See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/273638999
Research on analysis and design philosophy of the connections in steel
structures
Conference Paper · November 2013
CITATION READS
1 12,193
1 author:
Ioana Cristina Tomăscu
Universitatea Tehnica Cluj-Napoca
17 PUBLICATIONS 18 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
All content following this page was uploaded by Ioana Cristina Tomăscu on 17 March 2015.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.
C60 International Conference
”Tradition and Innovation - 60 Years of Constructions in Transilvania”
Research on analysis and design philosophy of the connections in steel
structures
Ioana C. Muresan1
1
Faculty of Civil Engineering, Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Constantin Daicoviciu Street, Cluj-Napoca, Romania,
[email protected]Summary: Connections are a key part of a steel structure and carrying them out properly is critical to achieve a safe
and economical structure. Thus, establishing a solution requires knowledge of structural mechanics, ability to trace the
flow of load in the beam and through the connection, experience and rational analysis of the design engineer. This
paper presents a very brief history of connections, then types of connections usually used in design practice are
described: angle connections, end plate connections and welded connections. In conventional analysis and design of
steel framed structures joints are usually carried out under the assumption that they are either ideally pinned or fully
rigid. However, experimental research shows that most connections used in current practice are semi-rigid type and
their behaviour lies between these two idealized situations. Structural analysis models allow the joint representation
with semi-rigid behaviour (ASRO, 2006). Eurocode 3 establishes three new categories of joints, according with both
stiffness and strength criteria, required in structural modeling (ASRO, 2006; CEMSIG, 2010) namely: continuous,
semi-continuous and simple joints. There are also presented the possibilities of modeling joints depending on the
method of analysis.
Keywords: connections; analysis; semi-rigidity; joints; steel structures.
1. Introduction
In recent years, there is a tendency to abandon the idealized approximations and to address a reflection of the real
structural behaviour. The question is of an advanced nonlinear analysis (Chiorean, 2009), in which the significant
effects that undertake the behaviour of the structure have to be captured properly. Behaviour of steel structures can be
controlled by the embodiment of the connections between their elements: beams, columns, bracings. Connections are a
key part of a steel structure and carrying them out properly is decisive to achieve a safe and economical structure. There
are many possible connection configurations, but only very few have been tested experimentally. Even among those
who were tested, changes in load directions, geometry, material types or supports, lead to the emergence of new
configurations to those subject to experimental tests. Thus, establishing a solution requires knowledge of structural
mechanics, ability to trace the flow of load in the beam and through the connection, experience and rational analysis of
the design engineer. Economic considerations play a role, too. If you are allowed to use bolts or welding, fabrication or
erection price plays an important role in choosing the type of connection.
In conventional analysis and design of steel framed structures, joints are usually carried out under the assumption that
they are either ideally pinned or fully rigid. The rigid joint assumes that relative rotation of connected elements is not
allowed, and the bending moment from the end of the beam is entirely transmitted to the column. The pinned joint
allows free rotation of the connected elements and the bending moment from the end of the beam is always zero.
However, experimental research shows that most connections used in current practice are semi-rigid type and their
behaviour lies between these two idealized situations.
In studying the connection behaviour, transmission capacity of efforts from the beam to the column is essential,
considering the external loadings of the structure and the solution chosen to achieve the connection. Thus, nodes can
transmit axial load, shear and / or bending moment, or only one of these requests, or a combination thereof, either all at
once, in which case it is ensured almost perfect continuity between elements. The effect of axial force and shear force is
negligible since their deformations are small compared with the rotational deformation of connections.
2. A Brief History of Connections
Structural steel frames have been used since the 20th century, when steel effectively replaced cast iron and wrought iron
as a construction material. Before the 1920s, connections and steel frame elements were constructed as very complex
built-up members with riveted plates. The entire frame structure was then encased in concrete for fire protection. Very
few steel structures were designed for seismic loading, because wind load was considered predominant before 1930,
and for some structures even this request was not considered. During this period, in 1928, appeared the first manual
AISC (American Institute of Steel Construction) which included specifications for steel frame structures. Standard hot
rolled shapes appeared after 1920. These were connected with riveted angles, became standard connections and were
used until 1960. Connection stiffness and strength was enhanced by non-structural masonry walls and concrete for fire
protection. In structural design of these structures the seismic forces were considered, but these forces were simplified
and often much smaller than those currently used. After 1960 rivets were replaced with high-strength bolts, but
C60 International Conference
”Tradition and Innovation - 60 Years of Constructions in Transilvania”
geometry and connection details remained the same. Embedding in concrete elements for fire protection was replaced
with lighter materials. Meanwhile seismic design procedures have evolved toward similar methods to those used in
modern seismic design. It was recognized that seismic forces can be extremely large and the structures could be
calculated for seismic design forces much smaller if they would consider inelastic capacity of the building and its
connections. This has led to increased interest in the inelastic behaviour of structures (FEMA, 2000).
During the 1960s welding became more economical and practical and welding procedures were developed. Frame
structures with welded-flange-welded-web connections were built and later these were replaced with welded-flange-
bolted-web connections, due to numerous researches at the time and due to the economy of these connections over the
welded web connections. This type of connection became the standard connection used for seismic design (FEMA,
2000).
During 1970-1994, many steel structures have been built in the USA using welded beam-column joints. Indeed, this
type of connection provides economical execution and it was believed that possess a high capacity of deformability
under bending moment action. But the Northridge earthquake of 17 January 1994 damaged these connections and
cracks of various sizes appeared in welds (James, 1997; Mahin, 1997). There was no collapse of structures with welded
beam-column connections, but came out the brittle nature of these joints. In the next period new design codes were
required for providing truly ductile zones at the end beams of these structures.
These new design specifications permit beam-column connection deflection (rotation), without exceeding their load-
bearing capacity. A feasible solution of this requirement is the semi-rigid (flexible) beam-column connection. This
concept of semi-rigid connection was considered an erection imperfection (Alexa and Moldovan, 2005), in the early
20th century and later modern design codes (ASRO, 2006), classified it as recommended connection in seismic regions.
The experimental results and researches (Alexa and Moldovan, 2005), showed that semi-rigid beam-column connection
is obtained by bolting, not welding (Mathe, 2009). As a natural consequence of the brittle behaviour of welded beam-
column connections during the 1994 Northridge earthquake, the bolted connections have been gaining poles (Mahin,
1997).
3. Types of connections
In literature there are many classifications of connections, according to various criteria and usually the same categories
of connections are discussed (AISC-LRFD, 1994; Chen and Toma, 1994; ASRO, 2006). Steel structures are made
usually of I or H shapes. In connecting these elements are usually used a few technical solutions: angle connections, end
plate connections and welded connections.
3.1 Angle connections
Angle connections are very versatile because you can get a variety of configurations of such connections. Thus, by
changing the size of angles, their length or thickness, the size of bolts or welds, holes or the type of material used, the
desired connection performance is obtained. Angle connections are used mainly in the beam to column joints. There are
many types of angle connections: single web angle, double web angle, flange angle, combined flange and web angles,
top and seat angles, Figure 1, Figure 2 and Figure 3, (Chen and Toma, 1994; AISC, 2002; Chen et al. 2006; Balc, 2012).
Single web angle connection is the most flexible combination of simple connections. It is suited to resist gravity shear
loads and has a reduced ability to transmit the bending moment, so it is classified as a pinned connection (Mazzolani
and Piluso, 1996; AISC, 2002). It has a small resistance to torsion, so it is not suitable for this action; it is not suitable
also for any application where axial tension due to the significant flexibility of this connection exists. This type of
connection is economical in terms of manufacture and has the advantage of a simple and safe erection.
Double web angle connection is suitable for transferring shear resulted from gravity loads and it also has a favourable
response to torsion as long as the connection size is at least half of the T distance (AISC, 1994; AISC, 2002). The
stiffness and the moment resistance of this connection are double compared with the simple angle connection.
Flange angle connection is achieved by welding or bolting the angles of the beam flange and the column flange. The
problem of bolts sliding in the holes is eliminated by choosing welded angles and the connection stiffness is increased
as against bolting solution.
Figure 1: Single and double web angle connections (Balc, 2012)
C60 International Conference
”Tradition and Innovation - 60 Years of Constructions in Transilvania”
Figure 2: Flange bolted and welded angle connections (Balc, 2012)
Figure 3: Combined flange and web bolted and welded angle connections (Balc, 2012)
3.2 End plate connections
The end plate connection consists of a steel plate welded to the end of the beam, along both the flanges and web, and
bolted to the column flange using preloaded high strength bolts. This type of connection can be flush end plate
connection, Figure 4 and Figure 6a, with plate length equal to the height of the beam, or extended end plate connection,
Figure 5, whose length exceeds the height of the beam, by extension on the tension side only, Figure 6b, when static
loads are applied, or both on the tension and compression sides, Figure 6c, when alternating cyclic load is applied (Chen
and Toma, 1994; Balc, 2012). Both types of connections may have additional stiffeners to reduce the flexibility of the
end plate and to change the characteristics of strength and stiffness. Also, the stiffeners may occur on the column flange
to prevent its flexural deformation.
Figure 4: Flush end plate connections (AISC, 2002)
Figure 5: Extended end plate connections (AISC, 2002)
C60 International Conference
”Tradition and Innovation - 60 Years of Constructions in Transilvania”
Figure 6: End plate connections (Chen and Toma, 1994)
3.3 Welded connections
Welding is used mainly in steel workshops, where there is specialised equipment and the supervision and control of the
procedure can be carried out easily, ensuring the obtaining of satisfactory weld quality. Welding versatility gives the
design engineer more freedom than any other means of connection. On the other hand, a welded connection can be
easily harmed by mistakes in design (choice of connection type, type of welding, the weld size or the required
resistance), execution errors (difficult access, one side welding versus two sides welding, the outer layer of weld, the
edge preparation before welding) or erection.
Connecting steel elements by welding, it results a joint with a high degree of strength and rigidity. A rigid connection
can be achieved if the weld is properly carried out, the only flexible element remained being the web panel of the
column. Fasteners can be used, depending on the nature of the loading. In figure below there are illustrated the main
configurations of welded connections, with or without stiffeners, Figure 7 (ASRO, 2006; Balc, 2012).
As a consequence of high stiffness of these connections the structure failure mode is sudden, without any warning, by
brittle fracture. To eliminate this inconvenience, there are a few technical solutions (Mazzolani and Piluso, 1996;
CEMSIG, 2010; Balc, 2012) by encouraging formation of plastic hinges in the beam and not in connection.
Figure 7: Welded connections (Balc, 2012)
4. Modeling of Connection (according to SR EN 1993-1-8)
4.1 Connection Behaviour
In traditional designing practice of steel framework structures, beam-column connections are considered as either fully
rigid or ideally pinned, but experimental investigations have shown that they have an intermediate behaviour between
the two extreme cases, that is a semi-rigid behaviour.
The figure below shows the relative rotation between the beam and the column, Φ c, when a bending moment, M, is
applied on the beam-to-column connection, Figure 8 (Chen, 2000; Balc, 2012). Hence, the connection behaviour is
represented by the M- Φc relation, which is the most important input data for analysis and design of semi-rigid steel
framed structures.
The schematic moment-rotation behaviour of most commonly used semi-rigid connections is shown in the figure below,
Figure 9 (Chen, 2000; Balc, 2012).
It may be observed that all moment-rotation curves are nonlinear and the T-stub connection is closest to a rigid
connection, while the web angle type represents a very flexible connection.
C60 International Conference
”Tradition and Innovation - 60 Years of Constructions in Transilvania”
Figure 8: Rotational deformation of a connection (Chen, 2000; Balc, 2012)
Figure 9: Moment rotation curves (Chen, 2000; Balc, 2012)
4.2 Methods of analysis
The European code classifies connections of steel structures according to the stiffness and strength criteria (ASRO,
2006; CEMSIG, 2012).
Eurocode 3 establishes three new categories of joints, according with both stiffness and strength criteria, required in
structural modelling (ASRO, 2006; CEMSIG, 2012), namely: continuous, semi-continuous and simple joints, Table 1.
Table 1. Connections modelling types, (CEMSIG, 2010)
Strength
Stiffness
Total Strength Partial Strength Nominally Pinned
Rigid Continuous Semi-Continuous -
Semi-Rigid Semi-Continuous Semi-Continuous -
Nominally Pinned - -
Continuous joint concept is suitable only for total strength and rigid connections, whose behaviour does not affect the
structural analysis. For nominally pinned connections in terms of both classification criteria (strength and stiffness)
simple joint concept is suitable. The simple joint is not capable to transmit bending moment and shear force can only
assume. Semi-continuous joint is suitable for the rest of combinations: rigid/partial strength, semi-rigid/total strength
and semi-rigid/partial strength and its behaviour influences the analysis of the structure through its rigidity (CEMSIG,
Table 2. Joints modelling and types of analyses, (CEMSIG, 2010)
Analysis type
Connection modeling
Elastic-Perfect Plastic or
type Elastic Analysis Rigid-Plastic Analysis
Elasto-Plastic
Continuous Rigid Total Strength Rigid / Total Strength
Rigid/Partial Strength
Semi-Continuous Semi-Rigid Partial Strength Semi-rigid/Total Strenght
Semi-Rigid/Partial Strength
Simple Nominally Pinned Nominally Pinned Nominally Pinned
2010).
C60 International Conference
”Tradition and Innovation - 60 Years of Constructions in Transilvania”
In the table above, Table 2, there are possibilities of joints modelling tabulated according to the method of analysis
performed (CEMSIG, 2010).
Structural analysis models allow semi-rigid connection representation by a rotational spring positioned between the
ends of the connected members, for example between the end of the beam and column (ASRO, 2006; CEMSIG, 2010).
In a linear-elastic analysis for connection modelling, the characteristic curve of moment-rotation response is associated
to this spring. If the rotational stiffness of the connection is zero, the joint is pinned, if the rotational stiffness is infinite,
the joint is rigid, and if rotational stiffness is between the two extreme cases the joint is semi-rigid (CEMSIG, 2012).
Methods of connections analysis are elastic, rigid-plastic and elastic-plastic analysis (ASRO, 2006; CEMSIG, 2012).
Elastic analysis requires connections to be classified only according to their stiffness because their strength is not
affected since the components and web panel yielding are not reached. Rotational stiffness, Sj, corresponding to the
bending moment from elastic analysis, Mj,Ed, is used to calculate the semi-rigid connections. If Mj, Ed is less than or
equal to 2/3 Mj,Rd, and Mj,Rd is the bending moment resistance, in the analysis is considered the entire value of the
connection stiffness, Sj,ini, otherwise a stiffness degradation occurs and it is taken into account through a stiffness
coefficient, η, which is given in design codes (ASRO, 2006; CEMSIG, 2012).
Rigid-plastic analysis requires connections to be classified only according to their strength and their stiffness is
considered infinite. To calculate the bending moment resistance, Mj,Rd, European standard gives formulas and provides
to ensure the required ductility for carrying the resulting rotations from structural analysis (ASRO, 2006; CEMSIG,
2012).
If an elastic-plastic analysis is performed, it is necessary to classify connections according to stiffness criteria (to define
the elastic characteristics) and strength criteria (to define the order of plastic hinges occurrence), (ASRO, 2006;
CEMSIG, 2012). In determining the internal forces of the structural elements, the full moment-rotation curve should be
used and stiffness coefficients, η, remain the same as in the elastic analysis.
5. Conclusions
Real behaviour of the structure as a whole depends on the characteristics and behaviour of connections. It was
demonstrated that all connections have a certain amount of rotation and develop a bending moment, well a semi-rigid
behaviour. The semi-rigid joints contribute to the formulation and execution of steel structures capable of meeting the
performance criteria imposed by seismic design standards. Global seismic performance of steel frame structures is
strongly influenced by the mechanical properties of beam-column connections, therefore semi-rigidity should be
considered and treated as an effective way to achieve this performance (Mazzolani and Piluso, 1996; Alexa and
Moldovan, 2005).
6. References
AISC, Design Guide 21, Welded Connections-APrimer for Engineers. 2006
AISC, Detailing for Steel Construction. 2nd ed. 2002.
AISC, Load and Resistance Factor Design. Manual of Steel Construction. 2nd ed, 1994.
AISC, Steel Design Guide Series 16, Flush and Extended Multiple-Row Moment End-Plate Connections. 2002.
Alexa P, Moldovan C, Structuri Metalice Alcatuite din Bare cu Conexiuni Elastice. Cluj-Napoca: Risoprint, 2005.
ASRO, SR EN 1993-1-8:2006, Eurocod 3: Proiectarea structurilor de otel. Partea 1-8: Proiectarea imbinarilor. Bucuresti:
Asociatia de standardizare din Romania.
Balc RM., Structuri Metalice in Cadre. Calculul si Alcatuirea Nodurilor, Teza de Doctorat, Universitatea Tehnica din Cluj-Napoca,
Facultatea de Constructii, Cluj-Napoca, 2012
CEMSIG, Calculul si Proiectarea Imbinarilor Structurale din Otel in Conformitate cu SR-EN 1993-1-8. Recomandari, Comentarii
siexemple de aplicare. Redactarea I. Timisoara, August 2010. Centrul de Cercetari pentru Mecanica Materialelor si Siguranta
Structurilor.
Chen WF., Goto Y., Liew JIR., Stability Design of Semi-Rigid Frames. John Wiley & Sons, 1996.
Chen WF., Practical Analysis for Semi-Rigid Frame Design. World Scientific, 2000.
Chen WF., Toma S., Advanced Analysis of Steel Frames. Theory, Software and Applications. New York: CRC Press, 1994.
Chiorean CG, Calculul Neliniar al Structurilor, Vol.1, Structuri Plane. Cluj-Napoca: U.T.PRESS, 2009.
FEMA, State of the Art Report on Connection Performance. FEMA-355D /September, 2000.
Kishi N., Chen WF., Goto Y., Matsuoka KG., Design Aid of Semi-rigid Connections for Frame Analysis. Engineering Journal /
American Institute Of Steel Construction, 2003.
Mahin SA., Lessons from Steel Buildings Damaged by the Northridge Earthquake, 1997.
http://nisee.berkeley.edu/northridge/mahin.html
Mathe AE., Analiza Elastica Geometric Neliniara a Structurilor Metalice cu Conexiuni Flexibile. Teza de Doctorat, Universitatea
Tehnica din Cluj-Napoca, Facultatea de Constructii, Cluj-Napoca, 2009.
Mazzolani FM., Piluso V., Theory and Design of Seismic Resistant Steel Frames. London and New York: Spon Press, 1996.
James CD., Finding the Results of Northridge Earthquake Research, 1997. http://nisee.berkeley.edu/northridge
Tamboli AR., Handbook of Structural Steel Connection Design and Details. 2nd ed. New York: McGrawHill, 2010.
Trahair NS., Bradford MA., Nethercot DA., Gardner L, The Behaviour and Design of Steel Structures to EC3. 4th ed. London and
New York: Taylor & Francis, 2008.
View publication stats
