Analysis and Design Procedure of Corner Gusset Plate Connection
Abstract: In order to achieve the post buckling strength of BRB member AISC seismic design provisions require that gusset plate axial capacity exceed
SCBF GUSSET PLATE CONNECTION DESIGN
Performance based seismic design (PBSD) is a formalized procedure for meeting these multiple design objectives. Special concentrically braced frames (SCBFs) are
1 Introduction
Proposed design procedure for gusset plate dimensions and force distribution at its interfaces to beam and column. Samira Ebrahimia samira.ebrahimi@ut.ac.ir.
Seismic design of braced frame gusset plate connections
brace. Figure 3: Gusset plate connection. 2 Proposed design procedure. To meet these diverse objectives a seismic design methodology based on.
Analysis and Design Procedure of Corner Gusset Plate Connection
Finally a design method accompanied by some design charts for rectangular type gusset plates subject to compression is proposed based on an inelastic plate
Analysis and Design Procedure of Corner Gusset Plate Connection
Abstract: In order to achieve the post buckling strength of BRB member AISC seismic design provisions require that gusset plate axial capacity exceed
ANALYSIS OF BEAM-COLUMN-GUSSET COMPONENTS IN 5
Finally a practical design procedure of thickness of gusset plate based on equivalent strut action is proposed for gusset plate subjected combined damper
DESIGN OF COLUMN BASE SLAB BASE:
Where Design bearing strength of concrete = 0.45fck fck = characteristic strength of concrete. STEP 2: ASSUME THICK. OF GUSSET PLATE (SAY 16MM) AND GUSSET
Seismic Design of Steel Special Concentrically Braced Frame Systems
Furthermore the current connection design procedures do not always assure ductile behavior. As noted earlier
gusset plate design utilizing block-shear concepts
strength design procedure for gusset plates loaded in tension. Twenty-eight gusset plates reflecting different strength parameters
GUSSET DESIGN
UTILIZING
AAI012
7194by
Steve G. Hardash
Reidar 8jarhovde
TheDeportment of Civil Engineering
ond Engineering Mechanics THEUNIVERSITY
Tucson, Arizona 85721
August 1984
IGUSSET PLATE DESIGN UTILIZING
bySteve G. Hardash
andReidar Bjorhovde
Department of Civil Engineering
and Engineering HechanicsTHE UNIVERSITY
Tucson, Arizona 85721
August 1984
IACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This report was funded by a grant from the American Institute of Steel Construction, for which the authors are sincerely appreciative. Also, the interaction with Dr. R. M. Richard is appreciated. Special thanks are due Messrs. Mun-Foo Leong and A. E. Moussa for the laboratory assistance, and to our shop personnel, Messrs. W. D. Lichtenwalter and L. Lujan, for their skills rendered. iii ITABLE OF
1. INTRODUCTION.
2. SCOPE
3. 4. 5. 6. 7.PREVIOUS
THE BLOCK-SHEAR
5.1 Design of Test Specimens
5.2 Description of Fabricated Test Specimens and
Materials. . • . . . . . .
5.3 Test Set-Up and Instrumentation.
5.4 Test Procedure
TEST6.1 Results During Testing
6.2 Failure Modes for Test Specimens
A STRENGTH
7.1 Previous Test Results.
7.2 Strength Model Parameters.
7.3 Investigation of the Four Basic Block-Shear Models
7.4 Modification of the Net Tensile --Gross Shear
Strength Model . • . . . . . . • . .7.5 Refinement of Strength Model ...•...
7.6 Investigation of Effects of Other
Parameters . • . . . . • . • . . . . .7.7 Summary and Final Proposed Strength Model.
iv Page vi ix x 1 3 4 9 16 16 18 2125
31
31
35
40
43
52
60
64
68
78
I
TABLE OF --Continued
8. RESISTANCE TENSILE GUSSET
9. APPLICATION DESIGN OF
9.1 Development of Design Curves .....
9.2Illustrative Analysis and Design Problem.
10. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS RESEARCH.
10.1Summary . . .. .•...
Recommendations for Future Research
APPENDIX A: LOAD-DEFORMATION DATA AND TEST SPECIMENTDETAILS FOR THE PRESENT
APPENDIX B: PHOTOGRAPHS TEST SPECIMENS AFTER
TESTING FOR THE PRESENT
v Page 8383
85
89
89
90
92
121
136
I
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS
IFigure
3.1 Page Whitmore Criterion for Determining Effective Width. 5 I3.2 Gusset Plate Detail . . . . . . . . . . . • . 7
4.1 Block-Shear Model of Failure for a Coped Beam Web 11
I4.2 Modified Block-Shear Model of Failure for a Coped
Beam Web. . . . . . . •.• 13
I4.3 Proposed Block-Shear Model for Gusset Plates. 15
I 5.15.2 General Gusset Test Plate Configuration . . 17
Fabrication Details for the Test Connection SplicePlates. • 22
I5.3 Fabrication Details for the Fixed End Splice Plates
and Bearing Assemblies .• 23 I5.4 Instrumentation for Test Plates Nos. 1, 2, and 3. 26
I 5.55.6 Instrumentation for Test Plates Nos. 4 to 28. 27
Front and Side View of a Typical Test Set-up. 28
I5.7 Test Set-up for Test Plate No. 28 . . 29
6.1 Load-Deformation Curve for Test Plate No. 28. 32
I6.2 Growth of Yield Lines During Testing of Plate No. 28. 34
I 6.36.4 Test Plate No. 28 at the End of the Loading Cycle 36
TWo Basic Failure Modes for the Gusset Test Plates. 38 I6.5 Test Plate No. 18 at the End of the Loading Cycle 39
7.1Fabrication Details for Test Connection ADl 41
I7.2 Failure Mode for Test Connection ADl. . 42
I vi I7.10(a)
7.10(b)
7.10(c)
7.10(d)
7.11 7.12 7.13 7.14LIST --Continued
Fabrication Details for the Test
Plates Which Failed During the
of Illinois StudyConnection Gusset
1963 University
Failure Modes for Two of the Gusset Plates Tested
During the 1963 University of Illinois Study . .
General Test Set-up for the University of Alberta
Study. . . • . • . • . . . . . . . . . • . • Fabrication Details for the 30· and 60· Bracing Angle Gusset Plate . . . • . . . . . . . . .Fabrication Details for the 45· Bracing Angle
Gu sset Plate . . . . . . . • . • . . .General Load-Deformation Daigram Showing Contribu
tion of Tensile Resistance and Shear Resistance in the Ultimate Strength ModelFour Baisc Free Body Sections ..
Professional Factor Using Tensile Gross Area and
Shear Gross Area . . . . . . . . . . . •
Professional Factor Using Tensile Net Area and
Shear Gross Area • . . . . • . . . . . .Professional Factor Using Tensile Gross Area and
Shear Net Area • . . . . . . . . . . . .
Professional Factor Using Tensile Net Area and
Shear Net Area • . . • . . • . . .Values of the Connection Length Factor to Give
P 1.0, Expressed as a Function of the
Connection Length. . • . . • . . . . . .•Professional Factor vs. Connection Length Using
42 Data Points . • . . . • . • .
Least Squares Lines for 39 and 42 Data Points.
Professional Factor vs. Connection Length Using
39 Data Points . . . . . . . • . • . . . . • .
vii Page 4445
46
47
48
51
53
56
57
58
59
62
63
66
67
I
Figure
7.15 I 7.16 7.17I 7.18
I 7.19 7.20 I 7.21 7.22 I 7.23 I 9.1 I 9.2 ILIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS --Continued
Professional Factor vs. Edge Distance.
Professional Factor vs. Bolt Pitch .
Professional Factor vs. Outside Bolt Gage.
Professional Factor vs. Plate Thickness.
Professional Factor vs. Fastener Size.
Professional Factor vs. Plate Geometry
Professional Factor vs. Plate Material Yield Stress.Professional Factor vs. Plate Material Ultimate
Tensile Stress . • . • . • . . . •Factor vs. Plate Material Yield
Stress to Ultimate Tensile Stress Ratio.
Design Curves for A36 Steel Plate Material
Details of the Gusset Plate Connection to be
Designed
viii Page 6970
7l 72
73
74
75
76
77
84
86
I
LIST OF TABLES
5.1 Test Connection Details for the Present Study.
7.1 Test Connection Details for Previous Studies.
7.2 Observed Ultimate Load for Each Test Specimen.
ix Page 19 4955
I. I
ABSTRACT
The prime object of this study is to develop an ultimate strength design procedure for gusset plates loaded in tension. Twenty-eight gusset plates, reflecting different strength parameters, were tested to failure, and the results are presented in this study. Utilizing the results from these tests along with the results from previous ultimate strength tests, a block-shear model incorpora ting tensile ultimate stress on the net area between the last row of bolts and an effective uniform shear stress on the gross area along the outside bolt lines is shown to be the most realistic ultimate strength model. The effective uniform shear stress is shown to be a linear function of the total connection length. A value for the resistance factor, of 0.85 is determined using the proposed strength model. Design curves for A36 steel are presented, along with a sample gusset plate design problem. x ICHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Gusset plates are common fastening elements used in fabri cated steel structures such as trusses or braced-frame structures. In the latter case, their primary purpose is to transfer either tensile or compressive loads from a bracing member to a beam and column joint. Current gusset plate design is based primarily on elastic analyses for determining critical sections and stresses. No known failures or adverse behavior have been noted, but substantial dif ferences in the factor of safety against ultimate load exist because of the assumptions involved [1]. It is therefore important to de velop an improved design method, with the goal of providing economy of design by means of a consistent factor of safety. The ultimate strength approach would fulfill this requirement for a consistent design and analysis method. To date, a few experi mental studies have been conducted to determine the behavior and ultimate strength of gusset plate connections. However, additional tests are needed to develop a design method based on ultimate strength behavior. 1 I I 2 I With the above in mind, a series of gusset plate tests were conducted at the University of Arizona. The results of these and I previous ultimate strength tests are presented in this study, from I which a practical design method is developed. I I' ICHAPTER 2
SCOPE The development of a design and analysis procedure for gusset plates, based on ultimate strength, will be accomplished by the following:1. Test to failure in tension 28 simple gusset plate models,
to determine failure modes and ultimate loads. Each plate will reflect different strength parameters, consisting of gage between lines of bolts, edge distance to first bolt, bolt pitch in bolt lines, and number of bolts in a line. 2. 3. Propose various block-shear models and compare the theoretical results to the actual ultimate loads for the tests conducted in this study and previous studies. Select the block-shear model, with modifications if necessary, that most accurately predicts the ultimate strength of the tested gusset plates. Develop a design and analysis procedure for tensile gusset plate connections, based on the Load and Resistance FactorDesign (LRFD) format.
The behavior of gusset plate connections is very complex. However, considering the behavior of these connections at ultimate load will assist in the development of a design procedure which in corporates elastic as well as ultimate strength considerations. 3 ICHAPTER J
PREVIOUS
connections have been an area of research since 1837. At that time, riveted flat-plate joints, such as those used in tanks and boilers, were considered. Since the late 1800's, long span structures have been common, and these incorporated truss-type members; hence, truss-type plate connections became an important topic of study up to the mid 1960's. The first detailed studies of gusset plate behavior only considered elastic response, and these will be described briefly. One of the first significant elastic experimental analyses was conducted by Whitmore on a Warren truss joint [2]. Analyses showed that the maximum tensile and compressive stresses were locatedquotesdbs_dbs6.pdfusesText_12[PDF] dessin a colorier et a imprimer
[PDF] dessin industriel pdf exercices
[PDF] details of the selected packet header window
[PDF] details overleaf meaning in hindi
[PDF] determine if functions are linearly independent
[PDF] determine the fourier series representations for the following signals
[PDF] determine the z transform including the region of convergence
[PDF] déterminer l'ensemble des solutions de l'équation
[PDF] deux droites sécantes dans lespace
[PDF] develop a new class called bank account
[PDF] développement langage bébé 19 mois
[PDF] devoir commun seconde nourrir les hommes
[PDF] devoir geo seconde nourrir les hommes
[PDF] devoir maison maths 1ere s trigonométrie