×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Jobs

SCBF - Connection design - To Omega or not to Omega

SCBF - Connection design - To Omega or not to Omega

SCBF - Connection design - To Omega or not to Omega

(OP)
In the 1997 UBC, Special Concentric Braced Frame connections were required to be designed for the lessor of three cases.  1)  Tension Strength of brace; 2)  Omega times the calculated earthquake force plus all applicable gravity loads; 3)  Max force able to be transferred to the system.

Well, now we are in the 2003 IBC, and it references directly the AISC manual (I forget the number, the 1997 version used to be known as the Yellow book, the latest version is blue).  In this manual, they give you only items 1 and 3 as listed above; as I read it, they don't allow you to base the connection on Omega times the actual load to the brace.

I have a two story building (architectural art project, really) shaped in an L-configuration with several holes in the floor diaphragm and a mechanical well in the flexible roof diaphragm.  Long story short, I have a lot of frames to account for the shape of building and diaphragm, and the braces are not loaded very highly.  In my case, designing for the tension capacity of the brace would be twice as big as what the forces in the braces actually are.

1st question:  Am I reading the AISC correctly, do you have to do the connection for the tension strength of the brace.

2nd question:  Does it seem right that I should have forces so much smaller than the tension strength of the brace?  Should I try to downsize my braces to lessen my connection requirements?

Thanks for any help you can provide.  

RE: SCBF - Connection design - To Omega or not to Omega

Question 1:  Yes, you are reading AISC correctly.  Unless you can show reduced loads due to hinges forming elsewhere, etc., then the connection has to be for the tensile capacity of the brace (A BIG BITE!).

Question 2: No, it doesn't seem right, but that is the nature of the beast.  The intent is to insure that the member would fail before the connection.
Yes, you should downsize your brace as much as you are comfortable with, since the stress in the brace is irrelevant to the connection design in this case.  If your brace is sized for a stress ratio of 0.45 rather than 0.9, it is likely your connection will be at least twice as large.

If you are not in seismic category D, E, or F; consider using R=3 and running this as a "system not specifically detailed for seismic", then you get to design the connections for whatever the loads are.

Good Luck!

RE: SCBF - Connection design - To Omega or not to Omega

(OP)
Thanks a lot.  That was just what I was looking for.

I'll have to take a look at my braces again to see if I can downsize any of them.  I am in seismic category D and the building I am doing requires these special detailing requirements.     

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources