LQ$
LQ LQ LQ
3/LQ$
5 True or False: Tearout along the edge will generally 16)6
not govern if the thickness of the plies is equal to the
bolt diameter. TURN TO PAGE 14 FOR THE ANSWERS

71$  72548($1*/( )$67(1Ζ1* 6<67(0

CUT INSTALLATION
TIME IN HALF
:DQW IDVWHU EROW LQVWDOODWLRQ"
6QXJ WLJKW GRQH ULJKW LV WKH DQVZHU
7KH SDWHQWHG 71$ 7RUTXH$QJOH )DVWHQLQJ 6\VWHP E\
/H-HXQH %ROW SURYLGHV D TXDQWLȴDEOH VQXJ FRQGLWLRQ SURPRWLQJ
VLPSOHU PRUH UHOLDEOH FRQQHFWLRQV 1RWKLQJ PDWFKHV WKH TXDOLW\
VLPSOLFLW\ DQG FRVWVDYLQJV RI RXU HQJLQHHUHG IDVWHQLQJ V\VWHP
)LQG RXW PRUH DERXW VSHFLI\LQJ $670 ) RQ \RXU SURMHFW

)HZHU %ROWV _ 6DIH ΖQVWDOODWLRQ _ 3UHFLVLRQ 7HQVLRQLQJ

71$ 7KH EHWWHU ZD\ WR EROW

86$%2/7 7LJKWHQ5LJKWFRP

12 APRIL 2018
 steel quiz ANSWERS

1 False. A minor change was made in the 2016 LQ)*UDGH$;EROWV

Specification, where the bolt bearing and tearout VWGKROHV
checks have been broken into two separate
equations.
%ROW %ROW
2 c. Poison bolt method. This method can be less
5Q 5Q
work for the designer but can also result in a
significant reduction in the predicted strength of a
bolted connection.
3 False. A user note is provided in Section J3.6 of
the 2016 Specification, describing the preferred 3/LQ$
LQ LQ LQ
method, but other options, such as the poison 3/LQ$
bolt method mentioned in question 2, could be 16)6
used. An additional method is also discussed in
the Commentary.
( kips
)( kips
4 Tr u e . H o w e v e r, f o r c o m m o n c o n n e c t i o n 7 Rn = 2 bolts × 44 bolt + 2 bolts × 29.3 bolt = 146.6 kips )
configurations, tearout is typically not a concern
between the rows of bolts.
5 True.
6 Five limit states: (1) bolt shear, (2) bearing on
the main material, (3) bearing on the connection Anyone is welcome to submit questions and answers for the Steel Quiz. If you
material, (4) tearout on the main material and (5) are interested in submitting one question or an entire quiz, contact AISC’s Steel
tearout on the connection material. Solutions Center at 866.ASK.AISC or at solutions@aisc.org.

®
Hollo-Bolt
The strongest expansion bolt
with full ICC-ES seismic approval
30% higher tensile capacity due to High Clamping Force design
23% higher shear resistance due to high quality materials
(ICC-ES data, 3/4” Hollo-Bolt vs other products evaluated to AC437)

 For HSS & structural steel sections HIGH

CLAMPING
 Fast, cost saving installation from one side FORCE

 Highest resistance to shear & tensile loads ICC

 Unique high clamping force design

 Hot Dip Galvanized corrosion protection
 All sizes approved for SDC A through F

Request a Lunch & Learn or the new catalog - Call 866 566-2658 or visit www.LindapterUSA.com

14 APRIL 2018
 steelwise
ARE YOU PROPERLY As material specifications
SPECIFYING change and improve, so too can
MATERIALS? your steel-framed buildings.
BY JONATHAN TAVAREZ
WE WOULD HOPE THAT your answer to the important
question masquerading as the title of this month’s SteelWise is
a resounding “Yes!”
We recognize that your answer might be a less confident
“Yes,” an “I think so,” an “I’m not sure,” a “Maybe” or even a
“Please help!” Wherever you are on the spectrum, rest assured
we’re here to help clarify any confusion.
As we know, ASTM specifications undergo periodic revi-
sions and new ones come into existence. The design and con-
struction process is simplified greatly through the reference of
appropriate ASTM specifications because they allow you to de-
fine all the relevant characteristics of a specified product. How-
ever, with dozens of ASTM specifications applicable to steel
construction alone, it can be a challenge to keep the standard
designations used in contracts current.
Here, we’ll provide a summary of the most common ASTM
specifications used in steel building design and construction,
including standards for structural shapes, plate products, fas-
tening products and more. This information is based on similar
information in AISC’s 15th Edition Steel Construction Manual.
Another useful AISC publication is Selected ASTM Standards for
Steel Construction, which provides a compilation of more than
60 steel-related ASTM standards. Both publications are avail-
able at www.aisc.org/publications. ASTM standards typically
include a section on ordering requirements listing the variables
in each standard that should be specified in a complete order
or specification for the material. This is routine for fabricator
purchasing departments at local fabrication companies.
Jonathan Tavarez
(tavarez@aisc.org) is a
staff engineer in AISC’s
Steel Solutions Center.
16 APRIL 2018
Structural Shapes
Let’s start with structural shapes, which are summarized inTable 2-4.
W-Shapes. The preferred material specification for
W-shapes is ASTM A992 (Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi). The avail-
ability and cost-effectiveness of W-shapes in grades other than
ASTM A992 should be confirmed prior to their specification.
W-shapes of limited sizes with higher yield and tensile strength
can be obtained by specifying ASTM A529 Grade 55, ASTM
A572 Grades 55, 60 or 65 or ASTM A913 Grades 60, 65 or
70. W-shapes with atmospheric corrosion resistance (weather-
ing characteristics) can be obtained by specifying ASTM A588.
These and other material specifications applicable to W-shapes
are shown in Table 2-4.
M-Shapes and S-Shapes. The preferred material speci-
fication for these shapes is in transition. ASTM A36 (Fy = 36
ksi, Fu = 58 ksi) is now only slightly more common than 50-ksi
grades like ASTM A529 Grade 50, ASTM A572 Grade 50, or
ASTM A992; each of these 50-ksi grades has Fy = 50 ksi and
Fu  = 65 ksi for these shapes. The availability and cost-effec-
tiveness of M-shapes and S-shapes in grades other than those
listed should be confirmed prior to their specification. M-
shapes and S-shapes with a higher yield and tensile strength
can be obtained by specifying ASTM A529 Grade 55, ASTM
A572 Grades 55, 60 and 65 or ASTM A913 Grades 60, 65
or 70. Atmospheric corrosion resistance (weathering charac-
teristics) can be obtained by specifying ASTM A588 Grade
50. These and other material specifications applicable to M-
shapes and S-shapes are shown in Table 2-4.
Channels. The preceding comments for M-shapes and
S-shapes apply equally to channels. However, note that
channels are now most commonly available as ASTM A992
(Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi). Be sure to confirm material avail-
ability with your fabricator.
HP-Shapes. The preferred material specification for HP
shapes is ASTM A572 Grade 50 (Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi); the
availability and cost effectiveness of other grades should be con-
firmed prior to specification. HP-shapes with atmospheric cor-
rosion resistance (weathering characteristics) can be obtained
by specifying ASTM A588 Grade 50. These and other material
specifications applicable to HP-shapes are shown in Table 2-4.
Angles. The preceding comments for M-shapes and S-
shapes apply equally to angles.
 steelwise
Structural Tees. Structural tees are
split from W-, M- and S-shapes to make Table 2-4
WT-, MT- and ST-shapes, respectively. Applicable ASTM Specifications
For the preferred material specifica-
tions, as well as other suitable material
for Various Structural Shapes
specifications for structural tees, refer to Fy Fu Applicable Shape Series
the preceding sections on W-, M- or S- Yield Tensile HSS
Stressa Stressa

Round
Steel ASTM

Rect.

Pipe
shapes, as appropriate.
Type Designation (ksi) (ksi) W M S HP C MC L
Rectangular (and Square) HSS. The
A36 36 58–80 b
preferred material specification for rectangu- A53 Gr. B 35 60
lar hollow structural sections (HSS) is ASTM 42 58
Gr. B
A500 Grade C (Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 62 ksi). Two 46 58
A500
material standards new to the 15th Edi- 46 62
Gr. C
tion Manual for HSS are A1065 and A1085. 50 62
A1085 Grade A (Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi) pro- Gr. A 36 58
Carbon A501
Gr. B 50 70
vides tighter wall thickness and corner radii
Gr. 50 50 65–100
tolerances. Additional benefits include a A529 c
Gr. 55 55 70–100
maximum yield stress of 70 ksi and a de- A709 36 36 58–80 b
fined standard for Charpy V-notch material 36 36–52 58
A1043d,k
toughness. The availability and cost-effec- 50 50–65 65
tiveness of rectangular HSS in grades other A1085 Gr. A 50 65
than ASTM A500 Grade C should be con- Gr. 42 42 60
Gr. 50 50 65
firmed prior to their specification. Because
A572 Gr. 55 55 70
A500 Grade C meets the requirements of
Gr. 60 e 60 75
Grade B, it is likely that you will receive Gr. 65 e 65 80
Grade C regardless of what you specify. It Gr. lak, lb & II 50 g 70 g
A618f
is therefore best to specify Grade C from High- Gr. III 50 65
Strength
the beginning and take advantage of the in- Low-
50 50 65
creased design strength. Rectangular HSS A709 50S 50–65 65
Alloy
50W 50 70
with atmospheric resistance (weathering
50 50h 65h
characteristics) can be obtained by speci-
A913 60 60 75
fying ASTM A847 or A1065 Grade 50W. 65 65 80
These and other material specifications 70 70 90
applicable to rectangular HSS are shown A992 50 i 65 i
in Table 2-4. Note that A1085 Grade A is A1065k Gr. 50 j 50 60
hoped to supersede A500 relatively soon. = Preferred material specification.
Round HSS. The preferred material = Other applicable material specification, the availability of which should be confirmed prior to specification.
= Material specification does not apply.
specification for round HSS is ASTM A500
Grade C (Fy = 46 ksi, Fu = 62 ksi). Note that Footnotes on facing page.
A1085 Grade A (Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi)
may also be specified for round HSS mem-
bers for tighter wall thickness—and again,
is hoped to supersede A500 relatively soon.
The availability and cost-effectiveness of
round HSS in grades other than ASTM
A500 Grade C should be confirmed prior
to specification. Generally speaking, only
round HSS with the same cross-sectional
dimensions as steel pipe are stocked and
available (see the “12 Tidbits” sidebar for
further information). Round HSS with
atmospheric corrosion resistance (weath-
ering characteristics) can be obtained by
specifying ASTM A847. These and other

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 17

 steelwise
material specifications applicable to round HSS are shown in
Table 2-4.
Steel Pipe. The Manual lists ASTM A53 Grade B (Fy =
35 ksi, Fu = 60 ksi) as the preferred material specification for
steel pipe used in structural frames—however, the following
considerations should be addressed first. Round ASTM A500
Grade C can be specified using pipe dimensions instead of
A53 to take advantage of the increased strength. A53 pipes
need to be pressure tested, which results in an unnecessarily
increased overall cost for less strength than what could have
been obtained if round A500 Grade C was specified. Addi-
tionally, regional availability may play a factor, so be sure
to contact your fabricator. See the sidebar “12 Tidbits” for
further information.

12 Important Tidbits
Here are a dozen points to keep in mind when specifying materials for your next project.
1. When in doubt, check it out. Have questions about availability? Call a fabricator or contact the AISC Steel Solu-
tions Center (solutions@aisc.org; 866.ASK.AISC). Either one can keep you swimming in available steel. Also, visit
www.aisc.org/aisc-membership to search for member providers.
2. Times change. When ASTM A992 was originally introduced, only W-shapes were covered. A later revision to
this ASTM standard expanded its scope to include other hot-rolled structural cross sections (channels, angles, M-
shapes, etc.), allowing them to be made to ASTM A992. Nevertheless, A992 still is not common in shapes other
than W-shapes and channels.
3. Round HSS ≠ steel pipe. Know the difference between ASTM A500 and ASTM A53. Remember that while ASTM A53
(Fy = 35 ksi) is the listed preferred material for pipes, ASTM A500 (Fy = 46 ksi for Grade C, 42 ksi for Grade B) can be
specified instead of using pipe dimensions. See Tidbit 4 to learn how to specify pipe dimensions for round HSS.
4. Generally speaking, only round HSS with the same cross-sectional dimensions as steel pipe are stocked and avail-
able. So avoid specifying a round HSS with a cross section that does not match up to one of the steel pipe cross
sections. This is a lot easier than it sounds; just use round HSS with non-zero numbers after the decimal point. For
example, HSS5.563×0.258 has the same cross-section as a Pipe 5 Std. And it will generally be available, while
HSS5.000×0.250 is an HSS-only product and may require a mill-order quantity to obtain.
5. Properly designate your HSS. A round HSS is designated by outside diameter and wall thickness, each expressed
to three decimal places—e.g., HSS5.563×0.258. A square or rectangular HSS is designated by nominal outside
dimensions and wall thickness, each in rational numbers—e.g., HSS5×3×3∕8. Rectangular HSS with even dimensions
for sides—e.g., HSS6×4×5∕16—is more readily available than odd-numbered dimensions—e.g., HSS5×3×3∕8.
6. Properly designate your steel pipes. Use nominal pipe size (NPS) designation through NPS 12—e.g., Pipe 5 Std., Pipe
5 x-strong or Pipe 5 xx-strong. Note that this notation has commonly been abbreviated as follows for the examples
given: P5, PX5 and PXX5, respectively. Above NPS 12, use the format “Pipe” followed by nominal diameter × nominal
wall thickness, each expressed to three decimal places—e.g., NPS 14 Standard is designated Pipe 14.000×0.375. The
latter format also applies to any steel pipe size smaller than NPS 12 that does not have an NPS size.
7. Don’t confuse anchor rods with structural bolts. Do not specify your anchor rods as ASTM F3125 Grade A325 or
A490. The ASTM F3125 standard covers headed bolts, with limited thread length, generally available only up to
8 in. in length and governed by provisions for steel-to-steel structural joints only. You say you’ve always specified
your anchorage devices this way and it’s never been a problem? Well, the reality is that your fabricator has been
awfully nice to not embarrass you by pointing out that you’ve specified a product that does not come in the length
you likely specified—or as a hooked or longer-threaded rod. Use ASTM F1554, which covers hooked, headed and
threaded/nutted rods in three strength grades and even has only slightly less tensile strength than A325 when
specified as Grade 105. ASTM F3125 Grade A325 has a tensile strength of 120 ksi while ASTM F1554 Grade 105
has a tensile strength of 105 ksi.
8. Have all the information at your fingertips. More extensive information can be found in the 15th Edition AISC Steel
Construction Manual and the AISC publication Selected ASTM Standards for Steel Construction, both available at
www.aisc.org/publications.
9. Remember to specify the alternate core location CVN requirement when you have heavy shapes or plates with
CJP groove welds and subject to tension; see AISC Specification Sections A3.1c and A3.1d for further information.
10. When specifying weathering steel plates or bars, think ASTM A588 first. ASTM A242 is increasingly less common.
11. Use the MC12×14.3 for stair stringers. The handrail pipe sizes will fit, as will the fillet welds used to connect them
to this new channel with a wider flange.
12. When in doubt, check it out and ask your fabricator. Oh wait, this is number 1. Well, it is very important and warrants
being the first and last consideration.

18 APRIL 2018
 steelwise
Plate Products
Table 2-5
Next, let’s take a look at plates, summarized
in Table 2-5. Applicable ASTM Specifications
Structural Plates. For main member for Plates and Bars
or weldment design, ASTM A36 and A572
Plates and Bars, in.
Grade 50 should be readily available. For
Fy Fu over over over over over
connection detail material, the preferred
Yield Tensile to 0.75 to 1.25 1.5 2 to 2.5 over over over
material specification for structural plates Steel ASTM Stressa Stressa 0.75 1.25 to 1.5 to 2 2.5 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 6 6 to 8 over
is in transition. Use of ASTM A36 (Fy = 36 Type Designation (ksi) (ksi) incl. incl. incl. incl. incl. incl. incl. incl. incl. 8
ksi for plate thickness equal to or less than 32 58–80
A36
8 in., Fy = 32 ksi otherwise; Fu = 58 ksi) is as 36 58–80
d
common as the use of ASTM A572 Grade e
Gr. C 30 55–75
A283
Carbon Gr. D 33 60–80 d
50 (Fy = 50 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi for plate thickness b b b b b
Gr. 50 50 65–100
equal to or less than 4 in.). The availability A529
Gr. 55 55 70–100 c c c c c

and cost-effectiveness of structural plates A709 Gr. 36 36 58–80

in grades other than these should be con- Gr. 42 42 60
firmed prior to their specification. Note also Gr. 50 50 65
that thickness ranges are different for other A572 Gr. 55 55 70
Gr. 60 60 75
grades as shown in Table 2-5. Structural
Gr. 65 65 80
plates with higher yield and tensile strength High- A709 Gr. 50 50 65
can be obtained by specifying ASTM A572 Strength
Gr. 36 36–52 58
Low- A1043e
Grade 55, 60 or 65; ASTM A529 Grade 55; Alloy Gr. 50 50–65 65
ASTM A1066 Grade 60, 65, 70 or 80; or Gr. 50 50 65
ASTM A514 Grade 90 or 100. Structural Gr. 60 60 75
A1066e Gr. 65 65 80 f
plates with atmospheric corrosion resistance
Gr. 70 70 85
(weathering characteristics) can be obtained g
Gr. 80 80 90
by specifying ASTM A588 Grade 42, 46 or 42 63
50. These and other material specifications Corrosion A242e 46 67
Resistant
applicable to structural plates are shown in High-
50 70
Table 2-5. Strength 42e 63
Low-Alloy A588 46e 67
Structural Bars. The preceding com-
50 70
ments for structural plates apply equally
to structural bars, though note that ASTM = Preferred material specification.
= Other applicable material specification, the availability of which should be confirmed prior to specification.
A514 is not applicable. While frequently = Material specification does not apply.
falling in the same size ranges as plates, bars
Footnotes on facing page.
are a separate classification and are gen-
erally available in widths up to 8 in. The
terminology section in the ASTM A6 Stan-
dard (see Selected ASTM Standards for Steel
Construction) provides thickness, width and
length definitions to differentiate between
steel plates and bars.
Raised-Pattern Floor Plates. ASTM
A786 is the standard specification for rolled
steel floor plates. As the floor-plate design
is seldom controlled by strength consid-
erations, ASTM A786 “commercial grade”
is commonly specified. In those cases, per
ASTM A786-15, Section 5.1.3, “The prod-
uct will be supplied with 0.33% maximum
carbon… and without specified mechani-
cal properties.” Alternatively, if a defined
strength level is desired, ASTM A786
raised-pattern floor plate can be ordered to

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 19

 steelwise
Table 2-6 a specific plate material specification, such
as ASTM A36, A572 or A588; see ASTM
Applicable ASTM Specifications for A786 Sections 5.1.3, 7.1 and 8.
Various Types of Structural Fasteners Sheet and Strip. Sheet and strip prod-
Bolts ucts, which are generally thinner than
High- Washers Anchor Rods structural plate and bar products, are pro-
Strength
duced to such ASTM specifications as A606,

Tension-Control

Threaded Rods
Twist-Off-Type

Common Bolts

Direct-Tension
Fy A1008 or A1011. This is an “umbrella”

Conventional
Min. Fu standard with many types and grades; the

Hardened

Threaded
Indicator

& Nutted
Yield Tensile

Hooked

Headed
Stress Stressa Diameter Range structural steel type is designated “SS” and

Plain
ASTM

Nuts
Designation (ksi) (ksi) (in.) the standards provide for grades from 25
Gr. A325d – 120 0.5 to 1.5 or 30 to 80. High-strength low-alloy and
Gr. F1852d
F3125

– 120 0.5 to 1.25

high-strength low-alloy with improved
Gr. A490d – 150 0.5 to 1.5
Gr. F2280d – 150 0.5 to 1.25 formability are designated as HSLAS and
F3111 – 200 1 to 1.25 incl. HSLAS-F, respectively, and may also be
F3043 – 200 1 to 1.25 incl. specified if needed. When using shims and
A194 Gr. 2H – – 0.25 to 4
similar products, note that 3∕16 in. is the
A563 – – 0.25 to 4
F436 – – 0.25 to 4b minimum thickness to specify and receive
F844 – – any a mill test report conforming to an ASTM
F959 – – 0.5 to 1.5 standard material. Availability should be
A36 36 58–80 to 10
checked before specifying the grade.
105 125 2.5 and under
A193 Gr. B7 95 115 over 2.5 to 4
75 100 over 4 to 7 Fastening Products
A307 Gr. A – 60 0.25 to 4 Next, let’s explore fasteners, summarized in
e e
109 125 0.25 to 2.5 incl.
Gr. BC e e
Table 2-6.
99 115 over 2.5 to 4 incl.
A354 Conventional Bolts. The new bolt
e e
130 150 0.25 to 2.5 incl.
Gr. BD
115 140 2.5 to 4 incl. e e standard ASTM F3125 now includes grades
e e
92 120 0.25 to 1 incl. that are made under similar manufacturing
A449d 81 105 over 1 to 1.5 incl. e e

e e
requirements by consolidating and replac-
58 90 over 1.5 to 3 incl.
Gr. 42 42 60 to 6 ing the ASTM A325, A325M, A490 and
Gr. 50 50 65 to 4c A490M standards for conventional high-
A572 Gr. 55 55 70 to 2 strength bolts in steel-to-steel connections.
Gr. 60 60 75 to 3.5
Type 1 is the most commonly specified
Gr. 65 65 80 to 1.25
50 70 4 and under
(medium-carbon steel). When atmospheric
A588 46 67 over 4 to 5 incl. corrosion resistance is desired, Type 3 can
42 63 over 5 to 8 incl. be specified. A new bolt standard ASTM
Gr. 36 36 58–80 0.25 to 4
F3111, with a tensile strength of 200 ksi,
F1554 Gr. 55 55 75–95 0.25 to 4
Gr. 105 105 125–150 0.25 to 3
has been introduced as an applicable mate-
= Preferred material specification. rial for conventional bolts. While it is still
= Other applicable material specification, the availability of which should be confirmed prior to specification. formally permitted by the AISC Specifica-
= Material specification does not apply.
– Indicates that a value is not specified in the material specification.
tion to use other material specifications in
a
b
Minimum, unless a range is shown. steel-to-steel bolting applications, the use
Diameter range is 2 in. to 12 in. for beveled and extra thick washers.
c
ASTM A572 permits rod diameters up to 11 in., but practicality of threading should be confirmed before specification. of materials besides those identified in this
d
When atmospheric corrosion resistance is desired, Type 3 can be specified.
e
See AISC Specification Section J3.1 for limitations on use of ASTM A449, A354 Gr. BC and A354 Gr. BD. article is relatively rare.
Twist-Off-Type Tension-Control Bolt
Assemblies. The bolt standard ASTM
F3125 includes the two grades preferred
for twist-off-type tension-control bolt
assemblies: F1852 and F2280. Grade
F1852 offers a strength equivalent to
that of Grade A325, and F2280 offers a
strength equivalent to A490. A new bolt
standard ASTM F3043, with a tensile
strength of 200 ksi, is introduced as an
applicable material for twist-off-type
tension-control bolts.
20 APRIL 2018
 steelwise
New Things
A list of recent developments to help guide your material specifications.
➤ The 15th Edition AISC Steel Construction Manual now includes design tables for W-shapes with A913 Grades 65
and 70 in Table 4-1. AISC Design Examples V15.0 now includes design tables for ASTM A1085 square, rectangular
and round HSS members, with additional resources located online at www.aisc.org/publications.
➤ The new filler metal standard, AWS A5.36 has been added that supersedes A5.20 and 5.29. This classification com-
bines both of the superseded materials into one specification that covers both carbon steel and low-alloy steel flux
cored arc welding electrodes.
➤ A new bolt standard, ASTM F3148, is in development in conjunction with LeJeune Bolt Company and will be intro-
duced to RCSC balloting for inclusion in the 2020 RCSC Specification. This standard is meant to provide a strength
between that of F3125 Grade A325 and A490, with the hopes of superseding them both in the future.
➤ A channel especially for stair stringers. The MC12×14.3 that was recently added to ASTM A6 was conceived as a
stair stringer. It has a 21∕8-in. flange width, which is wide enough to accept the common handrail pipe size and fillet
weld around it. No more crimping the pipe or goobering the weld!
➤ Bigger HP-shapes. The HP18 and HP16 series shapes that recently were added to ASTM A6 provide for even higher
pile strengths. Like all HP shapes, they have thicker webs (tw = tf ) and may help eliminate the need for stiffeners
and doublers when used as columns.
➤ Larger HSS. Until recently, ASTM A500 HSS was limited to 5∕8-in. thickness and 64-in. perimeter. It now permits HSS
to 7∕8-in. thickness and 88-in. perimeter. While the standards permit these larger sizes, they are not currently made
in the U.S.; availability should be checked. HSS with sizes that exceed ASTM A500’s 88-in. periphery limit can also
be obtained and are discussed in the article “Larger Hollow Structural Sections” in the November 2011 issue of
Modern Steel Construction (www.modernsteel.com). This includes a discussion of ASTM A1065 shapes, which are
produced by forming two channels and welding them together.
➤ There are two other materials worth mentioning: ASTM A283 covers low-yield carbon steel plate material in four
grades, and ASTM A1043 covers plates and shapes and is most commonly used as core material in the manufacture
of buckling-restrained braces. These two newer products are shown in Tables 2-4 and 2-5.

Nuts. The preferred material specification for heavy-hex
nuts is ASTM A563. For steel-to-steel structural bolting ap-
plications, the appropriate grade and finish are summarized in
Section 2.4 of the RCSC Specification for Structural Joints Using
High-Strength Bolts (www.aisc.org/specifications). If its avail-
ability can be confirmed prior to specification, ASTM A194
Grade 2H nuts are permitted as an alternative, as indicated in
Table 2.1 of the RCSC Specification. While RCSC (Research
Council on Structural Connections) is the authority of the use
of nuts, Table 1 in the ASTM F3125 specification may have
more up to date information and should be checked.
Washers for Structural Bolts. The preferred material
specification for hardened steel washers is ASTM F436. This
specification provides for both flat and beveled washers. Re-
cently, an “extra thick” option was added to provide for the cas-
es in RCSC Specification Table 6.1 that require a special 5∕16 -in.
thickness (when oversized or slotted holes are used in the
outer ply of a steel-to-steel structural joint).
Washers for Anchor Rods. In anchor rod applications, hole
sizes generally are larger than those for steel-to-steel structural
bolting applications; see Table 14-2 in the AISC Manual. Ac-
cordingly, washers used in such applications generally are re-
quired to be larger and might require design consideration for
proper force transfer, particularly when the anchorage is subject
to tension. Such anchor rod washers are generally made from
rectangular plate or bar material. When anchor rods are used
in holes that are smaller (5∕16 in. larger than rod diameters up to
1 in.; ½ in. larger than rod diameters over 1 in. to 2 in.; and 1 in.
larger than rod diameters over 2 in.) ASTM F844 washers can
be used. Note that they can be ordered with a larger diameter
than ASTM F436 washers. Also note that the use of smaller
holes will require more stringent placement of the anchors, and
that misplaced anchors are a relatively common issue—hence
why larger holes are recommended in the Manual.
Compressible-Washer-Type Direct-Tension Indicators.
When bolted joints are specified as pretensioned or slip-critical
and the direct-tension-indicator pretensioning method is used,
ASTM F959 compressible-washer-type direct-tension indi-
cators can be specified. Type 325 is used with ASTM F3125
Grade A325 or F1852 assemblies, and Type 490 is used with
ASTM F3125 Grade A490 or F2280 assemblies. The use of
these devices must conform to the requirements in the RCSC
Specification, which provides detailed requirements for pre-in-
stallation verification (Section 7), installation (Section 8) and
inspection (Section 9). The RCSC Specification also permits al-
ternative washer-type indicating devices subject to the provi-
sion in Section 2.6.2.
Anchor Rods. The preferred material specification for
anchor rods is ASTM F1554, which covers hooked, headed,
threaded and nutted anchor rods in two strength grades: 36
and 55. ASTM F1554 Grade 55 is most commonly specified,
although grades 36 and 105 are normally available. Note that
per Section 4.1 in ASTM F1554, when Grade 36 is ordered the
supplier may substitute weldable Grade 55 at their discretion.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 21

 QuickFrames are steelwise
pre-engineered and
often installed in
15 minutes or less...
ASTM F1554 Grade 36 may be welded
NO FOOLING! as is, and Grade 55 may be welded if it is or-
dered with Supplement S1; this is the more
common approach when welding is needed.
Grade 105 may not be welded, as the heat
will detrimentally affect performance.
Several other ASTM specifications
may also be used. For applications involv-
ing rods that are not headed, ASTM A36,
A193, A307, A354, A449, A572, A588 and
A687 can be specified; note that the ASTM
A307 Grade C “anchor bolt” has been de-
leted from ASTM A307 and replaced by
Learn more at NASCC, booth #412. ASTM F1554 Grade 36. For applications
involving headed rods, A354 and A449 can
be specified.
Threaded Rods. The preferred mate-
rial specification for threaded rods, whether
provided with plain or upset ends, is ASTM
A36. Other material specifications that can
quickframes.us/noaprilfooling 480-464-1500 be specified include ASTM A193, A307,
A354, A449, A572, A588 and F1554. Note
that ASTM A354 Grade BC and A449 are

,yW ZdΠ
permitted to be used for bolts when the
size required is outside the range of ASTM
F3125 Grade A325. ASTM A354 Grade
BD is permitted when the size required is
outside the range of ASTM F3125 Grade
A490. These standards are material stan-
 
dards, not bolt standards, so the desired di-
^ĂǀĞǀĂůƵĂďůĞƟŵĞĂŶĚŵŽŶĞLJ͘EĞǀĞƌƐĞĂƌĐŚ
mensions have to be specified as per ANSI
ĨŽƌďŽůƟŶŐĚŽĐƵŵĞŶƚƐĞǀĞƌĂŐĂŝŶ͊ ASME B18.2.6 heavy hex class 2A.
Shear Stud Connectors. Shear studs
Test Reports
are specified as given in AWS D1.1 Clause
Invoices 7, with material as required in Clause 7.2.6.
Packing Lists Type B is usual and the corresponding me-
DOT Approvals chanical requirements are stated in AWS
Order Tracking D1.1 Table 7.1 (Fy = 51 ksi, Fu = 65 ksi).
Filler Metal. AWS provides specifica-
Proof of Delivery
tions for filler metals in the A5 series of
specifications. Typically, there are two filler
metal specifications for each process: car-
bon steel for strengths up to E70 and low
alloy for higher strengths or other prop-
ĂůůŽƌ'ŽKŶůŝŶĞƚŽĮŶĚŽƵƚŵŽƌĞ erties such as weathering. These speci-
fications provide chemical composition
St. Louis Screw & Bolt requirements for the filler metals and ten-

sile property and CVN toughness require-
ƐƚůŽƵŝƐƐĐƌĞǁďŽůƚ͘ĐŽŵ ments for weld metal produced to specific
800Ͳ237Ͳ7059 classification test requirements. A recent
change that will become evident to those

^ƚƌƵĐƚƵƌĂůŽůƟŶŐdžƉĞƌƚƐ procuring filler metals and writing weld

procedure specifications is the release of
standard A5.36 Specification for Carbon And
22 APRIL 2018
 steelwise

Low-Alloy Steel Flux Cored Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc Welding
and Metal Cored Electrodes for Gas Metal Arc Welding. Some of
the fillers in A5.36 are identical to previous FCAW and GMAW
fillers but are defined in a fashion that is more consistent and
competitive with international standards.
Other Products
In addition to typical structural products, there are other re-
lated steel products to consider.
Steel Castings and Forgings. Steel castings can be pro-
duced in a wide variety of chemical compositions and mechanical

As for Bridges…
Another possibility for structural shapes
and plates is ASTM A709, which is an
“umbrella” standard that assembles
ASTM A36, A572, A992, A588, A1010
and three high-performance steel (HPS)
grades into a convenient single standard
for bridge designers and fabricators. The
HPS grades are available in plate form
only. Grade 50S is available in shapes.
The other grades are available in plate
form and as shapes, though availability
should be confirmed prior to specifica-
tion. ASTM A709 provides toughness
levels for three exposures and two uses.
Much of the material supplied to A709
meets one of those toughness levels.
Material furnished to ASTM A709 grades
are acceptable for use where the corre-
sponding parent standard is specified.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 23

 steelwise

properties; most are heat treated. Three

standards useful in steel structures are
ASTM A27 Grade 65-35, ASTM A216
Grade WCB with Supplementary Re-
quirement S11 and A958/A958M Grade
SC8620 class 80/50. Steel forgings are
specified as ASTM A668.
Crane Rails. Crane rails are furnished
to ASTM A759, ASTM A1 and/or manu-
facturer’s specifications and tolerances.
Rail is designated by unit weight in units of
pounds per yard. Dimensions of common
rail are shown in the AISC Manual Table
1-21; other rail profiles also exist and may
be available. Most manufacturers chamfer

The New View of the top and sides of the crane rail head at
the ends unless specified otherwise in order

Project Management
to reduce chipping of the running surfaces.
Often, crane rails are ordered as end-hard-
ened, which improves the crane rail ends’
resistance to impact from contact with the
Introducing the most powerful moving wheel during crane operation. Al-
way to drive every function of ternatively, the entire rail can be ordered
your shop. as heat-treated. When maximum wheel
loading or controlled cooling is needed,
 Visualize project progress in the model refer to manufacturer catalogs. Purchase
 Improve communication orders for crane rails should be noted “for
 ,QFUHDVHDFFXUDF\ HI¿FLHQF\ crane service.” Light 40-lb rails are avail-
able in 30-ft lengths, standard rails in 33-
ft or 39-ft lengths and crane rails up to 80
ft. Consult manufacturer for availability of
other lengths. Rails should be arranged so
We can now see the status of material, production,
shipping, drawings, and much more simply by viewing the that joints on opposite sides of the crane
model from within FabSuite. FabSuite View changes the runway will be staggered with respect to
way we manage a project! each other and with due consideration
Ricky Horton, McCombs Steel to the wheelbase of the crane. Rail joints
should not occur at crane girder splices.
Odd lengths that must be included to com-
plete a run or obtain the necessary stagger
should be no less than 10 ft long. Rails are
Visit us furnished with standard drilling for splice
at Booth bars in both standard and odd lengths un-
1407 less stipulated otherwise on the order.
Knowing the right specifications for
www.fabsuite.com your various steel shapes is one of the key
757.645.0842 info@fabsuite.com
methods for getting the most out of your
framing system. ■

24 APRIL 2018
 NASCC
THE STEEL CONFERENCE

2018 exhibitor
 business issues
INTEGRATING Try giving a warm welcome to the Danish
HYGGE AT WORK take on contentment and coziness.
BY ANNE SCARLETT

MARCH 20 was the International Day of Happiness, as desig- Since its inception in 2012, the World Happiness Report
nated by the United Nations. (www.worldhappiness.report) has measured the happiness
The overarching theme? To recognize happiness as a “fun- level (aka one’s perception of well-being) in more than 155
damental human goal” and achieve “a more inclusive, equitable countries. Northern Europeans (Denmark, Norway, Sweden
and balanced approach to economic growth that promotes and Iceland) top the list. According to the report, key factors
the happiness and well-being of all peoples.” (You can find out supporting happiness encompass: caring, freedom, generos-
more at www.dayofhappiness.net.) ity, honesty, health, income and good governance. The report
Besides the fact that most data is sliced and diced in such
if not all people aspire to be great detail (including a chap-
happy, why is this relevant? ter dedicated to work) that it’s
Because as AEC profession- While I’ve successfully created hard to get my mind around
als, we sometimes encounter it! But here’s my takeaway: It’s
opportunities to work with worth examining the happiest
worthy projects (or clients) to
meaningful connections with many people on the planet and their
make the world a better place. philosophical approach to life.
That’s a gift!
students over the past decade, What’s their secret sauce? Per-
But what about on a micro haps we can integrate some of
level? What about impact- integrating hygge enabled me to reach it into our own lives, starting
ing the happiness within our with ourselves.
immediate circle of fam- a larger proportion of that group. Cue hygge. Wait, what?
ily, friends and business col- Often described as “cozy,
leagues? Even further, what content and safe”—and
about reshaping ourselves to pronounced “hoo-guh” or
ensure that our personal happiness is as good as it can be, 365 “hue-guh”—hygge is a Danish approach to life, where the
days a year? Consider this: Americans spend an average of 25% focus is on environment, experience and connection. It appeals
of our time at work (that’s loosely 36% of our waking life). Our to our basic needs of both safety and belonging (through
professional life plays a significant role in our overall sense of comradery and conviviality). Setting up a hygge environment
personal well-being. As hard as we try to compartmentalize by comes naturally to some of us introverts, who revel in quiet
separating work life from personal life, the two still intricately times spent at home with candles, fires, pets, warming food
influence one another in terms of satisfaction and performance. and drink, comfortable clothes and kindred spirits. But how
can any of those things even remotely be transferred to the
work environment? And how does a work atmosphere—
Anne Scarlett is president of filled with competition, big goals, hustle, deadlines, highs
Scarlett Consulting, a Chicago- and lows and personality dynamics—even remotely jive with
based company specializing in the aforementioned atmosphere and perspective? I aimed to
AEC-specific strategic marketing explore exactly this.
plans, marketing audits and One of my work environments is within academia: the college
coaching. She is also on the classroom. There, amid a group of about 25 undergraduates, I
adjunct faculty of Columbia encounter generational differences (read: attitudes and commu-
College of Chicago and DePaul nication styles incongruent with my own) among these ambitious
University. She can be contacted yet often overwhelmed young adults. Tension can arise from all
via her website, angles. So last quarter, I made adjustments to see how I could
www.annescarlett.com. best integrate hygge into my academic experience. Here’s what I

26 APRIL 2018

did. My (reasonably professional) attire included a cozy scarf or
wrap. I’d allow plenty of time to get to class, so that my commute
would be stress-free, regardless of traffic or weather. I switched
out my favorite news source in favor of upbeat music that gave
me a boost of energy and positivity. Since fresh air and exercise
comprise a component of hygge, I would make time for a quick
spin around the campus upon arrival. And finally, I would grab a
warm drink prior to heading to the classroom.
During setup, I played music that my students would enjoy,
adjusted the lighting and even lit several candles on my desk
(according to my research, Danes are known to use candles not
only at home but also in their work environments—just say-
ing). I went through all my usual prep—setting up whiteboards,
etc.—and then still had time to briefly flip through a collection
of imagery on my computer that triggers pleasurable memories
(travel experiences, pets, family, etc.). Once the students began
to arrive, I’d discreetly do a bit of deep breathing in order to
fully appreciate and connect with each breath.
The result? I noticed that the physical environment seemed
easier for the students to settle into, and that the overall vibe—ini-
tiated by me—seemed more open and relaxed. I sensed that stu-
dents found me to be more approachable, and I found them to be
more committed to the course. And while I’ve successfully created
meaningful connections with many students over the past decade,
I felt that integrating hygge enabled me to reach a larger propor-
tion of that group, relative to some of my prior courses. The bot-
tom line: On a micro level, integrating elements of hygge into your
own work environment is worth a shot. And if you are a leader
in your firm, you could take this a step further by comparing the
Danish corporate models to your own company. Consider this key
excerpt from the 2017 World Happiness Report:
business
issues
“Being satisfied (as opposed to dissatisfied) with your job
is strongly correlated with the Cantril ladder measure of life
evaluation, whereas feeling actively engaged with your job is
more strongly correlated with positive affect. The strongest
relationship across all of these measures of general and work-
place well-being is that feeling ‘actively disengaged with one’s job’ is
most strongly correlated with low job satisfaction.”
Let’s look at a small snapshot of how the Danes inspire
employee engagement (aka satisfaction, loyalty, commitment
and high performance):
➤ Offering opportunities for lifelong learning through
abundant continuing education and training
➤ Reduce hierarchy. Often, tasks are suggested—rather
than directed—and are open for inclusive decision-making
➤ Strongly promoting work-life balance through five
weeks of vacation, shortened business hours (typically
8:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m.; breakfast and dinner business activi-
ties are rarely scheduled!), minimal overtime, flexibility
to tend to family matters, etc.
➤ Connecting with colleagues, such as reducing lunch
hours to 30 minutes, which encourages people at larger
companies to stay on site and hang out with their colleagues
For many years, I worked in a management capacity at
various AEC firms. Today, as an independent consultant, I
often think, “If only I had known then what I know now.”
Many of these things are doable with the right mindset, pri-
orities and careful budgeting. Think about it. Are you willing
to make a shift, either on a personal micro level or as a larger
initiative for your firm?
Take a page (or three) out of the playbook from the happiest
people on the planet and make this year your best yet! ■
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 27
 conference
preview
ROAD TO A look at resilience in steel buildings

RECOVERY subjected to earthquakes or other hazards.

BY HUSSAM MAHMOUD, PHD, AND
PATRICK MCMANUS, SE, PE, PHD

MODELING THE FUNCTIONALITY RECOVERY
PROCESS of a community’s infrastructure after an extreme
event is now at the forefront of research—and may soon be part
of everyday engineering practice.
Estimating post-disaster recovery of either single or
multiple infrastructure facilities in a community requires
proper flow and interaction of information of the physical,
economic and social components of the involved sectors.
Understanding this recovery process is essential, particularly
for critical infrastructure facilities, such as hospitals, whose
rapid recovery is vital to a community’s well-being. Luckily,
hospitals and other facilities framed with steel have a head
start on recovery, given steel’s high level of performance in
seismic events.
Stages of Recovery
We’ll go through an example seismic recovery effort
involving a steel building, but first let’s take a look at the
recovery process. A change in functionality due to an earth-
quake is categorized into three different stages, as shown in
Figure 1(a). The first stage is the pre-disaster stage, which is
the original level of functionality before the hazard, and the
immediate functionality drop, which takes place at the time
the hazard occurs. It can be expressed as a function of the
direct losses, the efficiency of the backup systems and the
interdependence between the different lifelines, as shown in
Figure 1(b). The second stage is the assessment and planning
stage, which takes more time compared to the immediate
functionality drop stage. It can be expressed as a function of
the direct losses and damage level that controls the assess-
ment and planning process. The third stage is the recovery
stage, which is mainly a function of direct losses, available
resources and interdependence between the hospital and
other lifelines. The duration of the recovery stage has sub-
stantial impact on indirect losses.
For the building itself, different parameters play vari-
ous roles in the level of functionality restoration that can be
achieved following an earthquake. This includes damage to the
structural and nonstructural components as well as the build-
ing’s content. The quantification of such damage requires the
development of appropriate numerical models that can capture
the behavior under the expected demand.

Figure 1. Functionality: (a) different stages and (b) main sub-functions.

28 APRIL 2018
 Figure 2. Hospital model: (a) building configuration, (b) steel material model, (c) BRB core model, (d) BRB connections model,
(e) rigid connection model, (f) semi-rigid connection model, (g) pinned connection model and (h) soil-structure interaction model.

After the Quake
As an example, let’s consider a study performed on a steel-
framed hospital in a high-seismic region that was subjected to
an earthquake. (The study was conducted as part of a coop-
erative agreement between the National Institute of Standards
and Technology/NIST and Colorado State University.) First,
the resilience (functionality) reduction and recovery is quan-
tified and assessed. A detailed finite element model with soil-
structure interaction is used to estimate damage. The results
of the finite element analysis of the hospital are used in the
hospital recovery framework that accounts not only for dam-
age to the structural components, nonstructural components
and other content, but also to other lifelines while considering
the reliance of all lifelines on each other. This recovery process
requires the inclusion of the constraints to repair each lifeline.
The sample hospital is six stories high in addition to a base-
ment, as shown in Figure 2(a). The full design of the hospital
was performed for an area with high seismicity under the direc-
tion of the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program
(NEHRP) in accordance with American Society of Civil En-
gineers/ASCE 7-10: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and
Other Structures. The building relies on buckling restrained
braces (BRBs) as the main lateral load-resisting elements. The
beams and columns are connected using rigid, semi-rigid and

Hussam Mahmoud (hussam.mahmoud@colostate.edu) is an associate

professor in the Department of Civil Engineering and director of the
Structural Laboratory at Colorado State University, and Patrick McManus
(pmcmanus@martinmartin.com) is a principal at Martin/Martin. The
authors wish to acknowledge Colorado State graduate student Emad
Hassan for conducting this research as part of his PhD study.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 29

 conference preview
pinned connections. Isolated footings are used to transfer the
loads to the underneath soil, and reinforced concrete walls are
used to support the outer steel columns at the basement level.
The Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360)
and Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC
341), both available at www.aisc.org/specifications, were used
to design the members and connections.
For the structural analysis, a 3D finite element model was
used in a nonlinear dynamic analysis; a more simplified 2D
model, assuming it can properly capture the behavior, could
also be used. The 3D finite element model of the hospital was
developed while accounting for various behavioral features in-
cluding: 1) bilinear material behavior, as shown in Figure 2(b);
2) BRB core material behavior, as shown in Figure 2(c); 3) BRB
connections—which are modeled using a group of springs to
simulate the in-plane and out-of-plane behavior of each con-
nection based on literature—as shown in Figure 2(d); 4) Rigid
and the semi-rigid connections—which were modeled using
springs based on 3D finite element models—as shown in Fig-
ure 2(e) and Figure 2(f), respectively; 5) Pinned connections,
modeled using a multi-linear behavior based on literature, as
shown in Figure 2(g); and 6) Soil-structure interaction, mod-
eled using a beam-on-nonlinear-Winkler foundation (BNWF)
model, as shown in Figure 2(h). In this study, the earthquake
was assumed to strike the building in 2017, five years after its
assumed construction date. The structural analysis of the hos-
pital was performed using nonlinear incremental dynamic time-
history analysis. The results of the analysis were then used to
develop fragility functions for the hospital for the structural
and non-structural components. Figure 3 shows the results of
the incremental dynamic analysis and the nonstructural com-
ponents drift-sensitive fragility functions.
Framework and Recovery Assessment
A discrete Markov chain process was used to estimate re-
covery for the various hospital building components such as
corridors, elevators, stairs and structural and nonstructural
Figure 3. Hospital model: (a) incremental dynamic analysis and (b) nonstructural components displacement-sensitive fragility
functions for various levels of damage.
30 APRIL 2018
components, through separating the functionality to different
independent sub-levels. Since there are typical limitations in
available resources following an extreme event, the resources
are distributed to different lifelines based on their importance
and significance to community recovery. The community re-
sources, in the form of repair crews, are distributed among
the previously mentioned lifelines to repair and return them
back to the required functionality level. The distribution of
the repair resources can be affected by several factors such as
funding availability, the type of required repair and access to
the damaged lifelines, among others. In this study, the factor
influencing the repair sequence of the lifelines is their expect-
ed economic return for the whole community. This is a com-
monly used factor by decision-makers. The repair sequence
starts with the structural components followed by the stairs,
the elevators and the exterior elements such as partitions and
claddings. The latter can be performed simultaneously with
interior repairs to the piping, HVAC elements, partitions,
ceilings, mechanical equipment and electrical systems. Since
the focus of this research is on functionality of the hospital,
an assumption is made that all repair sequences are the same
for all lifelines.
The results for the hospital and supportive infrastructure
repair recovery indicate that the assessment and planning stag-
es for transportation, telecommunications and hospital were
the lowest priority while for electricity, water and wastewater
lifelines were the highest. The first lifeline to reach total re-
pair recovery was transportation followed by electricity. Even
though the electric network had the highest level of damage, it
achieved full recovery quickly because of its importance to the
repair of other lifelines. In addition, it’s important to note that
the functionality recovery rate for different lifelines depends on
the assigned repair resources, which was determined using an
optimization process.
Undoubtedly, reducing the recovery time of the hospi-
tal is a key design objective. From a structural standpoint,
this can be achieved through collaboration between struc-

tural engineers and architects to reduce the structural and
nonstructural damages as a result of the seismic event—i.e.,
the right shift in fragility reduces the probability of failures
associated with structural and nonstructural components.
Achieving this will require reduction of floor displacements
and accelerations so that losses can be minimized, or by iso-
lating damage to sacrificial components that can be easily re-
placed or repaired. For steel buildings, this might be realized
through alternatives like using larger BRBs so as to stiffen
the structure and shift its fundamental period from that of
the expected earthquake records, which is typically marked
by the ground motion and soil condition characteristics in
the area.
Reparability
Steel buildings have historically performed well in seismic
events, though every significant earthquake reminds engineers
and researcher that there will always be room for improve-
ment. While a return to functionality is of paramount concern
when considering resiliency, a building owner may have an
interest in the ability of a structure to withstand future events.
In other words, how can the structural system be returned to
its pre-event state?
Interested in
business development
and making structural steel
the material of choice?
AISC
has a job
for you!
now hiring in
Boston San Francisco
to learn more visit
www.aisc.org/mynextcareer
There’s always a solution in steel.
conference preview
Most mainstream structural seismic force-resisting systems
currently in use in the U.S. accommodate the drifts associ-
ated a seismic event through inelastic deformation in primary
structural components. While steel may not exhibit the obvious
signs of degradation found in other materials, such as cracking
and spalling, the cumulative inelastic strain capacity of steel ele-
ments is reduced once inelastic action resulting from a seismic
event occurs. Quantifying the reduction in inelastic life is dif-
ficult at best in the absence of direct monitoring, which often
leaves decision-makers with no choice but to remove and re-
place potentially damaged areas of a structure.
Removing and replacing portions of primary elements,
particularly that have been welded into place, is an extremely
costly prospect. Conversely, the idea of isolating damage to
components that can be easily removed and replaced—e.g., the
replaceable fuse concept—has been gaining more traction re-
cently. We’ll discuss this concept, as well as the results of the
study, in further detail in our presentation. ■
This article is a preview of Session N1 “Resiliency and Reparability
of Steel Systems” at NASCC: The Steel Conference, taking place
April 11-13 in Baltimore. Learn more about the conference at
www.aisc.org/nascc.
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 31
 conference
preview Developing a design methodology for
steel strongback braced frames.
STURDY SPINE
BY BARBARA G. SIMPSON
A STRUCTURAL SYSTEM is like the human body.
In seismic regions, inelastic energy dissipation (like brace
buckling or beam yielding) is performed by the muscles. The
structural skeleton resists gravity and lateral forces through
a framework of bones. The rib cage is defined by beams, the
space between ribs is represented by building stories and the
limbs are characterized by columns.
But the analogy is incomplete. Conventional structural
skeletons do not typically include a spine or backbone.
While the flexural strength and stiffness of beams and col-
umns can implicitly redistribute seismic demands, conven-
tional structures typically do not have an explicit mechanism
(like a spine) to distribute yielding. If the implicit mecha-
nism is insufficient or unreliable, conventional systems tend
to form story mechanisms, concentrating damage in only a
few stories during large earthquakes.
Enter strongback braced frames, which modify conventional
structural skeletons to include an explicit structural steel spine
or “strongback.” Like the spine in a human body, the strong-
back ties the stories of a structure together. Designed to remain
essentially elastic during major earthquakes, the strongback is
intended to mitigate story mechanisms, redistribute inelastic
demands vertically and efficiently mobilize the inelastic com-
ponents (muscles) across every story.
Barbara Simpson (simp7@
berkeley.edu) is a doctoral
candidate at the University of
California, Berkeley.
32 APRIL 2018
While the strongback system has been employed success-
fully in both research and practice, its dynamic behavior has not
been systematically assessed or evaluated. Just as importantly,
practical code-oriented design methods have not yet been de-
veloped or validated. To develop a comprehensive design meth-
od for strongback braced frames, it is important to understand
how story mechanisms form, how the strongback behaves, how
to estimate strongback demands and how to implement re-
search on the strongback into practice.
Story Mechanisms
Steel braced frames are inherently stiff systems and are
naturally efficient in resisting seismic demands. During earth-
quakes, concentrically braced frames dissipate energy through
the post-buckling behavior of the braces. Successful designs
recognize and account for the redistribution of forces as braces
buckle in compression, yield in tension and subsequently lose
strength after buckling.
But reliance on brace buckling can be less than ideal. To
attain acceptable behavior, diagonal braces must be specially
detailed to exhibit a stable inelastic response. The incorpora-
tion of special ductile detailing, the introduction of buckling-
restrained braces (BRBs) and the inclusion of capacity-design
principles in modern building codes have resulted in im-
proved brace deformability and protection of critical connec-
tions and elements.
But while these and other design requirements have im-
proved their reliability and ductility, conventional steel braced
frames continue to be susceptible to story mechanisms (see
Figure 1). Story mechanisms in braced frames stem from the
inelastic behavior of the braces. When a brace in a story buckles,
that story becomes relatively weaker than the stories that have
remained elastic. Subsequent yielding is then promoted in the
weakened story, resulting in a story mechanism. In buckling-
restrained brace frames (BRBFs), the low post-yield stiffness of
the BRBs promotes concentrations of story drift, resulting in
similar behavior.
 During an earthquake, multi-story struc- A new four-story laboratory building in Berkeley, Calif., was one of the first major
tures can exhibit non-uniform story drift de- applications of a strongback braced frame using BRBs. By using an asymmetric
mands, increasing the likelihood of forming a strongback spine, Tipping Structural Engineers was able to cut the required frames
almost in half and the number of BRBs by one-third.
weak or soft story mechanism. These concen-
trated demands can increase local structural Figure 1. Plastic mechanism Figure 2. Plastic mechanism for
for concentrically braced frames. strongback braced frames.
and nonstructural damage, cause earlier mem-
ber failures and result in significant residual
displacements, potentially leading to extensive
or impractical repairs following an earthquake.

Strongback Characteristics
Story mechanisms arise from a limited
ability to redistribute inelastic demands to
adjacent stories. The inclusion of an essen-
tially elastic strongback provides an alterna-
tive force path to distribute demands to delay
or prevent story mechanisms (see Figure 2).
The strongback braced frame is a hybrid
of a conventional inelastic system and an es-
sentially elastic steel truss. Braces and beams
in the inelastic portion are designed and de-
tailed to yield. Typically, this energy dissipa-
tion is performed by conventional buckling
braces or BRBs. The opposite strongback
truss is then proportioned to remain essen-
tially elastic, resulting in a relatively stiff and
strong vertical spine. Axial forces and bend-
ing moments developed in these inelastic el-
ements are transferred vertically to adjacent
stories through the strongback.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 33

 conference preview
Gregory P. Luth and Associates, in association with Exponent, took advantage of the flexibility and redundancy of a modified strong-
back rocking system to economically accommodate significant changes and ill-defined loading conditions for the fast-paced design
and construction of the Tesla Gigafactory in Reno, Nev.
The strongback spine is not intended to provide supplemen-
tal lateral strength. Rather, the spine pivots about its base to
distribute demands in an imposed first mode shape. Inelastic
demands are not eliminated but averaged, resulting in reduced
peak and residual drifts. Since behavior is no longer controlled
by a story mechanism, the integrated hybrid system is stronger
and more ductile, increasing safety and reducing the probability
of yellow or red tagging following an earthquake.
Estimating Demands
The essentially elastic nature of the strongback spine
ensures that yielding occurs primarily in the designated in-
elastic components. Demands and details in those inelastic
regions can be determined by traditional design methods
typical of a conventional system—e.g., as required by ASCE/
SEI 7-16: Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other
Structures. To remain essentially elastic, strongback elements
could then be designed to be stronger than the demands de-
livered by the expected maximum capacity of the inelastic
members (including overstrength, strain hardening, etc.) per
capacity-based design.
But traditional capacity design alone is an insufficient lower
bound on the demands in the strongback spine. Capacity design
assumes that the capacities of the inelastic elements limit the
forces that can develop during an earthquake. However, since
34 APRIL 2018
the strongback elements are dually designed to remain elastic
and resist lateral loads, they continue to accumulate demands
after the inelastic elements have yielded and as the ground
shaking intensifies.
These seismic demands are dynamic and constantly chang-
ing with time. Though the displaced shape is dominated by
a first mode (inverted triangular) response (refer to Figure 2
again) the demands in the strongback elements are maximized
under higher mode (bending) contributions. Thus, the required
strength of the essentially elastic components is still bounded
by capacity design principles but is additionally bounded by
elastic or partially elastic higher mode effects. These demands
can be significantly higher than those predicted solely from ca-
pacity design methods.
From Research to Practice
The behavior of the strongback is inherently dynamic.
While an iterative nonlinear dynamic analysis approach is pos-
sible, it is not a design method that would be regularly used by
design engineers for most steel building structures. Moreover,
an iterative approach still needs a preliminary design to initiate
the iterative process. A simplified static method that envelopes
the demands from higher modes with the demands from the in-
elastic components can provide a simple estimate of strongback
demands for design.
 Spiral Stair Stringers
Big, True, Plumb and Fast!

5/8” x 8” and 20” A572-50 plate curved to make 20” x 8” welded box stringers.
IWUDGLXVLQVLGHVWULQJHUDQGIWUDGLXVRXWVLGHVWULQJHUIRUDPXOWLWUDYHOÁDUHGRULHQWDWLRQ

Let us form your most challenging helixes

from the smallest to the largest sizes of
plate (3” x 60”), channel (C18 x 54.7), tube
CHICAGO • KANSAS CITY
(18” x 6”), pipe (24”), or beam (W30 x 99).
cmrp.com
Turnaround time fastest in the industry.

Call us at 877-940-5739
6WDQGDUG0LOO6KDSHV5ROOHG7R<RXU6SHFLÀFDWLRQV Call 877-940-5739

We also roll stair stringers, helical hand rails,

off-axis bends, formed shapes and extrusions.

Visit cmrp.com for more information. CHICAGO • KANSAS CITY

 Connect Steel to Steel without
conference Welding or Drilling
preview ࠮ Full line of high-strength fasteners
࠮0KLHSMVYZLJVUKHY`Z[LLSJVUULJ[PVUZHUKPUWSHU[
 LX\PWTLU[
࠮,HZ`[VPUZ[HSSVYHKQ\Z[VUZP[L
࠮>PSSUV[^LHRLUL_PZ[PUNZ[LLSVYOHYT
 WYV[LJ[P]LJVH[PUNZ
Though cost studies are still preliminary, ࠮.\HYHU[LLK:HML>VYRPUN3VHKZ
both research and practice have suggested ࠮*VYYVZPVUYLZPZ[HU[
that the strongback system can achieve bet-
ter behavior than a conventional braced
frame at comparable initial construction
costs. Compared to a conventional braced
frame in which all the braces yield, the
strongback truss may require larger brace
and column sizes to remain elastic. However,
the overall number of BRBs can be reduced
compared to a traditional BRBF. Moreover,
ordinary details can be used in the essential-
ly elastic truss if the strongback is designed
by a large enough margin to remain essen-
tially elastic under a rare earthquake.
Costs can additionally be balanced by the FloorFix and Grating Clip We manufacture ICC-ES
strongback’s inherent vertical redundancy. secure raised or open JLY[PÄLK)V_)VS[ŽMVY
Provided the strongback is strong enough ÅVVYZHUKNYH[PUN /::ISPUKJVUULJ[PVUZ A K E E S A F E T Y C O M PA N Y

to bridge across multiple stories, the spine

For a catalog and pricing, call toll-free 1-888-724-2323 or visit www.LNAsolutions.com/BC-1
provides an alternative force path that could
be used to circumvent structural irregulari-
ties. For instance, one or more of the inelastic
braces could be removed to satisfy architec-
tural constraints or to compensate for unan- ONE MACHINE
DOES IT ALL
ticipated failures in the inelastic elements. In-
elastic braces can also be disproportionately
sized to their expected demand-to-capacity
ratio, allowing the same inelastic brace size
to be used in every story.
In research, numerical analyses and one Save time and money with
experimental test have demonstrated that all-in-one plasma cutting,
strongback braced frames can successfully
distribute inelastic demands and mitigate milling & drilling machines
concentrations of damage. In addition,
strongback braced frames have been imple-
mented and constructed in practice (more
on this in the session; see the two photos).
As a simple and robust modification of a
conventional braced frame, the strongback
braced frame alleviates structural or archi-
tectural irregularities and promises poten-
tial for an in-between solution between
basic seismic performance and enhanced
seismic performance objectives. ■

This article is a preview of Session N2 “AISC

Research: Development of a Design Method-
ology for Steel Strongback Braced Frames” at
NASCC: The Steel Conference, taking place
K i n et ic US A .c om
April 11-13 in Baltimore. Learn more about 1. 800 .60 6. 29 5 4
the conference at www.aisc.org/nascc.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 35

 conference
preview
STEEL Project specifications for steel can help
SPECIFICATIONS… keep designs grounded in reality while
UNRAVELED! also serving as a guide.
BY JON BEIER, PE
AS THOSE OF US that work in steel design and con-
struction know, the hands-on aspects of the industry—de-
signing members and connections, fabricating beams and
columns or erecting trusses and frames—comprise the face
of the job.
But how do we ensure that our designs come together
properly and are accurately communicated? Drawings are not
enough. This is where project specifications come in. Project
specifications provide a great deal of information that drawings
and general notes cannot always convey. A well thought-out set
of specifications can help elaborate on the information in the
drawings, assist with defining expectations related to standards
compliance and ensure that contractors are competing on a
level playing field.
As players in the design and construction industry, it is im-
portant that we understand the information in a project specifi-
cation, especially as it relates to steel. What options exist when
editing specifications, and what are the implications of each
option? How do the specifications relate to the general notes
included on the drawings? How are responsibilities defined in
the specifications, and what impacts could those responsibilities
have on a fabricator or erector? These are some of the ques-
tions that we will explore.
Jon Beier (jbeier@smbhinc.com)
is a principal with SMBH, Inc., in
Columbus.
36 APRIL 2018
While these inquiries aren’t always easy to answer, some
common language can go a long way. In the U.S. and Canada,
this common language can be found in MasterFormat. Man-
aged by the Construction Specifiers Institute (CSI), MasterFor-
mat is a system for organizing specifications and other docu-
mentation for commercial construction. It divides construction
products into 50 divisions, and each division is then divided
in multiple sections, which are generally organized by mate-
rial type or trade. This helps to define responsibilities of the
contractor as well as provide individual specifications for dif-
ferent materials. Metals such as steel typically occupy Division
05, which contains several sections dedicated to areas such as
structural steel, architecturally exposed structural steel (AESS),
steel joists, steel deck and metal fabrications.
Each section typically has three parts: general, products and
execution. The general part discusses overall requirements in-
cluding submittals, meeting requirements and quality assurance.
The products portion defines material properties included in
the project. The last part, execution, discusses various responsi-
bilities associated with the fabrication and erection of the speci-
fied elements, as well as quality control.
Although each section is separate, there are often associa-
tions between them. When it comes to applying MasterFormat
to a specific project, it is important that the sections are well
coordinated and consistent with the other specification sections,
general notes and construction drawings. It is equally impor-
tant for designers to be cognizant of what information appears
in multiple places. For example, steel member properties such
as yield strength are given in both the steel specifications and
in the general notes.
Project specifications for steel are dealt with in a variety of
ways by different companies. Customization is common and
important for maintaining efficiency and consistency between
all of a company’s projects. Therefore, each company’s specifi-
cations will likely look a little different from others. This ses-
sion will discuss some possible options for customizing office
specifications and, in addition to the
questions mentioned above, address
the following queries: Who edits spec-
ifications within your office? Do you
have a dedicated specification writer
or does each engineer edit their own
specifications? As an erector or fabri-
cator, what are the common items that
could have a big effect on cost?
The focus will mainly be on the
Structural Steel Framing section of
Division 5 in MasterFormat (05 12 00).
Some of the items to be discussed are:
➤ Definitions that ensure
consistency on the project
➤ Submittals including product
data, LEED submittals, shop
drawings and delegated-design
submittals
➤ Quality assurance requirements
such as AISC Certification
➤ Material properties and finishes
➤ The different types of bolts,
connectors and anchors
➤ Fabrication and erection tolerances
➤ Field connections
➤ Field quality control

Which bolts are right?

See that the bolts are tight!
with DuraSquirt DTIs ®

the best way to bolt!

800 552 1999 Booth 1422

802 460 3100
NASCC
THE STEEL CONFERENCE
appliedbolting.com 2018 sponsor
info@appliedbolting.com

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 37

 conference
preview

While the structural steel section will

Expanding Structural Solutions.
CHOOSE Lower construction
CELLULAR BEAMS costs: their design decreases
installation and material costs
TO CONSTRUCT YOUR
PARKING DECKS
Reduced operating
costs: minimal maintenance
required with a life
expectancy of 70+ years
Safety: open-air design
offers a welcoming atmosphere
wherever they are installed
Ayrsley Parking Deck, Charlotte, NC, February 2018
be the main focus, a few other sections
will be discussed as well, including AESS
(05 12 13), Steel Joist Framing (05 21 00),
Steel Decking (05 31 00) and Metal Fab-
rications (05 50 00). Each section has its
unique set of options. For example, when
AESS is specified, it is very important that
this section is coordinated with the struc-
tural steel section. Steel joists are unique
in that they often have delegated design
aspects. Therefore, there is certain infor-
mation related to the design that must be
conveyed to the joist supplier. Metal fab-
rications are similar in this respect, and a
unique aspect of this section is the fact that
the architect (not the structural engineer)
is the one that often edits it. Finally, the
metal deck section contains several options
related to type, finish and capacity. Not
fully considering or understanding the op-
tions for these various sections could have
detrimental effects on a project.
Another consideration is that specifica-
tions are technical documents that can be
used when resolving a dispute. If inconsis-
tencies exist in the specifications or infor-
mation is missing, it takes much more ef-
fort and resources to resolve these disputes
than if a little more time and effort were
spent on the front end to ensure consis-
tency and clarity.
Overall, specifications are an impor-
tant part of most projects. They provide
information on material properties in ad-
dition to the contractor’s expectations. It
is important for designers, detailers, fabri-
cators and erectors to take the time to ful-
ly read and understand the specifications
for their projects. Consider them another
tool to guide your projects and help them
■
go smoothly.

This article is a preview of Session N19 “Steel

Specifications Unraveled” at NASCC: The
Steel Conference, taking place April 11-13 in
Baltimore. Learn more about the conference at
Supplying design assistance
www.aisc.org/nascc.
and cellular beams.

Visit the C-BEAMS team to expand your long and short span structures to their best value potential.
(704) 322-3171 information@c-beams.com www.c-beams.com

38 APRIL 2018
 Fetch!
Retrieve your copy of the 15th Edition Steel Construction Manual today—
and teach yourself a few new steel design tricks!

Updates for this edition include:

• New heavier W-shape sizes and larger
HSS, pipe and angle sizes
• A new all-in-one “super table” that gives
the available compressive, flexural, shear
and tension strengths for W-shapes
• W-shape column tables for 65- and
70-ksi steel
• HSS design tables updated to higher
strength ASTM A500 Grade C steel
• Updated coped beam strength design
procedure
And of course, the Manual includes print
versions of current steel standards:
• ANSI/AISC 360-16, Specification for
Structural Steel Buildings
• ANSI/AISC 303-16, Code of Standard
Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges
• 2014 Specification for Structural
Joints Using High-Strength Bolts from
the Research Council on Structural
Connections

ORDER YOURS TODAY!

$200 Members | $400 Non-Members

There’s always a solution in steel. www.aisc.org/publications
American Institute of Steel Construction
800.644.2400
312.670.2400 www.aisc.org
 conference
preview
A BIG A new bridge between Iowa and Illinois
CONNECTION signals another success for structural steel
BETWEEN over the Mississippi River.
SMALL TOWNS
BY GREG HASBROUCK, PE
THE TINY TOWN OF SABULA, IOWA (popula-
tion: circa 550) is located on a tiny island in the Mississippi
River, roughly halfway between the larger Iowa river towns of
Dubuque and Davenport.
While small in stature, it sits at one end of a significant
crossing over the river, which has recently been replaced. The
new US 52 Savanna-Sabula Bridge opened to traffic this past
November, capping a monumental project for both Sabula
and Savanna, Ill., on the other side of the Mississippi. At over
2,400 ft in length, the steel tied arch and plate girder bridge
replaced a truss bridge, which was built in 1932. The crossing
provides a crucial transportation link for the region, with the
nearest alternate route over the Mississippi located 20 miles to
the south in Clinton, Iowa. Over the years, a number of repairs
had been made to the bridge, and it was rapidly approaching
the end of its useful life and in need of replacement.
The new Savanna-Sabula Bridge consists of 12 spans total-
ling 2,454 ft: a 546-ft main span steel tied arch over the naviga-
tion channel flanked by steel girder approach spans. The struc-
ture, at a total cost of $80 million, extends from a causeway
on the Iowa side in the middle of the Upper Mississippi River
Wildlife and Fish Refuge to the high bluffs of the Mississippi
Palisades in Illinois.
Greg Hasbrouck
(greg.hasbrouck@parsons.com)
is a supervising bridge engineer
in the Chicago office of Parsons
and was the bridge design lead
for the US 52 Savanna-Sabula
Bridge project.
40 APRIL 2018
Cross Section and Type Selection
The existing structure consisted of two 10-ft lanes with no
shoulders, and while projected traffic volumes for the area did
not warrant more capacity, improving the cross section to meet
policy standards was a priority for enhancing safety and mobil-
ity. The new cross section consists of two 12-ft lanes with 8-ft
shoulders on each side to provide more clearance and accom-
modate bicyclists on the shoulders.
The original navigation channel span closer to the Illinois
riverbank provided a 508-ft horizontal clearance and a 64.6-ft
vertical clearance above the normal pool elevation. As part of
the studies to improve the geometric configuration of the new
bridge and roadway, the desire was to minimize the vertical
profile grades on the bridge. To help achieve this goal, the de-
sign team approached the U.S. Coast Guard and facilitated the
coordination of a 150-ft shift of the navigation channel toward
the center of the river to bring down the grade and allow for a
7.5-ft superstructure depth over the channel.
Deep girder spans were eliminated from consideration due
to the minimal structure depth, leaving tied arch and cable-
stayed structure type options for the main span. After a type
evaluation, a steel tied arch was selected for the main span
due to its slightly lower overall cost, perceived advantages in
constructability and DOT familiarity with maintenance and
potential future deck replacement options.
New Tied Arch
The new bridge structure consists of an eight-span 1,420-ft
steel girder approach structure on the Iowa side, a 546-ft main
span steel tied arch over the navigation channel and a three-
span 488-ft steel girder approach structure on the Illinois side,
including a span over the BNSF rail road. The cross section
consists of a 6-girder layout with girders spaced at 7 ft, 3 in.
Using six girders allowed for the bridge deck to be replaced
one half at a time while maintaining bidirectional controlled
traffic on one lane, and three girders to maintain a redundant
 A cross-section view at the arch.
The $80 million bridge consists of 12 spans totalling 2,454
ft: a 546-ft main span steel tied arch over the navigation
channel flanked by steel girder approach spans.

structure and eliminate the need for total closure for fu-
ture maintenance and repairs.
A welded steel box section arch rib and bolted built-up
box tie girder were selected to provide both an efficient
section for the arch in compression and redundancy for
the tie girder in tension, with continuity of the force flow
through the web plates in the knuckle to simplify connec-
tion details. High-performance Grade HPS50W steel was
specified for the tie girder and knuckle plates for improved
toughness, and the tie girder is designed for the loss of
Erection of the cantilever arch.
any single plate (web or flange) and the resulting eccentric
loading on the remaining section.
Two vertical structural strand hangers support the tie
and floor system and are offset from the floor beam and
upper lateral bracing connections to simplify load paths,
detailing and fabrication at these critical connections. The
dual-strand system also provides redundancy at the hanger
connection in the event of hanger loss.
A floating deck system, with deck supported by six
lines of continuous stringers spanning over top the
floor beams, was selected to accommodate future deck
replacement. The stringers are fixed at the center two
floor beams and rest on elastomeric bearings over the re-
mainder of the floor beams to allow for any differential
movements of the arch and floor system during service.
Relative movements during erection were taken through
slotted holes in the connections, with the bolts tightened
after pouring the deck.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 41

 conference preview
The apan layout of the new bridge.
At midspan of the arch, the deck is extended and connected
to the tie girders to transfer longitudinal loads from the deck
directly to the arch system through diaphragm action of the
deck. The floor beams, stringers and lower lateral bracing were
all detailed with lengths under 60 ft to permit hot-dipping in
local galvanizing tanks for additional corrosion protection of
the floor system.
Upper lateral X-bracing was chosen to provide a modern,
light and efficient bracing system using simpler pin-connected
tension and compression truss elements made from square box
sections. These sections are galvanized to provide a protective
coating on both the inside and outside surfaces of the members.
Contractor and steel erector Kraemer North America
elected to construct the arch through cantilever erection, with
stay towers erected on top of the main river piers and tied
back to the approach superstructure steel girders two piers
away. The tension in the back stays was resisted by compres-
sion in the approach girders back to the main piers, creating a
balanced system with the compression occurring in the arch
during erection. ■ Tensor Engineering, Indian Harbour Beach, Fla.
42 APRIL 2018
The bridge’s location on the Mississippi River between
Iowa and Illinois.
This article is a preview of Session B3 “Major Spans–Part 1” at
NASCC: The Steel Conference, taking place April 11-13 in Baltimore.
Learn more about the conference at www.aisc.org/nascc. In addition
to featuring the US 52 Savanna-Sabula Bridge project mentioned
above, the session will also focus on Little Rock’s Broadway Bridge re-
placement project, which was featured in “Making a Signature Con-
nection” in the July 2017 issue, available at www.modernsteel.com.
Owner
Illinois Department of Transportation
Structural Engineer
Parsons, Chicago
Steel Team
Fabricator
Veritas Steel, Eau Claire and Wausau, Wis.
Erector and General Contractor
Kraemer North America, Plain, Wis.
Detailer
 The organizing committee of the
2018 NASCC: THE STEEL CONFERENCE
gratefully acknowledges the support of our

SPONSORS

CONFERENCE DINNER VENUES

Nucor WEDNESDAY KEYNOTE SPEAKER

Atlas Tube
WATER BOTTLES

CADeploy THURSDAY a.m. COFFEE BREAK

Controlled Automation, Inc.
CONFERENCE BAGS
WELCOME LUNCH
Peddinghaus Canam-Buildings
FabSuite–Steel Management Software
HOTEL KEY CARDS
SDS/2 WELCOME LOUNGE
American Welding Society
BADGE LANYARDS Giza
Trimble SILVER
American Metal Market
MOBILE APP Applied Bolting Technology, Inc.
Autodesk, Inc.
BRONZE
PROGRAM NOTEBOOKS Chicago Metal Rolled Products
Ficep Corporation
AISC Certification Hercules Bolt Company
InfoSight Corporation
GOLD SPONSORS Infra-Metals Co.
New Millennium Building Systems Ironworker Management Progressive
Action Cooperative Trust (IMPACT)
Steel Dynamics, Inc. planB Engineering
STRUMIS LLC Voortman Steel Group

THANK YOU!
 conference
preview
BIM FOR BRIDGES Bridging the information
AND STRUCTURES exchange chasm.
BY AARON COSTIN, PHD, AND
JASON STITH, SE, PE, PHD
WE ARE ARGUABLY living the greatest age of information
and technology.
In the past decade, there has been an explosion of informa-
tion-producing technology and software. Even more so, we are
witnessing mass use of that information. Google’s and Face-
book’s—two of the largest companies in the world by market
capitalization—greatest asset is their ability to own, manage
and maintain information. And we are experiencing the same
evolution in the architecture, engineering, construction and
operations industries, with the maturity of building informa-
tion modeling (BIM) and the development of smart cities.
However, the transportation infrastructure has been slow to
adopt these technologies, mainly due to the non-interoperability
(e.g., sharing capabilities) of the various software options. There
is a great need to bridge the chasm of non-interoperable soft-
ware in order to reap the full benefits of information production,
use and sharing for the life cycle of bridges and other transpor-
tation structures. To meet that need, we must look to adopt the
proven means and methods of BIM seen in the building domain.
The concept of BIM for bridges and structures will be in-
tegral to the management of bridge projects in the future, and
state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other owners
are already beginning to see the potential asset management
advantages of using BIM. BIM is not just a pretty 3D picture of
a structure that one can fly through and use for marketing pur-
poses. Rather, it encompasses the information that describes a
structure, from conception through operation and beyond. Es-
sentially, BIM is information. Behind the scenes of the repre-
sentations of the model is data. To a computer, data is just bits
and bytes—1s and 0s. Importance is placed on the data that
describes the geometry, material properties, section properties,
fabricator changes, coating systems, field changes, etc. Being
able to use the information in a stand-alone fashion (e.g., struc-
tural design) can be useful.
However, an enormous potential exists to link that
information to other stakeholders, such as designers to
fabricators to contractors to maintenance/asset management
tools. This sharing of information is known as information
44 APRIL 2018
exchange, and the free and effortless exchange of information
from one software to another is called interoperability. For the
bridge industry to capitalize on interoperability to enhance
asset management systems, a standardized scheme and
method needs to be developed and adopted. As the National
BIM Standard and the industry foundation classes (IFC)
(www.nationalbimstandard.org/) provide the standards and
methods for information exchanges in the building domain, so
too must such standards and methods be developed for bridges.
In order adopt a neutral format like IFC, the bridge industry
must first develop standardized exchange requirements.
AASHTO/NSBA Efforts
The National Steel Bridge Alliance (NSBA) is leading the
way for standardization of steel bridges by developing ex-
change requirements for these structures. The effort to de-
velop a standard has been going on for over a decade. Sev-
eral years ago, AASHTO/NSBA began a task group (TG15)
formed to focus on Data Modeling for Interoperability, head-
ed by Dr. Stuart Chen. This group started to build a data set
library and develop a graphical representation of the bridge
life-cycle (process map). Formed as a pilot study, the TG10/
TG15 subcommittee worked with erection engineers to de-
termine a model for this standardization process. Over the
course of two years, the authors of this article led the subcom-
mittee of dedicated volunteers, including Ron Crockett, Steve
Percassi, Jon Stratton, Rob McKenna, Jon Gast, Ronnie Med-
lock, Hanjin Hu and others. The group developed an infor-
mation delivery manual for steel bridge erection engineering
that identified the erection engineering exchanges needed for
interoperability. Currently, the AASHTO/NSBA database has
grown to more than 2,000 unique entities that can be speci-
fied for any given exchange. This bottom-up approach to BIM
standardization is an important distinction that uses bridge
industry experts rather than BIM experts to define the neces-
sary information to be exchanged. Several lessons were identi-
fied, including detailed assumption and standardized formats,
which would enable future work to be completed faster and
 Bridge as binary data.

more purposefully. Currently, TG15, chaired by Samy El- FHWA, along with 13 state DOTs, has pledged to finance a
sayed, is modifying final deliverables per comments provided pooled-fund study lead by Ahmad Abu-Hawash of IowaDOT and
by AASHTO/NSBA members. backed by SCOBS T-19 (chaired by Scot Becker of WisDOT)
(www.pooledfund.org/details/solicitation/1450). With
Latest FHWA Push a current total of $1.24 million pledged, the FHWA and these
Since standardization of the data scheme needs to be at the DOTs are committed to moving the practice forward by taking
national level, and not state DOT-specific, the Federal High- the recommendation from the recently completed NCHRP 20-07,
way Administration (FHWA) has an integral role to play. One Task 377, led by Michael Baker International, which outlined the
of the most notable voices in the realm of BIM for bridges and steps to develop and implement BIM within the bridge industry.
structures is Brian M. Kozy, principal bridge engineer at FHWA.
Kozy has been a staunch advocate in moving the industry toward
a BIM-based project development and asset management ap-
proach. In a recent discussion with Kozy, he stated that there are
two global benefits in adopting BIM for bridges and structures:
1. “When engineers produce and maintain a BIM model,
this is fundamentally providing a product that has much
greater value to the owner and other stakeholders down-
stream. Anyone who has need of information about the
bridge can benefit when a 3D model has been used, from
engineer to fabricator to contractor to owner to inspec-
tor and beyond.”
2. “BIM-based workflow fundamentally advances the way
that engineering is done for the bridge. Engineers and
other stakeholders can invest more of their time on de- Aaron Costin (aaron.costin@ufl.edu) is an assistant professor at
veloping the optimal solution for the project rather than the University of Florida’s M.E. Rinker, Sr. School of Construction
wasting time on the data management and other book- Management, and Jason Stith (jason.stith@mbakerintl.com) is a
keeping aspects of the project.” bridge technical manager for Michael Baker International. Both are
chairs of AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collaboration task groups.

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 45

 conference preview

C.Y. Yong

Looking Toward the Future

As this transition to a digital, model-based workflow transpires,
the members of the AASHTO/NSBA committee will be advising
and providing recommendations from lessons learned on behalf of
the steel bridge industry. In the not-too-distant future, when BIM
for bridges and structures is realized to its full potential, much
of the information transferred via engineering drawings will be
exchanged electronically.
What does this mean for engineers? The designers will provide
the camber information, which fabricators will be able to transfer
into detailing software without the risk of typos or time-consuming
data entry. Another area fabricators have identified where BIM will
assist is the bill of material sheet necessary for ordering steel. Iden-
tifying and keying in this information takes time and resources and
introduces a risk for error. CNC machines need information about
the bridge geometry that could originate from the designer and be
refined by the detailer. Quick and efficient data exchanges would
reduce cost and provide meaningful advancement over current prac-
tices. Later, the bridge lifecycle load raters and consideration for
overload permits need much of the same information as the original
designers, in addition to as-built and bridge inspection conditions,
which, if stored electronically in a standardized format, would expe-
dite accurate ratings. The list of possible improvements is vast, but
Jason Stith

it is fair to say that perpetually scarce transportation funding and

resources will necessitate this kind of innovation.

46 APRIL 2018
 conference preview

Significantly, tangible benefits via a

model-based approach have been proven
in the building domain, such as reduced er-
rors, shortened schedules, decreased proj-
ects costs and increased profits. However,
in order to realize the full potential of BIM
for bridges and structures, it’s essential for
all stakeholders to band together to pro-
vide collaboration and alignment. BIM has
been successful because it has been driven
by the building industry, and those of us in
the bridge industry must drive the effort
for our projects as well. ■

This article is a preview of Session B8 “Reduc-

ing Errors in Bridge Drawings—What You
Can do Today and Look to in the Future” at
NASCC: The Steel Conference, taking place
April 11-13 in Baltimore. Learn more about
the conference at www.aisc.org/nascc.
Jason Stith

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 47

 A Seattle office building incorporates
castellated beams to balance
high-seismic needs with
green objectives.
Balanced
DESIGN BY ERIN SPAULDING
Erin Spaulding (espaulding@
dci-engineers.com) is a
communications coordinator with
DCI Engineers. Jacob Meader,
PE, and Greg Gilda, SE, PE, both
with DCI Engineers, served as
technical advisors on this article.
48 APRIL 2018
THERE ARE MANY SELF-PROCLAIMED “Centers of
the Universe” out there.
Seattle’s Fremont neighborhood is one of them. The city and
its surrounding communities continue to experience significant
growth, with new and resilient structures going up at a rapid pace.
One of these, in Fremont, is Data 1, a five-story office building
adjacent to the George Washington Memorial Bridge, aka Auro-
ra Bridge (under which lives the famous Fremont Troll, a beloved
public sculpture located a couple of blocks uphill).
Completed this past summer, the building is helping to propel
what is quickly becoming the area’s upper echelon of project stan-
dards: resilient, efficient structures that incorporate green initiatives
from design through completion and beyond. The 125,000-sq.-ft
facility features a fourth-floor, steel-framed conference room that
cantilevers 10 ft from centerline into an interior courtyard, an ex-
 RoseBechtold, DCI

Data 1 incorporates castellated beams throughout.

The five-story, 125,000-sq.-ft office building sits mere feet away from
the supports of the George Washington Memorial Bridge in Seattle’s
Fremont neighborhood.
Weber Thompson
Weber Thompson

terior metal shading system for natural building cooling and a biore-
tention system in the right-of-way that collects and cleans 160,000
gallons of water runoff annually from the adjacent bridge.
DCI Engineers (DCI), the engineer of record, performed
structural analysis and design for the higher-rated Seismic De-
sign Category D project, whose upper four levels are framed with
structural steel; the retail level is concrete. This combined ap-
proach allowed the project to maintain the Type III B rating for
the above steel framing, thus avoiding fireproofing requirements,
which saved additional costs, and allowing the steel members to
remain exposed. The steel provided LEED benefits early on for
the project, fulfilling structural performance needs while also
meeting architectural desires and daylighting goals.
“The beauty of steel for this project coalesced around its ma-
teriality—its lightness, flexibility and industrial aesthetic,” noted
Myer Harrell, principal and director of sustainability with project
architect Weber Thompson. “Under Type III B construction, no
fireproofing was required, making steel the best structural choice.”
Castellated Beams
One major project component included fulfilling a 60% build-
ing transparency goal that would capture more daylight, reduce
electricity needs and provide tenants access to fresh air and optimal
views of the surrounding neighborhood. Satisfying much of the day-
lighting needs, a courtyard in the center of the building opens the
upper three steel levels to highly desired, albeit often cloud-muted,
Pacific Northwest daylight. And the steel framing system was able
to further take advantage of daylighting with the incorporation of
castellated beams, which allowed the team to achieve adequate floor
framing stiffness at a fraction of the weight while also allowing natu-
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 49
 RoseBechtold, DCI
Castellated beams allowed the team to achieve adequate floor framing stiff-
ness at a fraction of the weight while also allowing natural light to penetrate
the openings in the beam webs.
The central courtyard provides another significant conduit for daylighting.

Ryan Furth, Lewis Builders

ral light to penetrate the openings in the beam webs. The project
used approximately 830 tons of steel and included W14×109 gravity
columns and W24×146 moment frame columns, with typical floor
beams being comprised of two W12 sections cut and welded to cre-
ate an effective castellated depth of 18 in. Fabricator Brooklyn Iron
Works took on the entire steel scope of this project, including com-
plete fabrication of the castellated beams. This decision ensured that
deliveries were loaded in an erectable manner for the exceedingly
tight job site and helped keep the schedule on course.
“To achieve that same floor stiffness with a conventional
W12 beam would have increased the weight by 250%,” said
Jacob Meader, DCI project manager. “That net savings really
adds up when the whole building is considered.”
“The castellated beams allow higher ceiling clearances and
more daylighting, so the overall impact is interiors that feel
more open and brighter,” said Joanna Callahan, a partner with
CoU Limited Liability Co., Data 1’s developer.
50 APRIL 2018
CoU, which stands for “center of the universe,” was formed
specifically for the Data 1 project by Callahan, along with Mark
Grey and Callahan’s partner at Hess Callahan, Mike Hess. This
ownership team was also behind the Terry Thomas, Seattle’s
first green commercial office building designed without me-
chanical cooling and an example of the advantages of office day-
lighting efficiencies. That DCI project is located on the other
end of Lake Union from Data 1, in the city’s South Lake Union
district, and also uses castellated steel beams. In both buildings,
the beams allow routing for mechanical, electrical and plumb-
ing systems while eliminating the need for additional finishes
like ceilings and beam wrapping—serving as much an architec-
tural purpose as a performance one.
“The team encouraged the tenant to paint the steel beams,
girders, columns and underside of the metal deck white and
keep them exposed where possible, to support the core and
shell building daylight strategy,” said Myer.
 Brooklyn Iron Works

Castellated beams in production at Brooklyn Iron Work’s shop. The castellated

beams allowed for higher ceiling clearances and more daylighting. More than
800 tons of structural steel in all was used in the project.

Ryan Furth, Lewis Builders Brooklyn Iron Works

With the beams visible from street level, DCI chose a hex-
agonal pattern over a typical cellular (round) cut for added
material savings. However, because the roof had a fairly large
area consisting only of metal decking, DCI had to upsize the
castellated beams in line with the moment frames to act as col-
lectors and take the required axial load, due to dragging the
diaphragm forces, into the seismic force-resisting system. This
system included highly ductile steel special moment frames,
further enhancing the building’s seismic performance through
the moment frames’ minimized drift.
Transferring Loads
Designed in partnership with SidePlate, an engineering
firm specializing in connection systems designed specifically
for projects in high-seismic regions (like Data 1) the moment
frames did not require complete joint penetration (CJP) weld-
ing. Instead, the team used a field fillet-welded solution that
accomplished optimal connection stiffness without the added
size of CJP welding, thus lowering inspection and labor costs.
Distributing loads and strengthening the load path, however,
were complicated by the need to transition the forces at the
post-tensioned concrete transfer level. While fabricating the
steel portion of the moment frames was somewhat routine, the
anchorage and transfer to the concrete portion below was any-
thing but.
“There was a forest of rebar, steel and post-tensioning ten-
dons,” said Brett Hart, director of engineering for SidePlate
and project manager on Data 1. “We went out to the project
very early to focus on the base conditions and the construction
team was particularly concerned about fitting everything into
such a confined space.”
DCI and SidePlate worked together to find flexibility where it
could work, which included adjusting rebar size and positioning
within those connection areas. The design team also accounted
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 51
 North elevation.

Weber Thompson

The upper four levels are

framed with structural
steel while the retail level
is concrete.
An SMF base connection.

52 APRIL 2018
 A steel-framed signature stairwell.

for the three-story courtyard, which essen-

tially created a hole in the building’s dia-
phragm. The lateral structural framing in-
cluded all four sides of the building with an
added frame around the courtyard to pro-
vide redundancy, “a strategy cooked up to
bolster the load path for lateral forces in the
event of a seismic event,” according to Hart.
This would ensure an adequate load
path around the opening to the vertical/
lateral force-resisting system components
such as the moment frames. But it also
meant coordinating moment frame loca-
tions through several levels of mixed-use,
mixed-material construction using a mini-
mal number of transfer beams to accom-
modate the building’s open area param-
eters. This load path would go from the
roof, through four levels of steel-framing
office space, a concrete retail level and two
levels of subterranean parking. Occupancy
encroachment, particularly to parking, had
to be minimal.
Combining these factors with the slope
of the site, the DCI team performed a two-
stage lateral analysis, per the requirements
of ASCE 7 Section 12.2.3.2 to design the
combined lateral systems and eliminate any
torsional irregularities.
Resilient, seismic-centric design doesn’t
mean sacrificing project goals like in-
creased daylighting or energy efficiency. In
fact, Data 1 proved that it can actually en-
able stakeholders to invest in the life span
of a building, providing an opportunity for
Ryan Furth, Lewis Builders
sustainable practices for years to come. And
it’s certainly at the center of the universe in
terms of buildings that balance seismic and
sustainable goals. ■
General Contractor
Pennon Construction
Architect
Weber Thompson
Structural Engineer
DCI Engineers
Steel Team
Fabricator
Brooklyn Iron Works, Inc.,
Spokane, Wash.
Detailer
Axis Steel Detailing, Inc., Lehi, Utah

The building adroitly combines green

design and seismic performance.
Weber Thompson

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 53

 SEISMIC
Matters
BY LARRY S. MUIR, PE
A closer look at seismic design with AISC’s Steel Solutions Center.
HERE IN THE STEEL SOLUTIONS CENTER, we are
periodically asked about the percentage of questions involving
seismic design.
A quick analysis revealed that the answer is slightly more
than one out of every 20 questions.
Even though seismic demand must be considered in the
design of all structures, in many instances this demand is low
enough that no special measures are required. Here, when we
refer to “seismic design,” we are really referring to buildings
that must satisfy AISC’s Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
Buildings (ANSI/AISC 341, www.aisc.org/standards). Below
is a handful of some of the more compelling and relatable seis-
mic questions we’ve received recently. All of them are keyed to
the newest (2016) edition of the Seismic Provisions.
A few notes before we dive into the questions and answers:
➤ We receive a fair number of questions related to the prop-
er selection of the seismic force-resisting system (SFRS).
Permitted systems are described in documents like the
International Building Code and ASCE/SEI 7: Minimum
Larry Muir (muir@aisc.org)
is AISC’s director of technical
assistance.
54 APRIL 2018
Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. The or-
ganizations that develop and maintain these documents
are the best source of information related to their intent.
➤ Structural steel is obviously the preferred choice for a
structural system, but there are several steel options avail-
able. If permitted, a structural steel building “not specifi-
cally detailed for seismic resistance” (an R = 3 system)
is generally the most economical choice. The February
2018 Steel Interchange column included three questions
related to the selection of the SFRS. You can view it at
www.modernsteel.com.
➤ In addition to the items presented here and in the February
Steel Interchange, you can find other seismic-related Steel
Interchange items at www.modernsteel.com (select Re-
sources, then Steel Interchange). Items dating back to
May 1997 are individually listed, making a search for
the term “seismic” the easiest way to find seismic-
related items.
Slip-Critical Connections in the Seismic
Force-Resisting System
Do all bolted connections in the SFRS have to be designed
as slip-critical?
No. This is a relatively common question. With a few excep-
tions, Section D2.2 of the Seismic Provisions indicates that the
available shear strength of bolted joints shall be calculated as
bearing-type. However (again, with a few exceptions) the bolts
shall be pretensioned and the faying surfaces shall have a Class
A (or higher) slip coefficient.
In effect, the connections are designed as bearing
connections and detailed, fabricated and erected similar to
slip-critical connections.
Demand-Critical Welds
Are all welds in the SRFS required to be demand-critical?
No. The Seismic Provisions explicitly states every location
where demand-critical welds are required. There are no re-
quirements for demand-critical welds listed in Chapters A
through D. Therefore, the easiest way to determine which
welds in a particular system need to be demand-critical is to
go to the section covering the system in question (E1 for or-
dinary moment frames/OMFs, F2 for special concentrically
braced frames/SCBFs, etc.) and search for the words “demand
critical.” When designing special moment frames (SMFs)
there may also be connection-specific requirements in AISC
358: Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel
Moment Frames for Seismic Applications (a free download from
www.aisc.org/seismic).
Defining Elements in the Seismic
Force-Resisting System
Is a particular element (a beam, a column, a horizontal
brace, etc.) part of the SFRS?
Two answers are provided: one to the engineer and one to
the fabricator.
Fabricator: Section A4.1 of the Seismic Provisions requires
the engineer to designate the SFRS and identify members and
connections that are part of the SFRS in the structural design
drawings and specifications. If the intent is not clear relative to
a particular member or connection, then you should seek clari-
fication from the engineer.
You should not be expected to make this determination
without the information required in the Seismic Provisions, and
you should certainly not try to guess or assume the intent if it
is not clear.
Engineer: Section A4.1 of the Seismic Provisions requires
the engineer to designate the SFRS and identify members and
connections that are part of the SFRS in the structural design
drawings and specifications. As the engineer, you need to define
and communicate your intent.
It is sometimes argued that the definition of the SFRS pro-
vided in the Seismic Provisions requires that all elements in the
structure be considered part of the SFRS. This argument is of-
ten based on the assertion that all of the elements are included
in the computer model, and therefore seismic demand “leaks”
into every element in the model.
The Seismic Provisions requires the engineer of record (EOR)
to define the SFRS in the contract documents. The intent of the
Seismic Provisions is that the EOR will apply their own knowledge,
judgement and experience when defining the SFRS. It is not the
intent to have such items as gravity beams, conveyor supports,
pipe hangers and grating clamps meet the requirements of the
Seismic Provisions, though we have heard arguments made that
we require such practices. Ultimately, the EOR must make this
determination. The SFRS is not limited to the members in the
named system (ordinary concentrically braced frame—OCBF—
SMF, etc.) but neither must it extend to every element, or a ma-
jority of elements, in the structure. Elements that are sometimes
overlooked are collectors and chords.
Per Section A1, the Seismic Provisions applies to buildings and
other structures with moment frames, braced frames and shear walls.
Other structures are defined as those structures designed, fabricat-
ed and erected in a manner similar to buildings, with building-like
vertical and lateral force-resisting elements. As the structures being
designed approach the limits of the scope of the Seismic Provisions,
the engineer must apply significant judgment to its application to
ensure the intent is satisfied. When it comes to industrial, nonbuild-
ing structures, determining when and how the Seismic Provisions ap-
plies can also be tricky and requires some judgment.
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 55
 Unlisted Materials in the Seismic Force-Resisting System
In order to reduce costs, the owner of a project I am working
on would like to use material in the SRFS that is not listed
in Section A3.1 of the Seismic Provisions. Is this permitted?

No. The AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/

AISC 360, www.aisc.org/specifications) has a pretty liberal
stance on materials. Section A3.1 provides a list of approved
materials but does not prohibit the use of other materials. The
Commentary provides further guidance.
However, the Seismic Provisions treats material selection dif-
ferently. Section A3.1 states: “Structural steel used in the seismic
force-resisting system (SFRS) shall satisfy the requirements of
Specification Section A3.1, except as modified in these Provisions.”
It then provides requirements and exceptions related to the yield
strength of the material. It goes on to state: “The structural steel
used in the SFRS described in Chapters E, F, G and H shall meet
one of the following ASTM Specifications…” and provides a list
of permitted materials. There is an exception made for materials
in buckling restrained braced frames (BRBFs), which are subject
to cyclic qualification tests. The permitted materials have been
selected to be consistent with tested seismic systems and to re-
flect desirable seismic performance characteristics (e.g., ductility
or limited maximum tensile capacity) consistent with the require-
ments of the Seismic Provisions.
Even if other materials were not explicitly prohibited, their
use in the SFRS could be difficult due to lack of expected mate-
rial strengths established to be consistent with the Seismic Pro-
visions. The lack of values for Ry and Rt effectively excludes the
use of unlisted materials for yielding elements and makes correct
implementation of some provisions virtually impossible.

Maximum Force that Can Be Delivered to the System

In a number of places, the Seismic Provisions allows the de-
sign force (required strength) for elements to be limited
based on the maximum load effect that can be transferred
to the element by the system. What does this mean and how
is it implemented?

A basis of design is included for each system addressed in the Seis-

mic Provisions. It describes the intended behavior of each system
and often designates the expected source of inelastic deforma-
tion capacity (the yielding element) such as the moment beam in
special and intermediate moment frames (IMFs) or the brace in
BRBFs. In some cases, something other than the strength of the
yielding (or buckling, etc.) member limits the force that can be
delivered to an element. The exception you describe is intended
to account for this possibility.
A good deal of judgment is required when exercising this option
and to recognize that the exception rather than the rule is being ap-
plied. What may be acceptable behavior for one system may not be
acceptable for another. The Commentary provides guidance.
For OMFs, the Commentary lists the following factors that
can limit the forces transferred to the connection: column yield-
ing, panel zone yielding, foundation uplift and the overstrength
seismic load.
For SCBFs, the Commentary indicates that the maximum
force that can be transferred to the connection can be determined
by: performing a pushover analysis to determine the forces acting
on the connections at the frame capacity, determining how much

56 APRIL 2018
force can be resisted before causing uplift of a spread footing or Your understanding is not correct. Users of the Seismic Provi-
performing a suite of inelastic time history analyses and envel- sions sometimes mistakenly assume that all work is prohibited
oping the connection demands. in the protected zone. However, Section F2.5c also defines the
It must be recognized that limiting the force in this manner “elements that connect braces to beams and columns” (essential-
represents an exception and a relaxation relative to the behavior ly gusset plates) as protected zones. Gusset plates are commonly
described in the basis of design. If the exception is employed, thermally cut, drilled and welded. Work is clearly permitted to
the emphasis should be on the qualifier “maximum.” Again, the be performed in the protected zone.
Commentary provides guidance and cautions against the use of Section D1.3 prohibits “discontinuities specified in Section
lower-bound methods when determine the maximum load ef- I2.1.” Section I2.1 lists prohibited and permitted attachments
fect (force). Assumptions made relative to the effects of param- and work. Some items are to be “repaired as required by the en-
eters like restraint and material strength should tend to overes- gineer of record.” Among these items are erection holes. Section
timate the strength of the system. This is generally opposite to I2.1 also provides an exception: “Other attachments are permit-
the approach taken in typical design. ted where designated or approved by the engineer of record.”
It also needs to be recognized that the same uncertainty Therefore, the engineer of record is given some latitude relative
that makes the inelastic approach adopted for seismic design to the treatment of erection holes. In my experience, it is com-
desirable or even necessary still exists when trying to calculate mon to provide erection holes and it is also common to place the
the maximum force that can be delivered by the system. When erection holes such that they can be left in place after erection.
yielding cannot occur in some of the potential sources of inelas- The commentary to Section D2.2 states: “The Provisions do
tic deformation capacity, a more accurate determination of the not prohibit the use of erection bolts on a field-welded connec-
demand is in order. However, as stated in the Commentary, “It tion such as a shear tab in the web of a wide-flange beam moment
is unrealistic to expect that such forces can be accurately calcu- connection.” Figure C-D2.1 also indicates the use of erection bolts.
lated.” Again, a cautious approach is warranted. We have on a few occasions received inquiries about proj-
The resulting design must be consistent with the assump- ects where erection holes were not provided because they were
tions underlying the use of the exception (e.g., if anchor rods believed to be prohibited. In these cases, the braces had been
in the base plate are assumed to yield prior to buckling of misaligned during field welding due to the lack of erection
the braces, the anchor rods must be designed and detailed holes. Correcting the mislocated braces presented a significant
so that they can yield and develop the ductility assumed by challenge and a significant cost.
the designer).
Even after the maximum force has been determined, it is im- Combining Forces at Column Bases
portant to have a clear understanding of the underlying model. I am designing a column base per Section D2.6 of the Seis-
Engineers sometimes get lost in the maze of provisions when mic Provisions. This section contains provisions for deter-
they approach the requirements as a lawyer might. It is better mining the required axial, shear and flexural strength of
to take an engineering approach. the column base. It is clear that when the loads are calcu-
For example, if it has been determined that column panel lated using the overstrength seismic load, the shear, mo-
zone shear limits the force (load effect, moment, etc.) that ment and axial loads can act simultaneously as indicated by
can be delivered by the system, then the best place to start the analysis. However, in some cases the loads determined
your connection design is at the panel zone. Draw a free- from Section D2.6 are determined based on capacity of
body diagram of the panel zone at its ultimate strength. the column. In these cases, should the required axial, shear
Then draw free-body diagrams of the stiffeners that transfer and flexural strengths be assumed to act simultaneously?
these forces. Finally, draw a free-body diagram of the beam-
to-column connection to complete the design. Only after No. This can be inferred from the information provided in Sec-
you have determined the maximum force, established a load tion D2.6.
path and completed all of the limit state checks should you The capacity-based demands of Sections D2.6b(b)(1) [re-
put on your lawyer’s hat to go back and cross the t’s and dot quired shear strength] and D2.6c(b)(1) [required flexural
the i’s relative to any prescriptive Seismic Provision require- strength] are derived from the same model, which is described
ments. Remember the Specification and Seismic Provisions are in the Commentary as “a mechanism in which the column
written by engineers. There is usually some rational model forms plastic hinges at the top and bottom of the first story.”
underlying all of the words. These load effects obviously must act simultaneously. However,
once the hinge forms (as the moment reaches the expected flex-
Erection Holes for Vertical Braces ural strength of the column) no further axial load can be deliv-
The fabricator on our project has placed erection holes in ered to the base plate through the column. Therefore, there
hollow structural section (HSS) braces that are to be field is no need to consider a condition where the capacity-based
welded during erection. Section F2.5c of the Seismic Provi- moment and shear act and simultaneously with an axial load.
sions defines the protected zone as “the center one-quarter There is no axial load defined in Section D2.6a based on the
of the brace length and a zone adjacent to each connection expected strength of the column. In addition to calculating the
equal to the brace depth in the plane of buckling.” Figures demand “using the overstrength seismic load” Section D2.6a
C-F2.14 and C-F2.15 in the Commentary also indicate references Section D2.5, which in turn references Chapters E,
that the area near the end of the brace is a protected zone. F, G and H and Section D1.4a. Section D1.4a requires con-
Based on this, we believe the erection holes are prohibited. sideration of simultaneous inelasticity from intersecting frames
Please confirm that our understating is correct. when determining the required axial strength of the column

Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 57

 and therefore the splice and base plate connection (with some
exception). The “load effect resulting from the analysis require-
ments for the applicable system per Chapters E, F, G and H”
can certainly involve a combination of shears, moment and axial
load, but these are not based on the capacity of the column.
Though not explicitly stated in Section D2.6, it seems rea-
sonable that the demand on the base plate need not exceed the
expected strength of the column. The expected strength of the
column should be calculated to produce the greatest load effect
on the steel elements at the column base. It can be determined
as: (1) the maximum moment and corresponding shear that
could be delivered by the column (considering the expected
column strength and strain hardening) in combination with the
required axial load or (2) the maximum axial load that could
be delivered by the column (considering the expected column
strength) considering the required moment.
Prequalified Moment Connections
Do the beam-to-column moment connections for special
and intermediate moment frames need to be prequalified
per AISC 358?
No. The beam-to-column moment connections used in spe-
cial and intermediate moment frames have to accommodate a
specified story drift angle while maintaining a specified level of
flexural strength. Conformance with these requirements must
be demonstrated through physical tests. Sections E2.6c (IMF)
and E3.6c (SMF) provide four options:
BENT ON SATISFACTION
11 Bending Machines
Easyway and Hardway: Beams, Tubes, Angles, Tees, Channels, Flats,
Pipe & Rail
Sheet/Plate
Shearing (to ½” x 20’), Forming, Rolling (to 1¼”), and Coning
6 Press Brakes
1000 Ton x 30’ 750 Ton x 24’
400 Ton x 23’ 3-225 Ton x (10’, 12’, 14’)
CNC Machining
Quality
WhiteFab’s patented structural bending process minimizes
deformation and provides smoother curvatures. Each bent
section is verified for accuracy along its arc.
Facilities
170,000 sq. ft. of production area, under roof
“IF QUALITY IS WHAT YOU NEED,
LET WHITEFAB TAKE THE LEAD”
58 APRIL 2018
➤ Use of SMF prequalified connections designed in
accordance with AISC 358
➤ Use of a connection prequalified for SMF in accordance
with Section K1
➤ Use of tests reported in the research literature or
documented tests performed for other projects
➤ Use of tests that are conducted specifically for
the project
Though any of these methods are acceptable, the use of con-
nections in AISC 358 is the most commonly used option. When
designing buildings with SMF and IMF seismic force-resisting
systems, the engineer should confirm that the design allows for
use of conforming connections. It should be noted that AISC
358 contains prequalification limits for all included connection
configurations and that the other methods of demonstrating
conformance will also have limitations.
We also sometimes receive questions about connections
to the weak axes of columns and connections involving HSS.
There are no prequalified moment connections that can be
made to the weak axes of columns, though AISC 358 does ad-
dress boxed wide-flange columns, built-up box columns and
flanged cruciform columns, which can be used to accommo-
date orthogonal frames. AISC 358 contains only one prequali-
fied connection for use with HSS columns and it is limited to
concrete-filled 16-in. square HSS columns. There is also only
one prequalified connection for use with HSS beams, though
this is limited to rectangular and square HSS. There are no
prequalified connections using round HSS. ■
Phone 205-791-2011
Fax 205-791-0500
E-mail: sales@whitefab.com
Web: www.whitefab.com
 Modern Steel Construction is grateful for your support of our
2018 NASCC: The Steel Conference and
World Steel Bridge Symposium

EXHIBITING ADVERTISERS
Applied Bolting Technology
Atema
Atlas Tube, A Division of
Zekelman Industries
AVEVA
Bentley Systems
Bluebeam
Brown Consulting Services
C-BEAMS
Canam Buildings
Cast Connex Corporation
Chicago Clamp Company
Chicago Metal Rolled Products
Color Works Painting
Combilift USA
Controlled Automation
CoreBrace
Dlubal Software
DOWCO Consultants
Ercolina – CML USA
FabSuite
FICEP Corporation
GIZA
Grating Fasteners
Haydon Bolts
High Steel Structures
Independence Tube Qnect
a Nucor Company QuickFrames USA
InfoSight Corporation RISA
Infra-Metals SANRIA
Inovatech Engineering SDS/2
Integrous Steel Software Solutions SE Solutions
Ironworker Management SidePlate Systems
Progressive Action
Simpson Strong-Tie
Cooperative Trust
SlipNOT® Metal Safety Flooring
Kinetic Cutting Systems
St. Louis Screw & Bolt
Kottler Metal Products
Steel Erectors Association
LeJeune Bolt Company
of America
Lindapter International
Steel Joist Institute
LNA Solutions
Steelmax Tools
Max Weiss
STRUMIS
MDX Software
Taylor Devices
MOLD-TEK Technologies
Tnemec Company
New Millennium Building Systems
Trilogy Machinery
Nucor – Verco Decking
Trimble
Nucor – Vulcraft Group
V&S Galvanizing
Nucor – Yamato Steel Company
Valmont Coatings
Peddinghaus Corporation
Voortman Corporation
Profile Cutting
Systems USA
PythonX,
A Lincoln Company

THANK YOU!
 This seminar focuses on the updates in
these new publications and will be presented
The Louis F.
in the following cities in Spring 2018: Geschwindner
Seminar Series
4/3 Des Moines (SEAIA) 5/8 Dallas presents
4/20 Omaha (SEAON) 5/9 Houston
5/1 Portland (SEAO) 5/22 Detroit
5/4 Las Vegas (SEAoSN) 5/31 Los Angeles

The AISC Steel Construction

Manual, 15th Ed.
and 2016 Specification

A 4-hour All registrants will

Continuing have the opportunity
Education to purchase the
Event new Manual at a
by Louis F. Geschwindner discount price
PE, PhD of $125!

More information
There’s always a solution in steel.
can be found at
American Institute of Steel Construction
www.aisc.org/
312.670.2400 www.aisc.org
seminars
 The upcoming Safety Stand-Down
provides a great opportunity to bring the topic of safety
to the forefront and ensure that it continues to be
properly addressed year-round.

Standing Safe and

STRONG BY TOM SCHLAFLY

FOR THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, members of the con-
struction industry have participated in OSHA’s (Occupational
Safety and Health Administration) Safety Stand-Down.
The Stand-Down is a voluntary event for employers and
employees to talk directly about safety, including fall hazards
and fall protection. While it is intended primarily for those
working on job sites, fabricators and others on the shop/manu-
facturing side of the steel industry can also use the event to
present a current safety issue, review their safety procedures or
recognize employees for exemplary safety practices.
The Safety Stand-Down began in 2014, shortly after
the Fall Prevention Campaign was launched to reduce the
number of accidents from falls on construction sites (see
The National Campaign to Prevent Falls in Construction: Final
Report on the 2016 Safety Stand-Down at www.osha.gov/
stopfallsstanddown/2016report.pdf). OSHA has described
the event as a “tremendous success” that reaches an estimated
five million workers in the U.S. and around the world.
“The Cianbro Companies participate each year in the annual
OSHA Safety Stand-Down program regarding fall hazards and
fall protection,” says Jack Klimp, vice president and general
manager of Cianbro Fabrication and Coating Corporation (an
AISC member and certified fabricator). “For the past several
years, this training has been completed in conjunction with our
National Safety Week activities. On each day of the week, we
present or bring in speakers to address a broad range of shop
and field hazards, as well as hazards and safety tips for the home
and family.”
This year, the Safety Stand-Down will take place May 7-11.
OSHA is partnering with many key groups to assist with this
effort, and the Steel Erectors Association of America (SEAA)
and Ironworker Management Progressive Action Coopera-
tive Trust (IMPACT) also promote the Stand-Down. Compa-
nies wishing to participate may contact their OSHA Regional
Stand-Down Coordinator for help in planning an event. Pos-
sible events could include a toolbox talk, safety equipment in-
spections and/or developing rescue plans. The Stand-Down
page on OSHA’s site has resources including fall safety videos, a
fall hazards quiz and handouts on safety-related topics, as well as
a certificate of participation that can be downloaded during the
week of the Stand-Down. You can find out more at www.osha.
gov/stopfallsstanddown. Be safe out there! ■
And for a look at the effects of the current presidential administration
on OSHA regulations, check out Session O1 “The First Trump Year–
The Effect of the Administration on Industry Labor” at NASCC:
The Steel Conference, taking place April 11-13 in Baltimore. Learn
more about the conference at www.aisc.org/nascc.
Tom Schlafly (schlafly@aisc.
org) is AISC’s director of research
and secretary of the AISC Safety
Committee.
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 61
 news
ENGINEERING JOURNAL
Second Quarter 2018 Engineering Journal
Now Available
The Second Quarter 2018 issue of AISC’s
Engineering Journal is now available. You
can access the current issue as well as past
issues at www.aisc.org/ej.
➤ Behavior of Deep, Wide-Flange
Steel Beam-Column Members in
Seismic Applications
Frida Pettersson, Gian A. Rassati, James
A. Swanson and Thomas M. Burns
This study involves a parametric ana-
lytical investigation of the behavior of
deep columns with one-sided reduced
beam section (RBS) connections for appli-
cation in special moment frames (SMFs).
Earlier studies led to the prequalification
of RBS moment connections for column
sizes up to W14 sections. However, the
use of deeper columns in SMFs would
be advantageous because of their ability
to economically control drift. Informa-
tion on deep column behavior using an
RBS moment connection is limited, and
this study investigates this behavior using
a total of 40 assemblies designed accord-
ing to the 2016 AISC Seismic Provisions.
Four column sections were investigat-
ed—W14×426, W24×192, W27×194 and
W30×191—each subjected to five levels
of axial load and two levels of panel zone
strength, and modeled conservatively
without floor slab restraint.
➤ Design Formulation for Critical
Buckling Stress of Steel Columns
Subjected to Nonuniform Fire Loads
Mehrdad Memari and Hussam Mahmoud
Assessing the stability of steel build-
ing frames exposed to fire conditions is
challenging due to the need to consider
elevated temperature properties of steel,
nonuniform heating of structural mem-
bers and large deformational demands
on the frames. There has been signifi-
cant progress recently in simulating the
response of structural members and
systems under fire loads using finite ele-
ment methods. There is a need, however,
for conducting additional analysis while
expanding upon previous work to allow
for the development of additional design
62 APRIL 2018
provisions for column buckling while ac-
commodating varying temperature pro-
files. This study introduces a framework
for conducting stability analyses of W-
shape steel columns subjected to demands
imposed by fire loads considering non-
uniform longitudinal temperature pro-
files. Results from the analyses show good
agreement with available strength design
equations of steel columns at ambient and
elevated temperatures.
➤ Experimental Evaluation of a
Procedure for SMF Continuity
Plate and Weld Design
Adel Mashayekh and Chia-Ming Uang
The AISC Seismic Provisions require
continuity plates in an SMF welded mo-
ment connection to be connected to the
column flanges by complete-joint-pen-
etration groove welds. A design proce-
dure has been proposed that allows the
designer to evaluate the required forces
in the continuity plates such that more
economical welds (e.g., fillet welds) can
be used; the required thickness of the
continuity plates also need not be the
same as that prescribed in the Seismic
Provisions. With some minor modifica-
tions to the original design procedure,
two one-sided reduced beam section
moment connection specimens were
designed and constructed for experi-
mental verification of the proposed de-
sign procedure. To evaluate the effect of
potential column kinking on the fillet-
welded joints between the continuity
plates and the column flanges, weaker
panel zones were used that still satisfied
the code requirement.
➤ Steel Structures Research Update:
The Role of Gravity Framing
in the Seismic Performance of
Steel Buildings
Judy Liu
Ongoing work on the seismic perfor-
mance of steel buildings is highlighted.
The research fills knowledge gaps with
respect to the role of gravity framing in
the seismic response of steel buildings.
People and Firms
• J o n a t h a n H u m b l e , FAIA,
regional director of construction
c o d e s a n d s t a n d a rd s f o r
the American Iron and Steel
Institute (AISI)—where he has
worked for 22 years—has
been named to the College
of Fellows of the American
Institute of Architects (AIA).
Recipients of this designation
are selected by the AIA’s
Jury of Fellows for their
notable contributions to the
advancement of the profession
of architecture. Humble will
be recognized in June at the
investiture
ceremony at
S t . P a t r i c k ’s
Cathedral during
the 2018 AIA
Conference on
Architecture in
New York City.
• Jason McCormick, PhD,
is one of four University of
Michigan professors to be
named an Arthur F. Thurnau
Professor, the highest honor the
university bestows on a faculty
member in direct recognition
of their demonstrated impact
on education. McCormick, an
associate professor of civil and
environmental engineering in
the College of Engineering
and AISC's 2010 Milek Fellow,
co-pioneered a new approach
to show civil and environmental
engineering students how
structural systems are designed
and how they can fail. In his
approach, students use virtual
reality to visualize and interact
with components from multiple
angles in a 3D
lab so they
can “feel” how
massive loads
are carried down
from structure to
foundation.

IN MEMORIAM
Earthquake Engineering Expert Stephen Mahin Dies at 71
Stephen A. Mahin, a world-renowned
expert in earthquake engineering, passed
away on February 10.
Mahin was born in Lodi, Calif., on
October 16, 1946. Upon graduating
from high school, he spent more than
five decades at the University of Califor-
nia (UC), Berkeley—first as a student and
then as faculty. He received three civil
engineering degrees at UC Berkeley—a
BS (Honors), an MS and a PhD—served
as an assistant research engineer from
1974 to 1977 and then joined the faculty
as an assistant professor in 1977. Over
his UC Berkeley career, he served as the
chair of the Structural Engineering, Me-
chanics and Materials (SEMM) Program
from 1990 to 1993 and was the director
of PEER (Pacific Earthquake Engineer-
ing Research Center) from 2009 to 2015.
Most recently, he was the school’s By-
ron L. and Elvira E. Nishkian Professor
Emeritus of Structural Engineering in
the Department of Civil and Environ-
mental Engineering.
Mahin published hundreds of journal
articles, papers and reports, and the range
of topics reflects the comprehensive and
broad expanse of his research engage-
ment. AISC honored him with its Special
Educator Achievement Award in 2001
for leadership in improving steel struc-
tures subjected to earthquakes, and its
Lifetime Achievement Award in 2013 for
sustained contributions to the profession,
industry and academia. He served as pro-
gram manager for the six-year FEMA-
sponsored SAC Steel Project, which de-
veloped guidelines for the design of steel
moment frame structures following the
1994 Northridge earthquake. The SAC
guidelines and supporting documents led
directly to major changes to the AISC
seismic design standards used in the U.S.
and worldwide.
“Steve’s impacts on improving seis-
mic design and the structural engineer-
ing profession went far beyond the SAC
project, but this was certainly an impor-
tant highlight of his and many of our
careers,” said James O. Malley, SE, PE,
group director and senior principal with
Degenkolb Engineers in San Francisco.
“He was a man of never-ending ideas and
energy, and one that was instrumental in
supporting and fostering the careers of
many, many people within our industry.”
In 2016, Mahin became the founding
director of the Computational Model-
ing and Simulation Center (SimCenter)
of the Natural Hazards Engineering
Research Infrastructure, funded by the
National Science Foundation. Under
his leadership, the SimCenter assembled
a talented multi-university team of re-
searchers to advance simulation methods
to reduce the effects of natural hazards
on the built environment, with the ulti-
mate goal of improving community re-
silience to earthquakes, storms and other
extreme hazards.
“He gave his life’s work for the safety
of society in severe earthquakes, and he
certainly made important new discover-
ies,” said Ted Galambos, PhD, professor
emeritus with the Department of Civil,
Environmental and Geo-Engineering at
the University of Minnesota. “He was in-
deed a great leader in his field.”
In 1983, Mahin was awarded the
ASCE Walter Huber Civil Engineer-
ing Research Prize for his practical ap-
plication of rigorous theory to complex
engineering problems. In 1987, he was
awarded the Norman Medal by ASCE for
his seminal work on the seismic behav-
ior of offshore platforms, and in 2012 he
was inducted into the ASCE/OTC Hall
of Fame. His pioneering work on self-
centering bridges earned him the FHWA
James Cooper Best Paper Award in 2007.
He served as a director of the Structur-
al Engineers Association of Northern
California (SEAONC) and was awarded
SEAONC’s Helmut Krawinkler Award
in 2017 for outstanding leadership in im-
plementing state-of-the-art research into
structural engineering practice. In addi-
tion, he chaired the NEHRP Northridge
Earthquake Engineering Research Coor-
dination Program from 1995 to 1997.
“Steve was an impressive and gener-
ous force based on his deep understand-
ing of the behavior of structures un-
der seismic loads,” noted Tom Schlafly,
AISC’s director of research. “His contri-
butions to seismic design methods will
have an impact on our Seismic Provisions
news
and designers for years to come due to
his work on SAC, his many students and
his prolific collaborations with leaders in
the seismic engineering community. We
are thrilled that we recently supported
Steve’s work on strongback frames that
we believe, as Steve did, will become a
frequently used system.”
Mahin had a unique talent for inter-
acting and making friends with fellow
researchers throughout the world, and he
was invited to give keynote addresses at
several national and international confer-
ences. Many international research col-
laborations with Asian countries were
initiated and nurtured by his leader-
ship. Over three decades, he enlight-
ened, guided and led multiple phases
of U.S.-Japan research collaboration
on earthquake engineering using large-
scale test facilities operated by the two
countries. He chaired the NSF US-Ja-
pan Cooperative Earthquake Research
Program on Composite and Hybrid
Structures from 1995 to 1999 and the
NEES/E-Defense Collaborative Re-
search Program since 2004.
“We will miss this great man and
wonderful person,” remarked Gregory
MacRae, a professor in the department
of Civil and Natural Resources Engi-
neering at the University of Canterbury
in Christchurch, New Zealand. “We say
here [in New Zealand] that ‘a mighty
Totara has fallen.’”
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 63
 news
BRIDGES
New Thermal Spray Coatings Guide Now Available
A new free guide specification by the
AASHTO/NSBA Steel Bridge Collabo-
ration, Specification for Application of Ther-
mal Spray Coating Systems to Steel Bridges
(S8.2), is now available. The document
provides guidance on shop metallizing
steel girders while establishing and de-
fining the functions, operations, require-
ments and activities needed to achieve a
consistent quality.
Over the past two years, the
AASHTO/NSBA Collaboration task
group on coatings (TG8) has been devel-
oping a specification for the application
of thermal spray coating (metallizing).
In 2017, AASHTO and SSPC officially
adopted S8.2. A collaborative effort was
taken in the development of the docu-
ment to ensure owners’ and applicators’
representatives have clearly defined roles
and responsibilities. While using thermal
NASCC
Watch NASCC Sessions Without Leaving Your Office
If you can’t make it to Baltimore for
the 2018 NASCC: The Steel Confer-
ence (April 11-13), you can register for
the next best thing. NASCC Live of-
fers a choice of 26 of the best sessions
streamed live from the conference. You
advertiser index
AISC
Applied Bolting Technology
AVEVA
Cast Connex Corporation
C-BEAMS
Chicago Clamp Company
Chicago Metal Rolled Products
Controlled Automation
FabSuite
FICEP Corporation
Greiner Industries
IES
InfoSight Corporation
64 APRIL 2018
spray coatings on steel structures is not are available at www.steelbridges.org/
new, the practice is new to steel bridges collaborationstandards.
and has been growing in popularity with
bridge owners, especially in the north-
eastern U.S. At least four steel bridge
fabricators now have in-house thermal
spray application abilities. With growing
interest and increasing fabricator capa-
bilities, it was imperative a specification
be developed to define a consistent set
of standards. This document works to
achieve that goal.
S8.2 is written in specification lan-
guage so the document can be adopted in
whole as part of the project contract docu-
ments. It joins a growing list of documents
devoted to improving quality and value
through the standardization of design,
fabrication and erection of steel bridges.
This document and other guide speci-
fication documents from the Collaboration
can watch the sessions from your home (and haven’t registered yet!) one low reg-
or office, ask the speaker questions and istration fee gains you access to all of the
receive PDH credits. For more infor- technical sessions, the keynote sessions,
mation and to register for NASCC Live, the T.R. Higgins Lecture and the exhi-
visit www.aisc.org/nascclive. bition hall. For more information and to
And if you are able to attend in person register, visit www.aisc.org/nascc.
31 | 39 | 43 | 59 | 60 Kinetic Cutting Systems 35
37 LeJeune Bolt Company 12
67 Lindapter International 14
47 LNA Solutions 35
38 Peddinghaus Corporation 2
13 Qnect LLC 15
insert QuickFrames USA 22
25 SDS/2 7
24 SidePlate Systems 8
5 St. Louis Screw & Bolt 22
3 Trilogy Machinery 31
back cover Trimble 11
38 Whitefab 58
 marketplace & employment
Structural Engineers
Are you looking for a new and exciting opportunity? STRUCTURAL
We are a niche recruiter that specializes in matching great STEEL
structural engineers with unique opportunities that will help SHOP DRAWINGS
you utilize your talents and achieve your goals.
• We are structural engineers by background and enjoy
Tek1 Pty Ltd provides competitive steel detailing
helping other structural engineers find their “Dream Jobs.”
• We have over 30 years of experience working with services using Tekla software
structural engineers. 30 detailing Staff – 15 Tekla Licences
• We will save you time in your job search and provide
working 2 shifts
additional information and help during the process of
finding a new job. Head Office in Australia, Back office in India.
• For Current Openings, please visit our website and select
Hot Jobs. Contact : +61 3 9560 6397
• Please call or e-mail Brian Quinn, PE (616.546.9420 or
Brian.Quinn@FindYourEngineer.com) so we can learn email koshy@tek1.com.au
more about your goals and interests.
All inquiries are kept confidential. website www.tek1.com.au
SE Impact by SE Solutions, LLC | www.FindYourEngineer.com

LATE MODEL STRUCTURAL

The Berlin Steel Construction STEEL FABRICATING EQUIPMENT
Peddinghaus FPDB-2500 CNC Heavy Plate Processor, 96” Width, (3)
Company is a full service spe-
Drill Spindle, HPR260 Plasma, (1) Oxy Torch, Siemens 840, ‘08 #27974
cialty contractor, primarily with
Peddinghaus FPB1500-3E CNC Plate Punch with Plasma, 177 Ton,
structural steel and miscella-
Fagor 8025 CNC, 60” Max. Width, 1-1/4” Plate, 1999 #25161
neous metals. We design, fab-
Behringer HBP-530/1104G Structural Steel Mitre Cutting Band Saw,
ricate, and erect structures in
the Northeast and in other parts of the country. We have two
20.8” x 43.3” Maximum Cutting Capacity, 2” Blade, 2000 #27083
Controlled Automation BT1-1433 CNC Oxy/Plasma Cutting
fabrication facilities, four erection operations facilities, and six
office locations that provide engineering and management of
System, 14’ x 33’, Oxy, (2) Hy-Def 200 Amp Plasma, 2002 #20654
Controlled Automation ABL-100-B CNC Flat Bar Detail Line, 143
projects. We are a 100% employee owned company (ESOP)
Ton Punch, 400 Ton Single Cut Shear, 40’ Infeed, 1999 #24216
with a desire for growth. We service the private commercial,Controlled Automation 2AT-175 CNC Plate Punch, 175 Ton, 30” x
public, institutional, and industrial markets. 60” Travel, 1-1/2” Max. Plate, PC CNC, 1996 #23503
We are currently looking for experienced applicants for Controlled Automation DRL344 CNC Beam Drill Line, Hem WF140
Estimating Manager Saw, Tandem Line, 2008 #24937
Ficep Gemini 324PG Plate Processor, 10’ x 40’, 15 HP Drill,
for our Corporate office in Kensington, CT.
HPR260XD Plasma Bevel Head, 2014 #28489
The Estimating Manager is responsible to provide oversight, Ficep Gemini 36-HD Plate Processor, 12’ x 40’, 35 HP Drill,
leadership and development for the estimating and sales HPR400XD Plasma Bevel Head, 2012 #28490
needs of the company by managing internal and exter- www.PrestigeEquipment.com | Ph: +1.631.249.5566
sales@prestigeequipment.com
nal resources to process bids and proposals. Management
experience and degree preferred. A minimum of 10 years’
experience specific to estimating, negotiation and sales of
structural steel & miscellaneous metals fabrication and erec-
Steel Detailers,
tion is required. Must exhibit strong communication and Checkers,
proven leadership skills and have experience with common Estimators and
industry software. Salary range for this senior level position is
negotiable based on skills and experience. Project Managers
Interested applicants should submit their resumes to
knemergut@berlinsteel.com. We are an EOE. Lincoln Engineering Group is one of the fastest growing
structural and miscellaneous steel detailing firms in the
country located in Chicago suburbs. We currently have
immediate openings for experienced detailers, checkers,
Connect with AISC on estimators and project managers.
SOCIAL MEDIA Ideal candidate would have experience in Structural and
Miscellaneous steel detailing and/or checking. He/she
should be a team leader with excellent communication skills.
facebook.com/AISCdotORG @AISC We offer a competitive compensation and benefits package.
May consider relocation allowance for the right candidate.
youtube.com/AISCSteelTV @AISC Please submit your Résumé to: jobs@lincolnengineering.com
or Contact Terri Peters at (630) 445-2111.
Search employment ads online at www.modernsteel.com. To advertise, call 231.228.2274 or e-mail gurthet@modernsteel.com.
Modern STEEL CONSTRUCTION 65
 structurally PURPLE
sound PASSION

Joe Acker

Lynn Bryant

ON FEBRUARY 4, more than 67,000 football fans filled US Bank Stadium in Minneapolis, witnessing a historic Super Bowl
that featured the most-ever combined offensive yards gained in an NFL game—and resulted in a stunning Philadelphia Eagles
victory over perennial favorites to win it all, the New England Patriots.
But during the regular season, the vast majority of fans wear purple, as the stadium is the new home of the Minnesota Vikings,
replacing the Hubert H. Humphrey Metrodome when it opened in 2016. The structural steel venue—designed by HKS and
Thornton Tomasetti and fabricated by AISC member/certified fabricator LeJeune Steel—features an operable wall made of five
massive mechanized, pivoting panels and is topped by a 240,000-sq.-ft ETFE (ethylene tetrafluoroethylene) roof, the largest of its
kind in North America.
Not only did the stadium host Super Bowl LII, but it is also one of this year’s AISC IDEAS2 Awards winners. You can find out
more about the project, as well as the rest of the winners, in next month’s issue. And all of this year’s winners will be highlighted at
NASCC: The Steel Conference, taking place April 11-13 in Baltimore (www.aisc.org/nascc). ■

66 APRIL 2018
 “Design Your Projects
Under Budget
”
Structural Software
Easy. Versatile. Productive.

I can accomplish
so much analysis and design
in such a short amount of time
with VisualAnalysis.

Download your free trial today:

iesweb.com 800.707.0816