Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Shear Lag in Bolted Tension Members at Elastic and Yielding
Shear Lag in Bolted Tension Members at Elastic and Yielding
loading conditions
Fathy A. Abdelfattah and Mohamed S. Soliman
Civil Eng. Dept., Faculty of Engineering at Shobra, Zagazig University, Cairo, Egypt
This study measures the effects of shear lag on bolted tension members loading capacity at
elastic and yielding conditions. Nonlinear finite element analysis was used. The model
includes steel strain hardening effects. Comparing the obtained results with experimental
results presented in the literature validated the finite element model. Members of single and
double angles, I-shape and channels are considered. The results show that shear lag exists
at elastic and yielding loading conditions. Size and dimensions of member section,
connection details and material strength effect shear lag magnitude. The results are
compared against the guidance given in the different codes of practice. The authors
proposed modification to the formulas provided in the Egyptian code (2001) and British
standards BS5950 (1985) to include connection length when evaluating tension member
loading capacity.
! "#$ %
. -
+ . ( !/ 0
+ 1
,
* . ()
*+ * . &
,
2 / -
(
) . ( ()
3+ . (
0
"
3 6 . ( . 4 - , /4 5 0
* . "#$ *+
,
7 58 9
: ; )
4 % .
5
()
3+ . ( ( *.
; 5 < , $ *+
:(
, +9
(
- 7 -1 ) ,
) =; * .7+ - 7 -1 ) 0
3 (
.
> ( ,
Keywords: Shear lag, Tension members, Stress concentration
1. Introduction
Current design methods of tension
members are based on the assumption that
the nominal design strength will develop in a
uniform pattern through the critical net
section of the member. In practice, tension
members of single and double angles are
usually connected to gusset plate through one
leg. The eccentricity of fasteners at end
connections introduces eccentric tension load
into the member. The induced stresses and
strains at the critical net section, in the
direction of the applied tension, are not equal
and their distribution is not uniform. Stresses
are concentrated in the connecting leg.
Stresses in the unconnected leg become less
in value and not uniform. This phenomenon is
termed shear lag in tension member.
Chesson and Munse [1] presented review
of the literature about shear lag in tension
Alexandria Engineering Journal, Vol. 42 (2003), No.4, 463-474
Faculty of Engineering Alexandria University, Egypt.
members. Further, they reported the experimental results of thirty specimens having
different sections. They considered angles
connected back-to-back to a common gusset
plate forming star shape and built up sections
of box and I shapes. The measurements of the
strains in the angles and the webs of all the
considered sections showed that shear lag
exist. Munse and Chesson [2] introduced
empirical reduction factor U. It is used in the
design process to include the effect of shear
lag. The effective net area Ae is used instead of
the net area An at the critical net section.
Ae = An U,
(1)
U = (1 ex / L).
(2)
463
464
degrees
of
freedom
at
each
node;
465
466
467
Table 1
Loading capacity of tension members with different values of a/b
D4
Type
Single
angle
S1
S2
S3
S4
D1
D2
D3
Member
Double
angles
Specimen
Angle size*
127x76x6.4
102x76x6.4
76x76x6.4
76x51x6.4
127x76x6.4
102x76x6.4
76x76x6.4
76x51x6.4
Connection details
a/b
PF.E./Py
0.6
0.75
1.0
1.5
0.6
0.75
1.0
1.5
0.54
0.62
0.75
0.9
0.54
0.63
0.76
0.91
a/t =11.87
a = 76 mm
d =22mm
=24mm
n =2
s =3.5d
g =2d
Fy=250 N/mm2
Fu=400 N/mm2
468
Specimen
Single
angle
Type
S5
S6
S7
S8
Connection details
A/t
PF.E./Py
76x76x12.7
76x76x9.5
76x76x6.4
6.0
8.0
11.87
0.79
0.77
0.75
76x76x4.8
15.8
0.74
6.0
8.0
11.87
15.8
0.81
0.77
0.76
0.74
Angle size*
Double
angles
76x76x12.7
D5
76x76x9.5
D6
76x76x6.4
D7
76x76x4.8
D8
* All the dimensions are in mm
a/b=1.0
a = 76 mm
d =22mm
=24mm
n =2
s =3.5d
g =2d
Fy=250 N/mm2
Fu=400 N/mm2
469
Table 3
Loading capacity of tension members with different cross section forms
Specimen
Member size*
a/b
tc /to
PF.E./Py
A1
2 channels
C250 x 45
0.6
0.65
1.0
1.67
1.54
1.0
1.67
1.54
1.0
0.6
0.65
0.68
1.67
1.54
1.0
1.67
1.54
1.0
0.6
1.82
0.96
1.67
0.55
0.78
1.67
0.55
0.77
0.35
0.97
1.0
0.35
0.97
1.0
0.35
1.5
1.0
B1
C1
A2
B2
Properties:
Mass=45Kg/m
D=254mm
Bf=76mm
tf=11.1mm
tw=17.1mm
C2
A3
B3
C3
2 channels
C250 x 22
Mass=22Kg/m
tf=11.1mm
tw=17.1mm
Connection
details **
d=22mm
n= 6
Members
cross section forms
Form A
For specimens
A1, B1 and C1
d=30mm
n=3
For specimens
A2, B2 and C2
d=22mm
n=3
For specimens
A3, B3 and C3
I1
I2
I3
S shape
S460 x 104
Mass=104Kg/m
S shape
S460x81
Mass=81.4Kg/m
d=24mm
n=6
d=30mm
n=4
d=24mm
n=5
Form I
470
[17].
Table 4
Formulas available in codes of practice to calculate effective net area
Code
ECP [11]
BS 5950 [13]
AREA [12]
AASHTO [19]
AISC-LRFD [6]
AISC-ASD [4]
-----------------
Ae= An ( 1 ex /L)
Ae = An
Ae = An n
Notes
(3)
471
St. dev*.
1.06
0.1396
St. dev*.
-1.075
-0.164
ECP [11]
BS 5950 [13]
AREA [12]
AISC [6]
Formulas
(4-a)
and (4-b)
*Standard deviation
0.1122
-0.096
1.866
0.0055
0.067
0.8311
0.00002
0.0545
1.043
0.001
0.0345
0.9615
0.0023
0.0426
12. Conclusions
Shear lag exists at elastic and yielding
loading conditions. Stress distribution is
different to that assumed in design methods.
At allowable load, tension stress f x in the
connecting leg may reach double the nominal
stress value f n , fig. 3-a. At loads less than or
equal to the yielding load, the stress value
approach the ultimate tensile strength, fig. 4b. This occurs at bolts holes edges. Shear lag
magnitude is effected by shape of tension
member section and the dimensions of the
different elements in the section in addition to
connection details. The loading capacity for
members of single angles and members of
back to back double angles connected
472
tf, tw
y , u
References
[1]
[2]
[3]
Notations
Ae
An
a
Bf
b
D
d
E
ex
Fy
Fu
fe
fn
fx
G
J, K, W, U
L
n
PF.E.
Py
s
t
tc, to
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]
[9]
473
[10]
[11]
[12]
[13]
[14]
[15]
474
[16] German
specification
DIN
997,
Deutsches Institut fur Normung e. V.,
Berlin (1970).
[17] British Standards BS 4: Structural steel
sections: Part 1: Specification for hot
rolled
sections,
British
Standard
Institute, London, UK (1980).
[18] G. W. Owens, and P. R. Knowles, Steel
Designers Manual, fifth edition, The
Steel Construction Institute, London
(1994).
[19] Standard specifications for highway
bridges AASHTO, American Association
of state highway and transportation
officials, Washington, D. C. (1994).
[20] Eurocode 3: Design of steel structuresPart 1.1: General rules and rules for
buildings Env 1993-1-1: 1992, European
Committee for Standardization, Brussels
(1993).
[21] National Standard of Canada CAN/CSAS16.1-94, Candian Standards Association, Canada (1994)
Received March 11, 2003
Accepted July 9, 2003