Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
(OP)
Does anyone know how to design a built-up section for a steel spreader beam, using two channel section (toe to toe) to form a box section? This is an existing spreader beam, and there are welds along the seams (at the toes of the channels top & bot.) but we need to verify beam capacity.
I am concerned about lateral torsional buckling of the channels, which would induce longit. shear stresses on the welds? (i.e. take the section and turn it 90 degress and load it, the weld stresses are from VQ/I at mid-depth of the box section.
Beam is loaded with a point load at each end and supported by the crane in the middle.
I am concerned about lateral torsional buckling of the channels, which would induce longit. shear stresses on the welds? (i.e. take the section and turn it 90 degress and load it, the weld stresses are from VQ/I at mid-depth of the box section.
Beam is loaded with a point load at each end and supported by the crane in the middle.






RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Hyatt Collapse
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
You beat me to it...
tg
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
In our case there is a thick steel end plate welded at the ends of the spreader beam (around the perimeter of the toe to toe channels) and there are puddle welds 2" long at 6" o/c running along the seam at the channel toes top and bot. The point load is applied at the end of the beam thru the end plate.
If you look at shear flow (VQ/I) in the spreader beam under straight vertical load and assuming elastic stresses, there would be no load in the seam welds (in my mind). However, if the beam was to buckle laterally would there be shear stresses in the welds due to VQ/I, using Q of one of the 2 channels about the channel toes? (This can be visualized by turning the spreader beam on it's side, and considering bending about the weak axis of the composite section.)
The question is to check lateral torsional buckling of this unbraced cantilever beam how do I check the welds along the seam at the channel toes for the composite section, for bending/buckling in the weak direction?
* I'm using a k=2 factor on half the length of the spreader beam, where L/2 = distance from load to center lifting point0> This is based on k factors for steel columns in bending, k=1 is pin-pin, k=2 is fixed and free at the far end. Therefore my unbraced length for beam stability calcs. = L = entire spreader beam length.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
"The investigation found out that both designs of the walkways were well below the required safety stress required by the Kansas City Building Code."
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Never done this before, but try:
Image the 2 channels are independent but hold together by some clamping force at ends (use your fingers if you wish), now bend the channels [] side way, the tip of the left side flanges will be either longer, or shorter, than the right side flanges. To close this discrepancy, you will need to introduce compression on the longer flanges, and tension on the shorter flanges, these are the forces acting on the seams, and are required to make the 2 channels a composite (to check required welds to hold flanges together).
I think you can find better explanation in any of the "Strength of Material" text books, the question is what is the initial bending force. I will find P (fraction of the lift load), assume incidental eccentricity e=2tf/6 (or else), the M=Pe.
The composite box will bend in random manner w/r to x or y axis, side sway buckling will not be critical if compressive stress kept low. It might rotate endlessly about longitudinal axis, but does not twist. Since there is no rigid end support, therefore the rotation is immaterial from structural point of view. Keep your focus on design of the end picking (lifting) point, which is a much more critical issue.
Above are personal opinions on this matter. Keep talk/listen to persons familar with the design of lifting devices.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
I would suggest you take care in your assumption that some sort of bearing plate will avoid splitting the seam on the weld. In fact, Edward Phrang stated in his summaries of the HR collapse that even a plate like that wouldn't have helped all that much.
The reason, as I understand it, is that with a cover plate, all you are doing is slightly reducing the concentrated load from the rod directed right at the seam weld/hole. With the plate, it is still bending in weak axis mode and will still bend, introducing stresses across the throat of the weld. This is a very dangerous application of stress on a weld, especially a toe-to-toe "butt" weld that is very difficult to install correctly.
I believe they even tested mock-ups of a cover plated double channel box beam and it failed rather quickly.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
(See attached sketch in Excel)
This is an existing spreader beam that we have used in our precast yard for 20 years, and someone has asked us to verify the capacity.
Perhaps on Monday, I can scan the shop dwg and upload it to make it easier to see.
PS - JAE - I really value your opinion, (and everybody else's as well!)
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
JAE,
Good post about the hyatt collapse. There is also good reading in the Salvadori book "Why buildings Fall Down" regarding this structural failure.
I always thought that there was a mis-communication between the structural engineer and steel fabricator regarding the walkway collapse. The structural engineer designed an continuous threaded stud that supported all three walkways, so the rod has a maximum tensile force of the three walkways, and each nut only needs to support one platform.
What the steel fabricator provided was three individual rods, so the nut on the top platform needed to support three platforms, instead of the one that it was designed for.
That, and the fact there was people up there dancing to a beat would not have helped the matter.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
I usually keep the designs as simple as possible and use an omega of 5-6 depending on the failure mode. Makes everybody comfortable & more efficient in the field as well.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
1. Determine end compression forces applied to the built-up box.
2. Assume the flanges take the full load.
3. Now look at one of the channels, it has end equal and opposite loads at ends, that the line of action is eccentrical to its geometric axix (y), from which you can calculate the resultant stress at the tip of the flange.
4. Check compressive stress against allowable, taking K=1, L=full length.
5. Check weld strength by multiply the resulting stress and weld spacing.
Hope this would help.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
What does the connection at the middle look like?
tg
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
It is important to know the lifting points and configuration above and below to identify the most critical situation.
My assumption was there are two cables above that forms triangle with the spreader, and two vertical cables below. The picking points above and below are aligned. If there is offset, the whole picture will change.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
If what you're saying is correct, there is no bending, just axial compression. Look at th OP - it's different
tg
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Everything I said was guessing, unless a picture is shown. I think he wants to verify the strength (welds and channels) against side swing buckling caused by compression, not bending.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Want to verify capacities of strongback with different lifting locations and would like to know everyone's approach to analyze this section.
Thanks!
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
You should also consider replacing these welds with additional groove welds between the existing intermittent ones, and only considering the new ones in the calculation.
tg
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Weld size would depend on Q to insure adequate stength.
As far as the Hyatt, There were mutiple failures. The size of the rods were one the detail to use two instead of on rod was another. However there was also a detail that used a standard washer at the box/rod connection. A larger stiffer plate washer should have been used to transfer load out to the webs, instead of to a small area of the flange. This can be seen in one of the posted photos.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Respectfully, it's important to differentiate between what "matters structurally" and "section modulus". If I had a nickel for every non-structural engineer (i.e. mech, electrical, etc) who believe all there is to structural engineering is Mc/I, or M/S, well, I'd have a lot of nickels.
Slenderness ratios, buckling, instability, connection strength, catastrophic failures, improper load paths, progressive collapse, none of these are directly related to section modulus, but I would say they matter.
Remember, structural design is not about just calculating the stress and comparing with yield - it's also about calculation of reduced allowables based on instabilities, connection strengths, etc.
tg
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Although I agree that there is more to structuiral design than Mc/I, I am not sure what would change in my post.
RE: Built-up section - Steel Spreader Beam
Neither am I.
I guess its quite obvious that my work load is a little light these days!
tg