DESIGNING BOLTED END-PLATE CONNECTIONS IN COMPLIANCE WITH

EUROCODE AND UKRAINIAN CODES: CONSISTENCY AND CONTRADICTIONS

Anatolii Perelmuter1, Eduard Kriksunov1, Igor Gavrilenko1, Vitalina Yurchenko2
1

SCAD Soft Ltd., I. Klimenko str. 4/20, 03037, Kyiv, Ukraine.

Kyiv National University of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Povitroflotskyj av. 31, 03680, Kyiv, Ukraine.
E-mail: vitalinay@rambler.ru
Abstract. The article attempts to reveal consistency and contradictions in design procedures for bolted connections in
steel structural joints in compliance with EuroCode on one hand and Ukrainian building codes on the other hand. The
need for such a comparison has emerged because European steel components are being imported intensively into the
market of Ukraine. A software application for design and analysis of steel structural joints in compliance with different building codes has been developed and is presented in this paper.
Keywords: steel structural joints, bolted end-plate connections, bolted shear connections, design model, software implementation.

The Ukrainian construction market imports a good

deal of steel structural components from Europe. Accordingly, a lot of European manufacturers are going to the
Ukrainian market in order to supply steel components.
The basic approach is that the steel structural members
are designed and manufactured in Europe and further
delivered to Ukraine. Such structural components have to
be approved by the local Ukrainian authorities and comply with Ukrainian building standards and regulations.
Therefore it seems interesting to consider and compare design models and procedures for the bolted endplate connections used in Ukrainian design codes on one
hand and in EuroCode on the other hand, particularly in
EN 1993-1-8 which deals with the design and analysis of
steel structural joints.

Introduction
Bolted end-plate connections are widely used for
structural joints in steel frames (Fig 1) in the contemporary building practice. The primary advantage of such
connections is a simplicity of their on-site assembling. In
addition, the end-plate connections make it possible to
erect a steel framework in any climatic conditions or to
dismount the framework without making any damage to
its structural members. Other characteristic features of he
bolted end-plate connections include their high reliability
under dynamic loadings and facility of the connections
supervision ( 2005). On the other hand, structural members to be connected by end-plate connections
must be manufactured with high accuracy because such
connections do not have a compensatory capability.

Fig 1. Bolted end-plate connections in steel frames: (a) a joint between an external column and a rafter; (b) a joint between an internal column and a rafter; (c) a field joint on a rafter (photos were provided by ASTRON Buildings S.A.).

733

where M x is the design bending moment in the joint; m

and k are the respective numbers of horizontal and vertical rows in the bolted connection; ni is the number of
bolts in i th horizontal row; yi , ymax are distances from
the respective i th and extreme horizontal bolt row to the
neutral axis of the member around the end-plate. This
approach dictates that the thickness of the end-plate
should be found from the bending strength condition for
the end-plate in the elastic phase; this value is too conservative ( et al. 2009).
The design of bolted end-plate connections is regulated in Ukraine by the effectual Guidelines
( 1988, 1981) which were
prepared as a supplemental standard to corresponding
chapters of SNiP -23-81* and SP 53-102-2004. According to these Guidelines, the end-plate connection design
should be based on the following criteria:
the load-bearing ability of a bolt in tension and
shear;
the load-bearing ability of an end-plate in bending, and in possible surface tearing (peeling) in
a heat-affected zone;
the load-bearing ability of fillet welds between
an end-plate and an adjacent section of a structural member.
End-plate bolted connections of open-profile structural members are considered to be a set of T-shaped
elementary connections. The strength of a bolted endplate connection as a whole is treated as the sum of those
of its elementary connections. The design procedure for
the connections is based on an elastic behavior of the Tshaped elements that consist of bolts and adjacent pieces
of the end-plates (Fig 3).
To check the load-bearing ability, an additional
stress (a contact force) caused by a prying lever effect
should be taken into consideration. This contact force is a
resultant of whatever stresses appear when two contiguous end-plates are pressed together. The location of the
resultant depends on the thickness of the end-plates.
There is an additional factor in the bending analysis of
the end-plates: the design bending moment can be reduced by taking into account the end-plate being elastically clamped under the bolt. Thereby we can reduce the
thickness of the end-plate. This approach is based on
experimental computations carried out by various researches ( 1985, De Lima et. al.
2002, Vrtes and Ivnyi 2005).
According to ( 1988,
1981), the load-bearing ability of a bolted end-plate connection is considered to be sufficient when the following
condition is met:

Design models of bolted end-plate connections

The analysis of a bolted end-plate connection under
the simultaneous action of the bending moment and the
axial force in the case of an alternating-sign stress distribution is a fairly complicated task. The reason is that the
strain characteristics of the connection are different in its
respective areas of tension and compression. Therefore
both the localization of the neutral axis and the accurate
stress distribution are not known in advance in the design
cross-sections of the connected structural members
around the end-plate connection.
An inaccurate and conservative analysis of a bolted
end-plate connection can be performed under the assumption that the stresses in bolts are proportional to the distance from the point of application of the resultant force
in the compressed area (actually, from the center of the
compressed flange) to a selected bolt (Fig 2).
In this case, the design force in the most stressed
bolt can be found from the following equation:
ymax

N max =

i =1

Mx

(1)

ni yi2

kff , kfw
kff , kfw

a2

a2

lf , l w
Pf

deformed axis
of end-plate

Nb

Nb
c

Fig 2. A simplified design model of a bolted end-plate

connection

tf , t w
kff , kfw
kff , kfw

a2

deformed axis
of end-plate

Nb

Nb

N nb Nb,int +
c

a2

lf , l w
Pf

c
Q

Nb,ext ,i

next

i =1

(2)

where Nb,int is the load-bearing ability of a bolt in an

internal zone which is assumed equal to the bolts
prestressing force, Nb,int = b0 Rbt Abn ; b0 is a factor to

Fig 3. An improved design model of a bolted endplate connection

take into account an individual bolt behavior, stress re734

 2005) have addressed the design analysis of

bolted end-plate connections in steel frameworks where
plastic deformations are taken into account. This approach provides an opportunity to use reserves of the
load-bearing ability of bolted end-plate connections by
allowing a plastic deformation to develop in those and in
adjacent sections of the connected structural members.
This will make the required thickness of the end-plate as
small as possible.
The analysis of bolted end-plate connections where
plastic deformations are taken into account is performed
using a limit equilibrium method (Sumner and Murray
2003, Undermann and Schmidt 2005). Tree potential
failure mechanisms are considered: (i) failure of bolts, (ii)
failure of bolts with a simultaneous partial propagation of
plastic deformations in the end-plate, and (iii) a plastic
collapse of the end-plate (Sokol et al. 2002, Urbonas and
Daniunas 2004, Pisarek and Kozlowski 2006) (Fig 4).
If an end-plate has a considerable bending stiffness,
then the failure of the end-plate connection occurs as a
consequence of that of bolts loaded by external forces in
the absence of prying-lever contact forces. The loadbearing ability of such a connection will be defined completely by that of bolts in tension (Urbonas and Daniunas
2004):

laxation, and a non-uniformity in the stress distribution;

Rbt is a design strength of the bolt for tension; Abn is a
net cross-section area of the bolt; nb is the number of
bolts in the internal zone; Nb,ext ,i is a design force per

one bolt of the external zone of i th -shaped elementary

connection; the force is defined by the following formula:

+1

Nb,ext ,i = min i Rbt Abn ; 1,3 i

Rbt Abn
ii

(3)

where i is a factor assumed to depend on the bolts

dimensionless stiffness parameter, i :

i = 0,5088 0, 23561lg i
i

b
i

t
t
d
0,5
+
f
)
i( f

d2

i = 0,9 Rbt Abn bi

(4)

(5)

(6)

i t 2f Ry

where bi is the distance from the bolts axis to the edge

of the fillet weld of i th T-shaped elementary connection;
i is the end-plates width per one bolt of the external
zone of i th -shaped elementary connection, t f is the

FT , I =

end-plates thickness; i is a parameter that expresses a

relation between the distances from the bolt center to the
application points of contact forces caused by the prying
lever effect and from the bolt center to the edge of the
connected structural members profile; parameter i is
defined by the following equation:
1, 4 i (i 1, 0 ) i2 + ii (i 1, 0 ) = 0
3

(7)

FT , II =

Q
e

m
m

FT
B

(9)

2 ( e + m)

M
M

pl,1

pl,2

pl,2

FT

pl,1

pl,2

M pl ,1 + eBt

(8)

If the bending stiffness of end-plates is lower (they

are designed with a smaller thickness), the failure of the
end-plate connection occurs as a result of that of bolts
together with a partial propagation of plastic deformations in the end-plate. The load-bearing ability of this
connection can be found from the equation of a balance
between the external and internal works (Urbonas and
Daniunas 2004, Kozlowski and Pisarek 2005):

One of striking differences between EuroCode and

the Ukrainian building codes related to the design of
bolted end-plate connections is that EuroCode requires
the propagation of plastic deformations to be taken into
account. A lot of researches ( 1989,

i Bt ,i

FT

pl,1

pl,1

pl,2

Fig 4. Design models of bolted end-plate connections according to EN 1993-1-8

735

If a thin end-plate is used, the failure of a bolted

connection occurs by propagation of plastic deformations
in the body of its end-plate. The load-bearing ability of
the bolted connection in this case will be defined purely
by that of the end-plate:
FT , III =

2M pl ,1 + 2M pl ,2
m

The value of rotational stiffness S j ,ini is a criterion

suggested by EuroCode to classify joints into nominally
pinned, rigid, and semi-rigid ones (Fig 5). It is important
that structural properties of joints remain in compliance
with design assumptions made in the global analysis of
the entire structure and in the design procedures of particular structural members. In particular, the calculated
joint compliance must be sufficient to permit the same
rotation angle as that obtained by the static analysis
(Faella et. al. 2000, Urbonas and Daniunas 2003).
It should be noted that the effect of an actual joint
stiffness in steel frameworks becomes especially significant for structural joints with bolted connections of bearing type that possess a higher deformability comparing to
both welded connections and other types of bolted connections. The reason is primarily a bearing deformation
that emerges in bolt holes of connected members
(Krumm 1991, Kuhlmann et. al. 1998).
There is a European categorization of bolted connections which needs to be made consistent with the national
design codes for EuroCode to be implemented in
Ukraine.
According to Ukrainian building standards and regulations (SNiP -23-81*, a draft DBN V.2.6-: 200), all
bolted connections of steel structures are divided into (i)
shear connections and (ii) frictional (or slip-resistance)
connections depending on their external force transfer
mechanism. Flange connections (or bolted end-plate connections) make up a separate class of bolted connections,
and specific standard documents ( 1988,
1981) are used to regulate the design and
analysis of such connections.
In its turn, EuroCode identifies five categories of
bolted connections: three categories , and of shear
connections, and two categories D and E of tension connections (see Table 1). Bolted connection of the A category (bearing type) is a prototype for our usual shear
connection where external forces are resisted by shearing
in bolts and bearing of connected members in holes.
In bolted connections of the and categories,
high-strength preloaded bolts of grades 8.8 and 10.9 are
used. An external shear force that acts on the joint is resisted by friction forces between the contact surfaces of
the connected members due to the preloading of the bolts.
Bolted connections of the and categories are, as we
can see from EuroCode, essentially the same as bolted
frictional connections identified in the Ukrainian design
code. Meanwhile, one of the most significant differences
of EuroCode from the Ukrainian design code is that the
former requires the check of the load-bearing ability of
bolted connections to be based on design load combinations in both the ultimate limit state and the serviceability
limit state.
The following categories of bolted connections,
where the bolts are in tension, are usually employed in
bolted end-plate connections between steel structural
joints. If preloaded high-strength bolts of grades 8.8
and 10.9 are used, then those bolted connections belong
to category E, otherwise to category D.

(10)

It should be noted that the propagation of plastic deformations in end-plates and adjacent sections of connected structural members increases the overall deformability of a structure, and this fact should be taken into
account appropriately in a subsequent nonlinear structural
analysis (Cerfontaine and Jaspart 2002, Jaspart 2000).
Consistency and contradiction
The primary and most significant difference between
the European design regulations and those of Ukraine is
that the former require that the influence of the actual
stiffness of a steel structural joint on the real behavior of
a loaded steel framework should be analyzed. This is an
implementation of one of prospective contemporary
trends in the structural design and analysis. The serviceability of structural joints can be assessed not only by
their strength, as in the Ukrainian building regulations,
but also by their deformability or compliance (Da Silva
et. al. 2002).
EuroCode defines a procedure for calculating the rotation stiffness, S j , of a structural joint. It depends on
stiffness factors ki of particular structural members included in the joint (see Table 6.11 in EN 1993-1-8). For
end-plate bolted connections in frame structures, the initial rotation stiffness S j ,ini can be calculated by the following formula:

S j ,ini =

z2 E
1
i ki

(11)

where E is an elasticity modulus; z is a lever arm (see

Fig 6.15 in EN 1993-1-8).

Mj

Mj

rigid

S j,ini

semi-rigid

nominally pinned

Fig 5. A rotation stiffness-based classification of joints

736

Table 1. Categories of bolted connections

Category of bolted connections
according to EuroCode

(bearing type)
Shear connections

(slip resistance in serviceability limit state)

Criteria of load-bearing
ability

Fv, Ed Fv, Rd

Fv, Ed Fb, Rd
Fv, Ed , ser Fs, Rd , ser

Fv, Ed Fv, Rd

Notes
Bolt grades from 4.6 through 10.9 or
non-preloaded high-strength bolts

Analog from Ukrainian

design code
Shear connection

Preloaded high-strength bolts of grades

8.8 and 10.9

Preloaded high-strength bolts of grades

8.8 and 10.9. For N net , Rd , see

Frictional connection

Fv, Ed Fb, Rd

(slip resistance in ultimate limit state)

Fv, Ed Fs , Rd
Fv, Ed Fb, Rd

EN 1993-1-1

Fv, Ed N net , Rd
Tension
connections

D (non-preloaded)

Ft , Ed Ft , Rd

Ft , Ed B p, Rd
E (preloaded)

Ft , Ed Ft , Rd

Ft , Ed B p, Rd

Bolt grades from 4.6 through 10.9 or

non-preloaded high-strength bolts

Flange connections in
tension

Preloaded high-strength bolts of grades

8.8 and 10.9

Flange connections in
tension

Table 2. Minimum permissible spacing, end, and edge distances

Limit value
Minimum permissible distance

SNiP II-23-81

DBN .2.6 (draft)

EN 1993-1-8

1. between centers of the holes in the following direction:

) along external force,

p1,min :

when R yn

< 375 N/mm2

2,5d0

2d0

2, 2d0

when R yn

> 375 N/mm2

2,5d0

3d0

2, 2d0

b) across external force, p2,min :

when R yn

< 375 N/mm2

2,5d0

2d0

2, 4d0

when R yn

> 375 N/mm2

2,5d0

3d0

2, 4d0

2. from the center of hole to the element edge:

) along external force, e1,min :

when R yn

< 375 N/mm2

2d0

1,5d0

1, 2d0

when R yn

> 375 N/mm2

2d0

2,5d0

1, 2d0

with sheared edges

1,5d0

1,5d0

1, 2d0

with rolled edges

1, 2d0

1, 2d0

1, 2d0

1,3d0

1,3d0

1, 2d0

b) across external force, e2,min :

c) for slip-resistance bolted connection on any edge and with

any external force direction, e1,min , e2,min

Legend: d0 is the diameter of a hole; R yn = f y is a nominal yield strength.

737

Fv, Rd = L v fub ns A

It seems also interesting to compare different building code requirements to bolt spacing, end, and edge
distances. EuroCode and the Ukrainian building code
regulate minimum and maximum permissible spacing,
end, and edge distances between holes in bolted connections (see Tables 2 and 3). For connected members in
tension, the maximum permissible distances are set
mainly in order to ensure an appropriate closeness of a
bolted connection and thereby to avoid corrosion. For
connected members in compression, the maximum permissible distances are to prevent local buckling.
As it can be seen from Tables 2 and 3, in all cases
EuroCode defines lower values for both minimum and
maximum permissible distances between holes in bolted
connections. Additionally, it defines special cases where
a local buckling analysis should be performed for plates
in compressed connected members in the area between
bolts, in the external forces direction.
As for the distribution of external forces in bolted
connections, EuroCode takes into consideration a certain
non-uniformity of the distribution between bolts in a long
lap joint (a shear multi-bolted connection). For such cases
EuroCode suggests using factor L when calculating
shear resistance Fv, Rd of bolts as shown below:

M2

(12)

where A is the gross cross-section area of a bolt; M 2 is

a partial safety factor for bolted connections; fub is a
given ultimate tensile strength of the bolts; ns is the
number of shear surfaces; v is a factor calculated according to Table 3.4 of EN 1993-1-8 depending on a
bolts strength grade.
The value of factor L varies from 1,0 to 0,75 and
depends on the distance between the centers of end holes
in a bolted connection, L j (Fig 6), and on the bolt diameter d according to the following formula:

L = 1 0, 005 ( L j d 15) , L 0, 75

(13)

In similar design cases, SNiP II-23-81* uses only the

service factor b = 0,9 for shear multiple-bolted connections when calculating both the shear and the bearing bolt
resistance. In this way, SNiP II-23-81* actually allows
for the case where bolts in a joint might not start resisting
the load at the same time.

Table 3. Maximum permissible spacing, end and edge distances

Limit value
Maximum permissible distance

Draft
DBN V.2.6

EuroCode 3
EN 1993-1-8

8d0 or 12tmin

8d0 or 12tmin

14tmin or 200mm

in tension

16d0 or 24tmin

16d0 or 24tmin

14tmin or 200mm

in compression

12d0 or 18tmin

12d0 or 18tmin

14tmin or 200mm

SNiP II-23-81*
1. between centers of bolt holes, p1,max , p2,max :
) in end rows in the absence of curb angles, either in

tension or compression
b) in inner rows and in the end row in the presence of
curb angles:

2. from the center of a hole to the elements edge:

4d0 or 8tmin

e1,max , e2,max

4tmin + 40mm

e1
e2

p1

4d0 or 8tmin

p2

lef =0,6p1
Legend: d0 is the diameter of a hole; tmin is the thickness of a thinner outer element of the bolted connection.
Note: The maximum permitted distances between the centers of holes and that from the center of a hole to the elements edge are
presented here for steel structures made of steel as defined in EN10025, except for steel defined in EN10025-5.

738

Lj
F

trial engineering. The application helps perform a structural appraisal of a steel joint according to the requirements of SNiP -23-81*, SP 53-102-2004 and EN 19931-8 and design a steel structural joint based on a particular prototype.
Unlike invention, a prototype-based engineering
consists of choosing and utilizing an available solution.
This is the approach implemented in the COMET software; it is based on choosing from a set of parametrized
standard structural designs of joints (prototypes)
( et al. 2008). The set of parameters for a
prototype depends on what design conditions are predefined (material, internal forces etc.); they cannot be determined independently because a certain interrelationship might exist between them.
The COMET application uses the above approach
and thereby enables an engineer to improve his efficiency
by providing him with a wide range of prototypes. In this
way, a highly qualified personnel does not have to do a
routine technical work of checking and correcting a multitude of parameters to comply with building codes and
design specifications.
After a structural scheme is selected for a joint, the
system helps determine all parameters of it (they must
comply with building codes, a number of structural or
design constraints, and catalogues of steel members).
Both the building requirements and structural constraints
are mandatory, and any violation of those is not an option. However, there are also design constraints violating
which would only cause a warning, and the application
can generate a decision with the violations thus made.
The input data for computer-aided design of steel
structural joints include a joints type or configuration,
types and sizes of cross-sections of connected structural
members, and internal forces acting in adjacent sections
of the connected members.
The user has the options of either accepting the suggested decision or modifying it to his preferences, in
order to take into account a technology used to manufacture the involved steelwork members, requirements of
unification of the structural scheme within the framework
of a project or anything else (design team, manufacturing
plant etc.), the usage of standard decisions commonly
used in the project or team as well as the quality assurance system, marking system etc.
Having done this, the software performs an appraisal
of the joints design and generates a drawing: a sketch of
the design where all involved parameters and properties
are laid out. In order to be able to make additions or
changes to the design thus generated, or to alter the representation format (such as dimensioning, legends etc.), the
system can export the graphical results of the design procedure as a DXF (AutoCAD) file.
A set of incoming parameters and a set of outgoing
parameters are defined for each of joint prototypes (design parameters for structural decisions); methods have
been determined to identify those groups of parameters.
The representation of the structural joint becomes a basis
on which a mathematical model of the design problem is
formulated. The mathematical model includes a set of

Lj

Lj

F
L

II-23-81*
.2.6

1,0
0,9
0,75

EN 1993-1-8

15d 16d0

65d

66d0

Lj

Fig 6. Reduction of load-bearing ability of bolts in a

long lap joint

The draft of a new Ukrainian building code for steel

structures (DBN .2.6-: 200) defines the usage of a
service factor with the value of 0,9 for bolted connections
that resist shear and bearing. In addition, the DBN draft
includes a correction introduced to allow for a nonuniform distribution of external forces between fasteners
in a connection, for design cases where the distance between the end bolt holes in the direction of the force exceeds 16 diameters of the holes (Fig 6).
If a bending moment acts in a connection, the distribution of the internal forces between the fasteners should
be assumed dependent on the bolted connection type.
According to the Ukrainian building code, the distribution of the internal forces between the fasteners can be
assumed uniform (i. e. as in a rectangular stress diagram)
for frictional bolted connections, and non-uniform (as in a
triangular stress diagram) for shear bolted connection.
As for EN 1993-1-8, it has a strict requirement that
the distribution of the external forces between the fasteners in a connection should be elastic for C category bolted
connections, i.e. for frictional high-strength grade 8.8 and
10.9 preloaded bolt connections designed for ultimate
limit states. In addition, an elastic distribution of the external forces is required also for other categories of bolted
connections in cases where the design bearing resistance
of bolts exceeds the shear resistance. In other cases
EN 1993-1-8 assumes a plastic distribution of the external forces between the fasteners in steel structural joints.
Software implementation
A software implementation of the design and analysis procedures for bolted end-plate connections between
steel joints in framework structures is the COMET application included in the SCAD Office software suite
( et al. 2008). The COMET software application is used to perform a structural assessment of
design decisions and to develop designs of typical joints
of steel structural systems widely used in civil and indus739

criterial constraints such as a minimum weight

of auxiliary elements in a designed joint (gusset
plates, ribs, support tables etc.) or a minimum
labor content of manufacturing.
The COMET software provides the following
groups of prototypes for steel structural joints: nominally
rigid and nominally pinned column bases, beam and rafter splices, hinged and rigid joints between columns and
rafters, truss joints. A considerable part of structural steel
joints use bolted end-plate connections (such as beam and
rafter splices as well as rigid joints between rafters and
columns). In order to analyze and design such joints, the
COMET software implements actual Guidelines
( 1988, 1981), as well as
EN1993-1-8, and uses the design models of bolted endplate connections presented above.
The nomenclature of prototypes of beam-to-rafter
splices using bolted end-plate connections implemented
in the Beam-To-Beam Joints mode of the COMET
application is presented in Fig 7.

bf

hw

Kfw

Dp
Tp

tf

tf

tf

Tp

C2

Tp

Tp

Tp

Tp

Bp

Bp
Bp

c
bf

bf
Lo

To

Kfw

Lo

Kff

tf

Kff

tf

Dp

Kfw

Kfw

Tp

To

Dp

Lo
Tp

C2

Lo

tf

tf

C1

Hp

hw

n
Kfw

hw

Hp

Tp

Tp

Bp
Bp

e
bf
Kff

Lo

Lo

Kfw

tf

tf

Lo
Tp

Tp

Lo
Tp

Kfw

Tp

Bp

To

C2

C1

C1

hw

Hp

hw

Kfw

Hp

C1

Kff

tf

tf

C2

bf

C2

Dp

C1

Hp

Kfw

Hp

C1

hw

Hp

hw

Kfw

Bp

Fig 7. Prototypes of structural designs of splices between beams and rafters using bolted end-plate connections

740

Kff

tf

tf

C
D

bf

Kff
C

Dp

Kff

tf

Dp

bf

C2

design variables (unknown parameters of the design decision for the joint) and a set of constraints.
The set of constraints comprises:
constraints by the load-bearing ability of connected structural members and auxiliary structural elements (strictly speaking, the loadbearing ability of connected members should be
ensured before starting the design or structural
assessment of the joint; the checks performed
here are just additional majority-decision
checks which ensure the members are strong
enough in the elastic phase of their behavior);
these constraints are defined by building requirements;
assortment-based constraints for shaped and
sheet steel;
structural constraints which reflect the way
parts are manufactured; geometrical constraints
posed by mutual arrangement of the structural
members due to localization of welding and
bolted connections; possibility of welding together elements of different thickness etc.);

ability of the rafter, then the COMET software provides

several prototypes of joint design decisions with
haunches (see Fig 8, e, f). For several prototypes of joints
between rafter and columns, a feature for specifying a
rafter slope (Fig 8, d, f) also has been implemented.
The design and analysis of bolted end-plate connections in beam and rafter splices as well as rigid joints
between columns and rafters can be performed for several
design load combinations when the joint experiences a
simultaneous action of a bending moment, axial and shear
forces. In addition, internal forces in the abutting column
sections can be specified for joints between rafters and
columns: an axial force, two bending moments about the
main axes of the columns cross-section, and corresponding shear forces.
Interfaces of the Beam-To-Beam Joints and
Beam-To-Column Joints modes of the COMET software are presented in Fig 9 and Fig 10, respectively.

These joints are most often designed to match the

outer dimensions of an end-plate to the height of a beam
(Fig 7, ). If the bending moment acting in the joint cannot be taken on completely by the bolts located between
the beam flanges, then there appears a necessity to develop design decisions with extended end-plates and outside bolt rows which increase the end-plate height downwards (Fig 7, b, d) or upwards (Fig 7, c, e) depending on
the bending moments sign. If there are considerable
alternating-sign bending moments, designs of bolted endplate joints with extended end-plates and outside bolt
rows on either beam flange (Fig 7, f, j) are used.
The nomenclature of prototypes of rigid joints between rafters and columns using bolted end-plate connections, which are implemented in the Beam-To-Column
Joints mode of the COMET application, is presented in
Fig 8. If a considerable bending moment acts in the joint,
and the value of this moment exceeds the load-bearing

bf
Tp

Tp

bf

Tr

tf
Bp

Hp

K1

hw

Hp

hw

C1

C1

C2

D
C

C2

tf

C1

C
tf

Bs

Dp

Ts

Hs

Dp

tf

K1

S
Bp

b
Tp

Dp

Tp

bf

tf

Hp

K1

Hp

K1

hw

D
hw

tf

Dp

tf

bf

Dp

Dp

tf

a
b

Bp

Bp

d
Dp

c
Tp

Tp
bf

D
hw

tf

Dp

tf

bf

n1

tf

Hp

K1

K1
Hp

hw

n1

b
n2

C
Dp

Dp

Lv

Hv

Lv

Hv

tf

n2

Bp

Bp

Fig 8. Prototypes of structural designs of rigid joints between a rafter and

a column using bolted end-plate connections

741

Fig 9. Interface of the Beam-To-Beam Joint mode

of the COMET software

Fig 10. Interface of the Beam-To-Column Joint

mode of the COMET software (rigid joints)

53-102-2004.
[General rules for design of steel structures]. . , .
, - .
.2.6-: 2000. . , [Steel structures.

Conclusion
This paper presents principles for the design of
bolted end-plate connections in structural joints of steel
frames according to EuroCode and the Ukrainian building
codes. Consistency and contradictions in the design procedures for bolted connections based on different design
codes have been identified.
A software implementation for the design and analysis of bolted end-plate connections in steel joints of frame
structures has been presented. The application helps perform a structural assessment of design decisions and develop designs of typical joints for steel structural systems
widely used in civil and industrial engineering.

Design, manufacturing and installation requirements]

[online]. , . Available on
Internet:
<http://www.urdisc.com.ua/arhiv/dbn_steel.pdf>.
De Lima, L. R. ; da Silva, L. S. ; da S. Vellasco, P. C. G. ; de
Andrade, S. A. L. 2002. Experimental analysis of extended end-plate beam-to-column joints under bending
and axial force, in Proc. of III European Conference on
Steel and Composite Structures Eurosteel 2002, Coimbra, 2002, 11211130.
Da Silva, L. S.; Santiago, A.; Real, P. V. 2002. Post-limit stiffness and ductility of end-plate beam-to-column steel
joints,
Computer and Structures 80(2002): 515531.
doi:10.1016/S0045-7949(02)00014-7
EN 1993-1-8. Eurocode 3. Design of Steel Structures. Part 1.8:
Design of Joints. CEN Brussels, Belgium, 2005.
Faella, C.; Piluso, V.; Rizzano, G. 2000. Structural steel semirigid connections: theory, design and software. Boca Ration: CRC Press LLC. 494 p.
Jaspart, J. P. 2000. General report: session on connections.
Journal of Constructional Steel Research. vol. 55: 69-89.
doi:10.1016/S0143-974X(99)00078-4
, . .; , . . 1985. -

References

, . .; , . .; , . . 2009.

[On strength

analysis of flange connections with an alternating-sign

stress distribution],
[Industrial and Civil Engineering] 2: 26
30.
, . .; , . . 1989.

[Design of flange connec-

tions taking into account a propagation of plastic deforma

tions],

[In Proc. of
the International Colloquium Bolted and Special Field
Joints in Structural Steel Constructions], vol. 2. :
, 3236.
Cerfontaine, F.; Jaspart, J. P. 2002. Analytical study of the
interaction between bending and axial force in bolted
joints, in Proc. of III European Conference on Steel and
Composite Structures Eurosteel 2002, Coimbra, 2002,
9971006.
-23-81*. . [Steel structures. Codes of structural design].
, , 1990. 96 .

[Researches on T-

shaped flange connections using mockups made of an optically active material], . [In Proc. of Academic Institutions Civil Engineering and Architecture] 9: 1417.
, . .; , . .; , . .;
, . .; , . . 2008. SCAD
Office. SCAD [SCAD Software Suite]. : . 592 .
, . . 2005.
[Buildings with variable-section
steel frameworks]. : . 450 .

742

for design, manufacturing, and assembling of flange connections of roof trusses with chords made from Hsections]. , . , 1981.
Revised Annex J of Eurocode 3. Joints in Building Frames.
European Prestandard ENV 1993-1-1: 1992/A2. CEN
Brussels, Belgium, 1998.
Sokol, Z., Wald, F., Delabre, V., Muzeau, J. P., Svarc, M. 2002.
Design of end plate joints subject to moment and normal
force. In Proc. of III European Conference on Steel and
Composite Structures Eurosteel 2002, Coimbra, 2002,
12191228.
Sumner, E. A.; Murray, T. M. 2003. Behavior and design of
multi-row extended end-plate moment connections, in
Proc. of International Conference of Advances in Structures (ASCCA03), Sydney, 2003.
Undermann, D., Schmidt, B. 2005. Moment resistance of bolted
beam to column connections with four bolts in each row.
In Proc. of IV European Conference on Steel and Composite Structures Eurosteel 2005. Maastricht, 2005.
Urbonas, K.; Daniunas, A. 2003. Numerical tests of steel beamto-column semi-rigid connections, Journal of Civil Engineering and Management 9(4): 292296.
Urbonas, K.; Daniunas, A. 2004. Behaviour of steel beam-tobeam connections under bending and axial force, in Proc.
of 8th International Conference Modern Building Materials, Structures and Techniques. May 1921, 2004, Vilnius, Lithuania, 650653.
Vrtes, K.; Ivnyi, M. 2005. Investigation of minor axis and 3D
bolted end-plate connections experimental and numerical analysis load tests. Periodica Polytechnica. Ser. Mechanical Engineering 49(1): 4758.

Kennedy, N. A.; Vinnakota, S.; Sherbourne, A. 1981. The splittee analogy in bolted splices and beam-column connections, Joints in Structural Steelwork 2.1382.157.
Kozlowski, A.; Pisarek, Z. 2005. Characteristics of bolted end
plate joints with four bolts in the row, in Proc. of 10th Scientific Conference Rzeszow-Lviv-Kosice State of Art,
Trends of Development and Challenges in Civil Engineering. September 11-13, 2005, Koice, Slovakia.
Krumm, R. 1991. Calculation of rigid face plate connections
according to the DSTV/DASt Guidelines. Stahlbau.
vol. 60/3. Berlin.
Kuhlmann, U.; Davison, J. B.; Kattner M. 1998. Structural
systems and rotation capacity. In Proceeding of COST
Conference on Control of the Semi-rigid Behavior of Civil
Engineering Structural Connections, Lige, Belgium,
1998, 16776.
Pisarek, Z.; Kozlowski, A. 2006. End-plate steel joint with four
bolts in the row, in Proc. of the International Conference
Progress in Steel, Composite and Aluminium Structures. Ed. by Gizejowski, Kozlowski, Sleczka & Ziolko.
London: Taylor & Francis Group, 257826.
, ,

[Guidelines for analysis,

design, manufacturing and assembling of flange connections of steel structures]. ,

, . . , 1988, 83 .
,

[Guide

743