© All Rights Reserved

1 visualizzazioni

cta97-3.pdf

© All Rights Reserved

- m16fa655a(varios)
- Holztechnic-2013-It 01
- catalogo_prodotti
- Teoremi della plasticità (limite inferiore e superiore)
- Crono 75 RG Motorhacke BJ 2011 Alpina
- Manuale Proxxon Mf70-Staffe
- Sistemi Di Bloccaggio SNAPLOC_2007
- Alfa 147 - Scambio sedute dei sedili per uniformarne il consumo
- MenegottoTecnicaCostruzioni
- Man Tecning REV1
- Calettatori CONEX Compomac
- Portico 1 SkyCiv Report
- Scienza delle Costruzioni
- 16 - Deformabilita.pdf
- 3 Analisi Pushover
- MatrixStruct.pdf
- 02-rigidezza
- Loxeal_55-03
- Indice TG MEF.docx
- 15 - Cam Clay Modificato

Sei sulla pagina 1di 12

GIORNATE ITALIANE DELLA COSTRUZIONE IN ACCIAIO

ANCONA: 2-3-4-5 ottobre 1997

ANALYSIS OF BOLT PRELOADING INFLUENCE

SPERIMENTALE DELLINFLUENZA DEL

PRETENSIONAMENTO DEI BULLONI

Department of Civil Engineering, University of Salerno

ABSTRACT

The rotational stiffness of bolted connections can be properly predicted by means of the so-called

"component method". In this method, the T-stub model, which is used to compute the stiffness

contribution of the most important joint components of hanger-type connections, plays a fundamental

role. For this reason, an experimental analysis on hanger-type connections (bolted T-stubs) has been

carried out. On the basis of this analysis, the possibility of predicting the axial stiffness of the connection

is investigated. In addition, as the joint behaviour is strongly influenced by the bolt preloading, three

different levels of bolt preloading have been considered in the experimental analysis. Finally, starting

from the obtained experimental results, simple rules to account for bolt preloading influence are

suggested.

SOMMARIO

La rigidezza rotazionale di collegamenti bullonati pu essere valutata in modo appropriato mediante

limpiego del "metodo delle componenti". In tale metodo, assume un ruolo fondamentale il modello

"T-stub" che fornisce il contributo deformativo delle componenti nodali maggiormente influenti. Per

questo motivo, stata effettuata unanalisi sperimentale su collegamenti elementari costituiti da due

elementi a T bullonati. Sulla base dei risultati sperimentali stata analizzata la possibilit di prevedere

la rigidezza assiale di tale collegamento. Inoltre, dal momento che il comportamento nodale risulta

fortemente influenzato dal pretensionamento dei bulloni, lanalisi sperimentale stata condotta

considerando tre differenti livelli di precarico dei bulloni. Lanalisi ha consentito di individuare

semplici regole di calcolo che consentono di portate in conto linfluenza della pretrazione dei bulloni

nella valutazione della rigidezza rotazionale dei collegamenti.

1. INTRODUCTION

Different levels of accuracy can be required in the modeling of the connection rotational behaviour,

depending on the type of structural analysis to be performed. In particular, the required accuracy

increases as the sophistication of the analysis increases. In fact, in the case of a structural design based

on linear elastic analyses, only the connection rotational stiffness is required. On the contrary, the use

of plastic analyses requires the knowledge of the flexural resistance only. Finally, non-linear analyses

generally require the prediction of the overall moment rotation curve.

The prediction of the overall rotational behaviour of beam-to-column joints starting from their

geometrical and mechanical properties assumes primary importance. For this reason, this topic is

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -2-

extensively dealt with in Eurocode 3 (1990) [1], which provides not only the rules for identifying the

structural situations requiring the beam-to-column connection behaviour to be accounted for, but also

the criteria for predicting the rotational response of connections.

In particular, the prediction of the moment-rotation curve of beam-to-column joints is faced by

means of the so-called component method. The main feature of the method is its ability to account for

any connection typology, provided that the basic components were properly identified and modelled.

The joint flexural resistance is computed accounting for any possible collapse mechanism involving

the joint components. The joint rotational stiffness is predicted by properly combining the axial stiffness

of the basic components.

With reference to bolted connections, many components are modelled through the so-called

equivalent T-stub [1-4]. This is the case of the column flange in bending, the end plate in bending and

the flange cleat in bending [1]. For this reason, the correct prediction of the axial stiffness of this

elementary connection (hanger-type connection) is of primary importance within the component

method.

Aiming at a reliable prediction of the connection rotational stiffness, another aspect deserving

particular attention is the influence of the bolt preloading [2,5,6,7]. Therefore, the distinction between

connection with snug tightened bolts and connections with pretensioned bolts is commonly made.

In order to assess the rules for predicting the axial stiffness of hanger-type connections with snug

tightened bolts and to gain insight into the important influence of bolt preloading, an experimental

program has been planned. The main results of the planned experimental activity are presented in [8],

while the same experimental tests are exhaustively dealt with in [9]. In this paper, only a summary of

the obtained results is given and, on the base of these results, a revision of the rules for predicting the

axial stiffness of hanger-type connections is suggested. In addition, a simple rule for including the

influence of bolt preloading is proposed. The reliability of the suggested rules is verified through the

comparison with the test results.

The specimens are assemblied by the coupling of two properly shaped T-elements which have been

obtained from rolled profiles of series HEA and HEB, steel grade Fe430, cutting them along the web

plane. These T-elements are connected through the flanges by means of two high strength bolts (class

10.9). The connection of the flange with two bolts only has been adopted in order to investigate the

behaviour of the single bolt row without any interaction with adjacent bolt rows. This choice has

required great care in measuring axial displacements due to the important role of geometrical

imperfections. The specimens can be divided into two groups characterized by different bolt diameter.

The bolt diameter of the first group (6 specimens) is equal to 20 mm, while the second group (10

specimens) has bolt diameter equal to 12 mm.

Three different levels of bolt preloading have been applied. In particular, snug tightening is the first

level of preloading. The second level corresponds to a tensile stress in the bolts equal to 40% and 60%

of the bolt yield resistance, for bolt diameter equal to 20 mm and 12 mm respectively. Finally, these

stress ratios are increased to 80% for the third preloading level.

The geometrical properties of the specimens have been selected in order to investigate the influence

of bolt preloading in a wide range of the ratio between the flange flexural stiffness and the bolt axial

stiffness which can be related to the parameter = tf db

[4] where tf is the flange thickness, db is

the bolt diameter and = m db. The parameter m is a conventional distance between the bolt axis and

the web of the T-element accounting for the participation of the web-to-flange fillet to the flexural

deformation of the flange, it is defined as m = d 0.8 r, where d is the distance between the bolt axis

and the T-stub web and r is the radius of the web-to-flange fillet.

The tested specimens are characterized by values of the parameter ranging between 0.36 and 0.98,

covering the whole range of common structural details. With reference to Fig.1, the nominal and actual

values of the geometrical properties of the specimens are given in Appendix.

The specimens are subjected to a tensile axial force which is applied to the webs tightened by the

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -3-

The experimental tests have Plan Section X-X Lateral view

been carried out at the Ma- X

terial and Structure Labora- tw

tory of the Department of

e1

Civil Engineering of Salerno d

University. The testing ma- L1

n m 0.8 r

B1

chine (Fig.2) is a Schenck df

Hydropuls S56 (maximum

B

test load 630 kN, piston

stroke 125 mm) equipped tf

B2

wit h i n duct i ve exten- L2

s ometer s DSA 25/2 0N e2

(max = 20%).

As the aim of the ex- b

perimental tests is an accur- X

ate evaluation of the axial

stiffness, they have been

limited to the elastic range t hb

focusing the attention on the t wb

measure of the axial dis- d b tf

placement under increasing

tensile axial force. The axial

displacements have been tf

measured by means of exten- t wb

someters directly applied on t nb

the specimen.

Four C-shaped rigid bars washers

bolt head nut

have been connected to the

T-stub webs as shown in

t

Fig.2, allowing the recor- d hbs d hbl d win d west d nbs dnbl

ding of the relative displace-

ments corresponding to the

four measuring points E1,

E2, E3 and E4 shown in Figure 1 - Geometrical parameters of tested T-stubs

Fig.2. The actual axial dis-

placement has been evaluated as the average value among the four measuring points. This displacement

provide an accurate measure, because it is not affected by any undesired rotation of the specimen which

could arise due to geometrical imperfections.

2. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

The experimental tests, which have been carried out under force control, have been stopped at a force

level equal to 2/3 times the design resistance of the hanger-type connection. This level has been selected

to assure that the specimen remains in elastic range. This has been confirmed by the absence of residual

plastic deformations during the unloading. Therefore, the test repetition for different bolt preloading

levels has been possible. The force versus displacement relationship has been recorded.

As an example, with reference to specimen TS13, Fig.3 shows the influence of bolt preloading. A

similar behaviour has been observed for all specimens [4]. From the qualitative point of view (Fig.4),

it can be recognized that the influence of bolt preloading can be interpreted by means of two ideal

levels of the T-stub axial stiffness. The first level (line a) corresponds to a tightening force equal to

zero; the second level is given by the stiffness of the initial branch affected by bolt preloading. The

hatched curve (b), corresponding to the second stiffness level, represents the ideal case in which the

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -4-

E 1 ,E 3 E 2 ,E 4

inductive inductive

extensometers extensometers

E 3 ,E 4 E 1 ,E 2

C-shaped

rigid bar

specimen

bolt preloading prevents the detach of the connected flanges for any given value of the external axial

load.

Obviously, with reference to the actual behaviour obtained from experimental tests, the load versus

displacement curve of specimens with snug tightened bolts only initially follows the straight line

corresponding to the second stiffness level, while, successively, the curve develops with a slope

approximately equal to that corresponding to the first stiffness level. In addition, it can be immediately

observed that the loading level corresponding to the leaving of the experimental curve from the ideal

pretensioned behaviour (line b) increases as the bolt preloading level increases.

Concerning the stiffness evaluation, reference has been made to the secant stiffness corresponding

to a load level equal to 2/3 times the T-stub design resistance which, in Eurocode 3, is assumed as the

conventional limit of the elastic range [1].

The design resistance of the T-stubs is computed as the smallest value among three possible failure

modes [1]:

Mode 1: complete yielding of flanges

4 M pl.Rd (1)

Ft1.Rd =

m

where M pl.Rd is the plastic moment of the flanges evaluated according to Eurocode 3

(M pl.Rd = 14 beff t2f f y with beff = min 2 m ; 4 m + 1.25 n ; b ) (Fig.1) where m is the distance between

the bolt axis and the plastic hinge, n is the distance between the bolt axis and the prying force and b is

the width of the T-stub [1].

Mode 2: bolt failure with flange yielding

Mpl.Rd + 2 B t.Rd n (2)

Ft2.Rd =

m + n

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -5-

120

100

80

LOAD (kN)

60

40 snug tightening

20 bolt preloading level = 80%

0

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

DISPLACEMENT (mm)

Figure 3 - Influence of bolt preloading

120

fully pretensioned bolts non-pretensioned bolts

ideal behaviour ideal behaviour

100 80

%

(b) el

= (a)

ev

gl

80 d i n 0%

a =6

LOAD (kN)

elo ve

l

pr e

bo

lt gl

60 a din

elo ing

l t pr ten

o h

b tig

40 ug

sn

20

0

0 0.2

0.6 0.8 1 1.2 0.4 1.4 1.6

DISPLACEMENT (mm)

Figure 4 - Interpretation of bolt preloading influence

Mode 3: bolt failure

Ft3.Rd = 2 B t.Rd (3)

In table 1, with reference both to snug tightened bolts and to preloaded, the values of the initial stiffness

and of the secant stiffness (corresponding to a load level equal to 2/3 times the T-stub designresistance)

are given.

It can be observed that the bolt preloading leads to a significant increase both of the initial stiffness

and of the secant stiffness. In particular, due to the increase of the loading level corresponding to the

leaving of the experimental curve from the ideal pretensioned behaviour, the secant stiffness increases

as the preloading level increases.

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -6-

Secant stiffness

specimen Initial stiffness snug 40% 60% 80%

(kN/mm) tightening bolt preloading bolt preloading bolt preloading

K0.exp K(0.5).exp K(0.75).exp K1.exp

(kN/mm) (kN/mm) (kN/mm) (kN/mm)

TS-1 920 167 468 - 572

TS-2 210 112 132 - 150

TS-3 430 99 185 - 259

TS-4 430 103 186 - 227

TS-5 1300 229 307 - 410

TS-6 1400 214 388 - 568

TS-7 1430 237 - 265 640

TS-8 1000 213 - 309 376

TS-9 520 214 - 262 342

TS-10 800 266 - 295 353

TS-11 1100 82 - 124 155

TS-12 750 168 - 251 381

TS-13 1100 163 - 211 271

TS-14 1250 156 - 205 255

TS-15 370 192 - 225 258

TS-16 400 179 - 209 241

According to the component method, the axial stiffness of an hanger-type connection such as a couple

of T-elements connected by bolts, is provided by the following relationship:

1 (4)

Ko =

1 1 1

+ +

Kb Ku Kl

where K u, K l and K b represent the axial stiffness of the upper T-element, of the lower T-element and

of the bolts, respectively.

Concerning the axial stiffness of the upper and lower T-element, the following relationship can be

adopted:

0.5 E beff,j tf,j3 (5)

Kj = 3

m

where m is the distance between the bolt axis and the conventional restraining line, E is the modulus

of elasticity, tfj is the flange thickness of the T-element (being the index j=u or j=l for the upper and

lower T-element, respectively). The effective width (beff,j) has been computed by assuming a 45

spreading of the bolt action starting from the bolt head edge (Fig.5). It is important to underline that,

as a consequence of this assumption, the effective width values for stiffness calculation are different

from those suggested in Eurocode 3, where they are assumed to be coincident with those adopted for

strength calculations. According to previous studies on extended end plate connections [3,4], this

assumption leads to a significant improvement of the accuracy between computed and experimental

values of the joint rotational stiffness.

In order to account for the influence of geometrical imperfections, the stiffness of the T-element

has been evaluated considering an average value accounting for the different parameters (m 1.j or

m 2.j) defining the bolt location at the two flange sides (Fig.5).

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -7-

b eff,1j

b eff,2j

o

45

d hb 0.8 r 0.8 r d hb

m 1,j m 2,j

Therefore, the axial stiffness of the single T-element is computed by means of the following

relationship:

E tfj3 0.5 beff.1j 0.5 beff.2j (6)

Kj = 3 + 3

2

m 1.j m 2.j

where beff.1j and beff.2j represent the effective width values of each side of the T-stub flange.

With reference to the axial stiffness of a couple of bolts the following relationship has been adopted:

E Ab (7)

K b = 1.6

Lb

where A b is the resistant area of the bolt. The coefficient 1.6 accounts for the influence of the prying

forces which produce an increase of the bolt axial forces [10]. L b is the conventional bolt length given

by:

th + tn (8)

L b = tfu + tfl + 2 twh +

2

where twh, th and tn are the thicknesses of the washers, the bolt head and the nut, respectively. In

addition, tfu and tfl are the thicknesses of the flange of the upper and lower T-stub element, respectively.

In table 2, the predicted values of the axial stiffness (K o.c) of snug tightened specimens are compared

with the experimental ones (K o.exp). It can be observed that the stiffness prediction is sufficiently

accurate leading to an average overestimation equal to 27% and to a coefficient of variation equal to

0.13.

However, an improvement of this result can be obtained removing the conventional assumption

concerning the location of the restraining line. In fact, it has been pointed out by the experimental

results that the restraining line has to be considered more close to the T-stub web as the ratio d tf

decreases, being d the distance between the bolt axis and the web of the T-element. This behaviour

can be attributed to numerous phenomena such as the shear deformability, the influence of the fillet

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -8-

Specimen Beam Experimental = 0.8 as eq.(10)

profile stiffness Ko.c Ko.c Ko.exp Ko.c Ko.c Ko.exp

(kN/mm) (kN/mm)

TS-1 HEA220 167 249 1.49 177 1.06

TS-2 HEA220 112 108 0.96 100 0.90

TS-3 HEA160 99 124 1.25 103 1.04

TS-4 HEA160 103 119 1.16 101 0.98

TS-5 HEB160 229 314 1.37 221 0.96

TS-6 HEB160 214 322 1.50 223 1.04

TS-7 HEB200 237 302 1.27 225 0.95

TS-8 HEB200 213 295 1.38 221 1.04

TS-9 HEB220 214 324 1.51 246 1.15

TS-10 HEB220 266 308 1.16 230 0.87

TS-11 HEA220 82 92 1.12 90 1.09

TS-12 HEA220 168 168 1.00 136 0.81

TS-13 HEA260 163 216 1.33 172 1.06

TS-14 HEA260 156 211 1.35 170 1.09

TS-15 HEA300 192 225 1.17 182 0.95

TS-16 HEA300 179 223 1.25 180 1.00

Average 1.27 1.00

Coefficient of variation 0.13 0.09

and the flexural stiffness of the bolts. All these phenomena can be approximately accounted for by

assuming for the parameter m the following relationship:

m = dr (9)

where is a function of d tf. The correlation between the values of , which provide predicted values

of the axial stiffness equal to the experimental ones, and the ratio d tf has been obtained by means of

a regression analysis:

d (10)

= 0.16 0.08

tf

In table 2, the prediction of the stiffness of tested T-stubs obtained with the application of the

coefficient is given. It can be noted that, adopting the coefficient in predicting the stiffness of tested

specimens, a good accuracy has been obtained both in terms of average value and of coefficient of

variation. However, as it has been underlined in [8,9], this influence becomes less important when the

overall behaviour of more complex joints, with different bolt rows interacting each other, is considered.

In fact, in the case of actual beam-to-column bolted connections, such as extended end plate

connections, the number of involved components significantly increases reducing the influence of the

factor affecting only the stiffness of the column flange in bending. Therefore, for sake of simplicity,

the value = 0.8 can be used.

The most important result of the presented tests on snug tightened bolted T-stubs is the experimental

confirmation, based on the analysis of the single component, of the accuracy of the stiffness prediction

based on effective width values obtained by a 45o spreading of the bolt action starting from the bolt

head edge.

Bolt preloading plays an important role in the evaluation of the rotational stiffness of bolted connec-

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano -9-

tions, leading to its increase with respect to the case of snug-tightened bolts [2,4,5,7].

The stiffening effect of bolt preloading is related to two phenomena. On one hand, bolt preloading

gives rise to an increase in the axial stiffness of the system made of the bolt and the connected plates

considered as a whole. With reference to this first effect, the need to account for the influence of bolt

preloading has also been pointed out by other Authors [7]. On the other hand, the bolt preloading

modifies the overall behaviour of the T-stub affecting both the flange span and its restraining

conditions. This latter effect depends on the ratio between the flexural stiffness of the connected plates

and the bolt axial stiffness, which can be taken into account by means of the parameter defined in

Section 2.

With reference to the first effect, the bolt preloading provides an increase of the axial stiffness of

the bolt-plate system due to the decompression of the connected plates (T-stub flanges). This effect

has also been analysed in a previous work [4] by considering a 45o spreading of the bolt head action

into the washer and plate thickness. On the basis of this assumption, the ratio between the pretensioned

bolt axial stiffness K bp and the non pretensioned one K b = Eb A b L b has been obtained:

K bp tp (11)

= 4.10 + 3.25

Kb db

where tp, is the mean value of the thickness of the connected plates, and db is the bolt diameter. This

relationship covers the range of variation of the ratio K bp K b suggested by other Authors [5,11].

As already stated the bolt preloading affects the axial stiffness of the T-stub governing the flexural

deformability of its flanges through the location and the stiffness of the restraining action due to the

bolts. These two effects can be directly related to the parameter which accounts for the ratio between

the flexural stiffness of the flanges and the bolt axial stiffness [4]. In the case of very thick T-stub

flanges, the bolts are not able to prevent the detachment of the connected flanges and, therefore, the

bolt restraining action can be modelled as simple supports located at the bolt axis. On the contrary, in

the case of very thin plates, the bolt preloading prevents the detachment of the T-stub flanges which

can be assumed to be clamped at the edge line of the bolt head. Furthermore, the location of the prying

forces moves away from the bolt axis as the plate thickness-to-bolt diameter ratio increases. In addition,

Tab. 3 - Prediction of the secant stiffness of pretensioned T-stubs (bolt preloading level: 80%)

Specimen Beam Experimental the bolt preloading coefficient

profile stiffness Ko.c Ko.c K1.exp K1.c K1.c K1.exp

(kN/mm) (kN/mm)

TS-1 HEA220 572 249 0.43 410 0.72

TS-2 HEA220 150 108 0.72 217 1.45

TS-3 HEA160 259 124 0.48 261 1.01

TS-4 HEA160 227 119 0.53 251 1.11

TS-5 HEB160 410 314 0.77 465 1.13

TS-6 HEB160 568 322 0.57 478 0.84

TS-7 HEB200 640 302 0.47 406 0.63

TS-8 HEB200 376 295 0.78 394 1.05

TS-9 HEB220 342 324 0.95 450 1.32

TS-10 HEB220 353 308 0.87 415 1.18

TS-11 HEA220 155 92 0.59 141 0.91

TS-12 HEA220 381 168 0.44 235 0.62

TS-13 HEA260 271 216 0.80 285 1.05

TS-14 HEA260 255 211 0.83 278 1.09

TS-15 HEA300 258 225 0.87 292 1.13

TS-16 HEA300 241 223 0.92 290 1.20

Average 0.69 1.03

Coefficient of variation 0.27 0.23

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano - 10 -

the restraining action of the bolts depends on their axial and flexural stiffness [4].

The influence of bolt preloading on the flange span of the T-stub and its restraining conditions is,

therefore, accounted for by means of a correcting coefficient depending on the parameter (i.e. the

ratio between the flexural stiffness of the flanges and the bolt axial stiffness):

3 (12)

0.5 E beff,j tf,j

Kj = 3

m

The relationship between and has been determined on the base of the experimental results. To

this scope, the values of providing predicted values of the T-stub stiffness equal to the experimental

ones have been preliminarly evaluated with reference to the prediction of the secant stiffness (K 1)

corresponding to 2/3 times the T-stub design resistance and considering a bolt preloading level equal

to 80% (which is usually suggested for high strength bolts). Successively, the regression analysis of

versus has provided the following relationship:

1.28 (13)

tp

= 0.57

db

In table 3, the values of the T-stub stiffness predicted taking into account the bolt preloading

(K1.c) (eq. (11), (12), (13) with m evaluated according to eq. (9) with = 0.8) are compared with the

experimental ones (K1.exp). It can be observed that a significant underestimation of the axial stiffness

is obtained when the bolt preloading is neglected. On the contrary, the use of the bolt preloading

coefficient leads to a very good agreement between numerical and experimental results.

The axial stiffness (secant value corresponding to 2 3 Ft.Rd) for bolt preloading levels () different

from the reference one ( = 1 corresponding to 80%) can be approximately evaluated according to the

procedure represented in Fig.6 corresponding to the following relationship:

= 1 (80%) = 0

2/3 Ft.Rd K0 K0 K0

LOAD

F*

K1

F*

K

K0

DISPLACEMENT

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano - 11 -

K1 (14)

K =

K1

+ (1)

Ko

where the bolt preloading level is expressed as a fraction of that leading to a bolt tensile stress, due

to the tightening, equal to the 80% of the yield one.

With reference to the prediction of the stiffness K corresponding to the tested specimens reported

in Tab.1, the use of the above relationship leads to an average overestimation equal to 2% with a

coefficient of variation equal to 0.23.

6. CONCLUSIONS

The experimental results presented in this paper have confirmed that bolt preloading significantly

affects the stiffness of bolted connections. In particular, it has been evidenced that two ideal stiffness

levels can be identified. The first level corresponds to a tightening force equal to zero, while the second

level represents the ideal case in which bolt preloading prevents the detach of the connected plates for

any given value of the external force.

In addition, it has been verified that the axial stiffness of snug tightened bolted T-stubs can be

accurately predicted by assuming a 45 spreading of the bolt action starting from the bolt head edge.

The same procedure can be used to predict also the stiffness of pretensioned connections provided that

a properly calibrated coefficient representing the influence of bolt preloading is used.

7. REFERENCES

[1] CEN/TC250/SC3-PT9:"Eurocode 3, Part 1.1: Joints in Building Frames (Annex J)", ENV, January,

1997.

[2] Y .L. Y ee,R.E.Melchers: "Moment-Rotation Curves for Bolted Connections", Journal of Structural

Engineering, ASCE, Vol.112, January, 1986.

[3] C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano: "Reliability of Eurocode 3 Procedures for Predicting Beam-to-

Column Joint Behaviour." Third International Conference on Steel and Alluminium Structures,

Istanbul, May, 1995

[4] C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano: "Some proposals to improve EC3-Annex J approach for predicting

the moment-rotation curve of extended end plate connections." Costruzioni Metalliche, N.4, 1996.

[5] H. Agerskov: "High-Strength Bolted Connections Subject to Prying." ASCE Structural Division,

Vol.102, pp.161-175, January, 1976

[6] R.B. Fleischman, C.P. Chasten, Le-Wu Lu, G.C. Driscoll: "Top-and-seat Angle Connections and

End-plate Connections: Snug vs. Fully Pretensioned Bolts." Engineering Journal, AISC, First

Quarter, 1991

[7] J.P. Jaspart, R. Maquoi: "Effect of Bolt Preloading on Joint Behaviour", Steel Structures, Eurosteel

95, edited by Kounadis, Balkema, 1995.

[8] C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano: "Experimental Analysis of Bolted Connections: Snug Vs.

Preloaded Bolts", submitted for publication in ASCE Journal of Structural Engineering on March

1997 and recommended for acceptance on June 1997.

[9] C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano: "Experimental analysis of T-Stub assemblies with snug tightened

or pretensioned bolts", Rapporto N.73, Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Universit di Salerno,

1996.

[10] J.P. Jaspart, M. Steenhuis, K . W einand: "The stiffness model of Revised Annex J of Eurocode

3", Third International Workshop on Connection in Steel Structures, Trento, 28-31 May, 1995.

[11] O. Bursi: "Behaviour of High Strength Bolts in Bolted Beam-to-Column Connections." Proc. of

Applied Stress Analysis Conference, Nottingham, August.

C. Faella, V. Piluso, G. Rizzano - 12 -

In the following table the nominal and actual values of the geometrical properties of tested specimens,

depicted in the Fig.2, are given.

Specimen B b tf tw r e1 e2 L1 L2 B1 B2 df

(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

N 220.00 190.00 11.00 7.00 18.00 62.50 62.50 95.00 95.00 106.50 106.50 21.00

TS-1 AU 218.10 189.00 11.50 7.30 - 64.05 62.25 95.20 93.95 104.40 106.50 22.10

AL 218.10 189.00 11.30 7.20 - 61.75 62.65 96.05 94.60 104.20 106.50 22.10

N 220.00 190.00 11.00 7.00 18.00 50.50 50.50 95.00 95.00 106.50 106.50 21.00

TS-2 AU 217.50 189.00 11.00 7.25 - 48.65 50.85 93.45 94.50 106.10 104.15 22.10

AL 218.00 189.00 11.00 7.20 - 49.75 50.15 95.30 93.80 106.50 102.50 22.00

N 160.00 190.00 9.00 6.00 15.00 33.50 33.50 95.00 95.00 77.00 77.00 21.00

TS-3 AU 159.20 189.00 9.10 7.20 - 33.40 34.20 94.80 94.70 77.10 74.90 21.00

AL 159.60 189.00 9.10 7.10 - 34.60 34.20 95.45 94.05 77.60 74.90 21.50

N 160.00 190.00 9.00 6.00 15.00 33.50 33.50 95.00 95.00 77.00 77.00 21.00

TS-4 AU 159.65 189.00 9.45 7.20 - 32.70 33.10 95.45 93.95 76.20 76.25 21.90

AL 159.90 189.00 9.25 7.30 - 33.75 32.85 94.35 92.55 77.20 75.40 21.90

N 160.00 190.00 13.00 8.00 15.00 32.50 32.50 95.00 95.00 76.00 76.00 21.00

TS-5 AU 161.50 189.00 13.90 8.80 - 32.65 31.95 95.05 94.75 76.50 76.20 21.50

AL 161.15 189.00 13.60 8.75 - 32.40 31.85 95.40 93.70 76.90 75.50 21.00

N 160.00 190.00 13.00 8.00 15.00 32.50 32.50 95.00 95.00 76.00 76.00 21.00

TS-6 AU 159.80 189.00 13.50 8.70 - 33.15 32.65 95.10 94.25 76.80 74.30 21.10

AL 160.60 189.00 13.40 8.80 - 33.25 32.85 95.95 94.60 76.50 75.30 21.70

N 200.00 190.00 15.00 9.00 15.00 51.50 51.50 95.00 95.00 95.50 95.50 13.00

TS-7 AU 196.05 187.00 15.00 10.25 - 51.25 51.20 95.30 94.30 92.20 93.60 13.20

AL 198.00 189.00 14.70 10.30 - 51.35 51.75 95.05 94.05 93.10 94.60 13.10

N 200.00 190.00 15.00 9.00 18.00 51.50 51.50 95.00 95.00 95.50 95.50 13.00

TS-8 AU 198.80 189.00 15.00 10.20 - 51.25 51.75 96.25 94.05 95.70 92.90 13.10

AL 197.70 189.00 14.80 10.20 - 50.68 51.18 95.78 94.83 94.50 93.00 12.95

N 220.00 190.00 16.00 9.50 18.00 61.30 61.30 95.00 95.00 105.25 105.25 13.00

TS-9 AU 220.60 189.00 16.60 10.20 - 61.65 60.95 94.95 95.05 107.20 103.20 12.90

AL 219.30 189.00 16.40 10.10 - 60.85 61.85 94.95 94.35 107.10 102.10 12.90

N 220.00 190.00 16.00 9.50 18.00 61.30 61.30 95.00 95.00 105.25 105.25 13.00

TS-10 AU 219.80 189.00 15.50 10.20 - 61.40 62.40 96.10 94.50 102.50 107.10 12.80

AL 220.80 189.00 15.50 10.10 - 62.00 61.20 95.80 94.10 102.50 108.20 12.80

N 220.00 190.00 11.00 7.00 18.00 50.50 50.50 95.00 95.00 106.50 106.50 13.00

TS-11 AU 217.90 190.00 11.30 7.50 - 50.15 50.25 95.75 94.65 104.10 106.30 12.50

AL 218.00 189.00 10.80 7.30 - 50.25 50.35 95.85 95.05 103.50 107.20 12.70

N 220.00 190.00 11.00 7.00 18.00 62.50 62.50 95.00 95.00 106.50 106.50 13.00

TS-12 AU 218.00 190.00 10.60 7.30 - 62.85 63.35 94.95 93.95 106.10 104.60 12.70

AL 219.10 189.00 10.80 7.40 - 62.95 63.25 95.15 94.35 106.80 104.90 12.90

N 260.00 190.00 12.50 7.50 24.00 76.30 76.30 95.00 95.00 126.25 126.25 13.00

TS-13 AU 260.10 189.00 12.60 8.00 - 77.05 76.95 95.25 94.65 124.90 127.20 12.90

AL 258.80 189.00 12.70 8.00 - 76.85 76.95 95.25 93.85 126.40 124.40 12.90

N 260.00 190.00 12.50 7.50 24.00 76.30 76.30 95.00 95.00 126.25 126.25 13.00

TS-14 AU 260.00 189.00 12.70 8.30 - 74.45 76.65 96.65 94.35 125.30 126.40 12.90

AL 258.30 189.00 12.70 8.10 - 76.45 76.85 95.25 94.35 125.20 125.00 12.90

N 300.00 190.00 14.00 8.50 27.00 92.80 92.80 95.00 95.00 145.75 145.75 13.00

TS-15 AU 299.60 188.00 13.80 8.00 - 92.25 92.65 93.65 94.65 146.30 145.30 12.70

AL 299.90 190.00 13.80 8.00 - 92.25 92.15 95.25 95.35 145.60 146.30 12.90

N 300.00 190.00 14.00 8.50 27.00 92.80 92.80 95.00 95.00 145.75 145.75 13.00

TS-16 AU 299.00 189.00 13.80 8.00 - 93.15 91.95 94.55 95.25 144.30 146.70 12.90

AL 298.90 190.00 13.10 8.30 - 93.00 92.40 96.10 94.20 145.10 145.50 13.00

N= Nominal measure AU= Actual measure-upper T-stub AL= Actual measure-lower T-stub

BOLTS GEOMETRICAL PROPERTIES

bolt type db dhbs dhbl thb dnbs dnbl tnb dwint dwest twb

(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)

M12 12 21.60 19.00 8.90 21.50 18.90 11.90 23.50 13.30 2.50

M20 20 36.40 31.60 13.10 34.30 30.00 16.00 36.50 21.50 2.95

- m16fa655a(varios)Caricato daManuel Otero
- Holztechnic-2013-It 01Caricato dadanut_doc
- catalogo_prodottiCaricato dasergomet
- Teoremi della plasticità (limite inferiore e superiore)Caricato daGiuseppe Gentile
- Crono 75 RG Motorhacke BJ 2011 AlpinaCaricato daCipri Rengle
- Manuale Proxxon Mf70-StaffeCaricato dadansas
- Sistemi Di Bloccaggio SNAPLOC_2007Caricato dajonathan.gelli5153
- Alfa 147 - Scambio sedute dei sedili per uniformarne il consumoCaricato daarnold7894
- MenegottoTecnicaCostruzioniCaricato daFederica Milillo
- Man Tecning REV1Caricato daAshnek
- Calettatori CONEX CompomacCaricato daRodrigo Jechéla Barrios
- Portico 1 SkyCiv ReportCaricato daEstructurasGM Gerencia
- Scienza delle CostruzioniCaricato daAngelo De Marco
- 16 - Deformabilita.pdfCaricato daMa Rco
- 3 Analisi PushoverCaricato daDaniele Dominic Collura
- MatrixStruct.pdfCaricato daStefania Rinaldi
- 02-rigidezzaCaricato dajohn
- Loxeal_55-03Caricato dastaedtlerp
- Indice TG MEF.docxCaricato dafranco
- 15 - Cam Clay ModificatoCaricato daMa Rco
- ConcentrazioneTensioniCaricato daGiulio Cesare
- DOMANDE D'ESAMECaricato daVeronica Serra
- Capitolo_13_grashof 13.3.3.2Caricato daAlessio Destro
- Lezione Murature PorCaricato daCarmine Cacchione
- Riccadonna AbstractCaricato daandreamercuri
- ___tan_tdsCaricato daRippleMart
- Libro Manufactura Parte 8Caricato daBlanca Velazquez
- Dovrei Piegare La Parte Anteriore Della Macchina Del Tatuaggio - Macchine Del Tatuaggio_ITCaricato dapippo07
- Capitolo 1Caricato dasalvatorgabriele
- caratteristiche-viti.pdfCaricato daCkaal74

- CMetalliche1-2003Caricato daVincenzo Piluso
- cta99.pdfCaricato daVincenzo Piluso
- CTA97-1.pdfCaricato daVincenzo Piluso
- SallustioCaricato daVincenzo Piluso
- 3NOV04-PilusoCaricato daVincenzo Piluso
- ANALISI SPERIMENTALE DI COLLEGAMENTI TRAVE-COLONNA EQUIPAGGIATI CON DISSIPATORI AD ATTRITO E PROGETTAZIONE DI EDIFICIO P~1.pdfCaricato daVincenzo Piluso

- Lab Costr Lezione Sap2000 00 SAP 2000 TUTORIALCaricato daAndreaAlbero
- propulsori termini Rumore Combustione DieselCaricato daFrank Whittle
- trottola_angelaCaricato dasalonico
- MotokultivatoriCaricato daionut
- Manual montaj schelaCaricato daRaluca Maria Doltu
- 354M0010 DOMITOP DGT C 24-30 E 12.2001 ITCaricato dafloriantudor
- Profili e Flussi AerodinamiciCaricato daLandini Carlo Alessandro