×
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

HSS Truss Connection Configuration

HSS Truss Connection Configuration

HSS Truss Connection Configuration

(OP)
In a K connection of a structural truss, all of the books are telling me that an overlap connection or a gap connection is acceptable. It is unacceptable, however, to provide a K connection where the two brace members are cut and have a vertical weld between them.

There is very little explanation as to why this is unacceptable. Can anyone shed some light on this subject??

RE: HSS Truss Connection Configuration

Why is it unacceptable and where does it say it's unacceptable.  What I'm picturing is an overlapped K-connection which is dealt with in AISC 360-05 K3d (page 16.1-134).

Am I misunderstanding your condition?

RE: HSS Truss Connection Configuration

I don't think it is unacceptable.  It might be inefficient.  Why double cut both diagonals?  And welding the flush matching vertical walls would require a CJP with backing bar.   

http://www.FerrellEngineering.com

RE: HSS Truss Connection Configuration

(OP)
BAretired:

That's exactly the situation I'm referring to, and actual have that text book open in front of me. The assembly shown in figure c - WHY is this unacceptable? If there is still sufficient weld metal, penetration, etc. in the configuration to allow for the forces to be transferred, is it still not acceptable?

Packer simply states that it is unacceptable because it does not develop the required strength and the vertical weld is difficult. Is there some other inherent failure in this type of configuration that he is leaving out and that I should consider?

A steel manufacturer has gone ahead and fabricated a truss using this connection that Packer deems unacceptable. If the member sizes, welds, and geometry show that the loads can be safely carried, is it still unacceptable, but only because Packer says so??

RE: HSS Truss Connection Configuration

I looked at Design Guide 24 - HSS Connections.  Dr's Packer, Sherman, and Lecce simply make no reference to the detail requiring the vertical weld.   

http://www.FerrellEngineering.com

RE: HSS Truss Connection Configuration

Spencer10,

One web member is in compression and the other is in tension.  Taken together, their resultant is a horizontal force which goes into the chord (unless there is an applied load at the point of intersection).

The top wall and part of each sidewall carries a portion of the load, but does not come in contact with the chord.  The load must be carried by shear in the sidewalls immediately above the chord.

That and the difficulty of making a decent weld, I believe is why the connection is deemed unacceptable.  It does not mean the connection is incapable of carrying load, but it is not a full strength connection.

Connections (a) and (b) from my earlier post are capable of developing the full strength.  So is the overlapping detail attached.

BA

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