# Design of Crane Runway Beam with Channel Cap

DUANE S. ELLIFRITT and DUNG-MYAU LUE

INTRODUCTION A common practice in industrial buildings is to weld a channel, open side down, to the top flange of a standard rolled beam for use as a crane runway. In many cases, it is not possible to brace a crane runway laterally between columns, so the channel provides additional lateral stiffness. There are several interesting structural questions associated with the practice, like, what should be the welding pattern? How are the residual stresses affected? What if the channel has a yield strength different from the beam? However, the primary question addressed in this paper is, how does one check such a beam for lateral-torsional buckling? The AISC Specification provides formulas for lateral-torsional buckling of monosymmetric sections, but these are derived for three-plate sections, as shown in Figure 1(a). Some of these equations require the calculation of section properties that are not readily available from handbooks, like the warping constant, nor do they apply to the real section as shown in Figure 1(b). The purpose of this research was to develop an analytical solution to the problem of lateral-torsional buckling of a rolled beam with channel cap in terms that are readily available from standard section property tables. A program of full-scale testing was carried out to verify the analytical solution. It should be noted here that the solution proposed in this paper applies only to light- to medium-duty cranes, those classified as A, B, or C by the Crane Manufacturers Association of America (CM AA). ANALYTICAL SOLUTION FOR ELASTIC BUCKLING According to Clark and Hill (1960), Galambos (1968 & 1988), and Johnston (1976), the elastic nominal moment (Mn) of a monosymmetric beam, including the section of a rolled beam with a channel cap, can be expressed by the following equations:

nC, Mn = ^ { V ^ a 7 ^ where

1 +

Vi+52 + ^ ) }

(l)

1

2KL VG7 T?ECW (KLfGJ y2)dA-2y0

(2)

B,= \$x = \jytf+

(3)

(4)

Cw = )W2ntds, Wn = I f Wjds - W0, W„ = fPods
o o o

(5) (6)

J = jr2dA
A

K= effective length factors (AssumeKx = Ky = Kz= 1.0) To evaluate the elastic nominal moment (Mn) according to Equations 1, 2, and 3, one has to determine the coefficient of

r

n

Duane S. Ellifritt is professor of structural design, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Dung-Myau Lue is associate professor, National Chung-Hsing University, Taiwan.

(a)

(b)

Fig. 1. Common monosymmetric sections: (a) 3-plate section, (b) rolled beam with channel cap.

ENGINEERING JOURNAL / SECOND QUARTER / 1998

41

For the beam-and-channel section.82 0. V.< 0. and the torsional constant (J).9 2L. 42 ENGINEERING JOURNAL / SECOND QUARTER / 1998 . T. It can be seen that the approximate model (Equation 11) is accurate within ± 4 percent. one should calculate Px.95 Recognizing that (Iy/Ixf is a very small number.6-"fc C ( Q n 2 ~ . Equations 2 and 3 can be simplified into P. to calculate the exact values of warping constants (Cwc) of a beam with a channel cap.2 0.8" -•2? ~ * 5 0.4 0.monosymmetry (fy.8 0. Galambos. D.86 0. C ^w/~ =C ^ w 0. 1 D+- (10) ^ = 2.96 .98 .5 0.4 0.3 0.6 AC/AW 0.79+1.9h 2^ where -1 11+ 2D (9) 0.02 1 .1" 12* • >*" " " ft u 0) T> 9H z 1.08 2. The Cwc Model The authors used a computer program originally written in BASIC language by Dr.06 . The model as given by Equation 12 requires no calculation of 1. Cwc. this equation can be reduced to The resulting curve is superimposed on the data of Figure 3. but this can be a daunting task for routine design office use. Px for a section with a lipped top flange is given by 2 x = r The solution (Kitipornchai and Trahair) and the proposed model are plotted in Figure 2.87(7?-1) D + (7) Y (ii) B. PROPOSED MODELS The (3.7 0. For a monosymmetric section made of three dissimilar plates. 5 and 6. However. The results for the forty-five sections shown in the AISC manuals (AISC 1989 and AISC 1993) are plotted in Figure 3.8 ' A 4 • ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 2.1 . the following curve was found to be a good fit. * * y . Model According to Kitipornchai and Trahair (1980).8 0.7 0. and J according to Equations 4. . and letting h = D. By applying a multiple linear regression technique to the data.9 8 i1 6fi- - ym m r* 0. The warping constant model as a function of beam and channel area.6 Ac/Aw 0. The accuracy of the Px model. 2.9 1 0.04 .5 0. = 0. that are still reasonably accurate.25 (L -1 Vf Using the forty-five sections shown in the AISC Manual (AISC.92 0.88 0. it was found that Equation 11 gave a very close approximation of Equation 9 (3.2 < -f. Fig. = 0.3" J) . It would be better to have models for these three items which make use of known properties. 3. = 25 (8) where R 2J In this way.-g =t•m -**- •H Z. the need to calculate the warping constant is avoided.84 0. # • . Equations 7 and 8 are identical to the equations in the footnote on page 6-114 of the AISC-LRFD Specification (1993).79 w J (12) \$x = 0. they are conservative for the section which is the subject of this paper. the warping constant (CJ. these equations are correct only for the threeplate section.94 . 2 Fig. 2. 1989) as a data base.3 0. or easy-to-find properties.9 0..

ENGINEERING JOURNAL / SECOND QUARTER / 1998 43 . Fig.04 1.08 .96.94 0.98 . 5.i .9 0.2 < .98 0.08 . APPROXIMATE DESIGN USING THE PROPOSED MODELS The proposed models based on the previous discussions can be summarized by the following equations. This equation is more accurate.840. A w .3 percent to +5 percent in most sections. The accuracy of the warping constant model.06 1. and Cw are given in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction.6 Ac/AW 0. Again.7 0.7 0. 8 7 ( 2 / ? . 1993) previously.90. 4.1 ) D + A (18) (19) I =1 +1 I = — + I *y yw ' xxc> -*yc ^ ' *xc J = iibit^ = Jw+jc + hf(tl + t2)3^hf^1 + ti)(14) = Jw + Jc + bftlt2(tl + t2) where Jw and Jc = torsional constants for the wide flange and the channel.920.80 C -C 0. the model is applied to the forty-five sections in the AISC Manual and the results are plotted in Figure 5.79+1.88 0.02 1 0. The accuracy of the torsion constant model.95 W (20) (15) / = / w + / c + flf1f2(f1 + f2) (21) The forty-five AISC sections are used to examine the differences between the exact nominal moments (Mn) and the ones based on the proposed models.820. It can be seen that the model overestimates the value of / by +2. A 1.2 percent.860.5 0.6 Ac/Aw 0.820. it can be observed that the model gives results with errors of .8 0.86 0. *P*-*/^ 2KL y GJ B.84 0.9 0.4 0. These variables A c . while retaining the simplicity of the one published in 1993. In Figure 4. 0.3 0.79 V .^ < 0.06 . respectively bf = flange width of the wide flange fi = web thickness of the channel l. respectively of each element of the cross-section n = number of plate elements A further modification of Equation 13 has been done for the need of the practical designer. [It should be noted that Equation 12 is slightly different from the formula published by Lue and Ellifritt (Lue. Mn = -^-^Mpj{Bl+^\+B2 where + B\^ (16) •/=J^=il^ where (13) bt and tt = width and thickness.021.92 0.section properties and uses only Cw and the ratio Ac /Aw as the independent variables. The curves of nominal moment (Mn) versus unbraced length (Lb) were examined by using the proposed models.1 percent to +8.8 0. The modified formula of J is calculated based on the section properties and dimensions of wide flanges and channel caps as listed in AISC manual. n2ECwc (KLfGJ R-2I>< J (17) 1^ = 0 .04 .] The/Model The torsional constant (J) can be expressed by t2 = flange thickness of the wide flange All the variables shown are listed in the AISC manual.1 .88 0.80 -*%r&—•"*— 4*H i _ i 0.96 0.9 Fig.5 0.4 0. The proposed J is given by the following equations. Bx.3 0.94.