Sei sulla pagina 1di 25

Doc. ECCS-TC10-533

ECCS TECHNICAL COMMITTEE 10 « CONNECTIONS »

DESIGN SHEETS FOR THE DESIGN

OF SIMPLE STRUCTURAL JOINTS

WITH HEADER PLATE

by

J.P. JASPART and S. RENKIN

FIFTH DRAFT FOR PAST TWG10.3 THIRD DRAFT FOR PAST TWG10.1

March, 2003

LIST OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION

2 SIMPLE JOINTS WITH HEADER PLATE CONNECTIONS

2.1 Geometrical data

2.2 Notations

3 DESIGN SHEET

4 REMAINING POINTS OF DISCUSSION

4.1 Verification of the header plate in shear (gross and net section) and in bending

4.2 Header plates with more than two vertical bolt-rows

4.3 Requirements for sufficient ductility and rotation capacity

5 WORKED EXAMPLE

5.1 Geometrical and mechanical data

5.2 Joint shear resistance

5.3 Shear design check

6 REFERENCES

1. INTRODUCTION

The present paper is a updated version of the fourth draft presented at the ECCS TWG10.3 meeting in Coimbra. The first version (Doc. 174) has been presented and discussed at the ECCS TWG10.3 Innsbruck in March 2001, the second draft (Doc. 189) in Timisoara in October 2002 and the third one (Doc. 197) in Ljubljana in April 2002.

The four first draft were referring to the ENV Version of EC3, while the present one refer to the latest version of prEN1993 Part 1.8.

The scope of the document has been extended to header plates with four bolt columns instead of two in the previous versions.

All the discussion on weld design which took place in Coimbra are not yet included in the present document.

In order to facilitate the understanding of the proposed rules, an updated worked example is presented at the end of the paper.

2. SIMPLE JOINTS WITH HEADER PLATE CONNECTIONS

2.1 Geometrical data

In Figure 1, the geometry of the joint is given. For the supporting member, different configurations may be contemplated:

Connection to a column flange; Connection to a column web;

Connection to a column flange; Connection to a column web;
Connection to a column flange; Connection to a column web;

Connection to a beam web;

Connection to a beam web; … The design rules presented in Section 3 cover all these

The design rules presented in Section 3 cover all these possible configurations.

in Section 3 cover all these possible configurations. t p t f e 1 p 1
t p t f
t
p
t
f

e1

p1

p1

e1

e1 p1 p1 e1 mp e2 e2 p2 mp p2 e2
e1
p1
p1
e1
mp
e2
e2 p2 mp
p2 e2

Figure 1 Joint with header plate connection

a

w

A

A s

d

d o

f u,b

f y,b

n

n 1

n 2

e

e

2

p 1

p 2

m p

1

h p

t p

A

A

v

vnet

t

t w

f u

f y

V

Sd

Rd

F v.Rd

V

M0

M2

Throat thickness of the welds Correlation factor for the evaluation of the weld resistance

Nominal area of a bolt Resistant area of a bolt

Nominal diameter of a bolt shank Diameter of a bolt hole Ultimate strength of a bolt Yield strength of a bolt

Total number of bolts Number of horizontal rows Number of vertical rows Longitudinal end distance Transverse end distance Longitudinal bolt pitch Transversal bolt pitch Distance between the bolt columns and the toe of the weld connecting the header plate to the beam web (definition according to EC3 Annex J)

Height of the header plate Thickness of the header plate Gross shear area of the header plate Net shear area of the header plate

Thickness of the supporting plate (t cf and t cw for respectively a column flange and web, t bw for a beam web) Thickness of the supported beam web

Ultimate strength of a steel element (index p for header plate, wb for beam web, cf and cw for respectively column flange and web) Yield strength of a steel element (index p for header plate, wb for beam web, cf and cw for respectively column flange and web)

Shear force applied to the joint Shear resistance of the joint Design resistance in shear

Partial safety factor for steel sections

Partial safety factor

for net section at bolt holes for bolts for welds for plates in bearing

3. DESIGN SHEET: Resistance to shear forces

Failure mode Verification Bolts in shear V Rd 1 = 0,8 n F v,Rd f
Failure mode
Verification
Bolts in shear
V Rd 1 = 0,8 n F v,Rd
f
A
v
ub
F
v,Rd
M2
where the shear plane passes through the threaded portion of the
bolt :
A = A s (tensile stress area of the bolt)
- for 4.6, 5.6 and 8.8 bolt grades :
v = 0,6
- for 4.8, 5.8, 6.8 and 10.9 bolt grades :
v = 0,5
where the shear plane passes through the unthreaded portion of
the bolt :
A
(gross cross area of the bolt)
v = 0,6
according Table 3.4 in prEN 2002.
Header plate in bearing
V Rd 2 = n F b,Rd
k 1 f
d t
up
p
b
F
b,Rd
M2
e
p
1
f
1
1
;
;
ub
where b = min (
ou 1,0
)
3d
3d
4
f
up
0
0
e
k 1 = min (
2,8
2
1,7
;
2,5
)
d
0
(see Table 3.4 in prEN 2002)
Supporting member in
bearing
V Rd 3 = n F b,Rd
k 1 f
d t
up
b
F
b,Rd
M2
   

when the supporting element is a column flange :

 

t

= t cf

b = min (

 

p

1

1

f

ub

ou 1,0

)

 

3d

0

4

;

f

up

k

1 = min (

2,8

e

d

2

0

1,7

;

2,5

)

 

when the supporting element is a column web :

 

t

= t cw

b = min (

 

p

1

1

f

ub

ou 1,0

)

 

3d

0

4

;

f

up

 

1,4

p

2

1,7

;

2,5

 
 

k

1 = min (

)

 
   

d

0

 
 

when the supporting element is a beam web :

 

t

= t bw

b = min (

 

p

1

1

f

ub

ou 1,0

)

 

3d

0

4

;

f

up

k

1 = min (

2,8

 

e

d

2

0

1,7

;

2,5

)

 

The formula as it is written here applies to major axis beam-to-column joints (connection to a column flange), to single-sided minor axis joints and to single-sided beam-to-beam joint configurations. In the other cases, the bearing forces result from both the left and right connected members, with the added problem that the number of connecting bolts may differ for the left and right connections. The calculation procedure may cover such cases without any particular difficulty. It could just bring some more complexity in the final presentation of the design sheet.

Header plate in shear :

 

2 h

 

t

f

Gross section

V

Rd

4

p

p

yp

1 .27 3 M 0
1
.27
3
M
0
 

(2 sections)

 

Header plate in shear :

 

f

 

Net section

V

2

A

up

3 M 2
3
M 2
 

(2 sections)

 
 

Rd

5

v net

.

   
 

with

A v,net = t p ( h p – n 1 d 0 )

Header plate in shear :

 

Shear block

V Rd 6 = 2 F eff,1,Rd

(2 sections)

 
 

F

eff,1,Rd

f A up nt 1 A f nv yp 3 M2 M0
f
A
up
nt
1
A
f
nv
yp
3
M2
M0
with A nt = net area subjected to tension - for one bolt vertical row
with
A nt = net area subjected to tension
- for one bolt vertical row (n 2 = 2) :
d
A nt = t p ( e 2 –
2 0 )
- for two bolt vertical row (n 2 = 4) :
d
A nt = t p ( p 2 + e 2 – 3
0 )
2
A vt = net area subjected to shear
= t p ( h p – e 1 – (n 1 – 0,5) d 0 )
(see clause 3.10.2 in prEN 2002)
Header plate in bending
if hp 1,36 p 2 :
V Rd 7 =
else :
2
W
f
yp
el
V
Rd
7
(
p
t
)
2
w
M
0
2
2
t
h
p
p
with
W
el
6
Beam web in shear
f
ywb
V
t
h
Rd
8
w
p
3
M
0
(clause 5.4.6 in Eurocode 3)

Welds in shear

Shear resistance of the joint

Minimum weld size to be selected:

a

0,4 t

w

w

f

ywb 3 M2
ywb
3
M2
 

Steel

Ultimate strength f u

Correlation factor w

grade

EN 10025

S235

360

MPa

0,8

S275

430

MPa

0,85

S355

510

MPa

0,9

EN 10113

S235

390

MPa

0,8

S355

490

MPa

0,9

Other cases

   

1

(clause 6.6.5.3 and Annex M in Eurocode 3)

VRd

8

min

i 1

V

Rdi

f

uwb

M0

4. OUTCOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS IN TWG10.3 ON SPECIFIC ITEMS

4.1 Verification of the header plate in shear (gross and net section) and in bending

Only two figures are shown here to illustrate the problem (Figures 2 and 3) which has been extensively discussed in Innsbruck, Timisoara and Ljubljana.

extensively discussed in Innsbruck, Timisoara and Ljubljana. a – Shear (and possibly bending) in gr oss

a – Shear (and possibly bending) in gross and net sections

Anv Ant
Anv
Ant

b – Block shear

Figure 2 Critical sections in a header plate

M pl,red EC3 plastic resistance criterion M pl B M A el Elastic zone Plastic
M
pl,red
EC3 plastic resistance
criterion
M
pl
B
M
A
el
Elastic zone
Plastic zone
1
1
1
V pl
V Sd
V pl
V pl
V pl
2
1.5
1.27
Figure 3 Design criteria for header in shear and bending

Decision further to discussions in TWG10.3;

limitation of applied forces to M e.RD and (1/1.27)V pl , respectively for moment and shear, is kept in the design sheet. However a criterion should be given which defines a range of application where a simple shear check of the plate (applied force limited to V pl ) could be only performed.

the check of the header plate based on a

Proposal;

integrated in the design sheet for shear resistance (see 3.1) and applied in the worked example (see 5.). It should be discussed by TWG10.3 in the Coimbra meeting.

in Annex A to the present document, a proposal is made; the latter has been

4.2 Header plates with more than two vertical bolt-rows

4.2 Header plates with more than two vertical bolt-rows V S d /2 V S d
4.2 Header plates with more than two vertical bolt-rows V S d /2 V S d

V Sd /2

plates with more than two vertical bolt-rows V S d /2 V S d /2 Figure

V Sd /2

Figure 4 Header plate with two vertical bolt-rows

In such situations, it is assumed that the shear force V Sd applied to the joint distributes into two forces V Sd /2 located at the centre of gravity of the two bolt-groups connecting the header plate to the supporting element (see Figure 4).

This however raises some questions:

Can the shear resistance of the bolts still be checked by simply assuming that each individual bolt is subjected to a shear force equal to V Sd /n, where n designates the total number of bolts?

Decision further to discussions in TWG10.3: yes, it can.

Can the resistance of the header plate still be carried out as for header plates with two vertical bolt-rows (verifications in shear - gross and net sections - and bending)?

Decision further to discussions in TWG10.3: yes, it can. The lever arm used for the verification of the header plate in bending should however be taken as the distance between the critical section in bending and the centre of gravity of the bolt-group.

4.3 Requirements for sufficient ductility and rotation capacity

Generals

A simple joint is nothing else than an idealisation of the reality. Joints like those studied in the

present document undergo a significant internal rotation but transfer anyway a certain bending moment.

This means that the assumption that the beam is simply connected to the supporting element is potentially unsafe as the joint is subjected to a bending moment in addition to the shear force which is considered in the design procedure.

Two different attitudes may be adopted as far as this aspect is concerned:

The joint is considered as semi-rigid. Its rotational stiffness, design bending resistance and shear resistance have to be evaluated and the actual properties of the joint have to be explicitly taken into consideration in the frame and joint design and analysis process. This approach is the more scientifically correct one, but no doubt that few engineers will follow

it in their daily practice, and it is well understandable!

The joint is assumed to be perfectly pinned. Only its design shear resistance has to be evaluated. It has been demonstrated that such an approach is safe as far as the joint possesses a

sufficient rotation capacity. In other words, the joint has to be able to rotate sufficiently during the life of the structure (and therefore, in reality, to develop a certain bending moment) without being affected by a lack of ductility (mainly through the brittle failure of

a weld or of a bolt).

As a result, requirements for sufficient ductility and rotation capacity have to be established to ensure an appropriate response of the simple joints.

Design requirements for sufficient rotation capacity

The risk of brittle failure in the bolts or in the welds is reduced if the bending moment developing in the joint remains low.

In order to achieve this goal in the particular case of simple joints with header plates, the contact between the lower beam flange and the supporting member has to be strictly avoided (Figure 5). As a matter of fact, if such a contact takes place, a compression force develops at the contact place; it is equilibrated by tension forces in the bolts and a significant bending moment develops. The level of rotation at which the contact occurs is obviously dependent on the geometrical characteristics of the beam and of the header plate, but also on the actual deformations of the joint constituents.

In order to derive a simple criterion that the user could apply, before any calculation, to check

whether the risk of contact may be disregarded, the following rough assumptions are made (see Figure 5):

- the supporting element remains undeformed;

- the centre of rotation of the beam is located at the lower extremity of the header plate.

On the basis of such assumptions, a safe estimation (i.e. a lower bound) of the so-called "available rotation of the joint" available may be easily derived:

available

t

p

h

e

h p h e
h
p
h
e

t p

may be easily derived: available t p h e h p h e t p h
may be easily derived: available t p h e h p h e t p h
may be easily derived: available t p h e h p h e t p h
may be easily derived: available t p h e h p h e t p h

h

(1)

Figure 5 Geometrical characteristics of the joint and illustration of the contact between the beam and the supporting element

This available rotation has to be greater than the "required rotation capacity" which varies according to the structural system and loading.

For the usual case of a beam (length L and inertia I) simply supported at its extremities and subjected to an uniformly distributed load (factored load p at ULS), the required rotation capacity writes:

required

pL

3

24 EI

(2)

By expressing that available > required , a simple criterion ensuring a sufficient joint rotation capacity may be derived. It writes:

3

t pL

h

e

24

EI

(3)

Similar criteria may be derived for other load cases.

Design requirements for sufficient joint ductility

The joint deformation assumed in Figure 5 is far from being a realistic one. In reality, as already said, bending moments develop in the joint and, as a result, the bolts and the welds are subjected to tension forces in addition to shear forces. The premature failure of these elements which exhibit a brittle failure and which are more heavily loaded in reality than in the calculation model has therefore to be strictly avoided. Simple related criteria should also be proposed.

Criterion to avoid premature bolt failure because of tension forces

In [11], a criterion is given which allows to verify that, under the action of the tension forces, the plate will exhibit a significant deformation before the bolt fail in tension. According this criterion, at least one of the two following inequalities has to satisfied:

d f yp 1,9 t f ub p f ysu d 1,9 f ub t
d
f yp
1,9
t
f ub
p
f ysu
d 1,9
f ub
t su

where:

d :

:

:

f yp

f ysu

f

ub

:

t

p

:

t

su

:

nominal diameter of the bolt;

design yield strength of the end plate material;

design yield strength of the column flange;

ultimate tensile strength of the bolt material;

thickness of the end plate or flange cleat leg;

thickness of the column flange.

(4.a)

(4.b)

Obviously, such a criterion does not ensure that the whole shear capacity of the bolt may be considered when evaluating the shear resistance of the joint. And that is why a more restrictive criterion is here selected. This one, which is directly extracted from the revised Annex J of Eurocode 3, is of the same nature than the previous one (Formulae 4) but ensures that Mode 1 failure governs the behaviour of the plate (see [3]); its background is given in [12].

According to this criterion, at least one of the two following inequalities has to satisfied:

f yp d 2,8 t p f ub f ysu d 2,8 t su f
f yp
d 2,8
t p
f ub
f ysu
d 2,8
t su
f ub

(5.a)

(5.b)

Unfortunately, when this requirement is satisfied, it may be demonstrated :

that the tension force in the bolts amount 0.5B t.Rd , i.e. 50% of the tension resistance of

the bolts; that, for such a tension force, the shear resistance only amounts 64% of the full shear resistance of the bolts according to the EC3 resistance formula for bolts in shear and tension.

This looks at first side to be quite disappointing as the user tries to maximise the shear resistance of the joint. Obviously, it could be argued that only the bolt located in the upper half of the header plane are concerned by such a reduction, as the others are located in a compression zone, and are therefore not subjected to tension forces. Anyway, a reduction of the resistance of the joints when the "bolts in shear" is the governing failure mode is not welcome. In TWG10.3, it is agreed to take this reduction into consideration by multiplying the total resistance of the bolts in shear by a factor 0,8 (i.e. a reduction factor of 0,64 for half of the bolts located in the upper half of the header plate – 0,5.[1 + 0,64] 0,8).

Criterion to avoid premature weld failure because of tension forces

Decision further to discussions in TWG10.3: clear provisions should be given to ensure no brittle failure in the welds actually subjected to shear and bending stresses. Hereunder such provisions are proposed for discussion in Coimbra.

An easy way to avoid the brittle failure of the web is to design the latter so that the failure occurs by yielding in the beam web and not in the weld. A full-strength weld is therefore recommended. According to clause 6.6.5.3 and Annex M in Eurocode 3, the following rule may be applied to estimate the weld resistance per unit length (see Annex B):

V

Rd Annex M

,

=

2 a

f uwb

3 w M2
3
w
M2

( 2 welds).

(6)

 

Steel

Ultimate strength f u

Correlation factor w

grade

EN 10025

S235

360

MPa

0,8

S275

430

MPa

0,85

S355

510

MPa

0,9

EN 10113

S235

390

MPa

0,8

S355

490

MPa

0,9

Other cases

   

1

At first sight, the full strength condition requires that V Rd, Annex M is higher than:

V

Rd web

,

t

w

f

ywb

M

0

(7)

Then the minimum value of the throat thickness to get full strength welds may be derived as follows:

(8)

f ywb 3 M2 w f uwb M0
f
ywb
3
M2
w
f
uwb
M0

a

0,5 t

w

Values of a min derived by means of Equation (8) are listed in Table 1 for different steel grades.

Steel grade (EN 10025)

a min ( M2 =1,25; M0 =1,1)

S235

0,514 t w 0,535 t w 0,617 t w

S275

S355

Table 1 Minimum weld size according EC3 Annex M

But a less conservative approach may be followed by recognising, as in [14], that: “In Eurocode 3 (Version of April 1990), it is stated that the requirement for full strength will be satisfied if the design of the weld is not less than 80% of the design resistance of the weakest of connected parts”.

By applying this principle to the present situation, Equation (8) becomes :

a

0,5 t

w

f ywb 0,8 3 M2 w f uwb M0
f
ywb
0,8
3
M2
w
f
uwb
M0

(8)

and a significantly lower weld size is to be recommended (see Table 2).

Steel grade (EN 10025)

a min ( Mw =1,25; M0 =1,1)

S235

0,411 t w 0,428 t w 0,493 t w

S275

S355

Table 2 Minimum weld size according EC3 Annex M

This last approach is suggested in the present design recommendations.

5. WORKED EXAMPLE 5.1 Geometrical and mechanical data

M20 IPE300
M20
IPE300

HEA200

Main joint data

e 1 p 1 p 1 e 1 e 2 p 2 e 2
e
1
p
1
p
1
e
1
e 2
p 2
e 2

Configuration Column Beam Type of connection Header plate

Beam to column flange HEA 200 S 235 IPE 300 S 235 Header plate connection 230x200x10, S 235

Detailed characteristics

Column HEA 200, S235

Depth Thickness of the web Width Thickness of the flange Root radius Area Inertia

Yield strength Ultimate strength

Beam IPE 300, S235

Depth Thickness of the web Width Thickness of the flange Root radius Area Inertia

h

t w

b f

t f

r

A

I

f y

f u

h

t w

b f

t f

r

A

I

= 190.00

mm

=

6.50

mm

= 200.00

mm

=

10.00

mm

=

18.00

mm

=

53.83

cm²

= 3692.16

cm 4

= 235.00

N/mm²

= 360.00

N/mm²

= 300.00

mm

=

7.10

mm

= 150.00

mm

=

10.70

mm

=

15.00

mm

=

53.81

cm²

= 8356.11

cm 4

Yield strength Ultimate strength

Header plate 230x200x10, S 235

Vertical gap

Depth

Width

Thickness

Direction of load transfer (1)

Number of bolts rows Edge to first bolt row distance Pitch between bolt row 1 and 2 Pitch between bolt row 2 and 3 last bolt row to edge distance

f y

f u

g

h

b

t p

v

p

p

= 235.00

= 360.00

=

= 230.00

= 200.00

=

35.00

10.00

=

e 11 =

p

p

e 1n =

n

1

1[1]

1[2]

3

45.00

=

=

45.00

N/mm²

N/mm²

mm

mm

mm

mm

mm

70.00mm

70.00mm

mm

Direction perpendicular to Load transfer (2)

Number of bolts rows Edge to first bolt row distance Pitch between bolt row 1 and 2 last bolt row to edge distance

Yield strength Ultimate strength

Bolts M20, 8.8

Resistant area Diameter of the shank Diameter of the holes Yield strength Ultimate strength

Welds

Throat thickness of the weld Length of the weld

n 2 =

e 21 = p 2[1] e 2n =

f ypl = f upl =

A sb = d b d 0b = f yb = f ub =

=

2

50.00

=

50.00

235.00

360.00

245.00

20.00

22.00

640.00

800.00

a w =

l w

4.00

= 230.00

mm

100.00

mm

N/mm²

N/mm²

mm²

mm

mm

N/mm²

N/mm²

mm

mm

mm

Safety factors

M0

M1

M2

=

1.10

=

1.10

=

1.25

Applied shear force

V Sd = 200 kN

5.2 Joint shear resistance

Bolts in shear

V Rd1 = 0,8 n F v,Rd = 451.58 kN

n = 6

F v,Rd = v A f ub / M2 = 94.08 kN

Header plate in bearing

v

A = A s = 245.00 mm²

f ub

= 0.6

= 800.00 N/mm²

V Rd2 = n F b,Rd = 589.09 kN

n

= 6

F b,Rd = k 1 b d t p f up / M2 = 98.18 kN

b

1

2

3

k 1

d

t p

f ub

f up

Column flange in bearing

= min( 1 , 2 , 3 , 1 ) = 0.68

= e 1 / 3d 0 = 0.68

= p 1 / 3d 0 - 1/4 = 0.81

= f ub / f up = 2.22

= min(2.8 e 2 / d 0 – 1.7 ; 2.5)

= min(4.66 ; 2.5) = 2.5

= 20.00 mm

= 10.00 mm = 800.00 N/mm² = 360.00 N/mm²

V Rd3 = n F b,Rd = 700.36 kN

n = 6

F b,Rd = k 1 b d t cf f ucf / M2 = 116.73 kN

1

2

k 1

d

= min( 1 , 2 , 1) = 0.81

= p 1 / 3d 0 - 1/4 = 0.81

= f ub / f ucf = 2.22

= min(2.8 e 2 / d 0 – 1.7 ; 2.5)

= min(4.66 ; 2.5) = 2.5

= 20.00 mm

t cf

f ub

f ucf

= 10.00 mm = 800.00 N/mm² = 360.00 N/mm²

Gross section of the header plate in shear

V Rd4 = 2 F v,Rd = 446.75 kN

F v,Rd = A v f yp / (1.27

= 446.75 kN F v , R d = A v f y p / (1.27

3 M0 ) = 223.38 kN

A v = h p t p = 23.00 cm² f yp = 235.00 N/mm²

Net section of the header plate in shear

V Rd5 = 2 F v,Rd = 545.39 kN

F v,Rd = A v,net f up / (

d = 545.39 kN F v,Rd = A v,net f up / ( 3 M2 )

3 M2 ) = 272.69 kN

A v,net = ( h p - n 1 d 0 )t p = 16.40 cm²

h p = 230.00 mm

n 1

d 0 = 22.00 mm

t p

= 6

= 10.00 mm

f up = 360.00 N/mm²

Shear block of the header plate

V Rd6 = 2 F eff,1,Rd = 545.33 kN

F eff,1,Rd = f up A nt / M2 + f yp A nv / (

u p A n t / M 2 + f y p A n v /

3 M0 ) = 272.66 kN

A

A

nt

nv

f yp

f up

= t p ( e 2 - d 0 /2 ) = 390.00 mm²

t p

e 2 = 50.00 mm

d 0 = 22.00 mm

= t p ( h p – e 1 – ( n 1 – 0.5 ) d 0 ) = 1300.00 mm²

n 1

h p = 230.00 mm e 1 = 45.00 mm = 235.00 N/mm² = 360.00 N/mm²

= 10.00 mm

= 3

Header plate in bending

V Rd7 =

Beam web in shear

h p = 230.00 mm 1,364 p 2 = 136.40 mm

V Rd8 = F v,Rd = 201.42 kN

F v.Rd = A v f ywb / (

= 201.42 kN F v . R d = A v f y w b /

3 M0 ) = 201.42 kN

A v = h p t w = 16.33 cm²

Welds in shear

a min =

f ywb = 235.00 N/mm² f ywb 0,4 t 3 M2 w w f uwb
f ywb = 235.00 N/mm²
f
ywb
0,4 t
3
M2
w
w
f
uwb
M0
= 7.1 mm
t w

f ywb = 235.00 N/mm²

f uwb = 360.00 N/mm²

w

= 0.80

= 2,92 mm

as a = 4.00 mm, then a > a min

h p > 1,364 p 2

Joint shear resistance

Shear resistance of the joint V Rd = 201.42 kN

Failure Mode:

Beam web in shear

5.3 Design check

Applied shear force:

Shear resistance:

V

V Rd

Sd

= 200 kN

= 201.42 kN

Design O.K.

6. REFERENCES

[1]

GUILLAUME Marie-Laure Development of an European procedure for the design of simple joints (in French), Diploma work, University of Liège / CUST Clermont-Ferrand, July 2000.

[2]

EUROCODE 3 ENV : Design of steel structures. Part 1-1: General rules and rules for buildings, ENV 1993-1-1 : 1992 E.

[3]

Revised Annex J : Joints in building frames 1993-1-1 : 1992/A2, October 1998.

of Eurocode 3, CEN Bruxelles, ENV

[4]

BS 5950 : « British Standard: Structural use of steelwork in building », Part 1. Code of practice for design in simple and continuous construction: hot rolled section.

[5]

BCSA - SCI : Joints in Simple Construction, volume 1 : Design Methods, Second Edition, 1993.

[6]

BCSA - SCI : Joints in Simple Construction, volume 2 : Practical Applications, Dec

1992.

[7]

NEN 6770 :

Nederlands Nonnalisatie Instituut, NEN 6770 Staalconstructies TGB

1990, basiseisen.

[8]

Report SG/TC-1OA : Verbindingen : Aanbevelingen voor normaalkrachtverbindingen en dwarskrachtverbindingen, avril 1998.

[9]

G. Sedlacek, K. Weynand, S.Oerder : « Typisierte Anschlüsse im Stahlhochbau », DSTV, Stahlhbau-Verglagsges, Düsseldorf, 2000.

[10]

French NAD for EUROCODE 3: Calcul des structures en acier. Partie 1-1: Règles générales et Règles pour les Bâtiments, P 22-311-0, ENV 1993-1-1, Eyrolles 1996.

[11]

ECSC Research Contracts 7210-SA/212 and 320: "Frame Design including Joint Behaviour", 1993-1996, Final draft (forthcoming ECCS publication from TC10).

[12]

Jaspart, J.P.: "Recent advances in the field of steel joints. Column bases and further configurations for beam-to-column joints and beam splices", Professorship Thesis, Department MSM, University of Liège, 1997.

[13]

Jaspart, J.P.: "Etude de la semi-rigidité des assemblages poutre-colonne et de son influence sur la résistance et la stabilité des ossatures en acier", Ph. D.Thesis, Department MSM, University of Liège, 1991.

[14]

Gresnigt, A.M. : “Calculation of fillet welds in Eurocode 3”, Rivista Italiana della Saldatura, Anno XLII, n° 6, November-december 1990.