A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
Vertical Bracing Connections
This chapter and the following four chapters (Chapters 13‐16) discuss vertical braced frame connections and evaluate the component‐based finite element method (CBFEM) used in IDEA StatiCa for the design of steel connections in concentrically braced frames (CBFs) as per AISC 360 design provisions. The evaluation is performed by verification of four vertical braced frame connection examples in Chapters 13, 14, 15, and 16. For the presented examples, the provided brace members are square hollow structural sections (HSS), wide flange, and double‐angle sections. CBFEM can predict actual behavior and failure modes of the braced framed connections. The weld capacity, as calculated for several locations, agrees in both AISC and CBFEM. Also, the bolt limit states, including bolt shear and bearing in AISC, agree with CBFEM. The plate's limit states, including yielding, tension rupture, and shear rupture, are typically based on a 5% plastic strain limit according to CBFEM, which is also based on EN 1993‐1‐5 and are found to agree for the cases of the presented connections. The limit state of prying action in CBFEM is considered by the additional tension forces applied to the bolts. Beam web buckling, web crippling, and shear yielding would occur at high loads, and the model would not usually converge at such high loads; all other limit states would occur before these limit states. The buckling limit state of the gusset plate was not observed as a controlling limit state in either AISC or CBFEM.
Vertical Bracing Connections
This chapter and the following four chapters (Chapters 13‐16) discuss vertical braced frame connections and evaluate the component‐based finite element method (CBFEM) used in IDEA StatiCa for the design of steel connections in concentrically braced frames (CBFs) as per AISC 360 design provisions. The evaluation is performed by verification of four vertical braced frame connection examples in Chapters 13, 14, 15, and 16. For the presented examples, the provided brace members are square hollow structural sections (HSS), wide flange, and double‐angle sections. CBFEM can predict actual behavior and failure modes of the braced framed connections. The weld capacity, as calculated for several locations, agrees in both AISC and CBFEM. Also, the bolt limit states, including bolt shear and bearing in AISC, agree with CBFEM. The plate's limit states, including yielding, tension rupture, and shear rupture, are typically based on a 5% plastic strain limit according to CBFEM, which is also based on EN 1993‐1‐5 and are found to agree for the cases of the presented connections. The limit state of prying action in CBFEM is considered by the additional tension forces applied to the bolts. Beam web buckling, web crippling, and shear yielding would occur at high loads, and the model would not usually converge at such high loads; all other limit states would occur before these limit states. The buckling limit state of the gusset plate was not observed as a controlling limit state in either AISC or CBFEM.
Vertical Bracing Connections
StatiCa, IDEA (author) / Denavit, Mark (author) / Nassiri, Ali (author) / Mahamid, Mustafa (author) / Vild, Martin (author) / Sezen, Halil (author)
2024-10-15
8 pages
Article/Chapter (Book)
Electronic Resource
English
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2008
Vertical Bracing Connections for Moderate Seismic Demands
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2009
| ASCE | 2008
Design of Vertical Bracing Connections for High Seismic Drift
| British Library Conference Proceedings | 2009