P. 1
aisc-sp02

aisc-sp02

|Views: 1,314|Likes:
Published by Luis Pineda

More info:

Published by: Luis Pineda on Mar 27, 2011
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

05/10/2013

pdf

text

original

Sections

  • GLOSSARY
  • 4.1. Loads and Load Combinations
  • 4.2. Nominal Strength
  • 5. STORY DRIFT
  • 6. MATERIALS
  • 6.1. Material Specifications
  • 6.3. Notch-toughness Requirements
  • 7.1. Scope
  • 7.2. Bolted Joints
  • 7.3. Welded Joints
  • 7.4. Other Connections
  • 8. MEMBERS
  • 8.1. Scope
  • 8.2. Local Buckling
  • 8.3. Column Strength
  • 8.4. Column Splices
  • 8.5. Column Bases
  • 8.6. H-Piles
  • 9.1. Scope
  • 9.4. Beam and Column Limitations
  • 9.5. Continuity Plates
  • 9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
  • 9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
  • 9.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
  • 9.9. Column Splices
  • 10. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF)
  • 10.1. Scope
  • 10.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
  • 10.4. Beam and Column Limitations
  • 10.5. Continuity Plates
  • 10.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
  • 10.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
  • 10.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
  • 10.9. Column Splices
  • 11. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF)
  • 11.1. Scope
  • 11.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
  • 11.4. Beam and Column Limitations
  • 11.5. Continuity Plates
  • 11.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
  • 11.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
  • 11.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
  • 11.9. Column Splices
  • 12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF)
  • 12.1. Scope
  • 12.2. Special Segment
  • 12.3. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members
  • 12.5. Compactness
  • 13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF)
  • 13.1. Scope
  • 13.2. Bracing Members
  • 13.3. Bracing Connections
  • 13.4. Special Bracing Configuration Requirements
  • 13.5. Columns
  • 14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF)
  • 14.1. Scope
  • 14.2. Strength
  • 15. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF)
  • 15.1. Scope
  • 15.2. Links
  • 15.3. Link Stiffeners
  • 15.4. Link-to-Column Connections
  • 15.5. Lateral Bracing of Link
  • 15.6. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Link
  • 15.7. Beam-to-Column Connections
  • 15.8. Required Column Strength
  • 16. QUALITY ASSURANCE
  • P1. SCOPE
  • P2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
  • P2.1. Basis for Prequalification
  • P2.2. Authority for Prequalification
  • P3. TESTING REQUIREMENTS
  • P4. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES
  • P5. DESIGN PROCEDURE
  • P6. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD
  • S1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE
  • S2. SYMBOLS
  • S3. DEFINITIONS
  • S4. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS
  • S5. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES
  • S5.1. Sources of Inelastic Rotation
  • S5.2. Size of Members
  • S5.3. Connection Details
  • S5.4. Continuity Plates
  • S5.5. Material Strength
  • S5.6. Welds
  • S5.7. Bolts
  • S6. LOADING HISTORY
  • S6.1. General Requirements
  • S6.2. Loading Sequence for Beam-to-Column Moment Connections
  • S6.3. Loading Sequence for Link-to-Column Connections
  • S7. INSTRUMENTATION
  • S8. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS
  • S8.1. Tension Testing Requirements
  • S8.2. Methods of Tension Testing
  • S9. TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
  • S10. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
  • X1. SCOPE
  • X2. TEST CONDITIONS
  • X3. TEST SPECIMENS
  • X4. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
  • 1. SCOPE
  • 5. MATERIALS
  • 5.1. Structural Steel
  • 6.1. Scope
  • 8.2. Columns
  • 9.2. Columns
  • 9.3. Beams
  • 10.2. Columns
  • 10.3. Beams
  • 11.2. Columns
  • 12.2. Columns
  • 9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES
  • 12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES
  • 12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-special Segment Members
  • 12.6. Lateral Bracing
  • C1. SCOPE
  • C2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
  • C3. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
  • C4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTH
  • C5. STORY DRIFT
  • C6. MATERIALS
  • C6.1. Material Specifications
  • C6.2. Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength
  • C6.3. Notch-Toughness Requirements
  • C7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS
  • C7.2. Bolted Joints
  • C7.3. Welded Joints
  • C7.4. Other Connections
  • C8. MEMBERS
  • C8.1. Scope
  • C8.2. Local Buckling
  • C8.3. Column Strength
  • C8.4. Column Splices
  • C8.5. Column Bases
  • C8.6. H-Piles
  • C9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)
  • C9.1. Scope
  • C9.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
  • C9.4. Beam and Column Limitations
  • C9.5. Continuity Plates
  • C9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
  • C9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
  • C9.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
  • C10. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF)
  • C10.1. Scope
  • C10.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
  • C11. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF)
  • C11.1. Scope
  • C11.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
  • C11.5. Continuity Plates
  • C12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF)
  • C12.1. Scope
  • C12.2. Special Segment
  • C12.3. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members
  • C12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members
  • C12.5. Compactness
  • C12.6. Lateral Bracing
  • C13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF)
  • C13.1. Scope
  • C13.2. Bracing Members
  • C13.3. Bracing Connections
  • C13.4. Special Bracing Configuration Special Requirements
  • C13.5. Columns
  • C14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF)
  • C14.1. Scope
  • C14.2. Strength
  • C15. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF)
  • C15.1. Scope
  • C15.2. Links
  • C15.3. Link Stiffeners
  • C15.4. Link-to-Column Connections
  • C15.5. Lateral Bracing of the Link
  • C15.6. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Links
  • C15.7. Beam-to-Column Connections
  • C15.8. Required Column Strength
  • C16. QUALITY ASSURANCE
  • CP1. SCOPE
  • CP2.1.Basis for Prequalification
  • CP2.2.Authority for Prequalification
  • CP3. TESTING REQUIREMENTS
  • CP4. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES
  • CP5. DESIGN PROCEDURE
  • CP6. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD
  • CS1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE
  • CS3. DEFINITIONS
  • CS4. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS
  • CS5. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES
  • CS5.1.Sources of Inelastic Rotation
  • CS5.2.Size of Members
  • CS5.5.Material Strength
  • CS6. LOADING HISTORY
  • CS8. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS
  • CS10. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
  • C3. SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES
  • C4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS
  • C5. MATERIALS
  • C6. COMPOSITE MEMBERS
  • C6.1. Scope
  • C6.2. Composite Floor and Roof Slabs
  • C6.3. Composite Beams
  • C6.4. Reinforced-concrete-encased Composite Columns
  • C6.5. Concrete-filled Composite Columns
  • C7. COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS
  • C7.1. Scope
  • C7.2. General Requirements
  • C7.3. Nominal Strength of Connections
  • C9. COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF)
  • C9.3. Beams
  • C9.4. Moment Connections
  • C10. COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF)
  • C11. COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF)
  • C12. COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF)
  • C13. COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF)
  • C14. COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF)

P1: MRM

PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
ANSI/AISC 341-02
An American National Standard
Seismic Provisions for
Structural Steel Buildings
May 21, 2002
Supersedes the Seismic Provisions
for Structural Steel Buildings
dated April 15, 1997
including Supplements No. 1 and 2
and all previous versions
Approved by the
AISC Committee on Specifications and
issued by the AISC Board of Directors
AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION, INC.
One East Wacker Drive, Suite 3100
Chicago, Illinois 60601-2000
i
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
ii
Copyright
C
2002
by
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.
All rights reserved. This book or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any
form without the written permission of the publisher.
The AISC logo is a registered trademark of AISC and is used under license.
The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with
recognized engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is
believed to be accurate, this information should not be used or relied upon for any
specific application without competent professional examination and verification of
its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed engineer, architect or other
professional. The publication of the material contained herein is not intended as a
representation or warranty on the part of the American Institute of Steel Construc-
tion, Inc. or of any other personnamedherein, that this informationis suitable for any
general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or patents.
Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use.
Caution must be exercised when relying upon other specifications and codes devel-
oped by other bodies and incorporated by reference herein since such material may
be modified or amended from time to time subsequent to the printing of this edition.
The American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. bears no responsibility for such
material other than to refer to it and incorporate it by reference at the time of the
initial publication of this edition.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
iii
DEDICATION
Professor Egor Popov
This edition of the AISCSeismic Provisions is dedicated to the memory of Professor Egor
Popov. Professor Popov was a Professor for over 50 years at the University of California
at Berkeley, and a long time member of the AISC Committee on Specifications. Professor
Popov focused a major portion of his career improving the understanding and seismic per-
formance of steel structures. He was instrumental in the development of seismic design
provisions for steel structures for over thirty years, and initiated the activity of AISC in
this regard in the late 1980’s. As Chair of TC113 (the predecessor of TC9), he led the
publication of the first two editions of the AISC Seismic Provisions. Until the time of his
death at the age of 88 early in 2001, Professor Popov remained a very active member of
TC9 in the role of Vice Chair. His contributions to the development of these provisions
and understanding of the seismic performance of steel buildings is unequaled, and will
long be remembered and appreciated by AISC, the steel industry and the structural engi-
neering profession. It is entirely fitting that these provisions be dedicated to the memory
of Professor Egor Popov.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
iv
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
v
PREFACE
(This Preface is not a part of ANSI/AISC 341–02, Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel
Buildings, but is included for information purposes only.)
The AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Specification for Structural Steel
Buildings is intended to cover the common design criteria in routine office practice. Ac-
cordingly, it is not feasible for it to also cover the many special and unique problems
encountered within the full range of structural design practice. This document, the AISC
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (hereafter referred to as Seismic Pro-
visions) is a separate consensus document that addresses one such topic: the design and
construction of structural steel and composite structural steel/reinforced concrete building
systems for seismic demands.
These Provisions are presented in three parts: Part I is intended for the design and con-
struction of structural steel buildings, using LRFD; Part II is intended for the design
and construction of composite structural steel/reinforced concrete buildings; Part III is
an allowable stress design alternative to the LRFD provisions for structural steel build-
ings in Part I. In addition, three appendices, a list of Symbols, a Glossary, and a non-
mandatory Commentary with background information are provided. The first letter(s)
of words or terms that appear in the glossary are generally capitalized throughout these
Provisions.
The previous edition of the AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, pub-
lished on April 15, 1997, incorporated many of the early advances achieved as part of the
FEMA/SAC program and other investigations and developments related to the seismic
design of steel buildings. Recognizing that rapid and significant changes in the knowl-
edge base were occurring for the seismic design of steel buildings, especially Moment
Frames, the AISC Specifications Committee committed to generating frequent supple-
ments to the Seismic Provisions. This commitment was intended to keep the provi-
sions as current as possible. The first such supplement was completed and published
on February 15, 1999, Supplement No. 1 to the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions. Supple-
ment Number 2 to the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions was published on November 10,
2000.
This edition of the AISC Seismic Provisions incorporates Supplements No. 1 (February
15, 1999) and No. 2 (November 10, 2000) to the 1997 Seismic Provisions. This version
also includes Errata to Sections 8.4 and 9.9. Additional revisions resulted from con-
sidering new information generated by the FEMA/SAC project, which culminated late
in 2000, and other sources. These provisions were also modified to be consistent with
the ASCE 7-02 document, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures.
This allows these provisions to be incorporated by reference into both the 2003 IBC and
2002 NFPA 5000 building codes that use ASCE 7-02 as their basis for design loadings.
Because the scope of changes that have been made to these provisions since 1997 is so
large, they are being republished in their entirety. A major update to the commentary
to these provisions is also provided. Specific changes to these provisions include the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
vi PREFACE
following:
r
A clarification to the glossary to verify that chord and collector/drag elements
in floor diaphragms are considered to be part of the Seismic Load Resisting
System.
r
Additional requirements for the toughness of filler metals to be used in complete-
joint-penetration groove welds in intermediate and Special Moment Frame sys-
tems.
r
A revision to clarify member slenderness ratio requirements and better coordi-
nate with the LRFD provisions.
r
Increasing the Moment Frame column splice requirements to reflect the FEMA/
SAC recommendations.
r
Requiringthat splices of columns that are not part of the Moment Frames develop
a minimum shear force.
r
Clarifying Column Base design demands for various systems.
r
Adding a section on the use of H-pile members.
r
Clarifying lateral bracing requirements of Moment Frame beams, including the
provision of a required stiffness to be consistent with Section 3 of LRFD.
r
Increasing SMF web Connection design requirements to be consistent with the
FEMA/SAC recommendations.
r
Adding a new appendix (Appendix P) that defines procedures to be used in the
pre-qualification of moment Connections.
r
Incorporating FEMA/SAC recommendations for weld access holes in OMF
systems.
r
Incorporating FEMA/SAC recommendations for the removal of weld back-
ing and run-off tabs in OMF systems, including grinding surfaces to adequate
smoothness.
r
Dual units format. Values and equations are given in both U.S. customary
and metric units. The metric conversions (given in parentheses following the
U.S. units) are based on IEEE/ASTM SI 10, Standard for Use of the Inter-
national System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric System. The equations are
non-dimensionalized where possible by factoring out material constants, such
as E.
The AISC Committee on Specifications, Task Committee 9—Seismic Provisions is re-
sponsible for the ongoing development of these Provisions. The AISC Committee on
Specifications gives final approval of the document through an ANSI accredited ballot-
ing process, and has enhanced these Provisions through careful scrutiny, discussion, and
suggestions for improvement. AISC further acknowledges the significant contributions of
several groups to the completion of this document: the Building Seismic Safety Council
(BSSC), the SAC Joint Venture, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA),
the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the Structural Engineers Association of
California (SEAOC).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
PREFACE vii
The reader is cautioned that professional judgment must be exercised when data or rec-
ommendations in these provisions are applied, as described more fully in the disclaimer
notice preceding the Preface.
By, the members of AISC Committee on Specifications, Task Committee 9 – Seismic
Design:
James O. Malley, Chair James R. Harris
Mark Saunders, Vice-Chairman Patrick M. Hassett
Roy Becker Roberto T. Leon
Gregory G. Deierlein Robert Lyons
Richard M. Drake Harry W. Martin
Michael D. Engelhardt Clarkson W. Pinkham
Roger E. Ferch Rafael Sabelli
Timothy P. Fraser Thomas A. Sabol
Subhash Goel Kurt D. Swensson
John L. Gross Nabih F. G. Youssef
Cynthia J. Lanz, Secretary
Approved by the AISC Committee on Specifications,
Stanley D. Lindsey, Chairman John L. Gross
Roger E. Ferch, Vice-Chairman James R. Harris
Hansraj G. Ashar Tony C. Hazel
William F. Baker Mark V. Holland
John M. Barsom Lawrence A. Kloiber
Willam D. Bast Roberto T. Leon
Reidar Bjorhovde James O. Malley
Roger L. Brockenbrough Richard W. Marshall
Wai-Fah Chen Harry W. Martin
Gregory G. Deierlein David L. McKenzie
Duane S. Ellifritt Duane K. Miller
Bruce R. Ellingwood Thomas M. Murray
Shu-Jin Fang R. Shankar Nair
Steven J. Fenves Jack E. Petersen
James M. Fisher Douglas A. Rees-Evans
John W. Fisher Donald R. Sherman
Timothy P. Fraser W. Lee Shoemaker
Theodore V. Galambos William A. Thornton
Louis F. Geschwindner Raymond H. R. Tide
Lawrence G. Griffis Joseph A. Yura
Cynthia J. Lanz, Secretary
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
viii
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
ix
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SYMBOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xix
PART I STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS
GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS . . . . 5
3. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . 7
4.1. Loads and Load Combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4.2. Nominal Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. STORY DRIFT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6. MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.1. Material Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.2. Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength . . . . . . . 8
6.3. Notch-Toughness Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.2. Bolted Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.3. Welded Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7.4. Other Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.2. Local Buckling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8.3. Column Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.4. Column Splices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
8.5. Column Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8.6. H-Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
9.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.4. Beam and Column Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.5. Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
9.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9.9. Column Splices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
x TABLE OF CONTENTS
10. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
10.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
10.4. Beam and Column Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10.5. Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
10.9. Column Splices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
11.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11.4. Beam and Column Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
11.5. Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
11.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
11.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
11.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
11.9. Column Splices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12.2. Special Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
12.3. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members . . . . . . . . . . . 24
12.5. Compactness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
12.6. Lateral Bracing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) . . . . . . . 25
13.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
13.2. Bracing Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
13.3. Bracing Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
13.4. Special Bracing Configuration Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
13.5. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) . . . . . 28
14.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
14.2. Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
15. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
15.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
15.2. Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
15.3. Link Stiffeners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
15.4. Link-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
15.5. Lateral Bracing of Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15.6. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
15.7. Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
15.8. Required Column Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
16. QUALITY ASSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
TABLE OF CONTENTS xi
APPENDIX P. PREQUALIFICATION OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND
LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS
P1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
P2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
P2.1. Basis for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
P2.2. Authority for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
P3. TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
P4. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
P5. DESIGN PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
P6. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
APPENDIX S. QUALIFYING CYCLIC TESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN
AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS
S1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
S2. SYMBOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
S3. DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
S4. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
S5. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
S5.1. Sources of Inelastic Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
S5.2. Size of Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
S5.3. Connection Details . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
S5.4. Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
S5.5. Material Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
S5.6. Welds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
S5.7. Bolts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
S6. LOADING HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
S6.1. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
S6.2. Loading Sequence for Beam-to-Column Moment Connections . . . . . . 41
S6.3. Loading Sequence for Link-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
S7. INSTRUMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
S8. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
S8.1. Tension Testing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
S8.2. Methods of Tension Testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
S9. TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
S10. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
APPENDIX X. WELD METAL/WELDING PROCEDURE
SPECIFICATION TOUGHNESS VERIFICATION TEST
X1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
X2. TEST CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xii TABLE OF CONTENTS
X3. TEST SPECIMENS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
X4. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
PART II COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL AND REINFORCED
CONCRETE BUILDINGS
GLOSSARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS . . . . 49
3. SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . 49
5. MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.1. Structural Steel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
5.2. Concrete and Steel Reinforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6. COMPOSITE MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.2. Composite Floor and Roof Slabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.3. Composite Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6.4. Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
6.5. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7. COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
7.2. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
7.3. Nominal Strength of Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
8. COMPOSITEPARTIALLYRESTRAINED(PR) MOMENTFRAMES
(C-PRMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
8.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
8.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
8.3. Composite Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
8.4. Partially Restrained (PR) Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9. COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) . . . . . . . . . . 58
9.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9.3. Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9.4. Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
9.5. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
10. COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) . . . . . . 59
10.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
10.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
10.3. Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
10.4. Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
11. COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF) . . . . . . . . 60
11.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
11.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
TABLE OF CONTENTS xiii
11.3. Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
11.4. Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
12. COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) . . . . . . . . . . 60
12.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
12.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
12.3. Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
12.4. Braces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
12.5. Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
13. COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) . . . . 61
13.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
13.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
13.3. Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
13.4. Braces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61
13.5. Bracing Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
14. COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) . . . . . 62
14.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
14.2. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
14.3. Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
14.4. Braces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
14.5. Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
15. ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS
COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS
(C-ORCW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
15.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
15.2. Boundary Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
15.3. Coupling Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
16. SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS
COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS
(C-SRCW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
16.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
16.2. Boundary Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
16.3. Coupling Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
17. COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) . . . . . . . . . . 65
17.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
17.2. Wall Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
17.3. Boundary Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
PART III ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN (ASD) ALTERNATIVE
1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS . . . . 67
4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . 67
4.2. Nominal Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
4.3. Design Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
7.2. Bolted Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS
9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
9.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members . . . . . . . . . . 70
12.6. Lateral Bracing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) . . . . . . . 71
14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) . . . . . 71
14.2. Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71
COMMENTARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
PART I STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS
C1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
C2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS . . . . 76
C3. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76
C4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTH . . . . 77
C5. STORY DRIFT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79
C6. MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
C6.1. Material Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82
C6.2. Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength . . . . . . . 82
C6.3. Notch-Toughness Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83
C7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
C7.2. Bolted Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85
C7.3. Welded Joints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86
C7.4. Other Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C8. MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C8.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
C8.2. Local Buckling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
C8.3. Column Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
C8.4. Column Splices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
C8.5. Column Bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
C8.6. H-Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
C9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
C9.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
C9.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98
C9.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
C9.4. Beam and Column Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
C9.5. Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102
C9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104
C9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
C9.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106
C10. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
C10.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
C10.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
TABLE OF CONTENTS xv
C11. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
C11.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
C11.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
C11.5. Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
C12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
C12.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110
C12.2. Special Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111
C12.3. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members . . . . . . . . . . . . 112
C12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members . . . . . . . . . 113
C12.5. Compactness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
C12.6. Lateral Bracing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
C13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) . . . . . . 113
C13.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
C13.2. Bracing Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
C13.3. Bracing Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
C13.4. Special Bracing Configuration Special Requirements . . . . . . . . . 120
C13.5. Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
C14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) . . . . 121
C14.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
C14.2. Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121
C15. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
C15.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
C15.2. Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
C15.3. Link Stiffeners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127
C15.4. Link-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128
C15.5. Lateral Bracing of the Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
C15.6. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Links . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129
C15.7. Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
C15.8. Required Column Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
C16. QUALITY ASSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134
APPENDIX P. PREQUALIFICATION OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND
LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS
CP1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
CP2.1. Basis for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
CP2.2. Authority for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
CP3. TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138
CP4. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
CP5. DESIGN PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
CP6. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
APPENDIX S. QUALIFYING CYCLIC TESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN
AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS
CS1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
CS3. DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS
CS4. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
CS5. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
CS5.1. Sources of Inelastic Rotation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 142
CS5.2. Size of Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143
CS5.5. Material Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144
CS5.6. Welds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
CS6. LOADING HISTORY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145
CS8. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
CS10. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147
APPENDIX X. WELD METAL/WELDING PROCEDURE
SPECIFICATION TOUGHNESS VERIFICATION TEST . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
PART II COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL AND REINFORCED
CONCRETE BUILDINGS
C1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151
C2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS . . . 152
C3. SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
C4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . 152
C5. MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152
C6. COMPOSITE MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
C6.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
C6.2. Composite Floor and Roof Slabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
C6.3. Composite Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 154
C6.4. Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns . . . . . . . . . . 155
C6.5. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
C7. COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
C7.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158
C7.2. General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159
C7.3. Nominal Strength of Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160
C8. COMPOSITEPARTIALLYRESTRAINED(PR) MOMENTFRAMES
(C-PRMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
C9. COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) . . . . . . . . . 164
C9.1. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
C9.3. Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
C9.4. Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
C10. COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) . . . . 167
C11. COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF) . . . . . . . 167
C12. COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) . . . . . . . . 167
C13. COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) . . 167
C14. COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) . . . 169
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
TABLE OF CONTENTS xvii
C15. ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS
COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS
(C-ORCW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
C16. SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS
COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS
(C-SRCW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173
C17. COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) . . . . . . . . . 174
PART III ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN (ASD) ALTERNATIVE
C1. SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
C4.2. Nominal Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xviii
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xix
SYMBOLS
Numbers in parentheses after the definition of a symbol refer to the Section in either Part I
or II of these Provisions in which the symbol is first used.
Symbol Definition Section
A
f
Flange area, in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-8)
A
g
Gross area, in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
A
s
Cross-sectional area of structural steel elements in composite
members, in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-6)
A
sh
Minimum area of tie reinforcement, in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . (II-6)
A
sp
Horizontal area of the steel plate in composite shear wall,
in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-17)
A
st
Area of Link stiffener, in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
A
w
Link web area, in.
2
(mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
D Dead load due to the weight of the structural elements and
permanent features on the building, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Outside diameter of round HSS, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . (Table I-8-1)
E Effect of horizontal and vertical earthquake-induced loads . . (Glossary)
E
s
Modulus of elasticity of steel, E
s
= 29,000 ksi (200 000 MPa) (I-8, II-6)
E
s
I Flexural elastic stiffness of the chord members of the special
segment, kip-in.
2
(N-mm
2
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
F
y
Specified minimum yield stress of the type of steel to be used,
ksi (MPa). As used in the LRFD Specification, “yield stress”
denotes either the minimum specified yield point (for those
steels that have a yield point) or the specified yield strength
(for those steels that do not have a yield point). . . . . . . . . . (I-6)
F
yb
F
y
of a beam, ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
F
yc
F
y
of a column, ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
F
y f
F
y
of column flange, ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-8)
F
yh
Specified minimum yield strength of transverse reinforcement,
ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-6)
F
yw
F
y
of the Panel Zone steel, ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
F
u
Specified minimum tensile strength, ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . (I-7)
H Height of story, which may be taken as the distance between the
centerline of floor framing at each of the levels above and
below, or the distance between the top of floor slabs at each of
the levels above and below, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-8)
K Effective length factor for prismatic member . . . . . . . . . . (I-13)
L Live load due to occupancy and moveable equipment,
kips (kN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Span length of the truss, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xx SYMBOLS
L
p
Limiting laterally unbraced length for full plastic flexural
strength, uniform moment case, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
L
s
Length of the special segment, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
M
n
Nominal flexural strength, kip-in. (N-mm) . . . . . . . . . . . (I-11)
M
nc
Nominal flexural strength of the chord member of the special
segment, kip-in. (N-mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
M
p
Nominal plastic flexural strength, kip-in. (N-mm) . . . . . . . (I-9)
M
pa
Nominal plastic flexural strength modified by axial load, kip-in.
(N-mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
M
pc
Nominal plastic flexural strength of the column, kip-in.
(N-mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-8)
M
v
Additional moment due to shear amplification from the location
of the plastic hinge to the column centerline, kip-in.
(N-mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
M
u
Required flexural strength of a member or Joint, kip-in.
(N-mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
P
n
Nominal axial strength of a column, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . (I-8)
Nominal axial strength of a Composite Column, kips (N) . . . (II-6)
P
nc
Nominal axial compressive strength of diagonal members of the
special segment, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
P
nt
Nominal axial tensile strength of diagonal members of the
special segment, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-12)
P
o
Nominal axial strength of a Composite Column at zero
eccentricity, kips (N). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-6)
P
u
Required axial strength of a column or a Link, kips (N) . . . . (I-8)
Required axial strength of a Composite Column, kips (N) . . . (II-9)
P
uc
Required axial strength of a column in compression, kips (N) . (I-9)
P
y
Nominal axial yield strength of a member, which is equal to
F
y
A
g
, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Q
b
Maximum unbalanced vertical load effect applied to a beam by
the braces, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-13)
R
n
Nominal Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
R
u
Required strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
R
v
Panel Zone nominal shear strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
R
y
Ratio of the Expected Yield Strength to the minimum specified
yield strength F
y
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-6)
S Snow load, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
V
n
Nominal shear strength of a member, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
V
ns
Nominal shear strength of the steel plate in composite plate
shear walls, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-17)
V
p
Nominal shear strength of an active Link, kips (N) . . . . . . . (I-15)
V
pa
Nominal shear strength of an active Link modified by the axial
load magnitude, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
V
u
Required shear strength of a member, kips (N) . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Y
con
Distance from top of steel beam to top of concrete slab or
encasement, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-6)
Z Plastic section modulus of a member, in.
3
(mm
3
) . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Z
b
Plastic section modulus of the beam, in.
3
(mm
3
) . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Z
c
Plastic section modulus of the column, in.
3
(mm
3
) . . . . . . . (I-9)
a Angle that diagonal members make with the horizontal . . . . (I-12)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
SYMBOLS xxi
b Width of compression element as defined in LRFD
Specification Section B5.1, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Table I-8-1)
b
cf
Width of column flange, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
b
f
Flange width, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
b
w
Width of the concrete cross-section minus the width of the
structural shape measured perpendicular to the direction of
shear, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-6)
d Nominal fastener diameter, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-7)
d
b
Overall beam depth, in. (mm). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
d
c
Overall column depth, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
d
z
Overall Panel Zone depth between Continuity Plates, in. (mm) (I-9)
e EBF Link length, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
f

c
Specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi (MPa) . . . . . (II-6)
h
cc
Cross-sectional dimension of the confined core region in
Composite Columns measured center-to-center of the
transverse reinforcement, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (II-6)
l Unbraced length between stitches of built-up bracing members,
in. (mm). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-13)
Unbraced length of compression or bracing member, in. (mm) (I-13)
r Governing radius of gyration, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
r
y
Radius of gyration about y axis, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
s Spacing of transverse reinforcement measured along the
longitudinal axis of the structural composite member, in. (mm) (II-6)
t Thickness of connected part, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-7)
Thickness of element, in. (mm). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Table I-8-1)
Thickness of column web or doubler plate, in. (mm) . . . . . . (I-9)
t
bf
Thickness of beam flange, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
t
cf
Thickness of column flange, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
t
f
Thickness of flange, in. (mm). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
t
p
Thickness of Panel Zone including doubler plates, in. (mm) . . (I-9)
t
w
Thickness of web, in. (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Table I-8-1)
w
z
Width of Panel Zone between column flanges, in. (mm) . . . . (I-9)
z
b
Minimum plastic section modulus at the Reduced Beam
Section, in.
3
(mm
3
) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
M*
pc
Moment at beam and column centerline determined by
projecting the sum of the nominal column plastic moment
strength, reduced by the axial stress P
uc
/ A
g
, from the top and
bottom of the beam moment connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
M*
pb
Moment at the intersection of the beam and column centerlines
determined by projecting the beam maximum developed
moments from the column face. Maximum developed moments
shall be determined from test results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)

o
Horizontal seismic overstrength factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-4)
␦ Deformation quantity used to control loading of the Test
Specimen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (S6)

y
Value of deformation quantity ␦ at first significant yield of Test
Specimen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (S6)

Ratio of required axial force P
u
to required shear strength V
u
of
a Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-15)
␭ Slenderness parameter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-13)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM
PB262-FM PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:40 Char Count=
xxii SYMBOLS

ps
Limiting slenderness parameter for compact element. . . . . . (Table I-8-1)
␾ Resistance Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-8)

c
Resistance Factor for compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-13)

v
Resistance Factor for shear strength of Panel Zone of
beam-to-column connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (I-9)
Resistance Factor for the shear strength of a Composite Column (II-6)
␥ Link Rotation Angle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (S2)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
1
PART I. STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS
GLOSSARY
The first letter(s) of words or terms that appear in this glossary are generally capitalized
throughout these Provisions.
Applicable Building Code. The building code under which the building is designed. In
the absence of an Applicable Building Code, the loads and load combinations shall be
those stipulated in ASCE 7.
Amplified Seismic Load. The horizontal component of earthquake load E multiplied by

o
, where E and the horizontal component of E are defined in the Applicable Building
Code.
Authority Having Jurisdiction. The organization, political subdivision, office or individual
charged with the responsibility of administering and enforcing the provisions of this
standard.
Beam. A structural member that primarily functions to carry loads transverse to its longi-
tudinal axis; usually a horizontal member in a seismic frame system.
Braced Frame. A vertical truss system of concentric or eccentric type that resists lateral
forces on the Structural System.
Column Base. The assemblage of plates, connectors, bolts, and rods at the base of a column
used to transmit forces between the steel superstructure and the foundation.
Connection. A combination of joints used to transmit forces between two or more mem-
bers. Connections are categorized by the type and amount of force transferred (moment,
shear, end reaction).
Continuity Plates. Column stiffeners at the top and bottom of the Panel Zone; also known
as transverse stiffeners.
Design Earthquake. The earthquake represented by the Design Response Spectrum as
specified in the Applicable Building Code.
Design Story Drift. The amplified story drift (drift under the Design Earthquake, including
the effects of inelastic action), determined as specified in the Applicable Building
Code.
Design Strength. Resistance (force, moment, stress, as appropriate) provided by element
or connection; the product of the Nominal Strength and the Resistance Factor.
Diagonal Bracing. Inclined structural members carrying primarily axial load that are
employed to enable a structural frame to act as a truss to resist lateral loads.
Dual System. A Dual System is a Structural System with the following features: (1) an
essentially complete space frame that provides support for gravity loads; (2) resistance
to lateral load provided by moment resisting frames (SMF, IMF or OMF) that are
capable of resisting at least 25 percent of the base shear, and concrete or steel shear
walls, or steel Braced Frames (EBF, SCBF or OCBF); and, (3) each system designed
to resist the total lateral load in proportion to its relative rigidity.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
2 PART I – GLOSSARY
Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF). A diagonally Braced Frame meeting the require-
ments in Section 15 that has at least one end of each bracing member connected to
a beam a short distance from another beam-to-brace connection or a beam-to-column
connection.
Expected Yield Strength. The probable yield strength of the material, equal to the minimum
specified yield strength, F
y
, multiplied by R
y
.
Fully Restrained (FR). Sufficient rigidity exists in the connection to maintain the angles
between intersecting members.
Intermediate Moment Frame (IMF). AMoment Frame systemthat meets the requirements
in Section 10.
Interstory Drift Angle. Interstory displacement divided by story height, radians.
Inverted-V-Braced Frame. See V-Braced Frame.
Joint. An area where two or more ends, surfaces or edges are attached. Joints are catego-
rized by the type of fastener or weld used and the method of force transfer.
k-Area. An area of potentially reduced notch-toughness located in the web-to-flange fillet
area. See Figure C-I-6.1.
K-Braced Frame. An OCBF in which a pair of diagonal braces located on one side of a
column is connected to a single point within the clear column height.
Lateral Bracing Member. A member that is designed to inhibit lateral buckling or lateral-
torsional buckling of primary framing members.
Link. In EBF, the segment of a beam that is located between the ends of two diagonal
braces or between the end of a diagonal brace and a column. The length of the Link is
defined as the clear distance between the ends of two diagonal braces or between the
diagonal brace and the column face.
Link Intermediate Web Stiffeners. Vertical web stiffeners placed within the Link in EBF.
Link Rotation Angle. The inelastic angle between the Link and the beam outside of the
Link when the total story drift is equal to the Design Story Drift.
Link Shear Design Strength. The lesser of the design shear strength of the Link developed
from the moment or shear strength of the Link.
Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD). A method of proportioning structural com-
ponents (members, connectors, connecting elements, and assemblages) such that no
applicable limit state is exceeded when the building is subjected to all appropriate load
combinations.
Moment Frame. A building frame system in which seismic shear forces are resisted by
shear and flexure in members and connections of the frame.
Nominal Loads. The magnitudes of the loads specified by the Applicable Building Code.
Nominal Strength. The capacity of a building or component to resist the effects of loads,
as determined by computations using specified material strengths and dimensions and
formulas derived from accepted principles of structural mechanics or by field tests or
laboratory tests of scaled models, allowing for modeling effects and differences between
laboratory and field conditions.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
PART I – GLOSSARY 3
Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frame (OCBF). Adiagonally Braced Frame meeting the
requirements in Section 14 in which all members of the bracing system are subjected
primarily to axial forces.
Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF). A Moment Frame system that meets the requirements
in Section 11.
P-Delta Effect. Second-order effect of column axial loads after lateral deflection of the
frame on the shears and moments in members.
Panel Zone. The web area of the beam-to-column connection delineated by the extension
of beam and column flanges through the connection.
Partially Restrained (PR). A connection with insufficient rigidity to maintain the angles
between connected members in original alignment after load is applied.
Prequalified Connections. Connections that comply with the requirements of Appendix P.
Reduced Beam Section. A reduction in cross section over a discrete length that promotes
a zone of inelasticity in the member.
Required Strength. The load effect (force, moment, stress, or as appropriate) acting on
a member or connection that is determined by structural analysis from the factored
loads using the most appropriate critical load combinations, or as specified in these
Provisions.
Resistance Factor. A factor that accounts for unavoidable deviations in the actual strength
of a member or connection from the Nominal Strength and for the manner and conse-
quences of failure.
Seismic Design Category. A classification assigned to a building based upon such factors
as its occupancy and use.
Seismic Load Resisting System. The assembly of structural elements in the building that
resists seismic loads, including struts, collectors, chords, diaphragms and trusses.
Slip-Critical Joint. A bolted joint in which slip resistance on the faying surface(s) of the
connection is required.
Special Concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF). A diagonally Braced Frame meeting the
requirements in Section 13 in which all members of the bracing system are subjected
primarily to axial forces.
Special Moment Frame (SMF). A Moment Frame system that meets the requirements in
Section 9.
Special Truss Moment Frame (STMF). A truss Moment Frame system that meets the
requirements in Section 12.
Static Yield Strength. The strength of a structural member or connection that is deter-
mined on the basis of testing that is conducted under slow monotonic loading until
failure.
Structural System. An assemblage of load-carrying components that are joined together
to provide interaction or interdependence.
V-Braced Frame. A concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF or OCBF) in which a pair of
diagonal braces located either above or below a beam is connected to a single point
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
4 PART I – GLOSSARY
within the clear beam span. Where the diagonal braces are below the beam, the system
is also referred to as an Inverted-V-Braced Frame.
X-Braced Frame. A concentrically braced frame (OCBF) in which a pair of diagonal
braces crosses near mid-length of the braces.
Y-Braced Frame. An Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF) in which the stem of the Y is the
Link of the EBF system.
Zipper Column. A vertical (or nearly vertical) strut connecting the brace-to-beam inter-
section of an Inverted-V-Braced Frame at one level to the brace-to-beam intersection at
another level. See Figure C-I-13.3(b).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 2.] PART I – REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS 5
1. SCOPE
These Provisions are intended for the design and construction of structural steel
members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting Systems in buildings for
which the design forces resulting from earthquake motions have been determined
on the basis of various levels of energy dissipation in the inelastic range of response.
These Provisions shall apply to buildings that are classified in the Applicable
Building Code as Seismic Design Category D (or equivalent) and higher or when
required by the Engineer of Record.
These Provisions shall be applied in conjunction with the AISC Load and Resis-
tance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, hereinafter re-
ferred to as the LRFD Specification. All members and connections in the Seismic
Load Resisting Systemshall have a Design Strength as required in the LRFDSpec-
ification, and shall also meet all of the additional requirements in these Provisions.
Part I includes a Glossary, which is specifically applicable to this Part, and Ap-
pendices P, S, and X.
2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
The documents referenced in these Provisions shall include those listed in LRFD
Specification Section A6 with the following additions and modifications:
American Concrete Institute (ACI)
Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, ACI 318-02
American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC)
Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings,
December 27, 1999
Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for the Design of Steel Hollow
Structural Sections, November 10, 2000
Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Single-Angle Members,
November 10, 2000
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE)
Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE 7-02
American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)
Standard Specification for General Requirements for Rolled Structural Steel Bars,
Plates, Shapes, and Sheet Piling, ASTM A6/A6M-01
Standard Specification for Carbon Structural Steel, ASTM A36/A36M-00
Pipe, Steel, Black and Hot-Dipped, Zinc-Coated Welded and Seamless, ASTM
A53/A53M-01
Standard Specification for Low and Intermediate Tensile Strength Carbon Steel
Plates, ASTM A283/A283M-00
Standard Specification for Structural Bolts, Steel, Heat Treated, 120/105 ksi Min-
imum Tensile Strength, ASTM A325-01
Standard Specification for High-Strength Bolts for Structural Steel Joints
[Metric], ASTM A325M-00
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
6 PART I – REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS [Sect. 2.
Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products,
ASTM A370-02e1
Standard Specification for Heat-Treated Steel Structural Bolts, 150 ksi Minimum
Tensile Strength, ASTM A490-00
Standard Specification for High-Strength Steel Bolts, Classes 10.9 and 10.9.3, for
Structural Steel Joints [Metric], ASTM A490M-00
Standard Specification for Cold-Formed Welded and Seamless Carbon Steel Struc-
tural Tubing in Rounds and Shapes, ASTM A500-01
Standard Specification for Hot-Formed Welded and Seamless Carbon Steel Struc-
tural Tubing, ASTM A501-01
Standard Specification for High-Strength Carbon-Manganese Steel of Structural
Quality, ASTM A529/A529M-00
StandardSpecificationfor High-StrengthLow-AllowColumbium-VanadiumStruc-
tural Steel, ASTM A572/A572M-00a
Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Allow Structural Steel with 50 ksi
[345 MPa] Minimum Yield Point to 4 in. [100 mm] Thick, ASTM A588/
A588M-00a
Standard Specification for Hot-Formed Welded and Seamless High-Strength Low-
Alloy Structural Tubing, ASTM A618-01
Standard Specification for Sampling Procedure for Impact Testing of Structural
Steel, ASTM A673/A673M-95
Standard Specification for Cold-formed Welded and Seamless High Strength, Low
Alloy Structural Tubing with Improved Atmospheric Corrosion Resistance,
ASTM A847-99a
Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Allow Steel Shapes of Structural
Quality, Produced by Quenching and Self-Tempering Process (QST), ASTM
A913/A913M-00a
Standard Specification for Steel for Structural Shapes for Use in Building Framing,
ASTM A992/A992M-00
Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, ASTM
E8-01e1
Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials, ASTM
E8M-01e1
Standard Specification for “Twist Off” Type Tension Control Structural Bolt/
Nut/Washer Assemblies, Steel, Heat Treated, 120/105 ksi Minimum Tensile
Strength, ASTM F1852-00
American Welding Society
Filler Metal Procurement Guidelines, AWS A5.01-93
Specification for Carbon Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc Welding, AWS
A5.20-95
Specification for Low Alloy Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc Welding, AWS
A5.29-98
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 6.] PART I – MATERIALS 7
TABLE I-4-1
System Overstrength Factor,
o
Seismic Load Resisting System Ω
o
All moment-frame systems meeting Part I requirements 3
Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF) meeting Part I requirements 2
1
/2
All other systems meeting Part I requirements 2
Standard Methods for Mechanical Testing of Welds-U.S. Customary Units, AWS
B4.0-98
Standard Methods for Mechanical Testing of Welds-Metric Units, AWS B4.0M:
2000
Structural Welding Code – Steel, AWS D1.1:2002
Research Council on Structural Connections
Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTMA325 or A490 Bolts, June 23, 2000
3. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
The Required Strength and other seismic provisions for Seismic Design Categories
(SDCs), Seismic Use Groups or Seismic Zones and the limitations on height and
irregularity shall be as specified in the Applicable Building Code.
4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS
4.1. Loads and Load Combinations
The loads and load combinations shall be as stipulated by the Applicable Building
Code (see Glossary). Where Amplified Seismic Loads are required by these pro-
visions, the horizontal earthquake load E (as defined in the Applicable Building
Code) shall be multiplied by the overstrength factor
o
prescribed by the Appli-
cable Building Code. In the absence of a specific definition of
o
, the value for

o
shall be as listed in Table I-4-1.
4.2. Nominal Strength
The Nominal Strengthof systems, members andconnections shall meet the require-
ments in the LRFD Specification, except as modified throughout these Provisions.
5. STORY DRIFT
The Design Story Drift and story drift limits shall be determined as specified in
the Applicable Building Code.
6. MATERIALS
6.1. Material Specifications
Structural steel used in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall meet the require-
ments in LRFD Specification Section A3.1a, except as modified in this Section.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
8 PART I – MATERIALS [Sect. 6.
TABLE I-6-1
R
y
Values for Different Member Types
Application R
y
Hot-rolled structural shapes and bars
ASTM A36/A36M 1.5
ASTM A572/A572M Grade 42 (290) 1.3
ASTM A992/A992M 1.1
All other grades 1.1
Hollow Structural Sections
ASTM A500, A501, A618 and A847 1.3
Steel Pipe
ASTM A53/A53M 1.4
Plates 1.1
All other products 1.1
For buildings over one story in height, the steel used in the Seismic Load Resist-
ing Systems described in Sections 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 shall meet one of
the following ASTM Specifications: A36/A36M, A53/A53M, A500 (Grade B or
C), A501, A529/A529M, A572/A572M (Grade 42 (290), 50 (345) or 55 (380)),
A588/A588M, A913/A913M (Grade 50 (345) or 65 (450)), or A992/A992M. The
steel used for Column Base plates shall meet one of the preceding ASTM specifi-
cations or ASTM A283/A283M Grade D. The specified minimum yield strength
of steel to be used for members in which inelastic behavior is expected shall not
exceed 50 ksi (345 MPa) unless the suitability of the material is determined by
testing or other rational criteria. This limitation does not apply to columns for
which the only expected inelastic behavior is yielding at the Column Base.
No thermal treatment of weldment or test specimens is permitted, except that
machined tensile test specimens may be aged at 200˚F (93˚C) to 220˚F (104˚C)
for up to 48 hours, then cooled to room temperature before testing.
6.2. Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength
When required in these Provisions, the Required Strength of a connection or mem-
ber shall be determined from the Expected Yield Strength R
y
F
y
, of the connected
member, where F
y
is the specified minimum yield strength of the grade of steel
to be used. For rolled shapes and bars, R
y
shall be as given in Table I-6-1. Other
values of R
y
are permitted to be used if the value of the Expected Yield Strength
is determined by testing that is conducted in accordance with the requirements for
the specified grade of steel.
When both the Required Strength and the Design Strength calculations are made
for the same member or connecting element, it is permitted to apply R
y
to F
y
in
the determination of the Design Strength.
6.3. Notch-toughness Requirements
When used as members in the Seismic Load Resisting System, ASTM A6/A6M
Groups 3, 4, and 5 shapes with flanges 1
1
/
2
in. (38 mm) thick and thicker, and plates
that are 2-in. (50 mm) thick or thicker shall have a minimum Charpy V-Notch
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 7.] PART I – CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS 9
(CVN) toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27 J) at 70˚F (21˚C), determined as specified in
LRFD Specification Section A3.1c.
7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS
7.1. Scope
Connections, joints, and fasteners that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting
System shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter J, except as
modified in this Section.
7.2. Bolted Joints
All bolts shall be pretensioned high-strength bolts. All faying surfaces shall be
prepared as required for Class A or better Slip-Critical Joints. The design shear
strength of bolted joints is permitted to be calculated as that for bearing-type joints.
Bolted joints shall not be designed to share load in combination with welds on the
same faying surface.
The bearing strength of bolted joints shall be provided using either standard holes
or short-slotted holes with the slot perpendicular to the line of force, unless an
alternative hole type is justified as part of a tested assembly; see Appendix S.
The Design Strength of bolted joints in shear and/or combined tension and shear
shall be determined in accordance with LRFD Specification Sections J3.7 and
J3.10, except that the nominal bearing strength at bolt holes shall not be taken
greater than 2.4dtF
u
.
Bolted connections for members that are a part of the Seismic Load Resisting
System shall be configured such that a ductile limit-state either in the connection
or in the member controls the design.
7.3. Welded Joints
Welding shall be performed in accordance with a Welding Procedure Specifica-
tion (WPS) as required in AWS D1.1 and approved by the Engineer of Record.
The WPS variables shall be within the parameters established by the filler metal
manufacturer.
7.3a. General Requirements
All welds used in members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting System
shall be made with a filler metal that can produce welds that have a minimum
Charpy V-Notch toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27 J) at minus 20˚F (minus 29˚C), as
determined by AWS classification or manufacturer certification. This requirement
for notch toughness shall also apply in other cases as required in these Provisions.
7.3b. Additional Requirements in Special Moment Frames
and Intermediate Moment Frames
For structures in which the steel frame is normally enclosed and maintained at
a temperature of 50˚F (10˚C) or higher, the following CJP welds in Special and
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
10 PART I – MEMBERS [Sect. 8.
Intermediate Moment Frames shall be made with filler metal capable of providing
a minimum Charpy V-Notch toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27 J) at minus 20˚F (minus
29˚C) as determined by AWS classification test methods and 40 ft-lbf (54 J) at
70˚F (21˚C) as determined by Appendix X or other approved method:
(1) Welds of beam flanges to columns
(2) Groove welds of shear tabs and beam webs to columns
(3) Column splices
For structures with service temperatures lower than 50˚F(10˚C), these qualification
temperatures shall be reduced accordingly.
7.3c. Discontinuities
For members and connections that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System,
discontinuities located within a plastic hinging zone defined below, created by
errors or by fabrication or erection operations, such as tack welds, erection aids,
air-arc gouging, and flame cutting, shall be repaired as required by the Engineer
of Record.
7.4. Other Connections
Weldedshear studs shall not be placedonbeamflanges withinthe zones of expected
plastic hinging. The length of a plastic hinging zone shall be defined as one-half of
the depth of the beamon either side of the theoretical hinge point. Decking arc-spot
welds as required to secure decking shall be permitted. Decking attachments that
penetrate the beam flanges shall not be used in the plastic hinging zone.
Welded, bolted, screwed, or shot-in attachments for perimeter edge angles, exte-
rior facades, partitions, duct work, piping, or other construction shall not be placed
within the expected zone of plastic deformations of members of the Seismic Load
Resisting System. Outside the expected zone of plastic deformation area, calcula-
tions, based on the expected moment, shall be made to demonstrate the adequacy
of the member net section when connectors that penetrate the member are used.
Exception: Welded shear studs and other connections are permitted where they
have been included in the connection tests used to qualify the connection.
8. MEMBERS
8.1. Scope
Members in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall meet the requirements in the
LRFD Specification and those of this Section. For members that are not part of the
Seismic Load Resisting System, see Section 8.4c.
8.2. Local Buckling
Where required by these Provisions, members of the Seismic Load Resisting Sys-
tem shall meet the ␭
p
limitation in Table B5.1 in the LRFD Specification and the

ps
limitations of Table I-8-1.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 8.] PART I – MEMBERS 11
TABLE I-8-1
Limiting Width Thickness Ratios ␭
ps
for
Compression Elements
Limiting Width-
Thickness Ratios
Description of Element
Width
Thickness
Ratio

ps
(seismically compact)
Flanges of I-shaped rolled, hybrid or
welded beams [a], [b], [f], [h]
b/t 0.30

E
s
/F
y
Flanges of I-shaped rolled, hybrid or
welded columns [a], [c]
b/t 0.30

E
s
/F
y
Flanges of channels, angles and I-shaped
rolled, hybrid or welded beams and
braces [a], [d], [h]
b/t 0.30

E
s
/F
y
Flanges of I-shaped rolled, hybrid or
welded columns [a], [e]
b/t 0.38

E
s
/F
y
Flanges of H-pile sections b/t 0.45

E
s
/F
y
U
n
s
t
i
f
f
e
n
e
d
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
Flat bars[g] b/t 2.5
Legs of single angle, legs of double angle
members with separators, or flanges
of tees [h]
b/t 0.30

E
s
/F
y
Webs of tees [h] d/t 0.30

E
s
/F
y
Webs in flexural compression in beams
in SMF, Section 9, unless noted
otherwise [a]
h/t
w
2.45

E
s
/F
y
Other webs in flexural compression [a] h/t
w
3.14

E
s
/F
y
Webs in combined flexure and axial
compression [a], [b], [c], [d], [e],
[f], [h]
h/t
w for P
u
/␾
b
P
y
≤ 0.125
3.14

E
s
F
y

1 −1.54
P
u

b
P
y

for P
u
/␾
b
P
y
> 0.125
1.12

E
s
F
y

2.33 −
P
u

b
P
y

S
t
i
f
f
e
n
e
d
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
s
Round HSS in axial and/or flexural com-
pression [d], [h]
D/t 0.044 E
s
/F
y
Rectangular HSS in axial and/or flexural
compression [d], [h]
b/t or h/t
w
0.64

E
s
/F
y
Webs of H-Pile sections h/t
w
0.94

E
s
/F
y
[a] For hybrid beams, use the yield strength of the flange F
yf
instead of F
y
.
[b] Required for beams in SMF, Section 9.
[c] Required for columns in SMF, Section 9, unless the ratios
from Equation 9-3 are greater than 2.0 where it is
permitted to use ␭
p
in LRFD Specification Table B5.1.
[d] Required for beams and braces in SCBF, Section 13.
[e] It is permitted to use ␭
p
in LRFD
Specification Table B5.1 for columns in
STMF, Section 12 and EBF, Section 15.
[f] Required for Link in EBF, Section 15.
[g] Diagonal web members within the
special segment of STMF, Section 12.
[h] Chord members of STMF, Section 12.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
12 PART I – MEMBERS [Sect. 8.
8.3. Column Strength
When P
u
/␾P
n
is greater than 0.4 without consideration of the Amplified Seismic
Load, the following requirements shall be met:
(1) The required axial compressive and tensile strength, considered in the absence
of any applied moment, shall be determined using the load combinations stipu-
lated by the Applicable Building Code including the Amplified Seismic Load.
(2) The Required Strengths need not exceed either of the following:
(a) The maximum load transferred to the column considering 1.1R
y
times
the nominal strengths of the connecting beam or brace elements of the
building.
(b) The limit as determined from the resistance of the foundation to overturn-
ing uplift.
8.4. Column Splices
8.4a. General
The Required Strength of column splices shall equal the Required Strength of the
columns, including that determined from Section 8.3.
The centerline of column splices made with fillet welds or partial-joint-penetration
groove welds shall be located 4 ft. (1.2 m) or more away fromthe beam-to-column
connections. When the column clear height between beam-to-column connections
is less than 8 ft. (2.4 m), splices shall be at half the clear height.
Welded column splices that are subject to a calculated net tensile stress determined
using the load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code including
the Amplified Seismic Load, shall be made using filler metal with Charpy V-
Notch toughness as required in Section 7.3a and shall meet both of the following
requirements:
(1) The Design Strength of partial-joint-penetration groove welded joints shall be
at least equal to 200 percent of the Required Strength.
(2) The Design Strength for each flange shall be at least 0.5 times R
y
F
y
A
f
,
where R
y
F
y
is the Expected Yield Strength of the column material and A
f
is
the flange area of the smaller column connected.
Beveled transitions are not required when changes in thickness and width of flanges
and webs occur in column splices where partial-joint-penetration groove welded
joints are permitted.
8.4b. Column Web Splices
Column web splices shall be either bolted or welded, or welded to one column
and bolted to the other. In Moment Frames using bolted splices to develop the
Required Strength, plates or channels shall be used on both sides of the column
web.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 13
8.4c. Columns Not Part of the Seismic Load Resisting System
In moment frame buildings, splices of columns that are not a part of the Seismic
Load Resisting System shall satisfy the following:
(1) They shall be located 4 ft. (1.2 m) or more away fromthe beam-to-column con-
nections. When the column clear height between beam-to-column connections
is less than 8 ft. (2.4 m), splices shall be at half the clear height.
(2) The column splices shall have sufficient design shear strength with respect to
both orthogonal axes of the column to resist a shear force equal to M
pc
/H,
where M
pc
is the nominal plastic flexural strength of the column for the di-
rection in question, and H is the story height.
8.5. Column Bases
The connection of the structure frame elements to the Column Base and the connec-
tion of the Column Base to the foundations shall be adequate to transmit the forces
for which the frame elements were required to be designed. Design of concrete
elements at the Column Base, including anchor rod embedment and reinforcement
steel, shall be in accordance with ACI 318. The seismic loads to be transferred to
the foundation soil interface shall be as required by the Applicable Building Code.
8.6. H-Piles
8.6a. Design of H-Piles
Design of H-piles shall comply with the provisions of the AISC LRFD Speci-
fication regarding design of members subjected to combined loads. The width-
thickness ratios of member elements shall meet the ␭
ps
limitations of Table I-8-1.
8.6b. Batter H-Piles
If batter (sloped) and vertical piles are used in a pile group, the vertical piles shall
be designed to support combined effects of the dead and live loads without the
participation of batter piles.
8.6c. Tension in H-Piles
Tension in the pile shall be transferred to the pile cap by mechanical means such
as shear keys, rebars or studs welded to the embedded portion of pile. A length of
pile below the bottom of the pile cap equal to at least the overall depth of the pile
cross section shall be free of attachments and welds.
9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)
9.1. Scope
Special Moment Frames (SMF) are expected to withstand significant inelastic
deformations when subjected to the forces resulting fromthe motions of the Design
Earthquake. SMF shall meet the requirements in this Section.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
14 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Sect. 9.
9.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
9.2a. Requirements
All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting
System shall satisfy the following three requirements:
(1) The connection must be capable of sustaining an Interstory Drift Angle of at
least 0.04 radians.
(2) The required flexural strength of the connection, determined at the column
face, must equal at least 80 percent of the nominal plastic moment of the
connected beam at an Interstory Drift Angle of 0.04 radians.
(3) The required shear strength V
u
of the connection shall be determined using the
load combination 1.2D +0.5L +0.2S plus the shear resulting fromthe appli-
cation of a moment of 2[1.1R
y
F
y
Z/distance between plastic hinge locations].
Alternatively, a lesser value of V
u
is permitted if justified by analysis.
Connections that accommodate the required Interstory Drift Angle within the
connection elements and provide the required flexural and shear strengths noted
above are permitted, provided it can be demonstrated by analysis that the additional
drift due to connection deformation can be accommodated by the building. Such
analysis shall include effects of overall frame stability including second order
effects.
9.2b. Conformance Demonstration
All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting
System shall be demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of Section 9.2a by one
of the following:
(a) Use a connection Prequalified for SMF in accordance with Appendix P.
(b) Provide qualifying cyclic test results in accordance with Appendix S. Results
of at least two cyclic connection tests shall be provided and are permitted to
be based on one of the following:
(i) Tests reported in research literature or documented tests performed for
other projects that are demonstrated to represent project conditions, within
the limits specified in Appendix S.
(ii) Tests that are conducted specifically for the project and are representa-
tive of project member sizes, material strengths, connection configura-
tions, and matching connection processes, within the limits specified in
Appendix S.
9.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web
parallel to column web)
9.3a. Shear Strength
The required thickness of the panel zone shall be determined in accordance with
the method used in proportioning the panel zone of the tested connection. As a
minimum, the requiredshear strength R
u
of the panel zone shall be determinedfrom
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 15
the summation of the moments at the column faces as determined by projecting
the expected moments at the plastic hinge points to the column faces. The design
shear strength ␾
v
R
v
of the panel zone shall be determined using ␾
v
= 1.0.
(a) When P
u
≤ 0.75P
y
,
R
v
= 0.6F
y
d
c
t
p
¸
1 +
3b
cf
t
2
cf
d
b
d
c
t
p

(9-1)
where
t
p
= total thickness of Panel Zone including doubler plate(s), in. (mm)
d
c
= overall column depth, in. (mm)
b
cf
= width of the column flange, in. (mm)
t
cf
= thickness of the column flange, in. (mm)
d
b
= overall beam depth, in. (mm)
F
y
= specified minimum yield strength of the Panel Zone steel, ksi (MPa)
(b) When P
u
> 0.75P
y
, R
v
shall be calculated using LRFDSpecification Equation
K1-12.
9.3b. Panel Zone Thickness
The individual thicknesses t of column webs and doubler plates, if used, shall
conform to the following requirement:
t ≥ (d
z
+w
z
)/90 (9-2)
where
t = thickness of column web or doubler plate, in. (mm)
d
z
= Panel Zone depth between Continuity Plates, in. (mm)
w
z
= Panel Zone width between column flanges, in. (mm)
Alternatively, when local buckling of the column web and doubler plate is pre-
vented with plug welds between them, the total Panel Zone thickness shall satisfy
Equation 9-2.
9.3c. Panel Zone Doubler Plates
Doubler plates shall be welded to the column flanges using either a complete-
joint-penetration groove-welded or fillet-welded joint that develops the design
shear strength of the full doubler plate thickness. When doubler plates are placed
against the column web, they shall be welded across the top and bottom edges to
develop the proportion of the total force that is transmitted to the doubler plate.
When doubler plates are placed away from the column web, they shall be placed
symmetrically in pairs and welded to Continuity Plates to develop the proportion
of the total force that is transmitted to the doubler plate.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
16 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Sect. 9.
9.4. Beam and Column Limitations
Abrupt changes in beam flange area are not permitted in plastic hinge regions. The
drilling of flange holes or trimming of beam flange width is permitted if testing
demonstrates that the resulting configuration can develop stable plastic hinges
that meet the requirements in Section 9.2b. Where employed, the Reduced Beam
Section shall meet the required strength as specified in Section 9.2a(2).
Beams and columns shall satisfy the width-thickness limitations given in Table
I-8-1.
9.5. Continuity Plates
Continuity Plates shall be provided to match the tested connection.
9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
The following relationship shall be satisfied at beam-to-column connections:
M

pc
M

pb
> 1.0 (9-3)
where
M*
pc
= the sum of the moments in the column above and below the joint
at the intersection of the beam and column centerlines. M*
pc
is determined by summing the projections of the nominal flexu-
ral strengths of the column (including haunches where used) above
and below the joint to the beam centerline with a reduction for
the axial force in the column. It is permitted to take M*
pc
=
Z
c
(F
yc
− P
uc
/ A
g
). When the centerlines of opposing beams in the
same joint do not coincide, the mid-line between centerlines shall
be used.
M*
pb
= the sum of the moment(s) in the beam(s) at the intersection of the
beam and column centerlines. M*
pb
is determined by summing
the projections of the expected beam flexural strength(s) at the plas-
tic hinge location(s) to the column centerline. It is permitted to
take M*
pb
= (1.1R
y
F
yb
Z
b
+ M
v
), where M
v
is the additional
moment due to shear amplification from the location of the plastic
hinge to the column centerline. Alternatively, it is permitted to de-
termine M*
pb
from test results as required in Section 9.2b or
by analysis based upon the tests. When connections with Reduced
Beam Sections are used, it is permitted to take M*
pb
=
(1.1R
y
F
yb
z
b
+ M
v
).
A
g
= gross area of column, in.
2
(mm
2
)
F
yc
= specified minimum yield strength of column, ksi (MPa)
P
uc
= required column axial compressive strength, kips (a positive
number) (N)
Z
b
= plastic section modulus of the beam, in.
3
(mm
3
)
Z
c
= plastic section modulus of the column, in.
3
(mm
3
)
z
b
= minimumplastic section modulus at the Reduced BeamSection, in.
3
(mm
3
)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 17
Exception: When columns conform to the requirements in Section 9.4, this re-
quirement does not apply in the following two cases:
(a) Columns with P
uc
< 0.3F
yc
A
g
for all load combinations other than those
determined using the Amplified Seismic Load that meet either of the following
requirements:
(i) Columns used in a one-story building or the top story of a multistory
building.
(ii) Columns where: (1) the sum of the design shear strengths of all exempted
columns in the story is less than 20 percent of the required story shear
strength; and (2) the sum of the design shear strengths of all exempted
columns on each column line within that story is less than 33 percent
of the required story shear strength on that column line. For the purpose
of this exception, a column line is defined as a single line of columns or
parallel lines of columns located within 10 percent of the plan dimension
perpendicular to the line of columns.
(b) Columns in any story that have a ratio of design shear strength to required
shear strength that is 50 percent greater than the story above.
9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
9.7a. Restrained Connections
Column flanges at beam-to-column connections require lateral bracing only at the
level of the top flanges of the beams when a column is shown to remain elastic
outside of the Panel Zone. It shall be permitted to assume that the column remains
elastic when the ratio calculated using Equation 9-3 is greater than 2.
When a column cannot be shown to remain elastic outside of the Panel Zone, the
following requirements shall apply:
(1) The column flanges shall be laterally supported at the levels of both the top
and bottom beam flanges.
(2) Each column-flange lateral bracing shall be designed for a Required Strength
that is equal to 2 percent of the nominal beam flange strength (F
y
b
f
t
bf
).
(3) Column flanges shall be laterally supported, either directly or indirectly, by
means of the column web or by the flanges of perpendicular beams.
9.7b. Unrestrained Connections
A column containing a beam-to-column connection with no lateral bracing trans-
verse to the seismic frame at the connection shall be designed using the distance
between adjacent lateral braces as the column height for buckling transverse to the
seismic frame and shall conform to LRFD Specification Chapter H, except that:
(1) The required column strength shall be determined from the LRFD Specifica-
tion, except that E shall be taken as the lesser of:
(a) The Amplified Seismic Load.
(b) 125 percent of the frame Design Strength based upon either the beam
design flexural strength or Panel Zone design shear strength.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
18 PART I – INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) [Sect. 10.
(2) The slenderness L/r for the column shall not exceed 60.
(3) The column required flexural strength transverse to the seismic frame shall
include that moment caused by the application of the beam flange force spec-
ified in Section 9.7a(2) in addition to the second-order moment due to the
resulting column flange displacement.
9.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
Both flanges of beams shall be laterally braced directly or indirectly. The un-
braced length between lateral braces shall not exceed 0.086r
y
E
s
/F
y
. The Required
Strength of lateral bracing shall be at least 2 percent of the beam flange Nominal
Strength, F
y
b
f
t
f
.
In addition, lateral braces shall be placed near concentrated forces, changes in
cross-section and other locations where analysis indicates that a plastic hinge will
form during inelastic deformations of the SMF. Where the design is based upon
assemblies tested in accordance with Appendix S, the placement of lateral bracing
for the beams shall be consistent with that used in the tests. The Required Strength
of lateral bracing provided adjacent to plastic hinges shall be at least 6 percent
of the expected Nominal Strength of the beam flange computed as R
y
F
y
b
f
t
f
.
The required stiffness of all lateral bracing shall be determined in accordance
with Equation C3-8 or C3-10, as applicable, of the LRFD Specification. In these
equations, M
u
shall be computed as R
y
ZF
y
.
9.9. Column Splices
Column splices shall comply with the requirements in Sections 8.4 and 7.3b. In
addition, column splices in Special Moment Frames shall be located as described
in Section 8.4a, and shall have a required flexural strength that is at least equal to
R
y
times the design flexural strength of the smaller column. Where groove welds
are used to make the splice, they shall be complete-joint-penetration groove welds.
Weld tabs shall be removed. Steel backing need not be removed unless required by
the Engineer of Record. The required shear strength of column web splices shall
be at least equal to 2M
pc
/H.
Exception: The Required Strength of the column splice considering appropriate
stress concentration factors or fracture mechanics stress intensity factors need not
exceed that determined by inelastic analyses.
10. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF)
10.1. Scope
Intermediate Moment Frames (IMF) are expected to withstand limited inelastic
deformations in their members and connections when subjected to the forces result-
ing from the motions of the Design Earthquake. IMF shall meet the requirements
in this Section.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 10.] PART I – INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) 19
10.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
10.2a. Requirements
All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting
System shall satisfy the following three requirements:
(1) The connection must be capable of sustaining an Interstory Drift Angle of at
least 0.02 radians.
(2) The flexural strength of the connection, determined at the column face, must
equal at least 80 percent of the nominal plastic moment of the connected beam
at an Interstory Drift Angle of 0.02 radians.
(3) The required shear strength V
u
of the connection shall be determined using
the load combination 1.2D +0.5L +0.2S plus the shear resulting from the
application of 2[1.1R
y
F
y
Z/ distance between plastic hinge segments]. Alter-
natively, a lesser value of V
u
is permitted if justified by analysis. The required
shear strength need not exceed the shear resulting fromthe application of Load
Combinations using the Amplified Seismic Load.
Connections that accommodate the required Interstory Drift Angle within the
connection elements and provide the required flexural and shear strengths noted
above are permitted, provided it can be demonstrated by analysis that the additional
drift due to connection deformation can be accommodated by the building. Such
analysis shall include effects of overall frame stability including second order
effects.
10.2b. Conformance Demonstration
All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting
System shall be demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of Section 10.2a by one
of the following:
(a) Use a connection prequalified for IMF in accordance with Appendix P.
(b) Provide qualifying cyclic test results in accordance with Appendix S. Results
of at least two non-identical cyclic connection tests shall be provided and are
permitted to be based on one of the following:
(i) Tests reported in research literature or documented tests performed for
other projects that are demonstrated to represent project conditions, within
the limits specified in Appendix S.
(ii) Tests that are conducted specifically for the project and are representative
of project member sizes, material strengths, connection configurations,
and matching connection processes, within the limits specified in Ap-
pendix S.
10.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web
parallel to column web)
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
20 PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) [Sect. 11.
10.4. Beam and Column Limitations
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
10.5. Continuity Plates
Continuity Plates shall be provided to be consistent with the tested connection.
10.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
10.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
10.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
10.9. Column Splices
Column splices shall comply with the requirements in Sections 8.4 and 7.3b.
11. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF)
11.1. Scope
Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) are expected to withstand minimal inelastic de-
formations in their members and connections when subjected to the forces resulting
from the motions of the Design Earthquake. OMF shall meet the requirements in
this Section.
11.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
Beam-to-column connections shall be made with welds and/or high-strength bolts.
Connections are permitted to be FR or PR moment connections as follows:
(1) FR moment connections that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System
shall be designed for a required flexural strength M
u
that is at least equal to
1.1R
y
M
p
of the beamor girder or the maximummoment that can be delivered
by the system, whichever is less.
(a) Wheresteel backingisusedinconnectionswithcomplete-joint-penetration
(CJP) flange welds, steel backing and tabs shall be removed except that
top-flange backing attached to the column by a continuous fillet weld on
the edge below the CJP groove weld need not be removed. Removal of
steel backing and tabs shall be as follows:
(i) Following the removal of backing, the root pass shall be backgouged
to sound weld metal and backwelded with a reinforcing fillet. The
reinforcing fillet shall have a minimum leg size of
5
/
16
-in. (8 mm).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 11.] PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) 21
(ii) Weld tab removal shall extend to within
1
/
8
in. (3 mm) of the base
metal surface except at Continuity Plates where removal to within
1
/
4
in. (6 mm) of the plate edge is acceptable. Edges of the weld
tab shall be finished to a surface roughness value of 500 micro-in.
(13 micrometers) or better. Grinding to a flush condition is not re-
quired. Gouges and notches are not permitted. The transitional slope
of any area where gouges and notches have been removed shall not
exceed 1:5. Material removed by grinding that extends more than
1
/
16
in. (2 mm) below the surface of the base metal shall be filled
with weld metal. The contour of the weld at the ends shall provide a
smooth transition, free of notches and sharp corners.
(b) Where weld access holes are provided, they shall be as shown in
Figure 11-1. The weld access hole shall be ground smooth to a surface
roughness value not to exceed 500 micro in. (13 micrometers), and shall
be free of notches and gouges. Notches and gouges shall be repaired as
required by the Engineer of Record.
(c) Double-sided partial-joint-penetration groove welds and double-sided fil-
let welds that resist tensile forces in connections shall be designed to resist
a required force of 1.1R
y
F
y
A
g
of the connected element or part. Single-
sided partial-joint-penetration groove welds and single-sided fillet welds
shall not be used to resist tensile forces in the connections.
(2) PR moment connections are permitted when the following requirements are
met:
(a) Such connections shall provide for the Design Strength as specified in
Section 11.2a(1) above.
(b) The nominal flexural strength of the connection, M
n
, shall be no less than
50 percent of M
p
of the connected beam or column, whichever is less.
(c) The stiffness and strength of the PR moment connections shall be consid-
ered in the design, including the effect on overall frame stability.
For FR moment connections, the required shear strength V
u
of a beam-to-column
connection shall be determined using the load combination 1.2D +0.5L +0.2S
plus the shear resulting fromthe application of a moment of 2[1.1R
y
F
y
Z / distance
between plastic hinge segments]. Alternatively, a lesser value of V
u
is permitted if
justified by analysis. For PRmoment connections, V
u
shall be determined fromthe
load combination above plus the shear resulting from the maximum end moment
that the PR moment connections are capable of resisting.
11.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web
parallel to column web)
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
11.4. Beam and Column Limitations
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
22 PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) [Sect. 11.
Notes: 1. Bevel as required by AWS D1.1 for selected groove weld procedure.
2. Larger of t
bf
or
1
/
2
in. (13 mm) (plus
1
/
2
t
bf
, or minus
1
/
4
t
bf
)
3.
3
/
4
t
bf
to t
bf
,
3
/
4
in. (19 mm) minimum (±
1
/
4
in.) (± 6 mm)
4.
3
/
8
in. (10 mm) minimum radius (plus not limited, minus 0)
5. 3 t
bf

1
/
2
in.) (±13 mm)
Tolerances shall not accumulate to the extent that the angle of the access hole cut
to the flange surface exceeds 25

.
Fig. 11-1. Weld access hole detail (from FEMA 350, “Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for
New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings”).
11.5. Continuity Plates
When FR moment connections are made by means of welds of beam flanges
or beam-flange connection plates directly to column flanges, Continuity Plates
shall be provided to transmit beam flange forces to the column web or webs.
Plates shall have a thickness greater than or equal to that of the beam flange or
beam-flange connection plate. The welded joints of the Continuity Plates to the
column flanges shall be made with either complete-joint-penetration groove welds,
two-sided partial-joint-penetration groove welds combined with reinforcing fillet
welds, or two-sided fillet welds. The Required Strength of these joints shall not
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 12.] PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) 23
be less than the Design Strength of the contact area of the plate with the column
flange. The Required Strength of the welded joints of the Continuity Plates to the
column web shall be the least of the following:
(a) The sum of the Design Strengths at the connections of the continuity plate to
the column flanges.
(b) The design shear strength of the contact area of the plate with the column web.
(c) The weldDesignStrengththat develops the designshear strengthof the column
Panel Zone.
(d) The actual force transmitted by the stiffener.
11.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
11.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
11.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.
11.9. Column Splices
Column splices shall comply with the requirements in Section 8.4.
12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF)
12.1. Scope
Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF) are expected to withstand significant in-
elastic deformationwithina speciallydesignedsegment of the truss whensubjected
to the forces from the motions of the Design Earthquake. STMF shall be limited
to span lengths between columns not to exceed 65 ft (20 m) and overall depth
not to exceed 6 ft (1.8 m). The columns and truss segments outside of the special
segments shall be designed to remain elastic under the forces that can be generated
by the fully yielded and strain-hardened special segment. STMF shall meet the
requirements in this Section.
12.2. Special Segment
Each horizontal truss that is part of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall have
a special segment that is located between the quarter points of the span of the truss.
The length of the special segment shall be between 0.1 and 0.5 times the truss span
length. The length-to-depth ratio of any panel in the special segment shall neither
exceed 1.5 nor be less than 0.67.
Panels within a special segment shall either be all Vierendeel panels or all
X-braced panels; neither a combination thereof nor the use of other truss diagonal
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
24 PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) [Sect. 12.
configurations is permitted. Where diagonal members are used in the special seg-
ment, they shall be arranged in an X pattern separated by vertical members. Such
diagonal members shall be interconnected at points where they cross. The inter-
connection shall have a Design Strength adequate to resist a force that is at least
equal to 0.25 times the nominal tensile strength of the diagonal member. Bolted
connections shall not be used for web members within the special segment.
Splicing of chord members is not permitted within the special segment, nor within
one-half the panel length from the ends of the special segment. Axial forces due to
factored dead plus live loads in diagonal web members within the special segment
shall not exceed 0.03F
y
A
g
.
12.3. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members
In the fully yielded state, the special segment shall develop the required vertical
shear strength through the design flexural strength of the chord members and the
design axial tensile and compressive strengths of the diagonal web members, when
provided. The top and bottomchord members in the special segment shall be made
of identical sections and shall provide at least 25 percent of the required vertical
shear strength in the fully yielded state. The required axial strength in the chord
members shall not exceed 0.45 times ␾F
y
A
g
, where ␾ = 0.9. Diagonal members
in any panel of the special segment shall be made of identical sections. The end
connection of diagonal web members in the special segment shall have a Design
Strength that is at least equal to the expected nominal axial tensile strength of the
web member, R
y
F
y
A
g
.
12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-special Segment Members
Members and connections of STMF, except those in the special segment defined in
Section 12.2, shall have a Design Strength to resist the effects of load combinations
stipulated by the Applicable Building Code, replacing the earthquake load term
E with the lateral loads necessary to develop the expected vertical nominal shear
strength in the special segment V
ne
given as:
V
ne
=
3.75R
y
M
nc
L
s
+0.075E
s
I
(L − L
s
)
L
3
s
+ R
y
(P
nt
+0.3P
nc
) sin ␣ (12-1)
where
R
y
= yield stress modification factor, see Section 6.2
M
nc
= nominal flexural strength of the chord member of the special segment,
kip-in. (N-mm)
E
s
I = flexural elastic stiffness of the chord members of the special segment,
kip-in.
2
(N-mm
2
)
L = span length of the truss, in. (mm)
L
s
= length of the special segment, in. (mm)
P
nt
= nominal axial tension strength of diagonal members of the special
segment, kips (N)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 25
P
nc
= nominal axial compression strength of diagonal members of the special
segment, kips (N)
␣ = angle of diagonal members with the horizontal
12.5. Compactness
The width-thickness ratio of chord members shall not exceed the limiting ␭
ps
values
fromTable I-8-1. Diagonal web members within the special segment shall be made
of flat bars.
12.6. Lateral Bracing
The top and bottom chords of the trusses shall be laterally braced at the ends of
special segment, and at intervals not to exceed L
p
according to LRFD Specifi-
cation Section F1, along the entire length of the truss. The Required Strength of
each lateral brace at the ends of and within the special segment shall be at least
5 percent of the nominal axial compressive strength P
nc
of the special segment
chord member. Lateral braces outside of the special segment shall have a Required
Strength at least 2.5 percent of the nominal compressive strength P
nc
of the largest
adjoining chord member.
13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF)
13.1. Scope
Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) are expected to withstand signif-
icant inelastic deformations when subjected to the forces resulting from the mo-
tions of the Design Earthquake. SCBF have increased ductility over OCBF (see
Section 14) due to lesser strength degradation when compression braces buckle.
SCBF shall meet the requirements in this Section.
13.2. Bracing Members
13.2a. Slenderness
Bracing members shall have Kl/r ≤ 5.87

E
s
/F
y
.
13.2b. Required Compressive Strength
The Required Strength of a bracing member in axial compression shall not exceed

c
P
n
.
13.2c. Lateral Force Distribution
Along any line of bracing, braces shall be deployed in alternate directions such that,
for either direction of force parallel to the bracing, at least 30 percent but no more
than 70 percent of the total horizontal force is resisted by tension braces, unless
the Nominal Strength P
n
of each brace in compression is larger than the Required
Strength P
u
resulting from the application of load combinations stipulated by the
Applicable Building Code including the Amplified Seismic Load. For the purposes
of this provision, a line of bracing is defined as a single line or parallel lines whose
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
26 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Sect. 13.
plan offset is 10 percent or less of the building dimension perpendicular to the line
of bracing.
13.2d. Width-thickness Ratios
Width-thickness ratios of stiffened and unstiffened compression elements of braces
shall meet the compactness requirements in LRFD Specification Table B5.1 (i.e.,
␭ < ␭
p
) and the following requirements:
(1) The width-thickness ratio of angle legs shall comply with ␭
ps
in Table I-8-1.
(2) I-shaped members and channels shall comply with ␭
ps
in Table I-8-1.
(3) Round HSS shall have an outside diameter to wall thickness ratio conforming
to Table I-8-1 unless the round HSS wall is stiffened.
(4) Rectangular HSS shall have a flat width to wall thickness ratio conforming to
Table I-8-1 unless the rectangular HSS walls are stiffened.
13.2e. Built-up Members
The spacing of stitches shall be such that the slenderness ratio l/r of individual
elements between the stitches does not exceed 0.4 times the governing slenderness
ratio of the built-up member.
The total design shear strength of the stitches shall be at least equal to the design
tensile strength of each element. The spacing of stitches shall be uniform and not
less than two stitches shall be used. Bolted stitches shall not be located within the
middle one-fourth of the clear brace length.
Exception: Where it can be shown that braces will buckle without causing shear
in the stitches, the spacing of the stitches shall be such that the slenderness ratio
l/r of the individual elements between the stitches does not exceed 0.75 times the
governing slenderness ratio of the built-up member.
13.3. Bracing Connections
13.3a. Required Strength
The Required Strength of bracing connections (including beam-to-column con-
nections if part of the bracing system) shall be the lesser of the following:
(a) The nominal axial tensile strength of the bracing member, determined as
R
y
F
y
A
g
.
(b) The maximum force, indicated by analysis that can be transferred to the brace
by the system.
13.3b. Tensile Strength
The design tensile strength of bracing members and their connections, based upon
the limit states of tension rupture on the effective net section and block shear
rupture strength, as specified in LRFD Specification Section J4, shall be at least
equal to the Required Strength of the brace as determined in Section 13.3a.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 27
13.3c. Flexural Strength
In the direction that the brace will buckle, the required flexural strength of the
connection shall be equal to 1.1R
y
M
p
of the brace about the critical buckling axis.
Exception: Brace connections that meet the requirements in Section 13.3b, can
accommodate the inelastic rotations associated with brace post-buckling deforma-
tions, and have a Design Strength that is at least equal to the nominal compressive
strength F
cr
A
g
of the brace are permitted.
13.3d. Gusset Plates
The design of gusset plates shall include consideration of buckling.
13.4. Special Bracing Configuration Requirements
13.4a. V-Type and Inverted-V-Type Bracing
V-type and inverted-V-type Braced Frames shall meet the following requirements:
(1) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be continuous between columns.
(2) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to support the effects
of all tributary dead and live loads from load combinations stipulated by the
Applicable Building Code, assuming that bracing is not present.
(3) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to resist the effects of
load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code, except that a
load Q
b
shall be substituted for the term E. Q
b
is the maximum unbalanced
vertical load effect applied to the beam by the braces. This load effect shall be
calculated using a minimum of R
y
P
y
for the brace in tension and a maximum
of 0.3 times ␾
c
P
n
for the brace in compression.
(4) The top and bottom flanges of the beam at the point of intersection of braces
shall be designed to support a lateral force that is equal to 2 percent of the
nominal beam flange strength F
y
b
f
t
bf
.
Exception: Limitations 2 and 3 need not apply to penthouses, one-story buildings,
nor the top story of buildings.
13.4b. K-Type Bracing
K-type Braced Frames are not permitted for SCBF.
13.5. Columns
Columns in SCBF shall meet the following requirements:
Width-thickness ratios of stiffened and unstiffened compression elements of
columns shall meet the requirements for bracing members in Section 13.2d.
In addition to meeting the requirements in Section 8.4, column splices in SCBF
shall be designed to develop at least the nominal shear strength of the smaller
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
28 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Sect. 15.
connected member and 50 percent of the nominal flexural strength of the smaller
connected section. Splices shall be located in the middle one-third of the column
clear height.
14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF)
14.1. Scope
Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF) are expected to withstand limited
inelastic deformations in their members and connections when subjected to the
forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake. OCBF shall meet the
requirements in this Section.
14.2. Strength
The Required Strength of the members and connections, other than brace connec-
tions, in OCBFs shall be determined using the load combinations stipulated by the
Applicable Building Code, including the Amplified Seismic Load. The Required
Strength of brace connections is the expected tensile strength of the brace, deter-
mined as R
y
F
y
A
g
. Braces with Kl/r greater than 4.23

E
s
/F
y
shall not be used in
V or inverted-V configurations.
15. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF)
15.1. Scope
Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBFs) are expected to withstand significant inelastic
deformations in the Links when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions
of the Design Earthquake. The diagonal braces, the columns, and the beam seg-
ments outside of the Links shall be designed to remain essentially elastic under the
maximum forces that can be generated by the fully yielded and strain-hardened
Links, except where permitted in this Section. In buildings exceeding five stories
in height, the upper story of an EBF systemis permitted to be designed as an OCBF
or an SCBF and still be considered to be part of an EBF system for the purposes
of determining system factors in the Applicable Building Code. EBF shall meet
the requirements in this Section.
15.2. Links
Links shall comply with the width-thickness ratios in Table I-8-1.
The specified minimum yield stress of steel used for Links shall not exceed 50 ksi
(345 MPa).
The web of a Link shall be single thickness without doubler-plate reinforcement
and without web penetrations.
Except as limited below, the required shear strength of the Link V
u
shall not exceed
the design shear strength of the Link ␾V
n
,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 29
where:
␾ = 0.9
V
n
= Nominal shear strength of the Link, equal to the lesser of V
p
or 2M
p
/e,
kips (N)
V
p
= 0.6F
y
A
w
, kips (N)
e = Link length, in. (mm)
A
w
= (d
b
-2t
f
)t
w
If the required axial strength P
u
in a Link is equal to or less than 0.15P
y
, where P
y
is equal to F
y
A
g
, the effect of axial force on the Link design shear strength need
not be considered.
If the required axial strength P
u
in a Link exceeds 0.15P
y
, the following additional
requirements shall be met:
(1) The Link design shear strength shall be the lesser of ␾V
pa
or 2␾M
pa
/e, where:
␾ = 0.9
V
pa
= V
p

1 −

P
u
/P
y

2
(15-1)
M
pa
= 1.18M
p
¸
1 −

P
u
/P
y
¸
(15-2)
(2) The length of the Link shall not exceed:
[1.15 −0.5␳

(A
w
/A
g
)]1.6M
p
/V
p
when ␳

(A
w
/A
g
) ≥ 0.3, (15-3)
nor
1.6M
p
/V
p
when ␳

(A
w
/A
g
) < 0.3, (15-4)
where:
A
w
= (d
b
−2t
f
)t
w

= P
u
/V
u
The Link Rotation Angle is the inelastic angle between the Link and the beam
outside of the Link when the total story drift is equal to the Design Story Drift, .
The Link Rotation Angle shall not exceed the following values:
(a) 0.08 radians for Links of length 1.6M
p
/V
p
or less.
(b) 0.02 radians for Links of length 2.6M
p
/V
p
or greater.
(c) The value determined by linear interpolation between the above values for
Links of length between 1.6M
p
/V
p
and 2.6M
p
/V
p
.
15.3. Link Stiffeners
Full-depth web stiffeners shall be provided on both sides of the Link web at the
diagonal brace ends of the Link. These stiffeners shall have a combined width
not less than (b
f
−2t
w
) and a thickness not less than 0.75t
w
nor
3
/
8
in. (10 mm),
whichever is larger, where b
f
and t
w
are the Link flange width and Link web
thickness, respectively.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
30 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Sect. 15.
Links shall be provided with intermediate web stiffeners as follows:
(a) Links of lengths 1.6M
p
/V
p
or less shall be provided with intermediate web
stiffeners spaced at intervals not exceeding (30t
w
−d/5) for a Link Rotation
Angle of 0.08 radians or (52t
w
−d/5) for Link Rotation Angles of 0.02 ra-
dians or less. Linear interpolation shall be used for values between 0.08 and
0.02 radians.
(b) Links of length greater than 2.6M
p
/V
p
and less than 5M
p
/V
p
shall be provided
with intermediate web stiffeners placed at a distance of 1.5 times b
f
from each
end of the Link.
(c) Links of length between 1.6M
p
/V
p
and 2.6M
p
/V
p
shall be provided with
intermediate web stiffeners meeting the requirements of 1 and 2 above.
(d) Intermediate web stiffeners are not required in Links of lengths greater than
5M
p
/V
p
.
(e) Intermediate Link web stiffeners shall be full depth. For Links that are less than
25 in. (635 mm) in depth, stiffeners are required on only one side of the Link
web. The thickness of one-sided stiffeners shall not be less than t
w
or
3
/
8
in.
(10 mm), whichever is larger, and the width shall be not less than (b
f
/2)-t
w
.
For Links that are 25 in. (635 mm) in depth or greater, similar intermediate
stiffeners are required on both sides of the web.
The Required Strength of fillet welds connecting a Link stiffener to the Link web
is A
st
F
y
, where A
st
is the area of the stiffener. The Required Strength of fillet
welds fastening the stiffener to the flanges is A
st
F
y
/4.
15.4. Link-to-Column Connections
Link-to-column connections must be capable of sustaining the maximum Link
Rotation Angle based on the length of the Link, as specified in Section 15.2. The
strength of the connection, measured at the column face, must equal at least the
nominal shear strength of the Link, V
n
, as specified in Section 15.2 at the maximum
Link Rotation Angle.
Link-to-column connections shall be demonstrated to satisfy the above require-
ments by one of the following:
(a) Use a connection Prequalified for EBF in accordance with Appendix P.
(b) Provide qualifying cyclic test results in accordance with Appendix S. Results
of at least two cyclic connection tests shall be provided and are permitted to
be based on one of the following:
(i) Tests reported in research literature or documented tests performed for
other projects that are demonstrated to represent project conditions, within
the limits specified in Appendix S.
(ii) Tests that are conducted specifically for the project and are representa-
tive of project member sizes, material strengths, connection configura-
tions, and matching connection processes, within the limits specified in
Appendix S.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
Sect. 15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 31
Exception: Where reinforcement at the beam-to-column connection at the Link end
precludes yielding of the beam over the reinforced length, the Link is permitted to
be the beam segment from the end of the reinforcement to the brace connection.
Where such Links are used and the Link length does not exceed 1.6M
p
/V
p
, cyclic
testing of the reinforced connection is not required if the Design Strength of the re-
inforced section and the connection equals or exceeds the Required Strength calcu-
lated based upon the strain-hardened Link as described in Section 15.6. Full depth
stiffeners as required in Section 15.3 shall be placed at the Link-to-reinforcement
interface.
15.5. Lateral Bracing of Link
Lateral bracing shall be provided at both the top and bottom Link flanges at the
ends of the Link. The Required Strength of end lateral bracing of Links is 6 percent
of the expected Nominal Strength of the Link flange computed as R
y
F
y
b
f
t
f
.
15.6. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Link
The required combined axial and flexural strength of the diagonal brace shall be
the axial forces and moments generated by the expected nominal shear strength of
the Link R
y
V
n
increased by 125 percent to account for strain-hardening, where
V
n
is as defined in Section 15.2. The Design Strengths of the diagonal brace,
as determined in LRFD Specification Chapter H (including Appendix H3), shall
exceed the Required Strengths as defined above.
The design of the beam outside the Link shall meet the following requirements:
(1) The Required Strength of the beam outside of the Link shall be the forces
generated by at least 1.1 times the expected nominal shear strength of the Link
R
y
V
n
, where V
n
is as defined in Section 15.2. For determining the Design
Strength of this portion of the beam, it is permitted to multiply the Design
Strengths determined from the LRFD Specification by R
y
.
(2) The beam shall be provided with lateral bracing where analysis indicates that
support is necessary to maintain the stability of the beam. Lateral bracing shall
be provided at both the top and bottomflanges of the beamand each shall have
a Required Strength of at least 2 percent of the beam flange Nominal Strength
computed as F
y
b
f
t
f
.
At the connection between the diagonal brace and the beam at the Link end of the
brace, the intersection of the brace and beam centerlines shall be at the end of the
Link or in the Link.
The Required Strength of the diagonal brace-to-beam connection at the Link end
of the brace shall be at least the expected Nominal Strength of the brace as given
in Section 15.6. No part of this connection shall extend over the Link length. If the
brace resists a portion of the Link end moment, the connection shall be designed
as an FR moment connection.
The width-thickness ratio of the brace shall satisfy ␭
p
in LRFD Specification
Table B5.1.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
32 PART I – QUALITY ASSURANCE [Sect. 16.
15.7. Beam-to-Column Connections
Beam-to-column connections away from Links are permitted to be designed as
pinned in the plane of the web. The connection shall have a Required Strength to
resist rotation about the longitudinal axis of the beam based upon two equal and
opposite forces of at least 2 percent of the beamflange Nominal Strength computed
as F
y
b
f
t
f
acting laterally on the beam flanges.
15.8. Required Column Strength
In addition to the requirements in Section 8, the Required Strength of columns shall
be determined from load combinations as stipulated by the Applicable Building
Code, except that the moments and axial loads introduced into the column at the
connection of a Link or brace shall not be less than those generated by the expected
Nominal Strength of the Link multiplied by 1.1 to account for strain-hardening.
The expected Nominal Strength of the Link is R
y
V
n
, where V
n
is as defined in
Section 15.2.
16. QUALITY ASSURANCE
The general requirements and responsibilities for performance of a quality assur-
ance plan shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Authority Having
Jurisdiction and the specifications of the Engineer of Record.
The special inspections and tests necessary to establish that the construction is in
conformance with these Provisions shall be included in a quality assurance plan.
The contractor’s quality control programand qualifications, such as participation in
a recognized quality certification program, shall be considered when establishing
a quality control plan.
The minimum special inspection and testing contained in the quality assurance
plan beyond that required in LRFD Specification Section M5 shall be as follows:
(1) Visual inspection of welding shall be the primary method used to confirm that
the procedures, materials and workmanship incorporated in construction are
those that have been specified and approved for the project. Visual inspections
shall be conducted by qualified personnel, in accordance with a written prac-
tice. Nondestructive testing of welds in conformance with AWS D1.1 shall
also be performed, but shall not serve to replace visual inspection.
(2) All complete-joint-penetration and partial-joint-penetration groove welded
joints that are subjected to net tensile forces as part of the Seismic Load
Resisting Systems in Sections 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 and 15 shall be tested using
approved nondestructive methods conforming to AWS D1.1.
Exception: The amount of nondestructive testing is permitted to be reduced if
approved by the Engineer of Record and the Authority Having Jurisdiction.
When welds from web doubler plates or Continuity Plates occur in the k-Area
of rolled steel columns, the k-Area adjacent to the welds shall be inspected after
fabrication, as required by the Engineer of Record, using approved nondestructive
methods conforming to AWS D1.1.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
33
APPENDIX P
PREQUALIFICATIONOF BEAM-TO-COLUMN
ANDLINK-TO-COLUMNCONNECTIONS
PART I
P1. SCOPE
This appendix contains minimum requirements for prequalification of beam-to-
column moment connections in Special Moment Frames (SMFs) and Intermediate
Moment Frames (IMFs), and link-to-column connections in Eccentrically Braced
Frames (EBFs). Prequalified Connections are permitted to be used, within the
applicable limits of prequalification, without the need for further qualifying cyclic
tests.
P2. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
P2.1. Basis for Prequalification
Connections shall be Prequalified based on test data satisfying Section P3, sup-
ported by analytical studies and design models. The combined body of evidence
for prequalification must be sufficient to assure that the connection can supply the
required Interstory Drift Angle for SMF and IMF systems, or the required Link
Rotation Angle for EBFs, on a consistent and reliable basis within the specified
limits of prequalification. All applicable limit states for the connection that affect
the stiffness, strength and deformation capacity of the connection and the Seismic
Load Resisting System must be identified. These include fracture related limit
states, stability related limit states, and all other limit states pertinent for the con-
nection under consideration. The effect of design variables listed in Section P4
shall be addressed for connection prequalification.
P2.2. Authority for Prequalification
Prequalification of a connection and the associated limits of prequalification shall
be established by a Connection Prequalification Review Panel (CPRP) approved
by the Authority Having Jurisdiction.
P3. TESTING REQUIREMENTS
Data used to support connection prequalification shall be based on tests conducted
in accordance with Appendix S. The CPRP shall determine the number of tests and
the variables considered by the tests for connection prequalification. The CPRP
shall also provide the same information when limits are to be changed for a pre-
viously prequalified connection. A sufficient number of tests shall be performed
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
34 PART I – PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES [App. P4.
on enough non-identical specimens to demonstrate that the connection has the
ability and reliability to undergo the required Interstory Drift Angle for SMFs and
IMFs and the required Link Rotation Angle for EBFs, where the Link is adjacent
to columns. For connections that are already Prequalified Connections, and the
limits of prequalification are being changed, additional non-identical specimens
shall be tested prior to changing prequalification limits. The limits on member
sizes for prequalification shall not exceed the limits specified in Appendix S,
Section S5.2.
P4. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES
In order to be Prequalified, the effect of the following variables on connection
performance shall be considered. Limits on the permissible values for each variable
shall be established by the CPRP for the Prequalified Connection.
(1) Beam or Link parameters:
(a) Cross-section shape: wide flange, box, or other.
(b) Cross-section fabrication method: rolled shape, welded shape, or other.
(c) Depth.
(d) Weight per foot.
(e) Flange thickness.
(f) Material specification.
(g) Span-to-depth ratio (for SMF or IMF), or Link length (for EBF).
(h) Width thickness ratio of cross-section elements.
(i) Lateral bracing.
(j) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration.
(2) Column parameters:
(a) Cross-section shape: wide flange, box, or other.
(b) Cross-section fabrication method: rolled shape, welded shape, or other.
(c) Column orientation with respect to beam or Link: beam or Link is con-
nected to column flange, beamor Link is connected to column web, beams
or Links are connected to both the column flange and web, or other.
(d) Depth.
(e) Weight per foot.
(f) Flange thickness.
(g) Material specification.
(h) Width-thickness ratio of cross-section elements.
(i) Lateral bracing.
(j) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
App. P6.] PART I – PREQUALIFICATION RECORD 35
(3) Beam (or Link) – Column Relations:
(a) Panel zone strength.
(b) Doubler plate attachment details.
(c) Column-beam (or Link) moment ratio.
(4) Continuity Plates:
(a) Identification of conditions under which Continuity Plates are required.
(b) Thickness, width and depth.
(c) Attachment details.
(5) Welds:
(a) Weld type: CJP, PJP, fillet, or plug.
(b) Filler metal strength and toughness.
(c) Details and treatment of weld backing and weld tabs.
(d) Weld access holes: size, geometry and finish.
(e) Welding quality control and quality assurance.
(f) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration.
(6) Bolts:
(a) Bolt diameter.
(b) Bolt Grade: ASTM A325, A490, or other.
(c) Installation requirements: pretensioned, snug tight, or other.
(d) Hole type: standard, oversize, short-slot, long-slot, or other.
(e) Hole fabrication method: drilling, punching, sub-punching and reaming,
or other.
(f) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration.
(7) Additional Connection Details: All variables pertinent to the specific connec-
tion under consideration, as established by the CPRP.
P5. DESIGN PROCEDURE
A comprehensive design procedure must be available for a Prequalified Connec-
tion. The design procedure must address all applicable limit states within the limits
of prequalification.
P6. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD
APrequalified Connection shall be provided with a written prequalification record
with the following information:
(1) General description of the Prequalified Connection and drawings that clearly
identify key features and components of the connection.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
36 PART I – PREQUALIFICATION RECORD [App. P6.
(2) Description of the expected behavior of the connection in the elastic and
inelastic ranges of behavior, intended location(s) of inelastic action, and a
description of limit states controlling the strength and deformation capacity
of the connection.
(3) Listing of systems for which connection is Prequalified: SMF, IMF or EBF.
(4) Listing of limits for all prequalification variables listed in Section P4.
(5) A detailed description of the design procedure for the connection, as required
in Section P5.
(6) A list of references of test reports, research reports and other publications that
provided the basis for prequalification.
(7) Summary of material strengths
(8) Summary of quality control procedures.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
37
APPENDIX S
QUALIFYINGCYCLICTESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN
ANDLINK-TO-COLUMNCONNECTIONS
PART I
S1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE
This Appendixincludes requirements for qualifyingcyclic tests of beam-to-column
moment connections in Moment Frames and Link-to-column connections in Ec-
centrically Braced Frames, when required in these Provisions. The purpose of the
testing described in this Appendix is to provide evidence that a beam-to-column
connection or a Link-to-column connection satisfies the requirements for strength
and Interstory Drift Angle or Link Rotation Angle in these Provisions. Alternative
testing requirements are permitted when approved by the Engineer of Record and
the Authority Having Jurisdiction.
This Appendix provides only minimum recommendations for simplified test con-
ditions. If conditions in the actual building so warrant, additional testing shall
be performed to demonstrate satisfactory and reliable performance of moment
connections during actual earthquake motions.
S2. SYMBOLS
The numbers in parentheses after the definition of a symbol refers to the Section
number in which the symbol is first used.
␪ Interstory Drift Angle (S6)
␥ Link Rotation Angle (S6)
S3. DEFINITIONS
Complete Loading Cycle. Acycle of rotation taken fromzero force to zero force,
including one positive and one negative peak.
Interstory Drift Angle. Interstory displacement divided by story height, radians.
Inelastic Rotation. The permanent or plastic portion of the rotation angle be-
tween a beam and the column or between a Link and the column of the Test
Specimen, measured in radians. The Inelastic Rotation shall be computed
based on an analysis of Test Specimen deformations. Sources of inelastic
rotation include yielding of members, yielding of connection elements and
connectors, and slip between members and connection elements. For beam-
to-column moment connections in Moment Frames, inelastic rotation shall
be computed based upon the assumption that inelastic action is concentrated
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
38 PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES [App. S5.
at a single point located at the intersection of the centerline of the beam with
the centerline of the column. For Link-to-column connections in Eccentri-
cally Braced Frames, inelastic rotation shall be computed based upon the
assumption that inelastic action is concentrated at a single point located at
the intersection of the centerline of the Link with the face of the column.
Prototype. The connections, member sizes, steel properties, and other design,
detailing, and construction features to be used in the actual building frame.
Test Specimen. A portion of a frame used for laboratory testing, intended to
model the Prototype.
Test Setup. The supporting fixtures, loading equipment, and lateral bracing used
to support and load the Test Specimen.
Test Subassemblage. The combination of the Test Specimen and pertinent por-
tions of the Test Setup.
S4. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS
The Test Subassemblage shall replicate as closely as is practical the conditions that
will occur in the Prototype during earthquake loading. The Test Subassemblage
shall include the following features:
(1) The Test Specimen shall consist of at least a single column with beams or
Links attached to one or both sides of the column.
(2) Points of inflection in the test assemblage shall coincide approximately with
the anticipated points of inflection in the Prototype under earthquake loading.
(3) Lateral bracing of the Test Subassemblage is permitted near load application or
reaction points as needed to provide lateral stability of the Test Subassemblage.
Additional lateral bracing of the Test Subassemblage is not permitted, unless
it replicates lateral bracing to be used in the Prototype.
S5. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES
The Test Specimen shall replicate as closely as is practical the pertinent design,
detailing, construction features, and material properties of the Prototype. The fol-
lowing variables shall be replicated in the Test Specimen.
S5.1. Sources of Inelastic Rotation
Inelastic Rotation shall be developed in the Test Specimen by inelastic action in
the same members and connection elements as anticipated in the Prototype, i.e.,
in the beam or Link, in the column Panel Zone, in the column outside of the Panel
Zone, or within connection elements. The fraction of the total Inelastic Rotation
in the Test Specimen that is developed in each member or connection element
shall be at least 75 percent of the anticipated fraction of the total Inelastic Rotation
in the Prototype that is developed in the corresponding member or connection
element.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
App. S5.] PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES 39
S5.2. Size of Members
The size of the beamor Link used in the Test Specimen shall be within the following
limits:
(1) The depth of the test beamor Link shall be no less than 90 percent of the depth
of the Prototype beam or Link.
(2) The weight per foot of the test beam or Link shall be no less than 75 percent
of the weight per foot of the Prototype beam or Link.
The size of the column used in the Test Specimen shall properly represent the
inelastic action in the column, as per the requirements in Section S5.1. In addition,
the depth of the test column shall be no less than 90 percent of the depth of the
Prototype column.
Extrapolation beyond the limitations stated in this Section shall be permitted sub-
ject to qualified peer review and approval by the Authority Having Jurisdiction.
S5.3. Connection Details
The connection details used in the Test Specimen shall represent the Prototype
connection details as closely as possible. The connection elements used in the Test
Specimen shall be a full-scale representation of the connection elements used in
the Prototype, for the member sizes being tested.
S5.4. Continuity Plates
The size and connection details of Continuity Plates used in the Test Specimen
shall be proportioned to match the size and connection details of Continuity Plates
used in the Prototype connection as closely as possible.
S5.5. Material Strength
The following additional requirements shall be satisfied for each member or con-
nection element of the Test Specimen that supplies Inelastic Rotation by yielding:
(1) The yield stress shall be determined by material tests on the actual materials
used for the Test Specimen, as specified in Section S8. The use of yield stress
values that are reported on certified mill test reports are not permitted to be
used for purposes of this Section.
(2) The yield stress of the beam shall not be more than 15 percent below R
y
F
y
for
the grade of steel to be used for the corresponding elements of the Prototype.
Columns and connection elements with a tested yield stress shall not be more
than 15 percent above or below R
y
F
y
for the grade of steel to be used for
the corresponding elements of the Prototype. R
y
F
y
shall be determined in
accordance with Section 6.2.
S5.6. Welds
Welds on the Test Specimen shall satisfy the following requirements:
(1) Welding shall be performed in strict conformance with Welding Procedure
Specifications (WPS) as required in AWS D1.1. The WPS essential variables
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
40 PART I – LOADING HISTORY [App. S6.
shall meet the requirements in AWS D1.1 and shall be within the parameters
established by the filler-metal manufacturer.
(2) The specified minimum tensile strength of the filler metal used for the Test
Specimen shall be the same as that to be used for the corresponding Prototype
welds.
(3) The specified minimum CVN toughness of the filler metal used for the Test
Specimen shall not exceed the specified minimumCVNtoughness of the filler
metal to be used for the corresponding Prototype welds.
(4) The welding positions used to make the welds on the Test Specimen shall be
the same as those to be used for the Prototype welds.
(5) Details of weld backing, weld tabs, access holes, and similar items used for the
Test Specimenwelds shall be the same as those tobe usedfor the corresponding
Prototype welds. Weld backing and weld tabs shall not be removed from the
Test Specimen welds unless the corresponding weld backing and weld tabs
are removed from the Prototype welds.
(6) Methods of inspection and nondestructive testing and standards of acceptance
used for Test Specimen welds shall be the same as those to be used for the
Prototype welds.
S5.7. Bolts
The bolted portions of the Test Specimen shall replicate the bolted portions of the
Prototype connection as closely as possible. Additionally, bolted portions of the
Test Specimen shall satisfy the following requirements:
(1) The bolt grade (e.g., ASTM A325, ASTM A490, ASTM F1852) used in the
Test Specimen shall be the same as that to be used for the Prototype.
(2) The type and orientation of bolt holes (standard, oversize, short slot, long slot,
or other) used in the Test Specimen shall be the same as those to be used for
the corresponding bolt holes in the Prototype.
(3) When Inelastic Rotation is to be developed either by yielding or by slip within
a bolted portion of the connection, the method used to make the bolt holes
(drilling, sub-punching and reaming, or other) in the Test Specimen shall be
the same as that to be used in the corresponding bolt holes in the Prototype.
(4) Bolts in the Test Specimen shall have the same installation (pretensioned or
other) and faying surface preparation (no specified slip resistance, Class A, B,
or C slip resistance, or other) as that to be used for the corresponding bolts in
the Prototype.
S6. LOADING HISTORY
S6.1. General Requirements
The Test Specimen shall be subjected to cyclic loads according to the requirements
prescribed in Section S6.2 for beam-to-column moment connections in Moment
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
App. S7.] PART I – INSTRUMENTATION 41
Frames, and according to the requirements prescribed in Section S6.3 for link-to-
column connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames.
Loading sequences other than those specified in Sections S6.2 and S6.3 may be
used when they are demonstrated to be of equivalent or greater severity.
S6.2. Loading Sequence for Beam-to-Column Moment Connections
Qualifyingcyclic tests of beam-to-columnmoment connections inMoment Frames
shall be conducted by controlling the Interstory Drift Angle, ␪, imposed on the
Test Specimen, as follows:
(1) 6 cycles at ␪ = 0.00375 rad.
(2) 6 cycles at ␪ = 0.005 rad.
(3) 6 cycles at ␪ = 0.0075 rad.
(4) 4 cycles at ␪ = 0.01 rad.
(5) 2 cycles at ␪ = 0.015 rad.
(6) 2 cycles at ␪ = 0.02 rad.
(7) 2 cycles at ␪ = 0.03 rad.
(8) 2 cycles at ␪ = 0.04 rad.
Continue loading at increments of ␪ =0.01 radians, with two cycles of loading at
each step.
S6.3. Loading Sequence for Link-to-Column Connections
Qualifying cyclic tests of link-to-column moment connections in Eccentrically
Braced Frames shall be conducted by controlling the Link Rotation Angle, ␥,
imposed on the Test Specimen, as follows:
(1) 3 cycles at ␥ = 0.0025 rad.
(2) 3 cycles at ␥ = 0.005 rad.
(3) 3 cycles at ␥ = 0.01 rad.
(4) 2 cycles at ␥ = 0.02 rad.
(5) 2 cycles at ␥ = 0.03 rad.
(6) 2 cycles at ␥ = 0.04 rad.
Continue loading at increments of ␥ = 0.01 radians, with two cycles of loading at
each step.
S7. INSTRUMENTATION
Sufficient instrumentation shall be provided on the Test Specimen to permit mea-
surement or calculation of the quantities listed in Section S9.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
42 PART I – TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS [App. S9.
S8. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS
S8.1. Tension Testing Requirements
Tension testing shall be conducted on samples of steel taken from the material
adjacent to each Test Specimen. Tension-test results fromcertified mill test reports
shall be reported but are not permitted to be used in place of specimen testing for
the purposes of this Section. Tension-test results shall be based upon testing that
is conducted in accordance with Section S8.2. Tension testing shall be conducted
and reported for the following portions of the Test Specimen:
(1) Flange(s) and web(s) of beams and columns at standard locations.
(2) Any element of the connection that supplies Inelastic Rotation by yielding.
S8.2. Methods of Tension Testing
Tension testing shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM A6/A6M, ASTM
A370, and ASTM E8, with the following exceptions:
(1) The yield stress F
y
that is reported from the test shall be based upon the yield
strength definition in ASTM A370, using the offset method at 0.002 strain.
(2) The loading rate for the tension test shall replicate, as closely as practical, the
loading rate to be used for the Test Specimen.
S9. TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
For each Test Specimen, a written test report meeting the requirements of the Au-
thority Having Jurisdiction and the requirements of this Section shall be prepared.
The report shall thoroughly document all key features and results of the test. The
report shall include the following information:
(1) A drawing or clear description of the Test Subassemblage, including key
dimensions, boundary conditions at loading and reaction points, and location
of lateral braces.
(2) A drawing of the connection detail showing member sizes, grades of steel,
the sizes of all connection elements, welding details including filler metal,
the size and location of bolt holes, the size and grade of bolts, and all other
pertinent details of the connection.
(3) A listing of all other Essential Variables for the Test Specimen, as listed in
Section S5.
(4) A listing or plot showing the applied load or displacement history of the Test
Specimen.
(5) A plot of the applied load versus the displacement of the Test Specimen. The
displacement reported in this plot shall be measured at or near the point of
load application. The locations on the Test Specimen where the loads and
displacements were measured shall be clearly indicated.
(6) A plot of beam moment versus Interstory Drift Angle for beam-to-column
moment connections; or a plot of Link shear force versus Link Rotation Angle
for link-to-column connections. For beam-to-column connections, the beam
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
App. S10.] PART I – ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 43
moment and the Interstory Drift Angle shall be computed with respect to the
centerline of the column.
(7) The Interstory Drift Angle and the total Inelastic Rotation developed by the
Test Specimen. The components of the Test Specimen contributing to the
total Inelastic Rotation due to yielding or slip shall be identified. The portion
of the total Inelastic Rotation contributed by each component of the Test
Specimen shall be reported. The method used to compute Inelastic Rotations
shall be clearly shown.
(8) A chronological listing of significant test observations, including observa-
tions of yielding, slip, instability, and fracture of any portion of the Test
Specimen as applicable.
(9) The controlling failure mode for the Test Specimen. If the test is terminated
prior to failure, the reason for terminating the test shall be clearly indicated.
(10) The results of the material tests specified in Section S8.
(11) The Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) and welding inspection
reports.
Additional drawings, data, and discussion of the Test Specimen or test results are
permitted to be included in the report.
S10. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
The Test Specimen must satisfy the strength and Interstory Drift Angle or Link
Rotation Angle requirements of these Provisions for the SMF, IMF, or EBF con-
nection, as applicable. The Test Specimen must sustain the required Interstory
Drift Angle or Link Rotation Angle for at least one complete loading cycle.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
44
APPENDIX X
WELDMETAL / WELDINGPROCEDURE
SPECIFICATIONTOUGHNESS VERIFICATIONTEST
PARTI
Preamble: This appendix provides a procedure for qualifying the weld metal toughness
and is included on an interimbasis pending adoption of such a procedure by AWS or other
accredited organization.
X1. SCOPE
This appendix provides a standard method for qualification testing of weld filler
metals required to have specified notch toughness for service in specified joints in
steel Moment Frames for seismic applications.
Testing of weld metal to be used in production shall be performed by filler metal
manufacturer’s production lot, as defined in AWSA5.01, Filler Metal Procurement
Guidelines, as follows:
(1) Class C3 for SMAW electrodes,
(2) Class S2 for GMAW-S and SAW electrodes,
(3) Class T4 for FCAW and GMAW-C, or
(4) Class F2 for SAW fluxes.
Alternatively, filler metal manufacturers approved for production of products meet-
ing the above requirements, under a program acceptable to the Engineer, need not
conduct the mechanical A5 tests or the Weld Metal / Weld Procedure Specification
(WPS) Toughness Verification Test, or require lot control for each lot, and may
rely upon the Manufacturer’s certifications that the product meets the specified
performance requirements.
X2. TEST CONDITIONS
Tests shall be conducted at the range of heat inputs for which the weld filler metal
will be qualified under the WPS. It is recommended that tests be conducted at the
Low Heat Input Level and High Heat Input Level indicated in Table I-X-1.
Alternatively, the filler metal manufacturer or Contractor may elect to test a wider
or narrower range of heat inputs and interpass temperatures. The range of heat
inputs and interpass temperatures tested shall be clearly stated on the test reports
and user data sheets. Regardless of the method of selecting test heat input, the WPS,
as used by the contractor, shall fall within the range of heat inputs and interpass
temperatures tested.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
App. X4.] PART I – ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 45
TABLE I-X-1
WPS Toughness Verification Test Welding
and Preheat Conditions
Cooling Rate Heat Input Preheat ˚F (˚C) Interpass ˚F (˚C)
Low Heat Input Test 30 kJ/in. (1.2 kJ/mm) 70 ± 25 (21 ± 14) 200 ± 50 (93 ± 28)
High Heat Input Test 80 kJ/in. (3.1 kJ/mm) 300 ± 25 (149 ± 14) 500 ± 50 (260 ± 28)
X3. TEST SPECIMENS
Two test plates, one for each heat input level shall be used, and five Charpy V-
Notch (CVN) test specimens shall be made per plate. Each plate shall be steel, of
any AISC-listed structural grade. The test plate shall be
3
/
4
in. (19 mm) thick with
a
1
/
2
-inch (13 mm) root opening and 45˚ included groove angle. The test plate and
specimens shall be as shown in Figure 2A in AWS A5.20-95, or as in Figure 5 in
AWS A5.29-98. Except for the root pass, a minimum of two passes per layer shall
be used to fill the width.
All test specimens shall be taken from near the centerline of the weld at the mid-
thickness location, in order to minimize dilution effects. CVN specimens shall
be prepared in accordance with AWS B4.0-92, Standard Methods for Mechanical
Testing of Welds, Section A3. The test assembly shall be restrained during welding,
or preset at approximately 5 degrees to prevent warpage in excess of 5 degrees.
A welded test assembly that has warped more than 5 degrees shall be discarded.
Welded test assemblies shall not be straightened.
The test assembly shall be tack welded and heated to the specified preheat tem-
perature, measured by temperature indicating crayons or surface temperature ther-
mometers one inch from the center of the groove at the location shown in the
figures cited above. Welding shall continue until the assembly has reached the
interpass temperature prescribed in Table I-X-1. The interpass temperature shall
be maintained for the remainder of the weld. Should it be necessary to interrupt
welding, the assembly shall be allowed to cool in air. The assembly shall then be
heated to the prescribed interpass temperature before welding is resumed.
X4. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
The lowest and highest CVN toughness values obtained from the five specimens
from a single test plate shall be disregarded. Two of the remaining three values
shall equal, or exceed, the specified toughness of 40 ft-lbf (54 J) energy level at
the testing temperature. One of the three may be lower, but not lower than 30 ft-lbf
(41 J), and the average of the three shall not be less than the required 40 ft-lbf
(54 J) energy level. All test samples shall meet the notch toughness requirements
for the electrodes as provided in Section 7.3b.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262-01 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 16:16 Char Count=
46
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
47
PART II. COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL
AND REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS
GLOSSARY
The following glossary terms are applicable to Part II and are in addition to those given
in the Part I Glossary.
Boundary Member. Portion along wall and diaphragm edges strengthened with structural
steel sections and/or longitudinal steel reinforcement and transverse reinforcement.
Collector Element. Member that serves to transfer forces between floor diaphragms and
the members of the Seismic Force Resisting System.
Composite Beam. A structural steel beam that is either an unencased steel beam that
acts integrally with a concrete or composite slab using shear connectors or a fully
reinforced-concrete-encased steel beam.
Composite Brace. A reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section (rolled or built-
up) or concrete-filled steel section that is used as a brace.
Composite Column. A reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section (rolled or
built-up) or concrete-filled steel section that is used as a column.
Composite Plate -Concrete Shear Wall. Awall that consists of a steel plate with reinforced
concrete encasement on one or both sides that provides out-of-plane stiffening to prevent
buckling of the steel plate.
Composite Shear Wall. A reinforced concrete wall that has unencased or reinforced-
concrete-encased structural steel sections as Boundary Members.
Composite Slab. A concrete slab that is supported on and bonded to a formed steel deck
and that acts as a diaphragm to transfer force to and between elements of the Seismic
Force Resisting System.
Concrete-Filled Composite Column. Round or rectangular structural steel section that is
filled with concrete.
Coupling Beam. A structural steel or Composite Beam that connects adjacent reinforced
concrete wall elements so that they act together to resist lateral forces.
Encased Composite Beam. A structural steel beam that is completely encased in rein-
forced concrete that is cast integrally with the slab and for which full composite action
is provided by bond between the structural steel and reinforced concrete.
Encased Composite Column. A structural steel column (rolled or built-up) that is com-
pletely encased in reinforced concrete.
Face Bearing Plates. Stiffeners that are attached to structural steel beams that are em-
bedded in reinforced concrete walls or columns. The plates are located at the face of
the reinforced concrete to provide confinement and to transfer forces to the concrete
through direct bearing.
Fully Composite Beam. A Composite Beam that has a sufficient number of shear connec-
tors to develop the nominal plastic flexural strength of the composite section.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
48 PART II – GLOSSARY
Load-Carrying Reinforcement. Reinforcement in composite members that is designed and
detailed to resist the required loads.
Partially Composite Beam. An unencased Composite Beam with a nominal flexural
strength that is controlled by the strength of the shear stud connectors.
Partially Restrained Composite Connection. Partially Restrained connections as defined
in the LRFD Specification that connect partially or Fully Composite Beams to steel
columns with flexural resistance provided by a force couple achieved with steel rein-
forcement in the slab and a steel seat angle or similar connection at the bottom flange.
Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Shapes. Structural steel sections that are encased in rein-
forced concrete.
Restraining Bars. Steel reinforcement in composite members that is not designed to carry
required forces, but is provided to facilitate the erection of other steel reinforcement and
to provide anchorage for stirrups or ties. Generally, such reinforcement is not spliced
to be continuous.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 5.] PART II – MATERIALS 49
1. SCOPE
These Provisions are intended for the design and construction of composite struc-
tural steel and reinforced concrete members and connections in the Seismic Load
Resisting Systems in buildings for which the design forces resulting from earth-
quake motions have been determined on the basis of various levels of energy
dissipation in the inelastic range of response.
Provisions shall be applied in conjunction with the AISC Load and Resistance
Factor Design (LRFD) Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, hereinafter
referred to as the LRFDSpecification. All members and connections in the Seismic
Load Resisting System shall have a Design Strength as required in the LRFD
Specification and shall meet the requirements in these Provisions. The applicable
requirements in Part I shall be used for the design of structural steel components
in composite systems. Reinforced-concrete members subjected to seismic forces
shall meet the requirements in ACI 318, except as modified in these provisions.
When the design is based upon elastic analysis, the stiffness properties of the
component members of composite systems shall reflect their condition at the onset
of significant yielding of the building.
Part II includes a Glossary, which is specifically applicable to this Part. The Part I
Glossary is also applicable to Part II.
2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
The documents referenced in these provisions shall include those listed in Part I
Section 2 with the following additions and modifications:
American Society of Civil Engineers
Standard for the Structural Design of Composite Slabs, ASCE 3-91
American Welding Society
Structural Welding Code-Reinforcing Steel, AWS D1.4-98
3. SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES
The RequiredStrengthandother seismic provisions for Seismic DesignCategories,
Seismic Use Groups or Seismic Zones and the limitations on height and irregularity
shall be as stipulated in the Applicable Building Code.
4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS
The loads and load combinations shall be as stipulated by the Applicable Building
Code (see Glossary). Where Amplified Seismic Loads are required by these pro-
visions, the horizontal earthquake load E (as defined in the Applicable Building
Code) shall be multiplied by the overstrength factor
o
prescribed by the Appli-
cable Building Code. In the absence of a specific definition of
o
, the value for

o
shall be as listed in Table II-4-1.
5. MATERIALS
5.1. Structural Steel
Structural steel used in composite Seismic Load Resisting Systems shall meet the
requirements in LRFD Specification Section A3.1a. Structural steel used in the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
50 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Sect. 6.
TABLE II-4-1
System Overstrength Factor, Ω
o
Seismic Load Resisting System Ω
o
All moment-frame systems meeting Part II requirements 3
All Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF) 2
1
/2
and wall systems meeting Part II requirements
All other systems meeting Part II requirements 2
composite Seismic Force Resisting Systems described in Sections 8, 9, 13, 14, 16
and 17 shall also meet the requirements in Part I Section 6.
5.2. Concrete and Steel Reinforcement
Concrete and steel reinforcement used in composite Seismic Load Resisting Sys-
tems shall meet the requirements in ACI 318, excluding Chapters 21 and 22, and
the following requirements:
(1) The specified minimum compressive strength of concrete in composite mem-
bers shall equal or exceed 2.5 ksi (17 MPa).
(2) For the purposes of determining the Nominal Strength of composite members,
f

c
shall not be taken as greater than 10 ksi (69 MPa) for normal-weight
concrete nor 4 ksi (28 MPa) for lightweight concrete.
Concrete and steel reinforcement used in the composite Seismic Load Resisting
Systems described in Sections 8, 9, 13, 14, 16, and 17 shall also meet the require-
ments in ACI 318 Chapter 21.
6. COMPOSITE MEMBERS
6.1. Scope
The design of composite members in the Seismic Load Resisting Systems de-
scribed in Sections 8 through 17 shall meet the requirements in this Section and
the material requirements in Section 5.
6.2. Composite Floor and Roof Slabs
The design of composite floor and roof slabs shall meet the requirements of
ASCE 3. Composite slab diaphragms shall meet the requirements in this Section.
Details shall be designed to transfer forces between the diaphragm and Boundary
Members, Collector Elements, and elements of the horizontal framing system.
The nominal shear strength of composite diaphragms and concrete-filled steel
deck diaphragms shall be taken as the nominal shear strength of the reinforced
concrete above the top of the steel deck ribs in accordance with ACI 318 excluding
Chapter 22. Alternatively, the composite diaphragm design shear strength shall be
determined by in-plane shear tests of concrete-filled diaphragms.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 6.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 51
6.3. Composite Beams
Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I.
Composite Beams that are part of C-SMF as described in Section 9 shall also meet
the following requirements:
(1) The distance from the maximum concrete compression fiber to the plastic
neutral axis shall not exceed:
Ycon
+
d
b
1 +

1700 Fy
Es
(6-1)
where
Y
con
= distance from the top of the steel beam to the top of concrete, in. (mm)
d
b
= depth of the steel beam, in. (mm)
F
y
= specified minimum yield strength of the steel beam, ksi (MPa)
E
s
= modulus of elasticity of the steel beam, ksi (MPa)
(2) Beam flanges shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 9.4, except when
fully reinforced-concrete-encased compression elements have a reinforced
concrete cover of at least 2 in. (50 mm) and confinement is provided by hoop
reinforcement in regions where plastic hinges are expected to occur under
seismic deformations. Hoop reinforcement shall meet the requirements in
ACI 318 Section 21.3.3.
6.4. Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns
This Section is applicable to columns that: (1) consist of reinforced-concrete-
encased structural steel sections with a structural steel area that comprises at least
4 percent of the total composite-column cross-section; and (2) meet the additional
limitations in LRFD Specification Section I2.1. Such columns shall meet the re-
quirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I, except as modified in this Section.
Additional requirements, as specified for intermediate and special seismic sys-
tems in Sections 6.4b and 6.4c, shall apply as required in the descriptions of the
composite seismic systems in Sections 8 through 17.
Columns that consist of reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel sections with
a structural steel area that comprises less than 4 percent of the total composite-
column cross-section shall meet the requirements for reinforced concrete columns
in ACI 318 except as modified for:
(1) The steel shape shear connectors in Section 6.4a(2).
(2) The contribution of the reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section to
the strength of the column as provided in ACI 318.
(3) The seismic requirements for reinforced concrete columns as specified in the
description of the composite seismic systems in Sections 8 through 17.
6.4a. Ordinary Seismic System Requirements
The following requirements for Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite
Columns are applicable to all composite systems:
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
52 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Sect. 6.
(1) The nominal shear strength of the column shall be determined as the nominal
shear strength of the structural shape plus the nominal shear strength that is
provided by the tie reinforcement in the reinforced-concrete encasement. The
nominal shear strength of the structural steel section shall be determined in
accordance with LRFD Specification Section F2. The nominal shear strength
of the tie reinforcement shall be determined in accordance with ACI 318
Sections 11.5.6.2 through 11.5.6.9. In ACI 318 Sections 11.5.6.5 and 11.5.6.9,
the dimension b
w
shall equal the width of the concrete cross-section minus
the width of the structural shape measured perpendicular to the direction of
shear. The nominal shear strength shall be multiplied by ␾
v
equal to 0.75 to
determine the design shear strength.
(2) Composite Columns that are designed to share the applied loads between the
structural steel section and reinforced concrete shall have shear connectors
that meet the following requirements:
(a) If an external member is framed directly to the structural steel section
to transfer a vertical reaction V
u
, shear connectors shall be provided to
transfer the force V
u
(1 − A
s
F
y
/ P
n
) betweenthe structural steel sectionand
the reinforced concrete, where A
s
is the area of the structural steel section,
F
y
is the specified minimum yield strength of the structural steel section,
and P
n
is the nominal compressive strength of the Composite Column.
(b) If an external member is framed directly to the reinforced concrete to trans-
fer a vertical reaction V
u
, shear connectors shall be provided to transfer the
force V
u
A
s
F
y
/ P
n
between the structural steel section and the reinforced
concrete, where A
s
, F
y
and P
n
are as defined above.
(c) The maximum spacing of shear connectors shall be 16 in. (406 mm) with
attachment along the outside flange faces of the embedded shape.
(3) The maximum spacing of transverse ties shall be the least of the following:
(a) one-half the least dimension of the section
(b) 16 longitudinal bar diameters
(c) 48 tie diameters
Transverse ties shall be located vertically within one-half the tie spacing above
the top of the footing or lowest beam or slab in any story and shall be spaced
as provided herein within one-half the tie spacing below the lowest beam or
slab framing into the column.
Transverse bars shall have a diameter that is not less thanone-fiftiethof greatest
side dimension of the composite member, except that ties shall not be smaller
than No. 3 bars and need not be larger than No. 5 bars. Alternatively, welded
wire fabric of equivalent area is permitted as transverse reinforcement except
when prohibited for intermediate and special systems.
(4) All Load-Carrying Reinforcement shall meet the detailing and splice require-
ments in ACI 318 Sections 7.8.1 and 12.17. Load-Carrying Reinforcement
shall be provided at every corner of a rectangular cross-section. The maxi-
mum spacing of other load carrying or restraining longitudinal reinforcement
shall be one-half of the least side dimension of the composite member.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 6.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 53
(5) Splices andendbearingdetails for reinforced-concrete-encasedstructural steel
sections shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification and ACI 318
Section 7.8.2. If adverse behavioral effects due to the abrupt change in member
stiffness and nominal tensile strength occur when reinforced-concrete encase-
ment of a structural steel section is terminated, either at a transition to a pure
reinforced concrete column or at the Column Base, they shall be considered
in the design.
6.4b. Intermediate Seismic System Requirements
Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns in intermediate seismic sys-
tems shall meet the following requirements in addition to those in Section 6.4a:
(1) The maximum spacing of transverse bars at the top and bottom shall be the
least of the following:
(a) one-half the least dimension of the section
(b) 8 longitudinal bar diameters
(c) 24 tie bar diameters
(d) 12 in. (305 mm)
These spacings shall be maintained over a vertical distance equal to the greatest
of the following lengths, measured from each joint face and on both sides of
any section where flexural yielding is expected to occur:
(a) one-sixth the vertical clear height of the column
(b) the maximum cross-sectional dimension
(c) 18 in. (457 mm)
(2) Tie spacing over the remaining column length shall not exceed twice the
spacing defined above.
(3) Welded wire fabric is not permitted as transverse reinforcement in intermediate
seismic systems.
6.4c. Special Seismic System Requirements
Reinforced-concrete-encased columns for special seismic systems shall meet the
following requirements in addition to those in Sections 6.4a and 6.4b:
(1) The required axial strength for Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite
Columns and splice details shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 8.
(2) Longitudinal Load-Carrying Reinforcement shall meet the requirements in
ACI 318 Section 21.4.3.
(3) Transverse reinforcement shall be hoop reinforcement as defined in ACI 318
Chapter 21 and shall meet the following requirements:
(a) The minimum area of tie reinforcement A
sh
shall meet the following
requirement:
A
sh
= 0.09h
cc
s

1 −
F
y
A
s
P
n

f

c
F
yh

(6-2)
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
54 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Sect. 6.
where
h
cc
= cross-sectional dimension of the confined core measured
center-to-center of the tie reinforcement, in. (mm)
s = spacing of transverse reinforcement measured along the
longitudinal axis of the structural member, in. (mm)
F
y
= specified minimum yield strength of the structural steel core,
ksi (MPa)
A
s
= cross-sectional area of the structural core, in.
2
(mm
2
)
P
n
= nominal axial compressive strength of the Composite Column
calculated in accordance with the LRFD Specification, kips (N)
f

c
= specified compressive strength of concrete, ksi (MPa)
F
yh
= specified minimum yield strength of the ties, ksi (MPa)
Equation 6-2 need not be satisfied if the Nominal Strength of the reinforced-
concrete-encased structural steel section alone is greater than 1.0D +0.5L.
(b) The maximumspacing of transverse reinforcement along the length of the
column shall be the lesser of 6 longitudinal load-carrying bar diameters
and 6 in. (152 mm)
(c) When specified in Sections 6.4c(4), 6.4c(5) or 6.4c(6), the maximum
spacing of transverse reinforcement shall be the lesser of one-fourth
the least member dimension and 4 in. (102 mm). For this reinforce-
ment, cross ties, legs of overlapping hoops, and other confining rein-
forcement shall be spaced not more than 14 in. on center in the transverse
direction.
(4) Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns in Braced Frames with
axial compression forces that are larger than 0.2 times P
o
shall have trans-
verse reinforcement as specified in Section 6.4c(3)(c) over the total ele-
ment length. This requirement need not be satisfied if the Nominal Strength
of the reinforced-concrete-encased steel section alone is greater than
1.0D +0.5L.
(5) Composite Columns supporting reactions from discontinued stiff members,
such as walls or Braced Frames, shall have transverse reinforcement as speci-
fied in Section 6.4c(3)(c) over the full length beneath the level at which the dis-
continuity occurs if the axial compression force exceeds 0.1 times P
o
. Trans-
verse reinforcement shall extend into the discontinued member for at least the
length required to develop full yielding in the reinforced-concrete-encased
structural steel section and longitudinal reinforcement. This requirement need
not be satisfied if the Nominal Strength of the reinforced-concrete-encased
structural steel section alone is greater than 1.0D +0.5L.
(6) Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns that are used in C-SMF
shall meet the following requirements:
(a) Transverse reinforcement shall meet the requirements inSection6.4c(3)(c)
at the top and bottom of the column over the region specified in Sec-
tion 6.4b.
(b) The strong-column/weak-beam design requirements in Section 9.5 shall
be satisfied. Column Bases shall be detailed to sustain inelastic flexural
hinging.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 7.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS 55
(c) The minimum required shear strength of the column shall meet the re-
quirements in ACI 318 Section 21.4.5.1.
(7) When the column terminates on a footing or mat foundation, the transverse
reinforcement as specified in this section shall extend into the footing or mat
at least 12 in. (305 mm). When the column terminates on a wall, the transverse
reinforcement shall extend into the wall for at least the length required to de-
velop full yielding in the reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section
and longitudinal reinforcement.
(8) Welded wire fabric is not permitted as transverse reinforcement for special
seismic systems.
6.5. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns
This Section is applicable to columns that: (1) consist of concrete-filled steel rect-
angular or circular hollow structural sections (HSS) with a structural steel area
that comprises at least 4 percent of the total composite-column cross-section; and
(2) meet the additional limitations in LRFD Specification Section I2.1. Such
columns shall be designed to meet the requirements in LRFD Specification
Chapter I, except as modified in this Section.
The design shear strength of the Composite Column shall be the design shear
strength of the structural steel section alone.
In the special seismic systems described in Sections 9, 13 and 14, members and
column splices for Concrete-Filled Composite Columns shall also meet the re-
quirements in Part I Section 8.
Concrete-Filled Composite Columns used in C-SMF shall meet the following
additional requirements:
(1) The minimum required shear strength of the column shall meet the require-
ments in ACI 318 Section 21.4.5.1.
(2) The strong-column/weak-beam design requirements in Section 9.5 shall be
met. Column Bases shall be designed to sustain inelastic flexural hinging.
(3) The minimum wall thickness of concrete-filled rectangular HSS shall equal
b

F
y
/ (2E
s
) (6-3)
for the flat width b of each face, where b is as defined in LRFD Specification
Table B5.1.
7. COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS
7.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to connections in buildings that utilize composite or dual
steel and concrete systems wherein seismic force is transferred between structural
steel and reinforced concrete components.
Composite connections shall be demonstrated to have Design Strength, ductility
and toughness that is comparable to that exhibited by similar structural steel or
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
56 PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS [Sect. 7.
reinforced concrete connections that meet the requirements in Part I and ACI
318, respectively. Methods for calculating the connection strength shall meet the
requirements in this Section.
7.2. General Requirements
Connections shall have adequate deformation capacity to resist the critical Re-
quired Strengths at the Design Story Drift. Additionally, connections that are re-
quired for the lateral stability of the building under seismic forces shall meet the
requirements in Sections 8 through 17 based upon the specific system in which
the connection is used. When the Required Strength is based upon nominal mate-
rial strengths and nominal member dimensions, the determination of the required
connection strength shall account for any effects that result from the increase in
the actual Nominal Strength of the connected member.
7.3. Nominal Strength of Connections
The Nominal Strength of connections in composite Structural Systems shall be
determined on the basis of rational models that satisfy both equilibrium of internal
forces and the strength limitation of component materials and elements based upon
potential limit states. Unless the connection strength is determined by analysis
and testing, the models used for analysis of connections shall meet the following
requirements:
(1) When required, force shall be transferred between structural steel and rein-
forced concrete through direct bearing of headed shear studs or suitable alter-
native devices, by other mechanical means, by shear friction with the necessary
clamping force provided by reinforcement normal to the plane of shear trans-
fer, or by a combination of these means. Any potential bond strength between
structural steel and reinforced concrete shall be ignored for the purpose of the
connection force transfer mechanism.
(2) The nominal bearing and shear-friction strengths shall meet the requirements
in ACI 318 Chapters 10 and 11, except that the strength reduction (resistance)
factors shall be as given in ACI 318. Unless a higher strength is substanti-
ated by cyclic testing, the nominal bearing and shear-friction strengths shall
be reduced by 25 percent for the composite seismic systems described in
Sections 9, 13, 14, 16, and 17.
(3) The DesignStrengths of structural steel components incomposite connections,
as determined in Part I and the LRFD Specification, shall equal or exceed the
Required Strengths. Structural steel elements that are encased in confined
reinforced concrete are permitted to be considered to be braced against out-
of-plane buckling. Face Bearing Plates consisting of stiffeners between the
flanges of steel beams are required when beams are embedded in reinforced
concrete columns or walls.
(4) The nominal shear strength of reinforced-concrete-encased steel Panel Zones
in beam-to-column connections shall be calculated as the sum of the Nomi-
nal Strengths of the structural steel and confined reinforced concrete shear
elements as determined in Part I Section 9.3 and ACI 318 Section 21.5,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 8.] PART II – COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR) MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF) 57
respectively. The strength reduction (resistance) factors for reinforced con-
crete shall be as given in ACI 318.
(5) Reinforcement shall be provided to resist all tensile forces in reinforced con-
crete components of the connections. Additionally, the concrete shall be con-
finedwithtransverse reinforcement. All reinforcement shall be fullydeveloped
in tension or compression, as appropriate, beyond the point at which it is no
longer required to resist the forces. Development lengths shall be determined
in accordance with ACI 318 Chapter 12. Additionally, development lengths
for the systems described in Sections 9, 13, 14, 16 and 17 shall meet the re-
quirements in ACI 318 Section 21.5.4. Connections shall meet the following
additional requirements:
(a) When the slab transfers horizontal diaphragm forces, the slab reinforce-
ment shall be designed and anchored to carry the in-plane tensile forces at
all critical sections in the slab, including connections to collector beams,
columns, braces and walls.
(b) For connections between structural steel or Composite Beams and re-
inforced concrete or Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns,
transverse hoop reinforcement shall be provided in the connection region
to meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21.5, except for the following
modifications:
(i) Structural steel sections framing into the connections are considered
to provide confinement over a width equal to that of face bearing
stiffener plates welded to the beams between the flanges.
(ii) Lap splices are permitted for perimeter ties when confinement of the
splice is provided by Face Bearing Plates or other means that prevents
spalling of the concrete cover in the systems described in Sections 10,
11, 12 and 15.
(c) The longitudinal bar sizes andlayout inreinforcedconcrete andComposite
Columns shall be detailed to minimize slippage of the bars through the
beam-to-column connection due to high force transfer associated with the
change in column moments over the height of the connection.
8. COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR)
MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF)
8.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to frames that consist of structural steel columns and
Composite Beams that are connected with Partially Restrained (PR) moment con-
nections that meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Section A2. C-PRMF
shall be designed so that under earthquake loading yielding occurs in the ductile
components of the composite PR beam-to-column moment connections. Limited
yielding is permitted at other locations, such as the Column Base connection.
Connection flexibility and Composite Beam action shall be accounted for in deter-
mining the dynamic characteristics, strength and drift of C-PRMF. C-PRMF shall
meet the requirements of this section.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
58 PART II – COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) [Sect. 9.
8.2. Columns
Structural steel columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 8 and the
LRFD Specification. The effect of PR moment connections on stability of indivi-
dual columns and the overall frame shall be considered in C-PRMF.
8.3. Composite Beams
Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I.
For the purposes of analysis, the stiffness of beams shall be determined with an
effective moment of inertia of the composite section.
8.4. Partially Restrained (PR) Moment Connections
The Required Strength for the beam-to-column PR moment connections shall
be determined from the load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building
Code, including consideration of the effects of connection flexibility and second-
order moments. In addition, composite connections shall have a Nominal Strength
that is at least equal to 50 percent of M
p
, where M
p
is the nominal plastic flex-
ural strength of the connected structural steel beam ignoring composite action.
Connections shall meet the requirements in Section 7 and shall have an inelastic
rotation capacity of 0.015 radians and a total rotation capacity of 0.03 radians that
is substantiated by cyclic testing as described in Part I Section 9.2a.
9. COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF)
9.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to moment-resisting frames that consist of either com-
posite or reinforced concrete columns and either structural steel or Composite
Beams. C-SMF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake sig-
nificant inelastic deformations will occur, primarily in the beams, but with limited
inelastic deformations in the columns and/or connections. C-SMF shall meet the
requirements of this section.
9.2. Columns
Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for special seismic systems in
Sections 6.4 or 6.5. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in
ACI 318 Chapter 21, excluding Section 21.10.
9.3. Beams
Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in Section 6.3. Neither structural
steel nor composite trusses are permitted as flexural members to resist seismic
loads in C-SMF unless it is demonstrated by testing and analysis that the particular
system provides adequate ductility and energy dissipation capacity.
9.4. Moment Connections
The Required Strength of beam-to-column moment connections shall be deter-
mined from the shear and flexure associated with the nominal plastic flexural
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 10.] PART II – COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) 59
strengthof the beams framingintothe connection. The nominal connectionstrength
shall meet the requirements in Section 7. In addition, the connections shall be ca-
pable of sustaining an inelastic beam rotation of 0.03 radians. When the beam
flanges are interrupted at the connection, the inelastic rotation capacity shall be
demonstrated as specified in Part I Section 9 for connections in SMF. For connec-
tions to reinforced concrete columns with a beam that is continuous through the
column so that welded joints are not required in the flanges and the connection
is not otherwise susceptible to premature fractures, the inelastic rotation capacity
shall be demonstrated by testing or other substantiating data.
9.5. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
The minimum flexural strength and design of reinforced concrete columns shall
meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21.4.2. The minimum flexural strength
and design of Composite Columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 9.6
with the following modifications:
(1) The flexural strength of the Composite Column M

pc
shall meet the require-
ments in LRFDSpecification Chapter I with consideration of the applied axial
load, P
u
.
(2) The force limit for the exceptions in Part I Section 9.6(a) shall be P
u
< 0.1P
o
.
(3) Composite Columns exempted by the minimum flexural strength requirement
in Part I Section 9.6 shall have transverse reinforcement that meets the re-
quirements in Section 6.4c(4).
10. COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF)
10.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to moment resisting frames that consist of either compos-
ite or reinforced concrete columns and either structural steel or Composite Beams.
C-IMF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake inelastic
deformation will occur primarily in the beams but with moderate inelastic defor-
mation in the columns and/or connections. C-IMF shall meet the requirements of
this section.
10.2. Columns
Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for intermediate seismic systems
in Section 6.4 or 6.5. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in
ACI 318 Section 21.10.
10.3. Beams
Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD
Specification.
10.4. Moment Connections
The nominal connection strength shall meet the requirements in Section 7. The
Required Strength of beam-to-column connections shall meet one of the following
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
60 PART II – COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) [Sect. 12.
requirements:
(a) The connection Design Strength shall meet or exceed the forces associated
with plastic hinging of the beams adjacent to the connection.
(b) The connection Design Strength shall meet or exceed the Required Strength
generated by load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code,
including the Amplified Seismic Load.
(c) The connections shall demonstrate an inelastic rotation capacity of at least
0.02 radians in cyclic tests.
11. COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF)
11.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to moment resisting frames that consist of either com-
posite or reinforced concrete columns and structural steel or Composite Beams.
C-OMF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake limited in-
elastic action will occur in the beams, columns and/or connections. C-OMF shall
meet the requirements of this section.
11.2. Columns
Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for ordinary seismic systems in
Section 6.4 or 6.5. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in
ACI 318, excluding Chapters 21.
11.3. Beams
Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD
Specification.
11.4. Moment Connections
Connections shall be designed for the applied factored load combinations and their
Design Strength shall meet the requirements in Section 7.
12. COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF)
12.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to concentrically and Eccentrically Braced Frame sys-
tems that consist of either composite or reinforced concrete columns, structural
steel or Composite Beams, and structural steel or Composite Braces. C-OBF shall
be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake limited inelastic action
will occur in the beams, columns, braces, and/or connections. C-OBF shall meet
the requirements of this section.
12.2. Columns
Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns shall meet the requirements
for ordinary seismic systems in Sections 6.4. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 13.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) 61
shall meet the requirements in Section 6.5. Reinforced concrete columns shall
meet the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21.
12.3. Beams
Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD
Specification.
12.4. Braces
Structural steel braces shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification.
Composite Braces shall meet the requirements for Composite Columns in Sec-
tion 12.2.
12.5. Connections
Connections shall be designed for the applied load combinations stipulated by the
Applicable Building Code and their Design Strength shall meet the requirements
in Section 7.
13. COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF)
13.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to braced systems that consist of concentrically con-
nected members. Minor eccentricities are permitted if they are accounted for in
the design. Columns shall be either composite structural steel or reinforced con-
crete. Beams and braces shall be either structural steel or composite structural
steel. C-CBF shall be designed so that under the loading of the Design Earthquake
inelastic action will occur primarily through tension yielding and/or buckling of
braces. C-CBF shall meet the requirements of this section.
13.2. Columns
Structural steel columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 8. Composite
structural steel columns shall meet the requirements for special systems in Section
6.4 or 6.5. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements for structural
truss elements in ACI 318 Chapter 21.
13.3. Beams
Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD
Specification.
13.4. Braces
Structural steel braces shall meet the requirements for SCBF in Part I Section 13.
Composite Braces shall meet the requirements for Composite Columns in Sec-
tion 13.2.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
62 PART II – COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) [Sect. 14.
13.5. Bracing Connections
Bracing connections shall meet the requirements in Section 7 and Part I Section 13.
14. COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF)
14.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to braced systems for which one end of each brace
intersects a beam at an eccentricity from the intersection of the centerlines of the
beam and column or intersects a beam at an eccentricity from the intersection
of the centerlines of the beam and an adjacent brace. C-EBF shall be designed
so that inelastic deformations will occur only as shear yielding in the Links. The
diagonal braces, columns, and beamsegments outside of the Link shall be designed
to remain essentially elastic under the maximum forces that can be generated by
the fully yielded and strain-hardened Link. Columns shall be either composite
or reinforced concrete. Braces shall be structural steel. Links shall be structural
steel as described in this Section. The Design Strength of members shall meet
the requirements in the LRFD Specification, except as modified in this Section.
C-EBF shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 15, except as modified in this
Section.
14.2. Columns
Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements for structural truss ele-
ments in ACI 318 Chapter 21. Composite Columns shall meet the requirements
for special seismic systems in Sections 6.4 or 6.5. Additionally, where a Link is
adjacent to a reinforced concrete column or reinforced-concrete-encased column,
transverse reinforcement meeting the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21.4.4 (or
Section 6.4c(6)(a) for Composite Columns) shall be provided above and belowthe
Link connection.
All columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 15.8.
14.3. Links
Links shall be unencased structural steel and shall meet the requirement for EBF
Links in Part I Section 15. It is permitted to encase the portion of the beam outside
of the Link with reinforced concrete. Beams containing the Link are permitted to
act compositely with the floor slab using shear connectors along all or any portion
of the beam if the composite action is considered when determining the Nominal
Strength of the Link.
14.4. Braces
Structural steel braces shall meet the requirements for EBF in Part I Section 15.
14.5. Connections
In addition to the requirements for EBF in Part I Section 15, connections shall
meet the requirements in Section 7.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 15.] PART II – ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE 63
15. ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE
WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-ORCW)
15.1. Scope
The requirements in this Section apply when reinforced concrete walls are com-
posite with structural steel elements, either as infill panels, such as reinforced
concrete walls in structural steel frames with unencased or reinforced-concrete-
encased structural steel sections that act as Boundary Members, or as structural
steel Coupling Beams that connect two adjacent reinforced concrete walls. Rein-
forcedconcrete walls shall meet the requirements inACI 318excludingChapter 21.
C-ORCW shall meet the requirements of this section.
15.2. Boundary Members
When unencased structural steel sections function as Boundary Members in rein-
forced concrete infill panels, the structural steel sections shall meet the require-
ments in the LRFD Specification. The required axial strength of the Boundary
Member shall be determined assuming that the shear forces are carried by the re-
inforced concrete wall and the entire gravity and overturning forces are carried by
the Boundary Members in conjunction with the shear wall. The reinforced concrete
wall shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21.
When fully reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel sections function as Boun-
daryMembers inreinforcedconcrete infill panels, the analysis shall be basedupona
transformed concrete section using elastic material properties. The wall shall meet
the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21. When the reinforced-concrete-
encased structural steel Boundary Member qualifies as a Composite Column as
defined in LRFD Specification Chapter I, it shall be designed to meet the ordinary
seismic system requirements in Section 6.4. Otherwise, it shall be designed as a
Composite Column to meet the requirements in ACI 318.
Headed shear studs or welded reinforcement anchors shall be provided to transfer
vertical shear forces between the structural steel and reinforced concrete. Headed
shear studs, if used, shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I.
Welded reinforcement anchors, if used, shall meet the requirements in AWS D1.4.
15.3. Coupling Beams
Structural steel Coupling Beams that are used between two adjacent reinforced
concrete walls shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification and this
Section:
Coupling Beams shall have an embedment length into the reinforced concrete
wall that is sufficient to develop the maximum possible combination of moment
and shear that can be generated by the nominal bending and shear strength of the
Coupling Beam. The embedment length shall be considered to begin inside the
first layer of confining reinforcement in the wall Boundary Member. Connection
strength for the transfer of loads between the Coupling Beam and the wall shall
meet the requirements in Section 7.
Vertical wall reinforcement with design axial strength equal to the nominal shear
strength of the Coupling Beam shall be placed over the embedment length of the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
64 PART II – SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE [Sect. 16.
beamwithtwo-thirds of the steel locatedover the first half of the embedment length.
This wall reinforcement shall extend a distance of at least one tension development
length above and below the flanges of the Coupling Beam. It is permitted to use
vertical reinforcement placed for other purposes, such as for vertical Boundary
Members, as part of the required vertical reinforcement.
16. SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE
WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-SRCW)
16.1. Scope
C-SRCW systems shall meet the requirements in Section 15 for C-ORCW and the
shear-wall requirement in ACI 318 including Chapter 21, except as modified in
this Section.
16.2. Boundary Members
In addition to the requirements in Section 15.2a, unencased structural steel columns
shall meet the requirements in Part I Sections 5, 6 and 8.
Walls with reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel Boundary Members shall
meet the requirements in Section 15.2 as wells as the requirements in this Section.
The wall shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 including Chapter 21. Reinforced-
concrete-encased structural steel Boundary Members that qualify as Composite
Columns in LRFD Specification Chapter I shall meet the special seismic system
requirements in Section 6.4. Otherwise, such members shall be designed as com-
posite compression members to meet the requirements in ACI 318 including the
special seismic requirements for Boundary Members in Chapter 21. Transverse
reinforcement for confinement of the composite Boundary Member shall extend a
distance of 2h into the wall where h is the overall depth of the Boundary Member
in the plane of the wall.
Headed shear studs or welded reinforcing bar anchors shall be provided as specified
in Section 15.2. For connection to unencased structural steel sections, the Nominal
Strength of welded reinforcing bar anchors shall be reduced by 25 percent from
their Static Yield Strength.
16.3. Coupling Beams
In addition to the requirements in Section 15.3, structural steel Coupling Beams
shall meet the requirements in Part I Sections 15.2 and 15.3. When required in
Part I Section 15.3, the coupling rotation shall be assumed as 0.08 radians unless
a smaller value is justified by rational analysis of the inelastic deformations that
are expected under the Design Earthquake. Face Bearing Plates shall be provided
on both sides of the Coupling Beams at the face of the reinforced concrete wall.
These stiffeners shall meet the detailing requirements in Part I Section 15.3.
Vertical wall reinforcement as specified in Section 15.3 shall be confined by
transverse reinforcement that meets the requirements for Boundary Members in
ACI 318 Section 21.7.2.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
Sect. 17.] PART II – COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) 65
17. COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW)
17.1. Scope
This Section is applicable to structural walls consisting of steel plates with rein-
forced concrete encasement on one or both sides of the plate and structural steel or
composite Boundary Members. C-SPWshall meet the requirements of this section.
17.2. Wall Elements
17.2a. Nominal Shear Strength
The nominal shear strength of C-SPW with a stiffened plate conforming to Sec-
tion 17.2b shall be determined as:
V
ns
= 0.6A
sp
F
y
(17-1)
where
V
ns
= nominal shear strength of the steel plate, kips (N)
A
sp
= horizontal area of stiffened steel plate, in.
2
(mm
2
)
F
y
= specified minimum yield strength of the plate, ksi (MPa)
The nominal shear strength of C-SPW with a plate that does not meet the stiffen-
ing requirements in Section 17.2b shall be based upon the strength of the plate,
excluding the strength of the reinforced concrete, and meet the requirements in the
LRFD Specification,including the effects of buckling of the plate.
17.2b. Detailing Requirements
The steel plate shall be adequately stiffened by encasement or attachment to the
reinforced concrete if it can be demonstrated with an elastic plate buckling analysis
that the composite wall can resist a nominal shear force equal to V
ns
. The concrete
thickness shall be a minimum of 4 in. (102 mm) on each side when concrete is
provided on both sides of the steel plate and 8 in. (203 mm) when concrete is
provided on one side of the steel plate. Headed shear stud connectors or other
mechanical connectors shall be provided to prevent local buckling and separation
of the plate and reinforced concrete. Horizontal and vertical reinforcement shall
be provided in the concrete encasement to meet the detailing requirements in
ACI 318 Section 14.3. The reinforcement ratio in both directions shall not be less
than 0.0025; the maximumspacing between bars shall not exceed 18 in. (457 mm).
The steel plate shall be continuously connected on all edges to structural steel
framing and Boundary Members with welds and/or slip-critical high-strength bolts
to develop the nominal shear strength of the plate. The Design Strength of welded
and bolted connectors shall meet the additional requirements in Part I Section 7.
17.3. Boundary Members
Structural steel and composite Boundary Members shall be designed to meet the
requirements in Section 16.2.
Boundary Members shall be provided around openings as required by analysis.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-02 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:19 Char Count=
66
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-03 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:51 Char Count=
67
PART III. ALLOWABLE STRESS
DESIGN (ASD) ALTERNATIVE
As an alternative to the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) provisions for struc-
tural steel design in Part I, the use of the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) provisions
in this Part is permitted. All requirements of Part I shall be met except as modified or
supplemented in this Part. When using this Part, the terms “LRFD Specification”,
“FR” and “PR” in Part I shall be taken as “ASD Specification”, “Type 1”, and “Type 3”,
respectively.
1. SCOPE
Substitute the following for PART I Section 1 in its entirety:
These Provisions are intended for the design and construction of structural steel
members and connections in the Seismic Force Resisting Systems in buildings for
which the design forces resulting from earthquake motions have been determined
on the basis of various levels of energy dissipation in the inelastic range of response.
These Provisions shall apply to buildings that are classified in the Applicable
Building Code as Seismic Design Category D (or equivalent) and higher or when
required by the Engineer of Record.
These Provisions shall be applied in conjunction with the AISC Specification for
Structural Steel Buildings—Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design including
Supplement No. 1, hereinafter referred to as the ASD Specification. All members
and connections in the Seismic Force Resisting System shall be proportioned as
required in the ASD Specification to resist the applicable load combinations and
shall meet the requirements in these Provisions.
Part III includes the Part I Glossary and Appendix S.
2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
Substitute the following for the first two paragraphs of Part I Section 2:
The documents referenced in these Provisions shall include those listed in ASD
Specification Section A6 with the following additions and modifications:
American Institute of Steel Construction
Specification for Structural Steel Buildings—Allowable Stress Design and Plastic
Design, June 1, 1989 including Supplement No. 1, December 17, 2001
Substitute the following for the last paragraph of Part I Section 2:
Research Council on Structural Connections
Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTMA325 or A490 Bolts, June 23, 2000,
Appendix B
4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS
Substitute the following for Part I Section 4.2 in its entirety:
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-03 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:51 Char Count=
68 PART III – LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS [Sect. 4.
TABLE III-4-1
Resistance Factors for ASD
Limit State Resistance Factor
Tension
Yielding 0.90
Rupture 0.75
Compression buckling 0.85
Flexure
Yielding 0.90
Rupture 0.75
Shear
Yielding 0.90
Rupture 0.75
Torsion
Yielding 0.90
Buckling 0.90
Complete-joint-penetration groove welds
Tension or compression normal to effective area Base metal 0.90
Weld metal 0.90
Shear on effective area Base metal 0.90
Weld metal 0.80
Partial-joint-penetration groove welds
Compression normal to effective area Base metal 0.90
Weld metal 0.90
Tension normal to effective area Base metal 0.90
Weld metal 0.80
Shear parallel to axis of weld Weld metal 0.75
Fillet welds
Shear on effective area Weld metal 0.75
Plug or slot welds
Shear parallel to faying surface (on effective area) Weld metal 0.75
Bolts
Tension rupture, shear rupture, combined tension and shear 0.75
Slip resistance for bolts in standard holes,
oversized holes, and short-slotted holes 1.0
Slip resistance for bolts in long-slotted holes
with the slot perpendicular to the direction of the slot 1.0
Slip resistance for bolts in long-slotted holes with
the slot parallel to the direction of the slot 0.85
Connecting elements
Tension yielding, shear yielding 0.90
Bearing strength at bolt holes, tension rupture,
shear rupture, block shear rupture 0.75
Contact bearing Bearing on steel 0.75
Bearing on concrete 0.60
Flanges and webs with concentrated forces
Local flange bending, compression buckling of web 0.90
Local web yielding 1.0
Web crippling, Panel Zone web shear 0.75
Sidesway web buckling 0.85
4.2. Nominal Strength
The Nominal Strengths of members and connections shall be determined as
follows:
Replace ASD Specification Section A5.2 with the following: “The Nominal
Strength of structural steel members and connections for resisting seismic forces
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-03 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:51 Char Count=
Sect. 9.] PART III – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES 69
acting alone or in combination with dead and live loads shall be determined by
multiplying 1.7 times the allowable stresses in Section D, E, F, G, H, J, and K.
Amend the first paragraph of ASD Specification Section N1 by deleting “or earth-
quake” and adding: “The Nominal Strength of members and connections shall
be determined by the requirements contained herein. Except as modified in these
provisions, all pertinent requirements of Chapters A through M shall govern.”
In ASD Specification Section H1 the definition of F

e
shall read as follows:
F

e
=

2
E
s
(Kl
b
/r
b
)
2
(4-1)
where:
l
b
= the actual length in the plane of bending, in. (mm)
r
b
= the corresponding radius of gyration, in. (mm)
K = the effective length factor in the plane of bending
4.3. Design Strength
The Design Strength of structural steel members and connections subjected to
seismic forces in combination with other prescribed loads shall be determined
by converting allowable stresses into Nominal Strengths and multiplying such
Nominal Strengths by the Resistance Factors given in Table III-4-1.
7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS
7.2. Bolted Joints
Substitute the following for Part I Section 7.2 fourth paragraph in its entirety:
The design resistance to shear and combined tension and shear of bolted joints
shall be determined in accordance with the ASD Specification Sections J3.5 and
J3.7, except that the allowable bearing stress at bolt holes F
p
shall not be taken
greater than 1.2F
u
.
9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES
9.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections
(beam web parallel to column web)
Substitute the following for Part I Section 9.3a in its entirety:
The required thickness of the panel zone shall be determined in accordance with
the method used in proportioning the panel zone of the tested connection. As a
minimum, the requiredshear strength R
u
of the panel zone shall be determinedfrom
the summation of the moments at the column faces as determined by projecting
the expected moments at the plastic hinge points to the column faces. The design
shear strength ␾
v
R
v
of the panel zone shall be determined using ␾
v
= 1.0.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-03 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:51 Char Count=
70 PART III – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES [Sect. 12.
When P
u
≤ 0.75P
y
,
R
v
= 0.6F
y
d
c
t
p

1 +
3b
cf
t
2
cf
d
b
d
c
t
p

(9-1)
When P
u
> 0.75P
y
,
R
v
= 0.6F
y
d
c
t
p

1 +
3b
cf
t
2
cf
d
b
d
c
t
p

1.9 −
1.2P
u
P
y

. (9-1a)
where:
t
p
= total thickness of Panel Zone including doubler plate(s), in. (mm)
d
c
= overall column depth, in. (mm)
b
cf
= width of the column flange, in. (mm)
t
cf
= thickness of the column flange, in. (mm)
d
b
= overall beam depth, in. (mm)
F
y
= specified minimum yield strength of the Panel Zone steel, ksi (MPa)
9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
Substitute the following for Part I Section 9.7b(1) in its entirety:
The required column strength shall be determined fromthe ASDload combinations
stipulatedinthe Applicable BuildingCode, except that E shall be takenas the lesser
of:
(a) The Amplified Seismic Load
(b) 125 percent of the frame Design Strength based upon either the beam design
flexural strength or Panel Zone design shear strength
12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES
12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-special Segment Members
Substitute the following for the first sentence in Part I Section 12.4:
Members and connections of STMF, except those in the special segment defined
in Section 12.2, shall have a Design Strength to resist ASD load combinations as
stipulated by the Applicable Building Code replacing the earthquake load term
E with the lateral loads necessary to develop the expected vertical nominal shear
strength in the special segment V
ne
given as: [balance to remain unchanged]
12.6. Lateral Bracing
Substitute the following for the first sentence in Part I Section 12.6:
The top and bottom chords of the trusses shall be laterally braced at the ends of the
special segment, and at intervals not to exceed L
c
according to ASD Specification
Section F1, along the entire length of the truss.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-03 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:51 Char Count=
Sect. 14.] PART III – ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) 71
13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF)
Substitute the following for Part I Section 13.4a(2) in its entirety:
(2) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to support the effects
of all tributary dead and live loads assuming that the bracing is not present.
Substitute the following for Part I Section 13.4a(3) in its entirety:
(3) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to resist the effects
of ASD load combinations as stipulated by the Applicable Building Code,
except that a load Q
b
shall be substituted for the term E. Q
b
is the maximum
unbalanced vertical load effect applied to the beam by the braces. This load
effect shall be calculated using a minimum of P
y
for the brace in tension and
a maximum of 0.3 times ␾
c
P
n
for the brace in compression.
14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF)
Substitute the following for Part I Section 14.2 in its entirety:
14.2. Strength
The Required Strength of the members and connections, other than brace connec-
tions, in OCBF shall be determined using the ASD load combinations stipulated
by the Applicable Building Code except E shall be taken as the Amplified Seismic
Load. The Design Strength of brace connections shall equal or exceed the expected
tensile strength of the brace, determined as R
y
F
y
A
g
. Braces with Kl/r greater than
4.23

E
s
/F
y
shall not be used in V or inverted-V configurations.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-03 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 15:51 Char Count=
72
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
73
COMMENTARY
on the Seismic Provisions
for Structural Steel Buildings
May 21, 2002
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
74
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
75
PART I. STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS
Experience from the 1994 Northridge and 1995 Kobe earthquakes significantly expanded
knowledge regarding the seismic response of structural steel building systems, particu-
larly welded steel Moment Frames. (Note: glossary terms are capitalized throughout this
specification and commentary.) Shortly after the Northridge earthquake, the SAC Joint
Venture
1
initiated a comprehensive study of the seismic performance of steel Moment
Frames. Funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), SAC devel-
oped guidelines for structural engineers, building officials and other interested parties for
the evaluation, repair, modification and design of welded steel Moment Frame structures
in seismic regions. AISC actively participated in SAC activities.
Many recommendations in the Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel
Moment-Frame Buildings – FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) formed the basis for Supplement
No. 2 to the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC, 2000).
Supplement No. 2 to the 1997 Provisions was developed simultaneously and cooperatively
with the revisions to the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) NEHRP Provisions.
Accordingly, Supplement No. 2 formed the basis for steel seismic design provisions in
the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g) as well as those in the 2000 International
Building Code (IBC) 2002 Supplement, which has been published by the International
Code Council (ICC, 2002).
These 2002 AISC Seismic Provisions (hereinafter referred to as the Provisions) continue
incorporating the recommendations of FEMA 350 and other research. While research is
ongoing, the Committee has preparedthis revisionof the Provisions usingthe best available
knowledge to date. Although timing did not permit the adoption of these Provisions in
ASCE 7 (ASCE, 2002) it is intended that these provisions be used in conjunction with the
2002 edition of ASCE 7. It is also anticipated that these Provisions will form the basis
for structural steel seismic requirements in two model building code editions currently
under development: the International Building Code and the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) Building Code dated 2003. NFPA will reference ASCE 7 for seismic
loading.
C1. SCOPE
Structural steel building systems in seismic regions are generally expected to dis-
sipate seismic input energy through controlled inelastic deformations of the struc-
ture. These Provisions supplement the AISC LRFD Specification (AISC, 1999)
for such applications. The seismic design loads specified in the building codes
have been developed considering the energy dissipation generated during inelastic
response.
It should be noted that these provisions were developed specifically for buildings.
The Provisions, therefore, may not be applicable, in whole or in part, to non-
building structures. Extrapolation of their use to non-building structures should
be done with due consideration of the inherent differences between the response
characteristics of buildings and non-building structures.
1
A joint venture of the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), Applied Technology (ATC), and California
Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREe).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
76 PART I – GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS [Comm. C3.
The Provisions are intended to be mandatory for buildings in Seismic Design
Category D and above, as defined in the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction
Program (NEHRP) Seismic Provisions (FEMA, 2000e) and ASCE 7 (ASCE,
2002). For buildings in Seismic Design Category A to C the designer is given
a choice to either solely use the AISCLRFDSpecification (AISC, 1999) and the R
factor given for structural steel buildings not specifically detailed for seismic resis-
tance (typically 3) or the designer may choose to assign a higher Rfactor to a system
detailed for seismic resistance and follow the requirements of these Provisions.
C2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
The specifications, codes and standards referenced in Part I are listed with the
appropriate revision date that was used in the development of Part I. Where these
documents are referenced in the Provisions, the versions given in Section 2 apply.
While most of these documents are also referenced in the LRFD Specification,
some have been revised since its publication in 1999.
C3. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS
When designing buildings to resist earthquake motions, each building is catego-
rized based upon its occupancy and use to establish the potential earthquake hazard
that it represents. Determining the required Design Strength differs significantly
in each specification or building code. The primary purpose of these Provisions is
to provide information necessary to determine the Design Strength of steel build-
ings. The following discussion provides a basic overview of how several seismic
codes or specifications categorize building structures and how they determine the
Required Strength and stiffness. For the variables required to assign Seismic De-
sign Categories, limitations of height, vertical and horizontal irregularities, site
characteristics, etc., the Applicable Building Code should be consulted.
In the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g), buildings are assigned to one of
three Seismic Use Groups, depending upon occupancy or use. Group III includes
essential facilities, while Groups I and II include facilities associated with a lesser
degree of public hazard. Buildings are then assigned to a Seismic Design Category
based upon the Seismic Use Group, the seismicity of the site and the period of
the building. Seismic Design Categories A, B and C are generally applicable to
buildings in areas of lowto moderate seismicity and special seismic provisions like
those in these Provisions are not mandatory unless the Engineer of Record chooses
to use an R factor of one of the defined systems prescribed in these Provisions.
However, special seismic provisions are mandatory in Seismic Design Categories
D, E and F, including consideration of system redundancy. Seismic Design Cate-
gory D is generally applicable to buildings in areas of high seismicity and Seismic
Use Group III buildings in areas of moderate seismicity. Seismic Design Cate-
gories E and F are generally applicable to buildings in Seismic Use Groups I and II
and Seismic Use Group III, respectively, in areas of especially high seismicity.
In ASCE 7 (ASCE, 2002), buildings are assigned to one of four Occupancy Cat-
egories. Category IV, for example, includes essential facilities. Buildings are then
assigned to a Seismic Use Group based upon the Occupancy Categories and
the seismicity of the site. Seismic Design Categories A, B and C are generally
applicable to buildings in areas of low to moderate seismicity and special seismic
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C4.] PART I – LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTH 77
provisions like those in these Provisions are not mandatory. However, special seis-
mic provisions are mandatory in Seismic Design Categories D and E, which cover
areas of high seismicity.
In the 1997 Uniform Building Code (ICBO, 1997) and the 1999 SEAOC Seismic
Provisions (SEAOC, 1999), the detailing required for buildings is based on the
Seismic Zone in which the building is located.
A new term “Applicable Building Code” has been introduced into this edition
of the Seismic Provisions. While it is the intent that these Provisions be used
in conjunction with the codes and standards previously listed, there can be no
guarantee which building code edition a designer may use to design a steel building.
To eliminate potential conflicts with the many building codes currently in use,
these Provisions refer to the Applicable Building Code to establish loads and load
combinations, systemlimitations and systemfactors (e.g. R, C
d
and
o
). However,
where building codes differ from ASCE 7, it is the intent of these Provisions that
the ASCE 7 criteria apply.
C4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTH
These Provisions are intended for use with load combinations given in the Ap-
plicable Building Code. However, since they are written for consistency with the
load combinations given in ASCE 7 (ASCE, 2002) and IBC 2000 (ICC, 2000),
consistency with the Applicable Building Code should be confirmed.
The earthquake load E is the combination of the horizontal seismic load effect and
an approximation of the effect due to the vertical accelerations that accompany the
horizontal earthquake effects.
An amplification or overstrength factor
o
applied to the horizontal portion of the
earthquake load E is prescribed in ASCE7, the 2000 IBC, 2000 NEHRPProvisions
and the 1997 Uniform Building Code; however, the relevant load combinations
are not all expressed in exactly the same format, as shown in Table C-I-4.1. In
prior editions of these Provisions it was felt that this difference could be clarified
by including load combinations (Equations 4-1 and 4-2 in the 1997 Seismic Pro-
visions (AISC, 1997b)), primarily to account for overstrength inherent in different
systems or elements when determining the Required Strength of connections. Un-
fortunately, due to the difference in the various codes and source documents with
which these Provisions are intended to be used, the specification of Load Combi-
nations 4-1 and 4-2 proved confusing. It is not practical to specifically reference
any load combinations from reference documents, and Load Combinations 4-1
and 4-2 were eliminated in favor of a new term “Amplified Seismic Load.” When
used in these Provisions, this term is intended to refer to the appropriate load
combinations in the Applicable Building Code that account for overstrength of
members of the Seismic Load Resisting System. The load combinations contain-
ing the overstrength factor
o
should be used where these Provisions require use
of the Amplified Seismic Load.
The general relationship between the different structural steel systems is illustrated
in Table C-I-4.2 based upon similar information in the ASCE 7 load standard. R
is a seismic load reduction factor used to approximate the inherent ductility of the
Seismic Load Resisting System. C
d
is an amplification factor that is used with the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
78 PART I – LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTH [Comm. C4.
TABLE C-I-4.1
Load Combinations
Gravity Effects Additive
Basic Combinations
Code or Ref. including E Definition of E Overstrength
ASCE 7-2002 1.2D +1.0E +0.5L +0.2S E = ␳ Q
E
+0.2S
DS
D E =
o
Q
E
+0.2S
DS
D
NEHRP 2000 1.2D +1.0E +0.5L +0.2S E = ␳ Q
E
+0.2S
DS
D E =
o
Q
E
+0.2S
DS
D
IBC 2000 1.2D +1.0E + f
1
L + f
2
S E = ␳ Q
E
+0.2S
DS
D E
m
=
o
Q
E
+0.2S
DS
D
UBC 1997 1.2D +1.0E + f
1
L + f
2
S E = ␳ E
h
+ E
v
E
m
=
o
E
h
where E
v
= 0.5C
a
ID
Gravity Effects Counteraction
Basic Combinations
Code or Ref. including E Definition of E Overstrength
ASCE 7-2002 0.9D +1.0E +1.6H E = ␳ Q
E
−0.2S
DS
D E =
o
Q
E
−0.2S
DS
D
NEHRP 2000 0.9D +1.0E +1.6H E = ␳ Q
E
−0.2S
DS
D E =
o
Q
E
−0.2S
DS
D
IBC 2000 0.9D +1.0E E = ␳ Q
E
−0.2S
DS
D E
m
=
o
Q
E
−0.2S
DS
D
UBC 1997 0.9D +1.0E E = ␳ E
h
+ E
v
E
m
=
o
E
h
where E
v
= 0.5C
a
ID
Note: For definitions, see applicable code.
TABLE C-I-4.2
DESIGN FACTORS FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL
SYSTEMS
BASIC STRUCTURAL SYSTEM AND
SEISMIC LOAD RESISTING SYSTEM R C
d
Systems designed and detailed to meet the requirements in the
LRFD Specification but not the requirements of Part I 3 3
Systems designed and detailed to meet the requirements of both the LRFD Specification and Part I:
Braced Frame Systems:
Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) 6 5
Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF) 5 4
1
/
2
Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF)
with moment connections at columns away from Link 8 4
without moment connections at columns away from Link 7 4
Moment Frame Systems:
Special Moment Frames (SMF) 8 5
1
/
2
Intermediate Moment Frames (IMF) 4
1
/
2
4
Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) 3
1
/
2
3
Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF) 7 5
1
/
2
Dual Systems with SMF capable of resisting 25 percent of V:
Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) 8 6
1
/
2
Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF)
with moment connections at columns away from Link 8 4
without moment connections at columns away from Link 7 4
Dual Systems with IMF

capable of resisting 25 percent of V:
Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) 4
1
/
2
4

OMF is permitted in lieu of IMF in Seismic Design Categories A, B and C.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C5.] PART I – STORY DRIFT 79
loads for strength design to calculate the seismic drift. The use of these factors
should be consistent with those specified in the Applicable Building Code with
due consideration of the limitations and modifications necessary to account for
building category, building height, vertical or horizontal irregularities, and site
characteristics.
C5. STORY DRIFT
For non-seismic applications, storydrift limits, like deflectionlimits, are commonly
used in design to assure the serviceability of the structure. They vary because they
depend upon the structural usage and contents. As an example, for wind loads
such serviceability limit states are regarded as a matter of engineering judgment
rather than absolute design limits (Fisher and West, 1990) and no specific design
requirements are given in the LRFD Specification or these Provisions.
The situation is somewhat different when considering seismic effects. Research
has shown that story drift limits, although primarily related to serviceability, also
improve frame stability (P-) and seismic performance because of the resulting
additional strength and stiffness. Although some building codes, load standards
and resource documents contain specific seismic drift limits, there are major dif-
ferences among them as to how the limit is specified and applied. Nevertheless,
drift control is important to both the serviceability and the stability of the structure.
As a minimum, the designer should use the drift limits specified in the Applicable
Building Code.
The analytical model used to estimate building drift should accurately account
for the stiffness of the frame elements and connections and other structural and
nonstructural elements that materially affect the drift. Recent research on steel
Moment Frame connections indicates that in most cases Panel Zone deformations
have little effect on analytical estimates of drift and need not be explicitly modeled
(FEMA, 2000f ). In cases where nonlinear element deformation demands are of
interest, Panel Zone shear behavior should be represented in the analytical model
whenever it significantly affects the state of deformation at a beam-to-column
connection. Mathematical models for the behavior of the Panel Zone in terms of
shear force-shear distortion relationships have been proposed by many researchers.
FEMA 355C presents a good discussion of how to incorporate panel zone defor-
mations in to the analytical model (FEMA, 2000f).
Adjustment of connection stiffness is usually not required for connections tradi-
tionally considered as fixed, although FEMA350 (FEMA, 2000a) contains recom-
mendations for adjusting calculated drift for frames with Reduced Beam Sections.
Nonlinear models should contain nonlinear elements where plastic hinging is ex-
pected to properly capture the inelastic deformation of the frame.
The story drift limits in ASCE 7 (ASCE, 2002) and the 2000 NEHRP Provisions
(FEMA, 2000g) are to be compared to an amplified story drift that approximates the
difference in deflection between the top and bottomof the story under consideration
during a large earthquake. The amplified story drift is determined by multiplying
the elastic drift caused by the horizontal component of the earthquake load E by
a deflection amplification factor C
d
, which is dependent upon the type of building
system used; see Table C-I-4.2.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
80 PART I – STORY DRIFT [Comm. C5.
The following discussion pertains primarily to Moment Frames (FEMA, 2000a),
although other systems where high lateral drifts may occur require a similar anal-
ysis. Each story of the structure should be investigated to ensure that lateral drifts
induced by earthquake response do not result in a condition of instability under
gravity loads. The analysis of the structure should explicitly consider the geometric
nonlinearity introduced by P- effects. The quantity ␺
i
should be calculated for
each story for each direction of response, as follows:

i
=
P
i
R
i
V
yi
H
(C5-1)
where:
H = height of story, which may be taken as the distance between the centerline of
floor framing at each of the levels above and below, or the distance between
the top of floor slabs at each of the levels above and below, in. (mm)
P
i
= portion of the total weight of the structure including dead, permanent live,
and 25 percent of transient live loads acting on all of the columns within
story level i , kips (N)
R = design factor used to determine the design seismic loads applicable to the
Structural Systemas definedinthe Applicable BuildingCode. Inthe absence
of such definition, R is listed in Table C-I-4.1.

i
= calculated lateral drift at the center of rigidity of story i , when the design
seismic loads are applied in the direction under consideration, in. (mm)
V
yi
= total plastic lateral shear restoring capacity in the direction under consider-
ation at story i , kips (N)
The plastic story shear quantity, V
yi
, should be determined by methods of plastic
analysis. However, V
yi
may be approximately calculated from the equation:
V
yi
=
2
n

j =1
M
pG
j
H
(C5-2)
when the following conditions apply:
(1) All beam-column connections meet the strong-column-weak-beam criterion
in the story
(2) The same number of moment-resisting bays is present at the top and bottom
of the frame and
(3) The strength of girders, moment-connected at both ends, at the top and bottom
of the frame is similar
where:
M
pG
j
= the plastic moment capacity of girder “j” participating in the moment-
resisting framing at the floor level on top of the story, and
n = the number of moment-resisting girders in the framing at the floor level
on top of the story
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C5.] PART I – STORY DRIFT 81
In any story in which all columns do not meet the strong-column-weak-beam
criterion, the plastic story shear quantity, V
yi
may be calculated from the equation:
V
yi
=
2
m

k=1
M
pC
k
H
(C5-3)
where:
m = the number of columns in moment-resisting framing in the story under
consideration, and
M
pC
k
= the plastic moment capacity of each column “k”, participating in the
moment-resisting framing, considering the axial load present on the
column
For other conditions, the quantity V
yi
shall be calculated by plastic mechanism
analysis, considering the vertical distribution of lateral loads on the structure.
The quantity ␺
i
is the ratio of the effective story shear produced by first order P-
effects at the calculated story drift to the maximum restoring force in the structure.
When this ratio has a value greater than 1.0, the structure does not have enough
strength to resist the P- induced shear forces and may collapse in a sidesway
mechanism. If the ratio is less than 1.0, the restoring force in the structure exceeds
the story shear due to P- effects and unless additional displacement is induced
or lateral loads applied, the structure should not collapse. Given the uncertainty
associated with predicting significance of P-effects, it is recommended that when

i
in a story exceeds 0.3, the structure be considered unstable, unless a detailed
global stability capacity evaluation for the structure, considering P- effects, is
conducted.
P- effects can have a significant impact on the ability of structures to resist
collapse when subjected to strong ground shaking. When the non-dimensional
quantity, ␺
i
, calculated in accordance with Equation C5-1 significantly exceeds a
value of about 0.1, the instantaneous stiffness of the structure can be significantly
decreased, and can effectively become negative. If earthquake induced displace-
ments are sufficiently large to create negative instantaneous stiffness, collapse is
likely to occur.
Analyses reported in FEMA355F (FEMA, 2000f ) included direct consideration of
P-effects in determining the ability of regular, well configured frames designed
to modern code provisions to resist P--induced instability and P--induced
collapse. For regular, well-configured structures, if the value of ␺ is maintained
within the limits indicated in this section (i.e. 0.3 or less), P--induced instability
is unlikely to occur. Values of ␺ greater than this limit suggest that instability due
to P-effects is possible. In such cases, the frame should be redesigned to provide
greater resistance to P--induced instability unless explicit evaluation of these
effects using the detailed Performance Evaluation methods outlined in Appendix
A of FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) are performed.
The evaluation approach for P-effects presented in this section appears similar
to but differs substantially from that contained in FEMA 302 (FEMA, 1997a), and
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
82 PART I – MATERIALS [Comm. C6.
in use in the building codes for many years. The approach contained in FEMA
302 and the building codes was an interim formulation. Research indicates that
this interim approach was not meaningful. Some of this research included the
explicit evaluation of P- effects for buildings of varying heights, subjected to
many different types of ground motion and designed using different building code
provisions. Usingthese andother parameters, several tens of thousands of nonlinear
analyses were run to investigate P- effects. Extensive additional discussion on
the issue of P-effects and their importance in the response of structures at large
interstory drifts is contained in FEMA 355C (FEMA, 2000d).
C6. MATERIALS
C6.1. Material Specifications
The structural steels that are explicitly permitted for use in seismic design have
been selected based upon their inelastic properties and weldability. In general, they
meet the following characteristics: (1) a ratio of yield stress to tensile stress not
greater than 0.85; (2) a pronounced stress-strain plateau at the yield stress; (3) a
large inelastic strain capability (for example, tensile elongation of 20 percent or
greater in a 2-in. (50 mm) gage length); and (4) good weldability. Other steels
should not be used without evidence that the above criteria are met.
The 50 ksi (345 MPa) limitation on the specified minimumyield stress for members
expecting inelastic action refers to inelastic action under the effects of the Design
Earthquake. Modern steels of higher strength, such as A913 Grade 65, are generally
considered to have properties acceptable for seismic column applications.
C6.2. Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength
Brittle fracture of beam-to-column moment connections in the Northridge Earth-
quake resulted from a complex combination of variables. One of the many con-
tributing factors was the failure to recognize that actual beam yield stresses are
generally higher than the specified minimum yield stress F
y
, which elevates the
connection demand. In 1994, the Structural Shape Producers Council (SSPC)
conducted a survey to determine the characteristics of current structural steel pro-
duction (SSPC, 1994). FEMA (1995) subsequently recommended that the mean
values of F
y
from the SSPC study be used in calculations of demand on moment
connections. It was also recognized that the same overstrength concerns also apply
to other systems as well.
R
y
is defined as the ratio of Expected Yield Strength F
ye
to specified minimum
yield stress F
y
. It is used as a multiplier on the specified minimum yield stress
when calculating the Required Strength of connections and other members that
must withstand the development of inelasticity in another member. The specified
values of R
y
for rolled shapes are somewhat lower than those that can be calculated
using the mean values reported in the SSPC survey. Those values were skewed
somewhat by the inclusion of a large number of smaller members, which typically
have a higher measured yield stress than the larger members common in seismic
design. The given values are considered to be reasonable averages, although it
is recognized that they are not maxima. The Expected Yield Strength R
y
F
y
can
be determined by testing conducted in accordance with the requirements for the
specified grade of steel. Such an approach should only be followed in unusual
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C6.] PART I – MATERIALS 83
cases where there is extensive evidence that the values of R
y
are significantly
unconservative. It is not expected that this would be the approach followed for
typical building projects. Refer to ASTM A370.
The higher values of R
y
for ASTM A36/A36M (R
y
= 1.5) and ASTM A572/
A572M Grade 42 (290) (R
y
= 1.3) shapes are indicative of the most recently
reported properties of these grades of steel. If the material being used in design
was produced several years ago, it may be possible to use a reduced value of R
y
based upon testing of the steel to be used or other supporting data (Galambos and
Ravindra, 1978). The values of R
y
will be periodically monitored to ensure that
current production practice is properly reflected.
A survey of HSS and steel pipe production data in 2000 resulted in R
y
values of
1.3 and 1.4, respectively.
While ASTM A709/A709M is primarily used in the design and construction of
bridges, it could also be used in building construction. Written as an umbrella spec-
ification, its grades are essentially the equivalent of other approved ASTM spec-
ifications. For example, ASTM A709/A709 Grade 50 (345) is essentially ASTM
A572/A572MGrade 50 (345) and ASTMA709/A709MGrade 50W(345W) is es-
sentiallyASTMA588/A588MGrade 50(345). Thus, if used, ASTMA709/A709M
material should be treated as would the corresponding approved ASTM material
grade.
Specific provisions for some Seismic Load Resisting Systems stipulate that the Re-
quired Strength be determined by multiplying the Nominal Strength of a certain
member or connecting element by the value of R
y
for the corresponding mate-
rial grade. This overstrength is primarily of interest when evaluating the Design
Strength of another connecting element or member. It is not of interest, however,
when evaluating the Design Strength of the same member to which the value of
R
y
was applied in the determination of the Required Strength. Therefore, when
both the Required Strength and Design Strength calculations are made for the
same member or connecting element, it is also permitted to apply R
y
in the de-
termination of the Design Strength. An example of such a condition would be the
checking of the Required Strength of the beam outside of the Link in an EBF (see
Section 15.6). Since the Required Strength is generated in the same member (in
this case the Link portion of the beam), the Design Strength should also include
the R
y
term.
C6.3. Notch-Toughness Requirements
The LRFD Specification requirements for notch toughness cover Group 4 and
5 shapes and plate elements with thickness that is greater than or equal to 2 in.
(50mm) intensionapplications. Inthese Provisions, this requirement is extendedto
cover: (1) all Group 4 and 5 shapes that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting Sys-
tem; (2) ASTMGroup 3 shapes that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System
with flange thickness greater than or equal to 1
1
/
2
in. (38 mm); and, (3) plate ele-
ments with thickness greater than or equal to 2 in. (50 mm) that are part of the Seis-
mic Load Resisting System, such as the flanges of built-up girders. Because other
shapes and plates are generally subjected to sufficient cross-sectional reduction
during the rolling process such that the resulting notch toughness will exceed that
requiredabove (Cattan, 1995), specific requirements have not beenincludedherein.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
84 PART I – MATERIALS [Comm. C6.
The requirements of this section may not be necessary for members that resist only
incidental loads. For example, a designer might include a member in the Seismic
Load Resisting System to develop a more robust load path, but the member will
experience only an insignificant level of seismic demand. An example of such
a member might include a transfer girder with thick plates where its design is
dominated by its gravity load demand. It would be inconsistent with the intent of
this section if the designer were to arbitrarily exclude a member with insignifi-
cant seismic loads from the Seismic Load Resisting System that would otherwise
improve the seismic performance of the building in order to avoid the toughness
requirements in this section. The LRFD Specification requirements noted above
would still apply in this case.
For rotary-straightened W-shapes, an area of reduced notch toughness has been
documented in a limited region of the web immediately adjacent to the flange as
illustrated in Figure C-I-6.1. Recommendations issued (AISC, 1997a) by AISC
were followed up by a series of industry sponsored research projects (Kaufmann,
Metrovich and Pense, 2001; Uang and Chi, 2001; Kaufmann and Fisher, 2001;
Lee, Cotton, Dexter, Hajjar, Ye, and Ojard, 2001; Bartlett, Jelinek, Schmidt, Dexter,
Graeser, and Galambos, 2001). This research generally corroborates AISC’s initial
findings and recommendations.
Early investigations of connection fractures in the 1994 Northridge earthquake
identified a number of fractures that some speculated were the result of inadequate
through-thickness strength of the column flange material. As a result, in the period
immediately following the Northridge earthquake, a number of recommendations
were promulgated that suggested limiting the value of through-thickness stress de-
mand on column flanges to ensure that through-thickness yielding did not initiate
in the column flanges. This limit state often controlled the overall design of these
connections. However, the actual cause for the fractures that were initially thought
to be through-thickness failures of the column flange are now considered to be
unrelated to this material property. Detailed fracture mechanics investigations con-
ducted as part of the FEMA/SAC project confirm that damage initially identified
as through thickness failures is likely to have occurred as a result of certain combi-
nations of filler metal and base material strength and notch toughness, conditions
of stress in the connection, and the presence of critical flaws in the welded joint. In
addition to the analytical studies, extensive through-thickness testing conducted
specifically to determine the susceptibility to through thickness failures of modern
column materials meeting ASTM A572, Gr. 50 and ASTM A913, Gr. 65 specifi-
cations did not result in significant through-thickness fractures (FEMA, 2000h).
In addition, none of the more than 100 full scale tests on “post-Northridge” con-
nection details have demonstrated any through-thickness column fractures. This
combined analytical and laboratory research clearly shows that due to the high
restraint inherent in welded beamflange to column flange joints, the through thick-
ness yield and tensile strengths of the column material are significantly elevated
in the region of the connection. For the modern materials tested, these strengths
significantly exceed those loads that can be delivered to the column by the beam
flange. For this reason, no limits are suggested for the through-thickness strength
of the base material by the FEMA/SAC program or in these Provisions.
The preceding discussion assumes that no significant column flange laminations,
inclusions or other discontinuities occur in regions adjacent to welded beam
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C7.] PART I – CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS 85
Fig. C-I-6.1. “k-area.”
flange-to-column flange joints. Where column shapes with proportions equal to
those defined in this Section are used, the Engineer of Record should consider
specifying ultrasonic examination in these regions prior to welding. FEMA 353
(FEMA, 2000b) provides guidance for specifying such examinations.
C7. CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS
C7.2. Bolted Joints
The potential for full reversal of design load and likelihood of inelastic deforma-
tions of members and/or connected parts necessitates that pretensioned bolts be
used in bolted joints in the Seismic Load Resisting System. However, earthquake
motions are such that slip cannot and need not be prevented in all cases, even with
slip-critical connections. Accordingly, these Provisions call for bolted joints to be
proportioned as pretensioned bearing joints but with faying surfaces prepared as
for Class A or better slip-critical connections. That is, bolted connections can be
proportioned with Design Strengths for bearing connections as long as the faying
surfaces are still prepared to provide a minimum slip coefficient ␮ = 0.33. The re-
sulting nominal amount of slip resistance will minimize damage in more moderate
seismic events. This requirement is intended for joints where the faying surface
is primarily subjected to shear. Where the faying surface is primarily subjected to
tension or compression, e.g., in a bolted end plate connection, the requirement on
preparation of the faying surfaces may be relaxed.
The sharing of design load between welds and bolts on the same faying surface is
not permitted. Similarly, sharing of design loads should not be used on elements
of a member that are connected by different means. For example, the web of an
axially loaded wide flange should be connected by the same means as the flange
if the elements are resisting the same load, e.g. axial load in a brace.
To prevent excessive deformations of bolted joints due to slip between the con-
nected plies under earthquake motions, the use of holes in bolted joints in the
Seismic Load Resisting Systemis limited to standard holes and short-slotted holes
with the direction of the slot perpendicular to the line of force. An exception is
provided for alternative hole types that are justified as a part of a tested assembly.
Fabricationanderectiontolerances oftenrequire that oversizedholes be used. There
is no definitive data on the behavior of connections with oversize holes under either
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
86 PART I – CONNECTIONS, JOINTS, AND FASTENERS [Comm. C7.
dynamic loads or large cyclic load reversals. Static test data indicate that it is diffi-
cult to obtain the same preload in bolts in oversized holes as compared to standard
holes. In connections for diagonal members in Braced Frames, the reduced slip ca-
pacity may lead to unacceptable interstory drifts and designers should incorporate
this effect into their analyses. The loss of preload results in a lower static slip load,
but the overall behavior of connections with oversized holes has been shown to be
similar to those with standard holes (Kulak, Fisher and Struik, 1987).
To prevent excessive deformations of bolted joints due to bearing on the connected
material, the bearing strength is limited by the “deformation-considered” option
in LRFD Specification Section J3.10 (␾R
n
= 0.75 ×2.4dtF
u
). The philosophical
intent of this limitation in the LRFD Specification is to limit the bearing defor-
mation to an approximate maximum of
1
/
4
in. (6 mm). It should be recognized,
however, that the actual bearing load in a seismic event may be much larger than
that anticipated in design and the actual deformation of holes may exceed this
theoretical limit. Nonetheless, this limit should effectively minimize damage in
moderate seismic events.
Tension or shear fracture, bolt shear, and block shear rupture are examples of limit
states that generally result in non-ductile failure of connections. As such, these limit
states are undesirable as the controlling limit state for connections that are part of
the Seismic Load Resisting System. Accordingly, it is required that connections
be configured such that a ductile limit state in the member or connection, such as
yielding or bearing deformation, controls the Design Strength.
C7.3. Welded Joints
The general requirements for welded joints are given in AWS D1.1(AWS, 2000),
wherein a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) is required for all welds. Ap-
proval by the Engineer of Record of the WPS to be used is required in these
Provisions.
These Provisions contain two significant changes fromthe 1997 Provisions: (1) for
the critical CJP welds in the special and Intermediate Moment Frame systems, they
require that the weld metal be made with filler metals that meet minimum levels
of Charpy V-Notch (CVN) toughness using two different test temperatures and
specified test protocols, and (2) they require weld metal notch toughness in all
welds used in members and connections in the load path of the Seismic Load
Resisting System.
FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) and 353 (FEMA, 2000d) also recommend filler metal
that complies with minimum Charpy V-Notch (CVN) requirements using two
test temperatures and specified test protocols for critical welded joints. These
Provisions adopt the dual CVN requirement suggested in the FEMA documents
but require a lower temperature than the FEMArecommendations for the AWS A5
classification method (i.e. minus 20˚F rather than 0˚F). Successful testing at either
temperature ensures that some ductile tearing will occur before final fracture. Use
of this lower temperature is consistent with the filler metal used in the SAC/FEMA
tests and matches the filler metals commercially available. The more critical CVN
weld metal property is the minimumof 40 ft-lbf (54J) at 70˚F (21˚C) following the
procedure in Appendix X. Based on the FEMA recommendations, the Engineer
of Record may consider applying the 40 ft-lbf (54J) at 70˚F (21˚C) requirements
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C8.] PART I – MEMBERS 87
to other critical welds. For a discussion of special requirements for welds at low
temperatures, see FEMA (2000a, 2000d, and 2000f ).
All other welds in members and connections in the load path of the Seismic Load
Resisting System require weld metal with a minimum CVN toughness of 20 ft-lbf
(27J) at minus 20˚F (minus 29˚C). Welds carrying only gravity loads such as filler
beamconnections and welds for collateral members of the Seismic Load Resisting
System such as deck welds, minor collectors, and lateral bracing do not require
weld metal with notch toughness requirements. Following the manufacturer’s es-
sential variables, either the AWSclassification method in the AWSA5 specification
or manufacturer certification may be used to meet this CVN requirement.
It is not the intent of these Provisions to require project-specific CVN testing of
either the welding procedure or any production welds. Further, these weld tough-
ness requirements are not intended to apply to electric resistance welding (ERW)
and submerged arc welding (SAW); welding processes used in the production of
hollow structural sections and pipe (ASTM A500 and A53/A53M). In addition,
the control of heat input is not monitored unless specified.
Many operations during fabrication, erection, and the subsequent work of other
trades have the potential to create discontinuities in the Seismic Load Resisting
System. When located in regions of potential inelasticity, such discontinuities are
required to be repaired by the responsible subcontractor as required by the En-
gineer of Record. Discontinuities should also be repaired in other regions of the
Seismic Load Resisting System when the presence of the discontinuity would be
detrimental to its performance. The responsible subcontractor should propose a
repair procedure for the approval of the Engineer of Record. Repair may be unnec-
essary for some discontinuities, subject to the approval of the Engineer of Record.
The Engineer of Record should refer to AWS D1.1 and ASTM A6, Sect. 9 for
guidance in establishing the acceptance criteria for repair of discontinuities. Out-
side the plastic hinge regions, AWS D1.1 requirements for repair of discontinuities
should be applied.
C7.4. Other Connections
The FEMA/SAC testing has demonstrated the sensitivity of regions undergoing
large inelastic strains due to discontinuities caused by welding, rapid change of
section, penetrations, or construction caused flaws. For this reason, operations that
cause discontinuities are prohibited in the plastic hinging region. Areas where
plastic hinging is expected include Moment Frame hinging zones, Link beams of
EBFs, the ends and the center of SCBF braces, etc. The beam-column Panel Zone
is a common example of a region experiencing inelastic deformation. It should be
noted that yield level strains are not strictly limited to the plastic hinge zones and
caution should also be exercised in creating discontinuities in these regions as well.
C8. MEMBERS
C8.1. Scope
It is intended that Nominal Strengths, Resistance Factors, and Design Strengths of
members in the Seismic Load Resisting System be determined in accordance with
the LRFD Specification, unless noted otherwise in these Provisions.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
88 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm. C8.
C8.2. Local Buckling
To provide for reliable inelastic deformations in those Seismic Load Resisting
Systems that require high levels of inelasticity, the width-thickness ratios of
compression elements of the system should be less than or equal to those that
are resistant to local buckling when stressed into the inelastic range. Although
the width-thickness ratios for compact members, ␭
p
, given in LRFD Specifica-
tion Table B5.1, are sufficient to prevent local buckling before onset of yielding,
the available test data suggest that these limits are not adequate for the required
inelastic performance in several of the Seismic Load Resisting Systems. The width-
thickness ratios for seismically compact members, ␭
ps
, given in Table I-8-1 are
deemed adequate for ductilities to 6 or 7 (Sawyer, 1961; Lay, 1965; Kemp, 1986;
Bansal, 1971). The limitingwidth-thickness ratios for webs inflexural compression
have been modified (Uang and Fan, 2001) to comply with the recommendations
in FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a). Provisions for Special Moment Frames (SMF),
members in the special segment of Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF), Spe-
cial Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF), the Links in Eccentrically Braced
Frames (EBF), and H-pile design specifically reference Table I-8-1.
Diagonal web members used in the special segments of STMF systems are limited
to flat bars only at this time because of their proven high ductility without buckling.
The specified limiting width-thickness ratio of 2.5 in Table I-8-1 does not vary with
F
y
and is intended to be a practical method to limit the aspect ratio of flat bar cross-
sections.
Duringthe service life of a steel H-pile it is primarilysubjectedtoaxial compression
and acts as an axially-loaded column. Therefore, the b/t ratio limitations given in
Table B5.1 of the AISC LRFD Specification (AISC, 1999) should suffice. During
a major earthquake, because of lateral movements of pile cap and foundation, the
steel H-pile becomes a beam-columnandmayhave toresist large bendingmoments
and uplift. Cyclic tests (Astaneh-Asl and Ravat, 1997) indicated that local buckling
of piles satisfying the width-thickness limitations in Table I-8-1 occurs after many
cycles of loading. In addition, this local buckling did not have much effect on the
cyclic performance of the pile during cyclic testing or after cyclic testing stopped
and the piles were once again under only axial load. Thus, in keeping with the
Scope of the Provisions, the values in Table I-8-1 are specified for Seismic Design
Categories D, E, and F, while for lower Seismic Design Categories A, B, and C,
the less stringent values in LRFD Table B5.1 are permitted.
Round HSS sections used as piles in high seismic areas should also satisfy the
limiting width-thickness ratio value given in Table I-8-1.
In Section 6.2, the Expected Yield Strength, R
y
F
y
, of the material used in a member
is required for the purpose of determining the effect of the actual member strength
on its connections to other members of the Seismic Load Resisting System. The
width-thickness requirements in Table I-8-1, calculated using specified minimum
yield stress, are expected to permit inelastic behavior without local buckling and
need not be computed using the Expected Yield Strength.
C8.3. Column Strength
The axial loads generated during earthquake motions in columns that are part of the
Seismic Load Resisting System are expected to exceed those calculated using the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C8.] PART I – MEMBERS 89
code-specified seismic loads for several reasons: (1) the reduction in lateral load
for use in analysis of an elastic model of the structure; (2) the underestimation of
the overturning forces in the analysis; and (3) the concurrent vertical accelerations
that are not explicitly specified as a required load. The amplifications required in
this Section represent an approximation of these actions and are meant to provide
an upper bound for the required axial strength. The use of the Amplified Seismic
Load combinations account for these effects with a minimumrequired compressive
and tensile strength, and are to be applied without consideration of any concurrent
flexural loads on the column.
The exceptions provided in the last paragraph of Section 8.3 represent self-limiting
conditions wherein the required axial strength need not exceed the capability of
the Structural System to transmit axial loads to the column. For example, if a
spread footing foundation can only provide a certain resistance to uplift, there is
a natural limit to the load that the system can transmit to a column. Conversely,
the uplift resistance of a pile foundation designed primarily for compressive loads
may significantly exceed the required tensile strength for the column. This would
not represent a system strength limit.
C8.4. Column Splices
C8.4a. General
Except for Moment Frames, the Design Strength of a column splice is required
to equal or exceed both the Required Strength determined in Section 8.3 and
the Required Strength for axial, flexural and shear effects at the splice loca-
tion determined from load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building
Code.
Column splices should be located away from the beam-to-column connection to
reduce the effects of flexure. For typical buildings, the 4-ft (1.2 m) minimum dis-
tance requirement will control. When located 4 to 5 ft (1.2 to 1.5 m) above the
floor level, field erection and construction of the column splice will generally be
simplified due to improved accessibility and convenience. In general, it is rec-
ommended that the splice be within the middle third of the story height. For less
typical buildings, where the floor-to-floor height is insufficient to accommodate
this requirement, the splice should be placed as close as practicable to the midpoint
of the clear distance between the finished floor and the bottom flange of the beam
above. It is not intended that these column splice requirements be in conflict with
applicable safety regulations, such as the OSHA Safety Standards for Steel Erec-
tion developed by the Steel Erection Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee
(SENRAC).
Partial-joint-penetration groove welded splices of thick column flanges exhibit
virtually no ductility under tensile loading (Popov and Steven, 1977; Bruneau,
Mahin, and Popov, 1987). Consequently, column splices made with partial-joint-
penetration groove welds require a 100 percent increase in Required Strength and
must be made using weld metal with minimum CVN toughness properties.
The calculation of the minimum Design Strength in Section 8.4a(2) includes the
overstrength factor R
y
. This results in a minimum Design Strength that is not
less than 50 percent of the expected axial yield strength of the column flanges.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
90 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm. C8.
A complete-joint-penetration groove weld may be considered as satisfying this
requirement.
The possible occurrence of tensile loads in column splices utilizing partial-joint-
penetration groove welds during a maximum considered earthquake should be
evaluated. When tensile loads are possible, it is suggested that some restraint be
provided against relative lateral movement between the spliced column shafts. For
example, this canbe achievedwiththe use of flange splice plates. Alternatively, web
splice plates that are wide enough to maintain the general alignment of the spliced
columns can be used. Shake-table experiments have shown that, when columns
that are unattached at the base reseat themselves after lifting, the performance of
a steel frame remains tolerable (Huckelbridge and Clough, 1977).
These provisions are applicable to common frame configurations. Additional con-
siderations may be necessary when flexure dominates over axial compression in
columns in Moment Frames, and in end columns of tall narrow frames where
overturning forces can be very significant. The designer should review the con-
ditions found in columns in buildings with tall story heights, when large changes
in column sizes occur at the splice, or when the possibility of column buckling in
single curvature over multiple stories exists. In these and similar cases, special col-
umn splice requirements may be necessary for minimum Design Strength and/or
detailing.
In the 1992 AISC Seismic Provisions, beveled transitions between elements of
differing thickness and or width were not specifically required for butt splices
in columns subject to seismic loads. Although no column splices are known to
have failed in the Northridge Earthquake or previous earthquakes, this provision
is no longer considered to be prudent given the concern over stress concentrations,
particularly at welds. Moment Frame systems are included in this requirement
because inelastic analyses consistently suggest that large moments can be expected
at any point along the column length, despite the results of elastic analysis showing
that moments are lowat the mid-height of columns in Moment Frames subjected to
lateral loads. Column splices in Braced Frames can also be subject to tension due to
overturning effects. Accordingly, beveled transitions are required for all systems
with CJP groove-welded column splices. An exception to the requirements for
beveled transitions is provided when partial-joint-penetration groove welds are
permitted.
Where CJP groove welds are not used, the connection is likely to be a partial-joint-
penetration groove weld. The unwelded portion of the partial-joint-penetration
groove weld forms a crack-like notch that induces stress concentrations. A partial-
joint-penetration groove weld made from one side would produce an edge crack-
like notch (Barsomand Rolfe, 1999). Apartial-joint-penetration groove weld made
from both sides would produce a buried crack-like notch. The strength of such
crack-like notches may be computed by using fracture mechanics methodology.
Depending on the specific characteristics of the particular design configuration,
geometry and deformation, the analysis may require elastic-plastic or plastic finite
element analysis of the joint. The accuracy of the computed strength will depend
on the finite element model and mesh size used, the assumed strength and fracture
toughness of the base metal, heat affected zone and weld metal, and on the residual
stress magnitude and distribution in the joint.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C8.] PART I – MEMBERS 91
C8.4b. Column Web Splices
Column web splices should be concentric with the column loads. Bolted column
web splices are required to have connection plates on both sides of the web to
minimize eccentricities.
C8.4c. Columns Not Part of the Seismic Load Resisting System
Inelastic analyses (FEMA, 2000f; FEMA, 2000g) of Moment Frame buildings
have shown the importance of the columns that are not part of the Seismic Load
Resisting System in helping to distribute the seismic shears between the floors.
Even columns that have beam connections considered to be pinned connections
may develop large bending moments and shears due to non-uniform drifts of
adjacent levels. For this reason, it is recommended that splices of such columns be
adequate to develop the shear forces corresponding to these large column moments
in both orthogonal directions.
FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) recommends that: “Splices of columns that are not
part of the Seismic Load Resisting System should be made in the center one-third
of the column height, and should have sufficient shear capacity in both orthogonal
directions to maintain the alignment of the column at the maximumshear force that
the column is capable of producing.” The corresponding commentary suggests that
this shear should be calculated assuming plastic hinges at the ends of the columns
in both orthogonal directions.
Further review (Krawinkler, 2001) of non-linear analyses cited in FEMA 355C
(FEMA, 2000d) showed that, in general, shears in such columns will be less than
one-half of the shear calculated from2M
pc
/H. For this reason Section 8.4c requires
that the calculated shear in the splices be not less than M
pc
/H.
Bolted web connections are preferred by many engineers and contractors because
they have advantages for erection, and, when plates are placed on both sides of
the web, they are expected to maintain alignment of the column in the event
of a flange splice fracture. Partial-joint-penetration groove welded webs are not
recommended, because fracture of a flange splice would likely lead to fracture of
the web splice, considering the stress concentrations inherent in such welded joints.
C8.5. Column Bases
A ductile moment frame is usually expected to develop a hinge at the base of the
column. The Column Base detail must accommodate the required hinging rotations
while maintaining the strength required to provide the mechanism envisioned by
the designer. These conditions are similar to the requirements for beam-to-column
connections.
Column Bases for Moment Frames can be of several different types, as follows:
(1) A rigid base assembly may be provided which is strong enough to force
yielding in the column. The designer should employ the same guidelines as
given for the rigid fully-restrained connections. Such connections may employ
thick base plates, haunches, cover plates, or other strengthening as required
to develop the column hinge. Where haunched type connections are used,
hinging occurs above the haunch, and appropriate consideration should be
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
92 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm. C8.
Fig. C-I-8.5.1. Example “rigid base” plate assembly for moment frames.
given to the stability of the column section at the hinge. See Figure C-I-8.5.1
for examples of rigid base assemblies that can be designed to be capable of
forcing column hinging.
(2) Large columns may be provided at the bottom level to limit the drift, and a
“pinned base” may be utilized. The designer should ensure that the required
shear capacity of the column, base plate, and anchor rods can be maintained
up to the maximum rotation that may occur. It should be recognized, however,
that without taking special measures, column base connection will generally
provide partial rotational fixity.
(3) A connection which provides “partial fixity” may be provided, so that the
Column Base is fixed up to some column moment, but the base itself yields
before the column hinges. In designing a base with partial fixity, the designer
should consider the principles used in the design of partially-restrained con-
nections. This type of base may rely on bending of the base plate (similar
to an end plate connection), bending of angles or tees, or yielding of anchor
rods. In the latter case, it is necessary to provide anchor rods with adequate
elongation capacity to permit the required rotation and sufficient unrestrained
length for the yielding to occur. Shear capacity of the base plate to foundation
connection must be assured at the maximum rotation.
(4) The column may continue below the assumed seismic base (e.g. into a base-
ment, crawl space, or grade beam) in such a way that the column’s fixity is
assured without the need for a rigid base plate connection. The designer should
recognize that hinging will occur in the column, just above the seismic base.
The horizontal shear to be resisted at the ends of the column belowthe seismic
base should be calculated considering the probable Overstrength (R
y
F
y
) of
the framing. See Fig. C-I-8.5.2 for an example of a Moment Frame Column
Base fixed within a grade beam.
For both braced frame and Moment Frame Column Bases, the designer should con-
sider the base connection as similar to a beam-to-column connection and apply
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C8.] PART I – MEMBERS 93
Fig. C-I-8.5.2. Example of moment frame column base fixity in a grade beam.
similar principles of design and detailing. However, there are also significant dif-
ferences that must be considered:
(1) Long anchor rods embedded in concrete will strain much more than the steel
bolts or welds of the beam-to-column connections.
(2) Column Base plates are bearing on grout or concrete that is more compressible
than the column flanges of beam-to-column connections.
(3) Column Base connections have significantly more longitudinal load in the
plane of the flanges and less transverse load in the plane of the web, when
compared to beam-to-column connections.
(4) The shear mechanism between the Column Base and grout or concrete is
different fromtheshear mechanismbetweenbeamendplateandcolumnflange.
(5) AISC standard Column Base anchor rod hole diameter is different from AISC
standard steel-to-steel bolt holes.
(6) Foundation rocking and rotation may be an issue, especially for isolated col-
umn footings.
The Column Base connection is one of the most important elements in steel struc-
tures. Damage at Column Bases during past earthquakes has been reported by
many observers (Northridge Reconnaissance Team, 1996; Midorikawa, Hasegawa,
Mukai, Nishiyama, Fukuta, and Yamanouchi, 1997). Seismic design practice for
this class of connections has not been well developed (DeWolf and Ricker, 1990;
Drake and Elkin, 1999) mainly because of the rather limited number of analytical
and experimental studies that have been carried out to-date (DeWolf and Sarisley,
1980; Picard and Beaulieu, 1985; Thambiratnam and Paramasivam, 1986; Sato
andKamagata, 1988; Astaneh-Asl, Bergsma, andShen, 1992; Targowski, Lamblin,
and Guerlement, 1993; Ermopoulos and Stamatopoulos, 1996; Jaspart and
Vandegans, 1998; Stojadinovic, Spacone, Goel, and Kwon, 1998; Burda and Itani,
1999; Adany, Calado, and Dunai, 2000).
Most of the experimental studies have been performed on reduced scale speci-
mens representing basic types of connections simulating a column welded to an
exposed base plate, which in turn is connected to a concrete foundation through
anchor rods. Test specimens have been subjected to axial loading combined with
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
94 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm. C8.
cyclic bending to simulate the Column Base behavior in Moment Frames. Two
recent studies (Fahmy, Stojadinovic, and Goel, 2000; Lee and Goel, 2001) have
noted the importance of weld metal toughness and axis of bending of wide flange
column sections on ductility and energy dissipation capacity of the test specimens.
Also, relative strength and stiffness of the base plate and anchor rods can signifi-
cantly influence the stress distribution and failure modes. The performance of the
base connection also depends on the cyclic performance of the anchors and the
surrounding concrete (Klingner and Graces, 2001).
Many different types of Column Base connections are used in current practice.
Much research work is needed in order to better understand their behavior under
seismic loading and to formulate improved design procedures. Designers should
use caution and good judgment in design and detailing in order to achieve desired
strength, stiffness and ductility of this very important class of connections.
The Provisions are silent on the use of Amplified Seismic Loads for Column
Base design since this is under the purview of the Applicable Building Code.
In general, Amplified Seismic Loads are prescribed to assure sufficient Design
Strength to control the locations of inelastic deformations. When a connection is
required to be designed for Amplified Seismic Loads, the intent is to assure that the
connection is strong enough and stiff enough to allow yielding of the connected
member. In the case of Moment Frames, if the building systemperformance intends
column yielding at the base plate, the connection between the column and the base
plate should be designed for the Amplified Seismic Load. In the case of Braced
Frames, if the building system performance intends brace yielding at the base
plate, the connection between the brace and the base plate should be designed for
the Amplified Seismic Load.
C8.6. H-Piles
The provisions on seismic design of H-piles are based on the data collected on
the actual behavior of H-piles during recent earthquakes, including the 1994
Northridge earthquake (Astaneh-Asl, Bolt, McMullin, Donikaian, Modjtahedi,
and Cho, 1994) and the results of cyclic tests of full-scale pile tests (Astaneh-Asl
and Ravat, 1998; Astaneh-Asl, 2001). In the test program, five full size H-Piles
with reinforced concrete pile caps were subjected to realistic cyclic vertical and
horizontal displacements expected in a major earthquake. Three specimens were
vertical piles and two specimens were batter piles. The tests established that dur-
ing cyclic loading for all three vertical pile specimens a very ductile and stable
plastic hinge formed in the steel pile just below the reinforced concrete pile cap.
When very large inelastic cycles were applied, local buckling of flanges within
the plastic hinge area occurred. Eventually, low cycle fatigue fracture of flanges
or overall buckling of the pile occurred. However, before the piles experienced
fracture through locally buckled areas, vertical piles tolerated from 40 to 65 large
inelastic cyclic vertical and horizontal displacements with rotation of the plastic
hinge exceeding 0.06 radian for more than 20 cycles.
C8.6a. Design of H-Piles
Prior to an earthquake, piles, particularly vertical piles, are primarily subjected
to gravity axial load. During an earthquake, piles are subjected to horizontal and
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C8.] PART I – MEMBERS 95
Fig. C-I-8.6.1. Deformations of Piles and Forces Acting on an Individual Pile.
vertical displacements as shown in Figure C-I-8.6.1. The horizontal and verti-
cal displacements of piles generate axial load (compression and possibly uplift
tension), bending moment, and shear in the pile.
During tests of H-piles, realistic cyclic horizontal and vertical displacements were
applied to the pile specimens. Figure C-I-8.6.2 shows test results in terms of
axial load, bending moment interaction curves for one of the specimens. Based
on performance of test specimens, it was concluded (Astaneh-Asl, 2000) that
H-piles should be designed following the provisions of the AISC LRFD Specifi-
cation regarding members subjected to combined loads.
C8.6b. Batter H-Piles
The vertical pile specimens demonstrated very large cyclic ductility as well as
considerable energy dissipation capacity. A case study of performance of H-piles
during the 1994 Northridge earthquake (Astaneh-Asl et al., 1994) indicated excel-
lent performance for pile groups with vertical piles only. However, the batter pile
specimens did not show as much ductility as the vertical piles. The batter piles tol-
erated from7 to 17 large inelastic cycles before failure. Based on relatively limited
information on actual seismic behavior of batter piles, it is possible that during a
major earthquake, batter piles in a pile group fail and are no longer able to support
the gravity load after the earthquake. Because of this possibility, the use of batter
piles to carry gravity loads is discouraged. Unless, through realistic cyclic tests, it
is shown that batter piles will be capable of carrying their share of the gravity loads
after a major earthquake, the vertical piles in Seismic Design Categories D, E, and
F should be designed to support the gravity load alone, without participation of
the batter piles.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
96 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. C9.
Fig. C-I-8.6.2. Axial-Moment Interaction for H-Pile Test (Astaneh-Asl, 2000).
C8.6c. Tension in H-Piles
Due to overturning moment, piles can be subjected to tension. Piles subjected
to tension should have sufficient mechanical attachments within their embedded
area to transfer the tension force in the pile to the pile cap or foundation. Since
it is expected that a plastic hinge will form in the pile just under the pile cap or
foundation, the use of mechanical attachment and welds over a length of pile below
the pile cap equal to the depth of cross section of the pile is prohibited.
C9. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)
General Comments for Commentary Sections C9, C10 and C11
These Provisions include three types of steel Moment Frames: Special Moment
Frames (SMF) in Section 9, Intermediate Moment Frames (IMF) (new) in Section
10, and Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) in Section 11. The provisions for these
three moment-frame types reflect lessons learned from the Northridge and Kobe
Earthquakes, and from subsequent research performed by the SAC Joint Venture
for FEMA. The reader is referred to FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) for an extensive
discussion of these lessons and recommendations to mitigate the conditions ob-
served. Commentary on specific provisions in Section C9 is based primarily on
FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a).
The prescriptive moment-frame connection included in the 1992 AISC Seismic
Provisions was based primarily upon testing that was conducted in the early 1970s
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 97
(Popov and Stephen, 1972) indicating that for the sizes and material strengths test-
ed, a moment connection with complete-joint-penetration groove welded flanges
and a welded or bolted web connection could accommodate inelastic rotations in
the range of 0.01 to 0.015 radian. It was judged by engineers at the time that such
rotations, which corresponded to building drifts in the range of 2 to 2.5 percent were
sufficient for adequate frame performance. Investigations conducted subsequent
to the Northridge earthquake emphasized that the many changes that took place in
materials, welding, frame configurations and member sizes since the 1970s make
the original results unsuitable as a basis for current design. Additionally, recent
analyses using time histories from certain near-fault earthquakes, including P-
effects, demonstrate that drift demands may be larger than previously assumed
(Krawinkler and Gupta, 1998).
The three frame types included in these Provisions offer three different levels of
expected seismic inelastic rotation capability. SMF and IMF are designed to ac-
commodate approximately 0.03and 0.01 radian, respectively. OMFs are designed
to remain essentially elastic and are assumed to have only very small inelastic
demands. It is assumed that the elastic drift of typical Moment Frames is usually
in the range of 0.01 radian and that the inelastic rotation of the beams is approxi-
mately equal to the inelastic drift. These frames are assumed to accommodate total
interstory drifts in the range of 0.04, 0.02 and 0.01 radian, respectively.
Although it is common to visualize inelastic rotations in Moment Frames occurring
at beam or column “hinges”, analyses and testing demonstrate that the inelastic
rotations actually combine flexural deformations at the hinges, and shear defor-
mations of the Panel Zones, and deformations from other sources depending on
the configuration, unless the column webs are unusually thick. The contribution
of Panel Zone deformation to inelastic rotation is considered beneficial, provided
that it neither leads to significant local column flange bending at the beam-flange-
to-column-flange welds nor leads to significant column damage. Currently, the
amount of Panel Zone deformation that a given connection will have and how
much it will accommodate appears to be most reliably determined by testing.
Based upon the recommendations in FEMA350 (FEMA, 2000a), these Provisions
require connections in SMF and IMF be qualified for use by testing. (Note that the
IMF as defined in these Provisions is equivalent to the OMF as defined in FEMA
350.) It is not the intent of these Provisions to require specific tests for each design,
except where the design is sufficiently unique such that there are no published
or otherwise available tests adequately representing the proposed configuration.
For many commonly employed combinations of beam and column sizes, there are
readily available test reports in publications of AISC, FEMA, and others, including
FEMA 355D (FEMA, 2000e) and NIST/AISC (1998). Qualification testing is
not required for OMF connections, which may be proportioned following a set
of prescriptive design rules that have been demonstrated by testing to provide
adequate performance for the limited inelastic rotation expected for such frames.
C9.1. Scope
Special Moment Frames (SMF) are generally expected to experience significant
inelastic deformation during large seismic events. It is expected that most of the
inelastic deformation will take place as rotation in beam “hinges,” with some
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
98 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. C9.
inelastic deformation in the Panel Zone of the column. The amount of inelastic
deformation is dependent on the connection types used, the configuration, and a
number of other variables. The connections for these frames are to be qualified
based upon tests that demonstrate that the connection can sustain an Interstory
Drift Angle of at least 0.04 radian based upon a specified loading protocol. Other
provisions are intended to limit or prevent excessive Panel Zone distortion, column
hinging and local buckling that may lead to inadequate frame performance in spite
of good connection performance.
C9.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
C9.2a. Requirements
Sections 9.2a and 9.2b have been rewritten to clarify the requirements and coor-
dinate the requirements with Appendices P and S. Section 9.2a gives the perfor-
mance and design requirements for the connections, and Section 9.2b provides the
requirements for verifying that the selected connections will meet the performance
requirements.
FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) recommends two criteria for qualifying drift angle
(QDA) for Special Moment Frames. The “Strength degradation” drift angle, as
defined in FEMA 350, means the angle where “either failure of the connection
occurs, or the strength of the connection degrades to less than the nominal plastic
capacity, whichever is less”. The “Ultimate” drift angle capacity is defined as the
angle “at which connection damage is so severe that continued ability to remain
stable under gravity loading is uncertain”. Testing to this level can be hazardous to
laboratory equipment and staff, which is part of the reason that it is seldom done.
The strength degradation QDA is set at 0.04 radian and the ultimate QDA is set at
0.06radian. These values formedthe basis for extensive probabilistic evaluations of
the performance capability of various Structural Systems (FEMA, 2000f ) demon-
strating with high statistical confidence that frames with these types of connections
can meet the intended performance goals. For the sake of simplicity, and because
many connections have not been tested to the ultimate QDA, these Provisions adopt
the single criterion of the strength degradation QDA. In addition, the ultimate QDA
is more appropriately used for the design of high performance structures.
Although connection qualification primarily focuses on the level of plastic rotation
achieved, the tendency for connections to experience strength degradation with in-
creased deformation is also of concern. Strength degradation can increase moment
demands from P-effects and the likelihood of frame instability. In the absence of
additional information, it is recommended that this degradation should not reduce
flexural strength, measured at a drift angle of 0.04 radian, to less than the nominal
flexural strength, M
p
, calculated using the specified minimum yield strength, F
y
.
Figure C-I-9.1 illustrates this behavior. Note that 0.03 radian plastic rotation is
equivalent to 0.04 radian drift angle for frames with an elastic drift of 0.01 radian.
The required shear strength V
u
of the beam-to-column joint is defined as the
summation of the factored gravity loads and the shear that results fromthe required
flexural strengths on the two ends of the beam segment between the hinge points,
which can be determined as 1.1R
y
F
y
Z. However, in some cases, such as when
large gravity loads occur or when Panel Zones are weak, rational analysis may
indicate that lower combinations of end moments are justified.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 99
Fig. C-I-9.1. Acceptable strength degradation during hysteretic behavior, per Section 9.2b.
It should be recognized that truss Moment Frames can be designed with bottom-
chord members or connections that can deform inelastically and such frames are
permitted as SMF if all of the provisions of Section 9 are met.
C9.2b. Conformance Demonstration
Section 9.2b provides requirements for demonstrating conformance with the re-
quirements of Section 9.2a. It permits use of Prequalified Connections meeting
the requirements of Appendix P or use of connections qualified by tests. These
may be from previously documented tests or project-specific tests that meet the
requirements of Appendix S.
FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) includes recommendations for design and fabrication
of several types of connections that are deemed prequalified for use in Special
Moment Frames. These connection designs are based on extensive testing and
analysis performed by the SAC Joint Venture under a program funded by FEMA.
When used within the limitations listed in FEMA 350 and with quality control and
quality assurance requirements in FEMA 353 (FEMA, 2000b), these connections
are commonly considered to comply with the requirements of Section 9.2. Com-
parison of the proposed frame configurations with the SAC tested connections is
recommended to insure that the results are applicable.
C9.3. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections
(beam web parallel to column web)
Cyclic testing has demonstrated that significant ductility can be obtained through
shear yielding in column Panel Zones through many cycles of inelastic distortion
(Popov, Blondet, Stepanov, and Stojadinovic, 1996; Slutter, 1981; Becker, 1971;
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
100 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. C9.
Fielding and Huang, 1971; Krawinkler, 1978). Consequently, it is not generally
necessary to provide a Panel Zone that is capable of developing the full flexural
strength of the connected beams if the Design Strength of the Panel Zone can be
predicted. However, the usual assumption that Von Mises criterion applies and
the shear strength is 0.55F
y
d
c
t does not match the actual behavior observed in
many tests into the inelastic range. Due to the presence of the column flanges,
strain hardening and other phenomena, Panel Zone shear strengths in excess of
F
y
d
c
t have been observed. Accordingly, Equation 9-1 accounts for the significant
strength contribution of thick column flanges.
Despite the ductility demonstrated by properly proportioned Panel-Zones in previ-
ous studies, excessive Panel Zone distortions can adversely affect the performance
of beam-to-column connections (Englekirk, 1999). Consequently, the provisions
require that the Panel Zone design match that of the successfully tested connections
used to qualify the connection being used. The balance of the procedure of Sec-
tion 9.3a is intended to provide a minimum strength level to prevent excessively
weak Panel Zones, which may lead to unacceptable column distortion. Where
Prequalified Connections described in FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) are used, the
design of Panel Zones according to the methods given therein, generally meet the
requirements in Section 9.3a. This should be verified by the designer.
Equation 9-1 represents a Design Strength in the inelastic range and, therefore,
is for comparison to limiting strengths of connected members. ␾
v
has been set
equal to unity to allow a direct comparison between Design Strength of the beam
and the column Panel Zone. In the LRFD Specification, the engineer is given
the option to consider inelastic deformations of the Panel Zone in the analysis.
Separate sets of equations are provided for use when these deformations are and
are not considered. In the AISC Seismic Provisions, however, one set of equations
is provided and consideration of the inelastic deformation of the Panel Zone in
the analysis is required. The application of the moments at the column face to
determine the required shear strength of the Panel Zone recognizes that the beam
hinging will take place at a location away from the beam-to-column connection,
which will result in amplified effects on the Panel Zone shear. The previous version
of this provision included a reduction factor of 0.8 on the beam yielding effects,
which was intended to recognize that, in some cases, gravity loads might inhibit
the development of plastic hinges on both sides of a column. However, there is no
assurance that this will be the case, especially for one-sided connections and at
perimeter frames where gravity loads may be relatively small.
This provision requires that the Panel Zone thickness be determined using the
method used to determine the Panel Zone thickness in the tested connection, with
a minimumvalue as described in the remainder of the section. The intent is that the
local deformation demands on the various elements in the structure be consistent
with the results of the tests that justify the use of the connection. The expected shear
strength of the Panel Zone in relation to the maximum expected demands that can
be generated by the beam(s) framing into the column should be consistent with the
relative strengths that existed in the tested connection configuration. Many of the
connection tests were performed with a one-sided configuration. If the structure
has a two-sided connection configuration with the same beam and column sizes
as a one-sided connection test, the Panel Zone shear demand will be about twice
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 101
that of the test. Therefore, in order to obtain the same relative strength, the Panel
Zone thickness to be provided in the structure should be approximately twice that
of the test.
To minimize shear buckling of the Panel Zone during inelastic deformations, the
minimum Panel Zone thickness is set at one-ninetieth of the sum of its depth
and width. Thus, when the column web and web doubler plate(s) each meet the
requirements of Equation 9-2, their interconnection with plug welds is not required.
Otherwise, the column web and web doubler plate(s) can be interconnected with
plug welds as illustrated in Figure C-I-9.2 and the total Panel Zone thickness can
be used in Equation 9-2.
In the 1992 AISC Seismic Provisions, it was required that web doubler plates
be placed directly against the column web in all cases. In the 1997 revision
(AISC, 1997b), the commentary noted an alternative; to place web doubler plates
symmetrically in pairs spaced away from the column web. In the latter configura-
tion, both the web doubler plates and the column web are required to all indepen-
dently meet Equation 9-2 in order to be considered as effective.
Web doubler plates may extend between top and bottom Continuity Plates welded
directly to the column web and web doubler plate, or they may extend above and
below top and bottom Continuity Plates welded to the doubler plate only. In the
former case, the welded joint connecting the Continuity Plate to the column web
andwebdoubler plate is requiredtobe configuredtotransmit the proportionate load
from the Continuity Plate to each element of the Panel Zone. In the latter case, the
welded joint connecting the Continuity Plate to the web doubler plate is required
to be sized to transmit the load from the Continuity Plate to the web doubler plate
and the web doubler plate thickness is required to be selected to transmit this same
load; minimum-size fillet welds per LRFD Specification Table J2.4 are used to
connect along the column-web edges.
Fig. C-I-9.2. Connecting web doubler plates with plug welds.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
102 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. C9.
Shear loads transmitted to the web doubler plates from the Continuity Plates are
equilibrated by shear loads along column-flange edges of the web doubler plate.
It is anticipated that the Panel Zone will yield in a seismic event, and the welds
connecting the web doubler plate to the column flanges are required to be sized
to develop the shear strength of the full web doubler plate thickness. Either a
complete-joint-penetration groove-welded joint or a fillet-welded joint can be used
as illustrated in Figure C-I-9.3. The plate thickness and column fillet radius should
be considered before selecting the fillet-welded joint.
The use of diagonal stiffeners for strengthening and stiffening of the Panel Zone
has not been adequately tested for low-cycle reversed loading into the inelastic
range. Thus, no specific recommendations are made at this time for special seismic
requirements for this detail.
C9.4. Beam and Column Limitations
Reliable inelastic deformation requires that width-thickness ratios of projecting
elements be within those providing a cross-section resistant to local buckling into
the inelastic range. Although the width-thickness ratios for compact elements in
LRFD Specification Table B5.1 are sufficient to prevent local buckling before the
onset of yielding, the available test data suggest that these limits are not adequate
for the required inelastic performance in SMF. The limits given in Table I-8-1 are
deemed adequate for ductilities to 6 or 7 (Sawyer, 1961; Lay, 1965; Kemp, 1986;
Bansal, 1971).
The choice of the ratioinEquation9-3of 2.0(see Sect. 9.7a) as a trigger for preclud-
ing this limit is based upon studies of inelastic analyses by Gupta and Krawinkler
(1999), Bondy (1996) and others, that indicate that hinging of columns may not
be precluded at ratios below 2.0. Hinging of columns that do not comply with ␭
ps
may result in flange local buckling, which is detrimental to column performance.
C9.5. Continuity Plates
When subjected to seismic loads, an interior column (i.e., one with adjacent mo-
ment connections to both flanges) in a Moment Frame receives a tensile flange
force on one flange and a compressive flange force on the opposite side. When
stiffeners are required, it is normal to place a full-depth transverse stiffener on
each side of the column web. As this stiffener provides a load path for the flanges
on both sides of the column, it is commonly called a Continuity Plate. The stiff-
ener also serves as a boundary to the very highly stressed Panel Zone. When the
formation of a plastic hinge is anticipated adjacent to the column, the Required
Strength is the flange force exerted when the full beam plastic moment has been
reached, including the effects of overstrength and strain hardening, as well as shear
amplification from the hinge location to the column face.
Post-Northridge studies have shown that even when Continuity Plates of substan-
tial thickness are used, inelastic strains across the weld of the beam flange to the
column flange are substantially higher opposite the column web than they are at the
flange tips. Some studies have indicated stress concentrations higher than 4, which
can cause the weld stress at the center of the flange to exceed its tensile strength
before the flange force exceeds its yield strength based on a uniformaverage stress.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 103
Fig. C-I-9.3. Web doubler plates.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
104 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. C9.
This condition will be exacerbated if relatively thin Continuity Plates are used or if
Continuity Plates are omitted entirely. For this reason, an earlier formula that per-
mitted elimination of Continuity Plates where column flanges were very thick was
rescinded in FEMA267 (FEMA,1995) and the Supplement to FEMA267 (FEMA,
1997b). The use of Continuity Plates was recommended in all cases unless tests
showed that other design features of a given connection are so effective in reducing
or redistributing flange stresses that the connection will work without them.
Given the stress distribution cited above, there is little justification for some of the
old rules for sizing and connecting Continuity Plates, such as selecting its thickness
equal to one-half the thickness of the beam flange. On the other hand, the use of
excessively thick Continuity Plates will likely result in large residual stresses,
which also may be detrimental. Because of these apparently conflicting concepts,
it is recommended that Continuity Plate usage and sizing be based on tests.
The FEMA-sponsored SAC steel project studied this issue in depth. Continuity
plates are not required according to FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) when:
t
cf
>

1.8b
f
t
f
F
yb
R
yb
F
yc
R
yc
(C9-3)
and
t
cf
> b
f
/6 (C9-4)
Equation C9-3 is similar to the equation in older codes, except for the R
y
factors.
Justification for the use of Equation C9-3 and C9-4 is based on studies by Ricles
included in FEMA 355D (FEMA, 2000e).
These equations will be considered for incorporation in future editions of these
Provisions.
C9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio
The strong-column weak-beam (SC/WB) concept is perhaps one of the least un-
derstood seismic provisions in steel design. It is often mistakenly assumed that it
is formulated to prevent any column flange yielding in a frame and that if such
yielding occurs, the column will fail. Tests have shown that yielding of columns
in Moment Frame subassemblages does not necessarily reduce the lateral strength
at the expected seismic displacement levels.
The SC/WB concept represents more of a global frame concern than a concern at
the interconnections of individual beams and columns. Schneider, Roeder, and
Carpenter (1991) and Roeder (1987) showed that the real benefit of meeting
SC/WB requirements is that the columns are generally strong enough to force
flexural yielding in beams in multiple levels of the frame, thereby achieving a
higher level of energy dissipation. Weak column frames, particularly those with
weak or soft stories, are likely to exhibit an undesirable response at those stories
with the highest column demand-to-capacity ratios.
It should be noted that compliance with the SC/WB concept and Equation 9-3
gives no assurance that individual columns will not yield, even when all connec-
tion locations in the frame comply. It can be shown by nonlinear analysis that, as
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C9.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 105
the frame deforms inelastically, points of inflection shift and the distribution of
moments varies from the idealized condition. Nonetheless, yielding of the beams
rather than the columns will predominate and the desired inelastic performance
will be achieved in frames composed of members that meet the requirement in
Equation 9-3.
Previous formulations of this relationship idealized the beam/column intersection
as a point at the intersection of the member centerlines. Post-Northridge beam-
to-column moment connections are generally configured to shift the plastic hinge
location into the beam away from the column face and a more general formula-
tion was needed. FEMA 350 provides recommendations regarding the assumed
location of plastic hinges for different connection configurations. Recognition of
potential beam overstrength (see Commentary Section C6.2) is also incorporated
into Equation 9-3.
Exceptions to the requirement in Equation 9-3 are given in Sections 9.6a and 9.6b.
The compactness requirements in Section 9.4 must be met for columns using these
exceptions because it is expected that flexural yielding will occur in the columns.
In Section 9.6a, columns with low axial loads used in one-story buildings or in the
top story of a multi-story building need not meet Equation 9-3 because concerns
for inelastic soft or weak stories are not significant in such cases. Also excepted is a
limited percentage of columns that is lowenough to limit undesirable performance
while still providing reasonable flexibility where the requirement in Equation 9-3
would be impractical, such as at large transfer girders. Finally, Section 9.6 provides
an exception for columns in levels that are significantly stronger than in the level
above because column yielding at the stronger level would be unlikely.
C9.7. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint
Columns are required to be braced to prevent rotation out of the plane of the
Moment Frame, particularly if inelastic behavior is expected in or adjacent to the
beam-to-column connection during high seismic activity.
C9.7a. Restrained Connections
Beam-to-column connections are usually restrained laterally by the floor or roof
framing. When this is the case and it can be shown that the column remains elastic
outside of the Panel Zone, lateral bracing of the column flanges is required only
at the level of the top flanges of the beams. If it cannot be shown that the column
remains elastic, lateral bracing is required at both the top and bottom beam flanges
because of the potential for flexural yielding, and consequent lateral-torsional
buckling of the column.
The Required Strength for lateral bracing at the beam-to-column connection is 2
percent of the Nominal Strength of the beam flange. In addition, the element(s)
providing lateral bracing are required to have adequate stiffness to inhibit lateral
movement of the column flanges (Bansal, 1971). In some cases, a bracing member
will be requiredfor suchlateral bracing. Alternatively, it canbe shownthat adequate
lateral bracing can be provided by the column web and Continuity Plates or by the
flanges of perpendicular beams.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
106 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. C9.
The 1997 AISCSeismic Provisions required column lateral bracing when the ratio
in Equation 9-3 was less than 1.25. The intent of this provision was to require
bracing to prevent lateral-torsional buckling for cases where it cannot be assured
that the column will not hinge. Studies utilizing inelastic analyses (Gupta and
Krawinkler, 1999; Bondy, 1996) have shown that, in severe earthquakes, plastic
hinging can occur in the columns even when this ratio is significantly larger than
1.25. The revised limit of 2.0 was selected as a reasonable cut-off because column
plastic hinging for values greater than 2.0 only occurs in the case of extremely large
story drifts. The intent of the revisions to this section is to encourage appropriate
bracing of column flanges rather than force the use of much heavier columns.
C9.7b. Unrestrained Connections
Unrestrained connections occur in special cases, such as in two-story frames,
at mechanical floors or in atriums and similar architectural spaces. When such
connections occur, the potential for out-of-plane buckling at the connection should
be minimized. Three provisions are given for the columns to limit the likelihood
of column buckling.
C9.8. Lateral Bracing of Beams
General requirements for lateral bracing of beams are given in LRFD Specifica-
tion Chapter F. In Moment Frames, the beams are nearly always bent in reverse
curvature between columns unless one end is pinned. Using a plastic design model
as a guide and assuming that the moment at one end of a beam is M
p
and a pinned
end exists at the other, LRFD Specification Equation F1-17 indicates a maximum
distance between points of lateral bracing of 0.12r
y
E
s
/F
y
. However, there remains
the uncertainty in locating plastic hinges due to earthquake motions. Consequently,
the maximum distance between points of lateral bracing is more conservatively
specified as 0.086r
y
E
s
/F
y
for both top and bottom flanges.
The provisions of this section call for the placement of lateral bracing to be near the
location of expected plastic hinges. Such guidance dates to the original develop-
ment of plastic design procedures in the early 1960’s. In Moment Frame structures,
many connection details attempt to move the plastic hinge a short distance away
from the beam-to-column connection. Testing carried out as part of the SAC pro-
gram (FEMA, 2000a) indicated that the bracing provided by typical composite
floor slabs is adequate to avoid excessive strength deterioration up to the required
Interstory Drift Angle of 0.04 radian. As such, the FEMArecommendations do not
require the placement of supplemental lateral bracing at plastic hinge locations ad-
jacent to column connections for beams with composite floor construction. These
provisions allow the placement of lateral braces to be consistent with the tested
connections that are used to justify the design. For conditions where larger drifts
are anticipated or improved performance is desired, the designer may decide to
provide additional lateral bracing near these plastic hinges. If lateral braces are pro-
vided, they should provide a Design Strength of 6 percent of the expected capacity
of the beam flange at the plastic hinge location. If a Reduced Beam Section con-
nection detail is used, the reduced flange width may be considered in calculation
of the bracing force.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C10.] PART I – INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) 107
C10. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF)
General Commentary for Sections C10 and C11
As a result of studies conducted under the SAC program (FEMA, 2000f ), the In-
termediate Moment Frame (IMF) as defined in the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions
(AISC, 1997b) was not referenced in FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a). In these Provi-
sions, the previously defined Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF) has been split into
two systems: the IMF based on a tested connection design and the OMF based on
a prescriptive design procedure. Both systems are intended primarily for construc-
tion limited to certain Seismic Design Categories and height restrictions (FEMA,
2000e). It is intended that the new IMF and OMF will not experience the larger
Interstory Drift Angles expected of SMF or the previous IMF through the use of
more or larger framing members or because of less demanding Seismic Design
Categories. Many of the restrictions applied to the SMF are not applied to the IMF
and the OMF because limited inelastic action is required.
The statement, “No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specifica-
tion.” which appears in Sections 10.3, 10.4, 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, 11.3, 11.4, 11.6, 11.7,
and 11.8 indicates that these Provisions require no limitations or provisions be-
yond what is in the AISCLoad and Resistance Factor Design Specification (AISC,
1999) on that particular topic.
C10.1. Scope
The Intermediate Moment Frame (IMF) currently specified is essentially the same
as the Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF) system defined in the 1997 AISC Seismic
Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. This new IMF is intended to provide
limited levels of inelastic rotation capability and is based on tested designs.
The following building height and systemlimitations are given in the 2000 NEHRP
Provisions (FEMA, 2000g) for the IMF:
(1) There is no height limit in Seismic Design Categories (SDC) B and C.
(2) The IMF can be used in buildings up to 35 ft in height (10.7 m) regardless of
floor and/or wall weight for SDC D.
(3) The IMF is not permitted in SDC’s E, and F, except as described in reference
footnote i and j.
(4) Footnote i reads “Steel Ordinary Moment Frames and Intermediate Moment
Frames are permitted in single-story buildings up to a height of 60 feet (18.3 m)
when the moment joints of field connections are constructed of bolted end
plates and the dead load of the roof does not exceed 15 psf (0.72 kPa).”
Additionally, IMF’s are permitted in buildings up to a height of 35 feet (10.7 m)
where the dead load for each of the following elements: walls, floors, and roofs,
does not exceed 15 psf (0.72 kPa).
C10.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
The minimum Interstory Drift Angle required for IMF connections is 0.02 radian
while that for SMF connections is 0.04 radian. This level of Interstory Drift Angle
has been established for this type of frame based on engineering judgment applied
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
108 PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) [Comm. C11.
to available tests and analytical studies, primarily those included in FEMA (2000d
and 2000f ).
C11. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF)
C11.1. Scope
The Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF) is intended to provide for limited levels of
inelastic rotation capability that are less than those of the IMF. Unlike the IMF,
the OMF is based on a prescriptive design procedure.
The following building height and systemlimitations are given in the 2000 NEHRP
Provisions (FEMA, 2000g) for the OMF:
(1) There is no height limit on Seismic Design Categories (SDC) B and C.
(2) The OMF is not permitted in SDC’s D, E, and F, except as described in
reference footnotes i and j (see Section C10.1).
C11.2. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections
Even though the inelastic rotation demands on OMF are expected to be low, the
Northridge Earthquake damage demonstrated that little, if any, inelastic rotational
capacity was available in the connection prescribed by the codes prior to 1994.
Thus, even for OMF, new connection requirements are needed, and these are
provided in this section.
The specific requirements given for connections are given for both fully-restrained
(FR) and partially-restrained (PR) moment connections. For FR moment connec-
tions, a minimumcalculated strength of 1.1R
y
M
p
is required to recognize potential
overstrength and strain hardening of the beam. Additionally, detailing enhance-
ments are required that have been demonstrated by FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) to
significantly improve the connection performance over past steel Moment Frame
construction.
One such enhancement is the prescribed weld access hole given in Figure 11-1
and in FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a). The requirement to use the above weld ac-
cess hole configuration is not stipulated for SMF nor IMF connections since the
approved joints are based on testing. For OMF joints only, a minor increase in
certain tolerances might be appropriate to standardize the shape of access holes
for different beam sizes. Provided that the slope of the access hole cut to the flange
does not exceed 25˚, such adjustments to Figure 11-1 could include increasing the
plus tolerance of Note 2 to
3
/
4
t
bf
, Note 3 to +
1
/
2
in. (12 mm), and Note 5 to +1
in. (25 mm). Other weld access holes may provide good performance with lower
fabrication costs and can be used if verified by testing.
The testing completed by the SACJoint Venture found that improved performance
into the inelastic range can be obtained with the following improvements over
the prescriptive pre-Northridge connection detail: (1) the use of notch-tough weld
metal; (2) the removal of backingbars, backgougingof the weldroot, andrewelding
with a reinforcing fillet weld; (3) the use of a welded web connection; (4) the use
of Continuity Plates; and (5) use of the weld access hole detail as noted above.
Where the top flange steel backing is left in place, the steel backing is welded to the
flange with a continuous fillet. (See Figure C-I-11.1(d).) The steel backing should
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C11.] PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) 109
Fig. C-I-11.1. Schematic illustrations of strong-axis moment connections.
not be welded to the underside of the beam flange. Discussion of the connection
detailing is provided in FEMA documents 350 and 353 (FEMA, 2000a; FEMA,
2000b).
FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) did not prequalify welded connections of beams to
the weak axis of columns due to lack of sufficient test data. Use of moment con-
nections to the weak axis of columns require that several adjustments be made
to Section 11.2(1). The bottom flange Continuity Plate should be thicker than the
beam flange and set lower than theoretical underside of beam to facilitate beam
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
110 PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) [Comm. C12.
depth tolerance. The Continuity Plates should project 3 in. beyond the column
flange and be tapered to the width of the beam flange. Continuity Plates should
be provided on the far side of the column web. The bottom flange steel backing
should be removed, and a weld transition made to the thickened Continuity Plate.
The steel backing may remain at the top flange. See LRFD Manual of Steel Con-
struction (AISC, 2001), Driscoll and Beedle (1982), and Gilton and Uang (2002)
for information on fully-rigid connections to the column weak axis.
For information on bolted moment end-plate connections in seismic applications,
refer to Meng and Murray (1997) and FEMA 355D (FEMA, 2000e).
For information on PRconnections, the reader is referred to Leon (1990 and 1994),
Leon and Ammerman (1990), Leon and Forcier (1992), Bjorhovde, Colson, and
Brozzetti (1990), Hsieh and Deierlein (1991), Leon, Hoffman, and Staeger (1996)
and FEMA (2000e).
A welded beam-to-column moment connection in a strong-axis configuration
similar to one tested at Lehigh University for the SAC Project is illustrated in
Figure C-I-11.1(d). FEMA350 (FEMA, 2000a) recommends this detail for use in
OMF with similar member sizes and other conditions.
C11.5. Continuity Plates
For all welded OMF connections that are not based upon tests, Continuity Plates
are required.
When welding Continuity Plates to the column flanges with two-sided partial-
joint-penetration groove welds combined with reinforcing fillet welds, refer to
AWS D1.1, Article 2.6.2 and Annex I for an explanation of effective throat for
reinforced partial-joint-penetration groove welds.
The “contact area” referred to in this section is the thickness of the Continuity
Plate times its length, after reductions in length for access holes.
C12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF)
C12.1. Scope
Truss-girder Moment Frames have often been designed with little or no regard
for truss ductility. Research has shown that such truss Moment Frames have very
poor hysteretic behavior with large, sudden reductions in strength and stiffness
due to buckling and fracture of web members prior to or early in the dissipation
of energy through inelastic deformations (Itani and Goel, 1991; Goel and Itani,
1994a). The resultinghysteretic degradationas illustratedinFigure C-I-12.1results
in excessively large story drifts in building frames subjected to earthquake ground
motions with peak accelerations on the order of 0.4g to 0.5g.
Research work led to the development of special truss girders that limit inelastic
deformations to a special segment of the truss (Itani and Goel, 1991; Goel and
Itani, 1994b; Basha and Goel, 1994). As illustrated in Figure C-I-12.2, the chords
and web members (arranged in an X pattern) of the special segment are designed
to withstand large inelastic deformations, while the rest of the structure remains
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C12.] PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) 111
Fig. C-I-12.1. Strength degradation in undetailed truss girder.
elastic. Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF) have been validated by extensive
testing of full-scale subassemblages with story-high columns and full-span spe-
cial truss girders. As illustrated in Figure C-I-12.3, STMF are ductile with stable
hysteretic behavior for a large number of cycles up to 3 percent story drifts.
Because STMF are relatively new and unique, the span length and depth of the
truss girders are limited at this time to the range used in the test program.
C12.2. Special Segment
It is desirable to locate the STMF special segment near mid-span of the truss
girder because shear due to gravity loads is generally lower in that region. The
lower limit on special segment length of 10 percent of the truss span length provides
a reasonable limit on the ductility demand, while the upper limit of 50 percent of
the truss span length represents more of a practical limit.
The Required Strength of interconnection for X-diagonals is intended to account
for buckling over half the full diagonal length (El-Tayem and Goel, 1986; Goel
and Itani, 1994b). It is recommended that half the full diagonal length be used
in calculating the design compression strength of the interconnected X-diagonal
members in the special segment.
Because it is intended that the yield mechanism in the special segment form over
its full length, no major structural loads should be applied within the length of the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
112 PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) [Comm. C12.
Fig. C-I-12.2. Cross-braced truss.
Fig. C-I-12.3. Hysteretic behavior of STMF.
special segment. In special segments with open Vierendeel panels, i.e. when no
diagonal web members are used, any structural loads should be avoided. Accord-
ingly, a restrictive upper limit is placed on the axial load in diagonal web members
due to gravity loads applied directly within the special segment.
C12.3. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members
STMF are intended to dissipate energy through flexural yielding of the chord
members and axial yielding and buckling of the diagonal web members in the
special segment. It is desirable to provide minimum shear strength in the special
segment through flexural yielding of the chord members and to limit the axial
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 113
load to a maximum value. Plastic analysis can be used to determine the required
shear strength of the truss special segments under the factored earthquake load
combination.
C12.4. Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members
STMF are required to be designed to maintain elastic behavior of the truss mem-
bers, columns, and all connections, except for the members of the special segment
that are involved in the formation of the yield mechanism. Therefore, all members
and connections outside the special segments are to be designed for calculated
loads by applying the combination of gravity loads and equivalent lateral loads
that are necessary to develop the maximum expected nominal shear strength of
the special segment V
ne
in its fully yielded and strain-hardened state. Thus, Equa-
tion 12-1, as formulated, accounts for uncertainties in the actual yield strength of
steel and the effects of strain hardening of yielded web members and hinged chord
members. It is based upon approximate analysis and test results of special truss
girder assemblies that were subjected to story drifts up to 3 percent (Basha and
Goel, 1994). Tests (Jain, Goel, and Hanson, 1978) on axially loaded members have
shown that 0.3P
nc
is representative of the average nominal post-buckling strength
under cyclic loading.
C12.5. Compactness
The ductility demand on diagonal web members in the special segment can be
rather large. Flat bars are suggested at this time because of their high ductility.
Tests (Itani and Goel, 1991) have shown that single angles with width-thickness
ratios that are less than 0.18

E
s
/F
y
also possess adequate ductility for use as
web members in an X configuration. Chord members in the special segment are
required to be compact cross-sections to facilitate the formation of plastic hinges.
C12.6. Lateral Bracing
The top and bottom chords are required to be laterally braced to provide for the
stability of the special segment during cyclic yielding. The lateral bracing limit for
flexural members L
p
as specified in the LRFD Specification has been found to be
adequate for this purpose.
C13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF)
C13.1. Scope
Concentrically Braced Frames are those Braced Frames in which the centerlines
of members that meet at a joint intersect at a point to form a vertical truss system
that resists lateral loads. A few common types of concentrically Braced Frames
are shown in Figure C-I-13.1, including diagonally braced, cross-braced (X), V-
braced (or inverted-V-braced) and K-braced configurations. Because of their ge-
ometry, concentrically Braced Frames provide complete truss action with members
subjected primarily to axial loads in the elastic range. However, during a moderate
to severe earthquake, the bracing members and their connections are expected to
undergo significant inelastic deformations into the post-buckling range.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
114 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. C13.
Fig. C-I-13.1. Examples of concentric bracing configurations.
Since the initial adoption of concentrically Braced Frames into seismic design
codes, more emphasis has been placed on increasing brace strength and stiffness,
primarily through the use of higher design loads in order to minimize inelastic
demand. More recently, requirements for ductilityandenergydissipationcapability
have also been added. Accordingly, provisions for Special Concentrically Braced
Frames (SCBF) were developed to exhibit stable and ductile behavior in the event
of a major earthquake. Earlier design provisions have been retained for Ordinary
Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF) in Section 14.
During a severe earthquake, bracing members in a concentrically Braced Frame
are subjected to large deformations in cyclic tension and compression into the
post-buckling range. As a result, reversed cyclic rotations occur at plastic hinges
in much the same way as they do in beams and columns in Moment Frames. In
fact, braces in a typical concentrically Braced Frame can be expected to yield and
buckle at rather moderate story drifts of about 0.3 percent to 0.5 percent. In a severe
earthquake, the braces could undergo post-buckling axial deformations 10 to 20
times their yield deformation. In order to survive such large cyclic deformations
without premature failure the bracing members and their connections must be
properly detailed.
Damage during past earthquakes and that observed in laboratory tests of con-
centrically Braced Frames has generally resulted from the limited ductility and
corresponding brittle failures, which are usually manifested in the fracture of con-
nection elements or bracing members. The lack of compactness in braces results in
severe local buckling, the resulting high concentration of flexural strains at these
locations and reduced ductility. Braces in concentrically Braced Frames are subject
to severe local buckling, with diminished effectiveness in the nonlinear range at
lowstory drifts. Large story drifts that result fromearly brace fractures can impose
excessive ductility demands on the beams and columns, or their connections.
Research has demonstrated that concentrically Braced Frames, with proper con-
figuration, member design and detailing can possess ductility far in excess of that
previously ascribed to such systems. Extensive analytical and experimental work
by Goel and others has shown that improved design parameters, such as limiting
width/thickness ratios (to minimize local buckling), closer spacing of stitches and
special design and detailing of end connections greatly improve the post-buckling
behavior of concentrically Braced Frames. The design requirements for SCBF are
based on those developments.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 115
Previous requirements for concentrically Braced Frames sought reliable behavior
by limiting global buckling. Cyclic testing of Diagonal Bracing systems verifies
that energy can be dissipated after the onset of global buckling if brittle failures due
to local buckling, stability problems and connection fractures are prevented. When
properly detailed for ductility as prescribed in these Provisions, diagonal braces
can sustain large inelastic cyclic deformations without experiencing premature
failures.
Analytical studies (Tang and Goel, 1987; Hassan and Goel, 1991) on bracing sys-
tems designedinstrict accordance withearlier code requirements for concentrically
Braced Frames predicted brace failures without the development of significant en-
ergy dissipation. Failures occurred most often at plastic hinges (local buckling due
to lack of compactness) or in the connections. Plastic hinges normally occur at the
ends of a brace and at the brace midspan. Analytical models of bracing systems
that were designed to ensure stable ductile behavior when subjected to the same
ground motion records as the previous concentrically Braced Frame designs ex-
hibited full and stable hysteresis without fracture. Similar results were observed
in full-scale tests by Wallace and Krawinkler (1985) and Tang and Goel (1989).
For double-angle and double-channel braces, closer stitch spacing, in addition to
more stringent compactness criteria, is required to achieve improved ductility and
energy dissipation. This is especially critical for double-angle and double-channel
braces that buckle imposing large shear forces on the stitches. Studies also showed
that placement of double angles in a toe-to-toe configuration reduces bending
strains and local buckling (Aslani and Goel; 1991).
Many of the failures reported in concentrically Braced Frames due to strong ground
motions have been in the connections. Similarly, cyclic testing of specimens de-
signed and detailed in accordance with typical provisions for concentrically Braced
Frames has produced connection failures (Astaneh-Asl, Goel, and Hanson, 1986).
Although typical design practice has been to design connections only for axial
loads, good post-buckling response demands that eccentricities be accounted for
in the connection design, which should be based upon the maximumloads the con-
nection may be required to resist. Good connection performance can be expected
if the effects of brace member cyclic post-buckling behavior are considered (Goel,
1992c).
For brace buckling in the plane of the gusset plates, the end connections should be
designed for the full axial load and flexural strength of the brace (Astaneh-Asl et al.,
1986). Note that a realistic value of K should be used to represent the connection
fixity.
For brace buckling out of the plane of single plate gussets, weak-axis bending in the
gusset is induced by member end rotations. This results in flexible end conditions
with plastic hinges at midspan in addition to the hinges that formin the gusset plate.
Satisfactory performance can be ensured by allowing the gusset plate to develop
restraint-free plastic rotations. This requires that the free length between the end
of the brace and the assumed line of restraint for the gusset be sufficiently long
to permit plastic rotations, yet short enough to preclude the occurrence of plate
buckling prior to member buckling. A length of two times the plate thickness is
recommended (Astaneh-Asl et al., 1986). Note that this free distance is measured
from the end of the brace to a line that is perpendicular to the brace centerline,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
116 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. C13.
Fig. C-I-13.2. Brace-to-gusset plate requirement for buckling out-of-plane bracing system.
drawn fromthe point on the gusset plate nearest to the brace end that is constrained
from out-of-plane rotation. See Figure C-I-13.2. Alternatively, connections with
stiffness intwodirections, suchas crossedgusset plates, canbe detailed. Test results
indicate that forcingthe plastic hinge tooccur inthe brace rather thanthe connection
plate results in greater energy dissipation capacity (Lee and Goel, 1987).
Since the stringent design and detailing requirements for SCBF are expected to
produce more reliable performance when subjected to high energy demands im-
posed by severe earthquakes, model building codes have reduced the design load
level below that required for OCBF.
Bracing connections should not be configured in such a way that beams or columns
of the frame are interrupted to allowfor a continuous brace element. This provision
is necessary to improve the out-of-plane stability of the bracing system at those
connections.
A Zipper Column system and a two-story X system are illustrated in
Figure C-I-13.3. Two-story X and zipper-Braced Frames can be designed with
post-elastic behavior consistent with the expected behavior of V-braced SCBF.
These configurations can also capture the increase in post-elastic axial loads on
beams at other levels. It is possible to design 2-story X and zipper frames with
post-elastic behavior that is superior to the expected behavior of V-braced SCBF
by proportioning elements to discourage single-story mechanisms.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 117
Fig. C-I-13.3. (a) Two-story X-Braced Frame, (b) “Zipper-Column” with Inverted-V bracing.
C13.2. Bracing Members
C13.2a. Slenderness
The slenderness (Kl/r) limit has been raised to 5.87

E
s
/F
y
for SCBF. The
more restrictive limit of 4.23

E
s
/F
y
as specified for OCBF in Section 14.2
is not necessary when the bracing members are detailed for ductile behavior.
Tang and Goel (1989) and Goel and Lee (1992) showed that the post-buckling
cyclic fracture life of bracing members generally increases with an increase in
slenderness ratio. An upper limit is provided to maintain a reasonable level of
compressive strength.
C13.2c. Lateral Force Distribution
This provision attempts to balance the tensile and compressive resistance across
the width and breadth of the building since the buckling and post-buckling
strength of the bracing members in compression can be substantially less than
that in tension. Good balance helps prevent the accumulation of inelastic drifts
in one direction. An exception is provided for cases where the bracing members
are sufficiently oversized to provide essentially elastic response.
C13.2d. Width-thickness Ratios
Width-thickness ratios of compression elements in bracing members have been
reduced to be at or below the requirements for compact sections in order to min-
imize the detrimental effects of local buckling and subsequent fracture during
repeated inelastic cycles. Tests have shown this failure mode to be especially
prevalent in rectangular HSS with width-thickness ratios larger than the pre-
scribed limits (Hassan and Goel, 1991; Tang and Goel, 1989).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
118 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. C13.
C13.2e. Built-up Members
Closer spacing of stitches and higher stitch strength requirements are specified
for built-up bracing members in SCBF (Aslani and Goel, 1991; Xu and Goel,
1990) than those required for OCBF. These are intended to restrict individual
element bending between the stitch points and consequent premature fracture of
bracing members. Wider spacing is permitted under an exception when buckling
does not cause shear in the stitches. Bolted stitches are not permitted within the
middle one-fourth of the clear brace length as the presence of bolt holes in that
region may cause premature fractures due to the formation of a plastic hinge in
the post-buckling range.
C13.3. Bracing Connections
C13.3a. Required Strength
In concentrically Braced Frames, the bracing members normally carry most of
the seismic story shear, particularly if not used as a part of a Dual System. The
Required Strength of bracing connections should be adequate so that failure by
out-of-plane gusset buckling or brittle fracture of the brace are not critical failure
mechanisms.
The minimum of two criteria, (i.e. the nominal expected axial tension strength
of the bracing member and the maximum force that could be generated by the
overall system) determines the Required Strength of both the bracing connection
and the beam-to-column connection if it is part of the bracing system. This upper
limit is included in the specification for structures where elements other than
the tension bracing limit the system strength; for example, foundation elements
designed in systems based on the application of load combinations using the
Amplified Seismic Load. R
y
has been added to the first provision to recognize
the material overstrength of the member.
C13.3b. Tensile Strength
Braces in Special Concentrically Braced Frames are required to have gross-
section tension yielding as their governing limit state so that they will yield in a
ductile manner. Local connection failure modes such as net-section fracture and
block-shear rupture must be precluded. Therefore, the calculations for these fail-
ure modes must use the maximum load that the brace can deliver.
It should be noted that some, if not all, steel materials commonly used for braces
have Expected Yield Strengths significantly higher than their specified minimum
yieldstrengths; some have ExpectedYieldStrengths almost as highas their tensile
strength. For such cases, no significant reduction of the brace section is permis-
sible and connections may require local reinforcement of the brace section. This
is the case for knife-plate connections between gusset plates and A53 or A500
braces (e.g. pipe braces or square, rectangular, or round hollow structural steel
(tube) braces), where the over-slot of the brace required for erection leaves a
reduced section. If this section is left unreinforced, net-section fracture will be
the governing limit state and brace ductility may be significantly reduced (Korol,
1996; Cheng, Kulak, and Khoo, 1998). Reinforcement may be provided in the
formof steel plates welded to the tube, increasing the effective area at the reduced
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 119
Fig. C-I-13.4. P-␦ diagram for a strut.
brace section. Braces with two continuous welds to the gusset wrapped around
its edge (instead of the more typical detail with four welds stopping short of the
gusset edge) performed adequately in the tests by Cheng. However, this practice
may be difficult to implement in field conditions; it also creates a potential stress
riser that may lead to crack initiation.
C13.3c. Flexural Strength
Braces with “fixed” end connections have been shown to dissipate more energy
than those that are “pin” connected, because buckling requires the formation of
three plastic hinges in the brace. Nonetheless, end connections that can accommo-
date the rotations associated with brace buckling deformations while maintaining
adequate strength have also been shown to have acceptable performance. Testing
has demonstrated that where a single gusset plate connection is used, the rotations
can be accommodated as long as the brace end is separated by at least two times
the gusset thickness from a line perpendicular to the brace axis about which the
gusset plate may bend unrestrained by the beam, column, or other brace joints
(Astaneh-Asl et al., 1986). This condition is illustrated in Figure C-I-13.2 and
provides hysteretic behavior as illustrated in Figure C-I-13.4. The distance of “2t ”
shown in Figure C-I-13.2 should be considered the minimum offset distance. In
practice, it may be advisable to specify a slightly larger distance (perhaps “3t ”)
on construction documents to provide for erection tolerances. More information
on seismic design of gusset plates can be obtained from Astaneh-Asl (1998).
Where “fixed” end connections are used in one axis with “pinned” connections
in the other axis, the effect of the fixity should be considered in determining the
critical buckling axis.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
120 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. C13.
C13.4. Special Bracing Configuration Special Requirements
C13.4a. V-Type and Inverted V-Type Bracing
V-braced and Inverted-V-Braced Frames exhibit a special problem that sets them
apart from Braced Frames in which both ends of the braces frame into beam-
column joints. Upon continued lateral displacement as the compression brace
buckles, its force drops while that in the tension brace continues to increase up to
the point of yielding. This creates an unbalanced vertical force on the intersecting
beam. In order to prevent undesirable deterioration of lateral strength of the frame,
the SCBF provisions require that the beampossess adequate strength to resist this
potentially significant post-buckling load redistribution (the unbalanced load) in
combination with appropriate gravity loads. Tests have shown that typical brac-
ing members demonstrate a residual post-buckling compressive strength of about
30 percent of the initial compressive strength (Hassan and Goel, 1991). This is the
maximum compression load that should be combined with the full yield load of
the adjacent tension brace. The full tension load can be expected to be in the range
ofP
y
. In addition, configurations where the beam-to-brace connection is signif-
icantly offset from the midspan location should be avoided whenever possible,
since such a configuration exacerbates the unbalanced conditions cited above.
The adverse effect of this unbalanced load can be mitigated by using bracing
configurations, such as V- and Inverted-V-braces in alternate stories creating an
X- configuration over two story modules, or by using a “Zipper Column” with
V- or Inverted-V bracing (Khatib, Mahin, and Pister, 1988). See Figure C-I-13.3.
Adequate lateral bracing at the brace-to-beam intersection is necessary in order
to prevent adverse effects of possible lateral-torsional buckling of the beam.
The requirements in Sections 13.4a(1) and 13.4a(2) provide for a minimum
strength of the beams to support gravity loads in the event of loss of brace
capacities.
The limitations of Sections 13.4a(2) and 13.4a(3) need not be applied on the
beam strength of roof stories, penthouses, and one-story structures as the life
safety consequences of excessive beam deformations may not be as severe as for
floors.
C13.4b. K-Type Bracing
K-bracing is generally not considered desirable in concentrically Braced Frames
and is prohibited entirely for SCBF because it is considered undesirable to have
columns that are subjected to unbalanced lateral forces from the braces, as these
forces may contribute to column failures.
C13.5. Columns
In the event of a major earthquake, columns in concentrically Braced Frames can
undergo significant bending beyond the elastic range after buckling and yielding
of the braces. Even though their bending strength is not utilized in the design pro-
cess when elastic design methods are used, columns in SCBF are required to have
adequate compactness and shear and flexural strength in order to maintain their
lateral strength during large cyclic deformations of the frame. Analytical studies
on SCBF that are not part of a Dual System have shown that columns can carry
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C14.] PART I – ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) 121
Fig. C-I-13.5. Base shear vs. story drift of a SCBF.
as much as 40 percent of the story shear (Tang and Goel, 1987; Hassan and Goel,
1991). When columns are common to both SCBF and SMF in a Dual System, their
contribution to story shear may be as high as 50 percent. This feature of SCBF
greatly helps in making the overall frame hysteretic loops “full” when compared
with those of individual bracing members which are generally “pinched” (Hassan
and Goel, 1991; Black, Wenger, and Popov, 1980). See Figure C-I-13.5.
C14. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF)
C14.1. Scope
These Provisions assume that the Applicable Building Code significantly restricts
the permitted use of OCBF because of their limited ductility. Specifically, it is as-
sumedthat the restrictions giveninthe NEHRPSeismic Provisions (FEMA, 2000g)
govern the design of the structure. The NEHRP Seismic Provisions effectively re-
strict the use of OBCF as described in Section C14.2. If similar restrictions are not
found in the Applicable Building Code used for a given structure (e.g. 1997 Uni-
form Building Code (ICBO, 1997)), then the design of the concentrically Braced
Frame should comply with the detailing and design requirements for SCBF.
C14.2. Strength
In the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions, there were relatively few differences be-
tween Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBFs) and Special Concentri-
callyBracedFrames (SCBFs). Despite the lower R-value giveninthe 1997NEHRP
seismic provisions (FEMA, 1997a), these systems may not perform well in large
groundmotions. Consequentlythe OCBFprovisions, except those previouslygiven
for “Low Buildings,” have been eliminated.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
122 PART I – ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) [Comm. C14.
The specific reasons for elimination of most of the OCBF provisions that were in
the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions include:
(1) Section 14.3a.b allowed connections to be designed for a strength that may be
less than that of the braces themselves. This will preclude ductile performance
of the system.
(2) Section 14.4a.1 required that braces in V-Type and Inverted V-Type bracing
systems be designed for “at least 1.5 times the strength using LRFD Specifi-
cation [1993 version] Load combinations A4-5 and A4-6.” This may lead to
overly strong bracing, which will be capable of buckling the columns of the
Braced Frame, and may lead to collapse.
(3) Section 14.4a.3 does not provide for sufficient beam strength to maintain the
strength of the tension brace after buckling of the compression brace. The
result is that buckling of the compression brace or buckling and/or rotation
of the gusset plate can lead to a sudden and dramatic reduction in the story
strength.
The provisions in Section 13 for SCBF’s attempt to prevent all the above unde-
sirable characteristics. It is the intent of the Provisions that SCBF be used for all
concentrically Braced Frames where significant ductility is needed. In order to
accomplish this, the following items are included in the 2000 NEHRP Provisions
(FEMA, 2000g):
(1) The use of Ordinary Steel Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF’s) in the
Dual Systems is not included.
(2) The height limit of Seismic Design Categories (SDC) D and E are limited to
35 ft and OCBF’S are not permitted for SDC F, except as noted below.
(3) Each of these three categories has a reference footnote k.
(4) Footnote k reads “Steel ordinary Braced Frames are permitted in single story
buildings up to a height of 60 ft when the dead load of the roof does not exceed
15 psf, and in penthouse structures.”
The term “brace connection” includes the brace-to-gusset connection as well as
the gusset plate-to-column, beam, or base plate connection.
The application of the Amplified Seismic Load to determine the member size and
connections other than bracing connections, in SDC D and E buildings with an
R factor of about 2.5 would provide sufficient strength to preclude the need for
significant ductility of the system.
The effect of these modifications on the design of steel concentrically Braced
Frames in comparison to those designed in accordance with these Seismic Provi-
sions will be as follows:
(1) Most concentrically Braced Frames in the higher Seismic Design Categories
will be classified as SCBF.
(2) V-Type and Inverted V-Type SCBF frames will have lighter braces, but sig-
nificantly heavier floor beams.
(3) All configurations will be permitted to use larger Kl/r values, which may result
in lighter braces. Connections of the braces may be heavier, depending upon
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 123
whether or not the requirement to develop the strength of the braces for SCBF
is offset by the lighter bracing.
C15. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF)
C15.1. Scope
Research has shown that EBF can provide an elastic stiffness that is comparable
to that of SCBFs and OCBFs, particularly when short Link lengths are used, and
excellent ductility and energy dissipation capacity in the inelastic range, compara-
ble to that of SMF, provided that Links are not too short (Roeder and Popov; 1978;
Libby, 1981; Merovich, Nicoletti, and Hartle, 1982; Hjelmstad and Popov, 1983;
Malley and Popov, 1984; Kasai and Popov, 1986a and 1986b; Ricles and Popov,
1987a and 1987b; Engelhardt and Popov, 1989a and 1989b; Popov, Engelhardt,
and Ricles, 1989). EBF are composed of columns, beams, and braces in which
at least one end of each bracing member connects to a beam at a short distance
from an adjacent beam-to-brace connection or a beam-to-column connection as il-
lustrated in Figure C-I-15.1. This short beam segment, called the Link, is intended
as the primary zone of inelasticity. These provisions are intended to ensure that
cyclic yielding in the Links can occur in a stable manner while the diagonal braces,
columns, and portions of the beam outside of the Link remain essentially elastic
under the forces that can be generated by fully-yielded and strain-hardened Links.
Figure C-I-15.1 identifies the key components of an EBF: the Links, the beam
segments outside of the Links, the diagonal braces, and the columns. Requirements
for Links are provided in Sections 15.2 to 15.5; requirements for beam segments
outside of the Links and for the diagonal braces are provided in Sections 15.6 and
15.7; requirements for columns are provided in Section 15.8.
In some bracing arrangements, such as that illustrated in Figure C-I-15.2 with
Links at each end of the brace, Links may not be fully effective. If the upper Link
has a significantly lower design shear strength than that for the Link in the story
below, the upper Link will deform inelastically and limit the force that can be
delivered to the brace and to the lower Link. When this condition occurs the upper
Link is termed an active Link and the lower Link is termed an inactive Link. The
presence of potentially inactive Links in an EBFincreases the difficulty of analysis.
It can be shown with plastic frame analyses that, in some cases, an inactive Link
will yield under the combined effect of dead, live and earthquake loads, thereby
reducing the frame strength below that expected (Kasai and Popov, 1984). Fur-
thermore, because inactive Links are required to be detailed and constructed as
if they were active, and because a predictably inactive Link could otherwise be
designed as a pin, the cost of construction is needlessly increased. Thus, an EBF
configuration that ensures that all Links will be active, such as those illustrated in
Figure C-I-15.1(d), are recommended. Further recommendations for the design of
EBF are available (Popov et al., 1989).
These Provisions are primarily intended to cover the design of EBF in which the
Link is a horizontal framing member located between the column and a brace
or between two braces. For the Inverted Y-Braced EBF configuration shown in
Figure C-I-15.1(d), the Link is attached underneath the beam. If this configuration
is to be used, lateral bracing should be provided at the intersection of the diagonal
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
124 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Comm. C15.
Fig. C-I-15.1. Examples of eccentrically braced frames.
braces and the vertical link, unless calculations are provided to justify the design
with such bracing.
Columns in EBF should be designed following capacity design principles so that
the full strength and deformation capacity of the frame can be developed without
failure of any individual column and without the formation of a soft story. Plastic
hinge formation in columns should be avoided because, when combined with
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 125
Fig. C-I-15.2. EBF – active and inactive link.
hinge formation in the Links, it can result in the formation of a soft story. The
requirements of Sections 8.3 and 15.8 address column design.
C15.2. Links
Inelastic action in EBF is intended to occur primarily within the Links. The general
provisions in this section are intended to ensure that stable inelasticity can occur
in the Link.
The Link cross-section is required to meet the same width-thickness criteria as is
specified for beams in SMF (Table I-8-1).
The majority of experiments conducted on EBF have used Links with a specified
minimum yield stress of 50 ksi (345 MPa) or less. In order to stay within the
bounds of this experimental database, Links are not permitted to be made of steels
with a minimum specified yield stress in excess of 50 ksi (345 MPa).
The reinforcement of Links with web doubler plates is not permitted as such
reinforcement may not fully participate as intended in inelastic deformations. Ad-
ditionally, beam web penetrations within the Link are not permitted because they
may adversely affect the inelastic behavior of the Link.
The Link design shear strength ␾V
n
is the lesser of that determined fromthe plastic
shear strength of the Link section or twice the plastic moment divided by the Link
length, as dictated by statics assuming equalization of end moments. Accordingly,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
126 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Comm. C15.
Link design shear strength can be computed as follows:
␾V
n
=



␾V
p
for e ≤
2M
p
V
p

2M
p
e
for e >
2M
p
V
p
(C15.3-1)
This design shear strength should then be greater than or equal to the required shear
strength determined from the load combinations as required by the Applicable
Building Code, but without the inclusion of Amplified Seismic Loads.
The effects of axial load on the Link can be ignored if the required axial strength
on the Link does not exceed 15 percent of the nominal yield strength of the Link
P
y
. In general, such an axial load is negligible because the horizontal component
of the brace load is transmitted to the beam segment outside of the Link. However,
when the framing arrangement is such that larger axial forces can develop in
the Link, such as from drag struts or a modified EBF configuration, the additional
requirements in Section C15.2 apply and the design shear strength and Link lengths
are required to be reduced to ensure stable inelastic behavior.
To assure satisfactory behavior of an EBF, the inelastic deformation expected to
occur in the Links in a severe earthquake should not exceed the inelastic defor-
mation capacity of the Links. In these Provisions, the Link Rotation Angle is the
primary variable used to describe inelastic Link deformation. The Link Rotation
Angle is the plastic rotation angle between the Link and the portion of the beam
outside of the Link.
The Link Rotation Angle can be estimated by assuming that the EBF bay will
deform in a rigid-plastic mechanism as illustrated for various EBF configurations
in Figure C-I-15.3. In this figure, the Link Rotation Angle is denoted by the symbol

p
. The Link Rotation Angle can be related to the plastic story drift angle, ␪
p
,
using the relationships shown in the Figure C-I-15.3. The plastic story drift angle,
in turn, can be computed as the plastic story drift,
p
divided by the story height,
h. The plastic story drift can conservatively be taken equal to the Design Story
Drift. Alternatively, the Link Rotation Angle can be determined more accurately
by inelastic dynamic analyses.
The inelastic response of a Link is strongly influenced by the length of the Link
as related to the ratio M
p
/V
p
of the Link cross-section. When the Link length
is selected not greater than 1.6M
p
/V
p
, shear yielding will dominate the inelastic
response. If the Link length is selected greater than 2.6M
p
/V
p
, flexural yield-
ing will dominate the inelastic response. For Link lengths intermediate between
these values, the inelastic response will occur through some combination of shear
and flexural yielding. The inelastic deformation capacity of Links is generally
greatest for shear yielding Links, and smallest for flexural yielding Links. Based
on experimental evidence, the Link Rotation Angle is limited to 0.08 radian for
shear yielding Links (e ≤ 1.6M
p
/V
p
) and 0.02 radian for flexural yielding Links
(e ≥ 2.6M
p
/V
p
). For Links in the combined shear and flexural yielding range
(1.6M
p
/V
p
< e < 2.6M
p
/V
p
), the limit on Link Rotation Angle is determined
according to Link length by linear interpolation between 0.08 and 0.02 radian.
It has been demonstrated experimentally (Whittaker, Uang, and Bertero, 1987;
Foutch, 1989) as well as analytically (Popov et al., 1989) that Links in the first floor
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 127
Fig. C-I-15.3. Link Rotation Angle.
usually undergo the largest inelastic deformation. In extreme cases this may result
in a tendency to develop a soft story. The plastic Link rotations tend to attenuate at
higher floors, and decrease with the increasing frame periods. Therefore for severe
seismic applications, a conservative design for the Links in the first two or three
floors is recommended. This can be achieved by increasing the minimum design
shear strengths of these Links on the order of 10 percent over that specified in
Section 15.2.
C15.3. Link Stiffeners
A properly detailed and restrained Link web can provide stable, ductile, and pre-
dictable behavior under severe cyclic loading. The design of the Link requires
close attention to the detailing of the Link web thickness and stiffeners.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
128 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Comm. C15.
Full-depth stiffeners are required at the ends of all Links and serve to transfer the
Link shear forces to the reacting elements as well as restrain the Link web against
buckling.
The maximum spacing of Link Intermediate Web Stiffeners in shear yielding
Links (e ≤ 1.6 M
p
/V
p
) is dependent upon the size of the Link Rotation Angle
(Kasai and Popov, 1986b) with a closer spacing required as the rotation angle
increases. Intermediate Web Stiffeners in shear yielding Links are provided to
delay the onset of inelastic shear buckling of the web. Flexural yielding Links
having lengths greater than 2.6M
p
/V
p
but less than 5M
p
/V
p
are required to have
an intermediate stiffener at a distance fromthe Link end equal to 1.5 times the beam
flange width to limit strength degradation due to flange local buckling and lateral-
torsional buckling. Links of a length that are between the shear and flexural limits
are required to meet the stiffener requirements for both shear and flexural yielding
Links. When the Link length exceeds 5M
p
/V
p
, Link Intermediate Web Stiffeners
are not required. Link Intermediate Web Stiffeners are required to extend full depth
in order to effectively resist shear buckling of the web and to effectively limit
strength degradation due to flange local buckling and lateral-torsional buckling.
Link Intermediate Web Stiffeners are required on both sides of the web for Links
25 in. (635 mm) in depth or greater. For Links that are less than 25 in. (635 mm)
deep, the stiffener need be on one side only.
All Link stiffeners are required to be fillet welded to the Link web and flanges. The
welds to the Link web are required to provide a Design Strength that is equal to the
nominal vertical tensile yield strength of the stiffener in a section perpendicular to
both the plane of the web and the plane of the stiffener or the shear yield strength
of the stiffener, whichever is less. The connection to the Link flanges is designed
for correspondingly similar forces.
C15.4. Link-to-Column Connections
Prior to the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, Link-to-column connections were typi-
cally constructed in a manner substantially similar to beam-to-column connections
in SMFs. Link-to-column connections in EBF are therefore likely to share many
of the same problems observed in Moment Frame connections. Consequently, in a
manner similar to beam-to-column connections in SMFs, these Provisions require
that the performance of Link-to-column connections be verified by testing in accor-
dance with Appendix S, or by the use of prequalified Link-to-column connections
in accordance with Appendix P.
The load and deformation demands at a Link-to-column connection in an EBF
are substantially different from those at a beam-to-column connection in an SMF.
Consequently, beam-to-column connections which qualify for use in an SMF may
not necessarily perform adequately when used as a Link-to-column connection in
an EBF. Link-to-column connections must therefore be tested in a manner that
properly simulates the forces and inelastic deformations expected in an EBF.
These Provisions permit the use of Link-to-column connections without the need
for qualification testing for shear yielding Links when the connection is reinforced
with haunches or other suitable reinforcement designed to preclude inelastic ac-
tion in the reinforced zone adjacent to the column. This reinforced region should
remain essentially elastic for the fully yielded and strain hardened Link strength as
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 129
defined in Section 15.6 for the design of the diagonal brace. That is, the reinforced
connection should be designed to resist the Link shear and moment generated by
the expected shear strength of the Link R
y
V
n
increased by 125 percent to account
for strain hardening. Alternatively, the EBF can be configured to avoid Link-to-
column connections entirely.
These Provisions do not explicitly address the column Panel Zone design require-
ments at Link-to-column connections, as little research is available on this issue.
However, based on research on Panel Zones for SMF systems, limited yielding of
Panel Zones in EBF systems would not be detrimental. Pending future research
on this topic, it is recommended that the required shear strength of the Panel Zone
be determined from Equation 9-1 with the flexural demand at the column end of
the Link given by the equations in Commentary Section 15.6.
C15.5. Lateral Bracing of the Link
Lateral restraint against out-of-plane displacement and twist is required at the ends
of the Link to ensure stable inelastic behavior. The Required Strength for such
lateral bracing is 6 percent of the Expected Yield Strength of the beam flange.
In typical applications, a composite deck can likely be counted upon to provide
adequate lateral bracing at the top flange of the Link. However, a composite deck
alone cannot be counted on to provide adequate lateral bracing at the bottomflange
of the Link and direct bracing through transverse beams or a suitable alternative
is recommended.
C15.6. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Links
This section addresses design requirements for the diagonal brace and the beam
segment outside of the Link in EBF. The intent of these provisions is to assure that
yielding and energy dissipation in an EBF occur primarily in the Links. Conse-
quently, the diagonal brace and beamsegment outside of the Link must be designed
to resist the loads generated by the fully yielded and strain hardened Link. That
is, the brace and beam should be designed following capacity design principles
to develop the full inelastic capacity of the Links. Limited yielding outside of the
Links, particularly in the beams, is sometimes unavoidable in an EBF. Such yield-
ing is likely not detrimental to the performance of the EBF, as long as the beam
and brace have sufficient strength to develop the Link’s full inelastic strength and
deformation capacity.
In most EBF configurations, the diagonal brace and the beam are subject to large
axial loads combined with significant bending moments. Consequently, both the
diagonal brace and the beam should be designed as beam-columns.
A diagonal brace in a concentrically Braced Frame is subject to cyclic buckling
and is the primary source of energy dissipation in such a frame. Many of the
design provisions for OCBF and SCBF systems are intended to permit stable
cyclic buckling behavior of the diagonal braces. A properly designed diagonal
brace in an EBF, on the other hand, should not buckle, regardless of the intensity
of the earthquake ground motion. As long as the brace is designed to be stronger
than the Link, as is the intent of these provisions, then the Link will serve as a
fuse to limit the maximum load transferred to the brace, thereby precluding the
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
130 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Comm. C15.
possibility of brace buckling. Consequently, many of the design provisions for
braces in OCBF and SCBF systems intended to permit stable cyclic buckling of
braces are not needed in EBF. Similarly, the Link also limits the loads transferred
to the beam beyond the link, thereby precluding failure of this portion of the beam
if it is stronger than the Link.
The diagonal brace and beam segment outside of the Link must be designed for
some reasonable estimate of the maximumforces that can be generated by the fully
yielded and strain hardened Link. For this purpose, the nominal shear strength of
the Link, V
n
, as defined by Equation C15.3-1 is increased by two factors. First, the
nominal shear strength is increased by R
y
to account for the possibility that the
Link material may have actual yield strength in excess of the specified minimum
value. Secondly, the resulting expected shear strength of the Link, R
y
V
n
is further
increased to account for strain hardening in the Link.
Experiments have shown that Links can exhibit a high degree of strain hardening.
Recent tests on rolled wide-flange Links constructed of A992 steel (Arce, 2002)
showed strength increases due to strain hardening ranging from 1.2 to 1.45, with
an average value of about 1.30. Past tests on rolled wide-flange Links constructed
of A36 steel have sometimes shown strength increases due to strain hardening in
excess of 1.5 (Hjelmstad and Popov, 1983; Engelhardt and Popov, 1989a). Further,
recent tests on very large welded built-up wide-flange Links for use in major bridge
structures have shown strain hardening factors close to 2.0 (McDaniel, Uang, and
Seible, 2002; Dusicka and Itani, 2002). These sections, however, typically have
proportions significantly different from rolled shapes.
For purposes of designing the diagonal brace, these Provisions have adopted a stre-
ngth increase due to strain hardening equal to 1.25. This value is close to but some-
what below the average measured strain hardening factor for rolled wide-flange
Links of A992 steel. Designers should recognize that strain hardening in Links may
sometimes exceed this value, and so a conservative design of the diagonal brace
is appropriate. Further, if large built-up Link sections are used, designers should
consider the possibility of strain hardening factors substantially in excess of 1.25.
Based on the above, the Required Strength of the diagonal brace can be taken as
the forces generated by the following values of Link Shear and Link end moment:
For e ≤ 2M
p
/V
p
:
Link shear = 1.25R
y
V
p
Link end moment = e(1.25R
y
V
p
)/2
For e > 2M
p
/V
p
:
Link shear = 2(1.25R
y
M
p
)/e
Link end moment = 1.25R
y
M
p
The above equations assume Link end moments will equalize as the Link yields
and deforms plastically. For Link lengths less than 1.6M
p
/V
p
attached to columns,
Link end moments do not fully equalize (Kasai and Popov, 1986a). For this situa-
tion, the Link ultimate forces can be estimated as follows:
For Links attached to columns with e ≤ 1.6M
p
/V
p
:
Link shear = 1.25R
y
V
p
Link end moment at column = R
y
M
p
Link end moment at brace = [e(1.25 R
y
V
p
) − R
y
M
p
] ≥ 0.75R
y
M
p
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 131
The Link shear force will generate axial force in the diagonal brace, and for most
EBF configurations, will also generate substantial axial force in the beam segment
outside of the Link. The ratio of beam or brace axial force to Link shear force is
controlled primarily by the geometry of the EBF and is therefore not affected by
inelastic activity within the EBF (Engelhardt and Popov, 1989a). Consequently,
this ratio can be determined from an elastic frame analysis and can be used to
amplify the beam and brace axial forces to a level that corresponds to the Link
shear force specified in the above equations. Further, as long as the beamand brace
are designed to remain essentially elastic, the distribution of Link end moment to
the beam and brace can be estimated from an elastic frame analysis. For example,
if an elastic analysis of the EBF under lateral load shows that 80 percent of the
Link end moment is resisted by the beam and the remaining 20 percent is resisted
by the brace, the ultimate Link end moments given by the above equations can
be distributed to the beam and brace in the same proportions. Alternatively, an
inelastic frame analysis can be conducted for a more accurate estimate of how
Link end moment is distributed to the beam and brace in the inelastic range.
As described above, these Provisions assume that as a Link deforms to large plastic
rotations, the Link expected shear strength will increase by a factor of 1.25 due
to strain hardening. However, for the design of the beam segment outside of the
Link, these Provisions permit calculation of beam Required Strength based on
Link ultimate forces equal to only 1.1 times the Link expected shear strength. This
relaxation on Link ultimate forces for purposes of designing the beam segment
reflects the view that beam strength will be substantially enhanced by the presence
of a composite floor slab, and also that limited yielding in the beam will not likely
be detrimental to EBF performance, as long as stability of the beam is assured.
Consequently, designers should recognize that the actual forces that will develop in
the beam will be substantially greater than computed using this 1.1 factor, but this
low value of required beam strength will be mitigated by contributions of the floor
slab in resisting axial load and bending moment in the beamand by limited yielding
in the beam. Based on this approach, the required axial and flexural strength of the
beam can be first computed as described above for the diagonal brace, assuming
a strain hardening factor of 1.25. The resulting axial force and bending moment
in the beam can then be reduced by a factor of 1.1/1.25 = 0.88. In cases where
no composite slab is present, designers should consider computing required beam
strength based on a Link strain hardening factor of 1.25.
For most EBF configurations, the beam and the Link are a single continuous wide
flange member. If this is the case, the Design Strength of the beamcan be increased
by R
y
. If the Link and the beamare the same member, any increase in yield strength
present in the Link will also be present in the beam segment outside of the Link.
Design of the beam segment outside of the Link can sometimes be problematic in
EBF. In some cases, the beamsegment outside of the Link is inadequate to resist the
Required Strength based on the Link ultimate forces. For such cases, increasing the
size of the beammay not provide a solution. This is because the beamand the Link
are typically the same member. Increasing the beam size therefore increases the
Link size, which in turn, increases the Link ultimate forces and therefore increases
the beam Required Strength. The relaxation in beam Required Strength based on
the 1.1 factor on Link strength was adopted by these Provisions largely as a result
of such problems reported by designers, and by the view that EBF performance
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
132 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Comm. C15.
would not likely be degraded by such a relaxation due to beneficial effects of the
floor slab and limited beam yielding, as discussed above. Design problems with
the beam can also be minimized by using shear yielding Links (e ≤1.6M
p
/V
p
)
as opposed to longer Links. The end moments for shear yielding Links will be
smaller than for longer Links, and consequently less moment will be transferred
to the beam. Beam moments can be further reduced by locating the intersection of
the brace and beam centerlines inside of the Link, as described below. Providing a
diagonal brace with a large flexural stiffness so that a larger portion of the Link end
moment is transferred to the brace and away from the beam can also substantially
reduce beam moment. In such cases, the brace must be designed to resist these
larger moments. Further, the connection between the brace and the Link must be
designed as a Fully Restrained moment resisting connection. Test results on several
brace connection details subject to axial load and bending moment are reported in
Engelhardt and Popov (1989a).
Avoiding very shallow angles between the diagonal brace and the beam can also
mitigate problems with beam design. As the angle between the diagonal brace
and the beam decreases, the axial load generated in the beam increases. Using
angles between the diagonal brace and the beam of at least about 40 degrees
will often be beneficial in reducing beam required axial strength. Problems with
design of the beam segment outside of the Link can also be addressed by choosing
EBF configurations that minimize axial loads in the beam. An example of such a
configuration is illustrated in Engelhardt and Popov (1989b).
Typically in EBF design, the intersection of the brace and beam centerlines is
located at the end of the Link. However, as permitted in Section 15.6, the brace
connection may be designed with an eccentricity so that the brace and beam cen-
terlines intersect inside of the Link. This eccentricity in the connection generates a
moment that is opposite in sign to the Link end moment. Consequently, the value
given above for the Link end moment can be reduced by the moment generated by
this brace connection eccentricity. This may substantially reduce the moment that
will be required to be resisted by the beam and brace, and may be advantageous in
design. The intersection of the brace and beam centerlines should not be located
outside of the Link, as this increases the bending moment generated in the beam
and brace. See Figures C-I-15.4 and C-I-15.5.
C15.7. Beam-to-Column Connections
If the arrangement of the EBF system is such that a Link is not adjacent to a
column and large axial loads are not present in the beam, a simple connection can
be adequate if the connection provides some restraint against torsion in the beam.
The magnitude of torsion to be considered is calculated from a pair of equal and
opposite forces equal to 2 percent of the nominal beam flange yield strength.
C15.8. Required Column Strength
Similar to the diagonal brace and beam segment outside of the Link, the columns
of an EBF should also be designed using capacity design principles. That is, the
columns should be designed to resist the maximum forces generated by the fully
yielded and strain hardened Links. As discussed in Section C15.6, the maximum
shear force developed by a fully yielded and strain hardened Link can be estimated
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 133
Fig. C-I-15.4. EBF with W-shape bracing.
Fig. C-I-15.5. EBF with HSS bracing.
as 1.25R
y
times the Link nominal shear strength V
n
, where the 1.25 factor accounts
for strain hardening. For capacity design of the columns, this section permits
reduction of the strain hardening factor to 1.1. This relaxation reflects the view
that all Links above the level of the column under consideration will not likely
reach their maximum shear strength simultaneously. Consequently, applying the
1.25 strain hardening factor to all Links above the level of the column under
consideration is likely too conservative for a multistory EBF. For a low rise EBF
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
134 PART I – QUALITY ASSURANCE [Comm. C16.
with only a few stories, designers should consider increasing the strain hardening
factor on Links to 1.25 for capacity design of the columns, since there is a greater
likelihood that all Links may simultaneously reach their maximum shear strength.
In addition to the requirements of this section, columns in EBF must also be
checked in accordance with the requirements of Section 8.3, which are applicable
to all systems.
C16. QUALITY ASSURANCE
To assure ductile seismic response, steel framing is required to meet the quality
requirements as appropriate for the various components of the structure. ASCE
7 (ASCE, 2002) provides special requirements for inspection and testing based
upon the Seismic Design Category. Additionally, these Provisions, the AISCLRFD
Specificationfor Structural Steel Buildings, AISCCode of StandardPractice, AWS
D1.1, and the RCSCSpecification for Structural Joints Using ASTMA325 or A490
Bolts provide acceptance criteria for steel building structures.
These Provisions require that a quality assurance plan be implemented as required
by the Engineer of Record. In some cases, the contractor implements such a quality
control plan as part of normal operations, particularly contractors that participate
in the AISC Quality Certification Program for steel fabricators. The Engineer
of Record should evaluate the quality assurance needs for each project with due
consideration of what is already a part of the contractor’s quality control plan.
Where additional needs are identified, such as for innovative connection details or
unfamiliar construction methods, supplementary requirements should be specified
as appropriate. It should be noted that site observation by the Engineer of Record
is a critical portion of the quality assurance plan.
Visual inspection by a qualified inspector prior to, during, and after welding is
emphasized as the primary method used to evaluate the conformance of welded
joints to the applicable quality requirements. Joints are examined prior to the
commencement of welding to check fit-up, preparation bevels, gaps, alignment,
and other variables. During welding, adherence to the WPS is maintained. After
the joint is welded, it is then visually inspected to the requirements of AWS D1.1.
The subsequent use of other nondestructive testing methods as required by the
Engineer of Record is recommended to verify the soundness of welds that are
subject to tensile loads as a part of the Seismic Load Resisting Systems described
in Sections 9 through 15. Ultrasonic testing (UT) is capable of detecting serious
embedded flaws in groove welds in all standard welded joint configurations. A
program of UT of critical groove welds in tension should be specified by the
Engineer of Record as a part of the quality assurance plan, and may be required for
certain joints by the Authority Having Jurisdiction. UTis not suitable for inspecting
most fillet welds, nor should it be relied upon for the detection of surface or near-
surface flaws. Magnetic particle testing (MT) is capable of detecting serious flaws
on or near the surface of all types of welds, and should be considered by the
Engineer of Record for the inspection of critical fillet welded joints and for the
surface examination of critical groove welds subjected to tension loads. The use of
Penetrant Testing (PT) is not recommended for general weld inspection, but may be
used for crack detection in specific locations such as weld access holes and in the k-
Area of welded shapes, or for the location of crack tips for cracks detected visually.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. C16.] PART I – QUALITY ASSURANCE 135
Commentary Section C6.3 indicates that the k-Area of rotary-straightened wide-
flange columns may have reduced notch toughness. Preliminary recommendations
(AISC, 1997a) discouraged the placement of welds in this area because of post-
weld cracking that occurred on past projects. Where such welds are to be placed, it
is recommended to inspect these areas to verify that such cracking has not occurred.
Typically, such inspections would incorporate magnetic particle or dye penetrant
testing with acceptance criteria as specified in AWS D1.1. The required frequency
of such inspections should be specified in the contract documents.
FEMA 353, Recommended Specifications and Quality Assurance Guidelines for
Steel Moment-Frame Construction for Seismic Applications (FEMA, 2000b), is a
reference for the preparation of a quality assurance plan for steel SMF and IMF,
as well as for other Seismic Load Resisting Systems. In addition, the Authority
Having Jurisdiction may have specific quality assurance plan requirements.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
136
APPENDIX P
PREQUALIFICATIONOF BEAM-TO-COLUMNAND
LINK-TO-COLUMNCONNECTIONS
PARTI
CP1. SCOPE
Appendix P describes requirements for prequalification of beam-to-column con-
nections in Special and Intermediate Moment Frames and Link-to-column con-
nections in Eccentrically Braced Frames. The concept of prequalified beam-to-
column connections for Moment Frame systems, as used in these Provisions, has
been adopted from FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a), and has been extended to include
prequalified Link-to-column connections for EBF.
Previous editions of these Provisions released since the 1994 Northridge Earth-
quake required that the design of beam-to-column and Link-to-column connections
be based on qualifying cyclic tests per Appendix S. This requirement was based
on the view that the behavior of connections under severe cyclic loading cannot be
predicted by analytical means alone, and consequently, that the satisfactory per-
formance of all connections be confirmed by laboratory testing. To satisfy these
requirements, designers were required to provide substantiating test data, either
from project specific tests or from tests reported in the literature, on connections
matching project conditions within the limits specified in Appendix S.
The introduction of Prequalified Connections in these Provisions does not alter the
fundamental view that the performance of beam-to-column and Link-to-column
connections should be confirmed by testing. However, it is recognized that requir-
ing designers to provide substantiating test data for each new project is unneces-
sarily burdensome, particularly when the same connections are used on a repeated
basis that have already received extensive testing, evaluation and review.
It is the intent of these Provisions that designers be permitted to use Prequalified
Connections without the need to present laboratory test data, as long as the con-
nection design, detailing and quality assurance measures conformto the limits and
requirements of the prequalification. The introduction of Prequalified Connections
is intended to simplify the design and design approval process by removing the
onus on designers to present test data, and by removing the onus on the Authority
Having Jurisdiction to review and interpret test data. The use of Prequalified Con-
nections is not intended as a guarantee against damage to, or failure of, connections
in major earthquakes. Alicensed professional engineer, designer, or architect shall
design such connections, as with any others, for any specific application with com-
petent professional examination and verification of their accuracy, suitability, and
applicability.
The use of Prequalified Connections is permitted, but not required, by these
Provisions. Connections that are not prequalified are still permitted, as long as
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. CP2.] PART I – SCOPE 137
qualifying cyclic test data is presented in accordance with the requirements of
Appendix S.
CP2.1. Basis for Prequalification
In general terms, a Prequalified Connection is one that has undergone sufficient
testing, analysis, evaluation and reviewso that a high level of confidence exists that
the connection can fulfill the performance requirements specified in Section 9.2
for Special Moment Frames, in Section 10.2 for Intermediate Moment Frames, or
in Section 15.4 for Eccentrically Braced Frames. Prequalification should be based
primarily on laboratory test data, but supported by analytical studies of connec-
tion performance and by the development of detailed design criteria and design
procedures. The behavior and expected performance of a Prequalified Connec-
tion should be well understood and predictable. Further, a sufficient body of test
data should be available to ensure that a Prequalified Connection will perform as
intended on a consistent and reliable basis.
Further guidance on prequalification of connections is provided by the commentary
for FEMA 350, which indicates that the following four criteria should be satisfied
for a Prequalified Connection:
1. There is sufficient experimental and analytical data on the connection per-
formance to establish the likely yield mechanisms and failure modes for the
connection.
2. Rational models for predicting the resistance associated with each mechanism
and failure mode have been developed.
3. Given the material properties and geometry of the connection, a rational proce-
dure can be used to estimate which mode and mechanism controls the behavior
and deformation capacity (that is, Interstory Drift Angle) that can be attained
for the controlling conditions.
4. Given the models and procedures, the existing database is adequate to permit
assessment of the statistical reliability of the connection.
CP2.2. Authority for Prequalification
While the general basis for prequalification is outlined in Section P2.1, it is not
possible to provide highly detailed and specific criteria for prequalification, consid-
ering the wide variety of possible connection configurations, and considering the
continually changing state-of-the-art in the understanding of connection perfor-
mance. It is also recognized that decisions on whether or not a particular connection
should be prequalified, and decisions on establishing limits on prequalification,
will ultimately entail a considerable degree of professional engineering judgment.
Consequently, a fundamental premise of these provisions is that prequalification
can only be established based on an evaluation of the connection by a panel of
knowledgeable individuals. Thus, these Provisions call for the establishment of a
Connection Prequalification Review Panel (CPRP). Such a panel should consist
of individuals with a high degree of experience, knowledge and expertise in con-
nection behavior, design and construction. It is the responsibility of the CPRP to
review all available data on a connection, and then determine if the connection
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
138 PART I – TESTING REQUIREMENTS [Comm. CP3.
warrants prequalification and determine the associated limits of prequalification,
in accordance with Appendix P. It is the intent of these Provisions that only a sin-
gle, nationally recognized CPRP be established in order to maintain consistency
in the prequalification process.
CP3. TESTING REQUIREMENTS
It is the intent of these Provisions that laboratory test data form the primary basis
of prequalification, and that the connection testing conforms to the requirements of
Appendix S. FEMA 350 specifies the minimum number of tests on non-identical
specimens needed to establish prequalification of a connection, or subsequently to
change the limits of prequalification. However, in these Provisions, the number of
tests needed to support prequalification or to support changes in prequalification
limits is not specified. The number of tests and range of testing variables needed
to support prequalification decisions will be highly dependent on the particular
features of the connection and on the availability of other supporting data. Con-
sequently, this section requires that the CPRP determine if the number and type
of tests conducted on a connection are sufficient to warrant prequalification or
to warrant a change in prequalification limits. Both FEMA 350 and these Pro-
visions refer to “non-identical” test specimens, indicating that a broad range of
variables potentially affecting connection performance should be investigated in
a prequalification test program. It may also be desirable to test replicates of nom-
inally identical specimens in order to investigate repeatability of performance.
Individuals planning a test program to support prequalification of a connection are
encouraged to consult with the CPRP, in advance, for a preliminary assessment of
the planned testing program.
Tests used to support prequalification are required to comply with Appendix S.
This appendix requires test specimens be loaded at least to an Interstory Drift
Angle as specified in Section 9.2 for Special Moment Frames or in Section 10.2
for Intermediate Moment Frames, or a Link Rotation Angle as specified in Section
15.4 for Eccentrically Braced Frames. These provisions do not include the ad-
ditional requirement for connection rotation capacity at failure, as recommended
in FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a). For purposes of prequalification, however, it is
desirable to load specimens to larger deformation levels in order to reveal the ul-
timate controlling failure modes. Prequalification of a connection requires a clear
understanding of the controlling failure modes for a connection, i.e., the failure
modes that control the strength and deformation capacity of the connection. Con-
sequently, test data must be available to support connection behavior models over
the full range of loading, from the initial elastic response to the inelastic range of
behavior, and finally through to the ultimate failure of the connection.
When a connection is being considered for prequalification by the CPRP, all test
data for that connection must be available for review by the CPRP. This also
includes data on unsuccessful tests. Individuals seeking prequalification of a con-
nection are obliged to present the entire known database of tests for the connection.
Such data is essential for an assessment of the reliability of a connection. Note
that unsuccessful tests do not necessarily preclude prequalification, particularly
if the reasons for unsuccessful performance have been identified and addressed
in the connection design procedures. For example, if ten tests are conducted on
varying sized members and one test is unsuccessful, the cause for the “failure”
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. CP6.] PART I – PREQUALIFICATION RECORD 139
should be determined. If possible, the connection design procedure should be ad-
justed in such a way to preclude the failure and not invalidate the other nine tests.
Subsequent tests should then be performed to validate the final proposed design
procedure.
CP4. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES
This section provides a list of variables that can affect connection performance,
and that should be considered in the prequalification of connections. The CPRP
should consider the possible effects of each variable on connection performance,
and establish limits of application for each variable. Laboratory tests or analytical
studies investigating the full range of all variables listed in this section are not
required and would not be practical. Connection testing and/or analytical studies
investigating the effects of these variables are only required where deemed neces-
sary by the CPRP. However, regardless of which variables are explicitly considered
in testing or analytical studies, the CPRP should still consider the possible effects
of all variables listed in this section, and assign appropriate limits.
CP5. DESIGN PROCEDURE
In order to prequalify a connection, a detailed and comprehensive design procedure
consistent with the test results and addressing all pertinent limit states must be
available for the connection. This design procedure must be included as part of
the prequalification record, as required in Section P6. Examples of the format and
typical content of such design procedures can be found in FEMA 350 (FEMA,
2000a).
CP6. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD
A written prequalification record is required for a Prequalified Connection. As a
minimum, the prequalification record must include the information listed in Sec-
tion P6. The prequalification record should provide a comprehensive listing of all
information needed by a designer to determine the applicability and limitations of
the connection, and information needed to design the connection. The prequali-
fication record need not include detailed records of laboratory tests or analytical
studies. However, a list of references should be included for all test reports, re-
search reports, and other publications used as a basis of prequalification. These
references should, to the extent possible, be available in the public domain to per-
mit independent review of the data and to maintain the integrity and credibility of
the prequalification process. FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) provides an example of
the type and formatting of information needed for a Prequalified Connection.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
140
APPENDIX S
QUALIFYINGCYCLICTESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN
ANDLINK-TO-COLUMNCONNECTIONS
PARTI
CS1. SCOPE AND PURPOSE
The development of testing requirements for beam-to-column moment connec-
tions was motivated by the widespread occurrence of flange weld fractures in such
connections in the 1994 Northridge Earthquake. To improve performance of con-
nections in future earthquakes, laboratory testing is required to identify potential
problems in the design, detailing, materials, or construction methods to be used for
the connection. The requirement for testing reflects the view that the behavior of
connections under severe cyclic loading cannot be reliably predicted by analytical
means only.
It is recognized that testing of connections can be costly and time consuming.
Consequently, this Appendix has been written with the simplest testing require-
ments possible, while still providing reasonable assurance that connections tested
in accordance with these Provisions will perform satisfactorily in an earthquake.
Where conditions in the actual building differ significantly from the test condi-
tions specified in this Appendix, additional testing beyond the requirements herein
may be needed to ensure satisfactory connection performance. Many of the factors
affecting connection performance under earthquake loading are not completely
understood. Consequently, testing under conditions that are as close as possible
to those found in the actual building will provide for the best representation of
expected connection performance.
It is not intended in these Provisions that project-specific connection tests be con-
ducted on a routine basis for building construction projects. Rather, it is anticipated
that most projects would use connection details that have been previously prequal-
ified in accordance with Appendix P. If connections are being used that have not
been prequalified, then connection performance must be verified by testing in ac-
cordance with Appendix S. However, even in such cases, tests reported in the litera-
ture can be used to demonstrate that a connection satisfies the strength and rotation
requirements of these Provisions, so long as the reported tests satisfy the require-
ments of this Appendix. Consequently, it is expected that project-specific connec-
tion tests would be conducted for only a very small number of construction projects.
Although the provisions in this Appendix predominantly address the testing of
beam-to-column connections in Moment Frames, they also apply to qualifying
cyclic tests of Link-to-column connections in EBF. While there are no reports of
failures of Link-to-column connections in the Northridge Earthquake, it cannot
be concluded that these similar connections are satisfactory for severe earthquake
loading as it appears that few EBF with a Link-to-column configuration were
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. CS3.] PART I – DEFINITIONS 141
subjected to strong ground motion in that earthquake. Many of the conditions
that contributed to poor performance of moment connections in the Northridge
Earthquake can also occur in Link-to-column connections in EBF. Consequently,
the same testing requirements are applied to both moment connections and to
Link-to-column connections.
When developing a test program, the designer should be aware that the Authority
Having Jurisdiction may impose additional testing and reporting requirements not
covered in this Appendix. Examples of testing guidelines or requirements deve-
loped by other organizations or agencies include those published by SAC (FEMA,
2000a; SAC, 1997), by the ICBO Evaluation Service (ICBO Evaluation Service,
1997), and by the County of Los Angeles (County of Los Angeles Department of
Public Works, 1996). Prior to developing a test program, the appropriate Authority
Having Jurisdiction should be consulted to ensure the test programmeets all appli-
cable requirements. Even when not required, the designer may find the information
contained in the foregoing references to be useful resources in developing a test
program.
CS3. DEFINITIONS
Inelastic Rotation. One of the key parameters measured in a connection test is
the inelastic rotation that can be developed in the specimen. Previously in these
Provisions, inelastic rotation was the primary acceptance criterion for beam-to-
column moment connections in Moment Frames. The acceptance criterion in the
Provisions is now based on Interstory Drift Angle, which includes both elastic and
inelastic rotations. However, inelastic rotation provides an important indication of
connection performance in earthquakes and should still be measured and reported
in connection tests. Researchers have used a variety of different definitions for
inelastic rotation of moment connection test specimens in the past, making com-
parison among tests difficult. In order to promote consistency in howtest results are
reported, these Provisions require that inelastic rotation for moment connection test
specimens be computed based on the assumption that all inelastic deformation of a
test specimen is concentrated at a single point at the intersection of the centerline of
the beam with the centerline of the column. With this definition, inelastic rotation
is equal to the inelastic portion of the Interstory Drift Angle. Previously the Provi-
sions defined inelastic rotation of moment connection specimens with respect to the
face of the column. The definition has been changed to the centerline of the column
to be consistent with recommendations of SAC (SAC, 1997; FEMA, 2000a).
For tests of Link-to-column connections, the key acceptance parameter is the Link
inelastic rotation, also referred to in these Provisions as the Link Rotation Angle.
The Link Rotation Angle is computed based upon an analysis of test specimen
deformations, and can normally be computed as the inelastic portion of the rela-
tive end displacement between the ends of the Link, divided by the Link length.
Examples of such calculations can be found in Kasai and Popov (1986c), Ricles
and Popov (1987), Engelhardt and Popov (1989a), and Arce (2002).
Interstory Drift Angle. The Interstory Drift Angle developed by a moment con-
nection test specimen is the primary acceptance criterion for a beam-to-column
moment connection in a Moment Frame. In an actual building, the Interstory Drift
Angle is computed as the interstory displacement divided by the story height, and
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
142 PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES [Comm. CS5.
includes both elastic and inelastic components of deformation. For a test specimen,
Interstory Drift Angle can usually be computed in a straightforward manner from
displacement measurements on the test specimen. Guidelines for computing the
Interstory Drift Angle of a connection test specimen are provided by SAC (1997).
CS4. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS
A variety of different types of subassemblages and test specimens have been used
for testing moment connections. A typical subassemblage is planar and consists
of a single column with a beam attached on one or both sides of the column. The
specimen can be loaded by displacing either the end of the beam(s) or the end of
the column. Examples of typical subassemblages for moment connections can be
found in the literature, for example in SAC (1996) and Popov et al. (1996).
In these Provisions, test specimens generally need not include a composite slab
or the application of axial load to the column. However, such effects may have an
influence on connection performance, and their inclusion in a test program should
be considered as a means to obtain more realistic test conditions. An example
of test subassemblages that include composite floor slabs and/or the application
of column axial loads can be found in Popov et al. (1996), Leon, Hajjar, and
Shield (1997), and Tremblay, Tchebotarev, and Filiatrault (1997). A variety of
other types of subassemblages may be appropriate to simulate specific project
conditions, such as a specimen with beams attached in orthogonal directions to
a column. A planar bare steel specimen with a single column and a single beam
represents the minimum acceptable subassemblage for a moment connection test.
However, more extensive and realistic subassemblages that better match actual
project conditions should be considered where appropriate and practical, in order
to obtain more reliable test results.
Examples of subassemblages usedtotest Link-to-columnconnections canbe found
in Hjelmstad and Popov (1983), Kasai and Popov (1986c), Ricles and Popov
(1987b), Engelhardt and Popov (1989a), Dusicka and Itani (2002), McDaniel et al.
(2002), and Arce (2002).
CS5. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES
CS5.1. Sources of Inelastic Rotation
This section is intended to ensure that the inelastic rotation in the test specimen
is developed in the same members and connection elements as anticipated in the
prototype. For example, if the prototype moment connection is designed so that
essentially all of the inelastic rotation is developed by yielding of the beam, then the
test specimen should be designed and perform in the same way. A test specimen
that develops nearly all of its inelastic rotation through yielding of the column
Panel Zone would not be acceptable to qualify a prototype connection wherein
flexural yielding of the beam is expected to be the predominant inelastic action.
Because of normal variations in material properties, the actual location of inelastic
action may vary somewhat from that intended in either the test specimen or in the
prototype. Consequently, by requiring that only 75 percent of the inelastic rotation
occur in the intended elements of the test specimen, some allowance is made for
such variations. Thus, for the example above where essentially all of the inelastic
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. CS5.] PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES 143
rotation in the prototype is expected to be developed by flexural yielding of the
beam, at least 75 percent of the total inelastic rotation of the test specimen is
required to be developed by flexural yielding of the beam in order to qualify this
connection.
For many types of connections, yielding or inelastic deformations may occur in
more than a single member or connection element. For example, in some types
of moment connections, yielding may occur within the beam, within the column
Panel Zone, or within both the beam and Panel Zone. The actual distribution of
yielding between the beam and Panel Zone may vary depending upon the beam
and column dimensions, web doubler plate thickness, and on the actual yield
stress of the beam, column and web doubler plate. Such a connection design can
be qualified by running two series of tests: one in which at least 75 percent of
the inelastic rotation is developed by beam yielding; and a second in which at
least 75 percent of the inelastic rotation is developed by Panel Zone yielding. The
connection design would then be qualified for any distribution of yielding between
the beam and the Panel Zone in the prototype.
For Link-to-column connections in EBF, the type of yielding (shear yielding,
flexural yielding, or a combination of shear and flexural yielding) expected in the
test specimen Link should be substantially the same as for the Prototype Link.
For example, a Link-to-column connection detail which performs satisfactorily
for a shear-yielding Link (e ≤ 1.6M
p
/V
p
) may not necessarily perform well for a
flexural-yielding Link (e ≥ 2.6M
p
/V
p
). The load and deformation demands at the
Link-to-column connection will differ significantly for these cases.
Satisfying the requirements of this section will require the designer to have a
clear understanding of the manner in which inelastic rotation is developed in the
Prototype and in the test specimen.
CS5.2. Size of Members
The intent of this section is that the member sizes used in a test specimen should be,
as nearly as practical, a full-scale representation of the member sizes used in the
prototype. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that any potentially adverse
scale effects are adequately represented in the test specimen. As beams become
deeper and heavier, their ability to develop inelastic rotation may be somewhat di-
minished (Roeder and Foutch, 1996; Blodgett, 1995). Although such scale effects
are not yet completely understood, at least two possible detrimental scale effects
have been identified. First, as a beam gets deeper, larger inelastic strains are gen-
erally required in order to develop the same level of inelastic rotation. Second, the
inherent restraint associated with joining thicker materials can affect joint and con-
nection performance. Because of such potentially adverse scale effects, the beam
sizes used in test specimens are required to adhere to the limits given in this section.
This section only specifies restrictions on the degree to which test results can be
scaled up to deeper or heavier members. There are no restrictions on the degree to
which test results can be scaled down to shallower or lighter members. No such
restrictions have been imposed in order to avoid excessive testing requirements
and because currently available evidence suggests that adverse scale effects are
more likely to occur when scaling up test results rather than when scaling down.
Nonetheless, caution is advised when using test results on very deep or heavy
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
144 PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES [Comm. CS5.
members to qualify connections for much smaller or lighter members. It is prefer-
able to obtain test results using member sizes that are a realistic representation of
the prototype member sizes.
As an example of applying the requirements of this section, consider a moment
connection test specimen constructed with a W36 × 150 beam. This specimen
could be used to qualify any beam with a depth up to 40 in. (= 36/0.9) and a
weight up to 200 lbs/ft (=150/0.75). The limits specified in this section have been
chosen somewhat arbitrarily based on judgment, as no quantitative research results
are available on scale effects.
When choosing a beam size for a test specimen, several other factors should be
considered in addition to the depth and weight of the section. One of these factors
is the width-thickness (b/t ) ratio of the beam flange and web. The b/t ratios of
the beam may have an important influence on the performance of specimens that
develop plastic rotation by flexural yielding of the beam. Beams with high b/t
ratios develop local buckling at lower inelastic rotation levels than beams with
low b/t ratios. This local buckling causes strength degradation in the beam, and
may therefore reduce the load demands on the connection. A beam with very low
b/t ratios may experience little if any local buckling, and will therefore subject
the connection to higher moments. On the other hand, the beam with high b/t
ratios will experience highly localized deformations at locations of flange and web
buckling, which may in turn initiate a fracture. Consequently, it is desirable to test
beams over a range of b/t ratios in order to evaluate these effects.
In the previous edition of these Provisions, no specific restrictions were placed on
the size of columns used in test specimens in order to avoid excessively burden-
some testing requirements. However, restrictions have now been added to these
Provisions requiring that the depth of the test column be at least 90 percent of
the depth of the Prototype column. Tests conducted as part of the SAC program
indicated that performance of connections with deep columns may differ from the
performance with W12 and W14 columns (Chi and Uang, 2002). In addition to
adhering to this depth restriction, the column size should also be chosen to produce
inelastic deformation in the appropriate elements of the specimen, according to
the requirements of Section S5.1.
CS5.5. Material Strength
The actual yield stress of structural steel can be considerably greater than its spec-
ified minimum value. Higher levels of actual yield stress in members that supply
inelastic rotation by yielding can be detrimental to connection performance by
developing larger forces at the connection prior to yielding. For example, consider
a moment connection design in which inelastic rotation is developed by yielding
of the beam, and the beam has been specified to be of ASTM A36/A36M steel. If
the beam has an actual yield stress of 55 ksi (380 MPa), the connection is required
to resist a moment that is 50 percent higher than if the beam had an actual yield
stress of 36 ksi (250 MPa). Consequently, this section requires that the materials
used for the test specimen represent this possible overstrength condition, as this
will provide for the most severe test of the connection.
As an example of applying these provisions, consider again a test specimen in
which inelastic rotation is intended to be developed by yielding of the beam. In
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. CS6.] PART I – LOADING HISTORY 145
order to qualify this connection for ASTM A36/A36M beams, the test beam is
required to have a yield stress of at least 46 ksi (317 MPa) (=0.85R
y
F
y
for ASTM
A36/A36M). This minimum yield stress is required to be exhibited by both the
web and flanges of the test beam.
The requirements of this section are applicable only to members or connection ele-
ments of the test specimen that are intended to contribute to the inelastic rotation of
the specimen through yielding. The requirements of this section are not applicable
to members or connection elements that are intended to remain essentially elastic.
CS5.6. Welds
The intent of these Provisions is to ensure that the welds on the test specimen
replicate the welds on the prototype as closely as practicable. Accordingly, it is
required that the welding parameters, such as current and voltage, be within the
range established by the weld metal manufacturer. Other essential variables, such
as steel grade, type of joint, root opening, included angle and preheat level, are
required to be in accordance with AWS D1.1. It is not the intent of this section that
the electrodes used to make welds in a test specimen must necessarily be the same
AWSclassification, diameter or brand as the electrodes to be used on the Prototype.
CS6. LOADING HISTORY
The loading sequence prescribed in Section S6.2 for beam-to-column moment
connections is taken from SAC/BD-97/02, “Protocol for Fabrication, Inspection,
Testing, and Documentation of Beam-to-Column Connection Tests and Other Ex-
perimental Specimens” (SAC, 1997). This document should be consulted for fur-
ther details of the loading sequence, as well as for further useful information on
testing procedures. The prescribed loading sequence is not intended to represent
the demands presented by a particular earthquake ground motion. This loading se-
quence was developed based on a series of non-linear time history analyses of steel
Moment Frame structures subjected to a range of seismic inputs. The maximumde-
formation, as well as the cumulative deformation and dissipated energy sustained
by beam-to-column connections in these analyses, were considered when estab-
lishing the prescribed loading sequence and the connection acceptance criteria. If a
designer conducts a non-linear time history analysis of a Moment Frame structure
in order to evaluate demands on the beam-to-column connections, considerable
judgment will be needed when comparing the demands on the connection predicted
by the analysis with the demands placed on a connection test specimen using the
prescribed loading sequence. In general, however, a connection can be expected
to provide satisfactory performance if the cumulative plastic deformation, and the
total dissipated energy sustained by the test specimen prior to failure are equal
or greater to the same quantities predicted by a non-linear time-history analysis.
When evaluating the cumulative plastic deformation, both total rotation (elastic
plus inelastic) as well as inelastic rotation at the connection should be considered.
SAC/BD-00/10 (SAC, 2000) can be consulted for further information on this topic.
The loading sequence specified in SAC/BD-97/02 was specifically developed for
connections in Moment Frames, and may not be appropriate for testing of Link-
to-column connections in EBF. Inelastic deformation of EBF generally initiates at
much lower Interstory Drift Angles than in Moment Frames. The loading cycles
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
146 PART I – MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS [Comm. CS8.
prescribed for Moment Frame connection test specimens at Interstory Drift Angles
less than 0.01 radian will generally be in the elastic range. However, for typical
EBF, yielding in the Links may initiate at Interstory Drift Angles less than 0.00375
radian. Consequently, using the loading sequence prescribed for Moment Frames
may result in an excessive number of inelastic loading cycles for an EBF test spec-
imen. Further, the relationship between Interstory Drift Angle and Link Rotation
Angle in an EBF is dependent on the frame geometry. Consequently, prescribing a
loading history for Link-to-column connection tests based on the Interstory Drift
Angle may lead to inconsistent test results. Since acceptance criteria for Link-
to-column connections are based on the Link Rotation Angle, then a prescribed
loading history based on the Link Rotation Angle will provide for more consis-
tent test results. No standard loading sequence has been developed for testing of
Link-to-column connections. The loading sequence prescribed in Section S6.3 was
chosen based on judgment and a review of typical loading sequences used in past
EBF testing. The Link Rotation Angle ␥ specified in Section S6.3 for controlling
tests on Link-to-column connection specimens is intended to be the total Link
Rotation Angle, including both elastic and inelastic components of deformation.
This can usually be computed by taking the total relative end displacement of the
Link and dividing by the Link length. While test control is based on total Link
Rotation Angle, the acceptance criteria for Link-to-column connections are based
on the inelastic Link Rotation Angle.
The loading sequence specified in ATC-24, “Guidelines for Cyclic Seismic Test-
ing of Components of Steel Structures,” (Applied Technology Council, 1992) is
considered as an acceptable alternative to those prescribed in Sections S6.2 and
S6.3. Further, any other loading sequence may be used for beam-to-column mo-
ment connections or Link-to-column connections, as long as the loading sequence
is equivalent or more severe than those prescribed in Sections S6.2 and S6.3. To
be considered as equivalent or more severe, alternative loading sequences should
meet the following requirements: (1) the number of inelastic loading cycles should
be at least as large as the number of inelastic loading cycles resulting from the
prescribed loading sequence; and (2) the cumulative plastic deformation should be
at least as large as the cumulative plastic deformation resulting fromthe prescribed
loading sequence.
Dynamically applied loads are not required in these Provisions. The use of slowly
applied cyclic loads, as typically reported in the literature for connection tests,
are acceptable for the purposes of these Provisions. It is recognized that dynamic
loading can considerably increase the cost of testing, and that few laboratory fa-
cilities have the capability to dynamically load very large-scale test specimens.
Furthermore, the available research on dynamic loading effects on steel connec-
tions has not demonstrated a compelling need for dynamic testing. Nonetheless,
applying the required loading sequence dynamically, using loading rates typical
of actual earthquake loading, will likely provide a better indication of the expected
performance of the connection, and should be considered where possible.
CS8. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS
Tension testing is required for members and connection elements of the test speci-
men that contribute to the inelastic rotation of the specimen by yielding. These tests
are required to demonstrate conformance with the requirements of Section S5.5,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
Comm. CS10.] PART I – ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 147
and to permit proper analysis of test specimen response. Tension test results re-
ported on certified mill test reports are not permitted to be used for this purpose.
Yield stress values reported on a certified mill test report may not adequately repre-
sent the actual yield strength of the test specimen members. Variations are possible
due to material sampling locations and tension test methods used for certified mill
test reports.
ASTM standards for tension testing permit the reported yield stress to be taken as
the upper yield point. However, for steel members subject to large cyclic inelastic
strains, the upper yield point can provide a misleading representation of the actual
material behavior. Thus, while an upper yield point is permitted by ASTM, it is
not permitted for the purposes of this Section. Determination of yield stress using
the 0.2 percent strain offset method is required in this Appendix.
Only tension tests are required in this section. Additional materials testing, how-
ever, can sometimes be a valuable aid for interpreting and extrapolating test results.
Examples of additional tests, which may be useful in certain cases, include Charpy
V-Notch tests, hardness tests, chemical analysis, and others. Consideration should
be given to additional materials testing, where appropriate.
CS10. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
A minimum of two tests is required for each condition in the prototype in which
the variables listed in Section S5 remain unchanged. The designer is cautioned,
however, that two tests, in general, cannot provide a thorough assessment of the
capabilities, limitations, and reliability of a connection. Thus, where possible, it is
highly desirable to obtain additional test data to permit a better evaluation of the
expected response of a connection to earthquake loading. Further, when evaluating
the suitability of a proposed connection, it is advisable to consider a broader range
of issues other than just inelastic rotation capacity.
One factor to consider is the controlling failure mode after the required inelastic
rotation has been achieved. For example, a connection that slowly deteriorates in
strength due to local buckling may be preferable to a connection that exhibits a
more brittle failure mode such as fracture of a weld, fracture of a beamflange, etc.,
even though both connections achieved the required inelastic rotation.
In addition, the designer should also carefully consider the implications of un-
successful tests. For example, consider a situation where five tests were run on a
particular type of connection, two tests successfully met the acceptance criteria, but
the other three failed prematurely. This connection could presumably be qualified
under these Provisions, since two successful tests are required. Clearly, however,
the number of failed tests indicates potential problems with the reliability of the
connection. On the other hand, the failure of a tested connection in the laboratory
should not, by itself, eliminate that connection fromfurther consideration. As long
as the causes of the failure are understood and corrected, and the connection is
successfully retested, the connection may be quite acceptable. Thus, while the
acceptance criteria in these Provisions have intentionally been kept simple, the
choice of a safe, reliable and economical connection still requires considerable
judgment.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
148
APPENDIX X
WELDMETAL/ WELDINGPROCEDURE SPECIFICATION
TOUGHNESS VERIFICATIONTEST
PARTI
FEMA (FEMA, 2000b) first published this procedure for qualifying weld metals to meet
the recommended Charpy V-Notch (CVN) requirements. The procedure and test tempera-
tures vary fromthe existing AWS requirements. Since publication of the FEMAdocument,
the filler metal manufacturers have been conducting tests and are certifying those mate-
rials that meet this requirement. As stated, this Appendix is included on an interim basis
pending adoption of such a procedure by AWS or other accredited organization.
All component tests conducted in the SAC Project were conducted at room temperature,
approximately 70˚F (21˚C), at which it was determined that an adequate CVN toughness
is 40 ft-lbf (54 J). The lowest anticipated operating temperature of most buildings is
50˚F (10˚C). Considering the difference in loading rates between seismic motions and
CVN testing, and the temperature increase of weldments under seismic loads, the CVN
requirement of 40 ft-lbf (54 J) at 70˚F (21˚C) should be adequate for use at 50˚F (10˚C).
This additional weld toughness requirement is stipulated in Section 7.3b for CJP welds in
Special and Intermediate Moment Frames.
During the SAC study (see FEMA 355B, section 2.3.3.5 (FEMA, 2000d)), it was deemed
important to actually verify this expected higher toughness for performance at the expected
service temperature. Appendix X testing requirements for 40 ft-lbf (54 J) at 70˚F (21˚C)
are intended to verify that at most common service temperatures, the minimum toughness
is maintained to provide satisfactory performance in seismic joints.
For service temperatures below 50˚F (10˚C), it is reasonable to require a 40 ft-lbf (54 J)
minimumCVNtoughness at 20˚F (11˚C) above the lowest anticipated service temperature
of the building.
Filler metal classification testing is governed by the AWS A5 specifications, which require
specific tests on the weld metal, deposited using prescribed electrode diameters with
prescribed welding conditions. Actual production welding may be done with electrodes of
different diameters and under considerably different welding variables (amperage, voltage,
travel speed, electrode extension, position, plate thickness, joint geometry, preheat and
interpass temperatures, shielding gas type and flowrate, for example). Such variables may
considerably affect the actual tensile and CVN properties achieved in production welds.
Although the requirement of 7.3a is that all filler metals be classified under AWS A5
tests for a minimum of 20 ft-lbf at minus 20˚F (27 J at minus 29˚C) ensures that some
minimum level of notch toughness will be provided, there is no guarantee that 40 ft-lbf
(54 J) at 70˚F (21˚C) CVN will be achieved under either the A5 prescribed conditions, nor
the wide variety of possible welding procedures and cooling rates. For the critical welds
listed in Section 7.3b, additional testing is required to verify that the production weld will
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
PART I – WELD METAL/ WELDING PROCEDURE 149
achieve the required higher level of CVN toughness, under conditions similar to those to
be encountered in production.
The mechanical properties of welds are affected by the cooling rates experienced by the
welds. Cooling rates are in turn affected by the welding heat input, calculated as 0.06 times
arc voltage times welding current, divided by travel speed in inches per minute. Testing of
welds is required using high heat input levels, and low heat input levels. By testing using
bracketed heat inputs, requiring that production welding procedures fall within these tested
heat inputs, and by testing the actual electrode diameter and production lot to be used in
production, there is greater confidence that the as-deposited weld metal will provide the
required level of CVN toughness.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: MRM/SPH P2: MRM/UKS QC: MRM/UKS T1: MRM
PB262A-04 PB262/Seismic.cls January 3, 2003 8:37 Char Count=
150
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
151
PART II. COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL
AND REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS
C1. SCOPE
These Provisions for the seismic design of composite structural steel and reinforced
concrete buildings are based upon the 1994 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 1994) and
subsequent modifications made in the 1997 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 1997a).
Since composite systems are assemblies of steel and concrete components, Part I
of these Provisions, the LRFD Specification (AISC, 1999) and ACI 318 (ACI,
2002), form an important basis for Part II.
The available research demonstrates that properly detailed composite members
and connections can perform reliably when subjected to seismic ground motions.
However, there is at present limited experience with composite building systems
subjected to extreme seismic loads and many of the recommendations herein are
necessarily of a conservative and/or qualitative nature. Careful attention to all
aspects of the design is necessary, particularly the general building layout and de-
tailing of members and connections. Composite connection details are illustrated
throughout this Commentary to convey the basic character of the composite sys-
tems. However, these details should not necessarily be treated as design standards
and the cited references provide more specific information on the design of com-
posite connections. Additionally, refer to Viest, Colaco, Furlong, Griffis, Leon,
and Wylie (1997).
The design and construction of composite elements and systems continues to
evolve in practice. With further experience and research, it is expected that these
Provisions can be better quantified, refined and expanded. Nonetheless, these Pro-
visions are not intended to limit the application of new systems, except where
explicitly stated, for which testing and analysis demonstrates that the structure has
adequate strength, ductility, and toughness.
It is generally anticipated that the overall behavior of the composite systems herein
will be similar to that for counterpart structural steel systems or reinforced concrete
systems and that inelastic deformations will occur in conventional ways, such
as flexural yielding of beams in FR Moment Frames or axial yielding and/or
buckling of braces in Braced Frames. However, differential stiffness between steel
and concrete elements is more significant in the calculation of internal forces
and deformations of composite systems than for structural steel only or reinforced
concrete only systems. For example, deformations in reinforced concrete elements
can vary considerably due to the effects of cracking.
When systems have both ductile and non-ductile elements, the relative stiffness
of each should be properly modeled; the ductile elements can deform inelasti-
cally while the non-ductile elements remain nominally elastic. When using elastic
analysis, member stiffness should be reduced to account for the degree of crack-
ing at the onset of significant yielding in the structure. Additionally, it is nec-
essary to account for material overstrength that may alter relative strength and
stiffness.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
152 PART II – MATERIALS [Comm. C5.
C2. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS, CODES, AND STANDARDS
The specifications, codes and standards that are referenced in Part II are listed with
the appropriate revision date that was used in the development of Part II, except
those that are already listed in Part I.
C3. SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES
See Part I Commentary Section C3.
C4. LOADS, LOAD COMBINATIONS, AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS
In general, requirements for loads and load combinations for composite structures
are similar to those described in Part I Section C4. Specific seismic design, loading
criteria and usage limitations for composite structures are specified in the 2000
NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g).
The calculation of seismic loads for composite systems per the 2000 NEHRP
Provisions (FEMA, 2000g) is the same as is described for steel structures in Part
I Commentary Section C4. Table C-II-4.1 lists the seismic response modification
factors R and C
d
for the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g). The values in
Table C-II-4.1 are predicated upon meeting the design and detailing requirements
for the composite systems specified in these Provisions. Overstrength factors for
the composite systems given in Table II-4-1 of these Provisions are the same as
those specified in the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g).
ACI 318 Appendix Chas been included by reference to facilitate the proportioning
of building structures that include members made of steel and concrete. When
reinforced concrete members are proportioned using the minimum design loads
stipulated in LRFD Specification Section A4.1, which is consistent with those in
ASCE 7 (ASCE, 1998), the strength reduction factors ␾ in ACI 318 Appendix C
should be used in lieu of those in ACI 318 Chapter 9.
The seismic response modification factors R and C
d
for composite systems spec-
ified by the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g) are similar to those for
comparable systems of steel and reinforced concrete. This is based on the fact that,
when carefully designed and detailed according to these Provisions, the overall
inelastic response for composite systems should be similar to comparable steel and
reinforced concrete systems. Therefore, where specific loading requirements are
not specified in the Applicable Building Code for composite systems, appropriate
values for the seismic response factors can be inferred from specified values for
steel and/or reinforced concrete systems.
C5. MATERIALS
The limitations in Section 5.1 on structural steel grades used with Part II require-
ments are the same as those given in Part I. The limitations in Section 5.2 on
specified concrete compressive strength in composite members are the same as
those given in LRFD Specification Chapter I and ACI 318 Chapter 21. While
these limitations are particularly appropriate for construction in Seismic Design
Categories Dand higher, they apply in any Seismic Design Category when systems
are designed with the assumption that inelastic deformation will be required.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C6.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 153
TABLE C-II-4.1
Design Factors for Composite Systems
BASIC STRUCTURAL SYSTEM AND R C
d
SEISMIC LOAD RESISTING SYSTEM
Systems designed and detailed to meet the requirements of
both the LRFD Specification and Part I:
Braced Frame Systems:
Composite Concentrically Braced Frame (C-CBF) 5 4
1
/2
Composite Ordinary Braced Frames (C-OBF) 3 3
Composite Eccentrically Braced Frames (C-EBF) 8 4
Shear Wall Systems:
Composite Steel Plate Shear Walls (C-SPW) 6
1
/2 5
1
/2
Special Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls
Composite with Steel Elements (C-SRCW) 6 5
Ordinary Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls
Composite with Steel Elements (C-ORCW) 5 4
1
/2
Moment Frame Systems:
Composite Special Moment Frames (C-SMF) 8 5
1
/2
Composite Intermediate Moment Frames (C-IMF) 5 4
1
/2
Composite Partially Restrained Moment Frame (C-PRMF) 6 5
1
/2
Composite Ordinary Moment Frames (C-OMF) 3 2
1
/2
Dual Systems with SMF capable of resisting 25 percent of V:
Composite Concentrically Braced Frames (C-CBF) 6 5
Composite Eccentrically Braced Frames (C-EBF) 8 4
Composite Steel Plate Shear Walls (C-SPW) 8 6
1
/2
Special Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls
Composite with Steel Elements (C-SRCW) 8 6
1
/2
Ordinary Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls
Composite with Steel Elements (C-ORCW) 7 6
Dual Systems with IMF capable of resisting 25 percent of V:
Composite Concentrically Braced Frame (C-CBF) 5 4
1
/2
Composite Ordinary Braced Frame (C-OBF) 4 3
Ordinary Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls
Composite with Steel Elements (C-ORCW) 5
1
/2 4
1
/2
C6. COMPOSITE MEMBERS
C6.1. Scope
These Provisions address the seismic design requirements that should be applied
in addition to the basic design requirements for gravity and wind loading.
C6.2. Composite Floor and Roof Slabs
In composite construction, floor and roof slabs typically consist of either composite
or non-composite metal deck slabs that are connected to the structural framing to
provide an in-plane composite diaphragm that collects and distributes seismic
loads. Generally, composite action is distinguished from non-composite action on
the basis of the out-of-plane shear and flexural behavior and design assumptions.
Composite metal deck slabs are those for which the concrete fill and metal deck
work together to resist out-of-plane bending and out-of-plane shear. Flexural
strength design procedures and codes of practice for such slabs are well estab-
lished (ASCE, 2002; ASCE, 1991a and 1991b; AISI, 1996; SDI, 1993).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
154 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Comm. C6.
Non-composite metal deck slabs are one-way or two-way reinforced concrete
slabs for which the metal deck acts as formwork during construction, but is not
relied upon for composite action. Non-composite metal deck slabs, particularly
those used as roofs, can be formed with metal deck and overlaid with insulating
concrete fill that is not relied upon for out-of-plane strength and stiffness. Whether
or not the slab is designed for composite out-of-plane action, the concrete fill
inhibits buckling of the metal deck, increasing the in-plane strength and stiffness
of the diaphragm over that of the bare steel deck.
The diaphragm should be designed to collect and distribute seismic loads to the
Seismic Load Resisting System. In some cases, loads fromother floors should also
be included, such as at a level where a change in the structural stiffness results in
a redistribution. Recommended diaphragm (in-plane) shear strength and stiffness
values for metal deck and composite diaphragms are available for design from
industry sources that are based upon tests and recommended by the Authority
Having Jurisdiction (SDI, 1991; SDI, 2001). In addition, research on composite
diaphragms has been reported in the literature (Easterling and Porter, 1994).
As the thickness of concrete over the steel deck is increased, the shear strength
can approach that for a concrete slab of the same thickness. For example, in
composite floor deck diaphragms having cover depths between 2 in. (51 mm) and
6 in. (152 mm), measured shear stresses on the order of 3.5

f

c
(where

f

c
and
f

c
are in units of psi) have been reported. In such cases, the diaphragm strength
of concrete metal deck slabs can be conservatively based on the principles of
reinforced concrete design (ACI, 2002) using the concrete and reinforcement above
the metal deck ribs and ignoring the beneficial effect of the concrete in the flutes.
Shear forces are transferred through welds and/or shear devices in the collector
and boundary elements. Fasteners between the diaphragm and the steel framing
should be capable of transferring forces using either welds or shear devices. Where
concrete fill is present, it is generally advisable to use mechanical devices such
as headed shear stud connectors to transfer diaphragm forces between the slab
and collector/boundary elements, particularly in complex shaped diaphragms with
discontinuities. However, in low-rise buildings without abrupt discontinuities in
the shape of the diaphragms or in the Seismic Load Resisting System, the standard
metal deck attachment procedures may be acceptable.
C6.3. Composite Beams
These provisions apply only to composite beams that are part of the Seismic Load
Resisting System.
When the design of a composite beam satisfies Equation 6-1, the strain in the
steel at the extreme fiber will be at least five times the tensile yield strain prior to
concrete crushing at strain equal to 0.003. It is expected that this ductility limit
will control the beam geometry only in extreme beam/slab proportions.
While these Provisions permit the design of composite beams based solely upon
the requirements in the LRFD Specification, the effects of reversed cyclic load-
ing on the strength and stiffness of shear studs should be considered. This is
particularly important for C-SMF where the design loads are calculated assuming
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C6.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 155
large member ductility and toughness. In the absence of test data to support spe-
cific requirements in these Provisions, the following special measures should be
considered in C-SMF: (1) implementation of an inspection and quality assurance
plan to insure proper welding of shear stud connectors to the beams; and (2) use of
additional shear stud connectors beyond those required in the LRFD Specification
immediately adjacent to regions of the beams where plastic hinging is expected.
C6.4. Reinforced-concrete-encased Composite Columns
The basic requirements and limitations for determining the Design Strength of
encased composite columns are the same as those in the LRFD Specification.
Additional requirements for reinforcing bar details of composite columns that are
not coveredinthe LRFDSpecificationare includedbasedonprovisions inACI 318.
Composite columns can be an ideal solution for use in seismic regions because
of their inherent structural redundancy. For example, if a composite column is
designed such that the structural steel can carry most or all of the dead load acting
alone, then an extra degree of protection and safety is afforded, even in a severe
earthquake where excursions into the inelastic range can be expected to deteriorate
concrete cover and buckle reinforcing steel. However, as with any column of
concrete and reinforcement, the designer should be aware of the constructability
concerns with the placement of reinforcement and potential for congestion. This
is particularly true at beam-to-column connections where potential interference
between a steel spandrel beam, a perpendicular floor beam, vertical bars, joint ties,
and shear stud connectors can cause difficulty in reinforcing bar placement and a
potential for honeycombing of the concrete.
Seismic detailing requirements for composite columns are specified in the fol-
lowing three categories: ordinary, intermediate, and special. The required level
of detailing is specified in these Provisions for seismic systems in Sections 8
through 17. The ordinary detailing requirements of Section 6.4a are intended as
basic requirements for all cases. Intermediate requirements are intended for seis-
mic systems permitted in Seismic Design Category C, and special requirements
are intended for seismic systems permitted in Seismic Design Categories D and
above.
C6.4a. Ordinary Seismic System Requirements
These requirements are intendedtosupplement the basic requirements of the LRFD
Specification for encased composite columns in all Seismic Design Categories.
(1) Specific instructions are given for the determination of the nominal shear
strength in concrete encased steel composite members including assignment
of some shear to the reinforced concrete encasement. Examples for deter-
mining the effective shear width b
w
of the reinforced concrete encasement
are illustrated in Figure C-II-6.1. These provisions exclude any strength V
c
assigned to concrete alone (Furlong, 1997).
(2) Currently no existing specification in the United States includes requirements
for shear connectors for encased steel sections. The provisions in this subsec-
tion require that shear connectors be provided to transfer all calculated axial
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
156 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Comm. C6.
Fig. C-II-6.1. Effective widths for shear strength calculation of encased composite columns.
forces between the structural steel and the concrete, neglecting the contribution
of bond and friction. Friction between the structural steel and concrete is as-
sumed to transfer the longitudinal shear stresses required to develop the plastic
bending strength of the cross section. However, minimum shear studs should
be provided according to the maximum spacing limit of 16 inches. Further
information regarding the design of shear connectors for encased members is
available (Furlong, 1997; Griffis, 1992a and 1992b).
(3) The tie requirements in this section are essentially the same as those for com-
posite columns in ACI 318 Chapter 10.
(4) The requirements for longitudinal bars are essentially the same as those that
apply to composite columns for low- and non-seismic design as specified in
ACI 318. The distinction between load-carrying and restraining bars is made
to allow for longitudinal bars (restraining bars) that are provided solely for
erection purposes and to improve confinement of the concrete. Due to inter-
ference with steel beams framing into the encased members, the restraining
bars are often discontinuous at floor levels and, therefore, are not included in
determining the column strength.
(5) The requirements for the steel core are essentially the same as those for com-
posite columns as specified in the LRFD Specification and ACI 318. In addi-
tion, earthquake damage to encased composite columns in Japan (Azizinamini
and Ghosh, 1996) highlights the need to consider the effects of abrupt changes
in stiffness and strength where encased composite columns transition into re-
inforced concrete columns and/or concrete foundations.
C6.4b. Intermediate Seismic System Requirements
The more stringent tie spacing requirements for intermediate seismic systems
follow those for reinforced concrete columns in regions of moderate seismicity as
specified in ACI 318 Chapter 21 (Section 21.8). These requirements are applied
to all composite columns for systems permitted in Seismic Design Category C
to make the composite column details at least equivalent to the minimum level
of detailing for columns in Intermediate Moment Frames of reinforced concrete
(FEMA, 2000e; ICC, 2000).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C6.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 157
C6.4c. Special Seismic System Requirements
The additional requirements for encasedcomposite columns usedinspecial seismic
systems are based upon comparable requirements for structural steel and reinforced
concrete columns in systems permitted in Seismic Design Categories D and above
(FEMA, 2000e; ICC, 2000). For additional explanation of these requirements, see
the Commentaries for Part I in these Provisions and ACI 318 Chapter 21.
The minimumtie area requirement inEquation6-2is basedupona similar provision
in ACI 318 Section 21.4.4, except that the required tie area is reduced to take into
account the steel core. The tie area requirement in Equation 6-2 and related tie
detailing provisions are waived if the steel core of the composite member can alone
resist the expected (arbitrary point in time) gravity load on the column because
additional confinement of the concrete is not necessary if the steel core can inhibit
collapse after an extreme seismic event. The load combination of 1.0D +0.5L is
based upon a similar combination proposed as loading criteria for structural safety
under fire conditions (Ellingwood and Corotis, 1991).
The requirements for composite columns in C-SMF are based upon similar re-
quirements for steel and reinforced concrete columns in SMF (FEMA, 2000e;
ICC, 2000). For additional commentaries, see Part I in these Provisions and
ASCE 7.
The strong-column/weak-beam (SC/WB) concept follows that used for steel and
reinforced concrete columns in SMF. Where the formation of a plastic hinge at the
ColumnBase is likelyor unavoidable, suchas witha fixedbase, the detailingshould
provide for adequate plastic rotational ductility. For Seismic Design Category E,
special details, such as steel jacketing of the Column Base, should be considered
to avoid spalling and crushing of the concrete.
Closed hoops are required to ensure that the concrete confinement and nominal
shear strength are maintained under large inelastic deformations. The hoop de-
tailing requirements are equivalent to those for reinforced concrete columns in
SMF. The transverse reinforcement provisions are considered to be conservative
since composite columns generally will performbetter than comparable reinforced
concrete columns with similar confinement. However, further research is required
to determine to what degree the transverse reinforcement requirements can be re-
duced for composite columns. It should be recognized that the closed hoop and
cross-tie requirements for C-SMF may require special details such as those sug-
gested in Figure C-II-6.2 to facilitate the erection of the reinforcement around the
Fig. C-II-6.2. Example of a closed hoop detail for an encased composite column.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
158 PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS [Comm. C7.
steel core. Ties are required to be anchored into the confined core of the column
to provide effective confinement.
C6.5. Concrete-filled Composite Columns
The basic requirements and limitations for detailing and determining the Design
Strength of filled composite columns are the same as those in LRFD Specification
Chapter I. The limit of A
s
/A
g
≥ 0.04 is the same as that in the LRFDSpecification
and defines the limit of applicability of these Provisions. Although it is not intended
in these Provisions that filled composite columns with smaller steel area ratios be
prohibited, alternative provisions are not currently available.
The shear strength of the filled member is conservatively limited to the nominal
shear yield strength of the steel tube because the actual shear strength contribution
of the concrete fill has not yet been determined in testing. This approach is rec-
ommended until tests are conducted (Furlong, 1997; ECS, 1994). Even with this
conservative approach, shear strength rarely governs the design of typical filled
composite columns with cross-sectional dimensions up to 30 in. (762 mm). Alter-
natively, the shear strength for filled tubes can be determined in a manner that is
similar to that for reinforced concrete columns with the steel tube considered as
shear reinforcement and its shear yielding strength neglected. However, given the
upper limit on shear strength as a function of concrete crushing in ACI 318, this
approach would only be advantageous for columns with low ratios of structural
steel to concrete areas (Furlong, 1997).
The more stringent slenderness criteria for the wall thickness in square or rectan-
gular HSS is based upon comparable requirements from Part I in these Provisions
for unfilled HSS used in SMF. Comparing the provisions in the LRFD Specifica-
tion and Part I in these Provisions, the width/thickness ratio for unfilled HSS in
SMF is about 80 percent of those for OMF. This same ratio of 0.8 was applied
to the standard (non-seismic) b/t ratio for filled HSS in the LRFD Specification.
The reduced slenderness criterion was imposed as a conservative measure until
further research data becomes available on the cyclic response of filled square and
rectangular tubes. More stringent D/t ratio limits for circular pipes are not applied
as data are available to show the standard D/t ratio is sufficient for seismic design
(Boyd, Cofer, and McLean, 1995; Schneider, 1998).
C7. COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS
C7.1. Scope
The use of composite connections often simplifies some of the special challenges
associated with traditional steel and concrete construction. For example, compared
to structural steel, composite connections often avoid or minimize the use of field
welding, and compared to reinforced concrete, there are fewer instances where
anchorage and development of primary beam reinforcement is a problem.
Given the many alternative configurations of composite structures and connec-
tions, there are few standard details for connections in composite construction
(Griffis, 1992b; Goel, 1992a; Goel, 1993). However, tests are available for several
connection details that are suitable for seismic design. References are given in
this Section of the Commentary and Commentary Sections C8 to C17. In most
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C7.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS 159
composite structures built to date, engineers have designed connections using ba-
sic mechanics, equilibrium, existing standards for steel and concrete construction,
test data, and good judgment. The provisions in this Section are intended to help
standardize and improve design practice by establishing basic behavioral assump-
tions for developing design models that satisfy equilibrium of internal forces in
the connection for seismic design.
C7.2. General Requirements
The requirements for deformation capacity apply to both connections designed
for gravity load only and connections that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting
System. The ductility requirement for gravity load only connections is intended to
avoid failure in gravity connections that may have rotational restraint but limited
rotation capacity. For example, shown in Figure C-II-7.1 is a connection between a
reinforced concrete wall and steel beam that is designed to resist gravity loads and
is not considered to be part of the Seismic Load Resisting System. However, this
connection is required to be designed to maintain its vertical shear strength under
rotations and/or moments that are imposed by inelastic seismic deformations of
the structure.
In calculating the Required Strength of connections based on the Nominal Strength
of the connected members, allowance should be made for all components of the
members that may increase the Nominal Strength above that usually calculated in
design. For example, this may occur in beams where the negative moment strength
provided by slab reinforcement is often neglected in design but will increase the
moments applied through the beam-to-column connection. Another example is in
concrete-filled tubular braces where the increased tensile and compressive strength
of the brace due to concrete should be considered in determining the required
connection strength. Because the evaluation of such conditions is case specific,
these provisions do not specify any allowances to account for overstrength. How-
ever, as specified in Part I Section 6.2, calculations for the Required Strength of
Fig. C-II-7.1. Steel beam-to-RC wall gravity load shear connection.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
160 PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS [Comm. C7.
connections should, as a minimum, be made using the Expected Yield Strength of
the connected steel member. Where connections resist forces imposed by yielding
of steel in reinforced concrete members, ACI 318 Section 21.5 implies an Expected
Yield Strength equal to 1.25F
y
for reinforcing bars.
C7.3. Nominal Strength of Connections
In general, forces between structural steel and concrete will be transferred by a
combination of bond, adhesion, friction and direct bearing. Transfers by bond and
adhesion are not permitted for Nominal Strength calculation purposes because:
(1) these mechanisms are not effective in transferring load under inelastic load
reversals; and (2) the effectiveness of the transfer is highly variable depending on
the surface conditions of the steel and shrinkage and consolidation of the concrete.
Transfer by friction shall be calculated using the shear friction provisions in ACI
318 where the friction is provided by the clamping action of steel ties or studs
or from compressive stresses under applied loads. Since the provisions for shear
friction in ACI 318 are based largely on monotonic tests, the values are reduced
by 25 percent where large inelastic stress reversals are expected. This reduction is
considered to be a conservative requirement that does not appear in ACI 318 but
is applied herein due to the relative lack of experience with certain configurations
of composite structures.
In many composite connections, steel components are encased by concrete that
will inhibit or fully prevent local buckling. For seismic deign where inelastic load
reversals are likely, concrete encasement will be effective only if it is properly
confined. One method of confinement is with reinforcing bars that are fully an-
chored into the confined core of the member (using requirements for hoops in ACI
318 Chapter 21). Adequate confinement also may occur without special reinforce-
ment where the concrete cover is very thick. The effectiveness of the latter type of
confinement should be substantiated by tests.
For fully-encased connections between steel (or composite) beams and reinforced
concrete (or composite) columns such as shown in Figure C-II-7.2, the Panel
Zone nominal shear strength can be calculated as the sum of contributions from
Fig. C-II-7.2. Reinforced concrete column-to-steel beam moment connection.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C7.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS 161
Fig. C-II-7.3. Panel shear mechanisms in steel beam-to-reinforced concrete column connections
(Deierlein et al., 1989)
the reinforced concrete and steel shear panels (see Figure C-II-7.3). This super-
position of strengths for calculating the Panel Zone nominal shear strength is
used in detailed design guidelines (Deierlein, Sheikh, and Yura, 1989; ASCE,
1994; Parra-Montesinos and Wight, 2001) for composite connections that are sup-
ported by test data (Sheikh, Deierlein, Yura, and Jirsa, 1989; Kanno and Deierlein,
1997; Nishiyama, Hasegawa, andYamanouchi, 1990; Parra-Montesinos andWight,
2001). Further information on the use and design of such connections is included
in Commentary Part II, Section C9.
Reinforcing bars in and around the joint region serve the dual functions of resist-
ing calculated internal tension forces and providing confinement to the concrete.
Internal tension forces can be calculated using established engineering models that
satisfy equilibrium(e.g., classical beam-column theory, the truss analogy, strut and
tie models). Tie requirements for confinement usually are based on empirical mod-
els based on test data and past performance of structures (ACI, 1991; Kitayama,
Otani, Aoyama, 1987).
(1) In connections such as those in C-PRMF, the force transfer between the
concrete slab and the steel column requires careful detailing. For C-PRMF
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
162 PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS [Comm. C7.
Fig. C-II-7.4. Composite partially restrained connection.
connections (see Figure C-II-7.4), the strength of the concrete bearing against
the column flange should be checked. Only the solid portion of the slab (area
above the ribs) should be counted, and the nominal bearing strength should be
limited to 1.2 f

c
(Ammerman and Leon, 1990). In addition, because the force
transfer implies the formation of a large compressive strut between the slab
bars and the column flange, adequate transverse steel reinforcement should
be provided in the slab to form the tension tie. From equilibrium calculations,
this amount should be the same as that provided as longitudinal reinforcement
and should extend at least 12 in. (305 mm) beyond either side of the effective
slab width.
(2) Due to the limited size of joints and the congestion of reinforcement, it of-
ten is difficult to provide the reinforcing bar development lengths specified
in ACI 318 for transverse column reinforcement in joints. Therefore, it is
important to take into account the special requirements and recommenda-
tions for tie requirements as specified for reinforced concrete connections in
ACI 318, Section 21.5 and in ACI (1991), Kitayama et al. (1987), Sheikh
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C8.] PART II – COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED MOMENT FRAMES 163
and Uzumeri (1980), Park, Priestley, and Gill (1982), and Saatcioglu (1991).
Test data (Sheikh et al., 1989; Kanno and Deierlein, 1997; Nishiyama et al.,
1990) on composite beam-to-column connections similar to the one shown in
Figure C-II-7.2 indicate that the face bearing (stiffener) plates attached to the
steel beam provide effective concrete confinement.
(3) As in reinforced concrete connections, large bond stress transfer of loads
to column bars passing through beam-to-column connections can result in
slippage of the bars under extreme loadings. Current practice for reinforced
concrete connections is to control this slippage by limiting the maximum
longitudinal bar sizes as described in ACI (2002).
C8. COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR)
MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF)
Composite Partially Restrained (PR) frames consist of structural steel columns
and composite steel beams that are interconnected with PRcomposite connections
(Zandonini and Leon, 1992). PR composite connections utilize traditional steel
frame shear and bottomflange connections and the additional strength and stiffness
provided by the floor slab has been incorporated by adding shear studs to the beams
and slab reinforcement in the negative moment regions adjacent to the columns
(see Figure C-II-7.4). This results in a more favorable distribution of strength and
stiffness between negative and positive moment regions of the beams and provides
for redistribution of loads under inelastic action.
In the design of PR composite connections, it is assumed that bending and shear
loads can be considered separately with the bending assigned to the steel in the
slab and a bottom-flange steel angle or plate and the shear assigned to a web
angle or plate. Design methodologies and standardized guidelines for C-PRMF
frames and connections have been published (Ammerman and Leon, 1990; Leon
and Forcier, 1992; Steager and Leon, 1993; Leon, 1990). The performance of the
base connection also depends, of course, on the cyclic performance of the anchors
and the surrounding concrete (Klingner and Graces, 2001).
Subassemblage tests show that when properly detailed, the PR composite con-
nections such as those shown in Figure C-II-7.4 can undergo large deformations
without fracturing. The connections generally are designed with a yield stress that
is less than that of the connected members to prevent local limit states, such as
local buckling of the flange in compression, web crippling of the beam, Panel Zone
yielding in the column, and bolt or weld failures, from controlling. When these
limit states are avoided, large connection ductilities should ensure excellent frame
performance under large inelastic load reversals.
C-PRMF were originally proposed for areas of low to moderate seismicity in
the eastern United States (Seismic Design Categories C and below). However,
with appropriate detailing and analysis, C-PRMF can be used in areas of higher
seismicity (Leon, 1990). Tests and analyses of these systems have demonstrated
that the seismically induced loads on PR Moment Frames can be lower than those
for FRMoment Frames due to: (1) lengthening in the natural period due to yielding
in the connections and (2) stable hysteretic behavior of the connections (Nader
and Astaneh-Asl, 1992; DiCorso, Reinhorn, Dickerson, Radziminski, and Harper,
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
164 PART II – COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) [Comm. C9.
1989). Thus, in some cases, C-PRMF can be designed for lower seismic loads than
OMF. Because the force transfer relies on bearing of the concrete slab against the
column flange-bearing capacity of the concrete should be carefully checked. The
full nominal slab depth should be available for a distance of at least 6 in. (152 mm)
from the column flange.
For frames up to four stories, the design should be made using an analysis that, as
a minimum, accounts for the semi-rigid behavior of the connections by utilizing
linear springs with reduced stiffness (Bjorhovde, 1984). The effective connec-
tion stiffness should be considered for determining member load distributions and
deflections, calculating the building’s period of vibration, and checking frame
stability. Frame stability can be addressed using conventional effective buckling
length procedures. However, the connection flexibility should be considered in
determining the rotational restraint at the ends of the columns. For structures
taller than four stories, drift and stability need to be carefully checked using anal-
ysis techniques that incorporate both geometric and connection non-linearities
(Ammerman and Leon, 1990; Chen and Lui, 1991). PR composite connections
can also be used as part of the gravity load system for Braced Frames provided
that minimum design criteria such as those proposed by Leon and Ammerman
(1990) are followed. In this case no height limitation applies, and the frame should
be designed as a braced system.
Because the moments of inertia for composite beams in the negative and posi-
tive regions are different, the use of either value alone for the beam members in
the analysis can lead to significant errors. Therefore, the use of a weighted aver-
age is recommended (Ammerman and Leon, 1990; Leon and Ammerman, 1990;
Zaremba, 1988).
C9. COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF)
C9.1. Scope
Composite Moment Frames include a variety of configurations where steel or
composite beams are combined with reinforced concrete or composite columns. In
particular, composite frames with steel floor framing and composite or reinforced
concrete columns have been used in recent years as a cost-effective alternative to
frames with reinforced concrete floors (Furlong, 1997; Griffis, 1992b). For seismic
design, composite Moment Frames are classified as Special, Intermediate, or Ordi-
nary depending upon the detailing requirements for the members and connections
of the frame. As shown in Table C-II-4.1, C-SMF are primarily intended for use
in Seismic Design Categories D and above. Design and detailing provisions for
C-SMF are comparable to those required for steel and reinforced concrete SMF
and are intended to confine inelastic deformation to the beams. Since the inelastic
behavior of C-SMF is comparable to that for steel or reinforced concrete SMF, the
R and C
d
values are the same as for those systems.
C9.3. Beams
The use of composite trusses as flexural members in C-SMF is not permitted unless
substantiating evidence is provided to demonstrate adequate seismic resistance of
the system. This limitation applies only to members that are part of the Seismic
Load Resisting System and does not apply to joists and trusses that carry gravity
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C9.] PART II – COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) 165
loads only. Trusses and open web joists generally are regarded as ineffective as
flexural members in lateral load systems unless either (1) the web members have
been carefully detailed through a limit-state design approach to delay, control, or
avoid overall buckling of compression members, local buckling, or failures at the
connections (Itani and Goel, 1991) or (2) a strong-beam/weak-column mechanism
is adopted and the truss and its connections proportioned accordingly (Camacho
and Galambos, 1993). Both approaches can be used for one-story industrial-type
structures where the gravity loads are small and ductility demands on the critical
members can be sustained. Under these conditions and when properly propor-
tioned, these systems have been shown to provide adequate ductility and energy
dissipation capability.
C9.4. Moment Connections
A schematic connection drawing for composite Moment Frames with reinforced
concrete columns is shown in Figure C-II-7.2 where the steel beam runs contin-
uously through the column and is spliced away from the beam-to-column con-
nection. Often, a small steel column that is interrupted by the beam is used for
erection and is later encased in the reinforced concrete column (Griffis, 1992b).
Since the late 1980s, over 60 large-scale tests of this type of connection have
been conducted in the United States and Japan under both monotonic and cyclic
loading (Sheikh et al., 1989; Kanno and Deierlein, 1997; Nishiyama et al., 1990;
Parra-Montesinos and Wight, 2000). The results of these tests show that care-
fully detailed connections can perform as well as seismically designed steel or
reinforced concrete connections. In particular, details such as the one shown in
Figure C-II-7.2 avoid the need for field welding of the beam flange at the criti-
cal beam-to-column junction. Therefore, these joints are generally not susceptible
to the fracture behavior that is now recognized as a critical aspect of welded
steel moment connections. Tests have shown that, of the many possible ways of
strengthening the joint, face bearing plates (see Figure C-II-7.2) and steel band
plates (Figure C-II-9.1) attached to the beamare very effective for both mobilizing
the joint shear strength of reinforced concrete and providing confinement to the
concrete. Further information on design methods and equations for these compos-
ite connections is available in guidelines prepared by ASCE (Nishiyama et al.,
Fig. C-II-9.1. Steel band plates used for strengthening the joint.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
166 PART II – COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) [Comm. C9.
Fig. C-II-9.2. Composite (encased) column-to-steel beam moment connection.
1990) and Parra-Montesinos and Wight (2001). Note that while the scope of the
current ASCE Guidelines (ASCE, 1994) limits their application to regions of low
to moderate seismicity, recent test data indicate that the ASCE Guidelines are ade-
quate for regions of high seismicity as well (Kanno and Deierlein, 1997; Nishiyama
et al., 1990).
Connections between steel beams and encased composite columns (see
Figure C-II-9.2) have been used and tested extensively in Japan where design pro-
visions are included in Architectural Institute of Japan standards (AIJ, 1991). Alter-
natively, the connection strength can be conservatively calculated as the strength of
the connection of the steel beam to the steel column. Or, depending upon the joint
proportions and detail, where appropriate, the strength can be calculated using an
adaptation of design models for connections between steel beams and reinforced
concrete columns (ASCE, 1994). One disadvantage of this connection detail com-
pared to the one shown in Figure C-II-7.2 is that, like standard steel construction,
the detail in Figure C-II-9.2 requires welding of the beam flange to the steel
column.
Connections to filled composite columns (see Figure C-II-9.3) have been used less
frequently and only a few tests of this type have been reported (Azizinamini and
Prakash, 1993). Where the steel beams run continuously through the composite
column, the internal load transfer mechanisms and behavior of these connections
are similar to those for connections to reinforced concrete columns (Figure C-II-
7.2). Otherwise, where the beam is interrupted at the column face, special details
are needed to transfer the column flange loads through the connection.
These Provisions require that connections in C-SMF meet the same inelastic ro-
tation capacity of 0.03 radian as required for steel SMF in Part I. In connection
details where the beam runs continuously through the joint (Figure C-II-7.2) and
the connection is not susceptible to fracture, then the connection design can be
substantiated from available test data that is not subjected to requirements such as
those described in Part I, Appendix S. However, where the connection is interrupted
and fracture is of concern, then connection performance should be substantiated
following requirements similar to those in Part I, Appendix S.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C13.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) 167
Fig. C-II-9.3. Concrete-filled tube column-to-steel beam moment connection.
C10. COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF)
The basic construction and connections for C-IMF are similar to C-SMF except
that many of the seismic detailing requirements have been relaxed. C-IMF are
limited for use in Seismic Design Category C and below, and provisions for C-
IMF are comparable to those required for reinforced concrete IMF and between
those for steel IMF and OMF. The R and C
d
values for C-IMF are equal to those
for reinforced concrete IMF and between those for steel IMF and OMF.
C11. COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF)
C-OMF represent a type of composite Moment Frame that is designed and detailed
following the LRFD Specification and ACI 318, excluding Chapter 21. C-OMF
are limited to Seismic Design Categories A and B, and the design provisions are
comparable to those for reinforced concrete and steel frames that are designed
without any special seismic detailing. The R and C
d
values for C-OMF are chosen
accordingly.
C12. COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF)
Composite Braced Frames consisting of steel, composite and/or reinforced con-
crete elements have been used in low- and high-rise buildings in regions of lowand
moderate seismicity. The C-OBF category is provided for systems without special
seismic detailing that are used in Seismic Design Categories A and B. Because
significant inelastic load redistribution is not relied upon in the design, there is
no distinction between frames where braces frame concentrically or eccentrically
into the beams and columns.
C13. COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF)
C-CBF is one of the two types of composite Braced Frames that is specially
detailed for Sesimic Design Categories C and above; the other is C-EBF (see
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
168 PART II – COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) [Comm. C13.
Fig. C-II-13.1. Reinforced concrete (or composite) column-to-steel concentric brace.
Table C-II-4.1). While experience using C-CBF is limited in high seismic regions,
the design provisions for C-CBF are intended to result in behavior comparable to
steel SCBF, wherein the braces often are the elements most susceptible to inelastic
deformations (see Part I Commentary Section C13). The R and C
d
values and
usage limitations for C-CBF are similar to those for steel SCBF.
In cases where composite braces are used (either concrete-filled or concrete-
encased), the concrete has the potential to stiffen the steel section and prevent
or deter brace buckling while at the same time increasing the capability to dissi-
pate energy. The filling of steel tubes with concrete has been shown to effectively
stiffen the tube walls and inhibit local buckling (Goel and Lee, 1992). For concrete-
encased steel braces, the concrete should be sufficiently reinforced and confined
to prevent the steel shape from buckling. It is recommended that composite braces
be designed to meet all requirements of composite columns as specified in Part II,
Sections 6.4a through 6.4c. Composite braces in tension should be designed based
on the steel section alone unless test data justify higher strengths. Braces that are
all steel should be designed to meet all requirements for steel braces in Part I of
these Provisions. Reinforced concrete and composite columns in C-CBF are de-
tailed with similar requirements to columns in C-SMF. With further research, it
may be possible to relax these detailing requirements in the future.
Examples of connections used in C-CBF are shown in Figures C-II-13.1 through
C-II-13.3. Careful design and detailing of the connections in a C-CBF is required
to prevent failure before developing the strength of the braces in either tension or
compression. All connection strengths should be capable of developing the full
strength of the braces in tension and compression. Where the brace is composite,
the added brace strength afforded by the concrete should be considered. In such
cases, it would be unconservative to base the connection strength on the steel
section alone. Connection design and detailing should recognize that buckling
of the brace could cause excessive rotation at the brace ends and lead to local
connection failure.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART II – ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE 169
C14. COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF)
Structural steel EBF have been extensively tested and utilized in seismic regions
and are recognized as providing excellent resistance and energy absorption for
seismic loads (see Part I Commentary Section C15). While there has been little
use of C-EBF, the inelastic behavior of the critical steel Link should be essen-
tially the same as for steel EBF and inelastic deformations in the composite or
reinforced concrete columns should be minimal. Therefore, the R and C
d
values
and usage limitations for C-EBF are the same as those for steel EBF. As described
below, careful design and detailing of the brace-to-column and Link-to-column
connections is essential to the performance of the system.
The basic requirements for C-EBF are the same as those for steel EBF with ad-
ditional provisions for the design of composite or reinforced concrete columns
and the composite connections. While the inelastic deformations of the columns
should be small, as a conservative measure, detailing for the reinforced concrete
and encased composite columns are based upon those in ACI 318 Chapter 21. In ad-
dition, where Links are adjacent to the column, closely spaced hoop reinforcement
is required similar to that used at hinge regions in reinforced concrete SMF. This
requirement is in recognition of the large moments and load reversals imposed in
the columns near the Links.
Satisfactory behavior of C-EBF is dependent on making the braces and columns
strong enough to remain essentially elastic under loads generated by inelastic
deformations of the Links. Since this requires an accurate calculation of the shear
Link Nominal Strength, it is important that the shear region of the Link not be
encased in concrete. Portions of the beam outside of the Link are permitted to be
encased since overstrength outside the Link would not reduce the effectiveness
of the system. Shear Links are permitted to be composite with the floor or roof
slab since the slab has a minimal effect on the nominal shear strength of the Link.
The additional strength provided by composite action with the slab is important to
consider, however, for long Links whose Nominal Strength is governed by flexural
yielding at the ends of the Links (Ricles and Popov, 1989).
In C-EBF where the Link is not adjacent to the column, the concentric brace-
to-column connections are similar to those shown for C-CBF (Figures C-II-13.1
through C-II-13.3). An example where the Link is adjacent to the column is shown
in Figure C-II-14.1. In this case, the Link-to-column connection is similar to com-
posite beam-to-column moment connections in C-SMF (see Part II, Section 9) and
to steel coupling beam-to-wall connections (see Part II, Section 15).
C15. ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE
WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-ORCW)
The provisions in this Section apply to three variations of Structural Systems using
reinforced concrete walls. One type is where reinforced concrete walls serve as in-
fill panels in what are otherwise steel or composite frames. Examples of typical sec-
tions at the wall-to-column interface for such cases are shown in Figures C-II-15.1
and C-II-15.2. The details in Figure C-II-15.2 also can occur in the second type
of system where encased steel sections are used as vertical reinforcement in what
are otherwise reinforced concrete shear walls. Finally, the third variation is where
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
170 PART II – ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE [Comm. C15.
Fig. C-II-13.2. Reinforced concrete (or composite) column-to-steel concentric brace.
Fig. C-II-13.3. Concrete filled tube or pipe column-to-steel concentric base.
steel or composite beams are used to couple two or more reinforced concrete walls.
Examples of coupling beam-to-wall connections are shown in Figures C-II-15.3
and C-II-15.4. When properly designed, each of these systems should have shear
strength and stiffness comparable to those of pure reinforced concrete shear wall
systems. The structural steel sections in the boundary members will, however,
increase the in-plane flexural strength of the columns and delay flexural hinging
in tall walls. R and C
d
values for reinforced concrete shear walls with composite
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C15.] PART II – ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE 171
Fig. C-II-14.1. Reinforced concrete (or composite) column-to-steel eccentric brace. (Note:
Stiffeners designed according to Part I, Sect. 15.3)
Fig. C-II-15.1. Partially encased steel boundary element.
elements are the same as those for traditional reinforced concrete shear wall sys-
tems. Requirements in this section are for ordinary reinforced concrete shear walls
that are limited to use in Seismic Design Categories Cand below; requirements for
special reinforced concrete shear walls permitted in Seismic Design Categories D
and above are given in Section 16.
For cases where the reinforced concrete walls frame into non-encased steel shapes
(Figure C-II-15.1), mechanical connectors are required to transfer vertical shear
between the wall and column, and to anchor the wall reinforcement. Additionally,
if the wall elements are interrupted by steel beams at floor levels, shear connectors
are needed at the wall-to-beam interface. Tests on concrete infill walls have shown
that if shear connectors are not present, story shear loads are carried primarily
through diagonal compression struts in the wall panel (Chrysostomou, 1991).
This behavior often includes high loads in localized areas of the walls, beams,
columns, and connections. The shear stud requirements will improve performance
by providing a more uniform transfer of loads between the infill panels and the
boundary members (Hajjar, Tong, Schultz, Shield, and Saari, 2002).
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
172 PART II – ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE [Comm. C15.
Fig. C-II-15.2. Fully encased composite boundary element.
Fig. C-II-15.3. Steel coupling beam to reinforced concrete wall.
Two examples of connections between steel coupling beams to concrete walls are
shown in Figures C-II-15.3 and C-II-15.4. The requirements for coupling beams
and their connections are based largely on recent tests of unencased steel coupling
beams (Harries, Mitchell, Cook, and Redwood, 1993; Shahrooz, Remmetter, and
Qin, 1993). These test data and analyses show that properly detailed coupling
beams can be designed to yield at the face of the concrete wall and provide stable
hysteretic behavior under reversed cyclic loads. Under high seismic loads, the
coupling beams are likely to undergo large inelastic deformations through either
flexural and/or shear yielding. However, for the ordinary class of shear wall, there
are no special requirements to limit the slenderness of coupling beams beyond
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C16.] PART II – SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE 173
Fig. C-II-15.4. Steel Coupling beam to reinforced concrete wall with composite boundary member.
those in the LRFD Specification. More stringent provisions are required for the
special class of shear wall (see Part II, Section 16).
C16. SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE
WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-SRCW)
Additional requirements are given in this section for composite features of rein-
forced concrete walls classified as special that are permitted in Seismic Design
Categories D and above. These provisions are applied in addition to those ex-
plained in the commentary to Part II, Section 15. As shown in Table C-II-4.1, the
R-value for special reinforced concrete walls is larger than for ordinary walls.
Concerns have been raised that walls with encased steel boundary members may
have a tendency to split along vertical planes inside the wall near the column.
Therefore, the provisions require that transverse steel be continued into the wall
for the distance 2h as shown in Figures C-II-15.1 and C-II-15.2.
As a conservative measure until further research data are available, strengths for
shear studs to transfer load into the structural steel boundary members are reduced
by 25 percent from their Static Yield Strength. This is done because provisions in
the Specification and most other sources for calculating the Nominal Strength of
shear studs are based on static monotonic tests. The 25 percent reduction in stud
strengths need not apply to cases where the steel member is fully encased since the
provisions conservatively neglect the contribution of bond and friction between
the steel and concrete.
Several of the requirements for Links in steel EBF are applied to coupling beams to
insure more stable yielding behavior under extreme earthquake loading. It should
be noted, however, that the Link requirements for steel EBF are intended for
unencased steel members. For encased coupling beams, it may be possible to
reduce the web stiffener requirements of Part II, Section 16.3, which are the same
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
174 PART II – COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) [Comm. C17.
as those in Part I, Section 15.3, but currently, there are no data available that
provides design guidance on this.
C17. COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW)
Steel plate reinforced composite shear walls can be used most effectively where
story shear loads are large and the required thickness of conventionally reinforced
shear walls is excessive. The provisions limit the shear strength of the wall to the
yield stress of the plate because there is insufficient basis from which to develop
design rules for combining the yield stress of the steel plate and the reinforced
concrete panel. Moreover, since the shear strength of the steel plate usually is
much greater than that of the reinforced concrete encasement, neglecting the con-
tribution of the concrete does not have a significant practical impact. The NEHRP
Provisions assign structures with composite walls a slightly higher R value than
special reinforced concrete walls because the shear yielding mechanism of the
steel plate will result in more stable hysteretic loops than for reinforced concrete
walls (see Table C-II-4.1). The R value for C-SPW is also the same as that for
light frame walls with shear panels.
Two examples of connections between composite walls to either steel or compos-
ite boundary elements are shown in Figures C-II-17.1, C-II-17.2, and C-II-17.3.
The provisions require that the connections between the plate and the boundary
members (columns and beams) be designed to develop the full yield stress of the
plate. Minimum reinforcement in the concrete cover is required to maintain the
integrity of the wall under reversed cyclic loading and out-of-plane loads. Until
further research data are available, the minimum required wall reinforcement is
based upon the specified minimumvalue for reinforced concrete walls in ACI 318.
The thickness of the concrete encasement and the spacing of shear stud connectors
should be calculated to ensure that the plate can reach yield prior to overall or
Fig. C-II-17.1. Concrete stiffened steel shear wall with steel boundary member.
Fig. C-II-17.2. Concrete stiffened steel shear wall with composite (encased) boundary member.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
Comm. C17.] PART II – COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) 175
Fig. C-II-17.3. Concrete filled composite shear wall with two steel plates.
local buckling. It is recommended that overall buckling of the composite panel be
checked using elastic buckling theory using a transformed section stiffness of the
wall. For plates with concrete on only one side, stud spacing requirements that
will meet local plate buckling criteria can be calculated based upon h/t provisions
for the shear design of webs in steel girders. For example, in LRFD Specification
Appendix F2.2, the limiting h/t value specified for compact webs subjected to shear
is h/t
w
= 1.10

k
v
E
s
/F
yw
. Assuming a conservative value of the plate buckling
coefficient k
v
= 5 and F
y
= 50 ksi (345 MPa), this equation gives the limiting
value of h/t ≤ 59. For a
3
/
8
-in. (10 mm) thick plate, this gives a maximum value
of h = 22 in. (560 mm) that is representative of the maximumcenter-to-center stud
spacing that should suffice for the plate to reach its full shear yielding strength.
Careful consideration should be given to the shear and flexural strength of wall
piers and of spandrels adjacent to openings. In particular, composite walls with
large door openings may require structural steel boundary members attached to
the steel plate around the openings.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GMV
PB262A-05 PB262/Seismic.cls December 18, 2002 16:7 Char Count=
176
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GEL
PB262A-06 PB262/Seismic.cls December 17, 2002 16:57 Char Count=
177
PART III. ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN (ASD)
ALTERNATIVE
C1. SCOPE
Part III has been included in these Seismic Provisions for designers that choose
to use ASD in the seismic design of steel structures. A limited Supplement to
the ASD Specification (AISC, 1989) has been issued (AISC, 2001). As noted
in Part I, the seismic requirements are collateral provisions related to the LRFD
Specification. Part I is based upon the limit-state seismic load model used in the
NEHRP Provisions (FEMA, 2000g). Since the seismic requirements in Part I
are based upon the expected nonlinear performance of a structure, the use of
ASD in its traditional form is somewhat complicated because a knowledge of
Design Strengths, not allowable stresses, is required to assure that connectors have
sufficient strength to allow nonlinear behavior of the connected member(s).
The provisions in Part III allow for the selection of members in an ASD format
to provide the performance intended in Part I. Part III is intended as an overlay to
Part I and, when using ASD, the designer will use Part I for the seismic design of
a structure except where a section is replaced by or modified by a section shown
in Part III.
Provisions have not been included for the use of ASDwith the composite structural
steel and reinforced concrete systems, members, and connections in Part II because
ACI 318 is in limit-states format.
C4.2. Nominal Strength
The procedures in this section provide a methodology for the conversion of al-
lowable stresses into Nominal Strengths, in most cases by removing the factor of
safety from the ASD equations. These Nominal Strengths are converted to Design
Strengths when multiplied by the Resistance Factors given in Part III, Section 4.3.
In general, the Resistance Factors given are consistent with those in the LRFD
Specification.
The remainder of the provisions in Part III translate the provisions of Part I into
ASD terminology to correlate with the appropriate sections of ASD.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GEL
PB262A-06 PB262/Seismic.cls December 17, 2002 16:57 Char Count=
178
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
179
REFERENCES
Adany, S., Calado, L., and Dunai, L. (2000), “Experimental Studies on Cyclic Behavior
Modes of Base Plate Connections,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference
STESSA 2000 Montreal, Canada.
Allan, R.N. and Fisher, J.W. (1968), “Bolted Joints with Oversized or Slotted Holes,”
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 94, No. 6, pp. 2061–2080.
American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2002), “Recommendations for Design of Beam-
Column Joints in Monolithic Reinforced Concrete Structures,” Manual of Concrete
Practice, Part 3, 2002 Edition, ACI 352R-02, ACI, Farmington Hills, MI.
American Concrete Institute (ACI) (2002), ACI 318-02 Building Code Requirements for
Structural Concrete, ACI, Farmington Hills, MI.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (1989), Specification for Structural
Steel Buildings, Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design, AISC, Chicago, IL, June
1, 1989.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (1992), Seismic Provisions for
Structural Steel Buildings, AISC, Chicago, IL, June 15.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (1997a) “K-area Advisory State-
ment,” Modern Steel Construction, February, AISC, Chicago, IL.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (1997b), Seismic Provisions for
Structural Steel Buildings, AISC, Chicago, IL, April 15.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (1999), Load and Resistance Factor
Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, AISC, Chicago, IL, December
27.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (2000), Supplement No. 2 to Seismic
Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, AISC, Chicago, IL, November 10.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (2001), Load and Resistance Factor
Design Manual of Steel Construction, 3
rd
Ed., AISC, Chicago, IL.
American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) (2001), Supplement No. 1 to the
Specificationfor Structural Steel Buildings, Allowable Stress DesignandPlastic Design,
AISC, Chicago, IL, December 17.
American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) (1996), Specification for the Design of Cold-
Formed Steel Structural Members, AISI, Washington DC.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (1991a), Standard for the Structural Design
of Composite Slabs ANSI/ASCE 3-91, ASCE, Reston, VA.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (1991b), Standard Practice for Construction
and Inspection of Composite Slabs ANSI/ASCE 9-91, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
180 REFERENCES
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), (1994), “Guidelines for Design of Joints
between Steel Beams and Reinforced Concrete Columns”, Journal of Structural Engi-
neering, Vol. 120, No. 8, (August), pp. 2330–2357, ASCE, Reston, VA.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (1998), Minimum Design Loads for Build-
ings and Other Structures ANSI/ASCE 7-98, ASCE, Reston, VA.
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) (2002), Minimum Design Loads for Build-
ings and Other Structures ANSI/ASCE 7-2002, ASCE, Reston, VA.
American Welding Society (AWS) (2000), Structural Welding Code Steel, ANSI/AWS
D1.1:2002, AWS, Miami, FL.
Ammerman, D.J. andLeon, R.T. (1990), “UnbracedFrames withSemi-RigidConnections,
Engineering Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, (1
st
Qtr.), pp. 12–21, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Applied Technology Council (ATC) (1992), Guidelines for Cyclic Seismic Testing of
Components of Steel Structures ATC-24, ATC, Redwood City, CA.
Arce, G. (2002), “Impact of Higher Strength Steels on Local Buckling and Overstrength
in EBFs,” Master’s Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Texas at
Austin, Austin, TX.
Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ) (1991), AIJ Standards for Structural Calculation of
Steel ReinforcedConcrete Structures (Englishtranslationof 1987edition), Architectural
Institute of Japan, Tokyo, Japan.
Aslani, F. and Goel, S.C. (1991), “Stitch Spacing and Local Buckling in Seismic Resis-
tant Double Angle Bracing Members,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 177,
No. 8, (August), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Astaneh-Asl, A. (1998), “Seismic Behavior and Design of Gusset Plates for Braced
Frames,” Steel Tips, Structural Steel Education Council, Moraga, CA.
Astaneh-Asl, A. (2000), “Cyclic Behavior andSeismic Designof Steel H-Piles”, submitted
for publication in Engineering Journal, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Astaneh-Asl, A., Goel, S.C., and Hanson, R.D. (1986), “Earthquake-resistant Design of
Double Angle Bracing,” Engineering Journal, Vol. 23, No. 4, (4
th
Qtr.), AISC, Chicago,
IL.
Astaneh-Asl, A., Bergsma, G., and Shen, J.H. (1992), “Behavior and Design of Base
Plates for Gravity, Wind and Seismic Loads,” Proceedings of the National Steel Cons-
truction Conference, AISC, Las Vegas, Nevada.
Astaneh-Asl, A., Bolt, B., McMullin, K., Donikian, R.R., Modjtahedi, D. and Cho, S-W
(1994), “Seismic Performance of Steel Bridges During the 1994 Northridge Earthquake,
Report No. UCB/CEE-Steel-94/01, Dept. of Civil and Env. Engrg., Univ. of California,
Berkeley.
Astaneh-Asl, A., and Ravat, S. (1997), “Cyclic Tests of Steel H-Piles,” Report
No. UCB/CEE-Steel-97/01, Dept. of Civil and Env. Engrg., Univ. of California,
Berkeley.
Azizinamini, A. and Prakash, B.A. (1993), “An Innovative Connection Detail for High
Rise Buildings”, Proceedings of the 1993 ASCE Structures Congress, pp. 1220–1225,
ASCE, Reston, VA.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
REFERENCES 181
Azizinamini, A. and Ghosh, S.K. (1996), “Steel Reinforced Concrete Structures in 1995
Hyogoken-Nanbu Earthquake,” Journal of Structural Engineering. Vol. 123, No. 8,
(August), pp. 986–990, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Bansal, J.P. (1971), “The Lateral Instability of Continuous Steel Beams”, CESRL Disser-
tation No. 71-1, University of Texas, Austin, TX.
Barsom, J.M. and Rolfe, S.T. (1999), Fracture and Fatigue Control in Structures: Applica-
tions of Fracture Mechanics, Third Ed., ASTM MNL41, American Society for Testing
and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA.
Bartlett, F.M., Jelinek, J.J., Schmidt, B.J., Dexter, R.J., Graeser, M.D., and Galambos,
T.V (2001), Updating Standard Shape Material Properties Database for Design and
Reliability, University of Western Ontario and University of Minnesota.
Basha, H.S., and Goel, S.C. (1994), Seismic Resistant Truss Moment Frames with Ductile
Vierendeel Segment Research Report No. UMCEE 94-29, The University of Michigan
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Becker, E.R. (1971), Panel Zone Effect on the Strength of Rigid Steel Frames USCOE
001, University of Southern California Structural Mechanics Laboratory, Los Angeles,
CA.
Bertero, V.V., Popov, E.P., and Krawinkler, H. (1973), Further Studies on Seismic Behavior
of Steel Beam-Column Subassemblages Report No. UCB/EERC-73/27, Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Bjorhovde, R. (1984), “Effects of End Restraint on Column Strength - Practical Appli-
cations”, Engineering Journal, Vol. 21, No. 1, (1
st
Qtr.), pp. 1–13, AISC, Chicago,
IL.
Bjorhovde, R., Colson, A., and Brozzetti, J. (1990), “Classification System for Beam-
to-column Connections,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 116, No. 11,
pp. 3059–3076.
Black, R.C., Wenger, W.A., and Popov, E.P. (1980), Inelastic Buckling of Steel Struts
Under Cyclic Load Reversals Report No. UCB/EERC-80-40, Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Blodgett, O.W. (2001), “Notes on Beam to Column Connections,” Steel Moment Frame
Connection Advisory No. 3 SAC 95-01,SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
Bondy, K.P. (1996), “A More Rational Approach to Capacity Design of Seismic Moment
Frame Columns,” Earthquake Spectra, Volume 12, No. 3, (August, 1996), EERI,
Oakland, CA.
Boyd, P.F., Cofer, W.F., and McLean, D.I. (1995), “Seismic Performance of Steel-Encased
Concrete Columns under Flexural Loading”, ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 92, No. 3,
pp. 355–364, (May-June), ACI, Farmington Hills, MI.
Bruneau, M., Mahin, S.A., and Popov, E.P. (1987), Ultimate Behavior of Butt Welded
Splices in Heavy Rolled Steel Sections Report No. UCB/EERC-87/10, Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Burda, J.J., and Itani, A.M. (1999), “Studies of Seismic Behavior of Steel Base Plates,”
Report No. CCEER 99-7, Center for Civil Engineering Earthquake Research, Dept. of
Civil Engineering, Univ. of Nevada, Reno, Nevada.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
182 REFERENCES
Camacho, D. and Galambos, T.V. (1993), Development of a Moment-Resisting One-Story
Frame System for Seismic Resistance, Steel Joist Institute, Myrtle Beach, SC.
Carpenter, L.D. and Lu, L.W. (1972), Reversed and Repeated Load Tests of Full Scale
Steel Frames Fritz Engineering Laboratory Report No. 332.7, Lehigh University,
Bethlehem, PA.
Cattan, J. (1995), Statistical Analysis of Charpy V-Notch Toughness for Steel Wide-Flange
Structural Shapes, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Chen, W.F. and Lui, E.M. (1991), Stability Design of Steel Frames, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL.
Cheng, J.J., Kulak, G.L., and Khoo, H-A (1998), “Strength of Slotted Tubular Tension
Members,” Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 25, pp 982–991.
Chi, B. and Uang, C.M. (2002), “Cyclic Response and Design Recommendations of
Reduced Beam Section Moment Connections with Deep Columns,” Journal of Struc-
tural Engineering, American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 128, No. 4, pp. 464–
473.
Chrysostomou, C.Z. (1991), “Effects of Degrading Infill Walls on the Nonlinear Seis-
mic Response of Two-Dimensional Steel Frames”, (Dissertation), Cornell University
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ithaca, NY.
County of Los Angeles Department of Public Works (1996), County of Los Angeles Cur-
rent Position on Design and Construction of Welded Moment Resisting Frame Systems
(WMRF).
Deierlein, G.G., Sheikh, T.M., and Yura, J.A. (1989), “Part 2: Beam Column Moment
Connections for Composite Frames”, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 115,
No. 11, (November), pp. 2877–2896, ASCE, Reston, VA.
DeWolf, J.T. and Sarisley, E.F. (1980), Column Base Plates with Axial Loads and Mo-
ments,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 106, No. ST11, pp. 2167–2184.
DeWolf, J.T. and Ricker, D.T. (1990), Column Base Plates, Steel Design Guide Series
No. 1, AISC, Chicago, Illinois.
DiCorso, P.J., Reinhorn, A.M. , Dickerson, J.R. , Radziminski, J.B. , and Harper, W.L.
(1989), Response of Frames with Bolted Semi-Rigid Connections, Part I - Experimental
Study on Analytical Predictions Technical Report NCEER-89-0015, National Center
for Earthquake Engineering Research, Buffalo, NY.
Drake, R. and Elkin, S.J. (1999), “Beam-Column Base Plate Design – LRFD Method,”
Engineering Journal, AISC Vol. 36, No. 1 (First Quarter), pp. 29–38.
Driscoll, G.C. and Beedle, L.S. (1982), “Suggestions for Avoiding Beam-to-Column Web
Connection Failure,” Engineering Journal, Vol. 19, No. 1, (1
st
Qtr.), AISC, Chicago,
IL.
Dusicka, P. and Itani, A.M. (2002), “Behavior of Built-Up Shear Links Under Large
Cyclic Deformations.” Proceedings of the 2002 Annual Meeting of the Struc-
tural Stability Research Council, Structural Stability Research Council,Gainesville,
FL.
Easterling, W.S. and Porter M.L. (1994), “Steel Deck - Reinforced Concrete Diaphragms
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
REFERENCES 183
I & II”, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 120, No. 2, (February), pp. 560–596,
ASCE, Reston, VA.
Ellingwood, B.R. and Corotis, R.B. (1991), “Load combinations for Buildings Exposed
to Fires,” Engineering Journal, Vol. 28, No. 1, (1
st
Qtr.), pp. 37–44, AISC, Chicago, IL.
El-Tayem, A. and Goel, S.C. (1986), “Effective Length Factor for the Design of X-Bracing
Systems,” Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 23, No. 1, pp. 41–45.
Engelhardt, M.D. and Popov, E.P. (1989a), Behavior of Long Links in Eccentrically
Braced Frames, Report No. UCB/EERC-89/01, Earthquake Engineering Research
Center, Berkeley, CA.
Engelhardt, M.D. and Popov, E.P. (1989b), “On Design of Eccentrically Braced Frames”,
Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 5, No.3, August, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute,
Oakland, CA.
Englekirk, R.E. (1999), “Extant Panel Zone Design Procedures for Steel Frames are
Questioned,” Earthquake Spectra, Volume 15, No. 2, (May 1999), pp. 361–370, EERI,
Oakland, CA.
Ermopoulos, J. and Michaltsos, G.T. (1996), “Analytical Modeling of Column Base Plates
under Cyclic Loading,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 40, No. 3,
pp. 225–238.
European Committee for Standardization (1994), Eurocode 4, Design of Composite Steel
andConcrete Structures, Par 1-1: General Rules andRules for Buildings, ECS, Brussels,
Belgium.
Fahmy, M., Stojadinovic, B., and Goel, S.C. (2000), “Seismic Behavior of Moment Re-
sisting Steel Column Bases,” Research Report No. UMCEE 00-02, Dept. of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1994), NEHRP (National Earthquake
Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for
New Buildings, FEMA, Washington, DC.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1995), Interim Guidelines: Evalu-
ation, Repair, Modification and Design of Steel Moment Frames, FEMA 267 (SAC
95-02), FEMA, Washington, DC.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1997a), NEHRP Recommended Pro-
visions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, FEMA 302,
Part 1- Provisions, FEMA, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (1997b), Interim Guidelines Advisory
No. 1 - Supplement to FEMA 267, FEMA 267A (SAC 96-03), FEMA, Washington,
DC.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000a), Recommended Seismic
Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings, FEMA 350, FEMA,
Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000b), Recommended Specifications
and Quality Assurance Guidelines for Steel Moment-Frame Construction for Seismic
Applications, FEMA 353, FEMA, Washington, D.C.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
184 REFERENCES
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000c), State of the Art Report on
Base Metals and Fracture, FEMA 355A, prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000d), State of the Art Report on
Systems Performance of Steel Moment Frames Subject to Earthquake Ground Shaking,
FEMA 355C, prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Manage-
ment Agency, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000e), State of the Art Report on
Connection Performance, FEMA 355D, prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000f), State of the Art Report on
Performance Prediction and Evaluation of Steel Moment-Frame Buildings, FEMA
355F, prepared by the SAC Joint Venture for the Federal Emergency Management
Agency, Washington, D.C.
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2000g), NEHRP (National Earth-
quake Hazards Reduction Program) Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations
for New Buildings, FEMA, Washington, D.C.
Fielding, D.J. and Huang, J.S. (1971), “Shear in Steel Beam-to-Column Connections”,
Welding Journal, Vol. 50, No. 7, AWS, Miami, FL.
Fisher, J.M. and West, M.A. (1990), Serviceability Design Considerations for Low-Rise
Buildings, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Foutch, D.A. (1989), “Seismic Behavior of Eccentrically Braced Steel Building,” Journal
of Structural Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 8, (August), pp. 1857–1876, ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Furlong, R.W. (1997), “Composite Columns”, Composite Construction Design for Build-
ings, (Chapter 4), ASCE/McGraw Hill, New York, NY.
Galambos, T.V. and Ravindra, M.K. (1978), “Properties of Steel for Use in LRFD,” Journal
of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 104, No. ST9, (September), ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Gilton, C.S. and Uang, C.M. (2002), “Cyclic Response and Design Recommendations
of Weak-Axis Reduced Beam Section Moment Connections,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 128, No. 4, April, Reston, VA.
Goel, S.C. (1992a), Recommendations for US/Japan Cooperative Research Program
- Phase 5: Composite and Hybrid Structures Report UMCEE 92-29, The Univer-
sity of Michigan Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ann Arbor,
MI.
Goel, S.C. (1992b), “Cyclic Post Buckling Behavior of Steel Bracing Members”, Stability
and Ductility of Steel Structures Under Cyclic Loading, pp.75–104, CRC Press, Boca
Raton, FL.
Goel, S.C. (1992c), “Earthquake Resistant Design of Ductile Braced Steel Structures”,
Stability and Ductility of Steel Structures under Cyclic Loading, pp. 297–308, CRC
Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
REFERENCES 185
Goel, S.C. (1993), Proceedings of a US/Japan Cooperative Research Program Workshop
on Composite and Hybrid Structures Report UMCEE 93, The University of Michigan
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Goel, S.C. and Lee, S. (1992), “A Fracture Criterion for Concrete-Filled Tubular Bracing
Members Under Cyclic Loading”, Proceedings of the 1992 ASCE Structures Congress,
pp. 922–925, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Goel, S.C. and Itani, A. (1994a), “Seismic Behavior of Open Web Truss Moment Frames”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 120, No. 6, (June), pp.1763–1780, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
Goel, S.C. and Itani, A. (1994b), “Seismic Resistant Special Truss Moment Frames”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 120 No. 6, (June), pp. 1781–1797, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
Griffis, L.G. (1992a), Load and Resistance Factor Design of W-shapes Encased in Con-
crete, Design Guide Series 6, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Griffis, L.G. (1992b), “Composite Frame Construction”, Constructional Steel Design: An
International Guide, pp. 523–553, Elsevier Science Publishers, London, England.
Gupta, A. and Krawinkler, H. (1999), Prediction of Seismic Demands for SMRF’s with
Ductile Connections and Elements, SAC/BD-99/06, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento,
CA.
Hajjar, J.F., Tong, X., Schultz, A.E., Shield, C.K., and Saari, W.K. (2002), “Cyclic Be-
havior of Steel Frames with composite Reinforced Concrete Infill Walls,” Composite
Construction in Steel and Concrete IV, Hajjar, J. F., Hosain, M., Easterling, W. S., and
Shahrooz, B. M. (eds.), United Engineering Foundation, American Society of Civil
Engineers, Reston, VA.
Harries, K., Mitchell, D., Cook, W.D., and Redwood, R.G. (1993), “Seismic Response of
Steel Beams Coupling Concrete Walls”, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 119,
No. 12, (December), pp. 3611–3629, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Hassan, O. and Goel, S.C. (1991), Seismic Behavior and Design of Concentrically Braced
Steel Structures Report UMCE 91-1, The University of Michigan Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Hjelmstad, K.D. and Popov, E.P. (1983), “Cyclic Behavior and Design of Link Beams”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 109, No. 10, (October), ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Huckelbridge, A.A. and Clough, R.W. (1977), Earthquake Simulator Tests of Nine-Story
Steel Frame with Columns Allowed to Uplift Report No. UCB/EERC-77/23, Earthquake
Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
International Code Council (ICC) (2000), International Building Code, ICC, Birmingham,
AL.
International Code Council (2002), Supplement to the International Building Code, ICC,
Birmingham, AL.
International Conference of Building Officials (ICBO) (1997), Uniform Building Code,
ICBO, Whittier, CA.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
186 REFERENCES
International Conference of Building Officials Evaluation Service (1997), Acceptance
Criteria for Qualification of Steel Moment Frame Connection Systems AC 129, ICBO,
Whittier, CA.
Itani, A. and Goel, S.C. (1991), Earthquake Resistant Design of Open Web Framing
Systems Research Report No. UMCE 91-21, The University of Michigan Department
of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Jain, A., Goel, S.C., and Hanson, R.D. (1978), Hysteresis Behavior of Bracing Members
and Seismic Response of Braced Frames with Different Proportions Research Report
No. UMEE78R3, The University of Michigan Department of Civil Engineering, Ann
Arbor, MI.
Jaspart, J.P. and Vadegans, D. (1998), “Application of Component Method to Column
Bases,” Journal of Constructional Steel Research, Vol. 48, pp. 89–106.
Kanno, R. and Deierlein, G.G. (1997), “Seismic Behavior of Composite (RCS) Beam-
Column Joint Subassemblies,” Composite Construction III, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Kasai, K. and Popov, E.P. (1984), “On Seismic Design of Eccentrically Braced Steel
Frames”, Proceedings of the 8th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. 5,
pp. 387–394, EERI, San Francisco, CA.
Kasai, K. and Popov, E.P. (1986a), “General Behavior of WF Steel Shear Link Beams”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 112, No. 2, (February), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Kasai, K. and Popov, E.P. (1986b), “Cyclic Web Buckling Control for Shear Link Beams”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 112, No. 3, (March), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Kasai, K. and Popov, E.P. (1986c), A Study of Seismically Resistant Eccentrically Braced
Frames Report No. UCB/EERC-86/01, Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
Berkeley, CA.
Kaufmann, E.J., Xue, M., Lu, L.W., and Fisher, J.W. (1996), “Achieving Ductile Behav-
ior of Moment Connections”, Modern Steel Construction, Vol. 36, No.1, (January),
pp. 30–39, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Kaufmann, E.J. and Fisher, J.W. (2001), Effect of Straightening Method on the Cyclic
Behavior of K-area In Steel Rolled Shapes, ATLSS Center, Lehigh University,
December.
Kaufmann, E.J., Metrovich, B.R., and Pense, A.W. (2001), Characterization of Cyclic
Inelastic Strain Behavior On Properties of A572 Gr. 50 and A913 Gr 50 Rolled
Sections, ATLSS Center, Lehigh University, August.
Kemp, A.R. (1986), “Factors Affecting the Rotation Capacity of Plastically Designed
Members”, The Structural Engineer, Vol. 64B, No. 2, (June), The Institution of Struc-
tural Engineers, London, England.
Khatib, I., Mahin, S.A., and Pister, K.S. (1988), Seismic Behavior of Concentrically
Braced Steel Frames Report No. UCB/EERC 88-01, Earthquake Engineering research
Center, Berkeley, CA.
Kitayama, K., Otani, S., and Aoyama, H. (1987), “Earthquake Resistant Design Criteria
for Reinforced Concrete Interior Beam-Column Joints”, Proceedings of the Pacific
Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Wairakei, New Zealand.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
REFERENCES 187
Klingner, R.E. and Graces, H.L. (2001), “Seismic Response of Multiple-Anchor Con-
nections to Concrete,” ACI Structural Journal, Vol. 98, No. 6, Nov. – Dec.
Korol, R.M. (1996) “Shear Lag in Slotted HSS Tension Members,” Canadian Journal of
Civil Engineering, Vol. 23, pp. 1350–1354.
Krawinkler, H. and Gupta, A. (1998), “Story Drift Demands for Steel Moment Frame
Structures in Different Seismic Regions,” Proceedings of the 6
t h
U.S. National Confer-
ence on Earthquake Engineering, Seattle, WA.
Krawinkler, H. (1978), “Shear in Beam-Column Joints in Seismic Design of Steel
Frames”, Engineering Journal, Vol. 15, No. 3, (3
rd
Qtr.), AISC, Chicago, IL.
Krawinkler, H., Bertero, V.V. and Popov, E.P. (1971), Inelastic Behavior of Steel Beam-
to-Column Subassemblages, Report No. UCB/EERC-71/7, Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Krawinkler, H., Bertero, V.V., and Popov, E.P. (1975), Hysteresis Behavior of Steel
Columns, Report No. UCB/EERC-75/11, Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
Berkeley, CA.
Krawinkler, H. (2001), private communication with Mark Saunders, November 2001.
Lay, M.G. (1965), “Flange Local Buckling in Wide-Flange Shapes,” Journal of the Struc-
tural Division, Vol. 91, No. 6, (December), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Lee, S. and Goel, S.C. (1987), Seismic Behavior of Hollow and Concrete-Filled Square
Tubular Bracing Members, Report No. UMCE 87-11, University of Michigan Depart-
ment of Civil Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Lee, D. and Goel, S.C. (2001), Seismic Behavior of Column Base Plate Connections
Bending about Weak Axis, Research Report No. UMCEE 01-09, Dept. of Civil and
Environmental Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Lee, D., Cotton, S.C., Dexter, R.J., Hajjar, J.F., Ye, Y., and Ojard, S.D. (2002), Column
Stiffener Detailing and Panel Zone Behavior of Steel Moment Frame Connections,
University of Minnesota, June (Draft final).
Leon, R.T. (1990), “Semi-Rigid Composite Construction”, Journal of Constructional
Steel Research, Vol. 15, No. 2, pp. 99–120, Elsevier Science Publishers, London,
England.
Leon, R.T. (1994), “Composite Semi-Rigid Construction,” Engineering Journal, AISC,
Vol. 31, No. 2, pp. 57–67.
Leon, R.T. and Ammerman, D.J. (1990), “Semi-Rigid Connection for Gravity Loads”,
Engineering Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, (1
st
Qtr.), pp. 1–11, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Leon, R.T. and Forcier, G.P. (1992), “Parametric Study of Composite Frames”, Con-
nections in Steel Structures II, Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on
Connections in Steel Structures, pp. 152–159, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Leon, R.T., Hoffmann, J., andStaeger, T. (1996), Designof Partially-RestrainedComposite
Connections, Steel Design Guide Series No. 9, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Leon, R.T., Hajjar, J.F., and Shield, C.K. (1997), “The Effect of Composite Floor Slabs
on the Behavior of Steel Moment-Resisting Frames in the Northridge Earthquake,”
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
188 REFERENCES
Composite Construction in Steel and Concrete III, pp. 735–751, ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Libby, J.R. (1981), “Eccentrically Braced Frame Construction - A Case History,” Engi-
neering Journal, Vol. 18, No. 4, (4
th
Qtr.), AISC, Chicago, IL.
Liu, Z. and Goel, S.C. (1987), Investigation of Concrete Filled Steel Tubes under Cyclic
Bending and Buckling UMCE Report 87-3, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI.
Malley, J.O. and Popov, E.P. (1984), “Shear Links in Eccentrically Braced Frames”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 110, No. 9, (September), ASCE, Reston,
VA.
McDaniel, C.C., Uang, C.M., and Seible, F. (2002), “Cyclic Testing of Built-Up Steel
Shear Links for the New Bay Bridge.” Journal of Structural Engineering, American
Society of Civil Engineers (in press).
Meng, R.L. and Murray, T.M. (1997), “Seismic Performance of Bolted End-Plate Mo-
ment Connections,” Proceedings of the National Steel Construction Conference, AISC,
Chicago, IL.
Merovich, A.T., Nicoletti, J.P., and Hartle, E. (1982), “Eccentric Bracing in Tall Build-
ings”, Journal of the Structural Division, Vol. 108, No. 9, (September), ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Midorikawa, M., Hasegawa, T., Mukai, A., Nishiyama, I., Fukuta, T., and Yamanouchi, H.
(1997), “Damage Investigation of Steel Buildings in Specific Areas Observed from the
1995 Hyogoken-Nambu Earthquake,” Proceedings of U.S.-Japan Workshop on Steel
Fracture Issues, San Francisco, California.
Nader, M.N. and Astaneh-Asl, A. (1992), “Seismic Design Concepts for Semi-Rigid
Frames”, Proceedings of the 1992 ASCE Structures Congress, pp. 971–975, ASCE,
New York, NY.
Nader, M.N. and Astaneh-Asl, A. (1996), “Shaking Table Tests of Rigid, Semi-rigid and
Flexible Steel Frames,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 122, No. 6, (June),
pp. 589–596, ASCE, Reston, VA.
National Institute of Standards and Technology/American Institute of Steel Construction
(1998), Interim Design Guideline for the Seismic Modification of Welded Steel Moment
Frame Connections, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Nicoletti, J.P., Pinkham, C.W., Saunders, C.M., and Teal, E.J. (1984), A Synthesis of Steel
Research for Code Development, Structural Steel Education Council, San Francisco,
CA.
Nishiyama, I., Hasegawa, T., and Yamanouchi, H. (1990), “Strength and Deformation Ca-
pacity of Reinforced Concrete Column to Steel Beam Joint Panels”, Building Research
Institute Report 71, Ministry of Construction, Tsukuba, Japan.
Northridge Reconnaissance Team (1996), “Northridge Earthquake of January 17, 1994,”
Reconnaissance Report (Supplement C-2 to Volume 11), EERI, Oakland, California,
pp. 25–47.
Parra-Montesinos, G. and Wight, J.K. (2000), “Seismic Response of Exterior RCColumn-
to-Steel Beam Connections,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 126,
No. 10, pp. 1113–1121.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
REFERENCES 189
Parra-Montesinos, G. and Wight, J.K. (2001), “Modeling Shear Behavior of Hybrid
RCS Beam-Column Connections,” Jounal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127,
No. 1, pp. 3–11.
Park, R., Priestley, M.J.N., and Gill, W.D. (1982), “Ductility of Square Confined Concrete
Columns”, Journal of the Structural Division, Vol. 108, No. ST4, (April), pp. 929–950,
ASCE, Reston, VA.
Picard, A. and Beaulieu, D. (1985), “Behavior of a Simple Column Base Connection,”
Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering, Vol. 12, pp. 126–136.
Popov, E.P. (1980), “Seismic Behavior of Structural Assemblages,”Journal of the Struc-
tural Division, Vol. 106, No. ST7, (July), pp. 1451–1474, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Popov, E.P. and Pinkney, R.B. (1968), Behavior of Steel Building Connections Subjected
to Inelastic Strain Reversals - Experimental Data Bulletin No. 4, American Iron and
Steel Institute, Washington, DC.
Popov, E.P. and Stephen, R.M. (1972), Cyclic Loading of Full-Size Steel Connections
Bulletin No. 21, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, DC.
Popov, E.P. and Stephen, R.M. (1977), “Tensile Capacity of Partial Penetration Welds”,
Journal of the Structural Division, Vol. 103, No. ST9, (September), ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Popov, E.P., Amin, N.R., Louie, J.J., and Stephen, R.M. (1985), “Cyclic Behavior of Large
BeamColumn Assemblies”, Earthquake Spectra, Vol. 1, No. 2, (February), Earthquake
Engineering Research Institute, Oakland, CA.
Popov, E.P. and Tsai, K.C. (1987), “Performance of Large Seismic Steel Moment Con-
nections Under Cyclic Loads”, Proceedings of the Structural Engineers Association of
California Convention, SEAOC, Sacramento, CA.
Popov, E.P., Engelhardt, M.D., and Ricles, J.M. (1989), “Eccentrically Brace Frames:
U. S. Practice,” Engineering Journal, Vol. 26, No. 2, (2
nd
Qtr.), pp. 66–80, AISC,
Chicago, IL.
Popov, E.P., Blondet, M., Stepanov, L., and Stojadinovic, B. (1996), “Full-Scale Beam-to-
Column Connection Tests, University of California Department of Civil Engineering,
Berkeley, CA.
Research Council on Structural Connections (RCSC) (1994), Load and Resistance Factor
Design Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts, AISC,
Chicago, IL.
Ricles, J.M. and Popov, E.P. (1987a), Dynamic Analysis of Seismically Resistant Ec-
centrically Braced Frames Report No. UCB/EERC-87/107, Earthquake Engineering
Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Ricles, J.M. and Popov, E.P. (1987b), Experiments on EBFs with Composite Floors
Report No. UCB/EERC-87/06, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley,
CA.
Ricles, J.M. and Popov, E.P. (1989), “Composite Action in Eccentricity Braced Frames”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 8, (August), pp. 2046–2066, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
190 REFERENCES
Roeder, C.W. (1987), Inelastic Dynamic Analysis of Two Eight-Story moment Frames,
Structural Engineers Association of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Roeder, C.W. and Popov, E.P. (1978), “Eccentrically Braced Frames for Earthquakes”,
Journal of the Structural Division, Vol. 104, No. 3, (March), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Roeder, C.W. and Foutch, D.F. (1996), “Experimental Results for Seismic Resistant
Steel Moment Frame Connections,” Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 122,
No. 6, (June), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Saatcioglu, M. (1991), ACI 127.5 Deformability of Steel Columns, American Concrete
Institute, Detroit, MI.
SAC (1995a), Steel Moment Frame Advisory No. 3 SAC95-01, SAC Joint Venture,
Sacramento, CA.
SAC (1995b), Design Applications, Manual & Seminar Speakers Notes SAC95-03, SAC
Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
SAC (1995c), Characterization of Ground Motion During the Northridge Earthquake of
January 15, 1994 SAC95-03, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
SAC (1995d), Analytical and Field Investigations of Buildings Affected by the Northridge
Earthquake of January 17, 1994 SAC 95-04, Parts 1 and 2, SAC Joint Venture, Sacra-
mento, CA.
SAC (1995e), Parametric Analytical Investigations of Ground Motion and Structural
Response to the Northridge Earthquake of January 17, 1994 SAC95-05, SAC Joint
Venture, Sacramento, CA.
SAC(1995f), Case Studies of Steel Moment Frame BuildingPerformance inthe Northridge
Earthquake of January 17, 1994 SAC95-05, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento,
CA.
SAC(1995g), Surveys and Assessment of Damage to Buildings Affected by the Northridge
Earthquake of January 17, 1994 SAC95-06, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
SAC (1996), Technical Report: Experimental Investigations of Beam-Column Subassem-
blages SAC95-09, SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
SAC (1997), SAC/BD-97/02 Version 1.1, “Protocol for Fabrication, Inspection, Testing,
and Documentation of Beam-Column Connection Tests and Other Specimens,” SAC
Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
SAC (2000), SAC/BD-00/10, “Loading Histories for Seismic Performance Testing of
SMRF Components and Assemblies,” SAC Joint Venture, Sacramento, CA.
Sato, K. and Kamagata, S. (1988), “Aseismic Behavior of Steel Column Base,” Proceed-
ings of the Ninth World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Tokyo, Japan.
Sawyer, H.A. (1961), “Post-Elastic Behavior of Wide-Flange Steel Beams,” Journal of
the Structural Division, Vol. 87, No. ST8, (December), ASCE, Reston, VA.
Schneider, S.P. (1998), “Axially Loaded Concrete-Filled Tubes,” Journal of Structural
Engineering, Vol. 124, No. 10, pp. 1125–1138, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Schneider, S.P., Roeder, C.W., and Carpenter, J.E. (1991), Seismic Performance of
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
REFERENCES 191
Weak-Column Strong-Beam Steel moment Resisting Frames, University of Washing-
ton Department of Civil Engineering, Seattle, WA.
Shahrooz, B.M., Remmetter, M.E., and Qin, F. (1993), “Seismic Design and Performance
of Composite Coupled Walls”, Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 119, No. 11,
(November), pp. 3291–3309, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Sheikh, S.A. and Uzumeri, S.M. (1980), “Strength and Ductility of Tied Columns”, Jour-
nal of the Structural Division, Vol. 106, No. ST5, (February), pp. 1079–1102, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
Sheikh, T.M., Deierlein, G.G., Yura, J.A., and Jirsa, J.O. (1989), “Part 1: Beam Column
Moment Connections for Composite Frames”, Journal of Structural Engineering,
Vol. 115, No. 11, (November), pp. 2859–2876, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Slutter, R. (1981), Tests of Panel Zone Behavior in Beam Column Connections Lehigh
University Report No. 200.81.403.1, Lehigh University, Bethlehem, PA.
Steager, A. and Leon, R. T. (1993), Partially Restrained Composite Connections, AISC,
Chicago, IL.
Steel Deck Institute (SDI) (1993), Composite Deck Design Handbook, No. CDD1, SDI,
Canton, OH.
Steel Deck Institute (SDI) (2000), SDI Manual of Construction with Steel Deck, SDI, Fox
River Grove, IL, http://www.sdi.org/whites/moc1.pdf.
Steel Deck Institute (SDI) (2001), Standard Practice Details (SPD2), SDI, Fox River
Grove, IL.
Stojadinovic, B., Spacone, E., Goel, S.C., and Kwon, M. (1998), “Influence of Semi-
Rigid Column Base Models on the Response of Steel MRF Buildings,” Proceedings
of the Sixth U.S. National Conference on Earthquake Engineering, EERI, Seattle,
Washington.
Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) (1999), Recommended Lateral
Force Requirements and Commentary, SEAOC, Sacramento, CA.
Structural Shape Producers Council (1994), Statistical Analysis of Tensile Data for Wide-
Flange Structural Shapes, Chaparral Steel Company, Midlothian, TX.
Tang, X. and Goel, S.C. (1987), Seismic Analysis and Design Considerations of Braced
Steel Structures Report UMCE 87-4, The University of Michigan Department of Civil
and Environmental Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Tang, X. and Goel, S.C. (1989), “Brace Fractures and Analysis of Phase I Structure”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 115, No. 8, (August), pp. 1960–1976, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
Targowski, R., Lamblin, D., and Guerlement, G. (1993), “Base Plate Column Connection
under Bending: Experimental and Numerical Study,” Journal of Constructional Steel
Research, Vol. 27, pp. 37–54.
Thambiratnam, D. and Paramasivam, P. (1986), Base Plates under Axial Loads and
Moments,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 112, No. 5, pp. 1166–
1181.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction
P1: GIG
PB262A-08 PB262/Seismic.cls January 2, 2003 11:47 Char Count=
192 REFERENCES
Tremblay, R., Tchebotarev, N., and Filiatrault, A. (1997), “Seismic Performance of RBS
Connections for Steel Moment Resisting Frames: Influence of Loading Rate and Floor
Slab,” Proceedings; STESSA ’97, Kyoto, Japan.
Tsai, K.C. and Popov, E.P. (1986), Two Beam-to-Column Web Connections, Report No.
UCB/EERC-86/05, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Tsai, K.C. and Popov, E.P. (1997), “Seismic Panel Zone Design Effect on Elastic Story
Drift in Steel Moment Resisting Frames”, Journal of Structural Engineering, in press
at time of printing, ASCE, Reston, VA.
Uang, C.M. and Bertero, V.V. (1986), Earthquake Simulation Tests and Associated Studies
of 0.3-Scale Model of a Six-Story Concentrically Braced Steel Structure Report
No. UCB/EERC - 86/10, Earthquake Engineering Research Center, Berkeley, CA.
Uang, C.M. and Chi, B. (2001) Effect of Straightening Method on the Cyclic Behavior
of k Area in Steel Rolled Shapes, Report No. SSRP-2001/05, University of California,
San Diego, May.
Uang, C.M. and Fan, C.C. (2001), “Cyclic Stability Criteria for Steel Moment Connections
with Reduced Beam Section,” Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, Vol. 127,
No. 9, September, Reston, VA.
Viest, I.M., Colaco, J.P., Furlong, R.W., Griffis, L.G., Leon, R.T. and Wylie, L.A., Jr.
(1997), Composite Construction: Design for Buildings, McGraw-Hill/ASCE, Reston,
VA.
Wallace, B.J. and Krawinkler, H. (1985), Small-Scale Model Experimentation on Steel
Assemblies John A. Blume Earthquake Engineering Center Report No. 75, Stanford
University Department of Civil Engineering, Palo Alto, CA.
Whittaker, A.S., Uang, C.M., and Bertero, V.V. (1987), Earthquake Simulation Tests and
Associated Studies of a 0.3 - Scale Model of a Six-Story Eccentrically Braced Steel
Structure Report No. UBC/EERC-87/02, Earthquake Engineering Research Center,
Berkeley, CA.
Xu, P. and Goel, S.C. (1990), Behavior of Double Channel Bracing Members Under Large
Cyclic Deformations Report No. UMCE 90-1, University of Michigan Department of
Civil Engineering, Ann Arbor, MI.
Xue, M., Kaufmann, E.J., Lu, L.W., and Fisher, J.W. (1996), “Achieving Ductile Behavior
of Moment Connections - Part II”, Modern Steel Construction, Vol. 36, No. 6, (June),
pp. 38–42, AISC, Chicago, IL.
Zandonini, R. and Leon, R.T. (1992), “Composite Connections”, Constructional Steel
Design: An International Guide, pp. 501–522, Elsevier Science Publishers, London,
England.
Zaremba, C.J. (1988), “Strength of Steel Frames Using Partial Composite Girders”,
Journal of Structural Engineering, Vol. 114, No. 8, (August), pp. 1741–1760, ASCE,
Reston, VA.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002
American Institute of Steel Construction

ii

Copyright by

C

2002

American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. All rights reserved. This book or any part thereof must not be reproduced in any form without the written permission of the publisher. The AISC logo is a registered trademark of AISC and is used under license. The information presented in this publication has been prepared in accordance with recognized engineering principles and is for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate, this information should not be used or relied upon for any specific application without competent professional examination and verification of its accuracy, suitability, and applicability by a licensed engineer, architect or other professional. The publication of the material contained herein is not intended as a representation or warranty on the part of the American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. or of any other person named herein, that this information is suitable for any general or particular use or of freedom from infringement of any patent or patents. Anyone making use of this information assumes all liability arising from such use. Caution must be exercised when relying upon other specifications and codes developed by other bodies and incorporated by reference herein since such material may be modified or amended from time to time subsequent to the printing of this edition. The American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. bears no responsibility for such material other than to refer to it and incorporate it by reference at the time of the initial publication of this edition.

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

iii

DEDICATION

Professor Egor Popov

This edition of the AISC Seismic Provisions is dedicated to the memory of Professor Egor Popov. Professor Popov was a Professor for over 50 years at the University of California at Berkeley, and a long time member of the AISC Committee on Specifications. Professor Popov focused a major portion of his career improving the understanding and seismic performance of steel structures. He was instrumental in the development of seismic design provisions for steel structures for over thirty years, and initiated the activity of AISC in this regard in the late 1980’s. As Chair of TC113 (the predecessor of TC9), he led the publication of the first two editions of the AISC Seismic Provisions. Until the time of his death at the age of 88 early in 2001, Professor Popov remained a very active member of TC9 in the role of Vice Chair. His contributions to the development of these provisions and understanding of the seismic performance of steel buildings is unequaled, and will long be remembered and appreciated by AISC, the steel industry and the structural engineering profession. It is entirely fitting that these provisions be dedicated to the memory of Professor Egor Popov.

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

iv

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

9. In addition. which culminated late in 2000. Part II is intended for the design and construction of composite structural steel/reinforced concrete buildings. These provisions were also modified to be consistent with the ASCE 7-02 document. This commitment was intended to keep the provisions as current as possible. incorporated many of the early advances achieved as part of the FEMA/SAC program and other investigations and developments related to the seismic design of steel buildings. These Provisions are presented in three parts: Part I is intended for the design and construction of structural steel buildings. especially Moment Frames. 1999) and No.) The AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Specification for Structural Steel Buildings is intended to cover the common design criteria in routine office practice. 1 (February 15. 1 to the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions. This allows these provisions to be incorporated by reference into both the 2003 IBC and 2002 NFPA 5000 building codes that use ASCE 7-02 as their basis for design loadings. Part III is an allowable stress design alternative to the LRFD provisions for structural steel buildings in Part I. using LRFD. Recognizing that rapid and significant changes in the knowledge base were occurring for the seismic design of steel buildings. the AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (hereafter referred to as Seismic Provisions) is a separate consensus document that addresses one such topic: the design and construction of structural steel and composite structural steel/reinforced concrete building systems for seismic demands. Specific changes to these provisions include the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. A major update to the commentary to these provisions is also provided. 2000. 1999. published on April 15. This edition of the AISC Seismic Provisions incorporates Supplements No. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. Because the scope of changes that have been made to these provisions since 1997 is so large. May 21. Additional revisions resulted from considering new information generated by the FEMA/SAC project. they are being republished in their entirety. 2 (November 10. The first letter(s) of words or terms that appear in the glossary are generally capitalized throughout these Provisions. but is included for information purposes only. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. the AISC Specifications Committee committed to generating frequent supplements to the Seismic Provisions. a list of Symbols. 2000) to the 1997 Seismic Provisions. The first such supplement was completed and published on February 15.4 and 9. Accordingly. 1997. a Glossary. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . The previous edition of the AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Supplement No. it is not feasible for it to also cover the many special and unique problems encountered within the full range of structural design practice. This version also includes Errata to Sections 8. This document.v PREFACE (This Preface is not a part of ANSI/AISC 341–02. three appendices. and other sources. and a nonmandatory Commentary with background information are provided. Supplement Number 2 to the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions was published on November 10.

The equations are non-dimensionalized where possible by factoring out material constants. Increasing SMF web Connection design requirements to be consistent with the FEMA/SAC recommendations. Standard for Use of the International System of Units (SI): The Modern Metric System. Additional requirements for the toughness of filler metals to be used in completejoint-penetration groove welds in intermediate and Special Moment Frame systems. and suggestions for improvement. Adding a section on the use of H-pile members. The AISC Committee on Specifications gives final approval of the document through an ANSI accredited balloting process. Requiring that splices of columns that are not part of the Moment Frames develop a minimum shear force. The metric conversions (given in parentheses following the U. Clarifying lateral bracing requirements of Moment Frame beams. Dual units format. AISC further acknowledges the significant contributions of several groups to the completion of this document: the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC). units) are based on IEEE/ASTM SI 10. May 21. Incorporating FEMA/SAC recommendations for the removal of weld backing and run-off tabs in OMF systems.vi PREFACE following: r r r r r r r r r r r r r A clarification to the glossary to verify that chord and collector/drag elements in floor diaphragms are considered to be part of the Seismic Load Resisting System. Task Committee 9—Seismic Provisions is responsible for the ongoing development of these Provisions. such as E. and the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC).S. the National Science Foundation (NSF). A revision to clarify member slenderness ratio requirements and better coordinate with the LRFD provisions. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. the SAC Joint Venture. Increasing the Moment Frame column splice requirements to reflect the FEMA/ SAC recommendations. customary and metric units. The AISC Committee on Specifications. Incorporating FEMA/SAC recommendations for weld access holes in OMF systems.S. including grinding surfaces to adequate smoothness. and has enhanced these Provisions through careful scrutiny. the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). discussion. Adding a new appendix (Appendix P) that defines procedures to be used in the pre-qualification of moment Connections. including the provision of a required stiffness to be consistent with Section 3 of LRFD. Clarifying Column Base design demands for various systems. Values and equations are given in both U.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .PREFACE vii The reader is cautioned that professional judgment must be exercised when data or recommendations in these provisions are applied. Bast Reidar Bjorhovde Roger L. Engelhardt Roger E. Galambos Louis F. Baker John M. the members of AISC Committee on Specifications. R. Gross James R. Kloiber Roberto T. Sherman W. Vice-Chairman Roy Becker Gregory G. Fenves James M. as described more fully in the disclaimer notice preceding the Preface. Petersen Douglas A. Lindsey. Gross James R. Task Committee 9 – Seismic Design: James O. Martin Clarkson W. Tide Joseph A. Malley Richard W. Brockenbrough Wai-Fah Chen Gregory G. Lanz. Holland Lawrence A. By. Fraser Theodore V. Harris Tony C. Deierlein Duane S. Chair Mark Saunders. Ferch Timothy P. Rees-Evans Donald R. Thornton Raymond H. Hassett Roberto T. Lee Shoemaker William A. Lanz. Leon Robert Lyons Harry W. Pinkham Rafael Sabelli Thomas A. Ellingwood Shu-Jin Fang Steven J. Deierlein Richard M. G. Miller Thomas M. May 21. Youssef Cynthia J. Ellifritt Bruce R. Leon James O. Fisher John W. Vice-Chairman Hansraj G. Malley. Marshall Harry W. Harris Patrick M. Griffis Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Yura Cynthia J. Ferch. Martin David L. Hazel Mark V. Fraser Subhash Goel John L. Chairman Roger E. Barsom Willam D. Drake Michael D. Murray R. Fisher Timothy P. Shankar Nair Jack E. Sabol Kurt D. Stanley D. Secretary Approved by the AISC Committee on Specifications. Geschwindner Lawrence G. McKenzie Duane K. Swensson Nabih F. Ashar William F. Secretary John L.

viii Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . May 21.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength 6. . . . . . . xix PART I STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS GLOSSARY . Local Buckling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. . .1. . SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bolted Joints . . . . . . . . 6. Nominal Strength . . . . . . . . . . . Lateral Bracing of Beams .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Column Splices . 1 1. . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9. . .4. . . . . . . . 7 7 8 8 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 12 12 13 13 13 13 14 14 16 16 16 17 18 18 7. . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . .3. . . 8. . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 5. . . . . . . 9. . . . . . . . Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections 9. . .1. . . . . . . . 9. . AND STANDARDS . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . H-Piles . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . 8. . . 7. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . .8.2.6. . . . . . . . . . . . Beam and Column Limitations . CONNECTIONS. . . . . 9. . . . AND FASTENERS 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MEMBERS . . . . . . 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . Continuity Plates . . 7 4. . .6. . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . 7 STORY DRIFT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . LOAD COMBINATIONS. . 9. . . . May 21. . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . CODES. . . . . . . . . . . . .2. .7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. . . . . .4. . . JOINTS. AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . . . 2. . Column Splices . . . . Column Bases . . . . . . 7 LOADS. . . . . . . . . Material Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Column Strength 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1.ix TABLE OF CONTENTS SYMBOLS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. 9. . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Connections . . Loads and Load Combinations . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . 8. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Welded Joints . 7 MATERIALS . 4. . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . Notch-Toughness Requirements . . . . . . 9. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. . . . . Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members 12. . . . . . . Column Splices . . . . . . . . . . .9. .2. . . . . . . . Scope . . . . Continuity Plates . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections .6. . . . . . INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) 10. . . . Compactness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections 11. . . 12. . . . .7. . . . . . . . . . . QUALITY ASSURANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. .8. . . . Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . 12. . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . . . . . Lateral Bracing of Beams . . 11. . . . 13. . . . . . 15. . . Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections 10. . . . . Bracing Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . Special Bracing Configuration Requirements . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 13. . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. . . . . . . 13. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . .5. . . .8. . . Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . Lateral Bracing of Beams . . . . . . . Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 18 19 19 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 21 21 22 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 24 24 25 25 25 25 25 26 27 27 11. . . 32 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . 28 28 28 29 30 31 31 32 32 16. .5. 11. 10. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . .7. . . . . . . . . . Lateral Bracing of Link . . . . . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) . . . SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. . . . . 28 14. . . Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members . . . 10. . . . . . . . 15. . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . May 21. . . Strength . . . . . . Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. . . . Column Splices . . . . . . . . 28 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .x TABLE OF CONTENTS 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . 14. . . . Beam and Column Limitations . . . . Beam and Column Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . .7. 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required Column Strength . . . . . . . . Links .2. 13. . . . 12. . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. .1. . . . . . Bracing Members . . . . . . . . . . . . .8. 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . .9. . . . . . . . 15. Link-to-Column Connections .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12. . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Special Segment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lateral Bracing . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 15. . . 15. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) . . . . . . .3. . . . Link Stiffeners . . . . .3. . .5. . . . . Scope . .4. . 12. . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Link . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . Size of Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 S9. . . . . . . S8. . . . . . . .3. TEST CONDITIONS . . . S5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P4. . . . . . .1. . . . . . May 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . S2. . . . . . . . . . . S3. . . . . . . . Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 PREQUALIFICATION RECORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . .TABLE OF CONTENTS xi APPENDIX P. . . . . . . . . . LOADING HISTORY . . . . . . . . . S6. . S5. . . . . . . . . PREQUALIFICATION OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS P1. . S10. . . . . . . ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 38 39 39 39 39 39 40 40 40 41 41 S6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Authority for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . 33 P2. .2. . . . . . . . . . .2. . . S5. . . 33 TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . S4. . . . . . . 35 P3. . Welds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Tension Testing Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 S8. . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S5. . . . . . . . . . . . SCOPE . . . S7. . . . . . 41 MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sources of Inelastic Rotation . . . . . . .2. . . . WELD METAL/WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION TOUGHNESS VERIFICATION TEST X1. . . . . . . . 34 DESIGN PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 SYMBOLS . . . . Basis for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Bolts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . S5. . Material Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Loading Sequence for Link-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . Connection Details . . . . . . . . . . . .5. 42 S8. . . . INSTRUMENTATION . . . . . . . .7. . . . . . . . . 44 X2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . S5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . General Requirements . . QUALIFYING CYCLIC TESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS S1. . . . . . . . . . Methods of Tension Testing . . . . . . . P5. . . . . . 38 ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES S5. . . . . . . . . . Loading Sequence for Beam-to-Column Moment Connections S6. .4. . . . . . . . . . 37 TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS . . . APPENDIX S.6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 APPENDIX X. . . 33 PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES . 42 TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS . . . .2. 33 P2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P6. . . . . . . . SCOPE AND PURPOSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . P2. . SCOPE . . . . . . . . . . . S5. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . Columns . . . . ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . 6. . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 LOADS. . . . . . . . 5. . . . . Partially Restrained (PR) Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . 49 SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR) MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF) .xii TABLE OF CONTENTS X3. Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns 6. . . . .2. 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CODES. . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AND STANDARDS . LOAD COMBINATIONS. .3. . . . . . 60 11. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . Beams . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 COMPOSITE MEMBERS . . . 8. General Requirements . . . . 8. . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 PART II COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL AND REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS GLOSSARY . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . TEST SPECIMENS . . Beams . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . .1. . . . . . . . 8. . . 6. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . Concrete and Steel Reinforcement . . . . May 21. . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . 10. . 49 REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . Nominal Strength of Connections . . . 8. . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . . . . . . . 9. . 49 5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concrete-Filled Composite Columns . . . . . . Composite Beams . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . 50 50 50 51 51 55 55 55 56 56 57 57 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 59 59 59 59 59 59 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Columns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 11. . 45 X4. . . . . . Moment Connections . 3. . . . . . . . . . . . Columns . . . 49 MATERIALS . . .5.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Structural Steel . . . .3. . . . Composite Floor and Roof Slabs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . 47 1. . . . . . COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. . . . . . 49 5. . . . . . . 6. . . . . . Composite Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) 9. . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . SCOPE . 9. . . . . Columns . . . . . . . . 60 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . .

. . . . . . . . . . 68 4. . . . . . . . . Design Strength . . . Bracing Connections . . . . . . . . . Links . . . . . . . . . . . CODES. . . . . . . . . . . . 60 11. . . . .1. . . 69 CONNECTIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . JOINTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 7. . . . . . . . . . . . 2. . Boundary Members . . . . . . . . . . . . 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . 4. . . . . 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Boundary Members . SCOPE .3. . . . . . . .3. . Braces . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 64 64 64 65 65 65 65 17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . Coupling Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) 13. . . . . . . . . . Braces . . . . . . . . . . . Connections . . . . .3. . . . .3. . . .TABLE OF CONTENTS xiii 11. . . . . . 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . Bolted Joints . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . 13. . . . . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . LOAD COMBINATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . 12. . . . . 67 4. . . .2. . . . . . . . . . .4. Wall Elements . 15. . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 LOADS. . . . . .3. . . . Scope . . . . . Nominal Strength . 15. . PART III ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN (ASD) ALTERNATIVE 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AND FASTENERS . . . . . . . . . 60 12. . . . . .3. . . . 13. . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 21. . . .5. . Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17. . . . Beams . . 14. . Columns . . . . . . 16. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . 17. . . . . Connections . . . Columns . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 61 62 62 62 62 62 62 62 13. . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . 14. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) 12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Braces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Boundary Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Columns . . .5. . . 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . 14. . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) 17. . . . . . 67 REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. . 69 7. ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-ORCW) . . . . . 63 63 63 63 16. . . . . . . . . . SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-SRCW) . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . 13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. . . . 15. . .1. . . . AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AND STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12. . . 12. . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . Coupling Beams . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . 70 SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . H-Piles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. . . . . . . . . . . Beam and Column Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 97 98 99 102 102 104 105 106 C10. . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . . . . . . . . C8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 21. . . . .7. JOINTS. . . . . . . . . C9. . . Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength C6. . . . C6.4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82 82 82 83 85 85 86 87 87 87 88 88 89 91 94 C9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . CONNECTIONS. . . . . SCOPE . . . . . COMMENTARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . 70 12. . . .xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS 9. C9. . 71 ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . AND STANDARDS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . 14. . . . . . Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections C9. Column Bases . . Welded Joints . . . . . . . .1. . . 76 C4. . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . C8. . . . . 107 C10. . . . . Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . MATERIALS . . . . . . . . . C8. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Other Connections . . . . . . . . . . . Lateral Bracing . . . . . . . . . LOADS. . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections . . .7. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 PART I STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS C1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 C6. . . . . . . . 76 C3. . . C6. . Column Splices . . . . . .6. C8. . . . . . . . . 75 C2. . . . C8. . . . . . . . . . . AND NOMINAL STRENGTH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Notch-Toughness Requirements . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES . . . . 70 12. . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS . . . . . Scope . . . . . C8. . . . . . . . . C7. . . . . . . CODES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13. . . C9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) . . . . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C9. . . . . . . . LOAD COMBINATIONS. . . . . . . C9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . .2. .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 C5. . . . . . . . INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) . . . . .1. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . Material Specifications . . 69 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . .1. . . Local Buckling . . . . AND FASTENERS C7. . . . . . . . . . . . C7. MEMBERS . . . . . . . . . . . . Column-Beam Moment Ratio . . . .2. . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . STORY DRIFT . . . 107 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . . . . . . . Column Strength C8. . . . Lateral Bracing of Beams . . . . . . . . Bolted Joints . . . . . . 71 14. . . . . . . . . . . 69 9. . . . . . . . . . . . 107 C10. . . . . . . . . . . . . .8. . . . . . . 70 SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES . . . . . . . . C9. . . . . . . Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71 12. . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . C9. . . . C7. . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C12. . . . . . . . . . Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Basis for Prequalification . . . . .2. . . . . . . . C13. . . . . . . . . . . . Special Bracing Configuration Special Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . C12. . . . . . TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 21. . . . . .4. . . . . . . .8. . . . . . Link-to-Column Connections . Required Column Strength . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137 CP2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Lateral Bracing . . . . .3. .1. . 139 CP6. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 CP2. . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C15. . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C13. C11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . 141 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . . . 139 APPENDIX S. . C13. . . . . . . .5. . . . 121 C15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C14. . . . C13. . . .5. . 139 CP5. . . . . C15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SCOPE AND PURPOSE .TABLE OF CONTENTS xv C11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) C15. . . . . . Bracing Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . DEFINITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SCOPE . Scope . . . . . . . . . . Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Links C15. . . . 137 CP3. Columns . . . Scope . Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members C12. . . Lateral Bracing of the Link . . . . . 140 CS3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 108 108 110 110 110 111 112 113 113 113 113 113 117 118 120 120 C12. . . . . Scope . SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) . C12. . . . . . . Scope . .6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138 CP4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Special Segment . . . . . . . . . . . .7. C13. . . . . . . . . QUALIFYING CYCLIC TESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS CS1. . . . C11. . . . . 134 APPENDIX P. Compactness . . . . . . . . . . . 121 C14. . . . PREQUALIFICATION RECORD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Authority for Prequalification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . Beam-to-Column Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . C15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 123 125 127 128 129 129 132 132 C16. . . Bracing Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) C13. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121 C14. . . . . . . . . . . DESIGN PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C12. .1. . . . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections C11. . . . . . . Links . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . . Continuity Plates . . . . . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C15. . . . . . . . . . .2. . . . . . . . .4. . . . . . . . . . . PREQUALIFICATION OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS CP1. . . . .5. . . . QUALITY ASSURANCE . . . . . C15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C15. . .3. . Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members . . . Link Stiffeners . . . .

. . . . . C9. . . . . . . . . 146 CS10. . . . C6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6. . . . . . . C7. C9. . . . . . . . . 142 142 143 144 145 CS6. AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 PART II COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL AND REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS C1. . . . . . . . . . . . . C6. 167 C12. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . . . . . . C4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . May 21. . . . . . . . . 152 MATERIALS . . . . . . . . Nominal Strength of Connections . . . 167 C14. . . . . . . . . . MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS . . Welds . . C3. . . . . ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA . . . . . . . . . . . . C7. . . . . . . . . Size of Members . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moment Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Composite Floor and Roof Slabs . COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) . . . . . SCOPE .5. . . . . . . .4. . . . . . 152 SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES . . . . . . . C7. .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CS5. . . .2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF) . . .2. . . 152 COMPOSITE MEMBERS . 167 C13. . . . . . 163 COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) C9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . . . . .xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS CS4. . . . . . AND STANDARDS . LOADING HISTORY . C8. . . . Composite Beams . . . . CODES. Material Strength . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C6. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. . COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) . . . Beams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Concrete-Filled Composite Columns . 147 APPENDIX X. . . 152 LOADS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) . . . . . 142 CS5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153 153 153 154 155 158 158 158 159 160 C7. . . . . . . . . . C6. . . . . . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR) MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF) . . . . . . .4. . . . . C6. . COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS . C9. . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . . Scope . . . . . . . . . . . TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS . . . . . . . . Scope . . . . . 151 REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. . CS5. . . . . . . . C5.1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 CS8. . . . . . . . . . . . . C2. . 167 C11. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES . CS5. . . . . . . . . . WELD METAL/WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION TOUGHNESS VERIFICATION TEST . . . LOAD COMBINATIONS. . . . . . General Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . .3. . . Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns C6. . . . . . . . . . . 164 164 164 165 C10. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Sources of Inelastic Rotation CS5. . . . .

. . . . . . . . 169 C16. . . . . 177 C4. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174 PART III ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN (ASD) ALTERNATIVE C1. . . . . . . . COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-SRCW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . May 21. . . . 179 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . . . . ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-ORCW) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173 C17. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177 REFERENCES . .2. . . . .TABLE OF CONTENTS xvii C15. . . . . . . . . . . . . . SCOPE . . . . Nominal Strength . . . . . .

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .xviii Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. May 21.

. . . . . . . . Outside diameter of round HSS. . . . . . . . . . . Section (I-8) (I-9) (II-6) (II-6) (II-17) (I-15) (I-15) (I-9) (Table I-8-1) (Glossary) (I-8. . . “yield stress” denotes either the minimum specified yield point (for those steels that have a yield point) or the specified yield strength (for those steels that do not have a yield point). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . Symbol Definition Af Flange area. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Fy Specified minimum yield stress of the type of steel to be used. . . . . in. . ksi (MPa) . . . . . . Fyb Fy of a beam. ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . in. . . . K Effective length factor for prismatic member . ksi (MPa). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Es Modulus of elasticity of steel. . . ksi (MPa) . . . . . kips (N) . .2 (mm2 ) . . . . . . kip-in. kips (kN) . . Fyc Fy of a column. (mm) . . . . . . . . . L Live load due to occupancy and moveable equipment. . Span length of the truss. . . .2 (mm2 ) . Fyw Fy of the Panel Zone steel. . Ag Gross area. . . . . . in. (mm) . . . Fyh Specified minimum yield strength of transverse reinforcement.2 (mm2 ) . . II-6) (I-12) (I-6) (I-9) (I-9) (I-8) (II-6) (I-7) (I-8) (I-13) (I-9) (I-12) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . Fy f Fy of column flange. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ash Minimum area of tie reinforcement. . . . . in. . . . . D Dead load due to the weight of the structural elements and permanent features on the building. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in.2 (N-mm2 ) . . . . . .2 (mm2 ) . . . Aw Link web area. . . . . . E Effect of horizontal and vertical earthquake-induced loads . . . . . . E s = 29. . . . . . . . . . . . in. . .2 (mm2 ) . . . ksi (MPa) . . As Cross-sectional area of structural steel elements in composite members. . . . . . in. . . . . . . . . . . . or the distance between the top of floor slabs at each of the levels above and below. . . .xix SYMBOLS Numbers in parentheses after the definition of a symbol refer to the Section in either Part I or II of these Provisions in which the symbol is first used. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2 (mm2 ) . . . .000 ksi (200 000 MPa) Es I Flexural elastic stiffness of the chord members of the special segment. . . . . . . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . . . . .2 (mm2 ) . . ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . in. . . . . . . Ast Area of Link stiffener. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . May 21. . . . . Fu Specified minimum tensile strength. . . . . . . . ksi (MPa) . which may be taken as the distance between the centerline of floor framing at each of the levels above and below. . . . . . . . . . . As used in the LRFD Specification. . . . . . . . . . . H Height of story. Asp Horizontal area of the steel plate in composite shear wall. in. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in. .

. kips (N) . . . . . . . . . kips (N) . . . . . Nominal shear strength of the steel plate in composite plate shear walls. (N-mm) . kip-in. . in. . . . . . . . . . . . . . kips (N) . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction (I-12) (I-12) (I-11) (I-12) (I-9) (I-15) (I-8) (I-9) (I-9) (I-8) (II-6) (I-12) (I-12) (II-6) (I-8) (II-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-13) (I-9) (I-9) (I-6) (I-9) (I-15) (II-17) (I-15) (I-15) (I-9) (II-6) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-12) . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . Maximum unbalanced vertical load effect applied to a beam by the braces. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Plastic section modulus of a member. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distance from top of steel beam to top of concrete slab or encasement. . . . . . . . . Nominal axial tensile strength of diagonal members of the special segment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kips (N) . . . . . . . . .3 (mm3 ) . in. . . kip-in. kips (N) . . . . . . . which is equal to Fy A g . . . . . . . Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . kips (N) . . . . . . . Nominal axial strength of a Composite Column. . (N-mm) . .xx SYMBOLS Lp Ls Mn Mnc Mp M pa M pc Mv Mu Pn Pnc Pnt Po Pu Puc Py Qb Rn Ru Rv Ry S Vn Vns Vp V pa Vu Ycon Z Zb Zc a Limiting laterally unbraced length for full plastic flexural strength. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (N-mm) . . . . . . . kip-in. . .3 (mm3 ) . . in. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nominal axial yield strength of a member. . . . . . . . . . . . kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . (N-mm) . . . . . . kips (N) . . . kips (N) . . . . . Required axial strength of a column in compression. . . . . Additional moment due to shear amplification from the location of the plastic hinge to the column centerline. . . . . . uniform moment case. . . . . . . . . . . . kip-in. . . Nominal axial compressive strength of diagonal members of the special segment. . . Nominal plastic flexural strength of the column. . . Nominal Strength . . . . (N-mm) . . . . . Required axial strength of a Composite Column. . . . . . . . . . . . . Nominal shear strength of an active Link modified by the axial load magnitude. . . . . . . . . . Nominal flexural strength. . . . . Required axial strength of a column or a Link. . . . Plastic section modulus of the column. . . . . . . . . kips (N). (N-mm) . . . . . . . . . Plastic section modulus of the beam. . . . . . . . . . Nominal axial strength of a column. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kips (N) . . kip-in. . . . . . . . Angle that diagonal members make with the horizontal . . . kip-in. . Nominal axial strength of a Composite Column at zero eccentricity. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in. Nominal shear strength of an active Link. . . . . . . . (N-mm) . . . . . . . . Ratio of the Expected Yield Strength to the minimum specified yield strength Fy . . in. . . . . . . . . Nominal flexural strength of the chord member of the special segment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Nominal plastic flexural strength. . . kips (N) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required shear strength of a member. . . kip-in. . Panel Zone nominal shear strength . . . . . . . . . Nominal plastic flexural strength modified by axial load. . . . kips (N) . . May 21. (mm) . . . . . . . . . Nominal shear strength of a member. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Snow load. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . kips (N) . . . kips (N) . . kips (N) . Length of the special segment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in. . . . . .3 (mm3 ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Required flexural strength of a member or Joint.

. . . (mm) EBF Link length. . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction (Table I-8-1) (I-9) (I-9) (II-6) (I-7) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-15) (II-6) (II-6) (I-13) (I-13) (I-9) (I-9) (II-6) (I-7) (Table I-8-1) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (Table I-8-1) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-9) (I-4) (S6) (S6) (I-15) (I-13) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Unbraced length of compression or bracing member. . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . in. . . (mm) . . (mm). . . . . . . . . . . in. . May 21. . . . . . Width of Panel Zone between column flanges. . . . . Thickness of column web or doubler plate. . . . . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Moment at the intersection of the beam and column centerlines determined by projecting the beam maximum developed moments from the column face. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . (mm) . . . . . in. . . . . . Unbraced length between stitches of built-up bracing members. . . . . . . . in. . . . . . . in. . . . . . . . . . . . . Thickness of Panel Zone including doubler plates. in. Thickness of element.1. . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . in. . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . (mm). . . . . Moment at beam and column centerline determined by projecting the sum of the nominal column plastic moment strength. . . . . . . . . . . . . . in. . . . . Thickness of flange. . . . . . . Width of the concrete cross-section minus the width of the structural shape measured perpendicular to the direction of shear. . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . . . . . Overall column depth. . in. . . . Value of deformation quantity at first significant yield of Test Specimen . . . . . Spacing of transverse reinforcement measured along the longitudinal axis of the structural composite member. . . . . Overall Panel Zone depth between Continuity Plates. . . . . . . . . . Deformation quantity used to control loading of the Test Specimen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . . in. . . Cross-sectional dimension of the confined core region in Composite Columns measured center-to-center of the transverse reinforcement. . . . . . . . . . . in. . . . . . . . . . Flange width. . . . . (mm) . . . . . . . in. in. . . . . . . Minimum plastic section modulus at the Reduced Beam Section. . . Horizontal seismic overstrength factor . in. . . . . . . Maximum developed moments shall be determined from test results . . (mm) . . . . Thickness of beam flange. Thickness of column flange. in. from the top and bottom of the beam moment connection . . . . . . . . Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . Specified compressive strength of concrete. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . . in. . . . . (mm) . . . Overall beam depth. . . (mm) Thickness of connected part. . . (mm) . . . . . . . . . in. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . in. . in. . .SYMBOLS xxi b bc f bf bw d db dc dz e fc h cc l r ry s t tb f tc f tf tp tw wz zb M* pc M* pb o y Width of compression element as defined in LRFD Specification Section B5. . . . . . in. . (mm). . . . . . in. . ksi (MPa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Slenderness parameter. . . . in. . Radius of gyration about y axis. . . . . . . . . reduced by the axial stress Puc /A g . . . . . . . Nominal fastener diameter. . . . . . . . (mm) . . . . . (mm) Governing radius of gyration. . . in. . . . Ratio of required axial force Pu to required shear strength Vu of a Link . . . (mm) . . Thickness of web. . in. . . in. . Width of column flange. . .3 (mm3 ) . .

. Resistance Factor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .xxii SYMBOLS ps c v Limiting slenderness parameter for compact element. . . . . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . . . Resistance Factor for shear strength of Panel Zone of beam-to-column connections . . May 21. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Resistance Factor for the shear strength of a Composite Column Link Rotation Angle . . . . . . Resistance Factor for compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (Table I-8-1) (I-8) (I-13) (I-9) (II-6) (S2) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. . . . . . .

Design Story Drift. In the absence of an Applicable Building Code.PART I. (2) resistance to lateral load provided by moment resisting frames (SMF. determined as specified in the Applicable Building Code. or steel Braced Frames (EBF. The organization. and rods at the base of a column used to transmit forces between the steel superstructure and the foundation. The assemblage of plates. SCBF or OCBF). Beam. IMF or OMF) that are capable of resisting at least 25 percent of the base shear. Connection. office or individual charged with the responsibility of administering and enforcing the provisions of this standard. Diagonal Bracing. as appropriate) provided by element or connection. where E and the horizontal component of E are defined in the Applicable Building Code. including the effects of inelastic action). Continuity Plates. Design Strength. Column Base. May 21. A combination of joints used to transmit forces between two or more members. Resistance (force. A structural member that primarily functions to carry loads transverse to its longitudinal axis. Authority Having Jurisdiction. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Inclined structural members carrying primarily axial load that are employed to enable a structural frame to act as a truss to resist lateral loads. Column stiffeners at the top and bottom of the Panel Zone. political subdivision. Design Earthquake. A vertical truss system of concentric or eccentric type that resists lateral forces on the Structural System. moment. connectors. A Dual System is a Structural System with the following features: (1) an essentially complete space frame that provides support for gravity loads. The earthquake represented by the Design Response Spectrum as specified in the Applicable Building Code. and concrete or steel shear walls. Braced Frame. the product of the Nominal Strength and the Resistance Factor. usually a horizontal member in a seismic frame system. the loads and load combinations shall be those stipulated in ASCE 7. also known as transverse stiffeners. stress. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Amplified Seismic Load. The amplified story drift (drift under the Design Earthquake. end reaction). Connections are categorized by the type and amount of force transferred (moment. The building code under which the building is designed. and. Dual System. bolts. Applicable Building Code. (3) each system designed to resist the total lateral load in proportion to its relative rigidity. The horizontal component of earthquake load E multiplied by o . STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS GLOSSARY 1 The first letter(s) of words or terms that appear in this glossary are generally capitalized throughout these Provisions. shear.

Expected Yield Strength. See V-Braced Frame. See Figure C-I-6. Fully Restrained (FR).1. An area of potentially reduced notch-toughness located in the web-to-flange fillet area. connectors. and assemblages) such that no applicable limit state is exceeded when the building is subjected to all appropriate load combinations. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Sufficient rigidity exists in the connection to maintain the angles between intersecting members. Joint. A building frame system in which seismic shear forces are resisted by shear and flexure in members and connections of the frame. Intermediate Moment Frame (IMF). The probable yield strength of the material. The inelastic angle between the Link and the beam outside of the Link when the total story drift is equal to the Design Story Drift. Lateral Bracing Member. Link. Nominal Loads. An area where two or more ends. An OCBF in which a pair of diagonal braces located on one side of a column is connected to a single point within the clear column height. The capacity of a building or component to resist the effects of loads. multiplied by R y . Moment Frame. May 21. A diagonally Braced Frame meeting the requirements in Section 15 that has at least one end of each bracing member connected to a beam a short distance from another beam-to-brace connection or a beam-to-column connection. k-Area. A method of proportioning structural components (members. as determined by computations using specified material strengths and dimensions and formulas derived from accepted principles of structural mechanics or by field tests or laboratory tests of scaled models. In EBF. equal to the minimum specified yield strength. A Moment Frame system that meets the requirements in Section 10. Link Intermediate Web Stiffeners. Interstory Drift Angle. surfaces or edges are attached. Joints are categorized by the type of fastener or weld used and the method of force transfer. the segment of a beam that is located between the ends of two diagonal braces or between the end of a diagonal brace and a column. Inverted-V-Braced Frame. A member that is designed to inhibit lateral buckling or lateraltorsional buckling of primary framing members. The magnitudes of the loads specified by the Applicable Building Code. Vertical web stiffeners placed within the Link in EBF. The length of the Link is defined as the clear distance between the ends of two diagonal braces or between the diagonal brace and the column face. Link Rotation Angle. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. The lesser of the design shear strength of the Link developed from the moment or shear strength of the Link. K-Braced Frame.2 PART I – GLOSSARY Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF). Nominal Strength. Fy . allowing for modeling effects and differences between laboratory and field conditions. Interstory displacement divided by story height. Link Shear Design Strength. radians. connecting elements. Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD).

The assembly of structural elements in the building that resists seismic loads. collectors. A diagonally Braced Frame meeting the requirements in Section 14 in which all members of the bracing system are subjected primarily to axial forces. An assemblage of load-carrying components that are joined together to provide interaction or interdependence. A factor that accounts for unavoidable deviations in the actual strength of a member or connection from the Nominal Strength and for the manner and consequences of failure. moment. Special Moment Frame (SMF). A concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF or OCBF) in which a pair of diagonal braces located either above or below a beam is connected to a single point Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. chords. Required Strength. Slip-Critical Joint. or as specified in these Provisions. A classification assigned to a building based upon such factors as its occupancy and use. A Moment Frame system that meets the requirements in Section 9. Seismic Design Category. A bolted joint in which slip resistance on the faying surface(s) of the connection is required. A Moment Frame system that meets the requirements in Section 11. A truss Moment Frame system that meets the requirements in Section 12. stress.PART I – GLOSSARY 3 Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frame (OCBF). Partially Restrained (PR). or as appropriate) acting on a member or connection that is determined by structural analysis from the factored loads using the most appropriate critical load combinations. Resistance Factor. Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF). Special Concentrically Braced Frame (SCBF). A reduction in cross section over a discrete length that promotes a zone of inelasticity in the member. A connection with insufficient rigidity to maintain the angles between connected members in original alignment after load is applied. Structural System. The load effect (force. Connections that comply with the requirements of Appendix P. Special Truss Moment Frame (STMF). 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Prequalified Connections. diaphragms and trusses. May 21. P-Delta Effect. Panel Zone. Second-order effect of column axial loads after lateral deflection of the frame on the shears and moments in members. The strength of a structural member or connection that is determined on the basis of testing that is conducted under slow monotonic loading until failure. A diagonally Braced Frame meeting the requirements in Section 13 in which all members of the bracing system are subjected primarily to axial forces. including struts. The web area of the beam-to-column connection delineated by the extension of beam and column flanges through the connection. Static Yield Strength. V-Braced Frame. Seismic Load Resisting System. Reduced Beam Section.

See Figure C-I-13.3(b). the system is also referred to as an Inverted-V-Braced Frame. A vertical (or nearly vertical) strut connecting the brace-to-beam intersection of an Inverted-V-Braced Frame at one level to the brace-to-beam intersection at another level. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .4 PART I – GLOSSARY within the clear beam span. An Eccentrically Braced Frame (EBF) in which the stem of the Y is the Link of the EBF system. A concentrically braced frame (OCBF) in which a pair of diagonal braces crosses near mid-length of the braces. Where the diagonal braces are below the beam. May 21. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. X-Braced Frame. Y-Braced Frame. Zipper Column.

ASCE 7-02 American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Specification for General Requirements for Rolled Structural Steel Bars. ACI 318-02 American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings. 2000 Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Single-Angle Members. 1999 Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for the Design of Steel Hollow Structural Sections. May 21. ASTM A53/A53M-01 Standard Specification for Low and Intermediate Tensile Strength Carbon Steel Plates. Steel. Heat Treated. ASTM A6/A6M-01 Standard Specification for Carbon Structural Steel. and Sheet Piling. 2000 American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures. All members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall have a Design Strength as required in the LRFD Specification. AND STANDARDS 5 1. Steel. Part I includes a Glossary. SCOPE These Provisions are intended for the design and construction of structural steel members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting Systems in buildings for which the design forces resulting from earthquake motions have been determined on the basis of various levels of energy dissipation in the inelastic range of response. These Provisions shall apply to buildings that are classified in the Applicable Building Code as Seismic Design Category D (or equivalent) and higher or when required by the Engineer of Record. hereinafter referred to as the LRFD Specification. ASTM A283/A283M-00 Standard Specification for Structural Bolts. December 27. ASTM A325M-00 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 2. AND STANDARDS The documents referenced in these Provisions shall include those listed in LRFD Specification Section A6 with the following additions and modifications: American Concrete Institute (ACI) Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . and Appendices P. which is specifically applicable to this Part. S. Zinc-Coated Welded and Seamless.Sect. 2. CODES. CODES. and X. Plates.] PART I – REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. November 10. Shapes. ASTM A325-01 Standard Specification for High-Strength Bolts for Structural Steel Joints [Metric]. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. 120/105 ksi Minimum Tensile Strength. November 10. Black and Hot-Dipped. ASTM A36/A36M-00 Pipe. and shall also meet all of the additional requirements in these Provisions. These Provisions shall be applied in conjunction with the AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings.

ASTM A673/A673M-95 Standard Specification for Cold-formed Welded and Seamless High Strength.20-95 Specification for Low Alloy Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc Welding. ASTM A847-99a Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Allow Steel Shapes of Structural Quality. 2. ASTM E8-01e1 Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials. ASTM A913/A913M-00a Standard Specification for Steel for Structural Shapes for Use in Building Framing. Produced by Quenching and Self-Tempering Process (QST).01-93 Specification for Carbon Steel Electrodes for Flux Cored Arc Welding. ASTM A500-01 Standard Specification for Hot-Formed Welded and Seamless Carbon Steel Structural Tubing.6 PART I – REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. 150 ksi Minimum Tensile Strength. [100 mm] Thick. ASTM A529/A529M-00 Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Allow Columbium-Vanadium Structural Steel. AWS A5. AWS A5. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Steel. May 21. for Structural Steel Joints [Metric]. ASTM A572/A572M-00a Standard Specification for High-Strength Low-Allow Structural Steel with 50 ksi [345 MPa] Minimum Yield Point to 4 in. CODES. ASTM E8M-01e1 Standard Specification for “Twist Off” Type Tension Control Structural Bolt/ Nut/Washer Assemblies.3. Standard Test Methods and Definitions for Mechanical Testing of Steel Products.29-98 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. ASTM A490M-00 Standard Specification for Cold-Formed Welded and Seamless Carbon Steel Structural Tubing in Rounds and Shapes. ASTM A992/A992M-00 Standard Test Methods for Tension Testing of Metallic Materials.9. ASTM A370-02e1 Standard Specification for Heat-Treated Steel Structural Bolts. ASTM A618-01 Standard Specification for Sampling Procedure for Impact Testing of Structural Steel. ASTM A588/ A588M-00a Standard Specification for Hot-Formed Welded and Seamless High-Strength LowAlloy Structural Tubing. ASTM A501-01 Standard Specification for High-Strength Carbon-Manganese Steel of Structural Quality. ASTM A490-00 Standard Specification for High-Strength Steel Bolts. AWS A5. 120/105 ksi Minimum Tensile Strength. Classes 10. AND STANDARDS [Sect. Low Alloy Structural Tubing with Improved Atmospheric Corrosion Resistance.9 and 10. ASTM F1852-00 American Welding Society Filler Metal Procurement Guidelines. Heat Treated.

Nominal Strength The Nominal Strength of systems. 5.] PART I – MATERIALS 7 TABLE I-4-1 System Overstrength Factor.S. LOADS. AWS D1. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS The Required Strength and other seismic provisions for Seismic Design Categories (SDCs).2. STORY DRIFT The Design Story Drift and story drift limits shall be determined as specified in the Applicable Building Code. LOAD COMBINATIONS. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. AWS B4. Customary Units. the horizontal earthquake load E (as defined in the Applicable Building Code) shall be multiplied by the overstrength factor o prescribed by the Applicable Building Code. MATERIALS Material Specifications Structural steel used in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Section A3. Seismic Load Resisting System All moment-frame systems meeting Part I requirements Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF) meeting Part I requirements All other systems meeting Part I requirements o Ωo 3 21/2 2 Standard Methods for Mechanical Testing of Welds-U.0M: 2000 Structural Welding Code – Steel. 4.1. except as modified throughout these Provisions.1a.0-98 Standard Methods for Mechanical Testing of Welds-Metric Units. In the absence of a specific definition of o .1:2002 Research Council on Structural Connections Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 6. the value for o shall be as listed in Table I-4-1. Where Amplified Seismic Loads are required by these provisions. except as modified in this Section.1. 4. June 23.Sect. 6. members and connections shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. Seismic Use Groups or Seismic Zones and the limitations on height and irregularity shall be as specified in the Applicable Building Code. AWS B4. 6. 4. AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS Loads and Load Combinations The loads and load combinations shall be as stipulated by the Applicable Building Code (see Glossary). 2000 3. May 21.

R y shall be as given in Table I-6-1.8 PART I – MATERIALS [Sect. then cooled to room temperature before testing. A588/A588M. and 5 shapes with flanges 11/2 in. May 21.1 1. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .3 1. This limitation does not apply to columns for which the only expected inelastic behavior is yielding at the Column Base. For rolled shapes and bars. The specified minimum yield strength of steel to be used for members in which inelastic behavior is expected shall not exceed 50 ksi (345 MPa) unless the suitability of the material is determined by testing or other rational criteria. 4. (38 mm) thick and thicker. No thermal treatment of weldment or test specimens is permitted.4 1. 6.3 1. 11. 12. TABLE I-6-1 Ry Values for Different Member Types Application Hot-rolled structural shapes and bars ASTM A36/A36M ASTM A572/A572M Grade 42 (290) ASTM A992/A992M All other grades Hollow Structural Sections ASTM A500. Other values of R y are permitted to be used if the value of the Expected Yield Strength is determined by testing that is conducted in accordance with the requirements for the specified grade of steel.5 1. ASTM A6/A6M Groups 3. Notch-toughness Requirements When used as members in the Seismic Load Resisting System. it is permitted to apply R y to Fy in the determination of the Design Strength. except that machined tensile test specimens may be aged at 200˚F (93˚C) to 220˚F (104˚C) for up to 48 hours. (50 mm) thick or thicker shall have a minimum Charpy V-Notch Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. A53/A53M. When both the Required Strength and the Design Strength calculations are made for the same member or connecting element. 50 (345) or 55 (380)). 14 and 15 shall meet one of the following ASTM Specifications: A36/A36M. of the connected member. A529/A529M. A500 (Grade B or C). 6.1 For buildings over one story in height. A501. the Required Strength of a connection or member shall be determined from the Expected Yield Strength R y Fy . A913/A913M (Grade 50 (345) or 65 (450)).2. A618 and A847 Steel Pipe ASTM A53/A53M Plates All other products Ry 1.3. A501. the steel used in the Seismic Load Resisting Systems described in Sections 9. and plates that are 2-in. 13. The steel used for Column Base plates shall meet one of the preceding ASTM specifications or ASTM A283/A283M Grade D. or A992/A992M. where Fy is the specified minimum yield strength of the grade of steel to be used. A572/A572M (Grade 42 (290). Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength When required in these Provisions. 6.1 1.1 1. 10.

This requirement for notch toughness shall also apply in other cases as required in these Provisions. except as modified in this Section. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Bolted Joints All bolts shall be pretensioned high-strength bolts. and fasteners that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter J.1. General Requirements All welds used in members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall be made with a filler metal that can produce welds that have a minimum Charpy V-Notch toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27 J) at minus 20˚F (minus 29˚C). unless an alternative hole type is justified as part of a tested assembly. determined as specified in LRFD Specification Section A3. AND FASTENERS 9 (CVN) toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27 J) at 70˚F (21˚C). 7.4dtFu . 7. Bolted joints shall not be designed to share load in combination with welds on the same faying surface. JOINTS. All faying surfaces shall be prepared as required for Class A or better Slip-Critical Joints. joints.7 and J3.3b. The Design Strength of bolted joints in shear and/or combined tension and shear shall be determined in accordance with LRFD Specification Sections J3. AND FASTENERS Scope Connections. 7. JOINTS.] PART I – CONNECTIONS.Sect. Welded Joints Welding shall be performed in accordance with a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) as required in AWS D1.1 and approved by the Engineer of Record. see Appendix S.3a. CONNECTIONS. The bearing strength of bolted joints shall be provided using either standard holes or short-slotted holes with the slot perpendicular to the line of force.3. except that the nominal bearing strength at bolt holes shall not be taken greater than 2. as determined by AWS classification or manufacturer certification. Bolted connections for members that are a part of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall be configured such that a ductile limit-state either in the connection or in the member controls the design.1c.2. Additional Requirements in Special Moment Frames and Intermediate Moment Frames For structures in which the steel frame is normally enclosed and maintained at a temperature of 50˚F (10˚C) or higher.10. the following CJP welds in Special and Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 7. The design shear strength of bolted joints is permitted to be calculated as that for bearing-type joints. 7. The WPS variables shall be within the parameters established by the filler metal manufacturer. 7. 7.

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 7. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Decking attachments that penetrate the beam flanges shall not be used in the plastic hinging zone. exterior facades. 8. May 21.4c. bolted. Exception: Welded shear studs and other connections are permitted where they have been included in the connection tests used to qualify the connection. Local Buckling Where required by these Provisions. see Section 8.1. 8.3c. Welded. or shot-in attachments for perimeter edge angles. piping. Discontinuities For members and connections that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System. duct work. The length of a plastic hinging zone shall be defined as one-half of the depth of the beam on either side of the theoretical hinge point. 8.10 PART I – MEMBERS [Sect. calculations. discontinuities located within a plastic hinging zone defined below. 8. and flame cutting. Other Connections Welded shear studs shall not be placed on beam flanges within the zones of expected plastic hinging. Intermediate Moment Frames shall be made with filler metal capable of providing a minimum Charpy V-Notch toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27 J) at minus 20˚F (minus 29˚C) as determined by AWS classification test methods and 40 ft-lbf (54 J) at 70˚F (21˚C) as determined by Appendix X or other approved method: (1) Welds of beam flanges to columns (2) Groove welds of shear tabs and beam webs to columns (3) Column splices For structures with service temperatures lower than 50˚F (10˚C). screwed. MEMBERS Scope Members in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification and those of this Section.4.2. Decking arc-spot welds as required to secure decking shall be permitted. partitions.1 in the LRFD Specification and the ps limitations of Table I-8-1. 7. or other construction shall not be placed within the expected zone of plastic deformations of members of the Seismic Load Resisting System. shall be repaired as required by the Engineer of Record. these qualification temperatures shall be reduced accordingly. members of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall meet the p limitation in Table B5. Outside the expected zone of plastic deformation area. based on the expected moment. such as tack welds. shall be made to demonstrate the adequacy of the member net section when connectors that penetrate the member are used. For members that are not part of the Seismic Load Resisting System. erection aids. created by errors or by fabrication or erection operations. air-arc gouging.

[h] Chord members of STMF.1 for columns in STMF. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. [e].64 Es/Fy 0. [c] Unstiffened Elements Flanges of channels.0 where it is permitted to use p in LRFD Specification Table B5.] PART I – MEMBERS 11 TABLE I-8-1 Limiting Width Thickness Ratios Compression Elements Width Thickness Ratio b/t b/t b/t ps for Limiting WidthThickness Ratios (seismically compact) 0. [c].125 Pu b Py 2.33 − 0.14 Es Fy b Py ≤ 0. [f] Required for Link in EBF. [d]. [b] Required for beams in SMF.94 Es/Fy [a] For hybrid beams. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .45 Es/Fy 2. Section 12. [h] Webs of H-Pile sections D/t b/t or h/tw h/tw Es Fy > 0. [h] Rectangular HSS in axial and/or flexural compression [d].Sect. [b]. or flanges of tees [h] Webs of tees [h] Webs in flexural compression in beams in SMF. angles and I-shaped rolled. Section 12. [f].30 Es/Fy ps Description of Element Flanges of I-shaped rolled. Section 15. Section 15. hybrid or welded beams [a]. unless the ratios from Equation 9-3 are greater than 2. [b].5 0.54 b Py for Pu / 1. Section 13. [d].30 Es/Fy 0. hybrid or welded beams and braces [a]. hybrid or welded columns [a]. [f]. [h] Flanges of I-shaped rolled. unless noted otherwise [a] Other webs in flexural compression [a] Stiffened Elements Webs in combined flexure and axial compression [a]. [e] Flanges of H-pile sections Flat bars[g] Legs of single angle.45 Es/Fy h/tw h/tw 3. 8. Section 9.30 Es/Fy 0.30 Es/Fy d/t h/tw 0. Section 9. hybrid or welded columns [a]. legs of double angle members with separators. [g] Diagonal web members within the special segment of STMF.14 Es/Fy for Pu / 3. [h] Flanges of I-shaped rolled. [h] b/t b/t b/t b/t 0.12 Round HSS in axial and/or flexural compression [d].125 Pu b Py 1 − 1. Section 12 and EBF.30 Es/Fy 2. [d] Required for beams and braces in SCBF.1. Section 9. May 21.044 Es/Fy 0. [e] It is permitted to use p in LRFD Specification Table B5. [c] Required for columns in SMF. use the yield strength of the flange Fyf instead of Fy .38 Es/Fy 0.

8. or welded to one column and bolted to the other. When the column clear height between beam-to-column connections is less than 8 ft. The centerline of column splices made with fillet welds or partial-joint-penetration groove welds shall be located 4 ft. In Moment Frames using bolted splices to develop the Required Strength.3. Column Splices The Required Strength of column splices shall equal the Required Strength of the columns. Beveled transitions are not required when changes in thickness and width of flanges and webs occur in column splices where partial-joint-penetration groove welded joints are permitted. (1.5 times R y Fy A f . shall be made using filler metal with Charpy VNotch toughness as required in Section 7.2 m) or more away from the beam-to-column connections. including that determined from Section 8.3. 8.4 m).4a. the following requirements shall be met: (1) The required axial compressive and tensile strength. Welded column splices that are subject to a calculated net tensile stress determined using the load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code including the Amplified Seismic Load.4 without consideration of the Amplified Seismic Load. splices shall be at half the clear height.4b.1R y times the nominal strengths of the connecting beam or brace elements of the building. Column Strength When Pu / Pn is greater than 0. 8. shall be determined using the load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code including the Amplified Seismic Load. plates or channels shall be used on both sides of the column web. (2.3a and shall meet both of the following requirements: (1) The Design Strength of partial-joint-penetration groove welded joints shall be at least equal to 200 percent of the Required Strength. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (2) The Design Strength for each flange shall be at least 0.12 PART I – MEMBERS [Sect. considered in the absence of any applied moment. May 21. (2) The Required Strengths need not exceed either of the following: (a) The maximum load transferred to the column considering 1.4. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. where R y Fy is the Expected Yield Strength of the column material and A f is the flange area of the smaller column connected. (b) The limit as determined from the resistance of the foundation to overturning uplift. General 8. 8. Column Web Splices Column web splices shall be either bolted or welded.

Design of concrete elements at the Column Base. splices of columns that are not a part of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall satisfy the following: (1) They shall be located 4 ft. shall be in accordance with ACI 318. 9.4 m). H-Piles Design of H-piles shall comply with the provisions of the AISC LRFD Specification regarding design of members subjected to combined loads. rebars or studs welded to the embedded portion of pile. (2. The widththickness ratios of member elements shall meet the ps limitations of Table I-8-1. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.4c. May 21. Tension in H-Piles Tension in the pile shall be transferred to the pile cap by mechanical means such as shear keys. 9. 8. 8.6c. When the column clear height between beam-to-column connections is less than 8 ft. (2) The column splices shall have sufficient design shear strength with respect to both orthogonal axes of the column to resist a shear force equal to M pc /H .] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 13 8. 9. Columns Not Part of the Seismic Load Resisting System In moment frame buildings. A length of pile below the bottom of the pile cap equal to at least the overall depth of the pile cross section shall be free of attachments and welds.6a. splices shall be at half the clear height. 8.6b. 8. Column Bases The connection of the structure frame elements to the Column Base and the connection of the Column Base to the foundations shall be adequate to transmit the forces for which the frame elements were required to be designed.1. where M pc is the nominal plastic flexural strength of the column for the direction in question.2 m) or more away from the beam-to-column connections. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) Scope Special Moment Frames (SMF) are expected to withstand significant inelastic deformations when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake. the vertical piles shall be designed to support combined effects of the dead and live loads without the participation of batter piles.Sect. (1.6. Batter H-Piles If batter (sloped) and vertical piles are used in a pile group.5. SMF shall meet the requirements in this Section. Design of H-Piles 8. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . The seismic loads to be transferred to the foundation soil interface shall be as required by the Applicable Building Code. and H is the story height. including anchor rod embedment and reinforcement steel.

2a.04 radians.2b. material strengths. Connections that accommodate the required Interstory Drift Angle within the connection elements and provide the required flexural and shear strengths noted above are permitted.3.14 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Sect. 9. Conformance Demonstration All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall be demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of Section 9. 9. within the limits specified in Appendix S. (ii) Tests that are conducted specifically for the project and are representative of project member sizes. May 21. and matching connection processes. (b) Provide qualifying cyclic test results in accordance with Appendix S. (3) The required shear strength Vu of the connection shall be determined using the load combination 1.2a by one of the following: (a) Use a connection Prequalified for SMF in accordance with Appendix P. connection configurations. As a minimum. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 9. Requirements 9. must equal at least 80 percent of the nominal plastic moment of the connected beam at an Interstory Drift Angle of 0. Results of at least two cyclic connection tests shall be provided and are permitted to be based on one of the following: (i) Tests reported in research literature or documented tests performed for other projects that are demonstrated to represent project conditions. within the limits specified in Appendix S. 9. Alternatively. 9. the required shear strength Ru of the panel zone shall be determined from Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Shear Strength . determined at the column face. provided it can be demonstrated by analysis that the additional drift due to connection deformation can be accommodated by the building.2D + 0. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web parallel to column web) The required thickness of the panel zone shall be determined in accordance with the method used in proportioning the panel zone of the tested connection.2S plus the shear resulting from the application of a moment of 2[1.3a.2. (2) The required flexural strength of the connection. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall satisfy the following three requirements: (1) The connection must be capable of sustaining an Interstory Drift Angle of at least 0. a lesser value of Vu is permitted if justified by analysis.5L + 0.1R y Fy Z /distance between plastic hinge locations].04 radians. Such analysis shall include effects of overall frame stability including second order effects.

3b. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction (9-2) . shall conform to the following requirement: t ≥ (dz + w z )/90 where t = thickness of column web or doubler plate. When doubler plates are placed away from the column web. in.0. Panel Zone Thickness The individual thicknesses t of column webs and doubler plates. 9. in. in.75Py . (mm) = thickness of the column flange. when local buckling of the column web and doubler plate is prevented with plug welds between them. the total Panel Zone thickness shall satisfy Equation 9-2. (mm) = overall column depth. (a) When Pu ≤ 0. (mm) dz = Panel Zone depth between Continuity Plates.Sect. (mm) = specified minimum yield strength of the Panel Zone steel.6Fy dc t p 1 + where tp dc bc f tc f db Fy = total thickness of Panel Zone including doubler plate(s). in. in. ksi (MPa) 2 3bc f tc f d b dc t p (9-1) (b) When Pu > 0. 9. Panel Zone Doubler Plates Doubler plates shall be welded to the column flanges using either a completejoint-penetration groove-welded or fillet-welded joint that develops the design shear strength of the full doubler plate thickness. When doubler plates are placed against the column web. if used. in. May 21. Rv shall be calculated using LRFD Specification Equation K1-12. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Rv = 0.3c. (mm) Alternatively. 9. The design shear strength v Rv of the panel zone shall be determined using v = 1.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 15 the summation of the moments at the column faces as determined by projecting the expected moments at the plastic hinge points to the column faces. in. in. (mm) w z = Panel Zone width between column flanges. they shall be welded across the top and bottom edges to develop the proportion of the total force that is transmitted to the doubler plate. they shall be placed symmetrically in pairs and welded to Continuity Plates to develop the proportion of the total force that is transmitted to the doubler plate.75Py . (mm) = width of the column flange. (mm) = overall beam depth.

9. A g = gross area of column. ksi (MPa) Puc = required column axial compressive strength. in. Where employed. It is permitted to take M* pc = Z c (Fyc − Puc /A g ). Alternatively. it is permitted to determine M* pb from test results as required in Section 9.16 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Sect.3 (mm3 ) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. M* pb is determined by summing the projections of the expected beam flexural strength(s) at the plastic hinge location(s) to the column centerline.4.1R y Fyb Z b + Mv ).2b. 9. 9. the Reduced Beam Section shall meet the required strength as specified in Section 9.5. Continuity Plates Continuity Plates shall be provided to match the tested connection. The drilling of flange holes or trimming of beam flange width is permitted if testing demonstrates that the resulting configuration can develop stable plastic hinges that meet the requirements in Section 9. where Mv is the additional moment due to shear amplification from the location of the plastic hinge to the column centerline.0 M pb where M* pc = the sum of the moments in the column above and below the joint at the intersection of the beam and column centerlines. in.3 (mm3 ) Z c = plastic section modulus of the column.2a(2). 9.3 (mm3 ) z b = minimum plastic section modulus at the Reduced Beam Section. M* pc is determined by summing the projections of the nominal flexural strengths of the column (including haunches where used) above and below the joint to the beam centerline with a reduction for the axial force in the column. Beam and Column Limitations Abrupt changes in beam flange area are not permitted in plastic hinge regions. When connections with Reduced Beam Sections are used. May 21.2 (mm2 ) Fyc = specified minimum yield strength of column. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . the mid-line between centerlines shall be used.2b or by analysis based upon the tests. It is permitted to take M* pb = (1. Beams and columns shall satisfy the width-thickness limitations given in Table I-8-1. When the centerlines of opposing beams in the same joint do not coincide.1R y Fyb z b + Mv ). kips (a positive number) (N) Z b = plastic section modulus of the beam. in. Column-Beam Moment Ratio The following relationship shall be satisfied at beam-to-column connections: M∗ pc (9-3) ∗ > 1.6. in. it is permitted to take M* pb = (1. M* pb = the sum of the moment(s) in the beam(s) at the intersection of the beam and column centerlines.

7a. the following requirements shall apply: (1) The column flanges shall be laterally supported at the levels of both the top and bottom beam flanges. 9. this requirement does not apply in the following two cases: (a) Columns with Puc < 0. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint Column flanges at beam-to-column connections require lateral bracing only at the level of the top flanges of the beams when a column is shown to remain elastic outside of the Panel Zone.7. May 21. Unrestrained Connections A column containing a beam-to-column connection with no lateral bracing transverse to the seismic frame at the connection shall be designed using the distance between adjacent lateral braces as the column height for buckling transverse to the seismic frame and shall conform to LRFD Specification Chapter H.4. (b) Columns in any story that have a ratio of design shear strength to required shear strength that is 50 percent greater than the story above. except that E shall be taken as the lesser of: (a) The Amplified Seismic Load. (ii) Columns where: (1) the sum of the design shear strengths of all exempted columns in the story is less than 20 percent of the required story shear strength.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 17 Exception: When columns conform to the requirements in Section 9. When a column cannot be shown to remain elastic outside of the Panel Zone. 9. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 9. a column line is defined as a single line of columns or parallel lines of columns located within 10 percent of the plan dimension perpendicular to the line of columns. (2) Each column-flange lateral bracing shall be designed for a Required Strength that is equal to 2 percent of the nominal beam flange strength (Fy b f tb f ). by means of the column web or by the flanges of perpendicular beams.7b. and (2) the sum of the design shear strengths of all exempted columns on each column line within that story is less than 33 percent of the required story shear strength on that column line. except that: (1) The required column strength shall be determined from the LRFD Specification. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. either directly or indirectly.3Fyc A g for all load combinations other than those determined using the Amplified Seismic Load that meet either of the following requirements: (i) Columns used in a one-story building or the top story of a multistory building. For the purpose of this exception. (3) Column flanges shall be laterally supported. 9.Sect. Restrained Connections . (b) 125 percent of the frame Design Strength based upon either the beam design flexural strength or Panel Zone design shear strength. It shall be permitted to assume that the column remains elastic when the ratio calculated using Equation 9-3 is greater than 2.

Where groove welds are used to make the splice. (3) The column required flexural strength transverse to the seismic frame shall include that moment caused by the application of the beam flange force specified in Section 9. Where the design is based upon assemblies tested in accordance with Appendix S.9. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) Intermediate Moment Frames (IMF) are expected to withstand limited inelastic deformations in their members and connections when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake.7a(2) in addition to the second-order moment due to the resulting column flange displacement. The required shear strength of column web splices shall be at least equal to 2M pc /H . The Required Strength of lateral bracing provided adjacent to plastic hinges shall be at least 6 percent of the expected Nominal Strength of the beam flange computed as R y Fy b f t f . The unbraced length between lateral braces shall not exceed 0. and shall have a required flexural strength that is at least equal to R y times the design flexural strength of the smaller column. changes in cross-section and other locations where analysis indicates that a plastic hinge will form during inelastic deformations of the SMF.18 PART I – INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) [Sect. Steel backing need not be removed unless required by the Engineer of Record. 9. column splices in Special Moment Frames shall be located as described in Section 8. IMF shall meet the requirements in this Section. Scope Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Weld tabs shall be removed. 9. as applicable. In addition. May 21. The Required Strength of lateral bracing shall be at least 2 percent of the beam flange Nominal Strength. (2) The slenderness L/r for the column shall not exceed 60. 10. Mu shall be computed as R y ZF y . In addition.1. The required stiffness of all lateral bracing shall be determined in accordance with Equation C3-8 or C3-10. 10.086r y E s /Fy .3b. Exception: The Required Strength of the column splice considering appropriate stress concentration factors or fracture mechanics stress intensity factors need not exceed that determined by inelastic analyses. Lateral Bracing of Beams Both flanges of beams shall be laterally braced directly or indirectly.4 and 7. lateral braces shall be placed near concentrated forces. they shall be complete-joint-penetration groove welds. Fy b f t f . Column Splices Column splices shall comply with the requirements in Sections 8.8. 10.4a. the placement of lateral bracing for the beams shall be consistent with that used in the tests. In these equations. of the LRFD Specification. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

Alternatively. Such analysis shall include effects of overall frame stability including second order effects. (2) The flexural strength of the connection. connection configurations. (b) Provide qualifying cyclic test results in accordance with Appendix S. Conformance Demonstration All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall be demonstrated to satisfy the requirements of Section 10.3. must equal at least 80 percent of the nominal plastic moment of the connected beam at an Interstory Drift Angle of 0.02 radians.Sect. 10. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Requirements All beam-to-column joints and connections used in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall satisfy the following three requirements: (1) The connection must be capable of sustaining an Interstory Drift Angle of at least 0.2. a lesser value of Vu is permitted if justified by analysis. Results of at least two non-identical cyclic connection tests shall be provided and are permitted to be based on one of the following: (i) Tests reported in research literature or documented tests performed for other projects that are demonstrated to represent project conditions. provided it can be demonstrated by analysis that the additional drift due to connection deformation can be accommodated by the building. determined at the column face.2a. within the limits specified in Appendix S. 10. (ii) Tests that are conducted specifically for the project and are representative of project member sizes.2b. May 21.] PART I – INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) 19 10. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . material strengths.02 radians. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web parallel to column web) No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.2S plus the shear resulting from the application of 2[1. within the limits specified in Appendix S. Connections that accommodate the required Interstory Drift Angle within the connection elements and provide the required flexural and shear strengths noted above are permitted.5L + 0. The required shear strength need not exceed the shear resulting from the application of Load Combinations using the Amplified Seismic Load.2D + 0.1R y Fy Z / distance between plastic hinge segments].2a by one of the following: (a) Use a connection prequalified for IMF in accordance with Appendix P. and matching connection processes. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections 10. 10. (3) The required shear strength Vu of the connection shall be determined using the load combination 1.

11.2. (a) Where steel backing is used in connections with complete-joint-penetration (CJP) flange welds.1R y M p of the beam or girder or the maximum moment that can be delivered by the system.4. Column Splices Column splices shall comply with the requirements in Sections 8. 10. Beam and Column Limitations No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification.7. Connections are permitted to be FR or PR moment connections as follows: (1) FR moment connections that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall be designed for a required flexural strength Mu that is at least equal to 1. 10. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.6. the root pass shall be backgouged to sound weld metal and backwelded with a reinforcing fillet. 10. 10.5. Removal of steel backing and tabs shall be as follows: (i) Following the removal of backing.20 PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) [Sect.3b. 10. whichever is less. Continuity Plates Continuity Plates shall be provided to be consistent with the tested connection. (8 mm). Scope . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 11. Column-Beam Moment Ratio No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) are expected to withstand minimal inelastic deformations in their members and connections when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake. 11. Lateral Bracing of Beams No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. The reinforcing fillet shall have a minimum leg size of 5/16 -in.8. 11. 10. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections Beam-to-column connections shall be made with welds and/or high-strength bolts.1. May 21. OMF shall meet the requirements in this Section.4 and 7. steel backing and tabs shall be removed except that top-flange backing attached to the column by a continuous fillet weld on the edge below the CJP groove weld need not be removed.9.

the required shear strength Vu of a beam-to-column connection shall be determined using the load combination 1. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (6 mm) of the plate edge is acceptable. Alternatively. (c) The stiffness and strength of the PR moment connections shall be considered in the design. May 21. Notches and gouges shall be repaired as required by the Engineer of Record.4. Beam and Column Limitations No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. Grinding to a flush condition is not required. including the effect on overall frame stability. (3 mm) of the base metal surface except at Continuity Plates where removal to within 1/ in. (b) The nominal flexural strength of the connection. The contour of the weld at the ends shall provide a smooth transition. Vu shall be determined from the load combination above plus the shear resulting from the maximum end moment that the PR moment connections are capable of resisting. 11. (2 mm) below the surface of the base metal shall be filled with weld metal. (c) Double-sided partial-joint-penetration groove welds and double-sided fillet welds that resist tensile forces in connections shall be designed to resist a required force of 1. Gouges and notches are not permitted. (b) Where weld access holes are provided. shall be no less than 50 percent of M p of the connected beam or column. Mn . 11.5L + 0. For FR moment connections.1R y Fy A g of the connected element or part.3. Edges of the weld 4 tab shall be finished to a surface roughness value of 500 micro-in. (2) PR moment connections are permitted when the following requirements are met: (a) Such connections shall provide for the Design Strength as specified in Section 11. (13 micrometers).1R y Fy Z / distance between plastic hinge segments].2D + 0. they shall be as shown in Figure 11-1. and shall be free of notches and gouges. Material removed by grinding that extends more than 1/ 16 in. a lesser value of Vu is permitted if justified by analysis.] PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) 21 (ii) Weld tab removal shall extend to within 1/8 in. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. The weld access hole shall be ground smooth to a surface roughness value not to exceed 500 micro in. Singlesided partial-joint-penetration groove welds and single-sided fillet welds shall not be used to resist tensile forces in the connections. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web parallel to column web) No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. free of notches and sharp corners.Sect. (13 micrometers) or better. 11. whichever is less. The transitional slope of any area where gouges and notches have been removed shall not exceed 1:5.2S plus the shear resulting from the application of a moment of 2[1.2a(1) above. For PR moment connections.

The Required Strength of these joints shall not Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Continuity Plates shall be provided to transmit beam flange forces to the column web or webs. May 21. 11. Fig. 11. 11-1. 4.5. Continuity Plates When FR moment connections are made by means of welds of beam flanges or beam-flange connection plates directly to column flanges. or minus 1/4 tbf ) 3/ t to t . Bevel as required by AWS D1. Weld access hole detail (from FEMA 350. or two-sided fillet welds. (19 mm) minimum (± 1/ in.) (± 6 mm) 4 bf bf 4 4 3/ in. “Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings”). (13 mm) (plus 1/2 tbf . two-sided partial-joint-penetration groove welds combined with reinforcing fillet welds. (10 mm) minimum radius (plus not limited. 3/ in.1 for selected groove weld procedure. The welded joints of the Continuity Plates to the column flanges shall be made with either complete-joint-penetration groove welds. minus 0) 8 3 tbf (± 1/2 in.22 PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) [Sect.) (±13 mm) Tolerances shall not accumulate to the extent that the angle of the access hole cut to the flange surface exceeds 25◦ . Notes: 1. Plates shall have a thickness greater than or equal to that of the beam flange or beam-flange connection plate. Larger of tbf or 1/2 in. 5. 3. 2.

4. 11. The Required Strength of the welded joints of the Continuity Plates to the column web shall be the least of the following: (a) The sum of the Design Strengths at the connections of the continuity plate to the column flanges. 12. 12.5 nor be less than 0. (c) The weld Design Strength that develops the design shear strength of the column Panel Zone.8.1. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF) are expected to withstand significant inelastic deformation within a specially designed segment of the truss when subjected to the forces from the motions of the Design Earthquake.9. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 12. 11. Column Splices Column splices shall comply with the requirements in Section 8.] PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) 23 be less than the Design Strength of the contact area of the plate with the column flange. STMF shall meet the requirements in this Section. 12. Special Segment Each horizontal truss that is part of the Seismic Load Resisting System shall have a special segment that is located between the quarter points of the span of the truss. Column-Beam Moment Ratio No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. 11. STMF shall be limited to span lengths between columns not to exceed 65 ft (20 m) and overall depth not to exceed 6 ft (1.7. The length of the special segment shall be between 0.5 times the truss span length.8 m).67. (d) The actual force transmitted by the stiffener. neither a combination thereof nor the use of other truss diagonal Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. The columns and truss segments outside of the special segments shall be designed to remain elastic under the forces that can be generated by the fully yielded and strain-hardened special segment. Lateral Bracing of Beams No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. (b) The design shear strength of the contact area of the plate with the column web. Panels within a special segment shall either be all Vierendeel panels or all X-braced panels.6. 11.1 and 0. Scope .Sect. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. The length-to-depth ratio of any panel in the special segment shall neither exceed 1.2.

nor within one-half the panel length from the ends of the special segment. Diagonal members in any panel of the special segment shall be made of identical sections. replacing the earthquake load term E with the lateral loads necessary to develop the expected vertical nominal shear strength in the special segment Vne given as: Vne = (L − L s ) 3. 12. Where diagonal members are used in the special segment.4. The end connection of diagonal web members in the special segment shall have a Design Strength that is at least equal to the expected nominal axial tensile strength of the web member.45 times Fy A g .25 times the nominal tensile strength of the diagonal member. 12.075E s I + R y (Pnt + 0. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members In the fully yielded state. see Section 6. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . except those in the special segment defined in Section 12. configurations is permitted.75R y Mnc + 0. 12. kips (N) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (mm) Pnt = nominal axial tension strength of diagonal members of the special segment. where = 0. shall have a Design Strength to resist the effects of load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code.03Fy A g . kip-in. in.2 (N-mm2 ) L = span length of the truss.2 Mnc = nominal flexural strength of the chord member of the special segment. kip-in. (N-mm) E s I = flexural elastic stiffness of the chord members of the special segment. when provided. Such diagonal members shall be interconnected at points where they cross.3. they shall be arranged in an X pattern separated by vertical members. R y Fy A g . The interconnection shall have a Design Strength adequate to resist a force that is at least equal to 0. (mm) L s = length of the special segment. The top and bottom chord members in the special segment shall be made of identical sections and shall provide at least 25 percent of the required vertical shear strength in the fully yielded state.2.3Pnc ) sin Ls L3 s (12-1) where R y = yield stress modification factor. Nominal Strength of Non-special Segment Members Members and connections of STMF. in.24 PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) [Sect. Bolted connections shall not be used for web members within the special segment. Splicing of chord members is not permitted within the special segment. the special segment shall develop the required vertical shear strength through the design flexural strength of the chord members and the design axial tensile and compressive strengths of the diagonal web members. The required axial strength in the chord members shall not exceed 0. Axial forces due to factored dead plus live loads in diagonal web members within the special segment shall not exceed 0. May 21.9.

unless the Nominal Strength Pn of each brace in compression is larger than the Required Strength Pu resulting from the application of load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code including the Amplified Seismic Load. Diagonal web members within the special segment shall be made of flat bars. Scope . Slenderness Bracing members shall have Kl/r ≤ 5. Required Compressive Strength The Required Strength of a bracing member in axial compression shall not exceed c Pn .1. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 13. 13.87 E s /Fy . Lateral braces outside of the special segment shall have a Required Strength at least 2. 13. Lateral Force Distribution Along any line of bracing. 13. Lateral Bracing The top and bottom chords of the trusses shall be laterally braced at the ends of special segment. SCBF have increased ductility over OCBF (see Section 14) due to lesser strength degradation when compression braces buckle. For the purposes of this provision.5. at least 30 percent but no more than 70 percent of the total horizontal force is resisted by tension braces. braces shall be deployed in alternate directions such that. kips (N) = angle of diagonal members with the horizontal 12. Compactness The width-thickness ratio of chord members shall not exceed the limiting ps values from Table I-8-1.2a. Bracing Members 13. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) are expected to withstand significant inelastic deformations when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake. a line of bracing is defined as a single line or parallel lines whose Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 25 Pnc = nominal axial compression strength of diagonal members of the special segment.2c. The Required Strength of each lateral brace at the ends of and within the special segment shall be at least 5 percent of the nominal axial compressive strength Pnc of the special segment chord member.2.2b.5 percent of the nominal compressive strength Pnc of the largest adjoining chord member.Sect. along the entire length of the truss. 13.6. and at intervals not to exceed L p according to LRFD Specification Section F1. for either direction of force parallel to the bracing. SCBF shall meet the requirements in this Section. May 21. 13. 12.

Tensile Strength The design tensile strength of bracing members and their connections. (b) The maximum force. (3) Round HSS shall have an outside diameter to wall thickness ratio conforming to Table I-8-1 unless the round HSS wall is stiffened. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 13.1 (i. 13.3a.. Exception: Where it can be shown that braces will buckle without causing shear in the stitches. The total design shear strength of the stitches shall be at least equal to the design tensile strength of each element.3b. Bolted stitches shall not be located within the middle one-fourth of the clear brace length. as specified in LRFD Specification Section J4. indicated by analysis that can be transferred to the brace by the system. Bracing Connections 13. Width-thickness Ratios Width-thickness ratios of stiffened and unstiffened compression elements of braces shall meet the compactness requirements in LRFD Specification Table B5.2e. shall be at least equal to the Required Strength of the brace as determined in Section 13. based upon the limit states of tension rupture on the effective net section and block shear rupture strength.2d. 13.4 times the governing slenderness ratio of the built-up member. the spacing of the stitches shall be such that the slenderness ratio l/r of the individual elements between the stitches does not exceed 0. plan offset is 10 percent or less of the building dimension perpendicular to the line of bracing. Built-up Members The spacing of stitches shall be such that the slenderness ratio l/r of individual elements between the stitches does not exceed 0. The spacing of stitches shall be uniform and not less than two stitches shall be used. 13.26 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Sect.75 times the governing slenderness ratio of the built-up member. in Table I-8-1. Required Strength The Required Strength of bracing connections (including beam-to-column connections if part of the bracing system) shall be the lesser of the following: (a) The nominal axial tensile strength of the bracing member. < p ) and the following requirements: (1) The width-thickness ratio of angle legs shall comply with (2) I-shaped members and channels shall comply with ps ps in Table I-8-1.3.e. May 21. 13. determined as R y Fy A g . 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .3a. (4) Rectangular HSS shall have a flat width to wall thickness ratio conforming to Table I-8-1 unless the rectangular HSS walls are stiffened.

] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 27 13. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . the required flexural strength of the connection shall be equal to 1. In addition to meeting the requirements in Section 8. 13. Gusset Plates The design of gusset plates shall include consideration of buckling. Columns Columns in SCBF shall meet the following requirements: Width-thickness ratios of stiffened and unstiffened compression elements of columns shall meet the requirements for bracing members in Section 13. 13. Exception: Limitations 2 and 3 need not apply to penthouses. assuming that bracing is not present. K-Type Bracing K-type Braced Frames are not permitted for SCBF. Special Bracing Configuration Requirements 13.3b. 13. except that a load Q b shall be substituted for the term E.4b. and have a Design Strength that is at least equal to the nominal compressive strength Fcr A g of the brace are permitted.4.3 times c Pn for the brace in compression.4a. Exception: Brace connections that meet the requirements in Section 13.Sect.3d. one-story buildings.3c. This load effect shall be calculated using a minimum of R y Py for the brace in tension and a maximum of 0. (2) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to support the effects of all tributary dead and live loads from load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code. 13. can accommodate the inelastic rotations associated with brace post-buckling deformations. May 21. 13. nor the top story of buildings. V-Type and Inverted-V-Type Bracing V-type and inverted-V-type Braced Frames shall meet the following requirements: (1) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be continuous between columns.4. Flexural Strength In the direction that the brace will buckle.5. (3) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to resist the effects of load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code. column splices in SCBF shall be designed to develop at least the nominal shear strength of the smaller Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (4) The top and bottom flanges of the beam at the point of intersection of braces shall be designed to support a lateral force that is equal to 2 percent of the nominal beam flange strength Fy b f tb f .2d. Q b is the maximum unbalanced vertical load effect applied to the beam by the braces.1R y M p of the brace about the critical buckling axis.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .2. OCBF shall meet the requirements in this Section. In buildings exceeding five stories in height. 14. the columns. EBF shall meet the requirements in this Section. 14. Scope 15. and the beam segments outside of the Links shall be designed to remain essentially elastic under the maximum forces that can be generated by the fully yielded and strain-hardened Links. Splices shall be located in the middle one-third of the column clear height. connected member and 50 percent of the nominal flexural strength of the smaller connected section.1. Scope Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. in OCBFs shall be determined using the load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code. including the Amplified Seismic Load.23 E s /Fy shall not be used in V or inverted-V configurations. The Required Strength of brace connections is the expected tensile strength of the brace. Links Links shall comply with the width-thickness ratios in Table I-8-1. 15. The specified minimum yield stress of steel used for Links shall not exceed 50 ksi (345 MPa). 14. the upper story of an EBF system is permitted to be designed as an OCBF or an SCBF and still be considered to be part of an EBF system for the purposes of determining system factors in the Applicable Building Code. Braces with Kl/r greater than 4. The diagonal braces. ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBFs) are expected to withstand significant inelastic deformations in the Links when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake. Strength The Required Strength of the members and connections. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF) are expected to withstand limited inelastic deformations in their members and connections when subjected to the forces resulting from the motions of the Design Earthquake. other than brace connections.2. 15. 15. the required shear strength of the Link Vu shall not exceed the design shear strength of the Link Vn .28 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Sect.1. except where permitted in this Section. Except as limited below. determined as R y Fy A g . May 21. The web of a Link shall be single thickness without doubler-plate reinforcement and without web penetrations.

15.75tw nor 3/8 in. when (Aw /A g ) < 0.3. Link Stiffeners Full-depth web stiffeners shall be provided on both sides of the Link web at the diagonal brace ends of the Link. . kips (N) e = Link length. (15-3) 2 (15-1) (15-2) M pa = 1.15 − 0.5 (Aw /A g )]1.15Py . where: = 0.6M p /V p and 2.6M p /V p where: Aw = (db − 2t f )tw = Pu /Vu The Link Rotation Angle is the inelastic angle between the Link and the beam outside of the Link when the total story drift is equal to the Design Story Drift. (mm) Aw = (db -2t f )tw If the required axial strength Pu in a Link is equal to or less than 0.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 29 where: = 0.6M p /V p nor 1. If the required axial strength Pu in a Link exceeds 0. These stiffeners shall have a combined width not less than (bf − 2tw ) and a thickness not less than 0. whichever is larger.6M p /V p or less. (c) The value determined by linear interpolation between the above values for Links of length between 1. the effect of axial force on the Link design shear strength need not be considered. where Py is equal to Fy A g .6M p /V p or greater.15Py . (10 mm). where bf and tw are the Link flange width and Link web thickness.9 V pa = V p 1 − Pu /Py (2) The length of the Link shall not exceed: [1. in. (b) 0. The Link Rotation Angle shall not exceed the following values: (a) 0.08 radians for Links of length 1.3. (15-4) when (Aw /A g ) ≥ 0. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . the following additional requirements shall be met: (1) The Link design shear strength shall be the lesser of V pa or 2 M pa /e.6Fy Aw .02 radians for Links of length 2.18M p 1 − Pu /Py Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 15. kips (N) V p = 0. equal to the lesser of V p or 2M p /e.9 Vn = Nominal shear strength of the Link. May 21.6M p /V p . respectively.3.Sect.

stiffeners are required on only one side of the Link web.6M p /V p and less than 5M p /V p shall be provided with intermediate web stiffeners placed at a distance of 1. May 21. within the limits specified in Appendix S. Results of at least two cyclic connection tests shall be provided and are permitted to be based on one of the following: (i) Tests reported in research literature or documented tests performed for other projects that are demonstrated to represent project conditions. Link-to-Column Connections Link-to-column connections must be capable of sustaining the maximum Link Rotation Angle based on the length of the Link. and the width shall be not less than (bf /2)-tw . (b) Links of length greater than 2. 15. The Required Strength of fillet welds fastening the stiffener to the flanges is Ast Fy /4.08 and 0. and matching connection processes. (635 mm) in depth or greater.02 radians.6M p /V p or less shall be provided with intermediate web stiffeners spaced at intervals not exceeding (30tw − d/5) for a Link Rotation Angle of 0.6M p /V p shall be provided with intermediate web stiffeners meeting the requirements of 1 and 2 above. (e) Intermediate Link web stiffeners shall be full depth. Link-to-column connections shall be demonstrated to satisfy the above requirements by one of the following: (a) Use a connection Prequalified for EBF in accordance with Appendix P.30 PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) [Sect. similar intermediate stiffeners are required on both sides of the web.2 at the maximum Link Rotation Angle. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (d) Intermediate web stiffeners are not required in Links of lengths greater than 5M p /V p . as specified in Section 15. (635 mm) in depth.08 radians or (52tw − d/5) for Link Rotation Angles of 0. where Ast is the area of the stiffener. (c) Links of length between 1. measured at the column face. whichever is larger. The thickness of one-sided stiffeners shall not be less than tw or 3/8 in.02 radians or less. The strength of the connection.2. For Links that are less than 25 in.5 times bf from each end of the Link. Linear interpolation shall be used for values between 0. (10 mm). must equal at least the nominal shear strength of the Link. For Links that are 25 in. 15. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Vn .6M p /V p and 2. (ii) Tests that are conducted specifically for the project and are representative of project member sizes. connection configurations. (b) Provide qualifying cyclic test results in accordance with Appendix S. Links shall be provided with intermediate web stiffeners as follows: (a) Links of lengths 1. within the limits specified in Appendix S.4. as specified in Section 15. material strengths. The Required Strength of fillet welds connecting a Link stiffener to the Link web is Ast Fy .

cyclic testing of the reinforced connection is not required if the Design Strength of the reinforced section and the connection equals or exceeds the Required Strength calculated based upon the strain-hardened Link as described in Section 15. p in LRFD Specification Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. where Vn is as defined in Section 15. The Required Strength of the diagonal brace-to-beam connection at the Link end of the brace shall be at least the expected Nominal Strength of the brace as given in Section 15. If the brace resists a portion of the Link end moment.6.2.3 shall be placed at the Link-to-reinforcement interface. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .1. 15. For determining the Design Strength of this portion of the beam. it is permitted to multiply the Design Strengths determined from the LRFD Specification by R y .6. The design of the beam outside the Link shall meet the following requirements: (1) The Required Strength of the beam outside of the Link shall be the forces generated by at least 1. the intersection of the brace and beam centerlines shall be at the end of the Link or in the Link. Full depth stiffeners as required in Section 15. No part of this connection shall extend over the Link length.] PART I – ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (EBF) 31 Exception: Where reinforcement at the beam-to-column connection at the Link end precludes yielding of the beam over the reinforced length.2. Diagonal Brace and Beam Outside of Link The required combined axial and flexural strength of the diagonal brace shall be the axial forces and moments generated by the expected nominal shear strength of the Link R y Vn increased by 125 percent to account for strain-hardening. Where such Links are used and the Link length does not exceed 1. The width-thickness ratio of the brace shall satisfy Table B5.1 times the expected nominal shear strength of the Link R y Vn . (2) The beam shall be provided with lateral bracing where analysis indicates that support is necessary to maintain the stability of the beam. where Vn is as defined in Section 15.6. Lateral bracing shall be provided at both the top and bottom flanges of the beam and each shall have a Required Strength of at least 2 percent of the beam flange Nominal Strength computed as Fy b f t f . At the connection between the diagonal brace and the beam at the Link end of the brace. shall exceed the Required Strengths as defined above. Lateral Bracing of Link Lateral bracing shall be provided at both the top and bottom Link flanges at the ends of the Link.6M p /V p . The Required Strength of end lateral bracing of Links is 6 percent of the expected Nominal Strength of the Link flange computed as R y Fy b f t f . the Link is permitted to be the beam segment from the end of the reinforcement to the brace connection. as determined in LRFD Specification Chapter H (including Appendix H3). May 21. 15.5. 15. The Design Strengths of the diagonal brace.Sect. the connection shall be designed as an FR moment connection.

where Vn is as defined in Section 15. the Required Strength of columns shall be determined from load combinations as stipulated by the Applicable Building Code. The connection shall have a Required Strength to resist rotation about the longitudinal axis of the beam based upon two equal and opposite forces of at least 2 percent of the beam flange Nominal Strength computed as Fy b f t f acting laterally on the beam flanges. Nondestructive testing of welds in conformance with AWS D1. 16. Exception: The amount of nondestructive testing is permitted to be reduced if approved by the Engineer of Record and the Authority Having Jurisdiction. such as participation in a recognized quality certification program. Beam-to-Column Connections Beam-to-column connections away from Links are permitted to be designed as pinned in the plane of the web.1 to account for strain-hardening.1 shall also be performed. The contractor’s quality control program and qualifications. 10. QUALITY ASSURANCE The general requirements and responsibilities for performance of a quality assurance plan shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Authority Having Jurisdiction and the specifications of the Engineer of Record. in accordance with a written practice. 11. 12. The minimum special inspection and testing contained in the quality assurance plan beyond that required in LRFD Specification Section M5 shall be as follows: (1) Visual inspection of welding shall be the primary method used to confirm that the procedures.8. but shall not serve to replace visual inspection. 13. as required by the Engineer of Record.1. 15. Visual inspections shall be conducted by qualified personnel.2. May 21.32 PART I – QUALITY ASSURANCE [Sect. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . The expected Nominal Strength of the Link is R y Vn . The special inspections and tests necessary to establish that the construction is in conformance with these Provisions shall be included in a quality assurance plan. except that the moments and axial loads introduced into the column at the connection of a Link or brace shall not be less than those generated by the expected Nominal Strength of the Link multiplied by 1. shall be considered when establishing a quality control plan.7. Required Column Strength In addition to the requirements in Section 8. When welds from web doubler plates or Continuity Plates occur in the k-Area of rolled steel columns. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 14 and 15 shall be tested using approved nondestructive methods conforming to AWS D1. (2) All complete-joint-penetration and partial-joint-penetration groove welded joints that are subjected to net tensile forces as part of the Seismic Load Resisting Systems in Sections 9. 15. using approved nondestructive methods conforming to AWS D1. 16. the k-Area adjacent to the welds shall be inspected after fabrication. materials and workmanship incorporated in construction are those that have been specified and approved for the project.1.

A sufficient number of tests shall be performed Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. without the need for further qualifying cyclic tests. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Connections shall be Prequalified based on test data satisfying Section P3.2. P2. P2. The CPRP shall also provide the same information when limits are to be changed for a previously prequalified connection.1. Prequalified Connections are permitted to be used. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . The CPRP shall determine the number of tests and the variables considered by the tests for connection prequalification. within the applicable limits of prequalification. or the required Link Rotation Angle for EBFs. on a consistent and reliable basis within the specified limits of prequalification. May 21. All applicable limit states for the connection that affect the stiffness. and link-to-column connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBFs). P3. The combined body of evidence for prequalification must be sufficient to assure that the connection can supply the required Interstory Drift Angle for SMF and IMF systems. SCOPE This appendix contains minimum requirements for prequalification of beam-tocolumn moment connections in Special Moment Frames (SMFs) and Intermediate Moment Frames (IMFs).PART I 33 APPENDIX P PREQUALIFICATION OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS P1. Basis for Prequalification P2. stability related limit states. The effect of design variables listed in Section P4 shall be addressed for connection prequalification. Authority for Prequalification Prequalification of a connection and the associated limits of prequalification shall be established by a Connection Prequalification Review Panel (CPRP) approved by the Authority Having Jurisdiction. These include fracture related limit states. TESTING REQUIREMENTS Data used to support connection prequalification shall be based on tests conducted in accordance with Appendix S. supported by analytical studies and design models. strength and deformation capacity of the connection and the Seismic Load Resisting System must be identified. and all other limit states pertinent for the connection under consideration.

(d) Weight per foot. For connections that are already Prequalified Connections. or other. or other. box. where the Link is adjacent to columns. PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES In order to be Prequalified. (f) Material specification. the effect of the following variables on connection performance shall be considered. Section S5. beams or Links are connected to both the column flange and web. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Limits on the permissible values for each variable shall be established by the CPRP for the Prequalified Connection. or other. (g) Material specification. P4. (e) Weight per foot. (d) Depth. (f) Flange thickness. (e) Flange thickness. welded shape. (g) Span-to-depth ratio (for SMF or IMF). or other. (i) Lateral bracing. (c) Column orientation with respect to beam or Link: beam or Link is connected to column flange. (1) Beam or Link parameters: (a) Cross-section shape: wide flange. (h) Width thickness ratio of cross-section elements. May 21. (h) Width-thickness ratio of cross-section elements. additional non-identical specimens shall be tested prior to changing prequalification limits. or other. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (j) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration. (c) Depth. (b) Cross-section fabrication method: rolled shape. or Link length (for EBF). (i) Lateral bracing. on enough non-identical specimens to demonstrate that the connection has the ability and reliability to undergo the required Interstory Drift Angle for SMFs and IMFs and the required Link Rotation Angle for EBFs. (b) Cross-section fabrication method: rolled shape.34 PART I – PREQUALIFICATION VARIABLES [App. and the limits of prequalification are being changed. (j) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration. (2) Column parameters: (a) Cross-section shape: wide flange. welded shape. beam or Link is connected to column web. P4.2. The limits on member sizes for prequalification shall not exceed the limits specified in Appendix S. box.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . geometry and finish. fillet. short-slot.App. (b) Bolt Grade: ASTM A325. (c) Installation requirements: pretensioned. P5. sub-punching and reaming. (c) Column-beam (or Link) moment ratio. (7) Additional Connection Details: All variables pertinent to the specific connection under consideration. punching. or other. (c) Details and treatment of weld backing and weld tabs. (4) Continuity Plates: (a) Identification of conditions under which Continuity Plates are required. PJP. snug tight. or other. or other. width and depth. (6) Bolts: (a) Bolt diameter. (f) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration. (e) Welding quality control and quality assurance. oversize. (f) Other parameters pertinent to the specific connection under consideration. The design procedure must address all applicable limit states within the limits of prequalification. (d) Weld access holes: size. PREQUALIFICATION RECORD A Prequalified Connection shall be provided with a written prequalification record with the following information: (1) General description of the Prequalified Connection and drawings that clearly identify key features and components of the connection. (d) Hole type: standard. or plug. or other. May 21. P6.] PART I – PREQUALIFICATION RECORD 35 (3) Beam (or Link) – Column Relations: (a) Panel zone strength. A490. (b) Filler metal strength and toughness. DESIGN PROCEDURE A comprehensive design procedure must be available for a Prequalified Connection. as established by the CPRP. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (b) Thickness. P6. long-slot. (c) Attachment details. (5) Welds: (a) Weld type: CJP. (b) Doubler plate attachment details. (e) Hole fabrication method: drilling.

May 21. P6. (7) Summary of material strengths (8) Summary of quality control procedures. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. as required in Section P5. (2) Description of the expected behavior of the connection in the elastic and inelastic ranges of behavior. (6) A list of references of test reports. (4) Listing of limits for all prequalification variables listed in Section P4. IMF or EBF. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .36 PART I – PREQUALIFICATION RECORD [App. (3) Listing of systems for which connection is Prequalified: SMF. research reports and other publications that provided the basis for prequalification. intended location(s) of inelastic action. and a description of limit states controlling the strength and deformation capacity of the connection. (5) A detailed description of the design procedure for the connection.

Interstory Drift Angle (S6) Link Rotation Angle (S6) S3. inelastic rotation shall be computed based upon the assumption that inelastic action is concentrated Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. additional testing shall be performed to demonstrate satisfactory and reliable performance of moment connections during actual earthquake motions. and slip between members and connection elements. Sources of inelastic rotation include yielding of members. DEFINITIONS Complete Loading Cycle. SCOPE AND PURPOSE This Appendix includes requirements for qualifying cyclic tests of beam-to-column moment connections in Moment Frames and Link-to-column connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames. This Appendix provides only minimum recommendations for simplified test conditions. The permanent or plastic portion of the rotation angle between a beam and the column or between a Link and the column of the Test Specimen. Interstory Drift Angle. radians. S2. If conditions in the actual building so warrant. The Inelastic Rotation shall be computed based on an analysis of Test Specimen deformations. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .PART I 37 APPENDIX S QUALIFYING CYCLIC TESTS OF BEAM-TO-COLUMN AND LINK-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS S1. measured in radians. A cycle of rotation taken from zero force to zero force. Inelastic Rotation. For beamto-column moment connections in Moment Frames. Alternative testing requirements are permitted when approved by the Engineer of Record and the Authority Having Jurisdiction. May 21. SYMBOLS The numbers in parentheses after the definition of a symbol refers to the Section number in which the symbol is first used. Interstory displacement divided by story height. The purpose of the testing described in this Appendix is to provide evidence that a beam-to-column connection or a Link-to-column connection satisfies the requirements for strength and Interstory Drift Angle or Link Rotation Angle in these Provisions. when required in these Provisions. including one positive and one negative peak. yielding of connection elements and connectors.

e. in the column outside of the Panel Zone. The following variables shall be replicated in the Test Specimen.. and other design. and construction features to be used in the actual building frame. S4. S5. Test Setup. S5. The connections. Test Specimen. or within connection elements. construction features. intended to model the Prototype. The combination of the Test Specimen and pertinent portions of the Test Setup. Sources of Inelastic Rotation Inelastic Rotation shall be developed in the Test Specimen by inelastic action in the same members and connection elements as anticipated in the Prototype. in the column Panel Zone. Prototype. and lateral bracing used to support and load the Test Specimen. The fraction of the total Inelastic Rotation in the Test Specimen that is developed in each member or connection element shall be at least 75 percent of the anticipated fraction of the total Inelastic Rotation in the Prototype that is developed in the corresponding member or connection element. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. detailing. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . in the beam or Link. For Link-to-column connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames. ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES The Test Specimen shall replicate as closely as is practical the pertinent design. (2) Points of inflection in the test assemblage shall coincide approximately with the anticipated points of inflection in the Prototype under earthquake loading. inelastic rotation shall be computed based upon the assumption that inelastic action is concentrated at a single point located at the intersection of the centerline of the Link with the face of the column. loading equipment. A portion of a frame used for laboratory testing. Additional lateral bracing of the Test Subassemblage is not permitted. TEST SUBASSEMBLAGE REQUIREMENTS The Test Subassemblage shall replicate as closely as is practical the conditions that will occur in the Prototype during earthquake loading. detailing. unless it replicates lateral bracing to be used in the Prototype. i. steel properties. The supporting fixtures.1. The Test Subassemblage shall include the following features: (1) The Test Specimen shall consist of at least a single column with beams or Links attached to one or both sides of the column. member sizes. and material properties of the Prototype. (3) Lateral bracing of the Test Subassemblage is permitted near load application or reaction points as needed to provide lateral stability of the Test Subassemblage. May 21.38 PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES [App. at a single point located at the intersection of the centerline of the beam with the centerline of the column. S5. Test Subassemblage.

(2) The weight per foot of the test beam or Link shall be no less than 75 percent of the weight per foot of the Prototype beam or Link. Size of Members The size of the beam or Link used in the Test Specimen shall be within the following limits: (1) The depth of the test beam or Link shall be no less than 90 percent of the depth of the Prototype beam or Link.2.App. as per the requirements in Section S5.6.2. S5.] PART I – ESSENTIAL TEST VARIABLES 39 S5. Columns and connection elements with a tested yield stress shall not be more than 15 percent above or below R y Fy for the grade of steel to be used for the corresponding elements of the Prototype. May 21.5.3. (2) The yield stress of the beam shall not be more than 15 percent below R y Fy for the grade of steel to be used for the corresponding elements of the Prototype. R y Fy shall be determined in accordance with Section 6.1. The use of yield stress values that are reported on certified mill test reports are not permitted to be used for purposes of this Section. S5. S5. In addition. Extrapolation beyond the limitations stated in this Section shall be permitted subject to qualified peer review and approval by the Authority Having Jurisdiction.4. The connection elements used in the Test Specimen shall be a full-scale representation of the connection elements used in the Prototype. The size of the column used in the Test Specimen shall properly represent the inelastic action in the column.1. S5. Welds Welds on the Test Specimen shall satisfy the following requirements: (1) Welding shall be performed in strict conformance with Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) as required in AWS D1. S5. the depth of the test column shall be no less than 90 percent of the depth of the Prototype column. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . as specified in Section S8. The WPS essential variables Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Connection Details The connection details used in the Test Specimen shall represent the Prototype connection details as closely as possible. Material Strength The following additional requirements shall be satisfied for each member or connection element of the Test Specimen that supplies Inelastic Rotation by yielding: (1) The yield stress shall be determined by material tests on the actual materials used for the Test Specimen. for the member sizes being tested. Continuity Plates The size and connection details of Continuity Plates used in the Test Specimen shall be proportioned to match the size and connection details of Continuity Plates used in the Prototype connection as closely as possible.

S6. or C slip resistance. ASTM A325. (2) The type and orientation of bolt holes (standard. Weld backing and weld tabs shall not be removed from the Test Specimen welds unless the corresponding weld backing and weld tabs are removed from the Prototype welds. (4) The welding positions used to make the welds on the Test Specimen shall be the same as those to be used for the Prototype welds. Bolts The bolted portions of the Test Specimen shall replicate the bolted portions of the Prototype connection as closely as possible. and similar items used for the Test Specimen welds shall be the same as those to be used for the corresponding Prototype welds. ASTM F1852) used in the Test Specimen shall be the same as that to be used for the Prototype. or other) used in the Test Specimen shall be the same as those to be used for the corresponding bolt holes in the Prototype. or other) in the Test Specimen shall be the same as that to be used in the corresponding bolt holes in the Prototype. LOADING HISTORY The Test Specimen shall be subjected to cyclic loads according to the requirements prescribed in Section S6. S6. sub-punching and reaming. S5. weld tabs. Additionally. (2) The specified minimum tensile strength of the filler metal used for the Test Specimen shall be the same as that to be used for the corresponding Prototype welds. shall meet the requirements in AWS D1. ASTM A490.7.2 for beam-to-column moment connections in Moment S6. (3) The specified minimum CVN toughness of the filler metal used for the Test Specimen shall not exceed the specified minimum CVN toughness of the filler metal to be used for the corresponding Prototype welds.1. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .g. access holes. long slot. B. (5) Details of weld backing.1 and shall be within the parameters established by the filler-metal manufacturer. bolted portions of the Test Specimen shall satisfy the following requirements: (1) The bolt grade (e. (6) Methods of inspection and nondestructive testing and standards of acceptance used for Test Specimen welds shall be the same as those to be used for the Prototype welds. oversize. General Requirements Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Class A. the method used to make the bolt holes (drilling. (4) Bolts in the Test Specimen shall have the same installation (pretensioned or other) and faying surface preparation (no specified slip resistance.40 PART I – LOADING HISTORY [App. (3) When Inelastic Rotation is to be developed either by yielding or by slip within a bolted portion of the connection. short slot.. May 21. or other) as that to be used for the corresponding bolts in the Prototype.

Loading sequences other than those specified in Sections S6.0025 rad.03 rad. = 0. May 21. = 0.03 rad.04 rad.2. as follows: (1) 3 cycles at (2) 3 cycles at (3) 3 cycles at (4) 2 cycles at (5) 2 cycles at (6) 2 cycles at = 0. S7.04 rad.02 rad. S7.2 and S6.3 for link-tocolumn connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames.00375 rad.0075 rad. = 0.3. = 0.01 radians. Loading Sequence for Link-to-Column Connections Qualifying cyclic tests of link-to-column moment connections in Eccentrically Braced Frames shall be conducted by controlling the Link Rotation Angle.015 rad. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . with two cycles of loading at Continue loading at increments of each step. imposed on the Test Specimen. = 0. imposed on the Test Specimen. S6.02 rad. = 0. INSTRUMENTATION Sufficient instrumentation shall be provided on the Test Specimen to permit measurement or calculation of the quantities listed in Section S9. = 0. .App.] PART I – INSTRUMENTATION 41 Frames.01 rad.01 rad. with two cycles of loading at Continue loading at increments of each step.005 rad. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. = 0. = 0. = 0. and according to the requirements prescribed in Section S6. . = 0. Loading Sequence for Beam-to-Column Moment Connections Qualifying cyclic tests of beam-to-column moment connections in Moment Frames shall be conducted by controlling the Interstory Drift Angle.3 may be used when they are demonstrated to be of equivalent or greater severity. = 0.01 radians. = 0. = 0. S6.005 rad. as follows: (1) 6 cycles at (2) 6 cycles at (3) 6 cycles at (4) 4 cycles at (5) 2 cycles at (6) 2 cycles at (7) 2 cycles at (8) 2 cycles at = 0.

as closely as practical. The displacement reported in this plot shall be measured at or near the point of load application.2. The locations on the Test Specimen where the loads and displacements were measured shall be clearly indicated. including key dimensions. The report shall include the following information: (1) A drawing or clear description of the Test Subassemblage. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . S8.2. (4) A listing or plot showing the applied load or displacement history of the Test Specimen. (5) A plot of the applied load versus the displacement of the Test Specimen. MATERIALS TESTING REQUIREMENTS Tension testing shall be conducted on samples of steel taken from the material adjacent to each Test Specimen. the loading rate to be used for the Test Specimen. Tension-test results shall be based upon testing that is conducted in accordance with Section S8. Tension Testing Requirements S8. S9. Tension testing shall be conducted and reported for the following portions of the Test Specimen: (1) Flange(s) and web(s) of beams and columns at standard locations. boundary conditions at loading and reaction points. Methods of Tension Testing Tension testing shall be conducted in accordance with ASTM A6/A6M. ASTM A370.1. S9. The report shall thoroughly document all key features and results of the test.002 strain. with the following exceptions: (1) The yield stress Fy that is reported from the test shall be based upon the yield strength definition in ASTM A370. the beam Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. or a plot of Link shear force versus Link Rotation Angle for link-to-column connections. as listed in Section S5. May 21. Tension-test results from certified mill test reports shall be reported but are not permitted to be used in place of specimen testing for the purposes of this Section. the size and location of bolt holes. a written test report meeting the requirements of the Authority Having Jurisdiction and the requirements of this Section shall be prepared. and location of lateral braces. For beam-to-column connections. (2) The loading rate for the tension test shall replicate. grades of steel. the sizes of all connection elements. (2) Any element of the connection that supplies Inelastic Rotation by yielding. welding details including filler metal. and ASTM E8. S8. and all other pertinent details of the connection. (3) A listing of all other Essential Variables for the Test Specimen. (6) A plot of beam moment versus Interstory Drift Angle for beam-to-column moment connections. using the offset method at 0.42 PART I – TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS [App. the size and grade of bolts. TEST REPORTING REQUIREMENTS For each Test Specimen. (2) A drawing of the connection detail showing member sizes.

data. S10. Additional drawings. S10.App. The portion of the total Inelastic Rotation contributed by each component of the Test Specimen shall be reported. as applicable. and fracture of any portion of the Test Specimen as applicable. instability. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (10) The results of the material tests specified in Section S8. The Test Specimen must sustain the required Interstory Drift Angle or Link Rotation Angle for at least one complete loading cycle. IMF. If the test is terminated prior to failure. (7) The Interstory Drift Angle and the total Inelastic Rotation developed by the Test Specimen. slip. the reason for terminating the test shall be clearly indicated. and discussion of the Test Specimen or test results are permitted to be included in the report. including observations of yielding. The components of the Test Specimen contributing to the total Inelastic Rotation due to yielding or slip shall be identified. ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA The Test Specimen must satisfy the strength and Interstory Drift Angle or Link Rotation Angle requirements of these Provisions for the SMF. May 21. The method used to compute Inelastic Rotations shall be clearly shown.] PART I – ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 43 moment and the Interstory Drift Angle shall be computed with respect to the centerline of the column. (11) The Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) and welding inspection reports. (9) The controlling failure mode for the Test Specimen. (8) A chronological listing of significant test observations. or EBF connection. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

the filler metal manufacturer or Contractor may elect to test a wider or narrower range of heat inputs and interpass temperatures. It is recommended that tests be conducted at the Low Heat Input Level and High Heat Input Level indicated in Table I-X-1. Regardless of the method of selecting test heat input. Testing of weld metal to be used in production shall be performed by filler metal manufacturer’s production lot. (3) Class T4 for FCAW and GMAW-C. need not conduct the mechanical A5 tests or the Weld Metal / Weld Procedure Specification (WPS) Toughness Verification Test. as defined in AWS A5. shall fall within the range of heat inputs and interpass temperatures tested. under a program acceptable to the Engineer. X1. or require lot control for each lot. SCOPE This appendix provides a standard method for qualification testing of weld filler metals required to have specified notch toughness for service in specified joints in steel Moment Frames for seismic applications. Alternatively. TEST CONDITIONS Tests shall be conducted at the range of heat inputs for which the weld filler metal will be qualified under the WPS. May 21. filler metal manufacturers approved for production of products meeting the above requirements. as follows: (1) Class C3 for SMAW electrodes. and may rely upon the Manufacturer’s certifications that the product meets the specified performance requirements.01. Alternatively. X2. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. as used by the contractor. Filler Metal Procurement Guidelines. The range of heat inputs and interpass temperatures tested shall be clearly stated on the test reports and user data sheets. (2) Class S2 for GMAW-S and SAW electrodes.44 PART I APPENDIX X WELD METAL / WELDING PROCEDURE SPECIFICATION TOUGHNESS VERIFICATION TEST Preamble: This appendix provides a procedure for qualifying the weld metal toughness and is included on an interim basis pending adoption of such a procedure by AWS or other accredited organization. the WPS. or (4) Class F2 for SAW fluxes. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

The interpass temperature shall be maintained for the remainder of the weld. All test samples shall meet the notch toughness requirements for the electrodes as provided in Section 7. (19 mm) thick with a 1/2 -inch (13 mm) root opening and 45˚ included groove angle.0-92. (1. Section A3. of any AISC-listed structural grade. TEST SPECIMENS Two test plates. the assembly shall be allowed to cool in air. All test specimens shall be taken from near the centerline of the weld at the midthickness location. One of the three may be lower. measured by temperature indicating crayons or surface temperature thermometers one inch from the center of the groove at the location shown in the figures cited above. Welded test assemblies shall not be straightened. Two of the remaining three values shall equal.1 kJ/mm) Preheat ˚F (˚C) 70 ± 25 (21 ± 14) 300 ± 25 (149 ± 14) Interpass ˚F (˚C) 200 ± 50 (93 ± 28) 500 ± 50 (260 ± 28) X3. or exceed. Should it be necessary to interrupt welding.2 kJ/mm) 80 kJ/in.20-95. one for each heat input level shall be used. a minimum of two passes per layer shall be used to fill the width. and five Charpy VNotch (CVN) test specimens shall be made per plate. The test assembly shall be restrained during welding.29-98. the specified toughness of 40 ft-lbf (54 J) energy level at the testing temperature.] PART I – ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 45 TABLE I-X-1 WPS Toughness Verification Test Welding and Preheat Conditions Cooling Rate Low Heat Input Test High Heat Input Test Heat Input 30 kJ/in. but not lower than 30 ft-lbf (41 J). The test plate shall be 3/4 in. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA The lowest and highest CVN toughness values obtained from the five specimens from a single test plate shall be disregarded. and the average of the three shall not be less than the required 40 ft-lbf (54 J) energy level. X4. Standard Methods for Mechanical Testing of Welds. Except for the root pass. CVN specimens shall be prepared in accordance with AWS B4. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. The assembly shall then be heated to the prescribed interpass temperature before welding is resumed. X4.App. May 21. A welded test assembly that has warped more than 5 degrees shall be discarded. or as in Figure 5 in AWS A5. The test assembly shall be tack welded and heated to the specified preheat temperature. or preset at approximately 5 degrees to prevent warpage in excess of 5 degrees. (3. Each plate shall be steel. Welding shall continue until the assembly has reached the interpass temperature prescribed in Table I-X-1. in order to minimize dilution effects.3b. The test plate and specimens shall be as shown in Figure 2A in AWS A5.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . May 21.46 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.

A concrete slab that is supported on and bonded to a formed steel deck and that acts as a diaphragm to transfer force to and between elements of the Seismic Force Resisting System. COMPOSITE STRUCTURAL STEEL AND REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDINGS GLOSSARY 47 The following glossary terms are applicable to Part II and are in addition to those given in the Part I Glossary. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Composite Beam. A structural steel or Composite Beam that connects adjacent reinforced concrete wall elements so that they act together to resist lateral forces. Portion along wall and diaphragm edges strengthened with structural steel sections and/or longitudinal steel reinforcement and transverse reinforcement. Boundary Member. May 21. Stiffeners that are attached to structural steel beams that are embedded in reinforced concrete walls or columns. Encased Composite Column. Concrete-Filled Composite Column. Fully Composite Beam. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Composite Column. A reinforced concrete wall that has unencased or reinforcedconcrete-encased structural steel sections as Boundary Members. Collector Element. Encased Composite Beam. A reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section (rolled or built-up) or concrete-filled steel section that is used as a column. The plates are located at the face of the reinforced concrete to provide confinement and to transfer forces to the concrete through direct bearing. Composite Plate -Concrete Shear Wall. Coupling Beam. Member that serves to transfer forces between floor diaphragms and the members of the Seismic Force Resisting System. A structural steel column (rolled or built-up) that is completely encased in reinforced concrete. A structural steel beam that is either an unencased steel beam that acts integrally with a concrete or composite slab using shear connectors or a fully reinforced-concrete-encased steel beam. Composite Shear Wall.PART II. A wall that consists of a steel plate with reinforced concrete encasement on one or both sides that provides out-of-plane stiffening to prevent buckling of the steel plate. A structural steel beam that is completely encased in reinforced concrete that is cast integrally with the slab and for which full composite action is provided by bond between the structural steel and reinforced concrete. Composite Slab. Composite Brace. Face Bearing Plates. Round or rectangular structural steel section that is filled with concrete. A reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section (rolled or builtup) or concrete-filled steel section that is used as a brace. A Composite Beam that has a sufficient number of shear connectors to develop the nominal plastic flexural strength of the composite section.

Reinforcement in composite members that is designed and detailed to resist the required loads. Steel reinforcement in composite members that is not designed to carry required forces. An unencased Composite Beam with a nominal flexural strength that is controlled by the strength of the shear stud connectors. such reinforcement is not spliced to be continuous. Restraining Bars. Partially Restrained Composite Connection. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. May 21.48 PART II – GLOSSARY Load-Carrying Reinforcement. Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Shapes. but is provided to facilitate the erection of other steel reinforcement and to provide anchorage for stirrups or ties. Partially Restrained connections as defined in the LRFD Specification that connect partially or Fully Composite Beams to steel columns with flexural resistance provided by a force couple achieved with steel reinforcement in the slab and a steel seat angle or similar connection at the bottom flange. Generally. Structural steel sections that are encased in reinforced concrete. Partially Composite Beam. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

Part II includes a Glossary. SEISMIC DESIGN CATEGORIES The Required Strength and other seismic provisions for Seismic Design Categories. When the design is based upon elastic analysis. LOADS. the stiffness properties of the component members of composite systems shall reflect their condition at the onset of significant yielding of the building. The applicable requirements in Part I shall be used for the design of structural steel components in composite systems. In the absence of a specific definition of o . hereinafter referred to as the LRFD Specification. 5. Reinforced-concrete members subjected to seismic forces shall meet the requirements in ACI 318. AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS The loads and load combinations shall be as stipulated by the Applicable Building Code (see Glossary). CODES. 2. the value for o shall be as listed in Table II-4-1. May 21. SCOPE These Provisions are intended for the design and construction of composite structural steel and reinforced concrete members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting Systems in buildings for which the design forces resulting from earthquake motions have been determined on the basis of various levels of energy dissipation in the inelastic range of response. LOAD COMBINATIONS. which is specifically applicable to this Part. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. Provisions shall be applied in conjunction with the AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Specification for Structural Steel Buildings.1a. All members and connections in the Seismic Load Resisting System shall have a Design Strength as required in the LRFD Specification and shall meet the requirements in these Provisions. Where Amplified Seismic Loads are required by these provisions. Structural steel used in the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.4-98 3. MATERIALS Structural Steel Structural steel used in composite Seismic Load Resisting Systems shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Section A3. 5. the horizontal earthquake load E (as defined in the Applicable Building Code) shall be multiplied by the overstrength factor o prescribed by the Applicable Building Code. ASCE 3-91 American Welding Society Structural Welding Code-Reinforcing Steel. except as modified in these provisions. AND STANDARDS The documents referenced in these provisions shall include those listed in Part I Section 2 with the following additions and modifications: American Society of Civil Engineers Standard for the Structural Design of Composite Slabs.] PART II – MATERIALS 49 1. 5.Sect. AWS D1. Seismic Use Groups or Seismic Zones and the limitations on height and irregularity shall be as stipulated in the Applicable Building Code. 4. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . The Part I Glossary is also applicable to Part II.1.

COMPOSITE MEMBERS Scope The design of composite members in the Seismic Load Resisting Systems described in Sections 8 through 17 shall meet the requirements in this Section and the material requirements in Section 5. 9.1. the composite diaphragm design shear strength shall be determined by in-plane shear tests of concrete-filled diaphragms. 14. Alternatively. 6. TABLE II-4-1 System Overstrength Factor. The nominal shear strength of composite diaphragms and concrete-filled steel deck diaphragms shall be taken as the nominal shear strength of the reinforced concrete above the top of the steel deck ribs in accordance with ACI 318 excluding Chapter 22. (2) For the purposes of determining the Nominal Strength of composite members. 14.2.5 ksi (17 MPa). excluding Chapters 21 and 22. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 13. 6. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 6. Concrete and steel reinforcement used in the composite Seismic Load Resisting Systems described in Sections 8. 16. and 17 shall also meet the requirements in ACI 318 Chapter 21. 9. Ωo Seismic Load Resisting System All moment-frame systems meeting Part II requirements All Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF) and wall systems meeting Part II requirements All other systems meeting Part II requirements Ωo 3 21/2 2 composite Seismic Force Resisting Systems described in Sections 8.2. 6. Details shall be designed to transfer forces between the diaphragm and Boundary Members. f c shall not be taken as greater than 10 ksi (69 MPa) for normal-weight concrete nor 4 ksi (28 MPa) for lightweight concrete. and the following requirements: (1) The specified minimum compressive strength of concrete in composite members shall equal or exceed 2. 13. May 21.50 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Sect. Composite slab diaphragms shall meet the requirements in this Section. 5. Composite Floor and Roof Slabs The design of composite floor and roof slabs shall meet the requirements of ASCE 3. Concrete and Steel Reinforcement Concrete and steel reinforcement used in composite Seismic Load Resisting Systems shall meet the requirements in ACI 318. and elements of the horizontal framing system. Collector Elements. 16 and 17 shall also meet the requirements in Part I Section 6.

6. (mm) = specified minimum yield strength of the steel beam.4. shall apply as required in the descriptions of the composite seismic systems in Sections 8 through 17. (3) The seismic requirements for reinforced concrete columns as specified in the description of the composite seismic systems in Sections 8 through 17. (50 mm) and confinement is provided by hoop reinforcement in regions where plastic hinges are expected to occur under seismic deformations. Composite Beams that are part of C-SMF as described in Section 9 shall also meet the following requirements: (1) The distance from the maximum concrete compression fiber to the plastic neutral axis shall not exceed: Ycon + db (6-1) 1700 Fy 1+ Es where Ycon db Fy Es = distance from the top of the steel beam to the top of concrete. except as modified in this Section.3. 6.3. Columns that consist of reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel sections with a structural steel area that comprises less than 4 percent of the total compositecolumn cross-section shall meet the requirements for reinforced concrete columns in ACI 318 except as modified for: (1) The steel shape shear connectors in Section 6.3. Hoop reinforcement shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21.4b and 6.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 51 6.4c. ksi (MPa) = modulus of elasticity of the steel beam. Additional requirements. as specified for intermediate and special seismic systems in Sections 6. Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns This Section is applicable to columns that: (1) consist of reinforced-concreteencased structural steel sections with a structural steel area that comprises at least 4 percent of the total composite-column cross-section. and (2) meet the additional limitations in LRFD Specification Section I2. May 21.4a. 6. Ordinary Seismic System Requirements The following requirements for Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns are applicable to all composite systems: Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.4. Composite Beams Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I. in. in. Such columns shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I. (mm) = depth of the steel beam.1. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . except when fully reinforced-concrete-encased compression elements have a reinforced concrete cover of at least 2 in. (2) The contribution of the reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section to the strength of the column as provided in ACI 318.Sect.4a(2). ksi (MPa) (2) Beam flanges shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 9.

6. welded wire fabric of equivalent area is permitted as transverse reinforcement except when prohibited for intermediate and special systems.2 through 11.6. and Pn is the nominal compressive strength of the Composite Column. In ACI 318 Sections 11. Fy and Pn are as defined above.5. where As .5. where As is the area of the structural steel section. Alternatively.1 and 12.52 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Sect.9. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. shear connectors shall be provided to transfer the force Vu (1 − As Fy /Pn ) between the structural steel section and the reinforced concrete. (2) Composite Columns that are designed to share the applied loads between the structural steel section and reinforced concrete shall have shear connectors that meet the following requirements: (a) If an external member is framed directly to the structural steel section to transfer a vertical reaction Vu . (b) If an external member is framed directly to the reinforced concrete to transfer a vertical reaction Vu . The maximum spacing of other load carrying or restraining longitudinal reinforcement shall be one-half of the least side dimension of the composite member. 6. 3 bars and need not be larger than No. (406 mm) with attachment along the outside flange faces of the embedded shape.5. The nominal shear strength of the tie reinforcement shall be determined in accordance with ACI 318 Sections 11.75 to determine the design shear strength.9. The nominal shear strength shall be multiplied by v equal to 0. except that ties shall not be smaller than No.6.5 and 11. May 21. the dimension bw shall equal the width of the concrete cross-section minus the width of the structural shape measured perpendicular to the direction of shear. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (3) The maximum spacing of transverse ties shall be the least of the following: (a) one-half the least dimension of the section (b) 16 longitudinal bar diameters (c) 48 tie diameters Transverse ties shall be located vertically within one-half the tie spacing above the top of the footing or lowest beam or slab in any story and shall be spaced as provided herein within one-half the tie spacing below the lowest beam or slab framing into the column.8. Fy is the specified minimum yield strength of the structural steel section. (1) The nominal shear strength of the column shall be determined as the nominal shear strength of the structural shape plus the nominal shear strength that is provided by the tie reinforcement in the reinforced-concrete encasement.6.5. (4) All Load-Carrying Reinforcement shall meet the detailing and splice requirements in ACI 318 Sections 7. shear connectors shall be provided to transfer the force Vu As Fy /Pn between the structural steel section and the reinforced concrete. The nominal shear strength of the structural steel section shall be determined in accordance with LRFD Specification Section F2. 5 bars. Load-Carrying Reinforcement shall be provided at every corner of a rectangular cross-section.17. (c) The maximum spacing of shear connectors shall be 16 in. Transverse bars shall have a diameter that is not less than one-fiftieth of greatest side dimension of the composite member.

(457 mm) (2) Tie spacing over the remaining column length shall not exceed twice the spacing defined above.] PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS 53 (5) Splices and end bearing details for reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel sections shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification and ACI 318 Section 7. they shall be considered in the design.4a and 6. 6. measured from each joint face and on both sides of any section where flexural yielding is expected to occur: (a) one-sixth the vertical clear height of the column (b) the maximum cross-sectional dimension (c) 18 in.09h cc s 1 − Fy As Pn fc Fyh (6-2) Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (3) Transverse reinforcement shall be hoop reinforcement as defined in ACI 318 Chapter 21 and shall meet the following requirements: (a) The minimum area of tie reinforcement Ash shall meet the following requirement: Ash = 0. May 21.4b. (2) Longitudinal Load-Carrying Reinforcement shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21. either at a transition to a pure reinforced concrete column or at the Column Base. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .3. Intermediate Seismic System Requirements Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns in intermediate seismic systems shall meet the following requirements in addition to those in Section 6. (3) Welded wire fabric is not permitted as transverse reinforcement in intermediate seismic systems. (305 mm) These spacings shall be maintained over a vertical distance equal to the greatest of the following lengths.2. 6. Special Seismic System Requirements Reinforced-concrete-encased columns for special seismic systems shall meet the following requirements in addition to those in Sections 6. 6.4b: (1) The required axial strength for Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns and splice details shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 8.Sect.4a: (1) The maximum spacing of transverse bars at the top and bottom shall be the least of the following: (a) one-half the least dimension of the section (b) 8 longitudinal bar diameters (c) 24 tie bar diameters (d) 12 in.4c.8.4. If adverse behavioral effects due to the abrupt change in member stiffness and nominal tensile strength occur when reinforced-concrete encasement of a structural steel section is terminated.

legs of overlapping hoops. the maximum spacing of transverse reinforcement shall be the lesser of one-fourth the least member dimension and 4 in. (5) Composite Columns supporting reactions from discontinued stiff members. shall have transverse reinforcement as specified in Section 6. (6) Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns that are used in C-SMF shall meet the following requirements: (a) Transverse reinforcement shall meet the requirements in Section 6.0D + 0. May 21.54 PART II – COMPOSITE MEMBERS [Sect.4c(3)(c) over the full length beneath the level at which the discontinuity occurs if the axial compression force exceeds 0. kips (N) f c = specified compressive strength of concrete. in.4b. cross ties.2 times Po shall have transverse reinforcement as specified in Section 6. Transverse reinforcement shall extend into the discontinued member for at least the length required to develop full yielding in the reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section and longitudinal reinforcement. (102 mm). (152 mm) (c) When specified in Sections 6.4c(3)(c) at the top and bottom of the column over the region specified in Section 6. ksi (MPa) Equation 6-2 need not be satisfied if the Nominal Strength of the reinforcedconcrete-encased structural steel section alone is greater than 1. such as walls or Braced Frames.4c(6). ksi (MPa) As = cross-sectional area of the structural core. (b) The strong-column/weak-beam design requirements in Section 9. (b) The maximum spacing of transverse reinforcement along the length of the column shall be the lesser of 6 longitudinal load-carrying bar diameters and 6 in. where h cc = cross-sectional dimension of the confined core measured center-to-center of the tie reinforcement.5 shall be satisfied.5L.4c(5) or 6.5L . This requirement need not be satisfied if the Nominal Strength of the reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section alone is greater than 1.0D + 0. in. (4) Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns in Braced Frames with axial compression forces that are larger than 0.5L. on center in the transverse direction. 6.2 (mm2 ) Pn = nominal axial compressive strength of the Composite Column calculated in accordance with the LRFD Specification.1 times Po . Column Bases shall be detailed to sustain inelastic flexural hinging.4c(3)(c) over the total element length. For this reinforcement. ksi (MPa) Fyh = specified minimum yield strength of the ties. This requirement need not be satisfied if the Nominal Strength of the reinforced-concrete-encased steel section alone is greater than 1. 6. (mm) s = spacing of transverse reinforcement measured along the longitudinal axis of the structural member. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. and other confining reinforcement shall be spaced not more than 14 in.4c(4). (mm) Fy = specified minimum yield strength of the structural steel core.0D + 0. in. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

The design shear strength of the Composite Column shall be the design shear strength of the structural steel section alone. COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS Scope This Section is applicable to connections in buildings that utilize composite or dual steel and concrete systems wherein seismic force is transferred between structural steel and reinforced concrete components. Column Bases shall be designed to sustain inelastic flexural hinging. (3) The minimum wall thickness of concrete-filled rectangular HSS shall equal b Fy / (2E s ) (6-3) for the flat width b of each face.1. except as modified in this Section.1. (305 mm). 6. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns used in C-SMF shall meet the following additional requirements: (1) The minimum required shear strength of the column shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21. the transverse reinforcement as specified in this section shall extend into the footing or mat at least 12 in. In the special seismic systems described in Sections 9.5 shall be met.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS 55 (c) The minimum required shear strength of the column shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21.1. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns This Section is applicable to columns that: (1) consist of concrete-filled steel rectangular or circular hollow structural sections (HSS) with a structural steel area that comprises at least 4 percent of the total composite-column cross-section. members and column splices for Concrete-Filled Composite Columns shall also meet the requirements in Part I Section 8.1. 7. Such columns shall be designed to meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . where b is as defined in LRFD Specification Table B5. 13 and 14.5. ductility and toughness that is comparable to that exhibited by similar structural steel or Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.4. 7.5. (8) Welded wire fabric is not permitted as transverse reinforcement for special seismic systems. When the column terminates on a wall. Composite connections shall be demonstrated to have Design Strength. (7) When the column terminates on a footing or mat foundation.Sect. (2) The strong-column/weak-beam design requirements in Section 9.5. and (2) meet the additional limitations in LRFD Specification Section I2. May 21.1.4. the transverse reinforcement shall extend into the wall for at least the length required to develop full yielding in the reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel section and longitudinal reinforcement. 7.

Structural steel elements that are encased in confined reinforced concrete are permitted to be considered to be braced against outof-plane buckling.3. the nominal bearing and shear-friction strengths shall be reduced by 25 percent for the composite seismic systems described in Sections 9. General Requirements Connections shall have adequate deformation capacity to resist the critical Required Strengths at the Design Story Drift. 7. by shear friction with the necessary clamping force provided by reinforcement normal to the plane of shear transfer. as determined in Part I and the LRFD Specification. May 21. 7. Nominal Strength of Connections The Nominal Strength of connections in composite Structural Systems shall be determined on the basis of rational models that satisfy both equilibrium of internal forces and the strength limitation of component materials and elements based upon potential limit states. reinforced concrete connections that meet the requirements in Part I and ACI 318. Any potential bond strength between structural steel and reinforced concrete shall be ignored for the purpose of the connection force transfer mechanism. Additionally. and 17. or by a combination of these means. connections that are required for the lateral stability of the building under seismic forces shall meet the requirements in Sections 8 through 17 based upon the specific system in which the connection is used. Unless the connection strength is determined by analysis and testing. respectively. 7. (4) The nominal shear strength of reinforced-concrete-encased steel Panel Zones in beam-to-column connections shall be calculated as the sum of the Nominal Strengths of the structural steel and confined reinforced concrete shear elements as determined in Part I Section 9. shall equal or exceed the Required Strengths. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 14. 16. Methods for calculating the connection strength shall meet the requirements in this Section. the determination of the required connection strength shall account for any effects that result from the increase in the actual Nominal Strength of the connected member.5. force shall be transferred between structural steel and reinforced concrete through direct bearing of headed shear studs or suitable alternative devices.2. (2) The nominal bearing and shear-friction strengths shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Chapters 10 and 11. (3) The Design Strengths of structural steel components in composite connections. Face Bearing Plates consisting of stiffeners between the flanges of steel beams are required when beams are embedded in reinforced concrete columns or walls.3 and ACI 318 Section 21. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.56 PART II – COMPOSITE CONNECTIONS [Sect. except that the strength reduction (resistance) factors shall be as given in ACI 318. 13. When the Required Strength is based upon nominal material strengths and nominal member dimensions. Unless a higher strength is substantiated by cyclic testing. the models used for analysis of connections shall meet the following requirements: (1) When required. by other mechanical means.

Development lengths shall be determined in accordance with ACI 318 Chapter 12. 11. 12 and 15. 8. C-PRMF shall meet the requirements of this section. beyond the point at which it is no longer required to resist the forces. All reinforcement shall be fully developed in tension or compression. Additionally. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Additionally. braces and walls.5. COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR) MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF) Scope This Section is applicable to frames that consist of structural steel columns and Composite Beams that are connected with Partially Restrained (PR) moment connections that meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Section A2. (b) For connections between structural steel or Composite Beams and reinforced concrete or Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns. C-PRMF shall be designed so that under earthquake loading yielding occurs in the ductile components of the composite PR beam-to-column moment connections. columns. strength and drift of C-PRMF. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. except for the following modifications: (i) Structural steel sections framing into the connections are considered to provide confinement over a width equal to that of face bearing stiffener plates welded to the beams between the flanges.] PART II – COMPOSITE PARTIALLY RESTRAINED (PR) MOMENT FRAMES (C-PRMF) 57 respectively. (ii) Lap splices are permitted for perimeter ties when confinement of the splice is provided by Face Bearing Plates or other means that prevents spalling of the concrete cover in the systems described in Sections 10.Sect. (5) Reinforcement shall be provided to resist all tensile forces in reinforced concrete components of the connections.5. Connection flexibility and Composite Beam action shall be accounted for in determining the dynamic characteristics. such as the Column Base connection. 14. 8. 8.1. Connections shall meet the following additional requirements: (a) When the slab transfers horizontal diaphragm forces. the slab reinforcement shall be designed and anchored to carry the in-plane tensile forces at all critical sections in the slab.4. 13. (c) The longitudinal bar sizes and layout in reinforced concrete and Composite Columns shall be detailed to minimize slippage of the bars through the beam-to-column connection due to high force transfer associated with the change in column moments over the height of the connection. the concrete shall be confined with transverse reinforcement. including connections to collector beams. May 21. The strength reduction (resistance) factors for reinforced concrete shall be as given in ACI 318. 16 and 17 shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21. as appropriate. Limited yielding is permitted at other locations. transverse hoop reinforcement shall be provided in the connection region to meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21. development lengths for the systems described in Sections 9.

Partially Restrained (PR) Moment Connections The Required Strength for the beam-to-column PR moment connections shall be determined from the load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code.2.4. In addition. Columns Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for special seismic systems in Sections 6. C-SMF shall meet the requirements of this section.4. including consideration of the effects of connection flexibility and secondorder moments. excluding Section 21. 9. May 21.10. where M p is the nominal plastic flexural strength of the connected structural steel beam ignoring composite action. 8. but with limited inelastic deformations in the columns and/or connections.4 or 6. Columns Structural steel columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 8 and the LRFD Specification. 9.5.58 PART II – COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) [Sect. The effect of PR moment connections on stability of individual columns and the overall frame shall be considered in C-PRMF.1. Neither structural steel nor composite trusses are permitted as flexural members to resist seismic loads in C-SMF unless it is demonstrated by testing and analysis that the particular system provides adequate ductility and energy dissipation capacity.2a. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Chapter 21. Composite Beams Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I. Moment Connections The Required Strength of beam-to-column moment connections shall be determined from the shear and flexure associated with the nominal plastic flexural Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.015 radians and a total rotation capacity of 0. Beams Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in Section 6. 9.03 radians that is substantiated by cyclic testing as described in Part I Section 9.3. C-SMF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake significant inelastic deformations will occur. For the purposes of analysis. 8. 9.3. 9.2. primarily in the beams. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 8.3. 9. COMPOSITE SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (C-SMF) Scope This Section is applicable to moment-resisting frames that consist of either composite or reinforced concrete columns and either structural steel or Composite Beams. composite connections shall have a Nominal Strength that is at least equal to 50 percent of M p . Connections shall meet the requirements in Section 7 and shall have an inelastic rotation capacity of 0. the stiffness of beams shall be determined with an effective moment of inertia of the composite section.

Columns Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for intermediate seismic systems in Section 6.4. C-IMF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake inelastic deformation will occur primarily in the beams but with moderate inelastic deformation in the columns and/or connections. 10.] PART II – COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) 59 strength of the beams framing into the connection.2. the connections shall be capable of sustaining an inelastic beam rotation of 0. Moment Connections The nominal connection strength shall meet the requirements in Section 7.4.2. C-IMF shall meet the requirements of this section.03 radians. Pu . Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21.3. the inelastic rotation capacity shall be demonstrated by testing or other substantiating data.1.5. 10.10. In addition.6 shall have transverse reinforcement that meets the requirements in Section 6. the inelastic rotation capacity shall be demonstrated as specified in Part I Section 9 for connections in SMF. Beams Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. COMPOSITE INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (C-IMF) This Section is applicable to moment resisting frames that consist of either composite or reinforced concrete columns and either structural steel or Composite Beams. May 21. The minimum flexural strength and design of Composite Columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 9. 10. (2) The force limit for the exceptions in Part I Section 9. The Required Strength of beam-to-column connections shall meet one of the following Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 9. 10. 10. Column-Beam Moment Ratio The minimum flexural strength and design of reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21. Scope . (3) Composite Columns exempted by the minimum flexural strength requirement in Part I Section 9.4 or 6.1Po . When the beam flanges are interrupted at the connection.5.6 with the following modifications: (1) The flexural strength of the Composite Column M ∗ shall meet the requirepc ments in LRFD Specification Chapter I with consideration of the applied axial load. For connections to reinforced concrete columns with a beam that is continuous through the column so that welded joints are not required in the flanges and the connection is not otherwise susceptible to premature fractures. The nominal connection strength shall meet the requirements in Section 7.Sect. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 10.6(a) shall be Pu < 0.4c(4).

requirements: (a) The connection Design Strength shall meet or exceed the forces associated with plastic hinging of the beams adjacent to the connection.60 PART II – COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) [Sect. 11. Columns Reinforced-Concrete-Encased Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for ordinary seismic systems in Sections 6.1. Beams Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification.4. Concrete-Filled Composite Columns Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.5.02 radians in cyclic tests. 11. COMPOSITE ORDINARY BRACED FRAMES (C-OBF) This Section is applicable to concentrically and Eccentrically Braced Frame systems that consist of either composite or reinforced concrete columns. excluding Chapters 21. (c) The connections shall demonstrate an inelastic rotation capacity of at least 0.4 or 6. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in ACI 318. May 21. Moment Connections Connections shall be designed for the applied factored load combinations and their Design Strength shall meet the requirements in Section 7. 12. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 11. C-OBF shall meet the requirements of this section.3. 12. 11. (b) The connection Design Strength shall meet or exceed the Required Strength generated by load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code.2. C-OMF shall meet the requirements of this section.4. 12. and structural steel or Composite Braces. COMPOSITE ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (C-OMF) This Section is applicable to moment resisting frames that consist of either composite or reinforced concrete columns and structural steel or Composite Beams.1. Scope . Scope 12. structural steel or Composite Beams. C-OBF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake limited inelastic action will occur in the beams. 11. C-OMF shall be designed assuming that under the Design Earthquake limited inelastic action will occur in the beams. columns and/or connections. including the Amplified Seismic Load. and/or connections. braces. columns. Columns Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for ordinary seismic systems in Section 6.2.

Beams and braces shall be either structural steel or composite structural steel. Braces Structural steel braces shall meet the requirements for SCBF in Part I Section 13.2.2. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. C-CBF shall meet the requirements of this section. 13. Minor eccentricities are permitted if they are accounted for in the design.5.1. 13. Composite structural steel columns shall meet the requirements for special systems in Section 6. Scope .5.3. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements for structural truss elements in ACI 318 Chapter 21. Columns shall be either composite structural steel or reinforced concrete. 13. Composite Braces shall meet the requirements for Composite Columns in Section 12. Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21. 12. Beams Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. 12. May 21. 12.5.3. Beams Structural steel and Composite Beams shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. Columns Structural steel columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 8.2.4 or 6. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 13.] PART II – COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) 61 shall meet the requirements in Section 6.4. C-CBF shall be designed so that under the loading of the Design Earthquake inelastic action will occur primarily through tension yielding and/or buckling of braces. COMPOSITE CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-CBF) This Section is applicable to braced systems that consist of concentrically connected members. 13. 13. Composite Braces shall meet the requirements for Composite Columns in Section 13. Connections Connections shall be designed for the applied load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code and their Design Strength shall meet the requirements in Section 7.Sect. Braces Structural steel braces shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification.4.

and beam segments outside of the Link shall be designed to remain essentially elastic under the maximum forces that can be generated by the fully yielded and strain-hardened Link. except as modified in this Section. 14.4.4 (or Section 6. 14. The Design Strength of members shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. Composite Columns shall meet the requirements for special seismic systems in Sections 6. Braces Structural steel braces shall meet the requirements for EBF in Part I Section 15. columns. 13. Additionally.1. The diagonal braces.8. connections shall meet the requirements in Section 7. Links Links shall be unencased structural steel and shall meet the requirement for EBF Links in Part I Section 15. C-EBF shall be designed so that inelastic deformations will occur only as shear yielding in the Links. It is permitted to encase the portion of the beam outside of the Link with reinforced concrete. COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) This Section is applicable to braced systems for which one end of each brace intersects a beam at an eccentricity from the intersection of the centerlines of the beam and column or intersects a beam at an eccentricity from the intersection of the centerlines of the beam and an adjacent brace. 14. May 21. 14.5. All columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 15. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 14.4.4 or 6. Braces shall be structural steel. 14. where a Link is adjacent to a reinforced concrete column or reinforced-concrete-encased column. Beams containing the Link are permitted to act compositely with the floor slab using shear connectors along all or any portion of the beam if the composite action is considered when determining the Nominal Strength of the Link. Scope . Bracing Connections Bracing connections shall meet the requirements in Section 7 and Part I Section 13.62 PART II – COMPOSITE ECCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (C-EBF) [Sect. Connections In addition to the requirements for EBF in Part I Section 15.5. transverse reinforcement meeting the requirements in ACI 318 Section 21. C-EBF shall meet the requirements in Part I Section 15.4c(6)(a) for Composite Columns) shall be provided above and below the Link connection. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction 14.5.2. Columns shall be either composite or reinforced concrete. Columns Reinforced concrete columns shall meet the requirements for structural truss elements in ACI 318 Chapter 21. except as modified in this Section. Links shall be structural steel as described in this Section.3.

3.] PART II – ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE 63 15. When the reinforced-concreteencased structural steel Boundary Member qualifies as a Composite Column as defined in LRFD Specification Chapter I. the analysis shall be based upon a transformed concrete section using elastic material properties. When fully reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel sections function as Boundary Members in reinforced concrete infill panels. the structural steel sections shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. The wall shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21. shall meet the requirements in LRFD Specification Chapter I. it shall be designed to meet the ordinary seismic system requirements in Section 6. either as infill panels. The reinforced concrete wall shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21. Boundary Members When unencased structural steel sections function as Boundary Members in reinforced concrete infill panels. Scope 15. Otherwise. The embedment length shall be considered to begin inside the first layer of confining reinforcement in the wall Boundary Member.4. it shall be designed as a Composite Column to meet the requirements in ACI 318.Sect. such as reinforced concrete walls in structural steel frames with unencased or reinforced-concreteencased structural steel sections that act as Boundary Members. if used. Headed shear studs. Coupling Beams Structural steel Coupling Beams that are used between two adjacent reinforced concrete walls shall meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification and this Section: Coupling Beams shall have an embedment length into the reinforced concrete wall that is sufficient to develop the maximum possible combination of moment and shear that can be generated by the nominal bending and shear strength of the Coupling Beam. Vertical wall reinforcement with design axial strength equal to the nominal shear strength of the Coupling Beam shall be placed over the embedment length of the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. C-ORCW shall meet the requirements of this section. or as structural steel Coupling Beams that connect two adjacent reinforced concrete walls. 15.4. Welded reinforcement anchors. The required axial strength of the Boundary Member shall be determined assuming that the shear forces are carried by the reinforced concrete wall and the entire gravity and overturning forces are carried by the Boundary Members in conjunction with the shear wall. Connection strength for the transfer of loads between the Coupling Beam and the wall shall meet the requirements in Section 7. May 21. Headed shear studs or welded reinforcement anchors shall be provided to transfer vertical shear forces between the structural steel and reinforced concrete.1. 15. Reinforced concrete walls shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 excluding Chapter 21. 15. shall meet the requirements in AWS D1.2. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . if used. ORDINARY REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-ORCW) The requirements in this Section apply when reinforced concrete walls are composite with structural steel elements.

3. unencased structural steel columns shall meet the requirements in Part I Sections 5. When required in Part I Section 15. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.2a. The wall shall meet the requirements in ACI 318 including Chapter 21. such members shall be designed as composite compression members to meet the requirements in ACI 318 including the special seismic requirements for Boundary Members in Chapter 21. as part of the required vertical reinforcement.3. the coupling rotation shall be assumed as 0.2. Vertical wall reinforcement as specified in Section 15.08 radians unless a smaller value is justified by rational analysis of the inelastic deformations that are expected under the Design Earthquake.3 shall be confined by transverse reinforcement that meets the requirements for Boundary Members in ACI 318 Section 21. except as modified in this Section.2. 16.7. beam with two-thirds of the steel located over the first half of the embedment length. This wall reinforcement shall extend a distance of at least one tension development length above and below the flanges of the Coupling Beam. Scope 16. Transverse reinforcement for confinement of the composite Boundary Member shall extend a distance of 2h into the wall where h is the overall depth of the Boundary Member in the plane of the wall. It is permitted to use vertical reinforcement placed for other purposes. the Nominal Strength of welded reinforcing bar anchors shall be reduced by 25 percent from their Static Yield Strength. For connection to unencased structural steel sections.2 as wells as the requirements in this Section.2. Headed shear studs or welded reinforcing bar anchors shall be provided as specified in Section 15. structural steel Coupling Beams shall meet the requirements in Part I Sections 15.4. These stiffeners shall meet the detailing requirements in Part I Section 15. 16.3.2 and 15. Boundary Members In addition to the requirements in Section 15.64 PART II – SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE [Sect.1.3. SPECIAL REINFORCED CONCRETE SHEAR WALLS COMPOSITE WITH STRUCTURAL STEEL ELEMENTS (C-SRCW) C-SRCW systems shall meet the requirements in Section 15 for C-ORCW and the shear-wall requirement in ACI 318 including Chapter 21. Walls with reinforced-concrete-encased structural steel Boundary Members shall meet the requirements in Section 15. Otherwise. Reinforcedconcrete-encased structural steel Boundary Members that qualify as Composite Columns in LRFD Specification Chapter I shall meet the special seismic system requirements in Section 6. 6 and 8.3. 16. Face Bearing Plates shall be provided on both sides of the Coupling Beams at the face of the reinforced concrete wall. 16. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Coupling Beams In addition to the requirements in Section 15. May 21. such as for vertical Boundary Members.

17. The reinforcement ratio in both directions shall not be less than 0.including the effects of buckling of the plate. 17.2 (mm2 ) Fy = specified minimum yield strength of the plate.1. and meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification. The steel plate shall be continuously connected on all edges to structural steel framing and Boundary Members with welds and/or slip-critical high-strength bolts to develop the nominal shear strength of the plate. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction (17-1) . excluding the strength of the reinforced concrete. Boundary Members Structural steel and composite Boundary Members shall be designed to meet the requirements in Section 16. Nominal Shear Strength The nominal shear strength of C-SPW with a stiffened plate conforming to Section 17. (102 mm) on each side when concrete is provided on both sides of the steel plate and 8 in. May 21.2b shall be determined as: Vns = 0.6Asp Fy where Vns = nominal shear strength of the steel plate. Wall Elements 17. 17. Horizontal and vertical reinforcement shall be provided in the concrete encasement to meet the detailing requirements in ACI 318 Section 14.] PART II – COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) 65 17. C-SPW shall meet the requirements of this section. Detailing Requirements The steel plate shall be adequately stiffened by encasement or attachment to the reinforced concrete if it can be demonstrated with an elastic plate buckling analysis that the composite wall can resist a nominal shear force equal to Vns . COMPOSITE STEEL PLATE SHEAR WALLS (C-SPW) This Section is applicable to structural walls consisting of steel plates with reinforced concrete encasement on one or both sides of the plate and structural steel or composite Boundary Members.Sect.3. ksi (MPa) The nominal shear strength of C-SPW with a plate that does not meet the stiffening requirements in Section 17.0025. Boundary Members shall be provided around openings as required by analysis. 17. The concrete thickness shall be a minimum of 4 in. the maximum spacing between bars shall not exceed 18 in.2b shall be based upon the strength of the plate. The Design Strength of welded and bolted connectors shall meet the additional requirements in Part I Section 7. Scope 17. (457 mm). Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Headed shear stud connectors or other mechanical connectors shall be provided to prevent local buckling and separation of the plate and reinforced concrete.2a.2. in.2b. (203 mm) when concrete is provided on one side of the steel plate. kips (N) Asp = horizontal area of stiffened steel plate.3.2.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . May 21.66 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.

1989 including Supplement No. These Provisions shall apply to buildings that are classified in the Applicable Building Code as Seismic Design Category D (or equivalent) and higher or when required by the Engineer of Record. hereinafter referred to as the ASD Specification. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN (ASD) ALTERNATIVE 67 As an alternative to the Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) provisions for structural steel design in Part I. LOAD COMBINATIONS. respectively. 2. June 23.2 in its entirety: Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 1.PART III. “Type 1”. Appendix B 4. 1. May 21. the use of the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) provisions in this Part is permitted. 2000. All requirements of Part I shall be met except as modified or supplemented in this Part. When using this Part. and “Type 3”. All members and connections in the Seismic Force Resisting System shall be proportioned as required in the ASD Specification to resist the applicable load combinations and shall meet the requirements in these Provisions. “FR” and “PR” in Part I shall be taken as “ASD Specification”. December 17. These Provisions shall be applied in conjunction with the AISC Specification for Structural Steel Buildings—Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design including Supplement No. Part III includes the Part I Glossary and Appendix S. 2001 Substitute the following for the last paragraph of Part I Section 2: Research Council on Structural Connections Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts. the terms “LRFD Specification”. AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS Substitute the following for PART I Section 1 in its entirety: Substitute the following for the first two paragraphs of Part I Section 2: Substitute the following for Part I Section 4. AND STANDARDS The documents referenced in these Provisions shall include those listed in ASD Specification Section A6 with the following additions and modifications: American Institute of Steel Construction Specification for Structural Steel Buildings—Allowable Stress Design and Plastic Design. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . June 1. SCOPE These Provisions are intended for the design and construction of structural steel members and connections in the Seismic Force Resisting Systems in buildings for which the design forces resulting from earthquake motions have been determined on the basis of various levels of energy dissipation in the inelastic range of response. 1. CODES. LOADS.

shear yielding Bearing strength at bolt holes.0 0.75 0.75 Bearing on steel 0.90 Base metal Weld metal Base metal Weld metal Base metal Weld metal Base metal Weld metal Weld metal 0.90 0. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .75 0.90 0.75 0.90 0. tension rupture.90 1. oversized holes.75 0.75 Bearing on concrete 0.75 Weld metal 0.0 1.90 0.85 0.75 Weld metal 0. block shear rupture Contact bearing Flanges and webs with concentrated forces Local flange bending. TABLE III-4-1 Resistance Factors for ASD Limit State Tension Yielding Rupture Compression buckling Flexure Yielding Rupture Shear Yielding Rupture Torsion Yielding Buckling Complete-joint-penetration groove welds Tension or compression normal to effective area Shear on effective area Partial-joint-penetration groove welds Compression normal to effective area Tension normal to effective area Shear parallel to axis of weld Fillet welds Shear on effective area Plug or slot welds Shear parallel to faying surface (on effective area) Bolts Tension rupture.90 0. 4.90 0.2 with the following: “The Nominal Strength of structural steel members and connections for resisting seismic forces Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.85 0.90 0. combined tension and shear Slip resistance for bolts in standard holes. LOAD COMBINATIONS. Panel Zone web shear Sidesway web buckling Resistance Factor 0. Nominal Strength The Nominal Strengths of members and connections shall be determined as follows: Replace ASD Specification Section A5.90 0. May 21.75 0.80 0. AND NOMINAL STRENGTHS [Sect.90 0.80 0.90 0. shear rupture. compression buckling of web Local web yielding Web crippling.0 0.85 4.2.60 0.90 0. and short-slotted holes Slip resistance for bolts in long-slotted holes with the slot perpendicular to the direction of the slot Slip resistance for bolts in long-slotted holes with the slot parallel to the direction of the slot Connecting elements Tension yielding. shear rupture.68 PART III – LOADS.75 1.

9. 9. JOINTS. all pertinent requirements of Chapters A through M shall govern.7. CONNECTIONS. J.3. in.” In ASD Specification Section H1 the definition of F e shall read as follows: Fe = where: lb = the actual length in the plane of bending.] PART III – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES 69 acting alone or in combination with dead and live loads shall be determined by multiplying 1. except that the allowable bearing stress at bolt holes F p shall not be taken greater than 1. Substitute the following for Part I Section 7. Es (K lb /rb )2 2 (4-1) 7. As a minimum.3. in. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web parallel to column web) The required thickness of the panel zone shall be determined in accordance with the method used in proportioning the panel zone of the tested connection. the required shear strength Ru of the panel zone shall be determined from the summation of the moments at the column faces as determined by projecting the expected moments at the plastic hinge points to the column faces.2Fu . F. The design shear strength v Rv of the panel zone shall be determined using v = 1. E.0.2 fourth paragraph in its entirety: 9. (mm) rb = the corresponding radius of gyration. AND FASTENERS Bolted Joints The design resistance to shear and combined tension and shear of bolted joints shall be determined in accordance with the ASD Specification Sections J3. H. Except as modified in these provisions. Amend the first paragraph of ASD Specification Section N1 by deleting “or earthquake” and adding: “The Nominal Strength of members and connections shall be determined by the requirements contained herein. G.2. 7.7 times the allowable stresses in Section D.5 and J3. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction Substitute the following for Part I Section 9.3a in its entirety: . (mm) K = the effective length factor in the plane of bending 4. and K.Sect. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Design Strength The Design Strength of structural steel members and connections subjected to seismic forces in combination with other prescribed loads shall be determined by converting allowable stresses into Nominal Strengths and multiplying such Nominal Strengths by the Resistance Factors given in Table III-4-1.

6: The top and bottom chords of the trusses shall be laterally braced at the ends of the special segment.2. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .70 PART III – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES [Sect.75Py . Py (9-1a) Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint The required column strength shall be determined from the ASD load combinations stipulated in the Applicable Building Code. Rv = 0.6Fy dc t p 1 + When Pu > 0. in. = total thickness of Panel Zone including doubler plate(s). in. (mm) = specified minimum yield strength of the Panel Zone steel.7. in.4.6Fy dc t p 1 + where: tp dc bc f tc f db Fy 9. (mm) = overall column depth. and at intervals not to exceed L c according to ASD Specification Section F1.4: Members and connections of STMF.2Pu . Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Nominal Strength of Non-special Segment Members Substitute the following for the first sentence in Part I Section 12. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES 12.7b(1) in its entirety: 12. Rv = 0. Lateral Bracing Substitute the following for the first sentence in Part I Section 12. except those in the special segment defined in Section 12.9 − 1. May 21. (mm) = thickness of the column flange. (mm) = overall beam depth. ksi (MPa) 2 3bc f tc f 2 3bc f tc f db dc t p (9-1) db dc t p 1. shall have a Design Strength to resist ASD load combinations as stipulated by the Applicable Building Code replacing the earthquake load term E with the lateral loads necessary to develop the expected vertical nominal shear strength in the special segment Vne given as: [balance to remain unchanged] 12. (mm) = width of the column flange. in. in. along the entire length of the truss. except that E shall be taken as the lesser of: (a) The Amplified Seismic Load (b) 125 percent of the frame Design Strength based upon either the beam design flexural strength or Panel Zone design shear strength Substitute the following for Part I Section 9.75Py .6. When Pu ≤ 0. 12.

other than brace connections. Substitute the following for Part I Section 13. May 21. 14. in OCBF shall be determined using the ASD load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code except E shall be taken as the Amplified Seismic Load. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.23 E s /Fy shall not be used in V or inverted-V configurations.2 in its entirety: 14. Strength The Required Strength of the members and connections. determined as R y Fy A g .4a(3) in its entirety: (3) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to resist the effects of ASD load combinations as stipulated by the Applicable Building Code. The Design Strength of brace connections shall equal or exceed the expected tensile strength of the brace. 14. This load effect shall be calculated using a minimum of Py for the brace in tension and a maximum of 0.2.4a(2) in its entirety: Substitute the following for Part I Section 13. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .] PART III – ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) 71 13. Q b is the maximum unbalanced vertical load effect applied to the beam by the braces.Sect.3 times c Pn for the brace in compression. Braces with Kl/r greater than 4. except that a load Q b shall be substituted for the term E. ORDINARY CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (OCBF) Substitute the following for Part I Section 14. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) (2) A beam that is intersected by braces shall be designed to support the effects of all tributary dead and live loads assuming that the bracing is not present.

72 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

2002 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .73 COMMENTARY on the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings May 21.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . May 21.74 Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.

2000). 1999) for such applications. modification and design of welded steel Moment Frame structures in seismic regions. 2002). The seismic design loads specified in the building codes have been developed considering the energy dissipation generated during inelastic response. C1. 1 A joint venture of the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC). repair. the Committee has prepared this revision of the Provisions using the best available knowledge to date. which has been published by the International Code Council (ICC. building officials and other interested parties for the evaluation. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (Note: glossary terms are capitalized throughout this specification and commentary. Funded by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Extrapolation of their use to non-building structures should be done with due consideration of the inherent differences between the response characteristics of buildings and non-building structures. While research is ongoing. 2 formed the basis for steel seismic design provisions in the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA. The Provisions. AISC actively participated in SAC activities. NFPA will reference ASCE 7 for seismic loading. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. and California Universities for Research in Earthquake Engineering (CUREe). 2000g) as well as those in the 2000 International Building Code (IBC) 2002 Supplement. Supplement No. 2002) it is intended that these provisions be used in conjunction with the 2002 edition of ASCE 7. Although timing did not permit the adoption of these Provisions in ASCE 7 (ASCE. in whole or in part. may not be applicable. STRUCTURAL STEEL BUILDINGS 75 Experience from the 1994 Northridge and 1995 Kobe earthquakes significantly expanded knowledge regarding the seismic response of structural steel building systems. Accordingly. 2 to the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (AISC. It is also anticipated that these Provisions will form the basis for structural steel seismic requirements in two model building code editions currently under development: the International Building Code and the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) Building Code dated 2003. to nonbuilding structures. SAC developed guidelines for structural engineers. SCOPE Structural steel building systems in seismic regions are generally expected to dissipate seismic input energy through controlled inelastic deformations of the structure.) Shortly after the Northridge earthquake. It should be noted that these provisions were developed specifically for buildings. Supplement No. Many recommendations in the Recommended Seismic Design Criteria for New Steel Moment-Frame Buildings – FEMA 350 (FEMA. therefore. the SAC Joint Venture1 initiated a comprehensive study of the seismic performance of steel Moment Frames. particularly welded steel Moment Frames. Applied Technology (ATC). These Provisions supplement the AISC LRFD Specification (AISC. These 2002 AISC Seismic Provisions (hereinafter referred to as the Provisions) continue incorporating the recommendations of FEMA 350 and other research.PART I. 2000a) formed the basis for Supplement No. 2 to the 1997 Provisions was developed simultaneously and cooperatively with the revisions to the Building Seismic Safety Council (BSSC) NEHRP Provisions.

The primary purpose of these Provisions is to provide information necessary to determine the Design Strength of steel buildings. The Provisions are intended to be mandatory for buildings in Seismic Design Category D and above. CODES. C2. For buildings in Seismic Design Category A to C the designer is given a choice to either solely use the AISC LRFD Specification (AISC. the versions given in Section 2 apply. Buildings are then assigned to a Seismic Design Category based upon the Seismic Use Group. buildings are assigned to one of four Occupancy Categories. each building is categorized based upon its occupancy and use to establish the potential earthquake hazard that it represents. including consideration of system redundancy. While most of these documents are also referenced in the LRFD Specification. limitations of height. In ASCE 7 (ASCE. However. Seismic Design Category D is generally applicable to buildings in areas of high seismicity and Seismic Use Group III buildings in areas of moderate seismicity. 1999) and the R factor given for structural steel buildings not specifically detailed for seismic resistance (typically 3) or the designer may choose to assign a higher R factor to a system detailed for seismic resistance and follow the requirements of these Provisions. depending upon occupancy or use. Group III includes essential facilities. E and F. includes essential facilities. some have been revised since its publication in 1999.76 PART I – GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS [Comm. the seismicity of the site and the period of the building. etc. buildings are assigned to one of three Seismic Use Groups. for example. B and C are generally applicable to buildings in areas of low to moderate seismicity and special seismic Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. the Applicable Building Code should be consulted. Category IV. vertical and horizontal irregularities. For the variables required to assign Seismic Design Categories. C3. 2002). Where these documents are referenced in the Provisions.. 2002). The following discussion provides a basic overview of how several seismic codes or specifications categorize building structures and how they determine the Required Strength and stiffness. Seismic Design Categories A. special seismic provisions are mandatory in Seismic Design Categories D. Determining the required Design Strength differs significantly in each specification or building code. AND STANDARDS The specifications. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Seismic Design Categories A. REFERENCED SPECIFICATIONS. while Groups I and II include facilities associated with a lesser degree of public hazard. In the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA. GENERAL SEISMIC DESIGN REQUIREMENTS When designing buildings to resist earthquake motions. site characteristics. Buildings are then assigned to a Seismic Use Group based upon the Occupancy Categories and the seismicity of the site. as defined in the National Earthquake Hazard Reduction Program (NEHRP) Seismic Provisions (FEMA. C3. 2000e) and ASCE 7 (ASCE. B and C are generally applicable to buildings in areas of low to moderate seismicity and special seismic provisions like those in these Provisions are not mandatory unless the Engineer of Record chooses to use an R factor of one of the defined systems prescribed in these Provisions. codes and standards referenced in Part I are listed with the appropriate revision date that was used in the development of Part I. May 21. Seismic Design Categories E and F are generally applicable to buildings in Seismic Use Groups I and II and Seismic Use Group III. in areas of especially high seismicity. 2000g). respectively.

The general relationship between the different structural steel systems is illustrated in Table C-I-4. AND NOMINAL STRENGTH 77 provisions like those in these Provisions are not mandatory. Cd and o ).” When used in these Provisions. R. 1997) and the 1999 SEAOC Seismic Provisions (SEAOC. The load combinations containing the overstrength factor o should be used where these Provisions require use of the Amplified Seismic Load. 2000). C4. Cd is an amplification factor that is used with the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.] PART I – LOADS. consistency with the Applicable Building Code should be confirmed. While it is the intent that these Provisions be used in conjunction with the codes and standards previously listed. the specification of Load Combinations 4-1 and 4-2 proved confusing. since they are written for consistency with the load combinations given in ASCE 7 (ASCE.Comm. the detailing required for buildings is based on the Seismic Zone in which the building is located. where building codes differ from ASCE 7. primarily to account for overstrength inherent in different systems or elements when determining the Required Strength of connections. 2002) and IBC 2000 (ICC. However. Unfortunately. which cover areas of high seismicity. An amplification or overstrength factor o applied to the horizontal portion of the earthquake load E is prescribed in ASCE 7. R is a seismic load reduction factor used to approximate the inherent ductility of the Seismic Load Resisting System. C4. LOADS. this term is intended to refer to the appropriate load combinations in the Applicable Building Code that account for overstrength of members of the Seismic Load Resisting System. However. due to the difference in the various codes and source documents with which these Provisions are intended to be used. and Load Combinations 4-1 and 4-2 were eliminated in favor of a new term “Amplified Seismic Load. there can be no guarantee which building code edition a designer may use to design a steel building. In the 1997 Uniform Building Code (ICBO.g. the relevant load combinations are not all expressed in exactly the same format. the 2000 IBC. May 21. To eliminate potential conflicts with the many building codes currently in use. special seismic provisions are mandatory in Seismic Design Categories D and E. however. these Provisions refer to the Applicable Building Code to establish loads and load combinations. LOAD COMBINATIONS. A new term “Applicable Building Code” has been introduced into this edition of the Seismic Provisions. 1999). system limitations and system factors (e. as shown in Table C-I-4. In prior editions of these Provisions it was felt that this difference could be clarified by including load combinations (Equations 4-1 and 4-2 in the 1997 Seismic Provisions (AISC.2 based upon similar information in the ASCE 7 load standard. 2000 NEHRP Provisions and the 1997 Uniform Building Code. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . it is the intent of these Provisions that the ASCE 7 criteria apply.1. The earthquake load E is the combination of the horizontal seismic load effect and an approximation of the effect due to the vertical accelerations that accompany the horizontal earthquake effects. It is not practical to specifically reference any load combinations from reference documents. AND NOMINAL STRENGTH These Provisions are intended for use with load combinations given in the Applicable Building Code. LOAD COMBINATIONS. However. 1997b)).

9D + 1.0E + 1.0E + 0.5Ca ID Overstrength E= E= Em = Em = o QE − 0.0E + 1.2SDS D o QE o Eh Gravity Effects Counteraction Code or Ref. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .2SDS D o QE o Eh Note: For definitions.9D + 1.2D + 1.2D + 1.6H 0.2D + 1.2 DESIGN FACTORS FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL SYSTEMS BASIC STRUCTURAL SYSTEM AND SEISMIC LOAD RESISTING SYSTEM Systems designed and detailed to meet the requirements in the LRFD Specification but not the requirements of Part I R 3 Cd 3 Systems designed and detailed to meet the requirements of both the LRFD Specification and Part I: Braced Frame Systems: Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF) Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF) with moment connections at columns away from Link without moment connections at columns away from Link Moment Frame Systems: Special Moment Frames (SMF) Intermediate Moment Frames (IMF) Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF) Dual Systems with SMF capable of resisting 25 percent of V: Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF) with moment connections at columns away from Link without moment connections at columns away from Link Dual Systems with IMF∗ capable of resisting 25 percent of V: Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) ∗ 6 5 8 7 8 41/2 31/2 7 8 8 7 41/2 5 41/2 4 4 51/2 4 3 51/2 61/2 4 4 4 OMF is permitted in lieu of IMF in Seismic Design Categories A.0E 0.2SDS D + 0.2SDS D E = Q E − 0.0E + f 1 L + f 2 S Definition of E E = Q E + 0. ASCE 7-2002 NEHRP 2000 IBC 2000 UBC 1997 Basic Combinations including E 1.2SDS D E = Q E − 0. TABLE C-I-4. B and C.1 Load Combinations Gravity Effects Additive Code or Ref.2SDS D E = Eh + Ev where Ev = 0.2S 1.9D + 1.2SDS D E = Q E + 0.0E + 0.0E Definition of E E = Q E − 0.6H 0.5Ca ID Overstrength E= E= Em = Em = o QE o QE + 0. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. TABLE C-I-4.2SDS D o Q E − 0.2SDS D E = Eh + Ev where Ev = 0.2SDS D E = Q E + 0. ASCE 7-2002 NEHRP 2000 IBC 2000 UBC 1997 Basic Combinations including E 0. May 21.2SDS D − 0. AND NOMINAL STRENGTH [Comm.9D + 1. C4.78 PART I – LOADS.0E + f 1 L + f 2 S 1.5L + 0. see applicable code.2D + 1.5L + 0. LOAD COMBINATIONS.2SDS D + 0.2S 1.

Research has shown that story drift limits.2. As a minimum. The story drift limits in ASCE 7 (ASCE. there are major differences among them as to how the limit is specified and applied. STORY DRIFT For non-seismic applications. Panel Zone shear behavior should be represented in the analytical model whenever it significantly affects the state of deformation at a beam-to-column connection. The analytical model used to estimate building drift should accurately account for the stiffness of the frame elements and connections and other structural and nonstructural elements that materially affect the drift. like deflection limits. 2000f). Recent research on steel Moment Frame connections indicates that in most cases Panel Zone deformations have little effect on analytical estimates of drift and need not be explicitly modeled (FEMA. although primarily related to serviceability. drift control is important to both the serviceability and the stability of the structure. story drift limits. In cases where nonlinear element deformation demands are of interest. see Table C-I-4. They vary because they depend upon the structural usage and contents.) and seismic performance because of the resulting additional strength and stiffness.] PART I – STORY DRIFT 79 loads for strength design to calculate the seismic drift.Comm. also improve frame stability (P. 2000a) contains recommendations for adjusting calculated drift for frames with Reduced Beam Sections. C5. 2000f ). building height. 1990) and no specific design requirements are given in the LRFD Specification or these Provisions. 2002) and the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA. May 21. are commonly used in design to assure the serviceability of the structure. and site characteristics. As an example. Nonlinear models should contain nonlinear elements where plastic hinging is expected to properly capture the inelastic deformation of the frame. C5. Nevertheless. Adjustment of connection stiffness is usually not required for connections traditionally considered as fixed. The amplified story drift is determined by multiplying the elastic drift caused by the horizontal component of the earthquake load E by a deflection amplification factor Cd . vertical or horizontal irregularities. The situation is somewhat different when considering seismic effects. although FEMA 350 (FEMA. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . load standards and resource documents contain specific seismic drift limits. Although some building codes. the designer should use the drift limits specified in the Applicable Building Code. The use of these factors should be consistent with those specified in the Applicable Building Code with due consideration of the limitations and modifications necessary to account for building category. which is dependent upon the type of building system used. for wind loads such serviceability limit states are regarded as a matter of engineering judgment rather than absolute design limits (Fisher and West. FEMA 355C presents a good discussion of how to incorporate panel zone deformations in to the analytical model (FEMA. Mathematical models for the behavior of the Panel Zone in terms of shear force-shear distortion relationships have been proposed by many researchers. 2000g) are to be compared to an amplified story drift that approximates the difference in deflection between the top and bottom of the story under consideration during a large earthquake. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.

80

PART I – STORY DRIFT

[Comm. C5.

The following discussion pertains primarily to Moment Frames (FEMA, 2000a), although other systems where high lateral drifts may occur require a similar analysis. Each story of the structure should be investigated to ensure that lateral drifts induced by earthquake response do not result in a condition of instability under gravity loads. The analysis of the structure should explicitly consider the geometric nonlinearity introduced by P- effects. The quantity i should be calculated for each story for each direction of response, as follows:
i

=

Pi R i Vyi H

(C5-1)

where: H = height of story, which may be taken as the distance between the centerline of floor framing at each of the levels above and below, or the distance between the top of floor slabs at each of the levels above and below, in. (mm) Pi = portion of the total weight of the structure including dead, permanent live, and 25 percent of transient live loads acting on all of the columns within story level i, kips (N) R = design factor used to determine the design seismic loads applicable to the Structural System as defined in the Applicable Building Code. In the absence of such definition, R is listed in Table C-I-4.1. i = calculated lateral drift at the center of rigidity of story i, when the design seismic loads are applied in the direction under consideration, in. (mm) Vyi = total plastic lateral shear restoring capacity in the direction under consideration at story i, kips (N) The plastic story shear quantity, Vyi , should be determined by methods of plastic analysis. However, Vyi may be approximately calculated from the equation:
n

2 Vyi =
j=1

M pG j H (C5-2)

when the following conditions apply: (1) All beam-column connections meet the strong-column-weak-beam criterion in the story (2) The same number of moment-resisting bays is present at the top and bottom of the frame and (3) The strength of girders, moment-connected at both ends, at the top and bottom of the frame is similar where: M pG j = the plastic moment capacity of girder “j” participating in the momentresisting framing at the floor level on top of the story, and n = the number of moment-resisting girders in the framing at the floor level on top of the story
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

Comm. C5.]

PART I – STORY DRIFT

81

In any story in which all columns do not meet the strong-column-weak-beam criterion, the plastic story shear quantity, Vyi may be calculated from the equation:
m

2 Vyi = where:
k=1

M pCk H (C5-3)

m = the number of columns in moment-resisting framing in the story under consideration, and M pCk = the plastic moment capacity of each column “k”, participating in the moment-resisting framing, considering the axial load present on the column For other conditions, the quantity Vyi shall be calculated by plastic mechanism analysis, considering the vertical distribution of lateral loads on the structure. The quantity i is the ratio of the effective story shear produced by first order Peffects at the calculated story drift to the maximum restoring force in the structure. When this ratio has a value greater than 1.0, the structure does not have enough strength to resist the P- induced shear forces and may collapse in a sidesway mechanism. If the ratio is less than 1.0, the restoring force in the structure exceeds the story shear due to P- effects and unless additional displacement is induced or lateral loads applied, the structure should not collapse. Given the uncertainty associated with predicting significance of P- effects, it is recommended that when i in a story exceeds 0.3, the structure be considered unstable, unless a detailed global stability capacity evaluation for the structure, considering P- effects, is conducted. P- effects can have a significant impact on the ability of structures to resist collapse when subjected to strong ground shaking. When the non-dimensional quantity, i , calculated in accordance with Equation C5-1 significantly exceeds a value of about 0.1, the instantaneous stiffness of the structure can be significantly decreased, and can effectively become negative. If earthquake induced displacements are sufficiently large to create negative instantaneous stiffness, collapse is likely to occur. Analyses reported in FEMA 355F (FEMA, 2000f ) included direct consideration of P- effects in determining the ability of regular, well configured frames designed to modern code provisions to resist P- -induced instability and P- -induced collapse. For regular, well-configured structures, if the value of is maintained within the limits indicated in this section (i.e. 0.3 or less), P- -induced instability is unlikely to occur. Values of greater than this limit suggest that instability due to P- effects is possible. In such cases, the frame should be redesigned to provide greater resistance to P- -induced instability unless explicit evaluation of these effects using the detailed Performance Evaluation methods outlined in Appendix A of FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) are performed. The evaluation approach for P- effects presented in this section appears similar to but differs substantially from that contained in FEMA 302 (FEMA, 1997a), and
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

82

PART I – MATERIALS

[Comm. C6.

in use in the building codes for many years. The approach contained in FEMA 302 and the building codes was an interim formulation. Research indicates that this interim approach was not meaningful. Some of this research included the explicit evaluation of P- effects for buildings of varying heights, subjected to many different types of ground motion and designed using different building code provisions. Using these and other parameters, several tens of thousands of nonlinear analyses were run to investigate P- effects. Extensive additional discussion on the issue of P- effects and their importance in the response of structures at large interstory drifts is contained in FEMA 355C (FEMA, 2000d). C6. MATERIALS The structural steels that are explicitly permitted for use in seismic design have been selected based upon their inelastic properties and weldability. In general, they meet the following characteristics: (1) a ratio of yield stress to tensile stress not greater than 0.85; (2) a pronounced stress-strain plateau at the yield stress; (3) a large inelastic strain capability (for example, tensile elongation of 20 percent or greater in a 2-in. (50 mm) gage length); and (4) good weldability. Other steels should not be used without evidence that the above criteria are met. The 50 ksi (345 MPa) limitation on the specified minimum yield stress for members expecting inelastic action refers to inelastic action under the effects of the Design Earthquake. Modern steels of higher strength, such as A913 Grade 65, are generally considered to have properties acceptable for seismic column applications. C6.2. Material Properties for Determination of Required Strength Brittle fracture of beam-to-column moment connections in the Northridge Earthquake resulted from a complex combination of variables. One of the many contributing factors was the failure to recognize that actual beam yield stresses are generally higher than the specified minimum yield stress Fy , which elevates the connection demand. In 1994, the Structural Shape Producers Council (SSPC) conducted a survey to determine the characteristics of current structural steel production (SSPC, 1994). FEMA (1995) subsequently recommended that the mean values of Fy from the SSPC study be used in calculations of demand on moment connections. It was also recognized that the same overstrength concerns also apply to other systems as well. R y is defined as the ratio of Expected Yield Strength Fye to specified minimum yield stress Fy . It is used as a multiplier on the specified minimum yield stress when calculating the Required Strength of connections and other members that must withstand the development of inelasticity in another member. The specified values of R y for rolled shapes are somewhat lower than those that can be calculated using the mean values reported in the SSPC survey. Those values were skewed somewhat by the inclusion of a large number of smaller members, which typically have a higher measured yield stress than the larger members common in seismic design. The given values are considered to be reasonable averages, although it is recognized that they are not maxima. The Expected Yield Strength R y Fy can be determined by testing conducted in accordance with the requirements for the specified grade of steel. Such an approach should only be followed in unusual
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

C6.1. Material Specifications

Comm. C6.]

PART I – MATERIALS

83

cases where there is extensive evidence that the values of R y are significantly unconservative. It is not expected that this would be the approach followed for typical building projects. Refer to ASTM A370. The higher values of R y for ASTM A36/A36M (R y = 1.5) and ASTM A572/ A572M Grade 42 (290) (R y = 1.3) shapes are indicative of the most recently reported properties of these grades of steel. If the material being used in design was produced several years ago, it may be possible to use a reduced value of R y based upon testing of the steel to be used or other supporting data (Galambos and Ravindra, 1978). The values of R y will be periodically monitored to ensure that current production practice is properly reflected. A survey of HSS and steel pipe production data in 2000 resulted in R y values of 1.3 and 1.4, respectively. While ASTM A709/A709M is primarily used in the design and construction of bridges, it could also be used in building construction. Written as an umbrella specification, its grades are essentially the equivalent of other approved ASTM specifications. For example, ASTM A709/A709 Grade 50 (345) is essentially ASTM A572/A572M Grade 50 (345) and ASTM A709/A709M Grade 50W (345W) is essentially ASTM A588/A588M Grade 50 (345). Thus, if used, ASTM A709/A709M material should be treated as would the corresponding approved ASTM material grade. Specific provisions for some Seismic Load Resisting Systems stipulate that the Required Strength be determined by multiplying the Nominal Strength of a certain member or connecting element by the value of R y for the corresponding material grade. This overstrength is primarily of interest when evaluating the Design Strength of another connecting element or member. It is not of interest, however, when evaluating the Design Strength of the same member to which the value of R y was applied in the determination of the Required Strength. Therefore, when both the Required Strength and Design Strength calculations are made for the same member or connecting element, it is also permitted to apply R y in the determination of the Design Strength. An example of such a condition would be the checking of the Required Strength of the beam outside of the Link in an EBF (see Section 15.6). Since the Required Strength is generated in the same member (in this case the Link portion of the beam), the Design Strength should also include the R y term. C6.3. Notch-Toughness Requirements The LRFD Specification requirements for notch toughness cover Group 4 and 5 shapes and plate elements with thickness that is greater than or equal to 2 in. (50 mm) in tension applications. In these Provisions, this requirement is extended to cover: (1) all Group 4 and 5 shapes that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System; (2) ASTM Group 3 shapes that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System with flange thickness greater than or equal to 11/2 in. (38 mm); and, (3) plate elements with thickness greater than or equal to 2 in. (50 mm) that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System, such as the flanges of built-up girders. Because other shapes and plates are generally subjected to sufficient cross-sectional reduction during the rolling process such that the resulting notch toughness will exceed that required above (Cattan, 1995), specific requirements have not been included herein.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

Ye. As a result. Kaufmann and Fisher. 2001. these strengths significantly exceed those loads that can be delivered to the column by the beam flange. For rotary-straightened W-shapes. This research generally corroborates AISC’s initial findings and recommendations. Gr. 2001. and Galambos. in the period immediately following the Northridge earthquake. Dexter. An example of such a member might include a transfer girder with thick plates where its design is dominated by its gravity load demand. Metrovich and Pense. Dexter. an area of reduced notch toughness has been documented in a limited region of the web immediately adjacent to the flange as illustrated in Figure C-I-6. a designer might include a member in the Seismic Load Resisting System to develop a more robust load path. and Ojard. Cotton. a number of recommendations were promulgated that suggested limiting the value of through-thickness stress demand on column flanges to ensure that through-thickness yielding did not initiate in the column flanges. The preceding discussion assumes that no significant column flange laminations. For the modern materials tested. Recommendations issued (AISC. Detailed fracture mechanics investigations conducted as part of the FEMA/SAC project confirm that damage initially identified as through thickness failures is likely to have occurred as a result of certain combinations of filler metal and base material strength and notch toughness. 2001. Bartlett. Hajjar.1. The LRFD Specification requirements noted above would still apply in this case. none of the more than 100 full scale tests on “post-Northridge” connection details have demonstrated any through-thickness column fractures. For this reason. conditions of stress in the connection. the actual cause for the fractures that were initially thought to be through-thickness failures of the column flange are now considered to be unrelated to this material property. For example. C6. 2001. This combined analytical and laboratory research clearly shows that due to the high restraint inherent in welded beam flange to column flange joints. Lee. Schmidt. 2001). 50 and ASTM A913. and the presence of critical flaws in the welded joint. no limits are suggested for the through-thickness strength of the base material by the FEMA/SAC program or in these Provisions.84 PART I – MATERIALS [Comm. but the member will experience only an insignificant level of seismic demand. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 65 specifications did not result in significant through-thickness fractures (FEMA. In addition. May 21. 2000h). However. extensive through-thickness testing conducted specifically to determine the susceptibility to through thickness failures of modern column materials meeting ASTM A572. Gr. Uang and Chi. 1997a) by AISC were followed up by a series of industry sponsored research projects (Kaufmann. Early investigations of connection fractures in the 1994 Northridge earthquake identified a number of fractures that some speculated were the result of inadequate through-thickness strength of the column flange material. In addition to the analytical studies. Jelinek. Graeser. inclusions or other discontinuities occur in regions adjacent to welded beam Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. the through thickness yield and tensile strengths of the column material are significantly elevated in the region of the connection. The requirements of this section may not be necessary for members that resist only incidental loads. This limit state often controlled the overall design of these connections. It would be inconsistent with the intent of this section if the designer were to arbitrarily exclude a member with insignificant seismic loads from the Seismic Load Resisting System that would otherwise improve the seismic performance of the building in order to avoid the toughness requirements in this section.

There is no definitive data on the behavior of connections with oversize holes under either Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. For example. e. Bolted Joints . “k-area. axial load in a brace.Comm. Fabrication and erection tolerances often require that oversized holes be used. That is. C7. C-I-6. C7. The sharing of design load between welds and bolts on the same faying surface is not permitted. the use of holes in bolted joints in the Seismic Load Resisting System is limited to standard holes and short-slotted holes with the direction of the slot perpendicular to the line of force. An exception is provided for alternative hole types that are justified as a part of a tested assembly. Similarly. the web of an axially loaded wide flange should be connected by the same means as the flange if the elements are resisting the same load. 2000b) provides guidance for specifying such examinations. even with slip-critical connections. JOINTS.] PART I – CONNECTIONS. This requirement is intended for joints where the faying surface is primarily subjected to shear. AND FASTENERS 85 Fig. the Engineer of Record should consider specifying ultrasonic examination in these regions prior to welding. sharing of design loads should not be used on elements of a member that are connected by different means. However. bolted connections can be proportioned with Design Strengths for bearing connections as long as the faying surfaces are still prepared to provide a minimum slip coefficient = 0.” flange-to-column flange joints.2. To prevent excessive deformations of bolted joints due to slip between the connected plies under earthquake motions. these Provisions call for bolted joints to be proportioned as pretensioned bearing joints but with faying surfaces prepared as for Class A or better slip-critical connections. Where column shapes with proportions equal to those defined in this Section are used. Accordingly..g. CONNECTIONS. the requirement on preparation of the faying surfaces may be relaxed. in a bolted end plate connection.1. FEMA 353 (FEMA.33. JOINTS. AND FASTENERS The potential for full reversal of design load and likelihood of inelastic deformations of members and/or connected parts necessitates that pretensioned bolts be used in bolted joints in the Seismic Load Resisting System. May 21. Where the faying surface is primarily subjected to tension or compression. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction C7. earthquake motions are such that slip cannot and need not be prevented in all cases.g. The resulting nominal amount of slip resistance will minimize damage in more moderate seismic events. e.

and block shear rupture are examples of limit states that generally result in non-ductile failure of connections. this limit should effectively minimize damage in moderate seismic events. that the actual bearing load in a seismic event may be much larger than that anticipated in design and the actual deformation of holes may exceed this theoretical limit. the bearing strength is limited by the “deformation-considered” option in LRFD Specification Section J3. The more critical CVN weld metal property is the minimum of 40 ft-lbf (54J) at 70˚F (21˚C) following the procedure in Appendix X. Welded Joints The general requirements for welded joints are given in AWS D1. Based on the FEMA recommendations.4dtF u ). 2000a) and 353 (FEMA. These Provisions adopt the dual CVN requirement suggested in the FEMA documents but require a lower temperature than the FEMA recommendations for the AWS A5 classification method (i. Nonetheless. it is required that connections be configured such that a ductile limit state in the member or connection. and (2) they require weld metal notch toughness in all welds used in members and connections in the load path of the Seismic Load Resisting System. Successful testing at either temperature ensures that some ductile tearing will occur before final fracture.75 × 2. May 21.3. AND FASTENERS [Comm. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . The philosophical intent of this limitation in the LRFD Specification is to limit the bearing deformation to an approximate maximum of 1/4 in. Static test data indicate that it is difficult to obtain the same preload in bolts in oversized holes as compared to standard holes. however. controls the Design Strength. C7. Approval by the Engineer of Record of the WPS to be used is required in these Provisions. such as yielding or bearing deformation. Use of this lower temperature is consistent with the filler metal used in the SAC/FEMA tests and matches the filler metals commercially available. minus 20˚F rather than 0˚F). the Engineer of Record may consider applying the 40 ft-lbf (54J) at 70˚F (21˚C) requirements Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Fisher and Struik.86 PART I – CONNECTIONS. C7. Tension or shear fracture. the reduced slip capacity may lead to unacceptable interstory drifts and designers should incorporate this effect into their analyses. FEMA 350 (FEMA. 2000). (6 mm). As such. but the overall behavior of connections with oversized holes has been shown to be similar to those with standard holes (Kulak. It should be recognized.10 ( Rn = 0. In connections for diagonal members in Braced Frames. 1987). wherein a Welding Procedure Specification (WPS) is required for all welds. These Provisions contain two significant changes from the 1997 Provisions: (1) for the critical CJP welds in the special and Intermediate Moment Frame systems. these limit states are undesirable as the controlling limit state for connections that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System. dynamic loads or large cyclic load reversals.1(AWS. To prevent excessive deformations of bolted joints due to bearing on the connected material. Accordingly. JOINTS. The loss of preload results in a lower static slip load. they require that the weld metal be made with filler metals that meet minimum levels of Charpy V-Notch (CVN) toughness using two different test temperatures and specified test protocols. bolt shear.e. 2000d) also recommend filler metal that complies with minimum Charpy V-Notch (CVN) requirements using two test temperatures and specified test protocols for critical welded joints.

Other Connections The FEMA/SAC testing has demonstrated the sensitivity of regions undergoing large inelastic strains due to discontinuities caused by welding. either the AWS classification method in the AWS A5 specification or manufacturer certification may be used to meet this CVN requirement. or construction caused flaws. When located in regions of potential inelasticity.1 requirements for repair of discontinuities should be applied. and the subsequent work of other trades have the potential to create discontinuities in the Seismic Load Resisting System. etc. penetrations. C8. Welds carrying only gravity loads such as filler beam connections and welds for collateral members of the Seismic Load Resisting System such as deck welds. welding processes used in the production of hollow structural sections and pipe (ASTM A500 and A53/A53M). these weld toughness requirements are not intended to apply to electric resistance welding (ERW) and submerged arc welding (SAW). It should be noted that yield level strains are not strictly limited to the plastic hinge zones and caution should also be exercised in creating discontinuities in these regions as well. 2000d. 9 for guidance in establishing the acceptance criteria for repair of discontinuities. and Design Strengths of members in the Seismic Load Resisting System be determined in accordance with the LRFD Specification. Many operations during fabrication. unless noted otherwise in these Provisions. May 21. It is not the intent of these Provisions to require project-specific CVN testing of either the welding procedure or any production welds. the control of heat input is not monitored unless specified. The responsible subcontractor should propose a repair procedure for the approval of the Engineer of Record. such discontinuities are required to be repaired by the responsible subcontractor as required by the Engineer of Record. For a discussion of special requirements for welds at low temperatures. Scope . Following the manufacturer’s essential variables. Repair may be unnecessary for some discontinuities. Areas where plastic hinging is expected include Moment Frame hinging zones. C7. the ends and the center of SCBF braces.] PART I – MEMBERS 87 to other critical welds.Comm. Discontinuities should also be repaired in other regions of the Seismic Load Resisting System when the presence of the discontinuity would be detrimental to its performance. In addition. Resistance Factors. C8. and 2000f ). For this reason. subject to the approval of the Engineer of Record. erection. operations that cause discontinuities are prohibited in the plastic hinging region. MEMBERS It is intended that Nominal Strengths. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. see FEMA (2000a. The Engineer of Record should refer to AWS D1. The beam-column Panel Zone is a common example of a region experiencing inelastic deformation.4. Link beams of EBFs.1 and ASTM A6. All other welds in members and connections in the load path of the Seismic Load Resisting System require weld metal with a minimum CVN toughness of 20 ft-lbf (27J) at minus 20˚F (minus 29˚C). minor collectors. and lateral bracing do not require weld metal with notch toughness requirements. Further. rapid change of section. Sect. Outside the plastic hinge regions. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction C8. AWS D1.1.

Provisions for Special Moment Frames (SMF).5 in Table I-8-1 does not vary with Fy and is intended to be a practical method to limit the aspect ratio of flat bar crosssections. Cyclic tests (Astaneh-Asl and Ravat. C8. the less stringent values in LRFD Table B5. B.3. 1965. The limiting width-thickness ratios for webs in flexural compression have been modified (Uang and Fan. C8. and H-pile design specifically reference Table I-8-1. E. Lay. are expected to permit inelastic behavior without local buckling and need not be computed using the Expected Yield Strength. are sufficient to prevent local buckling before onset of yielding. while for lower Seismic Design Categories A. members in the special segment of Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF).2. ps . In Section 6. the values in Table I-8-1 are specified for Seismic Design Categories D. Therefore. Kemp. Although the width-thickness ratios for compact members. R y Fy . 1961. 1997) indicated that local buckling of piles satisfying the width-thickness limitations in Table I-8-1 occurs after many cycles of loading.1 of the AISC LRFD Specification (AISC. Local Buckling To provide for reliable inelastic deformations in those Seismic Load Resisting Systems that require high levels of inelasticity.1. of the material used in a member is required for the purpose of determining the effect of the actual member strength on its connections to other members of the Seismic Load Resisting System. Diagonal web members used in the special segments of STMF systems are limited to flat bars only at this time because of their proven high ductility without buckling. calculated using specified minimum yield stress. 1999) should suffice. and C. Thus. given in LRFD Specification Table B5. and F. p . this local buckling did not have much effect on the cyclic performance of the pile during cyclic testing or after cyclic testing stopped and the piles were once again under only axial load. the width-thickness ratios of compression elements of the system should be less than or equal to those that are resistant to local buckling when stressed into the inelastic range. 2000a).2. the Links in Eccentrically Braced Frames (EBF). the b/t ratio limitations given in Table B5. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF). The widththickness ratios for seismically compact members. 2001) to comply with the recommendations in FEMA 350 (FEMA. 1986. During a major earthquake. During the service life of a steel H-pile it is primarily subjected to axial compression and acts as an axially-loaded column. the steel H-pile becomes a beam-column and may have to resist large bending moments and uplift. The specified limiting width-thickness ratio of 2. C8. Column Strength The axial loads generated during earthquake motions in columns that are part of the Seismic Load Resisting System are expected to exceed those calculated using the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. The width-thickness requirements in Table I-8-1. Round HSS sections used as piles in high seismic areas should also satisfy the limiting width-thickness ratio value given in Table I-8-1. in keeping with the Scope of the Provisions.1 are permitted.88 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm. Bansal. the Expected Yield Strength. 1971). because of lateral movements of pile cap and foundation. May 21. the available test data suggest that these limits are not adequate for the required inelastic performance in several of the Seismic Load Resisting Systems. In addition. given in Table I-8-1 are deemed adequate for ductilities to 6 or 7 (Sawyer.

Bruneau.3 and the Required Strength for axial.5 m) above the floor level. For example. Mahin. and are to be applied without consideration of any concurrent flexural loads on the column. May 21. The use of the Amplified Seismic Load combinations account for these effects with a minimum required compressive and tensile strength. The amplifications required in this Section represent an approximation of these actions and are meant to provide an upper bound for the required axial strength. 1987). C8. For less typical buildings. C8. the uplift resistance of a pile foundation designed primarily for compressive loads may significantly exceed the required tensile strength for the column. flexural and shear effects at the splice location determined from load combinations stipulated by the Applicable Building Code. The calculation of the minimum Design Strength in Section 8. It is not intended that these column splice requirements be in conflict with applicable safety regulations.] PART I – MEMBERS 89 code-specified seismic loads for several reasons: (1) the reduction in lateral load for use in analysis of an elastic model of the structure. Consequently. there is a natural limit to the load that the system can transmit to a column.2 to 1. General Except for Moment Frames. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.4a(2) includes the overstrength factor R y . field erection and construction of the column splice will generally be simplified due to improved accessibility and convenience. When located 4 to 5 ft (1. the splice should be placed as close as practicable to the midpoint of the clear distance between the finished floor and the bottom flange of the beam above. Column splices should be located away from the beam-to-column connection to reduce the effects of flexure. it is recommended that the splice be within the middle third of the story height. Partial-joint-penetration groove welded splices of thick column flanges exhibit virtually no ductility under tensile loading (Popov and Steven. 1977.Comm. Column Splices C8. the Design Strength of a column splice is required to equal or exceed both the Required Strength determined in Section 8. This results in a minimum Design Strength that is not less than 50 percent of the expected axial yield strength of the column flanges. if a spread footing foundation can only provide a certain resistance to uplift. and (3) the concurrent vertical accelerations that are not explicitly specified as a required load. The exceptions provided in the last paragraph of Section 8. where the floor-to-floor height is insufficient to accommodate this requirement. and Popov. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .4.4a. (2) the underestimation of the overturning forces in the analysis.2 m) minimum distance requirement will control. Conversely.3 represent self-limiting conditions wherein the required axial strength need not exceed the capability of the Structural System to transmit axial loads to the column. In general. This would not represent a system strength limit. such as the OSHA Safety Standards for Steel Erection developed by the Steel Erection Negotiated Rulemaking Advisory Committee (SENRAC). column splices made with partial-jointpenetration groove welds require a 100 percent increase in Required Strength and must be made using weld metal with minimum CVN toughness properties. the 4-ft (1. For typical buildings.

In these and similar cases. The possible occurrence of tensile loads in column splices utilizing partial-jointpenetration groove welds during a maximum considered earthquake should be evaluated. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. C8. the performance of a steel frame remains tolerable (Huckelbridge and Clough. In the 1992 AISC Seismic Provisions. geometry and deformation. Additional considerations may be necessary when flexure dominates over axial compression in columns in Moment Frames. 1977). Depending on the specific characteristics of the particular design configuration. the analysis may require elastic-plastic or plastic finite element analysis of the joint. Although no column splices are known to have failed in the Northridge Earthquake or previous earthquakes. These provisions are applicable to common frame configurations. An exception to the requirements for beveled transitions is provided when partial-joint-penetration groove welds are permitted. When tensile loads are possible. particularly at welds. web splice plates that are wide enough to maintain the general alignment of the spliced columns can be used. this provision is no longer considered to be prudent given the concern over stress concentrations. and on the residual stress magnitude and distribution in the joint. when large changes in column sizes occur at the splice. the assumed strength and fracture toughness of the base metal. or when the possibility of column buckling in single curvature over multiple stories exists. A partialjoint-penetration groove weld made from one side would produce an edge cracklike notch (Barsom and Rolfe. beveled transitions are required for all systems with CJP groove-welded column splices. it is suggested that some restraint be provided against relative lateral movement between the spliced column shafts. Moment Frame systems are included in this requirement because inelastic analyses consistently suggest that large moments can be expected at any point along the column length. A complete-joint-penetration groove weld may be considered as satisfying this requirement. despite the results of elastic analysis showing that moments are low at the mid-height of columns in Moment Frames subjected to lateral loads. Accordingly. For example. and in end columns of tall narrow frames where overturning forces can be very significant. 1999). Column splices in Braced Frames can also be subject to tension due to overturning effects. special column splice requirements may be necessary for minimum Design Strength and/or detailing. The accuracy of the computed strength will depend on the finite element model and mesh size used. Shake-table experiments have shown that. A partial-joint-penetration groove weld made from both sides would produce a buried crack-like notch. the connection is likely to be a partial-jointpenetration groove weld. Where CJP groove welds are not used. heat affected zone and weld metal. The unwelded portion of the partial-joint-penetration groove weld forms a crack-like notch that induces stress concentrations. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . May 21. Alternatively. The strength of such crack-like notches may be computed by using fracture mechanics methodology. beveled transitions between elements of differing thickness and or width were not specifically required for butt splices in columns subject to seismic loads. The designer should review the conditions found in columns in buildings with tall story heights. this can be achieved with the use of flange splice plates. when columns that are unattached at the base reseat themselves after lifting.90 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm.

Such connections may employ thick base plates. and. The Column Base detail must accommodate the required hinging rotations while maintaining the strength required to provide the mechanism envisioned by the designer. FEMA. Bolted web connections are preferred by many engineers and contractors because they have advantages for erection. May 21. considering the stress concentrations inherent in such welded joints. Where haunched type connections are used. FEMA 350 (FEMA. 2000f. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . it is recommended that splices of such columns be adequate to develop the shear forces corresponding to these large column moments in both orthogonal directions. Column Bases A ductile moment frame is usually expected to develop a hinge at the base of the column.4b. C8. Partial-joint-penetration groove welded webs are not recommended. 2000a) recommends that: “Splices of columns that are not part of the Seismic Load Resisting System should be made in the center one-third of the column height. Columns Not Part of the Seismic Load Resisting System Inelastic analyses (FEMA. 2000g) of Moment Frame buildings have shown the importance of the columns that are not part of the Seismic Load Resisting System in helping to distribute the seismic shears between the floors. or other strengthening as required to develop the column hinge. Bolted column web splices are required to have connection plates on both sides of the web to minimize eccentricities.] PART I – MEMBERS 91 C8. because fracture of a flange splice would likely lead to fracture of the web splice.4c. C8. C8. For this reason. The designer should employ the same guidelines as given for the rigid fully-restrained connections. when plates are placed on both sides of the web. 2000d) showed that. hinging occurs above the haunch.” The corresponding commentary suggests that this shear should be calculated assuming plastic hinges at the ends of the columns in both orthogonal directions. These conditions are similar to the requirements for beam-to-column connections.4c requires that the calculated shear in the splices be not less than Mpc /H . shears in such columns will be less than one-half of the shear calculated from 2Mpc /H .Comm. For this reason Section 8. cover plates. Further review (Krawinkler. and should have sufficient shear capacity in both orthogonal directions to maintain the alignment of the column at the maximum shear force that the column is capable of producing.5. Column Bases for Moment Frames can be of several different types. Column Web Splices Column web splices should be concentric with the column loads. as follows: (1) A rigid base assembly may be provided which is strong enough to force yielding in the column. Even columns that have beam connections considered to be pinned connections may develop large bending moments and shears due to non-uniform drifts of adjacent levels. and appropriate consideration should be Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. haunches. they are expected to maintain alignment of the column in the event of a flange splice fracture. in general. 2001) of non-linear analyses cited in FEMA 355C (FEMA.

it is necessary to provide anchor rods with adequate elongation capacity to permit the required rotation and sufficient unrestrained length for the yielding to occur. (4) The column may continue below the assumed seismic base (e. The horizontal shear to be resisted at the ends of the column below the seismic base should be calculated considering the probable Overstrength (R y Fy ) of the framing.5. The designer should recognize that hinging will occur in the column. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (3) A connection which provides “partial fixity” may be provided. and anchor rods can be maintained up to the maximum rotation that may occur.1 for examples of rigid base assemblies that can be designed to be capable of forcing column hinging. crawl space. See Figure C-I-8. base plate. column base connection will generally provide partial rotational fixity. C-I-8. Example “rigid base” plate assembly for moment frames. the designer should consider the principles used in the design of partially-restrained connections. just above the seismic base. into a basement. that without taking special measures. or yielding of anchor rods. but the base itself yields before the column hinges. bending of angles or tees.g. however. The designer should ensure that the required shear capacity of the column.5. so that the Column Base is fixed up to some column moment. given to the stability of the column section at the hinge. In the latter case. This type of base may rely on bending of the base plate (similar to an end plate connection). and a “pinned base” may be utilized. May 21. (2) Large columns may be provided at the bottom level to limit the drift. In designing a base with partial fixity. C-I-8.92 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm.5.2 for an example of a Moment Frame Column Base fixed within a grade beam. C8. It should be recognized. Fig. See Fig. or grade beam) in such a way that the column’s fixity is assured without the need for a rigid base plate connection. Shear capacity of the base plate to foundation connection must be assured at the maximum rotation. the designer should consider the base connection as similar to a beam-to-column connection and apply Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.1. For both braced frame and Moment Frame Column Bases.

Nishiyama. Test specimens have been subjected to axial loading combined with Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Targowski. 1985. Thambiratnam and Paramasivam. (2) Column Base plates are bearing on grout or concrete that is more compressible than the column flanges of beam-to-column connections. Lamblin.Comm.5. 1993. 1988. similar principles of design and detailing. 1986. Burda and Itani. Spacone. 1996. 1992. Fukuta. 1999) mainly because of the rather limited number of analytical and experimental studies that have been carried out to-date (DeWolf and Sarisley. 1998.] PART I – MEMBERS 93 Fig. 1980. 1996. (6) Foundation rocking and rotation may be an issue.2. when compared to beam-to-column connections. Example of moment frame column base fixity in a grade beam. C-I-8. and Kwon. Picard and Beaulieu. which in turn is connected to a concrete foundation through anchor rods. Hasegawa. there are also significant differences that must be considered: (1) Long anchor rods embedded in concrete will strain much more than the steel bolts or welds of the beam-to-column connections. 1999. and Shen. Seismic design practice for this class of connections has not been well developed (DeWolf and Ricker. However. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . (4) The shear mechanism between the Column Base and grout or concrete is different from the shear mechanism between beam end plate and column flange. (5) AISC standard Column Base anchor rod hole diameter is different from AISC standard steel-to-steel bolt holes. Adany. Midorikawa. Jaspart and Vandegans. Stojadinovic. Mukai. 1997). 1998. Most of the experimental studies have been performed on reduced scale specimens representing basic types of connections simulating a column welded to an exposed base plate. 1990. Damage at Column Bases during past earthquakes has been reported by many observers (Northridge Reconnaissance Team. Ermopoulos and Stamatopoulos. and Dunai. The Column Base connection is one of the most important elements in steel structures. Bergsma. especially for isolated column footings. Drake and Elkin. Astaneh-Asl. 2000). Goel. Sato and Kamagata. May 21. and Guerlement. Calado. C8. (3) Column Base connections have significantly more longitudinal load in the plane of the flanges and less transverse load in the plane of the web. and Yamanouchi.

2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . if the building system performance intends column yielding at the base plate. low cycle fatigue fracture of flanges or overall buckling of the pile occurred. stiffness and ductility of this very important class of connections. relative strength and stiffness of the base plate and anchor rods can significantly influence the stress distribution and failure modes. are primarily subjected to gravity axial load. piles. Also. 2000. 2001).6a. piles are subjected to horizontal and Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. vertical piles tolerated from 40 to 65 large inelastic cyclic vertical and horizontal displacements with rotation of the plastic hinge exceeding 0. if the building system performance intends brace yielding at the base plate. and Cho. In the test program. Lee and Goel. 1998. and Goel. When very large inelastic cycles were applied. McMullin. Eventually. H-Piles The provisions on seismic design of H-piles are based on the data collected on the actual behavior of H-piles during recent earthquakes. five full size H-Piles with reinforced concrete pile caps were subjected to realistic cyclic vertical and horizontal displacements expected in a major earthquake. before the piles experienced fracture through locally buckled areas. local buckling of flanges within the plastic hinge area occurred. The Provisions are silent on the use of Amplified Seismic Loads for Column Base design since this is under the purview of the Applicable Building Code. The tests established that during cyclic loading for all three vertical pile specimens a very ductile and stable plastic hinge formed in the steel pile just below the reinforced concrete pile cap. May 21. Astaneh-Asl. the connection between the brace and the base plate should be designed for the Amplified Seismic Load. the connection between the column and the base plate should be designed for the Amplified Seismic Load. particularly vertical piles. C8. During an earthquake. 2001). The performance of the base connection also depends on the cyclic performance of the anchors and the surrounding concrete (Klingner and Graces. Designers should use caution and good judgment in design and detailing in order to achieve desired strength. Design of H-Piles Prior to an earthquake. Many different types of Column Base connections are used in current practice. In the case of Braced Frames. However. Two recent studies (Fahmy.94 PART I – MEMBERS [Comm. When a connection is required to be designed for Amplified Seismic Loads. Bolt. Much research work is needed in order to better understand their behavior under seismic loading and to formulate improved design procedures. Donikaian. In the case of Moment Frames. the intent is to assure that the connection is strong enough and stiff enough to allow yielding of the connected member. Amplified Seismic Loads are prescribed to assure sufficient Design Strength to control the locations of inelastic deformations. Three specimens were vertical piles and two specimens were batter piles. cyclic bending to simulate the Column Base behavior in Moment Frames. In general. C8. including the 1994 Northridge earthquake (Astaneh-Asl. C8. 2001) have noted the importance of weld metal toughness and axis of bending of wide flange column sections on ductility and energy dissipation capacity of the test specimens. Modjtahedi. 1994) and the results of cyclic tests of full-scale pile tests (Astaneh-Asl and Ravat.6. Stojadinovic.06 radian for more than 20 cycles.

E. the batter pile specimens did not show as much ductility as the vertical piles. bending moment interaction curves for one of the specimens. The horizontal and vertical displacements of piles generate axial load (compression and possibly uplift tension). Figure C-I-8. the vertical piles in Seismic Design Categories D. The batter piles tolerated from 7 to 17 large inelastic cycles before failure. and F should be designed to support the gravity load alone. Because of this possibility.] PART I – MEMBERS 95 Fig. C-I-8. Based on relatively limited information on actual seismic behavior of batter piles. A case study of performance of H-piles during the 1994 Northridge earthquake (Astaneh-Asl et al. Based on performance of test specimens. realistic cyclic horizontal and vertical displacements were applied to the pile specimens. 2000) that H-piles should be designed following the provisions of the AISC LRFD Specification regarding members subjected to combined loads. Deformations of Piles and Forces Acting on an Individual Pile. without participation of the batter piles. During tests of H-piles. vertical displacements as shown in Figure C-I-8.. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. through realistic cyclic tests.1.1. it is possible that during a major earthquake. and shear in the pile.Comm. Unless.6.2 shows test results in terms of axial load. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . batter piles in a pile group fail and are no longer able to support the gravity load after the earthquake. bending moment. However. Batter H-Piles The vertical pile specimens demonstrated very large cyclic ductility as well as considerable energy dissipation capacity. it is shown that batter piles will be capable of carrying their share of the gravity loads after a major earthquake. C8.6b. it was concluded (Astaneh-Asl.6.6. the use of batter piles to carry gravity loads is discouraged. 1994) indicated excellent performance for pile groups with vertical piles only. C8. May 21.

The provisions for these three moment-frame types reflect lessons learned from the Northridge and Kobe Earthquakes. SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) General Comments for Commentary Sections C9. Commentary on specific provisions in Section C9 is based primarily on FEMA 350 (FEMA. C-I-8. 2000). Tension in H-Piles Due to overturning moment. The prescriptive moment-frame connection included in the 1992 AISC Seismic Provisions was based primarily upon testing that was conducted in the early 1970s Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . C9. C8. the use of mechanical attachment and welds over a length of pile below the pile cap equal to the depth of cross section of the pile is prohibited. and Ordinary Moment Frames (OMF) in Section 11. The reader is referred to FEMA 350 (FEMA.96 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. Since it is expected that a plastic hinge will form in the pile just under the pile cap or foundation. Fig. 2000a) for an extensive discussion of these lessons and recommendations to mitigate the conditions observed. piles can be subjected to tension.6c. C9. C10 and C11 These Provisions include three types of steel Moment Frames: Special Moment Frames (SMF) in Section 9. Axial-Moment Interaction for H-Pile Test (Astaneh-Asl. May 21. 2000a).2.6. Intermediate Moment Frames (IMF) (new) in Section 10. and from subsequent research performed by the SAC Joint Venture for FEMA. Piles subjected to tension should have sufficient mechanical attachments within their embedded area to transfer the tension force in the pile to the pile cap or foundation.

the amount of Panel Zone deformation that a given connection will have and how much it will accommodate appears to be most reliably determined by testing. It is expected that most of the inelastic deformation will take place as rotation in beam “hinges.01 radian. except where the design is sufficiently unique such that there are no published or otherwise available tests adequately representing the proposed configuration. C9. analyses and testing demonstrate that the inelastic rotations actually combine flexural deformations at the hinges. there are readily available test reports in publications of AISC. recent analyses using time histories from certain near-fault earthquakes. Investigations conducted subsequent to the Northridge earthquake emphasized that the many changes that took place in materials. a moment connection with complete-joint-penetration groove welded flanges and a welded or bolted web connection could accommodate inelastic rotations in the range of 0. and others. Additionally.01 radian.01 to 0.1. For many commonly employed combinations of beam and column sizes.01 radian and that the inelastic rotation of the beams is approximately equal to the inelastic drift. these Provisions require connections in SMF and IMF be qualified for use by testing. including FEMA 355D (FEMA. and deformations from other sources depending on the configuration. demonstrate that drift demands may be larger than previously assumed (Krawinkler and Gupta.015 radian. frame configurations and member sizes since the 1970s make the original results unsuitable as a basis for current design. OMFs are designed to remain essentially elastic and are assumed to have only very small inelastic demands. Qualification testing is not required for OMF connections. SMF and IMF are designed to accommodate approximately 0. provided that it neither leads to significant local column flange bending at the beam-flangeto-column-flange welds nor leads to significant column damage. 1998). (Note that the IMF as defined in these Provisions is equivalent to the OMF as defined in FEMA 350.5 percent were sufficient for adequate frame performance. It is assumed that the elastic drift of typical Moment Frames is usually in the range of 0. C9.” with some Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.Comm. which may be proportioned following a set of prescriptive design rules that have been demonstrated by testing to provide adequate performance for the limited inelastic rotation expected for such frames. May 21. The contribution of Panel Zone deformation to inelastic rotation is considered beneficial. respectively.02 and 0. Based upon the recommendations in FEMA 350 (FEMA. FEMA. welding. unless the column webs are unusually thick. 0. Currently. respectively. and shear deformations of the Panel Zones. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .03and 0. It was judged by engineers at the time that such rotations. Scope Special Moment Frames (SMF) are generally expected to experience significant inelastic deformation during large seismic events. These frames are assumed to accommodate total interstory drifts in the range of 0. 2000a). 2000e) and NIST/AISC (1998).] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 97 (Popov and Stephen. which corresponded to building drifts in the range of 2 to 2. The three frame types included in these Provisions offer three different levels of expected seismic inelastic rotation capability.04.) It is not the intent of these Provisions to require specific tests for each design. 1972) indicating that for the sizes and material strengths tested. including Peffects. Although it is common to visualize inelastic rotations in Moment Frames occurring at beam or column “hinges”.

the configuration. Fy .04 radian. such as when large gravity loads occur or when Panel Zones are weak. Although connection qualification primarily focuses on the level of plastic rotation achieved. In the absence of additional information. Other provisions are intended to limit or prevent excessive Panel Zone distortion.1R y Fy Z . Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections C9.01 radian. The “Strength degradation” drift angle. the ultimate QDA is more appropriately used for the design of high performance structures.2a. and Section 9.04 radian drift angle for frames with an elastic drift of 0. M p . For the sake of simplicity. Strength degradation can increase moment demands from P. In addition. Section 9. and a number of other variables. measured at a drift angle of 0. FEMA 350 (FEMA. calculated using the specified minimum yield strength. or the strength of the connection degrades to less than the nominal plastic capacity. The amount of inelastic deformation is dependent on the connection types used. whichever is less”. as defined in FEMA 350. Note that 0. to less than the nominal flexural strength. it is recommended that this degradation should not reduce flexural strength. 2000f ) demonstrating with high statistical confidence that frames with these types of connections can meet the intended performance goals. the tendency for connections to experience strength degradation with increased deformation is also of concern.04 radian based upon a specified loading protocol. column hinging and local buckling that may lead to inadequate frame performance in spite of good connection performance. The required shear strength Vu of the beam-to-column joint is defined as the summation of the factored gravity loads and the shear that results from the required flexural strengths on the two ends of the beam segment between the hinge points.03 radian plastic rotation is equivalent to 0.2a and 9.2b provides the requirements for verifying that the selected connections will meet the performance requirements.2b have been rewritten to clarify the requirements and coordinate the requirements with Appendices P and S. C9. These values formed the basis for extensive probabilistic evaluations of the performance capability of various Structural Systems (FEMA.06 radian. 2000a) recommends two criteria for qualifying drift angle (QDA) for Special Moment Frames. May 21. and because many connections have not been tested to the ultimate QDA. However.effects and the likelihood of frame instability. inelastic deformation in the Panel Zone of the column. Requirements Sections 9.1 illustrates this behavior. rational analysis may indicate that lower combinations of end moments are justified.98 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . which is part of the reason that it is seldom done. in some cases. The “Ultimate” drift angle capacity is defined as the angle “at which connection damage is so severe that continued ability to remain stable under gravity loading is uncertain”. The connections for these frames are to be qualified based upon tests that demonstrate that the connection can sustain an Interstory Drift Angle of at least 0. means the angle where “either failure of the connection occurs. The strength degradation QDA is set at 0. C9.2a gives the performance and design requirements for the connections. which can be determined as 1.2. Figure C-I-9. these Provisions adopt the single criterion of the strength degradation QDA .04 radian and the ultimate QDA is set at 0. Testing to this level can be hazardous to laboratory equipment and staff. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.

FEMA 350 (FEMA. Conformance Demonstration Section 9. these connections are commonly considered to comply with the requirements of Section 9. C9. 1971. Blondet.Comm. Panel Zone of Beam-to-Column Connections (beam web parallel to column web) Cyclic testing has demonstrated that significant ductility can be obtained through shear yielding in column Panel Zones through many cycles of inelastic distortion (Popov. per Section 9.2b.1. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. C9. It should be recognized that truss Moment Frames can be designed with bottomchord members or connections that can deform inelastically and such frames are permitted as SMF if all of the provisions of Section 9 are met.2a. Acceptable strength degradation during hysteretic behavior. 1981. 1996. C9.3. These connection designs are based on extensive testing and analysis performed by the SAC Joint Venture under a program funded by FEMA. It permits use of Prequalified Connections meeting the requirements of Appendix P or use of connections qualified by tests. Stepanov. Slutter. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . These may be from previously documented tests or project-specific tests that meet the requirements of Appendix S. 2000b). 2000a) includes recommendations for design and fabrication of several types of connections that are deemed prequalified for use in Special Moment Frames.2. Comparison of the proposed frame configurations with the SAC tested connections is recommended to insure that the results are applicable. C-I-9. and Stojadinovic. When used within the limitations listed in FEMA 350 and with quality control and quality assurance requirements in FEMA 353 (FEMA.2b provides requirements for demonstrating conformance with the requirements of Section 9. Becker.2b.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 99 Fig.

100

PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)

[Comm. C9.

Fielding and Huang, 1971; Krawinkler, 1978). Consequently, it is not generally necessary to provide a Panel Zone that is capable of developing the full flexural strength of the connected beams if the Design Strength of the Panel Zone can be predicted. However, the usual assumption that Von Mises criterion applies and the shear strength is 0.55Fy dc t does not match the actual behavior observed in many tests into the inelastic range. Due to the presence of the column flanges, strain hardening and other phenomena, Panel Zone shear strengths in excess of Fy dc t have been observed. Accordingly, Equation 9-1 accounts for the significant strength contribution of thick column flanges. Despite the ductility demonstrated by properly proportioned Panel-Zones in previous studies, excessive Panel Zone distortions can adversely affect the performance of beam-to-column connections (Englekirk, 1999). Consequently, the provisions require that the Panel Zone design match that of the successfully tested connections used to qualify the connection being used. The balance of the procedure of Section 9.3a is intended to provide a minimum strength level to prevent excessively weak Panel Zones, which may lead to unacceptable column distortion. Where Prequalified Connections described in FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) are used, the design of Panel Zones according to the methods given therein, generally meet the requirements in Section 9.3a. This should be verified by the designer. Equation 9-1 represents a Design Strength in the inelastic range and, therefore, is for comparison to limiting strengths of connected members. v has been set equal to unity to allow a direct comparison between Design Strength of the beam and the column Panel Zone. In the LRFD Specification, the engineer is given the option to consider inelastic deformations of the Panel Zone in the analysis. Separate sets of equations are provided for use when these deformations are and are not considered. In the AISC Seismic Provisions, however, one set of equations is provided and consideration of the inelastic deformation of the Panel Zone in the analysis is required. The application of the moments at the column face to determine the required shear strength of the Panel Zone recognizes that the beam hinging will take place at a location away from the beam-to-column connection, which will result in amplified effects on the Panel Zone shear. The previous version of this provision included a reduction factor of 0.8 on the beam yielding effects, which was intended to recognize that, in some cases, gravity loads might inhibit the development of plastic hinges on both sides of a column. However, there is no assurance that this will be the case, especially for one-sided connections and at perimeter frames where gravity loads may be relatively small. This provision requires that the Panel Zone thickness be determined using the method used to determine the Panel Zone thickness in the tested connection, with a minimum value as described in the remainder of the section. The intent is that the local deformation demands on the various elements in the structure be consistent with the results of the tests that justify the use of the connection. The expected shear strength of the Panel Zone in relation to the maximum expected demands that can be generated by the beam(s) framing into the column should be consistent with the relative strengths that existed in the tested connection configuration. Many of the connection tests were performed with a one-sided configuration. If the structure has a two-sided connection configuration with the same beam and column sizes as a one-sided connection test, the Panel Zone shear demand will be about twice

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

Comm. C9.]

PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)

101

that of the test. Therefore, in order to obtain the same relative strength, the Panel Zone thickness to be provided in the structure should be approximately twice that of the test. To minimize shear buckling of the Panel Zone during inelastic deformations, the minimum Panel Zone thickness is set at one-ninetieth of the sum of its depth and width. Thus, when the column web and web doubler plate(s) each meet the requirements of Equation 9-2, their interconnection with plug welds is not required. Otherwise, the column web and web doubler plate(s) can be interconnected with plug welds as illustrated in Figure C-I-9.2 and the total Panel Zone thickness can be used in Equation 9-2. In the 1992 AISC Seismic Provisions, it was required that web doubler plates be placed directly against the column web in all cases. In the 1997 revision (AISC, 1997b), the commentary noted an alternative; to place web doubler plates symmetrically in pairs spaced away from the column web. In the latter configuration, both the web doubler plates and the column web are required to all independently meet Equation 9-2 in order to be considered as effective. Web doubler plates may extend between top and bottom Continuity Plates welded directly to the column web and web doubler plate, or they may extend above and below top and bottom Continuity Plates welded to the doubler plate only. In the former case, the welded joint connecting the Continuity Plate to the column web and web doubler plate is required to be configured to transmit the proportionate load from the Continuity Plate to each element of the Panel Zone. In the latter case, the welded joint connecting the Continuity Plate to the web doubler plate is required to be sized to transmit the load from the Continuity Plate to the web doubler plate and the web doubler plate thickness is required to be selected to transmit this same load; minimum-size fillet welds per LRFD Specification Table J2.4 are used to connect along the column-web edges.

Fig. C-I-9.2. Connecting web doubler plates with plug welds.

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

102

PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)

[Comm. C9.

Shear loads transmitted to the web doubler plates from the Continuity Plates are equilibrated by shear loads along column-flange edges of the web doubler plate. It is anticipated that the Panel Zone will yield in a seismic event, and the welds connecting the web doubler plate to the column flanges are required to be sized to develop the shear strength of the full web doubler plate thickness. Either a complete-joint-penetration groove-welded joint or a fillet-welded joint can be used as illustrated in Figure C-I-9.3. The plate thickness and column fillet radius should be considered before selecting the fillet-welded joint. The use of diagonal stiffeners for strengthening and stiffening of the Panel Zone has not been adequately tested for low-cycle reversed loading into the inelastic range. Thus, no specific recommendations are made at this time for special seismic requirements for this detail. C9.4. Beam and Column Limitations Reliable inelastic deformation requires that width-thickness ratios of projecting elements be within those providing a cross-section resistant to local buckling into the inelastic range. Although the width-thickness ratios for compact elements in LRFD Specification Table B5.1 are sufficient to prevent local buckling before the onset of yielding, the available test data suggest that these limits are not adequate for the required inelastic performance in SMF. The limits given in Table I-8-1 are deemed adequate for ductilities to 6 or 7 (Sawyer, 1961; Lay, 1965; Kemp, 1986; Bansal, 1971). The choice of the ratio in Equation 9-3 of 2.0 (see Sect. 9.7a) as a trigger for precluding this limit is based upon studies of inelastic analyses by Gupta and Krawinkler (1999), Bondy (1996) and others, that indicate that hinging of columns may not be precluded at ratios below 2.0. Hinging of columns that do not comply with ps may result in flange local buckling, which is detrimental to column performance. C9.5. Continuity Plates When subjected to seismic loads, an interior column (i.e., one with adjacent moment connections to both flanges) in a Moment Frame receives a tensile flange force on one flange and a compressive flange force on the opposite side. When stiffeners are required, it is normal to place a full-depth transverse stiffener on each side of the column web. As this stiffener provides a load path for the flanges on both sides of the column, it is commonly called a Continuity Plate. The stiffener also serves as a boundary to the very highly stressed Panel Zone. When the formation of a plastic hinge is anticipated adjacent to the column, the Required Strength is the flange force exerted when the full beam plastic moment has been reached, including the effects of overstrength and strain hardening, as well as shear amplification from the hinge location to the column face. Post-Northridge studies have shown that even when Continuity Plates of substantial thickness are used, inelastic strains across the weld of the beam flange to the column flange are substantially higher opposite the column web than they are at the flange tips. Some studies have indicated stress concentrations higher than 4, which can cause the weld stress at the center of the flange to exceed its tensile strength before the flange force exceeds its yield strength based on a uniform average stress.
Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

Comm. C9.]

PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)

103

Fig. C-I-9.3. Web doubler plates.

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

104

PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF)

[Comm. C9.

This condition will be exacerbated if relatively thin Continuity Plates are used or if Continuity Plates are omitted entirely. For this reason, an earlier formula that permitted elimination of Continuity Plates where column flanges were very thick was rescinded in FEMA 267 (FEMA,1995) and the Supplement to FEMA 267 (FEMA, 1997b). The use of Continuity Plates was recommended in all cases unless tests showed that other design features of a given connection are so effective in reducing or redistributing flange stresses that the connection will work without them. Given the stress distribution cited above, there is little justification for some of the old rules for sizing and connecting Continuity Plates, such as selecting its thickness equal to one-half the thickness of the beam flange. On the other hand, the use of excessively thick Continuity Plates will likely result in large residual stresses, which also may be detrimental. Because of these apparently conflicting concepts, it is recommended that Continuity Plate usage and sizing be based on tests. The FEMA-sponsored SAC steel project studied this issue in depth. Continuity plates are not required according to FEMA 350 (FEMA, 2000a) when: tc f > and tc f > b f /6 (C9-4) Equation C9-3 is similar to the equation in older codes, except for the R y factors. Justification for the use of Equation C9-3 and C9-4 is based on studies by Ricles included in FEMA 355D (FEMA, 2000e). These equations will be considered for incorporation in future editions of these Provisions. C9.6. Column-Beam Moment Ratio The strong-column weak-beam (SC/WB) concept is perhaps one of the least understood seismic provisions in steel design. It is often mistakenly assumed that it is formulated to prevent any column flange yielding in a frame and that if such yielding occurs, the column will fail. Tests have shown that yielding of columns in Moment Frame subassemblages does not necessarily reduce the lateral strength at the expected seismic displacement levels. The SC/WB concept represents more of a global frame concern than a concern at the interconnections of individual beams and columns. Schneider, Roeder, and Carpenter (1991) and Roeder (1987) showed that the real benefit of meeting SC/WB requirements is that the columns are generally strong enough to force flexural yielding in beams in multiple levels of the frame, thereby achieving a higher level of energy dissipation. Weak column frames, particularly those with weak or soft stories, are likely to exhibit an undesirable response at those stories with the highest column demand-to-capacity ratios. It should be noted that compliance with the SC/WB concept and Equation 9-3 gives no assurance that individual columns will not yield, even when all connection locations in the frame comply. It can be shown by nonlinear analysis that, as 1.8b f t f Fyb R yb Fyc R yc (C9-3)

Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings, May 21, 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction

7.4 must be met for columns using these exceptions because it is expected that flexural yielding will occur in the columns. Section 9. C9. Finally.7a. lateral bracing of the column flanges is required only at the level of the top flanges of the beams. particularly if inelastic behavior is expected in or adjacent to the beam-to-column connection during high seismic activity. a bracing member will be required for such lateral bracing. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Recognition of potential beam overstrength (see Commentary Section C6. Exceptions to the requirement in Equation 9-3 are given in Sections 9.Comm.6a and 9. Beam-to-Column Connection Restraint Columns are required to be braced to prevent rotation out of the plane of the Moment Frame.6a. 1971). lateral bracing is required at both the top and bottom beam flanges because of the potential for flexural yielding. The Required Strength for lateral bracing at the beam-to-column connection is 2 percent of the Nominal Strength of the beam flange. the element(s) providing lateral bracing are required to have adequate stiffness to inhibit lateral movement of the column flanges (Bansal. May 21. columns with low axial loads used in one-story buildings or in the top story of a multi-story building need not meet Equation 9-3 because concerns for inelastic soft or weak stories are not significant in such cases.6 provides an exception for columns in levels that are significantly stronger than in the level above because column yielding at the stronger level would be unlikely. Alternatively. Nonetheless. When this is the case and it can be shown that the column remains elastic outside of the Panel Zone. The compactness requirements in Section 9. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.2) is also incorporated into Equation 9-3. C9. points of inflection shift and the distribution of moments varies from the idealized condition. Post-Northridge beamto-column moment connections are generally configured to shift the plastic hinge location into the beam away from the column face and a more general formulation was needed. In some cases. FEMA 350 provides recommendations regarding the assumed location of plastic hinges for different connection configurations. Previous formulations of this relationship idealized the beam/column intersection as a point at the intersection of the member centerlines. such as at large transfer girders. In Section 9. yielding of the beams rather than the columns will predominate and the desired inelastic performance will be achieved in frames composed of members that meet the requirement in Equation 9-3. it can be shown that adequate lateral bracing can be provided by the column web and Continuity Plates or by the flanges of perpendicular beams.6b.] PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) 105 the frame deforms inelastically. C9. If it cannot be shown that the column remains elastic. and consequent lateral-torsional buckling of the column. In addition. Also excepted is a limited percentage of columns that is low enough to limit undesirable performance while still providing reasonable flexibility where the requirement in Equation 9-3 would be impractical. Restrained Connections Beam-to-column connections are usually restrained laterally by the floor or roof framing.

the potential for out-of-plane buckling at the connection should be minimized. they should provide a Design Strength of 6 percent of the expected capacity of the beam flange at the plastic hinge location. The intent of the revisions to this section is to encourage appropriate bracing of column flanges rather than force the use of much heavier columns. the maximum distance between points of lateral bracing is more conservatively specified as 0. at mechanical floors or in atriums and similar architectural spaces. For conditions where larger drifts are anticipated or improved performance is desired. there remains the uncertainty in locating plastic hinges due to earthquake motions.0 was selected as a reasonable cut-off because column plastic hinging for values greater than 2. 2000a) indicated that the bracing provided by typical composite floor slabs is adequate to avoid excessive strength deterioration up to the required Interstory Drift Angle of 0. Lateral Bracing of Beams General requirements for lateral bracing of beams are given in LRFD Specification Chapter F. However. In Moment Frames. The 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions required column lateral bracing when the ratio in Equation 9-3 was less than 1. When such connections occur. May 21. If a Reduced Beam Section connection detail is used.12r y E s /Fy . 1999.04 radian. In Moment Frame structures. the reduced flange width may be considered in calculation of the bracing force. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . C9. the FEMA recommendations do not require the placement of supplemental lateral bracing at plastic hinge locations adjacent to column connections for beams with composite floor construction. These provisions allow the placement of lateral braces to be consistent with the tested connections that are used to justify the design. Using a plastic design model as a guide and assuming that the moment at one end of a beam is M p and a pinned end exists at the other. Three provisions are given for the columns to limit the likelihood of column buckling.086r y E s /Fy for both top and bottom flanges. As such. such as in two-story frames.7b.8. Studies utilizing inelastic analyses (Gupta and Krawinkler. many connection details attempt to move the plastic hinge a short distance away from the beam-to-column connection. C9. the beams are nearly always bent in reverse curvature between columns unless one end is pinned.0 only occurs in the case of extremely large story drifts. C9. Bondy. The intent of this provision was to require bracing to prevent lateral-torsional buckling for cases where it cannot be assured that the column will not hinge. The provisions of this section call for the placement of lateral bracing to be near the location of expected plastic hinges. The revised limit of 2. 1996) have shown that. LRFD Specification Equation F1-17 indicates a maximum distance between points of lateral bracing of 0. Unrestrained Connections Unrestrained connections occur in special cases.106 PART I – SPECIAL MOMENT FRAMES (SMF) [Comm. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.25. the designer may decide to provide additional lateral bracing near these plastic hinges. Consequently.25. Such guidance dates to the original development of plastic design procedures in the early 1960’s. Testing carried out as part of the SAC program (FEMA. in severe earthquakes. plastic hinging can occur in the columns even when this ratio is significantly larger than 1. If lateral braces are provided.

2. 10.] PART I – INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) 107 C10.1. The following building height and system limitations are given in the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA. 10. IMF’s are permitted in buildings up to a height of 35 feet (10. except as described in reference footnote i and j.04 radian. 2000e). “No additional requirements beyond the AISC LRFD Specification. Scope The Intermediate Moment Frame (IMF) currently specified is essentially the same as the Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF) system defined in the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.3.” Additionally. the Intermediate Moment Frame (IMF) as defined in the 1997 AISC Seismic Provisions (AISC. C10. 2000g) for the IMF: (1) There is no height limit in Seismic Design Categories (SDC) B and C. the previously defined Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF) has been split into two systems: the IMF based on a tested connection design and the OMF based on a prescriptive design procedure.6. 11.” which appears in Sections 10. 11. Both systems are intended primarily for construction limited to certain Seismic Design Categories and height restrictions (FEMA.Comm.4. C10. does not exceed 15 psf (0. 10. The statement.7. (4) Footnote i reads “Steel Ordinary Moment Frames and Intermediate Moment Frames are permitted in single-story buildings up to a height of 60 feet (18. 1997b) was not referenced in FEMA 350 (FEMA. and F. (3) The IMF is not permitted in SDC’s E. This new IMF is intended to provide limited levels of inelastic rotation capability and is based on tested designs. (2) The IMF can be used in buildings up to 35 ft in height (10. 11. In these Provisions.8.3 m) when the moment joints of field connections are constructed of bolted end plates and the dead load of the roof does not exceed 15 psf (0. INTERMEDIATE MOMENT FRAMES (IMF) General Commentary for Sections C10 and C11 As a result of studies conducted under the SAC program (FEMA. and roofs.3.8 indicates that these Provisions require no limitations or provisions beyond what is in the AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification (AISC. 2000a). 1999) on that particular topic.6. 10. and 11. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . May 21. floors.72 kPa). 11.7 m) regardless of floor and/or wall weight for SDC D.02 radian while that for SMF connections is 0. C10.7. It is intended that the new IMF and OMF will not experience the larger Interstory Drift Angles expected of SMF or the previous IMF through the use of more or larger framing members or because of less demanding Seismic Design Categories. This level of Interstory Drift Angle has been established for this type of frame based on engineering judgment applied Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections The minimum Interstory Drift Angle required for IMF connections is 0. 2000f ).72 kPa). Many of the restrictions applied to the SMF are not applied to the IMF and the OMF because limited inelastic action is required.7 m) where the dead load for each of the following elements: walls.4.

1(d). Note 3 to + 1/2 in.1). 2000a). to available tests and analytical studies. 2000g) for the OMF: (1) There is no height limit on Seismic Design Categories (SDC) B and C. (2) the removal of backing bars. The requirement to use the above weld access hole configuration is not stipulated for SMF nor IMF connections since the approved joints are based on testing. the OMF is based on a prescriptive design procedure. Unlike the IMF. May 21. 2000a) to significantly improve the connection performance over past steel Moment Frame construction. a minor increase in certain tolerances might be appropriate to standardize the shape of access holes for different beam sizes. even for OMF. (25 mm). and F. E. Where the top flange steel backing is left in place. primarily those included in FEMA (2000d and 2000f ). Scope . a minimum calculated strength of 1. (12 mm). new connection requirements are needed. such adjustments to Figure 11-1 could include increasing the plus tolerance of Note 2 to 3/4 tb f .2. backgouging of the weld root. C11. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction C11. C11.) The steel backing should Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. (4) the use of Continuity Plates. Beam-to-Column Joints and Connections Even though the inelastic rotation demands on OMF are expected to be low. C11. The following building height and system limitations are given in the 2000 NEHRP Provisions (FEMA. ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) The Ordinary Moment Frame (OMF) is intended to provide for limited levels of inelastic rotation capability that are less than those of the IMF. and rewelding with a reinforcing fillet weld.1.1R y M p is required to recognize potential overstrength and strain hardening of the beam. inelastic rotational capacity was available in the connection prescribed by the codes prior to 1994. except as described in reference footnotes i and j (see Section C10. Other weld access holes may provide good performance with lower fabrication costs and can be used if verified by testing. and these are provided in this section. and (5) use of the weld access hole detail as noted above. The testing completed by the SAC Joint Venture found that improved performance into the inelastic range can be obtained with the following improvements over the prescriptive pre-Northridge connection detail: (1) the use of notch-tough weld metal. Thus. For OMF joints only. Additionally. the Northridge Earthquake damage demonstrated that little. (2) The OMF is not permitted in SDC’s D. (See Figure C-I-11. detailing enhancements are required that have been demonstrated by FEMA 350 (FEMA. and Note 5 to + 1 in. (3) the use of a welded web connection. One such enhancement is the prescribed weld access hole given in Figure 11-1 and in FEMA 350 (FEMA. the steel backing is welded to the flange with a continuous fillet. if any. For FR moment connections. Provided that the slope of the access hole cut to the flange does not exceed 25˚. The specific requirements given for connections are given for both fully-restrained (FR) and partially-restrained (PR) moment connections.108 PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) [Comm.

] PART I – ORDINARY MOMENT FRAMES (OMF) 109 Fig.Comm. FEMA 350 (FEMA. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . not be welded to the underside of the beam flange. 2000a) did not prequalify welded connections of beams to the weak axis of columns due to lack of sufficient test data. FEMA. Discussion of the connection detailing is provided in FEMA documents 350 and 353 (FEMA. C-I-11. Use of moment connections to the weak axis of columns require that several adjustments be made to Section 11.2(1). C11.1. 2000a. The bottom flange Continuity Plate should be thicker than the beam flange and set lower than theoretical underside of beam to facilitate beam Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. May 21. Schematic illustrations of strong-axis moment connections. 2000b).

For information on bolted moment end-plate connections in seismic applications. Goel and Itani. Goel and Itani. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .6. As illustrated in Figure C-I-12.1. after reductions in length for access holes. Research work led to the development of special truss girders that limit inelastic deformations to a special segment of the truss (Itani and Goel. the reader is referred to Leon (1990 and 1994). The resulting hysteretic degradation as illustrated in Figure C-I-12. 2000a) recommends this detail for use in OMF with similar member sizes and other conditions. while the rest of the structure remains C12. Leon. 1991. and a weld transition made to the thickened Continuity Plate. C11.2 and Annex I for an explanation of effective throat for reinforced partial-joint-penetration groove welds. Continuity Plates should be provided on the far side of the column web. Driscoll and Beedle (1982). Bjorhovde. The Continuity Plates should project 3 in. C12. For information on PR connections. Basha and Goel. and Staeger (1996) and FEMA (2000e).5. 1994b. A welded beam-to-column moment connection in a strong-axis configuration similar to one tested at Lehigh University for the SAC Project is illustrated in Figure C-I-11. Hoffman. Colson. May 21. 2001). sudden reductions in strength and stiffness due to buckling and fracture of web members prior to or early in the dissipation of energy through inelastic deformations (Itani and Goel. Research has shown that such truss Moment Frames have very poor hysteretic behavior with large. When welding Continuity Plates to the column flanges with two-sided partialjoint-penetration groove welds combined with reinforcing fillet welds. The steel backing may remain at the top flange. refer to Meng and Murray (1997) and FEMA 355D (FEMA. Article 2. beyond the column flange and be tapered to the width of the beam flange. 1991. The bottom flange steel backing should be removed. Continuity Plates For all welded OMF connections that are not based upon tests. The “contact area” referred to in this section is the thickness of the Continuity Plate times its length. C12. Leon and Forcier (1992). 1994a).4g to 0. 2000e).2. Scope Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. Hsieh and Deierlein (1991). Continuity Plates are required.110 PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) [Comm. Leon and Ammerman (1990). See LRFD Manual of Steel Construction (AISC.5g. depth tolerance.1(d). 1994).1. and Brozzetti (1990).1 results in excessively large story drifts in building frames subjected to earthquake ground motions with peak accelerations on the order of 0. and Gilton and Uang (2002) for information on fully-rigid connections to the column weak axis. FEMA350 (FEMA. the chords and web members (arranged in an X pattern) of the special segment are designed to withstand large inelastic deformations. SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) Truss-girder Moment Frames have often been designed with little or no regard for truss ductility. refer to AWS D1.

Comm. C12. 1986. It is recommended that half the full diagonal length be used in calculating the design compression strength of the interconnected X-diagonal members in the special segment. As illustrated in Figure C-I-12. Special Segment It is desirable to locate the STMF special segment near mid-span of the truss girder because shear due to gravity loads is generally lower in that region. STMF are ductile with stable hysteretic behavior for a large number of cycles up to 3 percent story drifts. C12. Because it is intended that the yield mechanism in the special segment form over its full length. the span length and depth of the truss girders are limited at this time to the range used in the test program. elastic. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Because STMF are relatively new and unique. Strength degradation in undetailed truss girder. C-I-12. Special Truss Moment Frames (STMF) have been validated by extensive testing of full-scale subassemblages with story-high columns and full-span special truss girders. 1994b). Goel and Itani.2. May 21.1. The Required Strength of interconnection for X-diagonals is intended to account for buckling over half the full diagonal length (El-Tayem and Goel. no major structural loads should be applied within the length of the Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.3. The lower limit on special segment length of 10 percent of the truss span length provides a reasonable limit on the ductility demand.] PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) 111 Fig. while the upper limit of 50 percent of the truss span length represents more of a practical limit.

any structural loads should be avoided. C12. i. C-I-12.3. special segment. It is desirable to provide minimum shear strength in the special segment through flexural yielding of the chord members and to limit the axial Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.2. Hysteretic behavior of STMF. Cross-braced truss. C12. In special segments with open Vierendeel panels. Nominal Strength of Special Segment Members STMF are intended to dissipate energy through flexural yielding of the chord members and axial yielding and buckling of the diagonal web members in the special segment.112 PART I – SPECIAL TRUSS MOMENT FRAMES (STMF) [Comm. a restrictive upper limit is placed on the axial load in diagonal web members due to gravity loads applied directly within the special segment. Fig. Accordingly. Fig.e. when no diagonal web members are used. C-I-12.3. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .

except for the members of the special segment that are involved in the formation of the yield mechanism. and all connections. May 21. C13. and Hanson.6.4. Lateral Bracing The top and bottom chords are required to be laterally braced to provide for the stability of the special segment during cyclic yielding. C12. C13. Tests (Itani and Goel. the bracing members and their connections are expected to undergo significant inelastic deformations into the post-buckling range. Compactness The ductility demand on diagonal web members in the special segment can be rather large. Plastic analysis can be used to determine the required shear strength of the truss special segments under the factored earthquake load combination. Chord members in the special segment are required to be compact cross-sections to facilitate the formation of plastic hinges.3Pnc is representative of the average nominal post-buckling strength under cyclic loading. Thus.1. Equation 12-1. 1978) on axially loaded members have shown that 0. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction C13. Therefore. including diagonally braced. Goel. It is based upon approximate analysis and test results of special truss girder assemblies that were subjected to story drifts up to 3 percent (Basha and Goel. SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) Concentrically Braced Frames are those Braced Frames in which the centerlines of members that meet at a joint intersect at a point to form a vertical truss system that resists lateral loads. columns.18 E s /Fy also possess adequate ductility for use as web members in an X configuration. 1994). as formulated. accounts for uncertainties in the actual yield strength of steel and the effects of strain hardening of yielded web members and hinged chord members. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.Comm.1. Tests (Jain. C12. all members and connections outside the special segments are to be designed for calculated loads by applying the combination of gravity loads and equivalent lateral loads that are necessary to develop the maximum expected nominal shear strength of the special segment Vne in its fully yielded and strain-hardened state. A few common types of concentrically Braced Frames are shown in Figure C-I-13. However. C12. Because of their geometry. Flat bars are suggested at this time because of their high ductility. Nominal Strength of Non-Special Segment Members STMF are required to be designed to maintain elastic behavior of the truss members.5. The lateral bracing limit for flexural members L p as specified in the LRFD Specification has been found to be adequate for this purpose. Scope . Vbraced (or inverted-V-braced) and K-braced configurations. concentrically Braced Frames provide complete truss action with members subjected primarily to axial loads in the elastic range. cross-braced (X). 1991) have shown that single angles with width-thickness ratios that are less than 0. during a moderate to severe earthquake.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 113 load to a maximum value.

member design and detailing can possess ductility far in excess of that previously ascribed to such systems. Extensive analytical and experimental work by Goel and others has shown that improved design parameters. Large story drifts that result from early brace fractures can impose excessive ductility demands on the beams and columns. Accordingly. more emphasis has been placed on increasing brace strength and stiffness. Earlier design provisions have been retained for Ordinary Concentrically Braced Frames (OCBF) in Section 14. bracing members in a concentrically Braced Frame are subjected to large deformations in cyclic tension and compression into the post-buckling range. requirements for ductility and energy dissipation capability have also been added. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. More recently. In a severe earthquake.1. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . reversed cyclic rotations occur at plastic hinges in much the same way as they do in beams and columns in Moment Frames. provisions for Special Concentrically Braced Frames (SCBF) were developed to exhibit stable and ductile behavior in the event of a major earthquake. with proper configuration. During a severe earthquake. braces in a typical concentrically Braced Frame can be expected to yield and buckle at rather moderate story drifts of about 0. Fig. In fact.3 percent to 0. The design requirements for SCBF are based on those developments. the resulting high concentration of flexural strains at these locations and reduced ductility. closer spacing of stitches and special design and detailing of end connections greatly improve the post-buckling behavior of concentrically Braced Frames. Research has demonstrated that concentrically Braced Frames. Since the initial adoption of concentrically Braced Frames into seismic design codes. Examples of concentric bracing configurations. C-I-13. May 21. which are usually manifested in the fracture of connection elements or bracing members.114 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. In order to survive such large cyclic deformations without premature failure the bracing members and their connections must be properly detailed. with diminished effectiveness in the nonlinear range at low story drifts. or their connections. C13.5 percent. primarily through the use of higher design loads in order to minimize inelastic demand. Damage during past earthquakes and that observed in laboratory tests of concentrically Braced Frames has generally resulted from the limited ductility and corresponding brittle failures. such as limiting width/thickness ratios (to minimize local buckling). As a result. Braces in concentrically Braced Frames are subject to severe local buckling. The lack of compactness in braces results in severe local buckling. the braces could undergo post-buckling axial deformations 10 to 20 times their yield deformation.

yet short enough to preclude the occurrence of plate buckling prior to member buckling. Similarly. Hassan and Goel. Plastic hinges normally occur at the ends of a brace and at the brace midspan. A length of two times the plate thickness is recommended (Astaneh-Asl et al. 1987. 1986). stability problems and connection fractures are prevented. weak-axis bending in the gusset is induced by member end rotations. Good connection performance can be expected if the effects of brace member cyclic post-buckling behavior are considered (Goel. the end connections should be designed for the full axial load and flexural strength of the brace (Astaneh-Asl et al. diagonal braces can sustain large inelastic cyclic deformations without experiencing premature failures.Comm. Note that a realistic value of K should be used to represent the connection fixity. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. This is especially critical for double-angle and double-channel braces that buckle imposing large shear forces on the stitches. Similar results were observed in full-scale tests by Wallace and Krawinkler (1985) and Tang and Goel (1989). When properly detailed for ductility as prescribed in these Provisions. Failures occurred most often at plastic hinges (local buckling due to lack of compactness) or in the connections. Analytical studies (Tang and Goel. Cyclic testing of Diagonal Bracing systems verifies that energy can be dissipated after the onset of global buckling if brittle failures due to local buckling. This requires that the free length between the end of the brace and the assumed line of restraint for the gusset be sufficiently long to permit plastic rotations. cyclic testing of specimens designed and detailed in accordance with typical provisions for concentrically Braced Frames has produced connection failures (Astaneh-Asl. Goel. Many of the failures reported in concentrically Braced Frames due to strong ground motions have been in the connections. and Hanson. This results in flexible end conditions with plastic hinges at midspan in addition to the hinges that form in the gusset plate. Analytical models of bracing systems that were designed to ensure stable ductile behavior when subjected to the same ground motion records as the previous concentrically Braced Frame designs exhibited full and stable hysteresis without fracture.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 115 Previous requirements for concentrically Braced Frames sought reliable behavior by limiting global buckling. 1986). closer stitch spacing.. 1991) on bracing systems designed in strict accordance with earlier code requirements for concentrically Braced Frames predicted brace failures without the development of significant energy dissipation. May 21. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . Satisfactory performance can be ensured by allowing the gusset plate to develop restraint-free plastic rotations. which should be based upon the maximum loads the connection may be required to resist. 1991). 1986). is required to achieve improved ductility and energy dissipation.. C13. in addition to more stringent compactness criteria. good post-buckling response demands that eccentricities be accounted for in the connection design. Note that this free distance is measured from the end of the brace to a line that is perpendicular to the brace centerline. Although typical design practice has been to design connections only for axial loads. For double-angle and double-channel braces. For brace buckling in the plane of the gusset plates. Studies also showed that placement of double angles in a toe-to-toe configuration reduces bending strains and local buckling (Aslani and Goel. 1992c). For brace buckling out of the plane of single plate gussets.

See Figure C-I-13. C-I-13. Bracing connections should not be configured in such a way that beams or columns of the frame are interrupted to allow for a continuous brace element.2. Since the stringent design and detailing requirements for SCBF are expected to produce more reliable performance when subjected to high energy demands imposed by severe earthquakes. Alternatively. drawn from the point on the gusset plate nearest to the brace end that is constrained from out-of-plane rotation. A Zipper Column system and a two-story X system are illustrated in Figure C-I-13. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction .116 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. model building codes have reduced the design load level below that required for OCBF. Two-story X and zipper-Braced Frames can be designed with post-elastic behavior consistent with the expected behavior of V-braced SCBF. 1987). This provision is necessary to improve the out-of-plane stability of the bracing system at those connections.3. Test results indicate that forcing the plastic hinge to occur in the brace rather than the connection plate results in greater energy dissipation capacity (Lee and Goel. such as crossed gusset plates. C13. can be detailed. May 21. connections with stiffness in two directions. Brace-to-gusset plate requirement for buckling out-of-plane bracing system. These configurations can also capture the increase in post-elastic axial loads on beams at other levels. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings.2. It is possible to design 2-story X and zipper frames with post-elastic behavior that is superior to the expected behavior of V-braced SCBF by proportioning elements to discourage single-story mechanisms. Fig.

C13.2. (a) Two-story X-Braced Frame. Tang and Goel (1989) and Goel and Lee (1992) showed that the post-buckling cyclic fracture life of bracing members generally increases with an increase in slenderness ratio.2a. (b) “Zipper-Column” with Inverted-V bracing.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 117 Fig.2d. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . 1991. Tang and Goel. C-I-13. The more restrictive limit of 4. C13.3.2c. Bracing Members C13.2 is not necessary when the bracing members are detailed for ductile behavior. Slenderness The slenderness (Kl/r ) limit has been raised to 5. Tests have shown this failure mode to be especially prevalent in rectangular HSS with width-thickness ratios larger than the prescribed limits (Hassan and Goel.Comm. 1989).23 E s /Fy as specified for OCBF in Section 14. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. C13. C13. Lateral Force Distribution This provision attempts to balance the tensile and compressive resistance across the width and breadth of the building since the buckling and post-buckling strength of the bracing members in compression can be substantially less than that in tension. An upper limit is provided to maintain a reasonable level of compressive strength. May 21. Good balance helps prevent the accumulation of inelastic drifts in one direction. Width-thickness Ratios Width-thickness ratios of compression elements in bracing members have been reduced to be at or below the requirements for compact sections in order to minimize the detrimental effects of local buckling and subsequent fracture during repeated inelastic cycles.87 E s /Fy for SCBF. An exception is provided for cases where the bracing members are sufficiently oversized to provide essentially elastic response.

The Required Strength of bracing connections should be adequate so that failure by out-of-plane gusset buckling or brittle fracture of the brace are not critical failure mechanisms. C13. It should be noted that some. These are intended to restrict individual element bending between the stitch points and consequent premature fracture of bracing members. 1996. particularly if not used as a part of a Dual System. or round hollow structural steel (tube) braces). 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . some have Expected Yield Strengths almost as high as their tensile strength. 1990) than those required for OCBF.118 PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) [Comm. R y has been added to the first provision to recognize the material overstrength of the member.3a. Cheng. increasing the effective area at the reduced Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. For such cases.3. the bracing members normally carry most of the seismic story shear. Tensile Strength Braces in Special Concentrically Braced Frames are required to have grosssection tension yielding as their governing limit state so that they will yield in a ductile manner. Kulak. If this section is left unreinforced. Wider spacing is permitted under an exception when buckling does not cause shear in the stitches. 1991. pipe braces or square.2e. foundation elements designed in systems based on the application of load combinations using the Amplified Seismic Load. Required Strength In concentrically Braced Frames. rectangular. the calculations for these failure modes must use the maximum load that the brace can deliver. (i. C13. C13. if not all. steel materials commonly used for braces have Expected Yield Strengths significantly higher than their specified minimum yield strengths. net-section fracture will be the governing limit state and brace ductility may be significantly reduced (Korol. Therefore. Xu and Goel. 1998). where the over-slot of the brace required for erection leaves a reduced section. This is the case for knife-plate connections between gusset plates and A53 or A500 braces (e. This upper limit is included in the specification for structures where elements other than the tension bracing limit the system strength. and Khoo. Local connection failure modes such as net-section fracture and block-shear rupture must be precluded. Reinforcement may be provided in the form of steel plates welded to the tube.3b. Bracing Connections C13. The minimum of two criteria. for example. no significant reduction of the brace section is permissible and connections may require local reinforcement of the brace section. May 21. Bolted stitches are not permitted within the middle one-fourth of the clear brace length as the presence of bolt holes in that region may cause premature fractures due to the formation of a plastic hinge in the post-buckling range.e. C13. Built-up Members Closer spacing of stitches and higher stitch strength requirements are specified for built-up bracing members in SCBF (Aslani and Goel.g. the nominal expected axial tension strength of the bracing member and the maximum force that could be generated by the overall system) determines the Required Strength of both the bracing connection and the beam-to-column connection if it is part of the bracing system.

it also creates a potential stress riser that may lead to crack initiation.. Testing has demonstrated that where a single gusset plate connection is used. the rotations can be accommodated as long as the brace end is separated by at least two times the gusset thickness from a line perpendicular to the brace axis about which the gusset plate may bend unrestrained by the beam. this practice may be difficult to implement in field conditions. column.3c. or other brace joints (Astaneh-Asl et al. 1986). C13.diagram for a strut. brace section. The distance of “2t” shown in Figure C-I-13. because buckling requires the formation of three plastic hinges in the brace. However.2 should be considered the minimum offset distance. Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings. In practice. This condition is illustrated in Figure C-I-13.] PART I – SPECIAL CONCENTRICALLY BRACED FRAMES (SCBF) 119 Fig.4. P.Comm. More information on seismic design of gusset plates can be obtained from Astaneh-Asl (1998). Braces with two continuous welds to the gusset wrapped around its edge (instead of the more typical detail with four welds stopping short of the gusset edge) performed adequately in the tests by Cheng. the effect of the fixity should be considered in determining the critical buckling axis.4. Nonetheless. C13. May 21. C-I-13. end connections that can accommodate the rotations associated with brace buckling deformations while maintaining adequate strength have also been shown to have acceptable performance. Flexural Strength Braces with “fixed” end connections have been shown to dissipate more energy than those that are “pin” connected. Where “fixed” end connections are used in one axis with “pinned” connections in the other axis. 2002 American Institute of Steel Construction . it may be advisable to specify a slightly larger distance (perhaps “3t”) on construction documents to provide for erection tolerances.2 and p