Sunteți pe pagina 1din 34

17-19 Gladding Place

P O Box 76 134
Manukau City,
New Zealand

Phone: +64-9-262 2885


Fax: +64-9-262 2856
Email: structural@hera.org.nz

No. 68 June/July 2002


The author(s) of each article in this publication are noted at the The procedure detailed herein has been the subject of
beginning of the article. review by a number of people. The effort and input of these
reviewers is greatly appreciated.

Introduction In This Issue Page


The Sliding Hinge Joint 1
As readers will be aware, HERA and the University
of Auckland are engaged in a long-term research Member Compression Capacity of a 33
project aimed at developing new forms of semi- Solid Section
rigid joints for moment-resisting, steel framed
seismic-resisting systems (MRSFs). Two joint References 33
types have been developed from this programme
as the preferred options for the beam to column
connections of MRSFs. These are the Flange The Sliding Hinge Joint: Design
Bolted Joint (FBJ) and the Sliding Hinge Joint
(SHJ). and Detailing Provisions and
Design Example
The experimental and analytical phases of this
project are now completed and the final phase This article has been written by G Charles Clifton, HERA
(writing up and presenting of results) has begun. Structural Engineer, John Butterworth, Senior Lecturer at the
University of Auckland Department of Civil and Resource
Engineering and Tanja Miller, Undergraduate Student from the
The FBJ was the first joint to be developed. Fachhochschule Weingarten on Study Leave (Industrial
Design and detailing procedures for it have already Practice) at HERA.
been published – in DCB No. 58, principally, and
with a minor corrigenda in DCB No. 62 and an 1. Introduction and Scope of Article
extension to its original scope of application in
DCB No. 64. This joint has been used in at least 1.1 Brief history of the overall project
two building developments (one in Auckland and
one in Napier), which was the intention behind the HERA and the University of Auckland are in the
design and detailing requirements being published final stages of a long-term research project aimed
prior to the release of the full research report [1]. at developing innovative new forms of semi-rigid
joints for moment-resisting steel framed seismic-
With the completion of the analytical work on the resisting systems (MRSFs).
SHJ, the research has now reached the stage
where final design and detailing provisions for the These joints are designed and detailed to achieve
SHJ can be made. This issue presents these the following performance characteristics:
recommendations, covering the design and • Remain fully rigid up to the design level
detailing of the joint itself and the design of serviceability limit state earthquake moment
moment-resisting steel framed system
incorporating the joint. It also presents a detailed • Remain reasonably rigid above the
design example on a particular SHJ. serviceability limit state level and up to the
design level ultimate limit state earthquake
Also covered is a short article on a specific design moment
issue that has arisen in recent times.
• Allow inelastic rotation between beam and
column to occur when the design ultimate limit
state earthquake moment is exceeded

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 1 No. 68, June/July 2002
• Be able to withstand the inelastic rotation records. Given that the records were selected and
demand associated with the design level scaled in accordance with the new draft, [4], while
earthquake with negligible damage, such that the FBJ frames had been designed to the existing
the post-design earthquake building response standard [2], some comparative 5 and 10 storey
under serviceability conditions is not frames were redesigned to the new standard to
significantly affected see the differences in seismic design actions, P - ∆
effects and subsequent member sizes. The
• Withstand greater levels of rotation demand member sizes for a given application turned out to
with increased damage but not failure. be the same from both standards for each case
studied.
Of the five joint types that have been researched
for this project, two joint details have emerged as For the SHJ NITH studies, the frames were all
preferred options for the beam to column designed and analysed to the draft provisions.
connections of MRSFs. These are the Flange Because the suite of earthquake records cover
Bolted Joint (FBJ) and the Sliding Hinge Joint three soil/fault conditions, the designs were
(SHJ). undertaken for these conditions. The three
These two joints are designed and detailed to meet conditions covered were:
the performance criteria in different ways. Very
briefly: (1) Class C – shallow soil [4] – with near fault
action
• The FBJ is designed for higher strength, low (2) Class C – shallow soil [4] – without near
design ductility demand applications. It is very fault action
simple to fabricate and erect. It has a low (3) Class D – soft soil [4] – without near fault
inelastic rotation damage threshold, but is action
capable of withstanding high levels of inelastic
rotation demand if necessary. Designs were undertaken for two seismic zones
(Auckland, Wellington). The near fault action
• The SHJ is designed for lower strength, high option is only applicable to Wellington.
design ductility demand applications. It is
slightly less simple than the FBJ to fabricate The SHJ NITH studies were completed in June
and more complex to erect and is designed to 2002. With their completion, the design and
withstand fully ductile levels of design inelastic detailing provisions for the SHJ have been
rotation with minimum damage. finalised and are presented herein.
The FBJ development was completed in 2001. Summary details of the NITH studies and the
Guidance on design and detailing of the FBJ and frame options will be given in DCB No. 69. Writing
MRSFs incorporating the FBJ has been given in up of the entire project is also progressing
DCB No. 58, with a minor corrigenda in DCB No. concurrently and is due for completion in the first
62. In the latter half of 2001, it became apparent quarter of 2003 [1].
from the numerical integration time history (NITH)
analyses that the originally proposed scope of A summary paper [7] of the research into both
application of the FBJ, which was for low ductility joints and systems was presented at the 2001
demand applications only, could be widened, and
NZSEE Technical Conference.
work on this was undertaken, with the results
published in DCB No. 64.
1.2 Scope of This Article
Up to the end of 2001, all NITH studies were
This article presents the design and detailing
undertaken in accordance with NZS 4203:1992 [2].
provisions for the SHJ and for MRSFs using the
However, the March 2002 version of the draft
SHJ. The former is presented in section 3 and the
replacement to that standard, which has been
latter in section 4. This is followed with a SHJ
under development for several years, contained design example, in section 5.
detailed guidance on the selection and scaling of
earthquake records for NITH. The selection and However, prior to presenting these provisions, this
scaling of earthquake records used up to the end article looks briefly at the performance of SHJs in
of 2001 was rather ad-hoc (see details in section severe earthquakes, in terms of the design
6.4 of HERA Report R4-88 [3] and summary philosophy, target performance requirements and
details in section 3.4, pp. 16-17 of DCB No. 64) behaviour from experimental tests. These issues
and so, in 2002, the opportunity has been taken to have already been mentioned in DCB No. 59 and
use the provisions of DR1170.4 [4] to produce a that article will be cross-referenced as appropriate.
revised suite of earthquake records and scale They will also be covered in detail in the thesis
factors. Details of these will be summarised in report [1] on the whole project.
DCB No. 69. The FBJ designs were then
reanalysed under this new suite of earthquake

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 2 No. 68, June/July 2002
Fig. 68.1
Sliding Hinge Joint: Isometric and Exploded View

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 3 No. 67, June/July 2002
Fig. 68.2
Layout and Notation for the
Sliding Hinge Joint

Fig. 68.3
Lever Aims for Moment Capacity Determination

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 4 No. 68, June/July 2002
Before commencing with the performance in moment from the large-scale test 4 and in
earthquakes, a description of the SHJ is in order. Fig. 68.4 herein, which shows the joint rotation
Fig. 68.1 shows an isometric and exploded view versus moment from the large-scale test 3.
of the joint. Fig. 68.2 shows an elevation with the
layout and notation, while Fig. 68.3 shows the On rotation reversal, the joint unloads abruptly,
lever arms for determination of the joint moment then the moment capacity builds up in the reverse
capacity. direction, as shown in Fig. 59.28 or 68.4. The
increase in moment with increasing reverse
2. Performance of the Sliding Hinge Joint rotation occurs in two stages; one as sliding
in Severe Earthquakes occurs along the first interface (beam to plate) and
then with a further increase in shear capacity as
2.1 Design philosophy and modes of the second interface (plate to cap plate) is
operation activated.

The slotted hole is designed to accommodate a


The design philosophy behind this joint has been
joint rotation of ± 30 mrad (radians x 10 -3)
to establish dependable behavioural
multiplied by an over rotation factor of 1.25; if the
characteristics for the SHJ and for the MRSF
inelastic rotation demand exceeds this, the joint
system for the serviceability limit state condition
undergoes further inelastic behaviour through
and for two levels of ultimate limit state conditions.
flange plate yielding, in the same manner as for
These are described in section 2.3. The first level
the FBJ (see DCB Issue No. 58). The first large-
of ULS condition is the design level ultimate limit
scale SHJ specimen, tested to destruction in test
state earthquake, as stipulated by NZS 4203 [2] or
2, still developed its design moment capacity at
DR 1170.4 [4] and the second is the more severe
maximum considered event. All the experimental over 120 mrad rotation!
and analytical work undertaken on the SHJ has Under the design level ULS earthquake, inelastic
been planned and executed with this philosophy rotation demand is expected to be not greater
in mind. than the 37.5 mrad accommodated within the
slotted holes. At this level of rotation demand,
The mode of operation of the SHJ is relatively minimum joint degradation will occur and only
simple. The beam is pinned laterally at the top minor slab cracking, such that no post-earthquake
flange level, using nominal sized bolt holes and repair is required.
FBJ details. This keeps lateral movement in the
floor slab to 2-3 mm, thus minimising undesirable Under the maximum considered event (MCE), the
floor slab participation and slab damage. Joint MRSF with SHJs will retain its integrity, to allow
rotation is achieved through sliding at the evacuation and post-earthquake assessment, but
bottom flange and the web bottom bolt level (see will suffer controlled joint damage, which may
Fig. 68.1 for the location of these components and necessitate replacement of components.
Fig. 64.10, DCB No. 64, for an illustration of this However, the results from the NITH studies show
mechanism). that, in most instances, little or no reinstatement
would be needed after most maximum considered
The sliding details are shown in the isometric view events, especially for buildings not subject to near
of Fig. 68.1. The sliding layers are between the fault action.
brass shims and plate (web plate, bottom bolts for
bottom flange plate). The holes for the web In terms of the force based seismic design
bottom bolts in the web plate and for the bottom philosophy of [2, 4], the design procedures
flange bolts in the bottom flange plate are slotted developed for these semi-rigid systems utilise
to allow this sliding to occur. The beam flange or either the equivalent static or modal response
web and the associated cap plates all have spectrum methods, in conjunction with NZS 3404
nominal sized holes. [5] and, where appropriate, HERA Report R4-76
[6]. The preliminary sizing / design method, in
When the moment demand on the SHJ from particular, is easy and rapid to use. These
earthquake generates internal beam axial forces procedures are given in sections 3 and 4 below.
which exceed the sliding resistance available
through the bottom flange bolts and web bottom 2.2 Design role of joint components
bolts, the joint will slide, allowing beam rotation to
occur. As sliding occurs, the cap plate is This is described in section 3.3.2 herein.
anchored in position relative to the beam flange or 2.3 Performance characteristics
web by the bolts, allowing the cap plate to also
slide relative to these surfaces. Once the The MRSFs with SHJs have been developed to
imposed moment reduces, there comes a point deliver the following performance characteristics
where the sliding stops and the joint becomes for the three levels of earthquake described in
rigid again. This is illustrated in Fig. 59.28 of DCB section 2.1.
No. 59, which shows the joint rotation versus

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 5 No. 68, June/July 2002
(1) For the serviceability limit state which is the only location likely to be
earthquake (ie. as represented by DR subjected to appreciable inelastic
1170.4 [4] Section 2.1.1, involving a return demand)
period of 20 years for normal structures (as
defined by Table 3.1 of AS/NZS 1170.0 (iii) In the extreme case, joint rotation
[8])): demand may cause the bolts to
impact the ends of the slotted holes,
(i) The joint and system shall remain requiring replacement of the sliding
effectively rigid, with negligible bolts and possibly bottom flange
inelastic action from any component plate replacement

(ii) This condition shall apply even when (iv) Panel zones may rotate in excess of
the system has been subjected to a 1% strain demand
prior ultimate limit state design level
event. (v) Lateral drift to be within sustainable
limits, including the influence of P - ∆
(2) For the design level ultimate limit state effects
earthquake (ie. as represented by [4, 8]
involving a return period of 500 years for (vi) The positioner bolt will need
normal structures): replacement

(i) Negligible inelastic demand in the (vii) Minor cracking only to the concrete
beams floor slab surrounding the frame.

(ii) Minimal inelastic demand in the Application of the design procedures for the force-
columns at base level (such that based method of design involves:
fixed column bases will be readily
repairable) and none at higher levels (a) Analysing the frame for the design level
earthquake using the Equivalent Static
(iii) The rotation demand on the joints is Method or the Modal Response Spectrum
not to cause the bottom flange bolts Method from [2,4], and sizing the members
to contact the ends of the slotted and connection components to meet the
holes required strength and stiffness criteria for
this event
(iv) Column panel zone rotation demand
to be ≤ 1% (b) Following the joint design and detailing
provisions given herein (section 3) such
(v) P - ∆ effects to be accounted for that the joint can sustain the MCE rotational
either through provision of suitable demands while delivering the performance
frame stiffness (ie. satisfying characteristics of (3) above.
Equation 6.1 (1) of [4]) or through
increased strength (ie. satisfying 2.4 SHJ behaviour from experimental tests
Clause 6.5.4 of (4)).
There has been extensive experimental testing
(vi) Lateral drift not to exceed 2% undertaken on the SHJ, involving both small-scale
component and large-scale assemblage tests.
(vii) The positioner bolt may need Some details of the large-scale tests are given on
replacement pages 26-30 of DCB No. 59 and a very brief
overview of these large-scale tests is given in
(viii) Minor cracking only to the concrete section 3.3 of [7]. Details of the small-scale
floor slab surrounding the frame. component tests are given on pages 28, 29 of
DCB No. 64.
(3) For the maximum considered
earthquake (ie. based on a 2000 year There has also been extensive finite element
return period event or higher): analysis (FEA) modelling of the sliding hinge joint
sliding assemblage. This work was undertaken in
(i) Negligible inelastic demand in the two stages; that from 2001 is summarised on
beams, except in the vicinity of bolts pages 24-33 of DCB No. 64 and presented in full
to the flange and web plates detail in HERA Report R4-110 [9]. That from
2002 will be summarised in DCB No. 70 and
(ii) Inelastic demand in the columns to presented in [1].
be able to be dependably resisted
(this applies especially at the base,

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 6 No. 68, June/July 2002
SHJ Test 3, 04/08/2000, Plastic Rotation vs Moment and Simultest3 from Hysteresis Model

800

600

400

200
Moment [kNm]

0
-30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-200

-400

-600

-800
Rotation [mrad]

Test 3 experimental data Simultest3

Fig. 68.4
Experimental and Simulated Moment-Rotation
Behaviour for Large-Scale Tests
Without Belleville Springs

Fig. 68.4 shows the moment-rotation • bolt layout and orientation


characteristics from the large-scale test 3, which • flange plate and cap plate thickness
involved the final proposed joint configuration • presence/absence of Belleville Springs
without Belleville Springs to the bottom flange • effect of loading rate: seismic-dynamic and
bolts. The moment-rotation characteristics of the pseudo-static
SHJ are markedly different to those of any other • effect of repeated loading on assemblage,
semi-rigid joint, because of the two stage sliding including after a delay time of 4 weeks
from the sliding components. In order to
accurately represent the joint behaviour in the One of the component experimental test results is
NITH analyses, a mathematical model of the shown in Fig. 64.16, DCB No. 64.
moment-rotation characteristics has had to be
developed and implemented into the computer On the basis of these component tests, a bolt
program, RUAUMOKO [10] used for the NITH design model has been developed to give the bolt
analyses. This has been done; see details in [11]. sliding shear capacity. Details of that model are
The simulated moment from that model generated given on pages 29, 30 of DCB No. 59. The basic
by the experimental rotations from test 3 is also mechanisms assumed for that model were
shown in Fig. 68.4. confirmed by FEA modelling, as described in [9]
and more briefly on pages 24-33 of DCB No. 64.
As the large-scale experimental tests could only
investigate one size and layout of bolt, plate and The completion of the experimental testing
cap plate and only at a pseudo-static rate of programme, FEA modelling and NITH studies has
loading, a series of small-scale tests on the allowed the design and detailing provisions for the
bottom flange sliding assemblage were SHJ and the MRSF systems incorporating the
undertaken during 2000/2001 on representative SHJ to be finalised. These are given in the next
connections to determine the influence of the two sections, starting with the design and detailing
following parameters. of the joint itself, in section 3.

• bolt size – range from M24 to M30

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 7 No. 68, June/July 2002
3. Design and Detailing of the Sliding Section 3.2 presents these requirements. It starts
Hinge Joint with limitations on the flange and web plate grade
and thickness, followed by the material selection
3.1 General for the brass shims.
The SHJ is intended for high ductility demand; This is followed by edge distances, bolt pitches
µdesign = 4 is used. In theory it is possible to use and gauges, then by the very important provision
µ = 6, the maximum allowed from [2 or 4]. The of clearance between the beam face and the
joint’s ductility capacity is more than adequate for column flange.
this. However, as noted in section 2.3 (1), one of
the performance criteria set for the joint is to The dimensioning of all components is then
remain effectively rigid, even after the joint has covered. This is followed by aspects of bolt
been subjected to a design level ultimate state selection and installation and forming of the
earthquake. slotted holes.

Such an event is associated with some permanent Section 3.2 ends with surface treatment
softening of the joint, hence the decision to use requirements for the ply contact surfaces.
µdesign = 4 as the ULS design ductility.
3.2.1 Material selection for the joint
Designers should be aware of the very great components
advantage that the SHJ and the FBJ offer over
The bolts used, except for the positioner bolt, are
conventional rigid-jointed MRSF systems. This
Property Class 8.8 Structural Bolts (HSFG bolts)
advantage is the ability to de-couple seismic and
to AS/NZS 1252 [13]. For calculation of bolt shear
gravity requirements in the frame and connection
capacity, threads are assumed to be in the shear
design. The approach used involves a variation
plane. These bolts are to be supplied galvanized
on the procedure for design of multi-storey wind-
(this is the default surface treatment specified by
resisting MRSFs in non-seismically active
[13]).
countries, such that:
The positioner bolt is a Property Class 4.6 black
(i) The beams are designed to resist the
bolt to AS 1111.1 [14]. Only one positioner bolt
maximum applied gravity loads (dead, live
per joint is used and it has the same diameter as
loads) in a simply supported condition
the bottom flange bolts. It must be supplied black
(ii) The joint is sized to resist only the moment finish, to make it visibly different from the HSFG
generated by the earthquake action, ie. bolts. Black finish is the default surface treatment
Mcode, µdesign. This moment is calculated and for this property class of bolt.
applied independently of the beam’s section
Grade of steel for the flange, web plates and cap
moment capacity.
plates is to be 250, 300 or 350. It is important,
(iii) The columns are designed to resist the when sizing the plates, that the use of grades 300
overstrength action developed by the joint, or 350 in order to reduce the plate thickness for a
not that from the beam. given width is clearly specified in the contract
documents so that the grade used in design is
Thus the beam depth can be chosen for gravity supplied in practice. Designers can always opt for
strength and lateral stiffness control without use of grade 250 material; this is also consistent
impacting on the column design. with the approach used in R4-100 [12].

Details of the MRSF design are given in section 4. The brass shim material must be specified as
Coverage of the joint design itself now UNS C2600 – ½ Hard Temper, eg. to AS 1566
commences, first with the all-important detailing [15]. It is very important that the ½ Hard
provisions and material selection. These should Temper is included in the specification, as that
be read in conjunction with Fig. 68.1 for general defines the hardness, yield stress and tensile
details and Fig. 68.2 for specific layout and strength required and on which all the research
notation. The notation used herein is consistent has been based.
with that of the Structural Steelwork Connections
Guide, HERA Report R4-100 [12]. 3.2.2 Limit on flange and web plate
thickness as a function of bolt
3.2 Detailing requirements and material diameter
selection
The same relationship as is used for the Flange
As with all structural components designed to Bolted Joints should be used for the bottom flange
deliver dependable performance under severe plate and web plate. This is given by equation
seismic action, the detailing requirements and 68.1 and has been determined from the
selection of appropriate materials are as important component testing;
to the final behaviour as the design itself.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 8 No. 68, June/July 2002
ti,max = 0.9df (68.1) parallel to the line of principal applied force, shall
be ≥ df. This dimension is a'ep in Fig. 68.2.
where:
ti,max = maximum thickness of bottom flange,
web plate The distance between the centreline of the last
df = diameter of bolt pair of sliding bottom flange bolts and the
centreline of the positioner bolt is given by;
This translates to:
'
Sp,bfb→pb = Max(2aep; 0.5Lsh + aep + aep)
• 16 mm for M20 bolts (68.2)
• 20 mm for M24 bolts
• 25 mm for M30 bolts where:
• 32 mm for M36 bolts Lsh = length of slotted hole; see equation 68.6
in section 3.2.6.
For the top flange plate, which is sized on the
basis of the actions generated by the sliding bolts 3.2.4 Pitches and gauges
(bottom flange and web bottom bolts), this limit
Spf = Sgf = Sgw = 70 mm for M20 bolts
can be relaxed slightly in the larger bolt diameters,
up to: Spf = Sgf = Sgw = 90 mm for M24, M30 bolts
• 16 mm for M20 bolts Spf = Sgw = 140 mm for M36 bolts
• 20 mm for M24 bolts
• 32 mm for M30 bolts Sgf = 140 mm (preferred) for M30, M36 bolts
• 40 mm for M36 bolts = 90 mm (alternative) for M30, M36 bolts,
where the beam flange width is inadequate
3.2.3 Edge distances required to accommodate the sum of 140 mm plus at
least 4df.
For the edge distances to all the nominal sized
holes, these are ≥ 2df. This applies to the web top Note that the minimum beam flange
bolts, and the top flange bolts. The relevant width required from (Sgf + 2aet,f,b) will
distances are shown in Fig. 68.2, namely: not allow the SHJ to be used for beams
with bf < 170 mm.
aet = edge distance transverse to the line of
principal applied force Table 68.1 gives the relevant values for each
aep = edge distance parallel to the line of dimension that have been used for th range
principal applied force of practical bolt diameters for the SHJ, along
with the design sliding shear capacities,
For the slotted holes, the minimum distance from determined in accordance with equations 59.4
the end of a slotted hole to an adjacent free edge, to 59.10 of DCB No. 59.

Table 68.1
Bolt Sliding Shear Design Capacities and Detailing Properties

BOLT SLIDING SHEAR DESIGN CAPACITIES AND OTHER PROPERTIES

Bolt Plate Plate thickness limit,


Designation Thickness φVfss kN φVfss, bs kN φVfn kN df mm df ' mm aep mm aet mm Sgw mm Sgf mm Sp mm bottom flange & web
mm plates

M20 12 42 51 93 20 22 50 50 70 70 70 16
M20 16 38 47 93 20 22 50 50 70 70 70 16
M20 20 36 44 93 20 22 50 50 70 70 70 16
M24 12 65 78 133 24 26 50 50 90 90 90 20
M24 16 60 73 133 24 26 50 50 90 90 90 20
M24 20 56 69 133 24 26 50 50 90 90 90 20
M24 25 52 64 133 24 26 50 50 90 90 90 20
M30 16 104 124 214 30 33 65 65 90 90 90 25
M30 20 98 118 214 30 33 65 65 90 90 90 25
M30 25 91 111 214 30 33 65 65 90 90 90 25
M30 32 83 102 214 30 33 65 65 90 90 90 25
M36 16 162 190 313 36 39 75 75 140 90 140 32
M36 20 153 182 313 36 39 75 75 140 90 140 32
M36 25 144 173 313 36 39 75 75 140 90 140 32
M36 32 132 162 313 36 39 75 75 140 90 140 32

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 9 No. 68, June/July 2002
3.2.5 Clearance between beam face and (3) Length of bottom flange plate
column flange
See Fig. 68.2 for these terms.
This is the dimension fSHJ shown in Fig. 68.2.
'
Lbfb = fSHJ + Lsh(0.5nbfb – 0.5) + 0.5nbfp aep
The dimension is calculated on the basis that,
when the sliding hinge joint is subject to maximum + Sp,bfb→pb + aep
design negative rotation, thus causing the beam (68.5)
bottom flange to move its closest in towards where:
the column flange (see the right hand figure,
Fig. 64.10 of DCB No. 64), there is still a clear Lsh = 2.5 θpdb + d f' (68.6)
length of flange plate of 2.5tbfp available. This Sp,bfb→pb = as given by equation 68.2
gives the following requirements for fSHJ in mm; θp = 30 x 10 -3 radians
d'f = diameter of nominally sized
fSHJ ≥ 10 + 1.25 θp,desdb + 2.5 tbfp (68.3)
bolthole to NZS 3404 Clause
where: 14.3.5.2.1 (mm)
10 = gap to clear weld between column and db = depth of beam (mm)
bottom flange plate (mm)
θp,des = 30 x 10 -3 radians 3.2.7 Dimensions of bottom flange plate
db = depth of beam (mm) brass shims
tbfp = thickness of bottom flange plate (mm) (1) For both brass shims (upper and lower):
The value from equation 68.3 should be rounded Width = bbfp + 40 mm (68.7)
up to the nearest 5 mm.
where:
As specified in section 3.2.6 of DCB No. 58, the bbfp = width of bottom flange plate
FBJ has a constant clearance gap, fFBJ, of 20 mm.
In contrast, the SHJ has a variable clearance gap (2) Thickness of both brass shims = 3 mm
that, in practice, varies from 50 mm to 100 mm or
more. (3) Length of upper brass shim

The 10 mm gap for the weld applies, irrespective Lubfbs = Lbfp - fSHJ (68.8)
of the type of weld used between the bottom
flange plate and the face of the column. (4) Length of lower brass shim

3.2.6 Dimensions of the bottom flange Llbfbs = Lbcp (68.9)


plate
where:
This depends on the number of bottom flange Lbcp = length of flange cap plate, from
bolts, which are determined from sections 3.6 and section 3.2.8
3.7. Once this is determined, the dimensions of 3.2.8 Dimensions of bottom flange cap
the bottom flange plate are determined as follows: plate
(1) Width of bottom flange plate: (1) Width, bbcp

bbfp,min ≥ 4df,bfb + Sgf (68.4.1) bbcp = bbfp (68.10)


bbfp,max ≤ 1.05bfc (68.4.2)
(2) Thickness,
where:
tbcp = Min (tbfp ; 20 mm) (68.11)
df,bfb = diameter of bottom flange bolts
Sgf = bolt gauge (3) Length
(Fig. 68.2 and Table 68.1)
'
Lbcp = 2aep + 0.5(nbfp – 2) (LSH + aep )
Where possible, use a flat bar to minimise
fabrication cost. (68.12)

3.2.9 Dimensions of web plate


(2) Thickness of bottom flange plate; tbfp
(1) Depth
The initial estimate of thickness is
determined from section 3.5 and confirmed
This is the dimension dwp in Fig. 68.3. The
from section 3.7. The limiting thickness as web plate should be as deep as is
a function of bolt size from section 3.2.2 practicable for the given depth of beam,
must also be met.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 10 No. 68, June/July 2002
leading to the following recommendations (3) Thickness of both brass shims
for hot – rolled beams.
This is 3 mm.
dwp, minimum = db – 2tfb – 58 (68.12.1)
(4) Length of inner web brass shim
dwp, maximum = db – 2tfb – 48 (68.12.2)

dwp, average = db – 2tfb – 53 (68.12.3) Liwbs = Lwp - fSHJ (68.14)

where: (5) Length of outer web brass shim


db, tfb are the beam depth, flange thickness
(mm). Lowbs = Liwbs + 30 mm (68.15)

The limits for dwp are given in mm. The additional length of the outer brass
shim is to allow it to be held for positioning
(2) Thickness during erection, once the web cap plate is
twp = tbfp is initially used and is increased in place.
only if required from section 3.9. This has
not been required in any of the designs 3.2.11 Dimensions of web cap plate
undertaken for the NITH studies.
(1) Depth
(3) Length
dwcp = 2aet (68.16)
As can be seen from Fig. 68.2, the spacing
of the web top bolts and the web bottom (2) Thickness
bolts is controlled by different criteria. The
web top bolts align with the top flange bolts, twcp = Min (twp ; 20mm) (68.16)
while the web bottom bolts align with the
bottom flange bolts. (3) Length

Thus the length of the web plate is Lwcp = Lwp – fSHJ (68.18)
controlled by:
3.2.12 Dimensions of top flange plate
Lwp ≥ Max [(fSHJ + 2aep + (nwtb – 1) Sg,w);
' '
( aep + nwbb (Lsh + aep )] This depends on the number of top flange bolts,
(68.13) which are determined from section 3.11. Once
this is determined, the dimensions of the top
where: flange plate are determined as follows:
nwtb = number of web top bolts, from
section 3.8 (1) Width of top flange plate
nwbb = number of web bottom bolts, from
section 3.6 btfp, min ≥ 4df,tfb + Sgf (68.19.1)

3.2.10 Dimensions of web brass shims btfp, max ≤ 1.05bbfc (68.19.2)


(1) Depth of web inner brass shim where:
df,tfb = diameter of top flange bolts
As shown in Fig. 68.1 and, to a lesser
extent, in Fig. 68.2, the inner brass shim Where possible, use a flat bar to minimise
extends the full depth of the web plate, with fabrication cost.
a return at the top of 15 mm. This return is
to allow the brass shim to hook over the (2) Thickness of top flange plate
web plate during erection, thus making it
self-supporting while the beam is being put This is determined from section 3.11; the
into position. limit of section 3.2.2 as a function of bolt
size must also be met.
The inner web brass shim is therefore dwp
clear depth with a 15 mm return to either (3) Length of top flange plate
the left or right as appropriate.
Ltfp = fSHJ + 2aep + (0.5ntfb – 1) Spf (68.20)
(2) Depth of web outer brass shim
where:
This is equal to the web cap plate depth. ntfb = number of top flange bolts, from
section 3.12.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 11 No. 68, June/July 2002
3.2.13 Dimensions of optional decking • nwtb ≥ nwbb
support shim • df,bfb = df,wbb = df,wtb
• df,tfb = df,bfb is preferred
This is shown in Fig. 68.1. Its use facilitates • df,positioner bolt = df,bfb
laying of decking around the connection, reducing
cost and enhancing constructability. It is formed 3.2.15 Use of Belleville Springs
from 3 mm thick steel plate.
These are optional for the bottom flange bolts.
(1) Width They increase the bolt sliding shear capacity, as
described in DCB No. 59 pages 29, 30, through
bdss ≥ Max (btfp ; bbf) + 100 (68.21) reducing the loss of installed bolt tension due to
the interaction of moment and axial force in the
where: bolt shank when the joint is sliding. This benefit is
bbf = width of beam flange (mm) of principal importance for the bottom flange bolts
and, throughout this project, the research has
This allows 50 mm overlap each side of the concentrated on the following options:
wider of the beam flange or the top flange
plate. • no Belleville Springs
• Belleville Springs to the bottom flange bolts
(2) Thickness = 3 mm
Fig. 68.1 shows the former option, while Fig. 68.2
(3) Length shows the latter.
Ldss = Ltfp – 20 mm (68.22) If Belleville Springs are to be used, then they must
be of sufficient number and strength to develop
The outer edge of the decking support shim close to the bolt proof load, from NZS 3404 Table
and top flange plate coincide; the inner 15.2.5.1, when fully compressed.
edge extends past the face of the beam
towards the column face, as shown in Fig. From the manufacturer’s load charts [16] for
68.2, with a gap of 20 mm adjacent to the alloy/carbon steel springs, the following
column. designation and number of springs are required to
achieve this:
3.2.14 Preferred bolt sizes and bolt
groupings • For a M20 bolt, 2 No. 12-EH-168 springs
• For a M24 bolt, 3 No. 16-H-168 springs
For an initial guesstimation of bolt sizes, use M24
• For a M30 bolt, 3 No. 20-H-225 springs
for beams up to 600 mm deep and M30 for beams
above 600 mm deep. • For a M36 bolt, 3 No. 24-H-262 springs

When Belleville Springs are installed, they are to


The minimum sliding bolt group layout is:
be placed under the nut end of the bolt, between
the hardened washer and the face of the cap
• 4 bottom flange bolts (2 rows of 2 bolts) plate, as shown in Fig. 68.2.
• 3 web bottom bolts (3 rows)
When determining the nut rotation from the snug-
This is the layout shown in Fig. 68.2. tight position to apply, for the given bolt length,
from Table 15.2.5.2 of [5], an extra ½ turn must be
When increasing the number of sliding bolts to added to allow for compression of the Belleville
develop the design moment, do this as follows: Springs. This extra ½ turn applies for all bolt
diameters used (M20 to M36). A background to
• Add one row of bottom flange bolts to give 6 this will be given in [1].
bottom flange bolts (3 rows) and 3 web bottom
bolts (3 rows); then 3.2.16 Allowance for manufacturing
tolerances in the supported beam and
• Add one row to each bolt group (ie. increase inclusion of a decking support shim
the sliding bolt numbers in groups of 3 at a
time). As described on pages 23, 24 of DCB No. 56 and
in section 3.2.7 of DCB No. 58 for the FBJ,
This keeps sliding bolt group proportions in line allowance must be made for manufacturing
with those experimentally tested. tolerances in the beams by offsetting the positions
of the top and bottom flange plates.
Other constraints on bolt sizes and groupings are:

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 12 No. 68, June/July 2002
In the case of the FBJ, the magnitude of the offset Finally, note mention of the decking support shim
was not important to the operation of the joint, in Fig. 68.1. This is made from 3 mm thick Grade
thus the final recommendations were driven only 250 or 300 plate. It extends 50 mm beyond the
by constructability considerations. top flange plate on whichever side(s) of the beam
support(s) steel decking and provides a support to
However, in the case of the SHJ, it is important to the decking during construction. It is also detailed
minimise the offset between the bottom face of in item 35 of HERA Report R4-58 [17]; see
the beam and the bottom flange plate. In the first especially item 35c therein in this regard. It is an
large-scale test specimen, this offset was 3 mm, extra component to consider in fabrication and
whereas in the second test specimen, it was only erection but one which greatly facilitates placing of
1 mm. The greater offset from the first test the decking around the connection. Note also the
resulted in an appreciable loss of bolt tension and 3 mm thick plate extensions welded onto the
hence sliding shear capacity of the joint. However underside of the top tension/compression
the effect of the offset in test 1 was exacerbated stiffeners in Fig. 68.1 and Fig. 68.5 for the same
by allowing for a minimum gap between the purpose.
bottom corner of the beam and the column face of
only 15 mm under maximum negative rotation. In 3.2.17 Bolt tightening sequence and method
the second test specimen, this minimum gap was of tightening
increased to 40 mm using equation 68.3, thus
reducing the pull-down effect on the bolts by a The bolts are to be positioned in the directions
factor of 18. While this increase in clearance has shown in Fig. 68.1 and tightened from the nut end.
a significant effect, it is also desirable to limit the This is particularly important to avoid clashes
maximum net extent of mismatch likely between between the web and flange bolts during
the top surface of the bottom flange plate and the installation.
bottom surface of the beam to 2 mm. This results
in the following recommendations for The positioner bolt is used during erection to
manufacturing tolerance allowances in the SHJ: stabilise the bottom of the joint and to prevent
undue rotation.
(1) The allowances are provided as an offset of
each flange plate away from the Once the frame is aligned, the bolts should all be
specified centreline position of the beam snug tightened, starting with the bottom flange
(see Fig. 68.2) bolts and working up.

(2) The up offset for the top flange plate is as The tightening pattern should be to NZS 3404
follows: Clause 15.2.4.1. For each group of bolts (eg. the
bottom flange bolts) this means starting with the
• 3 mm for beam depths up to 610 mm bolts closest to the column face and working
• 4 mm for beam depths above 610 mm along the row away from the column face. For the
• 3 mm is added to all the above to flange bolts, this may require two or more rounds
accommodate a decking support shim, of snug tightening to get all bolts snug tight,
where used. pulling the flange plate in hard against the flange
upper brass shim.
(3) The down offset for the bottom flange plate
is as follows: The bolts are then fully tensioned, starting again
with the bottom flange bolts and working up.
• 2 mm for all beam depths Tensioning is to the part turn method of NZS 3404
• 3 mm is added to all the above to Clause 15.2.5.2. For bottom flange bolts where
accommodate the flange upper brass Belleville Springs are installed, tighten by an extra
shim, which is always required. ½ turn from snug tight over that specified in Table
15.2.5.2 of [5].
In practice, these tolerance allowances will lead to
a gap existing between the beam flange and top 3.2.18 Tightening of large diameter HSFG
flange plate in most instances; this gap is readily bolts
closed by the bolt tightening, for which the
moment developed is at least an order of The SHJ connections will routinely require the use
magnitude greater than the weak axis plastic of fully tensioned M30 high strength structural
moment capacity of the plate. bolts and occasionally the use of M36 bolts. It is
important to ensure that, when this size is
The web plate must also be offset from the specified, they are fully tensioned.
column flange centreline by an amount equal to
half the beam web thickness plus 3.5 mm. 3 mm This task is beyond the scope of a standard
of this is to accommodate the web inner brass impact wrench. Suitable equipment is readily
shim.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 13 No. 68, June/July 2002
available; details are given on page 24 of DCB (1) Calculate the design sliding shear capacity,
issue No. 56. ΣφVfss, of the bottom flange plate bolt group
and the web bottom bolt group.
3.2.19 Forming of the slotted holes
(2) Take moments of each of the sliding shear
The slotted holes in the bottom flange plate and capacities from (1) about the top of steel
web plate (see Figs. 68.1 – 68.3 for their location) beam. The lever arms are shown in Fig.
can be formed by machine flame cutting or water 68.3. The sum of these moments = φMSHJ.
jet cutting to the required dimensions.
The design vertical shear (seismic plus gravity) is
However, they can also be formed by drilling a carried by the web top bolts; thus the design
nominally sized hole at each end of the slotted shear capacity, φVSHJ, of the SHJ = the design
hole, then gas cutting across the top and bottom shear capacity of the web top bolt group. For
of this pair of drilled holes to form the slotted hole. most applications, only one row of web top bolts
This gas cut surface need be no smoother than will be required to carry the design vertical shear,
that from good practice hand gas cutting, provided however, if this is large, two rows of web top bolts
that the rounded ends of the slotted hole are of may be needed.
drilled surface smoothness. If this method is
adopted, then the width of slotted hole, as In all the representative designs undertaken in this
measured between the adjacent gas cut surfaces, project, only one row has been needed.
must lie between d'f and (d'f + 2) mm. This has
been the approach used in all the SHJ The joint is sized to develop the following design
experimental tests undertaken. moment and shear capacities:

3.2.20 Surface treatment of the ply contact φMSHJ ≥ Mdesign


*
(68.23)
surfaces
φVSHJ ≥ VGQU + VEµdesign (68.24)
The sliding surfaces are between steel and brass.
φVSHJ ≥ VGQmax (68.25)
The steel surfaces must be clean and free of any
surface coatings, loose scale, loose rust, visible where:
grease or oil marks.
M*design = design moment for the SHJ from
The brass surfaces must be clean and free of the most critical of earthquake or
surface coatings, visible grease or oil marks. wind; see section 3.4.

Because of these restrictions on surface condition VGQU = design shear force from load
of the sliding surfaces, the SHJ is principally combination G + Qu (dead and
intended for application in corrosion category C1 live load for use in conjunction
to ISO 9223 [18] (very low rate of corrosion, with earthquake).
typically found inside heated or air conditioned
buildings with clean atmospheres). VEµdesign = design shear force derived from
out-of-balance design seismic
The contact surfaces for the bottom flange bolts moments acting on the clear
and web bottom bolts must be as specified above beam length.
for SHJs in corrosion categories C2 to C5 of [18].
Non-contact surfaces can be protected with an VGQmax = design shear force for full factored
appropriate surface treatment; the edges of the loading, eg. 1.2G + 1.6Q from [2].
contact surfaces should be sealed against water
ingress. The positioner bolt will need to be 3.3.2 Design role of joint components
painted in these applications.
Refer to Fig. 68.1 in conjunction with this section.
3.3 Design concepts for the sliding hinge The design roles of the SHJ components are as
joint follows:

3.3.1 Development of moment and shear • The top flange bolts act as the anchor point
capacity for joint rotation, pinning the beam top corner
in place relative to the column
The design moment capacity of the SHJ, φMSHJ, is
determined as follows: • The web top bolts resist the applied vertical
shear force. They are subject to only small
movement in the longitudinal direction due to

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 14 No. 68, June/July 2002
their proximity to the pinning action of the top Step 3 : Determine initial bottom flange plate
flange bolts. width and thickness and initial web plate
thickness
• The web bottom bolts and bottom flange bolts Step 4 : Determine bolt size and numbers for
develop the sliding shear resistance moment adequacy, then finalise bottom
flange plate width and thickness
• The cap plates provide the support to the bolt
end remote from the beam of the sliding bolt Step 5 : Design web top bolts for vertical shear
groups resistance

• The brass shims facilitate smooth sliding Step 6 : Design web plate
between the steel surfaces at a near constant
level of shear friction, which is essential to the Step 7 : Design top flange bolts and plate
maintenance of stable and sufficient bolt
tension when the joint is sliding Step 8 : Check on reduced tension capacity of
the beam at the bolted connection
• The Belleville Springs, which are optional
additions to the bottom flange bolts, assist Step 9 : Design welds between plates and
these bolts to retain bolt tension under sliding. column
This sustains the bolt sliding shear capacity,
Vss, at a higher level than is the case without Step 10 : Dimension flange and web plates
the springs and retains joint stiffness in the
post-sliding regime of behaviour. Step 11 : Design, detail positioner bolt and shims

• The positioner bolt is a black finish class 4.6 Step 12 : Design tension/compression stiffeners
bolt that connects between the beam flange
and bottom flange plate only, through nominal Step 13 : Calculate joint overstrength capacity
sized holes in each ply. It has the same
diameter as the rest of the bolts (which are all Step 14 : Design joint panel zone
galvanised finish property class 8.8 structural
bolts). The positioner bolt has three very The full SHJ design procedure, starting with
important roles, namely: determination of joint design moment and design
shear, is given in sections 3.4 to 3.21.
(i) It acts as a stability bolt for erection
3.4 Calculation of the design moment and
purposes, making the joint rigid for
design shear
erection by developing moment
resistance in conjunction with the top 3.4.1 Design earthquake moment
flange bolts
As has been mentioned in section 3.1, the joint
(ii) It functions as a locater bolt for the itself is sized to resist the code-derived
sliding bolts, ensuring that they are earthquake moment alone, ignoring joint moments
located in the middle of the slotted induced by gravity only, with the beam designed
holes in the erected joint to resist the full factored gravity load (ie. 1.2G +
1.6Q to NZS 4203 [2]) as a simply supported
(iii) It provides a rapid visual indicator as beam.
to whether the joint has gone into the
sliding mode following a severe For the SHJ, the design earthquake moment,
earthquake; if this happens and the ME* µdesign , is determined from [2 or 4, 5 and 6] for
joint inelastic rotation exceeds around
low-rise and medium-rise MRSFs. The joint
10 mrad, the positioner bolt shears
design earthquake moment is given in sections
through and the lower half drops out.
4.2 and 4.3 herein.
3.3.3 Sequence of design actions 3.4.2 Design shear force

The full SHJ design procedure involves the This is given by the largest of equations 68.24 and
following 14 steps: 68.25.

Step 1 : Determine design moments and shears The seismic component of shear, VE*µdesign , is
given by:
Step 2 : Determine sliding bolt group layouts
3 ME* µdesign
VE*µdesign = (68.26)
(Lb - d c )

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 15 No. 68, June/July 2002
where: 0.7 = strength reduction factor for tension
3 ≈ 1.4 x 1.1 x 2 friction action
1.4 = overstrength factor on joint 0.8 = strength reduction factor for bolt sliding
1.1 = allowance for φMSHJ / M* shear capacity determination
2 = moment pattern factor (equal 0.85 = kh for short slotted holes, from NZS 3404
and opposite end moments) Clause 9.3.3.1.
(Lb – dc) = clear length of beam
In practice, the length of slotted hole will typically
3.4.3 Design wind moment be such as to classify it as a long slotted hole.
However the cap plate provides much more
The SHJ has been developed as a semi-rigid joint robust confinement than an oversized washer,
for seismic-resisting systems. However, it must thus the value of kh for short slotted holes rather
also perform satisfactorally under wind loading. than for long slotted holes is used.

In designs for New Zealand application, in Step 3: Check if equation 68.28 is satisfied
accordance with NZS 4203 [2] or its proposed
replacement [4, 19], it is possible that ultimate φMSHJ,WSLS ≥ *
MWSLS (68.28)
limit state wind design may govern some joints in
buildings over around 10 storeys high. This will If it is, the joint design is satisfactory.
be especially the case for designs to the draft
Loadings Standards [4] which are located in the If it isn’t, then add an extra set of sliding bolts in
lowest seismic regions. accordance with section 3.2.14 and recheck. This
will affect the overall joint design and overstrength
Also, because the levels of wind loading action and require reconsideration of the joint and
associated with the serviceability and ultimate limit system design for earthquake.
states are closer (see eg. Table 5.4.2 of [2]) than
for earthquake, it is possible that either wind limit In practice, for designs to either the current
state may govern some SHJs in buildings as low Standard [2] or the new draft [4 and 19], it is likely
as 10 storeys high. that, where wind action governs, it will be the ULS
rather than SLS that is critical. This is because
For this reason, brief guidance on SHJ design for
each wind limit state is given below. the ratio of (M*WSLS / M*WULS ) will typically be less
than 0.75.
3.4.3.1 Wind ultimate limit state
Having determined the design moment and shear,
The joint design for the wind ultimate limit state
the joint design proceeds as follows. For this
moment, M*WULS , uses the principles and procedure, the ULS design moment is designated
procedures as given in sections 3.5 to 3.16. In M*design , which covers the critical ULS moment
saying this, it is conservative to apply the relevant
being from either earthquake or from wind, as
overstrength factors as ductility demand is not
appropriate.
anticipated under M*WULS .
3.5 Determine bottom flange plate width and
It follows, in checking for the wind ultimate limit initial thickness
state, that if M*Eì > M*WULS , then the earthquake
3.5.1 Bottom flange plate width
condition governs design for the ultimate limit
state. See section 3.2.6 (1) for the limits. Select a plate
width, bbfp, within these limits.
3.4.3.2 Wind serviceability limit state
3.5.2 First estimate of bottom flange plate
The SHJ must remain rigid at the wind thickness
serviceability limit state. This is easily checked as
follows: The bolt sliding shear capacity is a function of the
plate thickness, hence the joint moment capacity
Step 1: Calculate the design wind serviceability is also a function of the plate thickness. This
limit state moment, M*WSLS . means it is desirable to obtain a rapid estimate of
bottom flange plate thickness as soon as the joint
Step 2: Determine the moment associated with design moment is known. This is determined from
rigid action of the joint from equation 68.27. the following two equations.

φMSHJ,WSLS = 0.75φMSHJ,Eµ (68.27) *


1.2 Mdesign
N t,*design = (68.29)
where: db
0.75 = (0.7/0.8) x 0.85

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 16 No. 68, June/July 2002
N t,*design φVfss,bs = design sliding shear capacity,
tbfp ≥ (68.30) with BS
0.9 (bbfp − 2df' ) fy,bfp = get from Table 68.1 for bolt
size and plate thickness
where:
0.9 = strength reduction factor Fig. 68.3 shows the lever arms for the moment
d'f = bolt hole diameter for nominal sized capacity determination. The value of 26.5 used in
equation 68.33 comes from the average web plate
hole, from NZS 3404 Clause 14.3.5.2.1.
depth, from equation 68.12.3.
fy,bfp = bottom flange plate yield stress
3.6.3 Check moment adequacy
3.5.3 Check plate thickness limit in relation
to bolt size
This is given by:
Check that the limit of section 3.2.2 is satisfied; if
it isn’t, then a larger bolt diameter is needed for φMSHJ ≥ *
Mdesign (68.34)
the given plate thickness.
where:
3.5.4 Apply this estimate of thickness to M*design is from section 3.4; typically section 3.4.1.
the web plate

3.6 Determine sliding bolt size and numbers 3.6.4 Review bolt numbers and size
for moment adequacy
If equation 68.34 is easily satisfied, reduce
3.6.1 Start with the following bolt size to M20 and recalculate; this gives
φMSHJ, minimum for the given beam size.
• Bolt size, numbers and layout from section
3.2.14. If equation 68.34 is not satisfied;

3.6.2 Calculate moment capacity of joint • Either increase the bolt numbers in accordance
with section 3.2.14 and recalculate; or
(1) Joints with no Belleville Springs • Increase the bolt size and recalculate; or
• Increase the bolt numbers and bolt size and
φMSHJ = nbfb φV fss db + nwbb φV fss ewb recalculate.
(68.31)
3.7 Design of bottom flange plate
(2) Joints with Belleville Springs in bottom
flange There are four cases to consider, three of which
require calculation and the fourth of which is dealt
φMSHJ = nbfb φV fss,bs db + nwbb φV fss ewb with by detailing. These are:
(68.32)
(i) Suppression of net tension yield prior to the
where: bolts developing their sliding shear
nbfb = no. of bottom flange bolts capacity; see section 3.7.1
= 4 for initial trial, from section
3.2.14 (ii) Suppression of net tension fracture while
nwbb = no. of web bottom bolts joint is in active sliding mode; see section
= 3 for initial trial, from section 3.7.2
3.2.14
(iii) Suppression of compression yielding while
φVfss = design sliding shear capacity, no joint is in active sliding mode; see section
BS 3.7.3
= get from Table 68.1 for bolt size
and plate thickness (iv) Suppression of premature bolt shear
fracture when end of slotted hole is
• Bolt size for initial trial from
section 3.2.14 reached; this is covered by compliance with
the bottom flange plate thickness to bolt
• Plate thickness from section
diameter ratio given by equation 68.1.
3.5.2
3.7.1 Net tension yield
ewb = db – tfb – 26.5 – aet (mm)

(68.33)
*
N ty,bfp = 1.15 nbfb φVfss,bfp (68.35)

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 17 No. 68, June/July 2002
φNty,bfp = 0.9 (bbfp - 2df' ) f y,bfp tbfp (68.36) φNcu,bfp = 0.85bbfp tbfp fy,bfp (68.43)

where: where:
nbfp = no. of bottom flange bolts from 0.85 = 0.9 x 0.942
section 3.6.4 0.942 = α v from Table 6.3.3 of NZS 3404 for
1.15 = 0.9 / 0.8 = difference in φ between bolt α n = 25 and α b = 0.5
and plate
(b,t,fy)bfp = from section 3.6 φNcu,bfp ≥ Nu,* bfp is required (68.44)
d'f = function of df,bfb from NZS 3404 Clause
14.3.5.2.1 (see also Table 68.1) where:
φVfss,bfp = φVfss or φVfss,bs as appropriate, from *
Nu,bfp is given by equation 68.38
Table 68.1.
Use the resulting tbfp for the web plate.
φNty,bfp ≥ N ty,
*
bfp is required (68.37)
3.8 Design of web top bolts
3.7.2 Check for net tension failure
These are designed to resist the applied vertical
This is determined from the design action shear, in bearing, with threads included in the
developed under the design level of rotation. The shear plane.
ideal capacity of the plate is used to resist this
action, therefore the ideal capacity factor is 3.8.1 Vertical design shear force
incorporated into the design action determination,
thus: *
Vwv = Max(VE*µdesign + VGQu
* *
; VGQmax ) (68.45)

φVfss,bfp where:
Nu,* bfp = nbfb Csp 0.9 (68.38)
φ VE*µdesign = as given by equation 68.26
* *
where: VGQu , VGQmax = as given by the tributary area
nbfb = no of bottom flange bolts, from section vertical loading for the
3.6 appropriate factored maximum
Csp = 1.45 when no springs are used (dead + live) loads
= 1.55 when Belleville Springs are used
0.9 = ideal capacity factor 3.8.2 Determine the number of web top
bolts required
φNtu,bfp = 0.77 (bbfp - 2df' ) fu,bfp tbfp (68.39)
*
Vwv
nwtb ≥ (68.46)
where: φVfn,wtb
fu,bfp = ultimate tensile strength of bottom flange
plate where:
φVfn,wtb = design capacity, threads included,
φNtu,bfp ≥ Nu,* bfp is required (68.40) same bolt diameter as for web
bottom bolts. (See eg. [20] for this
3.7.3 Compression capacity information).

First the slenderness ratio of the bottom flange If nwtb < nwbb, where nwbb has been determined
plate must be checked from section 3.6, then add additional web top bolts
such that nwtb = nwbb. The additional web top bolts
Le,bfp = 0.7 (fSHJ + 1.25θpdb) (68.41) are then used to resist the forces developed by
the sliding groups of bolts, in conjunction with the
flange top bolts, in section 3.11.
 Le,bfp   fy,bfp 
λn,bfp =     (68.42)
 250  3.9 Design of web plate
 0.29 tbfp 
The web plate thickness, twp, has been set equal
Check if λ n,bfp ≤ 25. If it is, proceed to the next to be bottom flange plate thickness, from step
equation. If it isn’t, then α v for input into equation 3.7.3. The web plate’s capability to resist the
68.43 needs to be re-evaluated from Table 6.3.3 vertical shear and horizontal tension actions now
of NZS 3404 [5] for the value of λ n,bfp from needs to be determined.
equation 68.42.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 18 No. 68, June/July 2002
Vertical shear will be resisted over the full depth of φNtu,wp ≥ 0.77(1.5d wcp - d f' )t wp fu,wp (68.54)
plate less the width involved in resisting horizontal
actions from the web bottom bolts. Horizontal
tension/compression is developed by the sliding φNtu,wp ≥ N tu,
*
wp is required (68.55)
resistance of the web bottom bolts. This is
resisted by the strip of web plate under the web 3.9.5 Sizing of web plate
cap plate for commencement of yield and by
1.5 x bwcp for tension fracture under overstrength This can now be done; see section 3.2.9.
action.
3.10 Sizing of cap plates and brass shims
3.9.1 Calculate design vertical shear 3.10.1 Bottom flange cap plate
capacity of plate
See section 3.2.8 for determining the width,
φVvn,wp = 0.9 x 0.6 x 0.6 x 0.83(d wp - d wcp) fy,wp t wp α v thickness and length of bottom flange cap plate,
using the values determined above.
= 0.27(d wp - d wcp) f y,wp t wp α v
(68.47) 3.10.2 Bottom flange upper and lower brass
where: shims
(d wp - d wcp) fy,wp See section 3.2.7.
α v = 1.0 if ≤ 82 (68.48)
t wp 250
3.10.3 Web cap plate
αv = 1.0 otherwise; see Clause 5.11.5.1 of See section 3.2.11.
NZS 3404.
3.10.4 Web inner and outer brass shims
The second 0.6 is to account for moment / shear
interaction. See section 3.2.10.

dwcp = as given by section 3.2.11(1) 3.11 Design of top flange bolts and plate

3.9.2 Check vertical shear adequacy of The top flange plate anchors the beam laterally
plate and operates as a hinge about which the beam
can slide. It is designed to resist the combined
φVvn,wp ≥ Vwv
*
(68.49) shear developed by the web bottom bolts and
bottom flange bolts, using bolts of the same
where: diameter. The shear from these is the greater of
*
the overstrength sliding shear or the threads
Vwv = design vertical shear force from equation excluded design shear capacity. The latter will
68.45. always govern and is therefore the only check
needed. Because of this it is simply a matter of
3.9.3 Check for net tension yield matching bolt numbers, incorporating any web top
bolt unused capacity to resist the lateral force.
This is checked under the design sliding shear, for
the width of web plate under the cap plate only. 3.11.1 Number of bolts required

wp = 1.15nwbb φVfss
* Using the same bolt diameter as for the web
N ty, (68.50)
bottom bolts and the bottom flange bolts.

φNty,wp = 0.9(d wcp - d f' )t wp fy,wp (68.51)


nftb required =
1
kr
( (
nwbb + nbfb - nwtb,used - nwtb,calc))
φNty,wp ≥ *
N ty,wp is required (68.52) (68.56)
where:
3.9.4 Check for net tension failure kr = reduction factor for bolts in a line
from NZS 3404 Table 9.3.2.1.
This is checked for the overstrength sliding action
associated with reaching the end of the slotted nwtb,calc = no. of web top bolts required from
hole, with this action being resisted by a depth of equation 68.46, section 3.8.2
web plate = 1.5 x depth of cap plate.
nwtb,used = no. of web top bolts used from
φVfss,wb section 3.8.2
wp = nwbb
*
N tu, C sp 0.9 (68.53) If the length of the joint, as measured from the first
φ to the last bolt, exceeds 15df, then kr < 1.0.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 19 No. 68, June/July 2002
3.11.2 Determine the top flange plate width φNt,tfp and φNc,tfp ≤ 0.85ntfp φVfn,tfb (68.62)
required

See section 3.2.12(1) for the limits on btfp. Select If equation 68.62 is not satisfied, add an extra pair
a plate width within these limits. of top flange bolts and recheck.

3.11.3 Determine required thickness to 3.12 Check on the reduced tension capacity
suppress tension yielding of the beam at the bolted connection
region
This is sized so that the plate can develop the
sliding shear capacity of the bottom flange and The purpose of this check is to suppress yielding
web bottom bolts, without tension yielding. of the beam cross-section through the loaded end
of the beam under moment-induced tension
during the sliding phase of the joint. Such yielding
1.15 (nbfb φVfs + nwbb φVfs )
t tfp,tension ≥ (68.57) would cause unwanted loss of bolt tension and
0.9(btfp - 2d f' )fy,tfp hence sliding shear moment capacity.

where: 3.12.1 Calculate the design tension action,


φVfs = φVfss or φVfss,bs as required N*tb , on the tension half of the beam,
fy,tfp = yield stress of top flange plate from equation 68.63
d'f = diameter of bolt hole to NZS 3404
Clause 14.3.5.2.1 1.15φMSHJ
*
N tb = 0.5 x Nt (68.63)
φMsx,b
Where possible, use a flat bar to minimise
fabrication cost.
where:
φMSHJ = the joint design moment capacity from
3.11.4 Undertake a slenderness ratio check
section 3.6
on the top flange plate, if no concrete
slab is present φMsx,b = the design section moment capacity for
the beam size chosen; eg. from [20]
If there is a concrete slab in contact with the top Nt = the nominal section gross yielding
surface of this plate, which will be the typical case, capacity, determined from NZS 3404
no slenderness check is needed. Equation 7.2.1
3.12.2 Calculate the design tension capacity
If there isn’t a concrete slab, then: of the beam from the lesser of

Le,tfp = 0.7 (fSHJ + aep,tf,b) (68.58) φNtb = 0.39Anb fub (68.64.1)

 Le,tfp   fy,bfp  φNtb = 0.45Agfyfb (68.64.2)


λn,tfp =     (68.59)
 0.29 t tfp   250 
where:
Anb = net area of the beam cross section,
where: calculated in accordance with Clause
fSHJ is determined from equation 68.3 9.1.10 of [5]
aep is given in Table 68.1 for the given bolt size. fub = tensile strength of the beam
fyfb = yield stress of the beam flange
Check if λ n,tfp ≤ 25, when no concrete slab is
present. If it isn’t and no slab is present, then α v 3.12.3 Check that the following is satisfied
for input into equation 68.61 needs to be re-
evaluated from Table 6.3.3 of NZS 3404 [5].
φN tb > N tb
*
(68.65)
3.11.5 Check top flange plate and bolt
adequacy for the ULS condition If this equation is not satisfied, use a larger beam
size so that it is satisfied. Do not use beam
Calculate reinforcing plates with the SHJ.

φNt,tfp = 0.77(btfp - 2d f' )t tfp fu,tfp (68.60)  φMSHJ 


In practice, if   ≤ 0.76, the beam end

 φMsx,b 
φNc,tfp = 0.85btfp t tfp f y,tfp (68.61) capacity is likely to be adequate. For preliminary
design, one can use (M*design / φMsx,b ) ≤ 0.76/1.15
Check ≈ 0.66 as a target value for beam selection.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 20 No. 68, June/July 2002
3.13 Welds required between column flange where:
and bottom flange plate *
vtw = φNt,tfp from equation 68.60
bmin = lesser of (btfp ; bfc)
The bottom flange plate has been sized to
btfp = width of top flange plate
dependably resist the maximum force expected
under the maximum design rotation, in 3.14.2 Design of welds
accordance with section 3.7.2. This carries the
joint-overstrength factor, which means that the Determine fillet weld size required as for the
weld need only be designed to develop the design bottom flange plate, see section 3.13.2. If tw > 15
tension capacity of the flange plate, not the mm use a CPBW.
overstrength tension capacity.
3.15 Welds required between column flange
3.13.1 Design action on bottom flange plate and web plate
weld
These welds are subject to two very different sets
* of conditions. The first is combined moment and
Ntw,bfp vertical shear generated by the web top bolts and
bfp =
*
vw, (68.66)
2bmin resisted by the clear depth of web plate for shear
and the full depth for moment. The second is
where: moment-induced axial tension generated by the
web bottom bolts at the end of their sliding
N*tw,bfp = φNtu,bfp from equation 68.39 regime, taken over a thickness of web plate equal
bmin = lesser of (bbfp; bfc) to 1.5 x the thickness of the web cap plate. The
bbfp = width of bottom flange plate two cases are considered separately and the
bfc = width of column flange design action is the maximum from the two cases,
but not required to be greater than the design
3.13.2 Select fillet weld size such that: tension capacity of the plate. All this involves:

φv w ≥ v w,
*
(68.67) 3.15.1 Calculate actions on weld from
bfp
vertical shear
where: *
Vwv
φvw = design capacity of category SP fillet *
vwv,wp,v = (68.69)
weld from [5] 2(dwp - d wcp)

Values of φvw are listed in [20] *


3Vwvey
wp,h =
*
vwv, 2
(68.70)
d wp
This is the fillet weld size required on each side of
the flange plate to column flange.
( ) + (v ) 
0.5
=  v *wv,v
* 2 * 2
vwv,wp wv,h (68.71)
3.13.3 From consideration of welding 
economics and clearance requirements,
determine if the fillet weld size from where
3.13.2 will be used or if a complete *
Vwv = design vertical shear force, from
penetration butt weld is required.
equation 68.45
dwp = average depth of web plate, from
If tw > 12 - 15 mm, use a complete penetration
equation 68.12.3
butt weld (CPBW). For most fabricators engaged
dwcp = depth of web cap plate, from section
in multi-storey construction, the changeover point
3.10.3
to a CPBW will be tw > 15 mm.
ey = fSHJ + aep,wt,b + ((nwtb – 1)/2)Sg,wt
3.14 Welds required between column flange (68.72)
and top flange plate
3.15.2 Calculate actions on weld from axial
A similar situation applies to that for the bottom tension generated by web bottom
flange plate, namely: bolts

3.14.1 Design action on top flange plate φN tu,wp


wp =
*
weld vwh, (68.73)
3d wcp
*
Ntw,tfp where:
tfp =
*
vtw, (68.68)
2bmin φNtu,wp = capacity given by equation 68.54

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 21 No. 68, June/July 2002
3.15.3 Calculate design actions on weld • Replace all terms related to the beam
between column flange and web plate flange with the same term for the bottom
flange plate, ie: Abfp replaces Afb; fy,bfp
 0.9t wp fy, wp 
( )
replaces f yb; tbfp replaces tfb; bbfp replaces
wp = Min Max v wv,wp ; v wh,wp ; 
* * *
vw, bfb; twf relates to the weld calculated from
 2 x 103  3.13.3 above.
(68.74)
• More simply, use equation 50.2 from
3.15.4 Design weld section 3.2(2) of DCB Issue No. 50 with
the same substitutions as stated above.
Select fillet weld size such that
(3) Design and detail the tension/compression
φvw,wp ≥ v w,
*
wp (68.75) stiffeners to section 3.2 of DCB issue No.
50 (with the above modification to section
where: 3.2(2) of that issue)
φvw = design capacity of a category SP fillet
weld, eg. from [20] 3.18 Joint overstrength moment, MoSHJ

The size is used on each side full length of the This is determined as follows:
web plate to column flange.
 φMSHJ 
If tw,required ≥ 15 mm use a CPBW.
o
MSHJ = φoms  (68.76)
 φ 
3.16 Selection and location of the positioner
bolt where:
φMSHJ = joint design moment from section 3.6
The role of the positioner bolt is described in φ = 0.8
section 3.3.2; its grade and appearance in section φoms = 1.4 for the SHJ with or without Belleville
3.2.1. Springs
This bolt connects between the bottom flange This overstrength factor has been derived from
plate and beam flange only. It is placed as shown the experimental testing, using the methodology
in Fig. 68.2; the distance from the centreline of as will be described in [1].
this bolt to the centreline of the adjacent row of
bottom flange bolts is given by equation 68.2. 3.19 Joint panel zone requirements

This bolt is intended to be snug tightened only, but 3.19.1 Design shear force on panel zone
can be fully tensioned to hold the bottom of the
joint in place during erection, if desired. The panel zone design moment for input into NZS
3404 Equation 12.9.5.2(1) is the joint overstrength
3.17 Tension/compression stiffener moment given by equation 68.76. However,
requirements compared to the layout of a rigid welded joint, the
top and bottom flange plates are more widely
These are determined using NZS 3404 Clause spaced apart (see Fig. 68.2) which reduces the
12.9.5.3.1, modified as described below, in unbalanced shear force on the connection.
conjunction with section 3.2, page 13, DCB Issue
No. 50. These two aspects are incorporated into equation
68.77, which gives the design shear force on the
(1) Provide tension/compression stiffeners panel zone of a SHJ.
positioned opposite the flange plates, so
that top of steel is the same for each  MSHJ
o   o 
VP,* SHJ =   +  MSHJ  - VCOL
element.
 (
 db + tbfp ) 
L (
 db + tbfp
 ) 
R
(2) Use NZS 3404 Equations 12.9.5.3(3) and (68.77)
12.9.5.3(4) to determine the area of where:
stiffener required for each design action, The subscripts L and R refer to the left and right
with the following modification: hand beams at the connection.
MoSHJ = as given by equation 68.76.
• The tension/compression stiffener
design is based on the bottom flange
For preliminary design and for most final designs,
plate dimensions for both the top and
VCOL can be accounted for as described in NZS
the bottom pair of stiffeners. This may
3404 Commentary Equation C12.9.5(1).
mean that the top pair of stiffeners are
slightly thinner than the top flange plate.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 22 No. 68, June/July 2002
3.19.2 The design shear capacity of the The effects of the slight foundation flexibility
panel zone, φVc , is calculated to NZS should be accounted for; in lieu of a more detailed
3404 Eq 12.9.5.3.(5). analysis, use the rotational stiffness given by NZS
3404 Clause 4.8.3.4.1(b).
3.19.3 The panel zone has adequate
capacity when Design and detailing concepts for moment-
resisting column baseplate connections are given
φVc ≥ Vpz∗ (68.78) on pages 11-20 of DCB Issue No. 56.

Doubler plates, if needed, should be designed in The advice in both articles is written to utilise, as
accordance with sections 4 and 6 of DCB Issue much as possible, the standard details and
No. 57, pages 23-25 therein, which, although provisions in HERA Report R4-100 [12].
written for FBJ connections, actually covers both 3.20.3 Pinned bases
FBJ and SHJ connections.
Design actions and detailing requirements are
With the SHJ, doubler plates are not typically given in section 4.2.2, page 23 of DCB Issue No.
going to be necessary when only one beam 50. The advice therein is also written for use in
frames into the column, but will often be required conjunction with [12]. Note that, for analysis, a
when two beams frame into the column. “pinned” connection should be assigned a realistic
3.20 Connections at column bases rotational stiffness. This can be obtained from
Clause 4.8.3.4.1 (a) of [5].
3.20.1 Options available and impact on
building performance 3.20.4 Ring spring bases

The most commonly used column base Fig. 15 of [21] shows a ring spring test setup
connection type for a MRSF is a fixed base which would also be applicable to a column base
connection. This has the advantage of reducing application.
lateral deflection in the superstructure. As
mentioned in section 2.3, with fixed base columns The ring spring joint is well suited to application at
the inelastic demand on the joints under the the column base of a MRSF with SHJs or FBJs.
design severe seismic event is within the This is because it combines the benefit of the
performance criteria specified for the columns in pinned base, in protecting the column from
sections (2) and (3) therein. With pinned base inelastic action at its base, with the ability to
columns, these limits are slightly exceeded in generate a rapid increase in moment capacity with
some types of earthquake record, principally increasing rotation demand. The joint also has
those exhibiting positive near fault directional good self-centering capability, which will assist in
motion. returning the building to its pre-earthquake
position at the end of the strong ground motion
A third option is a ring-spring type detail at the shaking.
column base. This is mentioned in [21], with a
picture of such a joint shown as Fig. 15 of [21]. Design of the ring spring joint for this system is
relatively straightforward. It is referenced from
When subjected to a design level severe seismic section 6.2 of [21] and will be described in [1];
event, it is anticipated that minor damage to the further details are not given herein. Contact the
yielding regions of columns adjacent to the HERA Structural Engineer for more information.
column bases would occur in columns with fixed
base connections. For columns with pinned base 3.21 Guidance on practical aspects of sliding
connections, minor damage would be expected hinge joint design
within the baseplate detail. In each case, minimal
• The flange plates should be made as wide as
or no repair would be anticipated to be necessary possible, within the limits of sections 3.2.6 (1)
from this level of event. and 3.2.12(1)
The ring-spring base would be dependably
• The top flange plate will typically be the same
undamaged by this level of event.
thickness or the next thickness up from the
Brief guidance on each type of column base bottom flange plate and the web plate
connection is now given.
• The maximum number of bottom flange bolts
13.20.2 Fixed bases should be 8, in order to keep the required
bottom flange plate thickness within the
The design actions for fixed bases are given in maximum thickness allowed for the given bolt
section 4.2.1, pages 22,23 of DCB Issue No. 50 diameter. If the design from section 3.6
and are directly applicable to these semi-rigid indicates that nbfb = 10 is required, look at
systems. The actions are based on µdesign = 4.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 23 No. 68, June/July 2002
increasing the bolt size. With nbfp = 8, nwbb = the number of bays (more than one scheme may
nwtb = 4 will result, with ntfb = 12, typically. be required).

• Refer to Table 68.2, section 4.2, step 7 for The SHJ has been developed for perimeter frame
typical values of φMSHJ/φMsx,b that have application and the guidance given in step 2.2 and
resulted from the many representative frames step 6 herein for the member sizes to meet frame
designed as part of this project. stiffness requirements is formulated on that basis.
(Perimeter frames and internal frames are as
4. Design of Moment-Resisting Steel defined in NZS 3404[5]).
Frames Incorporating Sliding Hinge
Joint Connections Step 2 Estimate beam sizes required

4.1 General and scope of guidance given This estimate should be made at the first level
above the seismic base level, at the level of
Section 4 presents guidance on the design of the uppermost principal seismic mass level and at
MRSF system that incorporates the SHJ. This selected intermediate levels.
guidance is very similar to that for MRSFs with
FBJs and follows the same format as that given in Guidance on the number of intermediate levels to
DCB No. 58 for the FBJ systems. consider is given on page 5.3 of [6]. For buildings
up to 4 storeys in height, do the check at every
Section 4.2 covers preliminary design, while level. For buildings up to 8 storeys in height,
section 4.3 covers final design. check levels 1, 3, 5 and 8. For buildings between
8 and 12 storeys in height, check levels 1, 3, 5, 8,
The design procedures presented herein are 11 and 12. For buildings above 12 storeys in
based, in format and content (wherever possible), height, check 1, 3, 6 then every 4th level.
around the procedures incorporating capacity However, the SHJ is probably not the most cost-
design presented in sections 5 and 6 of HERA effective system to use on buildings above this
Report R4-76 [6] for preliminary and final design, height, because of the limited ductility demand
respectively, of category 1 or 2 MRSFs with rigid required compared with what the SHJ can deliver.
beam to column connections. For such high-rise buildings, the FBJ offers a
potentially more cost-effective solution, especially
For such systems, strength and stiffness cannot in low to medium seismic zones.
be de-coupled, so the columns must be designed
to resist the beam section overstrength actions (or Step 2.1 To carry gravity loads
the upper limit seismic actions Emax).
Use the approach given in step 2.1, section 5.2 of
In contrast, for the semi-rigid systems [6], except use the denominator value of 8 in
incorporating SHJs, strength and stiffness are equation 5.1 of [6] instead of 10. This
considered separately and the columns are corresponds to a simply supported condition,
designed to develop only the overstrength which is required for design in accordance with
moment from the joint. This requires some section 3.1(i) herein.
modifications to the R4-76 [7] procedures, but is a
considerable simplification from the designer’s Use the lightest category 3 section from
view point. NZS 3404 [6] within a particular designation to
resist the design moment, such that M*≤ φMs. (In
Given that this guidance is being written at the the 1992 edition of NZS 3404, this category was
time of transition from NZS 4203:1992 [2] to the designated 3A, which is still used in HERA report
new Loadings Standard [4], wherever practicable R4-76 [6]. This point is picked up in the summary
the requirements of both documents are notes Tips on Seismic Design of Steel Structures
referenced. which are included in all post-July 2000 copies of
[6]).
4.2 Procedure for MRSF preliminary design
Step 2.2 To provide suitable frame lateral
The preliminary design procedure presented stiffness
below is based around that given in R4-76 section
5.2 for preliminary design of category 1 and 2 (1) For perimeter frame MRSFs, select beam
MRSFs. It is presented in the same step by step depths from the target span to depth ratios
format as section 5.2 of [7] and with the same given by equations 68.79.1 to 68.79.3
headings.
(1.1) For the lower half of the structure (up to
Step 1 Establish preliminary frame layouts 0.5H)
Formulate the preliminary frame layout or layouts (L/d*) = (9 or 11)10 > (11 or 13)5
in terms of the beam and column spacings and (68.79.1)

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 24 No. 68, June/July 2002
(1.2) For the three-quarter height (0.75H) of the Step 4 Determine the design bending
structure moments at the joints (ie.
M∗Eì and M∗Emax ) for load cases Eµ and
(L/d*) = (11)10 , (13 or 15)5
(68.79.2) Emax

(1.3) For the uppermost level (1.0H) of the (1) Use the procedure given in step 3.2,
structure section 5.2 of [6], except that, instead of
calculating M∗Eì as given on page 5.7 of [6],
(L/d*) = (15)10 , (14 or 15)5 (68.79.3)
use equation 68.81 below.
In equations 68.79;
ME∗ = (∑ M joint,i )/ 2nbeam,i (68.81)
• The figures in ( )10 are the target L/d* ratios for
a 10 storey building; those in ( )5 are for a 5 where:
storey building. Interpolate for building levels
between these. ∑ M joint, i = sum of the out-of-balance moments
• Where two figures are given, the first is for a at each joint on level i
frame with sufficient stiffness to meet the P - ∆
nbeam, i = number of beams in the semi-rigid
OK deflection limit of NZS 4203 Equation 4.7.1
[2] or of DR 1170.4 Equation 6.5(1). The system on level i
second is for a frame that does not meet this
limit and for which the strength is increased to (2) In applying step 3.2, section 5.2 of [6],
compensate, in accordance with DR1170.4 assume that the columns above and below
Clause 6.5.4. that level are all the same section.

L = span of beam (centre to centre) (3) Calculate both M∗Eì and M∗Emax .
d* = target depth of beam
Step 5 Check magnitude of wind moment
(2) At each level, select the lightest weight and use if this exceeds the
category 3 section, from NZS 3404 [6], for earthquake moment
which db ≥ d* (db = depth of beam).
Calculate the ULS design wind moment, M∗WULS ,
Step 2.3 Select the largest beam size from
steps 2.1 and 2.2 from section 3.4.3.1 and substitute it for M∗Eì if
required.
Step 3 Calculate the design seismic loads
Step 6 Reassess the beam size in order that
Use the procedure given in step 3.1, section 5.2 of beam web reinforcing plates are not
HERA Report R4-76 [7], except that the estimate required.
of fundamental period should be given by :

(i) For a perimeter MRSF in which This involves checking that M∗design / φMsx,b ≤ 0.66,
dcol ≥ 0.8dbeam as described in section 3.12.3.

Step 7 Estimate the column sizes required


T1 = 0.12h0.75
n (68.80.1)
Step 7.1 For the first seismic storey
(ii) For a perimeter MRSF in which
dcol < 0.8dbeam Select the lightest designation I-section cross
section that complies with the following:
T1 = 0.15h0.75
n (68.80.2)
(1) Flange slenderness complies with NZS
There are two levels of seismic load to determine, 3404 Table 12.5 [5] for a category 2
namely: member
(2) Web slenderness complies with Equation
(1) That associated with determining the 8.4.3.3(2) of [5] for ( N∗g / Ns ) ≤ 0.3. This
design joint moment. This is load case Eµ
(see section 3.4.1 herein), determined for gives
µdesign = 4.
 d1  44
  ≤ (68.82)
(2) That associated with determining the upper  w  storey 1
t fy /250
limit design seismic actions on the
secondary members. This is load case where:
Emax and is determined for µmax = 1.25. d1,tw,fy are as defined in NZS3404

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 25 No. 68, June/July 2002
(3) Check the column moment and axial load moment from section 3.18, using φMSHJ
capacity at the first level (and then at all estimated for the given beam size from
other levels where the beam size is Table 68.2.
checked) by using step 2.2, section 5.2 of
[6], in conjunction with the overstrength Step 8 Review member sizes to control
moment for the joint from section 3.18. To lateral deflection
do this requires determination of φMSHJ. For
preliminary design, the following guidance Use the procedure given in step 4, section 5.2 of
HERA Report R4-76 [6]. When applying
can be given for expected ratios of φMSHJ /
equations 5.14 and 5.15 of [6], there are two
φMsx,b, based on the range of representative
general lateral deflection regimes to aim for.
frames designed for this project. Having
These are:
determined the beam size and hence
strength from step 2.3, a preliminary (1) Meeting the P - ∆ OK drift limit, such that no
estimate of φMSHJ can be made from the increase in strength to account for P - ∆
following: actions is required
Table 68.2 (2) Meeting the maximum drift limit, as given by
Clause 2.5.4.5 of [2] or Clause 8.5.2.1 of
Indicative Values of φMSHJ / φMsx,beam [4], and applying the P - ∆ enhancement
given by Clause 6.5.4 of [4] if the P - ∆ drift
Location in Lowest limit is exceeded.
Other
MRSF seismic zone,
P - ∆ OK For buildings in the highest seismic zones, the
preferred option is (1). For buildings in the lowest
seismic zones, the joint strength required in
≤ 0.5 H 0.25 0.45 – 0.6
meeting (1) may be considerably lower than that
0.75 H 0.35 0.45 – 0.55
required to resist wind loading, thus making (2)
1.0 H 0.30 0.40 – 0.45 the preferred option. Buildings in intermediate
seismic zones may benefit from having both
Notes to Table 68.2:
(1) H = height of structure options checked.
(2) Lowest seismic zone, P - ∆ OK means design for Zmin
and for the stiffness limits of NZS 4203 Equation 4.7.1 If the member sizes need increasing, increase the
or DR 1170.4 Equation 6.5(1) to be met beam sizes to a greater extent than the column
(3) Other means design for increased strength to cater for sizes, as the beam sizes have a greater effect on
P - ∆ actions in conjunction with meeting the maximum
drift limit for the lowest seismic zone, or any design for
the MRSF stiffness.
the highest seismic zone.
Step 9 Design the connections
Step 7.2 For the levels above the first seismic
level This involves applying the detailed procedure
given in section 3 herein.
At each level where the beam size has been
determined, choose the column from the lightest 4.3 Procedure for MRSF final design
designation of I-section type cross section which The procedure for final design is based on the
complies with all the following: established capacity design procedure from [5,6]
for conventional category 1 and 2 MRSFs. It uses
(1) The column cross section (flange, web the detailed procedure given in section 6.2 of [6],
slenderness) complies with NZS 3404 wherever possible. It is presented in step by step
Table 12.5 and Clause 12.8 for a category format, using the step numbers and headings
3 member. (Category 3 rather than corresponding to those of section 6.2 of [6].
category 4 is used, because the joints
develop an appreciably higher overstrength Step 1 Analyse the frame for the required
moment than conventional MRSFs, hence load cases and load combinations
the columns above the base are marginally
more likely to be subject to slight inelastic Follow step 1 in section 6.2 of [6]; load case Emax
action than those of a conventional MRSF). is based on µ = 1.25.
For this reason, the cross sections are
made category 3 to give them a small Step 2 Assess P – delta effects and check
dependable inelastic rotation capacity the seismic lateral deflections
without loss of performance.
The frame elastic stiffness (ie. with the joints in
their closed condition) should be such as to
(2) Column moment and axial load capacity
comply with the appropriate lateral deflection
complies with step 2.2, section 5.2 of [6], in
regime (see section 4.2 step 8 above).
conjunction with the estimated overstrength

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 26 No. 68, June/July 2002
Step 3 Derive the beam bending moments movement and inelastic rotation demand in the
using moment redistribution SHJs, however at the expense of column base
damage. Pinned bases are very applicable for
This step is not required as the gravity and SHJ frames.
seismic moments are applied as separate cases
for beam design. This is a major simplification Step 8 Design the columns
from conventional MRSF design for earthquake
loading. The columns at the lowest level of fixed based
frames are designed as category 2 members in
Step 4 Determine the required beam sizes accordance with NZS 3404 Clause 12.8.3, using
(1) The positive moment capacity must be able the design actions from step 7. Note especially
to resist the maximum moment from applied the axial load/web slenderness requirements of
vertical loading (eg. from 1.2G & 1.6Q for Clause 12.8.3.1.
[2]) in a simply supported manner. This is a
more severe requirement than equation 6.2 The columns at the higher levels of fixed based
of [6]. frames are category 3 members.

(2) The second criteria on selecting beam size The columns at all levels of pinned based frames
is to provide adequate frame stiffness. The may be category 3 members, however the pinned
preliminary design beam size selection is based detail itself must be detailed for a
likely to dependably cover this requirement. dependable inelastic rotation of 30 milliradians, in
If the beam size is required to be increased, accordance with section 3.20.3 herein, which on-
the moment input through the joint into the references to section 4.2.2, page 23 of DCB Issue
column does not have to increase No. 50.
accordingly.
Step 9 Design and detail the connections
Step 5 Determine the beam overstrength
moment capacities and design shear This involves applying the detailed procedure
forces given in section 3 herein.

The general details of steps 5.1 to 5.4 of section 4.4 Guidance on practical aspects of the
6.2 of [6] are applicable, except that the MRSF design
overstrength moment capacity of the beam, 4.4.1 Estimation of fundamental period
o
Mbeam , is replaced by the overstrength moment
o The range of representative frame designs
capacity of the joint, MSHJ . This is given by undertaken for the NITH over 2001/2002 have
equation 68.76, section 3.18 herein. given an indication of the accuracy of equations
68.80.1 and 68.80.2. These frames have covered
In step 5.2, Ccol = 1.0 is used in all instances. the following:
Step 5.4 from [6] does not need to be applied, due
• 5 and 10 storey
to the nature of vertical shear force transfer from
the beam to the column via. the joint. This avoids • Auckland (low seismic zone) and Wellington
(high seismic zone)
the concentration of shear force in the beam web
immediately adjacent to the joint that occurs with • Intermediate soil conditions, with and without
rigid jointed MRSFs. positive near fault action and soft soil
conditions.
Step 6 Evaluate the overstrength factors at
each beam-column joint These designs have shown that the equations
slightly over-predict the period determined by
Follow step 6, from [6], for joints in the RUAUMOKO [10] for the frames in the most
superstructure, using the overstrength joint severe applications and underpredict it to as much
capacity calculated from step 5 above. as 15% in the least severe applications. The
extent of overprediction (which is potentially
Follow section 3.20 on pages 23 herein for joints unconservative) is not more than 5%.
at the column bases.
4.4.2 Choice of members to use for the
Step 7 Determine the design actions for the beams and columns
typical levels and for the base
Follow the guidance given previously herein in
Follow step 7, from [6], for the superstructure. conjunction with that given on pages 21 - 22 of
DCB Issue No. 49.
Follow section 3.20 on page 23 herein for the
column bases; fixed bases limit frame lateral

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 27 No. 68, June/July 2002
When using generically one-sided welded beams, to a 610 x 229 x 171W column, as shown in
these beams must be double sided welded Fig. 68.5.
through the connection region and for a
reasonable distance beyond the bolt(s) furthest in The design example is taken from level 1 of a 5
along the beam flanges or web from the beam storey MRSF for Auckland, soft soil (soil class D
end adjacent to the column. A distance of 300 from [4]). In this case, the P - ∆ provisions for
mm is recommended. stiffness are not met, so the force multiplier
provisions of Clause 6.5.4 are used. These
Because this semi-rigid system decouples increase the design seismic base shear by 1.73 in
strength and stiffness, the same beam size can be this instance.
used over many levels, with the moment capacity
of the joint reduced at successively higher levels Design of the joint shown in Fig. 68.5 is covered in
by reducing the number and diameter of the bolts. section 5.2.
This offers considerable scope for matching
moment capacity to moment demand more 5.2 Design of the joint
closely over each level of the MRSF than is
The detailing requirements from section 3.2 are all
possible with a rigid framed system, while using
met by the SHJ detail shown in Fig. 68.5 and are
the same beam size.
not elaborated on further in this example. The
allowances for manufacturing tolerances given in
5. Sliding Hinge Joint Design Example
section 3.2.16 are incorporated into the flange
5.1 Scope and introduction plate offsets from the beam centreline shown in
Fig. 68.5.
Section 5 presents a design example for the
SHJ. It relates to a 530UB82 beam connected

∗ ∗

Fig. 68.5
Sliding Hinge Joint Design Example

Notes:
(1) The beam supports a 120 mm slab on trapezoidal steel decking, deck rib height 54 mm, which is not shown.
Concrete strength = 25 MPa.
(2) The design moment and shear is:
M∗E = ME
*
µdesign = 377 kNm (both directions ) - wind moment is not considered here

VG, ∗
Qu = 122.4 kN (due to G & Qu) ; VGQmax = 185 kN
(3) The beam span, between column centrelines, is 7 m.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 28 No. 68, June/July 2002
This joint design is not using Belleville Springs ewb = 528 – 13.2 – 26.5 – 65 = 423 mm
which would be the typical case.
φVfss for M30 and 20 mm plate, = 98 kN
5.2.1 Design moment (section 3.4.1)
φMSHJ,new = 435 > M∗design = 377 √ OK accept
M ∗design = M *Eµdesign = 377 kNm
Thus the design solution involves:
5.2.2 Design shear force (section 3.4.2)
M30 bolts; nbfb = 6; nwbb = 3
3M E* µ design 3 x 377
VE∗µ design = = = 177 kN
(Lb - d c ) (7.0 - 0.61) 5.2.5 Design of bottom flange plate

Vdesign = VGQu + VE∗µdesign = 122 + 177 = 299 kN (section 3.7)


5.2.5.1 Net tension yield
VGQmax = 185 kN - not critical

N∗ty,bfp (equation 68.35) = 1.15 x 6 x 98 = 676 kN


5.2.3 Determine bottom flange plate width
and initial thickness (section 3.5)
φN ty,bfp (equation 68.36) = 783 kN
(1) Bottom flange plate width
bbfp = 240; d'f = 33; fy,bfp = 250; tbfp = 20
bbfp,min (equation 68.4.1)
= 4 x 24 + 90 = 186 mm
φNbfp > N*ty, bfp √ O.K.
bbfp,max (equation 68.4.2)
= 1.05 x 229 = 240 mm
from section 3.2.14, M24 bolts are used as 5.2.5.2 Net tension failure
first estimate for the 530UB82 beam size
Try bbfp = 240 mm. ∗ 98
Nu,bfp (equation 68.38) = 6 x x 1.45 x 0.9 = 959 kN
0.8
(2) First estimate of bottom flange plate
thickness φN∗tu,bfp (equation 68.39) = 1098 kN
1.2 x 377
N∗tdesign (equation 68.29) = = 857 kN fu,bfp = 410 MPa
0.528

857 x 103 φN tu,bfp ≥ N*u,bfp √ O.K.


t tfp (equation 68.30) ≥
0.9(240 − 2x26) x 250
5.2.5.3 Compression capacity
= 20.3 mm
fSHJ (equation 68.3)
fy,bfp = 250 MPa is used
≥ 10 + 1.25 x 30 x 10-3 x 528 + 2.5 x 20 = 80 mm
From section 3.2.2, tbfp,max = 20 mm for M24 bolts.
The answer for fSHJ is rounded up to the nearest
5.2.4 Determine sliding bolt size and 5mm
numbers for moment adequacy
(section 3.6) Le,bfp (equation 68.41)
= 0.7 (80 + 1.25 x 30 x 10-3 x 528) = 70 mm
φMSHJ, initial estimate (equation 68.31)
= (4 x 56 x 528 + 3 x 56 x 438) x 10-3 = 192 kNm λ n,bfp (equation 68.42)
 70  250
ewb (equation 68.33) =   = 12.1
= 528 – 13.2 – 26.5 – 50 = 438 mm  0.29 x 20  250

φVfss for M24 and 20 mm plate, As λ n,bfp < 25, equation 68.43 does not need
Table 68.1 = 56 kN modification

φMSHJ, initial estimate = 192 < M∗design = 377 NG φNcu,bfp (equation 68.43) = 1020 kN

As this is considerably below requirements,


φN cu,bfp ≥ N *u,bfp √ O.K.
increase both the bolt diameter and add one set of
bolts to the bottom flange.
5.2.6 Design of the web top bolts (section 8)
φMSHJ, new
= (6 x 98 x 528 + 3 x 98 x 423) x 10-3 = 435 kNm *
Vwv (equation 68.45) = Max (299; 185) = 299 kN

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 29 No. 68, June/July 2002
5.2.9.3 Determine plate thickness to
+ 1.6Q ≈ 1.85 (see Note (2) in Fig. 68.5)
*
V1.2G
suppress tension yielding
299
n wtb ≥ = 1.40 ⇒ require 2 bolts 1.15 x 882,000
214 t tfp,tension (equation 68.57)≥ = 25.8 mm
0.9 (240 - 66) 250
As nwtb,required = 2 < nwbb,required = 3, increase nwtb to
3. The additional bolt is used as part of the top Select ttfp = 25 mm – 4% under √ O.K.
bolt group to anchor the sliding bolts.
5.2.9.4 Check top flange plate and bolt
5.2.7 Design of web plate (section 3.9) adequacy for the ULS condition
5.2.7.1 Check for vertical shear adequacy φNt,tfp (equation 68.60) = 1373 kN
φVvn, wp (equation 68.47) = 429 kN φNc,tfp (equation 68.61) = 1275 kN

α v (equation 68.48) = 1.0 0.85 ntfp φVfn,tfp = 0.85 x 8 x 214 = 1455 kN


dwp = dwp,average (equation 68.12.3) = 448 mm
dwcp = (equation 68.16) = 2 x 65 = 130 mm Max (φNt, φNc) ≤ 0.85 ntfp φVfn,tfp √ O.K.
φVvn, wp = 429 kN > Vwv
*
= 299 kN √ OK 5.2.10 Calculate beam tension adequacy in
the connection region (section 3.12)
5.2.7.2 Check for net tension yield
435 2840
N∗ty,wp (equation 68.50) = 1.15 x 3 x 98 = 338 kN N*tb (equation 68.63) = 0.5 x 1.15 x x = 1414 kN
558 0.9

φN ty, wp (equation 68.51) = 437 kN φMsx,b = 558 kNm, from [20]


d'f = 33 mm
2840
Nt = , from [20]
φN ty,wp > N*ty,wp √ O.K. 0.9

φNtb,1 (equation 68.64.1) = 0.39 x 8124 x 0.440


5.2.7.3 Check for net tension failure = 1395 kN
3 x 98
N*tu,wp (equation 68.53) = x 1.45 X 0.9 = 479 kN fub = 440 MPa for the grade 300 beam
0.98 Anb = Ag – 4 x 33 x 13.2 – 2 x 33 x 9.6
= 8124 mm2
φNtu,wp (equation 68.54) = 1023 kN
φNtb,2 (equation 68.64.2) = 0.45 x 10,500 x 0.300
φN tu,wp > N *tu,wp √ O.K. = 1417 kN

5.2.8 Sizing of cap plates and brass shims


Min (φNtb,1 ; φNtb,2) = 1395 kN < N*tb = 1414 kN
(section 3.10)
Beam is 1% overstressed for this check – accept.
This is done in accordance with section 3.10. The
resulting sizes are shown in Fig. 68.5. 5.2.11 Design of welds between column
flange and bottom flange plate
5.2.9 Design of top flange bolts and plate (section 3.13)
(section 3.11)
1098
5.2.9.1 Number of bolts required v *w,bfp (equation 68.66) = = 2.39 kN/mm run
2 x 230
 1 N*tw,bfp = 1098 kN (section5.2.5.2)
ntfb,required (equation 68.56) = Even  (3 + 6 - (3 - 2 )) = 8
1.0 
bmin = Min (240 ; 230) = 230 mm
kr = 1.0 as Lj = 3 x 90 = 270 mm < 15df = 450 mm
bfc = 230 mm
5.2.9.2 Determine top flange plate width
φvw for a 15 mm leg length, category SP, fillet
Use btfp = bbfp = 240 mm weld made with E48 weld metal = 2.44 kN/mm

As φvw > v *w,bfp , use a 15 mm FW both sides.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 30 No. 68, June/July 2002
(This is changed to CPBW in section 5.2.12 for 5.2.15 Determine area of
consistency with the top flange plate tension/compression stiffeners
requirements). required (section 3.17)

5.2.12 Design of welds between column This uses the procedure in section 3.2 of DCB No.
flange and top flange plate 50, with modifications as described in section 3.17
(section 3.14) herein.
 fyp 
A s,pair,required ≥ (bbfptbfp - t wc tbfp )  
1373  fys 
v *w, tfp (equation 68.68) = = 2.98 kN/mm  
2 x 230 (DCB No. 50, eq 50.2)

N*tw = 1373 kN (section 5.2.8.4) 250


≥ (240 x 20 − 15.5 x 20) = 4490 mm 2
250
As φvw for 15 mm FW < v *w, tfp , use a CPBW to the
fys = 250 MPa, as grade 250 plate is used.
top flange plate. Same weld details are then also
used to bottom flange plate for consistency. As starting point, select same thickness as bottom
flange plate, ie. 20 mm.
5.2.13 Welds between column flange and
web plate (section 3.15) bs,min ≥ (0.9 bfp – twc) / 2
(DCB No. 50, eq 50.1)
5.2.13.1 Weld actions from vertical shear
= (0.9 x 240 – 15.5) / 2
299 = 100 mm
v *wv, wp, v (equation 68.69) = = 0.47 kN/mm
2 (448 - 130) b  f 
t s,min ≥ ( s )  ys  = 6 mm
C1  250 
 
3 x 299 x 235
v *wv, wp,h (equation 68.70) = = 1.05 kN/mm (DCB No. 50, eq 50.3)
(448)2
where:
ey (equation 68.72) = 80 + 65 +90 = 235 mm C1 = 15 (based on the incoming beam
category of 3)
(
v *wv, wp = (0.47)2 + (1.05)2 )
0.5
= 1.15 kN/mm
Try 110 x 20 FL for stiffeners – Grade 250 used

As,supplied = 2 x 110 x 20 = 4400 mm2 √ O.K.


5.2.13.2 Actions on weld from moment-
induced axial tension, web bottom As,supplied = 98% of As,required √ accept
bolts
Use 2 110 x 20 plate stiffeners for each pair of
tension / compression stiffeners.
1023
wp (equation 68.73) = = 2.62 kN/mm
*
Vwh,
3 x 130 Check 2bs + tw = 220 + 15.5
= 235.5 ≈ bfc = 230 mm √ O.K.
5.2.13.3 Final design action
5.2.16 Welds between stiffeners and column
v *w, wp (equation 68.74) = Min (2.62 ; 2.25) = 2.25 kN/mm flange adjacent to incoming beam

0.9bst sfys
s,cf =
0.9 t wp fy,wp *
v w, (DCB No. 50, eq 50.4)
3
= 2.25 kN/mm 2bs
2 x 10
= 2.25 kN/mm
5.2.13.4 Sizing of weld
Use 14 mm leg length, category SP welds, E 48
φvw for 14 mm leg length category SP FW, E48 filler metal
weld metal = 2.28 kN/mm > v *w, wp
φvw = 2.28 kN/mm > v w,
*
s,cf √ O.K.
Use a 14 mm leg length FW each side.
5.2.17 Welds between stiffeners and column
5.2.14 Selection and location of positioner web
bolt
0.9bs ts fys
s,cw =
*
v w, (DCB No. 50, eq 50.5)
See details in Fig. 68.5. C2d1c

= 0.43 kN/mm

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 31 No. 68, June/July 2002
where: The spreadsheets cover the connection design,
C2 = 2.0; 1 beam frames into connection (see including the procedure given above. There are
Fig. 68.5) worksheets for the joints without Belleville Springs
to the bottom flange plate and for the joints with
d1c = 573 from [22] for the 610 x 229 x 171 W Belleville Springs.
column
The spreadsheets are written for 5 and for 10
(Assume no doubler plate required at this stage; storey buildings, however this can be altered.
with a SHJ in a perimeter frame, this will always
be the case for 1 beam framing into the column). The spreadsheets do allow rapid joint design to be
made.
Use 5 mm leg length, category SP welds
They have been produced on Microsoft ® Excel for
φvw = 0.82 kN/mm √ O.K. Office 97 and a copy of each is available free-of-
charge on a “use at your own risk” basis. They
5.2.18 Joint overstrength moment have been checked against the design example in
(section 3.18) section 5 and had quite thorough informal
checking, but have not been through a formal
1.4 x 435 quality assurance checking programme.
MoSHJ (equation 68.76) = = 761kNm
0.8
Associated with the spreadsheets is a data set of
φMSHJ = 435 kNm (section 5.2.4).
section properties that are called up by a macro
routine and used in the frame design.
5.2.19 Design shear force on panel zone
(section 3.19)
7. Acknowledgments
761
Vp,* SHJ (equation 68.77) = - 217 = 1171kN The HERA Structural Engineer, principal author of
(0.528 + 0.020) this article, would like to acknowledge the
contribution of all persons/organisations involved
Vcol = 761 / 3.5 = 217 kN in this research, with special mention of:
hc = 3.5 m
1. The undergraduate students from Germany
5.2.20 Design shear capacity of panel zone who have undertaken and continue to
undertake the setting up of experimental tests,
φVc the processing and presentation of data from
= 0.9 x 0.6 x 275 x 629 x 15.5 x 1.0 x [1.10] x 10 -3 this testing, the development of analytical
= 1599 kN modelling data and other essential work.

tfc = 27.9 mm; 2. Dr John Butterworth Hank Mooy and Jos


twc = 15.5 mm; Geurts, University of Auckland, for assistance
dc = 629 mm with planning and undertaking the extensive
fywc = 275 MPa pseudo-static and seismic-dynamic
experimental testing involved in this project.
5.2.21 Panel zone adequacy (section 3.19)
3. Dr John Butterworth, for his guidance and
φVc = 1599 kN > Vp,* SHJ = 1171 Kn input as principal PhD supervisor to Charles
Clifton.
No web doubler plates are needed. 4. The Foundation for Research, Science and
Technology, for providing the principal funding
for this project.
That ends the design example. See Fig. 68.5
for the joint details.

6. Spreadsheet Programs are Available

Detailed spreadsheets have been developed for


the design of the representative 5 and 10 storey
frames. The design of the frames is to the
seismic provisions of the new draft loadings
standard [4], however the same approach is used
with the current standard [2].

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 32 No. 68, June/July 2002
Member Compression Capacity the points of end restraint. However the cross
section at any point along the member length
of a Solid Section will not undergo distortion, it will simply move
as an entity in the manner shown in Fig. 9.4
This article has been written by G Charles Clifton, HERA (a) of the HERA Limit State Design Guides
Structural Engineer. Volume 1 [23]. However, if the member is
restrained also along its sides, its behaviour
Recently a design query has been received changes markedly, as described in section 9.2
regarding calculating the member compression of [23]. With both end and side support, kf ≠
capacity of a solid section supported at its ends 1.0 in all instances and must be calculated to
and loaded in compression through those ends. Clause 6.2.4.
Two questions were raised, namely:
2. The compression member section constant,
1. What value of form factor is applicable? α b, is given in Table 6.3.3 (1) of NZS 3404 [5]
2. What value of member section constant is for most types of cross section, but not
applicable? for solid cross sections. For such sections,
α b = -0.5 is used.
The answers to those are as follows:
Another point with regard to solid rectangular
Calculation of design member compression
capacity, φNc, is undertaken to NZS 3404 [5] cross sections is that r = I / A = 0.29t, where t is
Clause 6.3. It is a two stage operation, the first the thickness in the direction of buckling. This
stage being the calculation of section means that rectangular cross sections supported
compression capacity, φNs, to Clause 6.2. only at their ends typically have low values of r,
resulting in high slenderness ratios and a member
When calculating the compression capacity of a compression capacity much lower than their
steel member, the issue of buckling under the section compression capacity.
compression load is of paramount importance.
This subject is comprehensively dealt with in References
Section 6 of the Standard [5]. Put simply:
1. Clifton, GC; Thesis Report on the
Development of New Semi-Rigid Joints for
• Local buckling of elements of a cross-section Moment-Resisting Steel Frames. In
under compression load is an issue when preparation, due for publication first quarter of
determining the section compression capacity 2003.
and is addressed in Clause 6.2. This form of
buckling involves one part of a cross section 2. NZS 4203:1992, General Structural Design
undergoing buckling relative to another part. and Design Loadings for Buildings; Standards
New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.
• Member buckling involves the member
moving out-of-plane between points of 3. Clifton, GC et. al.; Development of Moment-
restraint. In member buckling, the whole Resisting Steel Frames Incorporating Semi-
cross section moves from its at-rest position, Rigid Elastic Joints 1995/96 Research Report;
with this movement being effectively zero at HERA Manukau City, 1996, HERA Report R4-
the points of restraint and reaching a 88.
maximum within the midspan regions furthest
away from the points of restraint. 4. DR 1170.4 PPC 5 DR4/V Draft Joint
Earthquake Loadings Standard, July 2002
With this background and through reference to the Version; Standards New Zealand, Wellington.
NZS 3404 provisions, the above two questions
can be readily answered. 5. NZS 3404: 1997, plus Amendment No. 1:
2001, Steel Structures Standard; Standards
1. The form factor, kf, is associated with the New Zealand, Wellington, New Zealand.
effectiveness of the cross section against
local buckling. kf = 1.0 means that the 6. Feeney MJ and Clifton G C; Seismic Design
cross section will not undergo any local Procedures for Steel Structures; HERA,
buckling. A solid cross-section is in this Manukau City, 1995, HERA Report R4-76 ; to
category, so kf = 1.0 is the appropriate value be read with Clifton, GC; Tips on Seismic
to use. This applies even for a thin plate Design of Steel Structures; Notes from
member restrained only at its ends and Presentations to Structural Groups mid-2000;
loaded through those ends in compression. HERA, Manukau City, 2000.
Such a member will have low compression
capacity, limited by member buckling between

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 33 No. 68, June/July 2002
7. Clifton, GC et.al.; Two New Semi-Rigid Joints 21. Clifton, GC et.al.; Moment-Resisting Steel
for Moment-Resisting Steel Frames; NZSEE Framed Seismic-Resisting Systems With
2001 Conference, Wairakei; New Zealand Semi-Rigid Connections; SESOC Journal,
Society for Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 11, No. 2, 1998, pp. 21-41 and 43-52.
Wellington, 2001.
22. Structural Sections to BS4: Part 1 and BS
8. AS/NZS 1170.0:2002 Structural Design 4848: Part 4; Corus Sections, Plates and
Actions Part 0: General Principles; Standards Commercial Steels, Redcar, Teeside, UK,
New Zealand; Wellington. 1999.

9. Mago, N and Clifton, GC; Sliding Hinge Joint 23. Clifton, GC; Steelwork Limit State Design
FEA Study; HERA, Manukau City, 2001, Guides Volume 1; HERA, Manukau City,
HERA Report R4-110. 1994, HERA Report R4-80.

10. Carr, AJ; RUAUMOKO – the Maori God of


Volcanoes and Earthquakes; University of
Canterbury, Civil Engineering Department,
Christchurch, 1998.

11. Pantke, M; Development of analytical Models


for SHJ and SHJs; Report Produced for
Second Industrial Internship, HERA; Manukau
City, 2001.

12. Hyland C; Structural Steelwork Connections


Guide; HERA, Manukau City, 1999, HERA
Report R4-100.

13. AS/NZS 1252:1996, High Strength Bolts With


Associated Nuts and Washers for Structural
Engineering; Standards New Zealand,
Wellington.

14. AS 1111.1; 2000 ISO Metric Hexagon


Commercial Bolts; Standards Australia,
Sydney, Australia.

15. AS 1566:1997, Copper and Copper Alloys –


Rolled Flat Products; Standards Australia,
Sydney, Australia.

16. Belleville Springs (Product Manual): Solon


Manufacturing Company, Chardon, Ohio,
USA.

17. Manual of Standard Connection Details for


Structural Steelwork, Second Edition; HERA,
Manukau City, 1990, HERA Report R4-58.

18. ISO 9223:1992, Corrosion of Metals and


Alloys – Corrosively of Atmospheres –
Classification; ISO, Geneva, Switzerland.

19. AS/NZS 1170.2: 2002, Structural Design


Actions Part 2; Wind Actions; Standards New
Zealand, Wellington.

20. Design Capacity Tables for Structural Steel,


Third Edition, Volume 1: Open Sections;
Australian Institute of Steel Construction,
Sydney, Australia, 2000.

HERA Steel Design & Construction Bulletin Page 34 No. 68, June/July 2002

S-ar putea să vă placă și