I "2 ,'" _ \

I ~\
t- Q.,-', ~
--..- ) -
I \ -
I :..L- ~n., I 0.-°"'-,",",,-.0-

I 2., ~<a..&t~ 1~~"" \

I
~t\JJ--- ~ &",1, 4~ /........"-,:>-".1· - -
I >11W~ -llhN- -t..:l 9.>c~ • ~"" ~ e...
I -c ..,....tJ............,.,.... .J .. c...... ~ ;'<' I.:A-~
\ "J

AME RICAN I STITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION • INC.

The Wrigley Building I 400 North Michigan Avenue I Chlcago, llIinols 60611-4185
312· 67G-2400

I
RRl10 6

I 7235
 I
t
I
,
I
•
I DETERMINATION OF COLUMN FIXITY

AT COLUMN BASES

J
I
..
I Donald D. Cannon, Jr.
August 1984
1
I
l
I
I
J
I
I
 ~

J
.~

...
~
~

I INTRODUCTION

t One of the first steps in most structural engineering

problems is to choose a reasonable model for the structure

I being analyzed. In modeling a framed structure it is

common practice for the engineer to assume that the column

1 bases are either fully fixed or fully pinned. In reality

I neither of these two assumptions is strictly valid due to

• the difficulty in obtaining either of these ideal con-

I ditions in practice. In frame analysis, regardless of

which of these two assumptions is used, the calculated

J bending moments in the columns of the first tier are gen-

erally larger than those which will actually exist in

I the structure. These larger moments normally lead to the

~ use of heavier columns than are really necessary and

therefore result in a more expensive and less competitive

I structure.

The assumptions made concerning the degree of fixity

1 also have a significant effect on the calculated drift

I of a structural frame. If the column bases are assumed

to be pinned the calculated drift may be so large that

1 stiffer members are required to reduce the drift to ac-

ceptable levels. Therefore if partial base fixity is

I considered, additional savings may be realized because of

the lighter members needed to control drift. At the other

I extreme, the assumption of full base fixity in drift cal-

J culations may result in an underestimation of the actual

drift.

I 1

t
l
 ---- - --- - - - -

I In the design of steel columns by AISC guidelines

2

t and specifications , an attempt is made to account for the

difficulty in obtaining either perfectly fixed or per-

I fectly pinned column bases in practice. This difficulty

is accounted for by recommending rigidity ratios [(;6 ~

-- ~(c:!.OL UMN / BEAM) R.IG.ID'T",eS J , for use in effective

I length alignment charts , of 1.0 rather than zero for fixed

•I bases and of 10.0 rather than infinity for pinned bases. l

While these assumptions seem reasonable , they are quite

subjective and place all base connections into two

J categories with no provision for additional variation

I of base fixity.

Galambos
2
showed that by accounting for partial base

fixity of a typical pinned base detail the theoretical

buckling strength of a rigid frame can be increased

I
, significantly. Preliminary results of current research 3

indicate that for a typical pinned base detail a rigidity

ratio ( ~) for the column base as low as 1.50 (rather

I than the recommended value of 10.0) may be justified.

Such a drastic reduction in the rigidity ratio will

1 result in significant reduction of the effective length

factor and may allow the use of lighter columns. These re-

I sults tend to concur with results of similar studies 4 , 5, 6

I which consider the effect of partial restraint provided

by simple beam-to-column connections. These studies

J have also indicated that significant reductions in the

column effective length may be justified by considering the

I
t
 3
partial restraint of a . simple beam-to-column connection.

1 The preceding discussion has made it clear that

consideration of the degree of fixity of column bases

I would result in more realistic and more accurate structural

l analysis, thereby resulting in a more efficient design.

Unfortunately, the determination of the degree of re-

I straint offered by column bases is not treated explicitly

• in existing literature. There have, however, been some

I attempts to develop reasonable methods for estimating

2
the rotational characteristics of column bases. , 7, 8

J The PCI Design Handbook,9 published by the Prestressed

I Concrete Institute, presents a method for approximating

the degree of fixity of column bases for precast concrete

~ columns which is fairly easy to use.

The primary purpose of this study is to develop a

I
, rational method for approximating the degree of fixity

of a typical steel column base detail. The method will

be similar to the method presented in the PCI Design

I Handbook and will consider the combined effects of footing

rotation, anchor bolt elongation, and base plate bending

1 on the fixity of the column base. In addition to the

development of the relationships for the base stiffness,

J a program for the Hewlett-Packard HP-4l calculator will

I be presented as an aid in using the proposed method.

Using the calculator program, a sensitivity analysis

J will be conducted to determine the relative significance

of the variables involved in the expressions. Tables

I
t
I ~
I and charts will be presented , as an additional design
4

t aid , to a l low the engineer to obtain a reasonable

estimate of column base fixity for preliminary input

I
, into an analysis . Finally , an example will be provided

on the use of the design aids in structural analysis

and design.

I DEVELOPMENT OF THE METHOD

•
I The base detail studied is shown in Figure 1 .

nomenclature used is defi n ed i n Appendix A.

The

The degree

J of fixity of a column base is the ratio of the stiffness

of the base to the sum of the base and column stiffnesses.

I This ratio is analogous to the distribution factors used

in moment distribution . The stiffness of the column base

~ is defined as the moment requ ired to rotate the base

I through a unit angle . Similarly , the absolute stiffness

of a member is defined as the moment required to rotate

1 one end of the member through a unit angle when the far

end of the member is fully fixed. The inverse of stiff-

I ness is defined as flexibi l ity . Th e approach used in

1 this development is to apply a unit moment (P * e) to

, the column and determine the expression for the resulting

base rotation . This expression is then divided by the

applied moment to give an expression for the column base

I flexibility . Finally , the expression for the flexibility

is inverted to obtain an expression for the base stiff-

I ness.

I
t
.. ~
~

I
t
AIJCIlOR. BeLTS----- BAse Pt....rs
I (r~o O~ M.(.) I
,- -
1 J.
I
•
Fooi1l'l6.

IHI -'-
b
B

I 4. J oa.

J
I D
p
.1
tI I-
M=Pe.

I
1
I
1 -,---, ,..,
;i
....
:iII
t,

I I-. I'
"
I'
I'
c..t, ~J,
II
II
II

I
J F,u.URE 1- BASE. DET'AII.. ST1JDil~D.

I
t
. ....,.
.."

6
I The total rotation of the base is the sum of the

t rotations d ue to three factors (Fig. 2).

components is the rotation of the column footing due to

One of the

I the elastic behavior of the soil beneath the footing .

The development of an expression for the rotation of the

l footing is relatively simple , but it is based on the

I modulus of subgrade reaction. The modulus of subgrade

• reaction (Ks) is the ratio of the pressure exerted on

I the soil to the settlement of the soil , and is difficult

to obtain with any degree of accuracy . 10 , 11 The ex-

J pression for the footing rotation is now developed assuming

the footing rotates about its center (Fig. 3):

I
tI Rearranging ;

I
, Assuming the rotation is through a small angle;
1\
OF -
- ~
D/z.
_ ~/,K..
D/2.
I substituting 1= ~ ~ .JC c. " D2 )

1 e. = 1<.M{D/
F
Since M =. Pe ;
r,. ( Oh)
2)

~ 1\
of
where
= I<. r,.
I
p~

... 8 DT
( 1)

I " 12.
Now a fairly simple expression for the footing

J rotation is available . This equation is valid only if

there is no separation between the footing and the soil.

I
t
J .: (p
1

I
t
I p
l
I
•
I
J \
I
4
I
,
I OF ROTATION .

--
I
I
J
I
J
t
l
I
t
I
1
I
• D
I
J
I
. 6" ,.
~
FOO1'"'/NG.
,. BEAIi! I NG.
SET'Tl.EM!I-JT:
PII.E':'iUlt.f! .

I Ks" fV!oDUI.U$ OF SUBGo~ADE

P,6Ac.rION.

1 K
s
~l
6
F

I 9F " FooliNG. ROT'ArloN.

1 F'GUI!.E. 3 - FaallN(;' l<.orAf",oN.

I
I
J
I
t
 I 9

This is not a serious limitation since the rotation of

t the footing normally reduces the vertical compressive

stress in the soil on one side of the footing rather

I
, than actually causing separation on the tension side.

The problem is now one of obtaining a reasonable estimate

of Ks.

I To simplify the use of the modulus of subgrade re-

• action it is assumed that (a) the value of Ks is

I independent of the magnitude of pressure and (b) the

J value of Ks has the same value at every point on the

footing surface .
10
Actually the value of the modulus

I of subgrade reaction is highly dependent on the size,

shape , and depth of the footing . For the same soil , the

value of Ks decreases with increasing width of the footing

and also decreases with increasing length of the footing.

I
, The value of Ks increases with increasing depth below

original gound surface. Teng

10
and Bowles

expressions to adjust the modulus of subgrade reaction

11
present

I obtained by a one foot square bearing plate test to take

1 account for these footing size and shape effects.

guidelines for selecting

9 , 10, 11, 12
Ks are given in several ref-
Some

erences. Ta bl e 1 g1ves
. a range f va 1 ues
I 0

• for K to use as a guide for approximations. 11

s

I Another component of the base rotation is the ro-

tation due to bending in the base plate. Several assump-

J tions are made in the derivation of an expression for

this component of the base rotation. First, bending in

I
t
J=
I III

1 tABLe 1 - /(AtJGE... OF= VALUeS OF !/)ODULUS OF

SVBGeADE g.EAC.TlON Ks ,11
I
.. SOIL

I LOO$~
• SAND 30 - lao

I ME'DIIJI'1 DENSE SAND t,o - 500

J Dt::NSE. SAND 400 - gOO

I CJ,AlfE'1 MEDlu~ DeNSC ZOO - 500

.. SAND

'5 tl...T"1 MeDTuM

SAND.
[)I!£NSE 15'0 - 300

I
, ~ .. ~ 4 kd 75; - )5"0

I 4k~f ~ ~" ~ 'l k.st- /50 - 300

1 11A "> '8 ~'Sf >300

I
•
I
J
I
t
J ...- .~

I 11
the base plate is assumed to be elastic. Second, it is

1 assumed that the axial forces and the moments due to the

stresses in the column web can be neglected without

I appreciable error. Figure 4 shows that under an applied

l moment the forces generated in the web are indeed small

with respect to the forces generated in the column

I flanges . The third assumption is that the ratio of the

• stiffness of the base plate between the column flanges

I to the stiffness of the base plate outside the column

flanges can be represented by the factor lambda ('A);

J A'" I &'TOJ!IIN F~AN("E~
I
I where J.f) ~
aun /Of! FLNJG.£s
). ~ 00

This factor allows any additional stiffness provided by

welding the column web to the base plate to be accounted

I
,
for in the expression for rotation due to base plate

bending . A fourth assumption is that , because of moment

transfer between th e base plate and the column flanges,

the moment in the base plate just inside the column

I flange can be represented by a factor beta ( ~ ) times the

1 base plate moment just outside the column flange (where

o ~ ,. ~ 1.0 ).

I Before an expression for the rotation at the base

• of the column due to bending of the base plate can be

I developed, expressions for the forces acting on the base

plate must be derived . In the derivation all forces

J acting on the base plate are considered to be concentrated

I loads (Fig . 5) . The resultant compressive force between

t
.. - ........
12.
I
1
I
l
I
•
I
J
I f=~-£.

.. s" A

II
, f.:-
1

I
( F'ol1c.e /L EONG.TII)
~
['
':.1

I
•
I
J F /G.URE 4- - STR~SS A'-lD
CoLUMN.
FOR CE. D,SiRI BunONS ON

I
t
.. ........<Zl
....
~.)
\3

I
t
I
V1
l IV

~W I DEF
I I C.OW""
•
I
J
I AN C.HOR
80 Lr
LoCo "l", O/'J ~ I ~B"'<;e PLATE.
tI
I
, I iI \ I , \
•

Fa Fe
I ~ '" TENS I ON FaRce /N ANc.Hae. BOLT'S

l Fe. =CaMPRESS IVE

AND
F ORCE
8.-.sc
BeTilJEEN
Pl...ArE.
CONCl!er-c

I
•
I
J
I
t
L
J:
I the concrete and the base plate is assumed to act at the
14

1 centerline of the anchor bolts . Except for very stiff

base plates this position of the resultant is essentially

I an outer bound for the location of the compressive

l resultant . These assumptions are generally conservative

because they tend to result in a n overestimation of

I base flexibility and, therefore , an underestimation of

• base stiffness . Referring to Figure 5 and using statics,

I the tension force (F ) in the anchor bolts can be ex-

B
pressed as :

J
I Solving this equation for FB and rearranging:

.. Fa ~ - -ttz ..
Pc.
to.l)
~
~2(")
+- Pc.

I
, Similarly , the resultant compressive force (Fc) may be

I expressed as :

PL o. + .lI z) + Pe - '3' F,
~
~M~ -;; 0 ; =0
•
•• F.,.. Pc. +- ~'2-.+
~
.,I.)
~
} ~(~)
~ = PG +
I ~

.I ~ = pf; +- -k-J ( 3)

I
t
J -::
I The remaining forces acting on the base plate are
15

1 those applied through the column flanges . Referring

again to Figure 4 . an expression is derived for the force

I (Pc) applied by the compression flange. It is assumed

l that the average stress in the flange is equal to the

maximum flange stress . This assumption tends to compen-

I sate for the force in the web which is neglected .

• Therefore . from Figure 4:

I Pc. = AF t",u
FRo /0\ ; t"A':: %+ PYs ...
J ~ ,;A,,[f +

I Simplification gives;

Setting

I
, In equation 4. the coefficient Bx is the same as the Bx

that is tabulated in the column tables published in the

(4-)

I Manual of Steel Construct1oo.

. 1
The trends for this co-

l efficient and the newly introducted alpha ( 0( ) coefficient

..I
have been studied and the results are shown in Table 2 .

Using these expressions which have been derived

for the forces acting on the base plate. an expression can

be developed for the rotation at the base of the column

due to base plate bending. The method of virtual work will

j be used in this derivation . In Figure 6(a) the real forces.

I as modeled by the assumptions noted previously . are

t
 a>

.. ~ V1

I
1 /ABLE; 2 - VALUES t)F tHE. ~EFrlC!.IEN-r5

I ALPJ1A (eX) AND Bx ~~ WIDE.

}==LANG.E. 6JLUMNS.
~
I N01-1INAL ALPHA ( 0<) B)(
•
&I...UI'IN
Sl~e; J.j 160 H Low AVG... HIGH l...tJw AV<Oi .
I
WI4- D.4171 0.33,,7 O.3'n" O.Z()JO 0./ (, 'iO O. I'il40

J
Wl2
I 0.3'15'1 ~.3+S~ O.3nt 0.2274- O.204~ O. Z I ':J5'"

.. WID 0. 3'1(' q O.35"~~ O.3'Z4-GI 0.2774 O.Zt./' (J Z~i4()

I
, W<6 D. 3'140 0.3~72. iJ. 3 i S'5" O.33'Z~ 0.3 Z(, 2. 0 .33/3

W~ 0.3 7('3 0.31('3 0.3S25" o.+'i2.0 o.~'~ 0.4(,0'1

I
l
I
•
I
.-
I
t
 17
I
.. C:=;::=~======~==:::;::=::J-- &"'SI!! PL..A;-e.

I
1
I
•
I
J (0. ) REAL Fo~e$.

I
.. ,
I
, -t
I
1
..I tms~~+z. ..
a- V
x

(b) V, RTUAL FORCE.5,

tI FORCES ON B.... s~ PL ....n: AND RE:S.UL;-I N6,

I BENDING. MOMENr I) ""G..RAMS.

t
.. (l)
.-
.~

••
'-l

I applied to the base plate and expressions are shown for

t the bending moment in different regions of the plate .

Note that the factor beta ( ~ ) is applied in the equation

I for moment . Figure 6(b) shows the application of a unit

l moment and the resulting virtual forces.

information from Figure 6 to the virtual work equation

Applying the

I gives:

• r -l(F••')~
I +
• E,.l:~

J + S [~a - -;TxJlg x
J.

o AErI,
I
..
Note that in the third term of this equation the

lambda ( ~ ) factor is applied to the base plate stiff-

ness. Multiplying both sides by Ep Ip and multiplying

I
,
the polynomials in the third term gives:

I"
Er:r~ 8p = , !i. x".4. +- I 0\
.£i ;< ")v,. +- -1... J..I [fl · ~F.
"I c-
~ D 4 "D t

I
1
Integrating;
I
• + _I [..<z"z.F..J
r e

I :>. a-

J
I
t
.. a:>
,...
........
00
I~

I
Simplifying ;
11 Er r,9r • [Fe + Fa] ;; + ~~ [~~ Fe. + ~; ~ - /$; Pc.

I -~ .. Fc. - ~ eA F;. + ; d p.:J

From equation s 2 and 3 ;
l Fe. ... F, '" p[ l + ~ J+ P [~ - -tJ
I F
'" +
F:::. ~
~
• Po
Substituting for [ Fc + F a] and combini n g terms;
I Ep Tp 8," Z; ~~& + X; [. . ~ (~ "-,8) - (Pc. - Fe ') pi
J + (Pe - Fe) ~ .A J
Factoring beta ( f$ ), Fc ' and d o ut of t h e second term;
I
.- Simplifying;
I
, From equation 3 ;

I Fe. ~ p[; r ~ J
Pe [t ~J
1 Fe
Fc.
:0

~ Pe [ 2. ez : " ]
oj.

I From equations 3a and 4; a

• 0< P[8. G + I]
I Pe [ 2.~2 ~ c.~J
oj.

.I z~o([B.e""l
2.e +- a-

I
t
 zo

substituting for

1
I
l Simplifying;

I -;- ~.;;P~ [t( t ~ ti)( ,. - I)

•
I
t ( p< [Bx ~ ~1 - ( ~ +- L.))( $- - t ) 1
J
I
..
I
,
I
Factoring out p~ and dividing by E, If;
1
I 8,. = l
~~~ ~ +- ,\;J f~(i
>- + ~c)(ft - I)
• + (!~ - ~ X'KB)< ~d. S) t)}] (~)
I +- (o< -

.-
I
t
 2.1
I Now an expression for the rotation of the column

base due to bending in the base plate is available.

While most of the variables in the equation are straight-

I forward and easily obtained for a specific column base

l detail, the factors beta ( ~ ) and lambda ( ).. ) are not

readily attainable. If the column web is welded to the

I base plate it is obvious that lambda will have a value

• greater than 1.0, but it is not obvious whether lambda

I should have an order of magnitude of 10.0 or of 100 . 0.

Similarly, the value for beta will probably be only

J slightly less than 1.0 if the column flange is welded to

I the base plate on one side of the flange only . If the

flange is welded to the base plate on both sides of the

~ flange or is welded with a full penetration groove weld,

some transfer of moment will occur between the base plate

I
, and the column flange . Either of these weld conditions

would require beta to have a value less than one.

selection of reasonable values of the beta and lambda

The

I factors will be discussed in another section of this paper.

If a value of 1.0 for beta ( ft ) is used the rotation

1 can be simplified somewhat. Substituting a value of 1.0

for beta leads to the following form for Equation 5:

I
•
I
.. The third component of the column base rotation is

the rotation due to the elongation of the tension anchor

bolts. In the derivation of an expression for this

I
t
I
..I --
~

tv
.....

rotation , two simplifying assumptions are made. First,

It it is assumed that the plate rotates about the anchor

boltson the compression side. This assumption is con-

I
, sistent with the assumed location of the resultant com-

pressive force. Second, the derivation assumes that the

anchor bolts do not yield and do follow a linear stress-

I strain relationship. From Figure 7 the rotation due to

• anchor bolt elongation can be derived as follows:

I SUM Of'< A~A OF ANClIat.

J Using Equation 2 ;
80L.i"S ON nt-JslaAJ SlOt:. ,

I Fe = p[ ~ - ~ J (2.')
and substituting for Fa ;
tI b.p, ; [~ - ±] : L;
assuming the an~le of rotatfona is small;
I
, •• &$
8" ~
_ [~-
~
y~
~J
t\t Ea
PL&
,....--;=-

Simplifying this equation gives;

I
1 Now a fairly simple expression is available for

I determining the rotation at the base of a column due to

• anchor bolt elongation. Observing the first term of the

I equation , it is apparent that for eccentricities ( ~ )

less than 0/2. the result would be a negative rotation.

J Therefore, for e'~ this expression is in valid.

I
t
I
p
t r ""'" M~ P...
I
...
1 1r-
I
•
I
Fa
J
I J

I1
1\
/
~
I

t, )
8
II
II ~I
,I
I
, ,I I
I' 'F.
Ie L
,
, I
' t I
I
,I I
II I
,i
I II
I
I

--_
,- J L...,
...
~ L
---
1
~--

A: Ia-rA/.. AR.EA or- IeN~/ON

8 ANtHaR. 801..TS.

I
• 7- Due
I hGUIC.E ROTAnoN Ie) ANC HOe. BaL.:!"' EU:JNGAIIOtV.

J
I
t
 .. 0
.....
.
w
~

r-J

'2.+
II
I There are two factors which this expression for

4 ea neglects. The effects of pretensioning the anchor

bolts and the effects of crushing of the concrete under

I
, anchor bolt head are both neglected .

anchor bolts tends to decrease the rotation and increase

the stiffness of t he column base .

Pretensioning the

Conversely , crushing

I of the concrete under the bolt head causes a reduction

• in stiffness . Pre tensioning the anchor bolts tends to

I counteract the flexibility increase due to the crushing

of the concrete because some of the crushing is complete

J before any loads are applied to the column. Neglecting

I the effects of pretensioning the anchor bolts is not

usually critical because it results in underestimating

~ the stiffness.

The expressions, for the three rotational components

I
, of the column base , which have been derived can be

summed to find the total rotation due to an applied

moment ( Pe. ):

I 8r orA L - 8F + 8 6 + Bp

1 .. Brar... -
L.
Ks~
p~
+ (Ze - 1 )
Z~"
&
A. Es +- a
Er If
f 2~ ~
3 ~ Z.

I +- ~"J Z. [i(t "ieX~-I) +(~ - ~X()(8)C ... (<< - o.S)

c::. - t~ (7)
• '"
I
I'I
Since the flexibility ( r ) is the rotation due to an

applied moment , divide through by Pe;

ro = 8n "'-A L
Pe.
I
I

t
 .. - U>
...
'''>
~

I
..
I
-- Since stiffness (K) is the inverse of the flexibility;
I Y
I

•
I
J I
" [j"'''
13 + ('" -D,S) - -LJJ
I + '717 ,~ ~ ~

.. Using Equations 7 , 8, and 9 , the engineer can obtain an

estimate of the flexibility and stiffness of a column

base of the type studied .

I
, for.
A few notes on the use of these equations are called

First, since Equation 6 is invalid for eccentricities

(e) less than VZ' the equations given for flexibility

I and for stiffness (Equations 8 and 9) are not valid for

values of e less than ~. Second , the equation deri ve d

1 for the stiffness at the base of the column gives an

approximation of the absolute stiffness . Therefore,

I
• when comparing the base stiffness with the column stiff-

I ness, the absolute stiffness (+E~/~ ) of the column should

be used , or alternately , the base stiffness should be

J divided by 4E (where E is the modulus of elasticity of the

base materials) and compared with the relative stiffness
I of the column (I l L).

t
I
I
CALCULATOR PROGRAM

A program has been developed for the Hewlett-

I Packard HP-41 calculator which solves the expressions

l
previously developed to determine the stiffness of column

bases . A listing of the program and sample output are

I provided in Appendix B. The program prompts the user to

• input the follo wing variables :

I B = Footing width

D = Footing Length

J KS ~ Modulus of subgrade reaction

LB ~ Anchor bolt length

I AB = Summation of area of tension anchor bolts

EB = Young ' s Modulus for anchor bolts

d = Depth of column section

I
, B = Ratio of column area to column section modulus
x
0( = Ratio of AFI A for column (See Table 2 )

a = Distance from column face to centerline of anchor

bolts

I Ep ~ Young ' s Modulus for base plate

1 b

tp
~

=
Base plate width

Base plate thickness

I P = Ratio of base plate moment just inside flang e

• A
to base plate moment just outside flange

Ratio of base plate stiffness between column

I =

, P = Axial load
flanges to base plate stiffness outside column
flanges

e = Load eccentricity

I
t
 Z7

I Once the variables have been set, the program calculates

i and prints each of the three components of the rotation,

the three components of the flexibility, the total

I
, flexibility , and the total stiffness of the column base.

The user is then given the opportunity to change the

column base variables and the applied loading (P and e).

I This program works very well and saves considerable

• time in computing the column base stiffness . It is very

I useful in the design process because it allows one to

J
vary the inputs and compare resulting stiffnesses fairly

quickly.

I BEHAVIOR

It is very important in structural engineering, as

well as other fields, for the engineer to have a good

I understanding of the principles involved and the behavior

, which the equations exhibit before using them. The

purpose of this section is to observe the behavior of

the derived expressions as small changes are made in the

I variables involved. The behavior is studied by beginning

1 with a set base configuration and varying values of one

variable at a time. The beginning base configuration

I selected is:

• LB = 24 in. b =. 30 in. 0 = 10 ft.

I AB = 6 in.
2
t
P
= 2 in . B = 6 ft.
a = 4 in. ~ = 1.0 K = 250 Ib/ in 3
J ~ = 20.0
s

I
t
 ....a>
.I ....
.....
,~

I First, the relative values of the three components

1 of the column base flexibility are compared. The flex-

ibilities due to each of the three rotation components
I are determined for a W14 x 43 column with the base con-
figuration given. These flexibilities are determined for

-- eccentricities of load varying from zero to 120 inches.

I The three components of the flexibility are plotted 1n

• Figure 8 together with the total flexibility of the column

I base connection. For this particular case the footing
rotation component accounts for the largest percentage
J of the total base flexibility. Note that for values of

I eccentricity of less than about 12 inches the equations

.. behave much differently than they do at larger eccentri-

cities. This graph amplifies the importance of the
limitation of the equation to values of eccentricity (e)
I
, grea ter than V2..
Figure 9 is a comparison of the full stiffness of
the selected base for a heavy 14 inch column (W14 x 426)

I and a light 14 inch column (W14 x 43). Superimposed on

the same graph 1S a plot of the stiffness for a represent-
1 ative 14 inch column. For this representative column
alpha (co() was taken as 0.385, Bx was taken as 0.185, and
I
• the column depth (d) was taken as 14 inches. The graph

I indicates that using these values of 0( , Bx ' and d

results in a lower bound estimate for the column base

J stiffness. Figure 10 shows similar results for 12 inch

wide flange columns; where 0( = 0.385, Bx = 0.215, and
I d = 12 inches for the representative 12 inch column. It

t
 .. - (!)

....,
0<>

I
1
I
--I
IlDO

1/00
I

•
I
J 100 -----
~""1...

I 10.

.. /"'.
-::--
I

-d
,
<>-
bOO
-- -
---- - -----

I
,
<:l !rOO

"t
,
400
- -
---- FcGn~

.J
ii 300 ----
I ~
j(

zoo
ANOf'CR. L.T"$

B.... ~I!O
1 \00
Pt.A1"l:.

I
• 0
0 11 2.'t II. +l 1.0 12. r+
"
I I
/0'

I Eu.eN T7! / C/n {/Nt! 1/ t!S}

~ 'Ftc"URE:. 25 - C.0I-1f>A~1 SON CJ~ II1f!Ee 0JfVlf>ONeNrs; OF

"'1J1r; BASE. Ft..eXIf!,/LlT'f.
I
t
.I :
t)

I !OOO

1
I
..
I
• ZIJ()O

I I~O

0-
..!
J -!J.
"l
<:)
I~

1114 4-

I
"-
V I ~o

.. ~

V1
ti1
I , ••

1000
v WI+
iV/40xH

I
, V)
:<

~
~ 100

'00
I 400

1 ZOO

I 0
lor
• 0 11- 2.+ ~ ~

ECCt!N~ICJT'1
toO 12.

e. (~)
h 'It.

I
, F/6 U ~E '! - COMPARISON
W\ 4-
OP
C.OLUH "-l~ .
S,'FFNE!;S pal!

I
t
.. .....
I I

I ?,DOD --
---
1 2.roo

2~01

I
1.'1,00

--I '21.00

• 1.000

I I tOO
I'

J J
I'l
I~o

<:::l
I -...
'-' I~O
IU3'34

.. ~

\1'1
VI
11.06

1000
4l1G.. W/l.
VVll)( 40

I
,
UJ
"Z
\l
U. ~OD

}:
VI ~oo - -- .

I 400

1 100

I "0 .,,, lor

• 0 Il- l'! 3f., 49 7Z

e{~ )
9+

I Ec..ccNIf?- Ie 11'1

.I F I GURE. ICJ - Co I-IPA F;,/ ~ON OF STIFFNESS Foe

IN 12. ~Ol..VMNS.
I
t
 J: ~
,
I should be noted that the percent change in the base

1 stiffness with column weight is quite small ln comparlson

with the percent change in column weight .

I The final observations of behavior are made by

varying the values of Ks ' D, B, LB, AB, d, a, b, t p '
l and one at a time. The reference curve is for a
representative 14 inch column with the base configuration
I
• given earlier. The variation of base stiffness with

I small changes in these variables is illustrated in Figures

11 through 21.

J In revlewlng the graphs of these variations several

general characteristics are noted. First, for all of the
I variables except Beta (~) small variations from the

~ reference value cause variance in the stiffness (K) of

at least 10 percent. The variation of stiffness is

I
, particularly large (20 to 50%) for changes in Ks ' in D,
and in values of tp less than 3.0 inches . Small changes
in B, LB, AB, d, a, b, and result i n variations of
stiffness of roughly 10 to 20 percent. This
I would indicate that, if the engineer had a fairly good

1 estimation for these variables and took care in esti-

mating Ks ' D, and t p ' an estimate of the base stiffness
I could be determined within about 10 to 20 percent .
• The distressing point is that the modulus of sub-
I grade reaction (Ks) is probably the most variable and the

I
J most difficult to determine factor, in addition to being
one of the most critical. As a possible approach to

I counter this problem one could choose upper and lower

It
J: .l!,

>-J

I !ooo

-
1 ZJco - - -

-
I 2.1.0'

l
2.~

zzoo

I
• 21>00

I 1
1<1
I ~ OO

J -
<>
'--' IGoOO
K ..-leo ~.:.r

X "s - 35'".0 % ,
I 1'r00

.. VI
VI
UJ
z
u..
Izco

1000 ~
k.: 25"6~~r

K3 ~ ISO 1Y.:..r
I
,
lJ..
i=
VJ 200

1..00

I 4\ 00
- J<. • ." 5"0 ~... ~

1 z.o~

} 0
0 IZ. 2"1- 36- 'ti '0
I I
-n
I
(1<1. ~"
I I
IOl

e. {~}
I J3{:tE N T1<. IC. rr"1

J !='I GUI!.E II - YAf?/ATJOfoJ OF I< /))rrH (}HAN~ES

};J Ks. .
I
t
.I :......
w
:14-

I ~ODo

1 2iO

I 'lJ-/JD

~
2<\DO

ZUJD

I
• 20cl6

I j10 0
D: /4 '

J ~ / ('00
f).., 2 '

-!J..
I on 140 0

.. -Q

"'-.J
~
1200
O~ 10 '

I ~
,
/ DOO
tI)
0",8 '
11l 'too
t
I
- \l.
bOO

-
01 '/-O c
0:: "

1 20. D=4'

I
• 00 IZ 24 34> .,.g

Ec.t!.cJJTRIC IT'1
(,0 7Z.

e.(~)
0" M- / 03

I
J H G UR.c J 2. - VA~/A/?ON CJF K WlrH ~HAI\k;.ES
J:jJ D.
I
t
.. C)
.-
....
V1
3!.

I 3000
.-
t 2.iOO
----- _.
u.oo
I --~-
.
! !

2'r(J1)
1 :

I t .1
I

• '2.000

I /"'\.
. ~
1100
-Il.
J ~
III
<:) 11.00
Le. - 1'2. "

I X
14 00 ----
- z.+"
4 VI
I!O'
l "' ~"

I ~ 1000 ---

, VI
2.
\L
u.
1=
goo

{p00
•
-- ---

I 4CO

1 ZJ)0
c - -r
---- - -
I
•
0 4-~ (,,0 7l. 84 /Oi
0 I l. l.+ 31. " i-

Ec.t!. EJ0Ifa JCol T 'i e.( ~')

I
)4- - VAR.. 1A T70 I'J

'"
P IG.U fii!.E O~ /)Jrn-/
J C HANc;.c $ IN Ls .
I
t
 ..'"
.~

.....
w

•t
.::n
"$000 - .. :
. ---.---
- .. --
---
-.. ,-
r
+-
.
'Z. ~oo
!
--. -t -----
-- ---
.
-.' •-

•1
t .~~
zt.oo -,
. ...
- - -
,.
•t--- .,
, .. - I . - -
. -
.. -
- "
.- .;:..,c
1
+ - _ .. -
,

--, r:.
2.400

·
.. ,_. -
t:
,
:
L:~
I':
- lI ..
. ;- - . . . . 1 - -
1

: .-- --teo
].Zoo
1-- -

••
; -
~=.':
- - :
- :
,...
r-
.f:.:
~

"[,-
t- t , -..!
UJoo · - ..
I
·
.

'.IJ
. 'r:- f
" .- , r--·-
L
.
- ---
--
t

0 •r: .F. I-
: t-
,j 1100 ,
__1-
..,-"'- .. .
• ..
..t. .
- 0
"-.....J
11.00 '- A·

~
• ~

eli
IJ)
ill
14-00

/2.00
---

A ~ 4-;" .

'., en
2
\L
u..
-
1000

900

,
L
t
..

:.
t.

iJ,00
r:
!
I ,
T
400
,-
1
. j.-

-- --"-.
2./).
• :
i: - .s-:
,~
1 t
1

,L , !

••
: .. - F-, .! ~~q,-
0
0 12- 2.4- 51.0 4i r..o 72.. z+ 11. 10f

~
• 'FIG.URE: IE; -
E~tENn/(2.l7'1f

VAf?/AIJON
~HANG6S IN
OF
A
e. ( ~ ")

g •
J< WJ-rH

I
t
.. .-...
~

~a

I ~oo

-
t UOO
: . -
I Z.oo
~
;
:

1 2+40

Z2Ji0
.- --' ~

I
• "'"·1
z.o~O

I ~ /900
...
J 'V
<)
' 1000
tl.. %.2.
Ii -IS·
If"_

I X 1+00
J. J4-'
>s

~ III
V1
IlOO -.- --
UJ
:z - -- --.
I
,
1000

~
'i oo - ---
([) {,,()o - -
I ._--
--
400

1 Zoo
-r ,,

+-- 1
} 0
0 11- Z.'I· ~r.. 4Q GoO n 9t
" 109

I £~fENfR.IC.lrt e{~)
F/~u~c: } &, - VAR IA ,JON IN J<
J 6lAtJG.ES IN J.
WI71I

I
t
.. a:>
..-
.....
w
cc
I
t
I
, l:1P4 ,.•
-
-- r -: ;
- t - : -
- I., '-_'
J...:-

I 1fI., '
-. <j\ - _i
•I ZDpO
r

~ ltoo
'J
J ,f
~-,-

I- I
-:,{ I
IIIb 6
t-1 _ _';-'_-i.,
.;:J
I ..... ,I -

..
IQ.{)O
"---'
X. /ZOO

I 1000~----~----~-------7--------~-----

, 900

~OO
l:
~---:::--=---- ,-

I -.;..'- - - ---1

1 zoo ~--~---7~--~'--~----+---~--~----~---
: - 1
.- ----
•

-----1"-"::..'-
I
1----' -

• o
o /2. .2+ 310 4~ t..D 10f

I EceIENIRIt2II'1

J F IGUkE n VAR..I A liON ()~ J<. ()JI T1I

~HANG.E$ IN a...
I
t
 .. -(j)

•,.•

I 3000 r-:,c_--;:--::-:c:-::-:::-r----;:-
- .-- . ,-- - --;--- - -
-..:-
i U#,~
. -~
!
: ~-~C-~
t t
-7..~~,~-~---------
.;." . .. I

I
,
I
•I \~-+--,--+-'--
_I'
-,--
. -1-
!
..!( I t oo ! -- - -¥-"""'-'-- - , - - - - , - - ' - - - " - - - - , - - - -

J
I 1+00

~ IUo 1---

I
,
1000

70 0 r------~-~-------------

I
1
I
•
I EC(!' EN-rR I C./i '1
, FIGURE / Cj VAf?.1 Ail ON
61 AIJC,. c$ IN
OF K
t" .
e. (~)

w rrH

I
t
 .. - ..D
.....
....
l'>

I 3000

1 UOo . -. - t
_.
~::
--
!t-

I
--. t--
tlDD

l 24-00

.
I
'2Z00
- ~. - . ~
I -~- --~ -
r:--. I
:--:.
- :
-'-

•I ~
UOD -- - r
I -
-----'-" -. ---- - .- ----,-
~ t
11~
..:;(

J M
<::l
-....
"-..;
It-OO

I ~ /4<'0

~ VI
/200
- .. --...-
VI ,
UJ
I
,
1000
Z
~ \/00
~
(j) ~D

I 400
-
•

1 ZOO
--- --..:. . :-+r
.: -
t

I
• °0 Jz. 24

I E~ENTR.IC./T'1 e. (~')

-.t
I
FIG,URc 20 - VAR./A/JON OF
CJ.+ANGES IN;8.
J< /))/111

I
It
 .I ~ A
t.,j

I - - - - -------,-- _._ -- - -

.. ?,DOO

2.906

I 21.00
,-
, .
.. 2.400

2200
-
.--:--+--

- , -
r
-- -

I
•I ~
.~
ZollO

~
I~M
'"
J
<::)

---
'-.; /uO()

~
I /4-00 - - ~~------ --- --- -
~
--

~----.-----------------:~:!
'- )."100

~
V)
Vl /zoo

II ~
-----=;;::.:::::::=--==---- -
,
1000
~ A-I

~ goa

V7 - --,
iJJoo
I
1
4 00

z.ao ~--------~--- ----

I
• ()
0 12. 24- 3f" 4-g ~ 71. N 'f~ 109

I E~ENfR)C 11'1 e(~ )

I

J 2) - VAl< fAil ON OF J.< WITH

CHAN6c<; IN A.
I

~
 .. -......
h
'J»

I bounds for the subgrade modulus and calculate coorespond-

t lng upper and lower bounds of stiffness. The other

variables are not quite as critical Slnce they can be
I altered in the design if need be.

1 Focusing attention on coefficients introduced ln this

study; ft and A . First, it was found that if I> could

I be taken as unity the expression for base plate bending

• could be simplified significantly. Based on the graph in

I Figure 20, it appears that assuming Beta ( ~) equals unity
I
would be very much acceptable for approximating base
J stiffness . In comparison with the variations of the stiff-

I ness with changes in other variables, the variation of

stiffness with changes in Beta is negligible. Nevertheless,

~ if more accurate estimates of the base stiffness are de-

sired, the possibility of using Beta less than one should
I
, be explored.
Finally, some conclusions can be drawn concernlng
Lambda ( A ) from the plot of Figure 21. There are basically

I two situations to be considered in choosing values of

this coefficient. First, if the column web is not welded
1 to the base plate it appears that Lambda (A) should be
taken conservatively as 1.0. Second, if the web is welded
I
• to the base plate some value greater than 1.0 should be

I chosen. The question of how much the column web stiffens

the base plate is one without an obvious answer. Ideally,

J a finite element analysis, backed by experimental tests,

could be used to get an approximate range for Lambda (A)
I in this case. Looking at Figure 21 carefully reveals that

t
 +s

A ~ 10.0 and
1 the difference i n stiffness between

~ ~ 100 . 0 is very small . Based on this graphical re-

I presentation it appears that assumi ng Lambda ( A ) equals

either 5 . 0 or 10 . 0 would give a reasonable lower bound

l value for the stiffness.

I RECOMMENDATIONS

• Application of this expression in structural engi-

I neering practice should be done only after obtaining a

good understanding of the behavior of the equation and

of the assumptions involved in the derivation . If the

engineer understands the behavior and the assumptions

made , he can easily choose values for the variables which

I~ will give conservative estimates of the stiffness , with-

out being overly conservative .

I
, For the use of the equations to obtain approximate

values of stiffness and flexibility , several recommenda-

tions are made. First , it is recommended that the

I average values given in Table 3 be used for representative

1 nominal column sizes .

Beta (~
Second , it is recommended that

) be taken as unity. For cases where the column

} web is not welded to the base plate , Lambda ( ).. ) can

be taken conservatively as unity . Finally , if the

I column web is welded to the base plate, a value for

Lambda of 10 . 0 is probably a slightly conservative

J assumption.

I
t
i TABLE 3 - RE.t:!.oMMEIJDEiJ VAL.U£S FoR.
d) B)() Mb 0<.
I
1 t20WJMN
SI'CE Bx
I /4 v... {).I '€f tJ.3 ~5"
• WIJr
I W\2- J2 ..... {).ZIt, 63~S-

J WID J D;".. . ~.U~ 0.395"

I W'3 ~ i..-. 0.331 o.3~~

.. W" I> 1...., • O.4~1 {).39~

I
,
I
1
}
I
J
I
t
.. - -------- - -- -- - - -

<.!)

.....
'"
J>
47
I Tables are provided in Appendix C which allow the

1 engineer to very quickly obtain a rough estimate for the

column base flexibility and stiffness. The three tables

I
..
give values of flexibility for each of the three com-

ponents of rotation. Table Cl tabulates flexibility due

to the footing for different sizes of square footings

~I
I.
and different values for the modulus of subgrade reaction.

Table C2 tabulates the flexibility caused by anchor bolt

II elongation for various values of

different nominal column sizes.

La and A
a,
Finally, Table C3
and for

IJ tabulates values of flexibility due to base plate bending

I for different nominal column sizes as the base plate

thickness varies . These tables are provided as a quick

~ way to obtain a first estimate of column base stiffness .

A value for each of the three components is selected.

I
, These three values are then summed to determine the total

base flexibility . Finally , the inverse of the total

flexibility is taken to give the total base stiffness.

I The recommended procedure for using these relation-

ships and design aids in structural design is as follows:

1 1. Use portal method or some other approximate

method to obtain preliminary estimates of mem-

} ber forces .

I 2. Assume trial member sizes and column base

configuration .

J 3. Use the tables in Appendix C to approximate

the flexibility due to each of the three rota-
I tional components ('aF ) 'f~ J t fp ).
t
I
4. Determine the approximate base stiffness (K) by:

1 '4'F + +- ~,.
I
1s
5. Using this base stiffness to either:
I (a) Determine a distribution factor for the

base of the column, for use in moment

-- distribution;

I
•
I or (b) Choose an equivalent member, to attach to

the column base just above a hinged support

J (see Figure 22), which has the same stiff-

ness that the assumed column base has;

I J<.
SA S I!.
= 4-eI"",
L e..,
~ IeM ~ I "DIt. eq",v. M""'6e.e.
Le... = LeN~"" <>t<- e:qv,v. ME,.. .t:e .

I
, 6.

7.
Analyze the structure by the method selected

to obtain design member forces.

Calculate the rigidity ratio:

I 8. Determine effective length of the column using

1 9.
the effective length factor alignment charts.

Revise column size and base detail.

10. Revise approximation of column base stiffness

I using Equation 9 or calculator program.

11. Repeat Steps 5 through 10 if necessary .

This recommended procedure is illustrated in Appendix D.

I
t
I
1
I
1 K = 4EIc.
lc.

I
•
I
J
I
..
I
,
I
1
I /N//

I ( b ) !="I':AME:.. vrJ t:OUIVALI:.t-JT Me:M8ER.~

J HGU~ e. 22 - Apf'LI~A TlON ()~ BASE SnFF}JEss

W/iH EQUI V ALeNt /V1E::MBlEl2.. s .
I
t
..
· ~...
'

o
A

I
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1 An expression has been developed which allows an

engineer to approximate the stiffness of column bases .

I The approximation considers the combined effects of

l footing rotation, elongation of anchor bolts , and bend-

ing in the base plate . Several simplifying assumptions

I have been made:

• 1. Base plate , anchor bolts , and soil behave

I elastically .

J 2.

3.
Forces in the column web are neglected.

Forces on the base plate are modeled as con-

I centra ted forces .

.. 4. Resultant compressive force in the concrete

acts at the bolt line.

After developing the expression a sensitivity

I
, analysis was performed to investigate the relative

significance of the variables involved . The stiffness

was found to be a very strong function of the modulus

I of subgrade reaction, the footing length , and the base

1 plate thickness. Variations in the values of the other

functions caused only a moderate variation in the bas e

(fo ),
I stiffness with the single exception of Beta

which caused very little variation .

I Based on the assumptions made in the development

and the results of the sensitivity analysis , recommenda-

J tions were made for the practical application of these

expressions. Examples of the recommended applications

I
t
1.1
~
...
en
~I
~

I are given in Appendix D. A program for the Hewlett-

4 Packard HP-4l calculator and approximate flexibility

charts are presented as design aids for utilizing the

I
, proposed method.

This method provides a rational approach for es-

timating the column base stiffness for a specific base

I detail. Research is needed , however, to verify the

•I validity of this method. The engineer should recognize

that the calculated base stiffness using this method

is accurate to only three significant digits at best

J because of the assumptions and approximations made.

I If used intelligently the method pres~nted will be of

significant practical value to the practicing engineer .

~
I
,
I
1
I
•
I
j
I
t
.. .::!)
.-
~

",
I
1 1.
REFERENCES

American Institute of Steel Construction, Manual of

Steel Construction , 8th Ed. , Chicago , Ill ., 1980.
I 2. Galambos , T . V. , "Influence of Partial Base Fixity
on Frame Stability, " Transactions , American Socity

l of Civil Engineers, Vol. 126, Paper No. 3256,

1961, pp 929-951.

3. Beaulieu, D., Samson , G. , and Picard, A., "A Study

I of the Stabilizing Action of a Simple Column

•I Base Connection ," 3rd International Colloquium

Proceedings , Stability of Metal Structures,
Structural Stability Research Council , Bethlehem,
PA , 1983 , pp 21-35 .

J 4. Jones , S . W., Kirby, P. A. , and Nethercot, D. A.,

"Columns with Semirigid Joints , " Journal of the
Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No . ST2,
February , 1982 , pp 361-372.
I 5. Sugimoto , H., and Chen , W. F. , "Small End Restraint
Effects on Strength of H-Columns," Journal of

f the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 108, No. ST3,

March , 1982 , pp 661-681.

6. Bjorhovde , R., " Effect of End Restraint on Column

I
, 7.
Strength - Practical Applications ," AISC Engineering
Journal , Vol . 21 , No . 1 , 1984 , Chicago, Ill.,
pp 1-13.

Salmon , C. G., Schenker , L., and Johnston, B. G.,

"Moment-Rotation Characteristics of Column
Anchorages ," Transactions , American Society of
I Civil Engineers, Vol. 122 , Paper No . 2852, 1957,
pp 132-154 .

l 8. LaFraugh , R. W., and Magura, D. D. , "Connections in

Precast Concrete Structures - Column Base Plates,"
Journal of the Prestressed Concrete Institute,
Vol . 2 ., No.6, December 1966, pp 18-39.
} 9. Prestressed Concrete Institute, PCI Design Handbook,
2nd Ed ., Chicago , Ill., 1978, pp . 4-21 thru 4-25.
I
, 10.

11.
Teng , W. C., Foundation Design, Prentice-Hall, Inc.,
Englewood Cliffs , NJ , 1962, pp 184-189 .

Bowles , J. E ., Foundation Analysis and Design , 3rd

Ed ., McGraw-Hill, Inc., New York, NY, 1982, pp
320-325.
I
t
I
eI ..........
(,D

V1
,..j

I
.. 12. Department of the Navy, Naval Facilities Engineering
Command, Design Manual - Soil Mechanics, Found-
ations, and Earth Structures, NAVFAC DM-7,
March, 1971, p 7-11-10 and p. 7-11-18.
I
'I
I
•I
J
I
..
I
,
I
1
}
I
j
I
t
.. - ....
C!)

. ."
w
A - NaYllENCLATUR.e. .
I APPeNDIX

.. P = Ax /AL. Ul~O ON CoL.U/"1N.

e = E:.e.CElVrll../I!'T'f OF LoAD ON CO/.. UMN .
K. :. S UBG.~{)E:
I
fIIOClUL.US OF= R.E)OC lioN.

1- = ~ESSU'U! t:x.eR.llfEO B'1

..
'f!dOTING.. ON TlIE: SOl L..
AF '" S~:r"L.EMewr OF SOIL. DUE To
e,. :; R.oTA~/ON Or A:>o·nN6..
D = /..EM>.111 OF FOCTIIJG. (PER.Pe;.Jb/C./JL.A~
I B s W I()T-M OF FOOiIN<A.
= ~r .
•I If''':' ,....,,.,,fSf.JI of
A'" RAno 01=
INE ..,/A

BAse: PUlTe. :r:

OF HJon>JG. (PUN VIIE/.U)
BeTWI!EN FLAMSSS TO dvrslD~ I-UIV6ES.
~ '" pelU.£tJr}.G,t;;; , . 1101"1£"" IN 8}.Ui "'-ATE ourSlb£ D~ COI.-IJMN I"tAN6~S
,;lI,t.,.. CM.R..J~ OVI!A: -rn BI>.5/Z f> ..... TE. 8e:TWI:E."-I F<-ANG.E.S.

l Fa'" rol{c. E
~
/to.)

= CcMPR.eS!OI'IE Fd2.cE
T"l!:IJSION AtJc)jo~

8e''''l!eN
804..T5 .
~at. E~ A-tJc BASI! PLATE .

I J. - Ctx.IJMN DePni.

.. ~ ... O/srANc.E

~ = ..( ...
FR.OM
!IJ.Ic. >401.
z.",
B"~,,. •

t~= MAl< ,,.,UM ~ES'i /N COL.VI<\N FL.ANCO-~.

FIoCe. of CeL-VM"'; '0 CE.,""","L.., ... & <>1=

I
, A,r = .MEI- 0 r= COLtHJ 1"lA~ E .
P.. c F<>~E , ,,, c..MPfl, ttSS/VE (.'OI.IJ'o1IJ ~LANG.t:..
P'1" .. FoR.ce IN

A .. }. fl. .. 1- OF' CoLUMN

,ENS/LEi. (!(H.. IJMN

C~~S secnON.
~l.ANG.e.

I S~=S~cnOo.l
0<. = A~/A
B",s AI::;"
MODULUS OF' C OI.. UMN ABOIff In. )<-A~'5.

1 I:. ~ U) 1I>-nI

4· TlIIC.I(.",;;:~S
e;. = Mo~tlL.US
01" BAsE.

OF
pUTE .
OF BASE PI.).Te.
eLASl1clT'r etc BAs£ hAiE.

J I~
8,
'" Mpl"lSVT" OF' /N~R."""A
c i<.ctrA'T70N CUE 7l:l
OF aASE

BAS. PL.ATC:
PL.ATE. IN
BeNb, o.J<i..
PL..ANE. oF- Be.NDING.,.

I ~ ;C.~A)JG.IO:
L. -:: LEtJGTI\ OF
IN LE",c;..TII OF /Em I ON
TEIVSION ANCI<02.
ANCHck..

BOl..TS Fll.tz'I
80LT"S .

&I..T HEAO "'"

TcP OF- BAse A..A.TE..
j As = SIJtI\ OF= Ail.I:" OF= A~1.. TIONS ION AN~>lOlt. BOl..n.

EL ~ MoouL.uS 0 F= ELAs'T'IC 11''1 OF A~C.M02. BoI..TS.

I Gg ~ ThE!. ~'1"""o t-J

~:o ~/>... c
Due: ~o
F'L.E)l.IB'LIT"I ·
Ell'T'!!ONS ,ON OF A~HO" BOL.'1"5 .

t K = B~o;c $'1" 1"""''''''1'

.. ~ V1
-'>

I
1
I PRP "BASFLEX"
81 ' LBL "BPSFLEX"

l e2 CF 81
B3 CLRC
B4 "PRIHTER OW
85 AVIEW 46'lSl 94

I 86 PSt
B7 "HOR"AL "ODE' -
47 "COL D<PTH'"
48 PPOIWT
• BS AYIEW
89 ·PSE
49 5 0 87
59 "COL BX"
I 18 AD'I
II ' IHPLIT DRT~'
51 PRO"PT
52 STO 12
53 "QLPHpo"
12 AYIEW

J 13 ADY
14 "UHITS '
15 ~'IIEW
54 PRO"PT
55 STO 21
56 FS' 81
57 CTO 14
16 ' KIPS . INCHES'
I 17 AVm

.. 18 ADV
19' L8L 81
28 -FTC WIDTH' -
21 PPOftPT
58tLBL 85
59 "AS OFFSET"
68 PPO"PT
61 5,0 88
62 FS' 81
63 CTO IS
I 22 STO 81

, 23 ' FTC
24
25
26
27
LEHGTH"
PROftPT
5,0 82
FS' 81
CTO 11
64 tlBL ~
6S "SP "OD EL~S""
66 PPO~Pi
6, STO 89
68 'SF WlN~ o ,
69 PRO"PT
I 2S' LBL B2
29 ' SUB "ODULUSo ,
38 PPOftPT
78 STO 18
71 'So THI ~ K E55"

1 31 STO 83
32 FS' 81
72 P~O"PT
73 STO 11

, 33 GTO 12
J4 ' LBL 8J
35 'AS LEHCTH'"
36 PRom
37 STO 84
,4 's' 81
75 CTI) 16

76' LSL 8f
77 ' SETPo,
78 PRO"P'
I
, 38 'RB RPER"
39 PRom
48 STO a5
41 ' ~B "OD EL~S , .
42 PPOftPT
43 STO 9.
79 m 22
8e ' L~ ~BDA o ,
81 PRO~PT
82 STO 23
83 SF 81

44 FS' ~1
I 45 GTO 13

t
.. .-,-
""
.."
'"
I
t 84. lSl 88 138. lBl B 183
184
RCl
I/X
22
85 ' AXIAL lOAD" 131 ' THETA AB: '
I 86 PRom
87 STO 14
88 'ECCEHTRICITY"
132 RVIEW
133 2
134 EHTERt
185
186
187
2
,
3
188 /
1 89 PRom
98 STO 15
91 RCl 87
135 m IS
136 •
137 RCL 17
189
198
191
,5
-
•
n RCl 88 138 -
I 93 2
94 •
139 RCl 17
148 Xf2
In
193
STO
RCL
26
22
• 95 + 141 2 194
195
I
-
I 96 5TO 17
97 RDV
98 ADV
142 •
143 I
144 RCl 84
196
197
RCl
!IX
P

\45 • 198 peL 15

J 188
99' lBl A
'T~ETA FTG: '
191 QVIEW
\46 RCl 85
147 1
148 RCl 86
199 2
2e~ •
281 :X
282 +
I 192 RCl 82
183 3
184 YtX
149 I
158 RCL 14
151 •
283 •
284 RCL 88
185 RCl 81 152 X(:8' 285 •
~ 186 •
187 12
153 8
154 STO 18
286 RCl
287 I
8i'

188 I 155 VIEW 18 288 RCl 2~

289 +
I
,
189 RCl 83 156 PSE
118 • 157 'RBFlEX:' 218 CL 8'
ill I /~ 158 RVIE~ 211 'm
112 14 159 RCL 18 212 •
113 • 168 RCl 14 213 m 88
Z!( T
114 RCL 15 161 I
115 • 162 RCl 15 215 m 22
216 •
I 116S016
117 Y;EW 16
liS PSE
163
164
165
I
STO 26
VIEW 26
217
218
RCl 2,
I

1 1\9 'FTGFlEX:'
l~ AYIEW
121 RCl 16
122 R(~ 14
Ib6
167
PSE
' ,

!68' lSl C
219
229
221
222
RCL I'
'
PCL 88
EHTW

} 123 I
124 PCL IS
125 '
169 'THETR Bp:'
178 RV/EW
171 RCL 2:
223
224
225
3
YfX
RCl J(
226 Xf2
I 126 ST& 27 172 RCL 12

, 127 'IIEW 27 173 • 227 '

128 PSE 174 RCl 21 228 2
129 ' , 175 ,5 229 •
176 - 238 ,
1;'; RCL 15 231
2~2 1-
178 I
233 RCl !'
I 179 t
188 RC" 17
181 I/X
234
235
•
RCL IS
182 - 236 •
t
.. --VI
57

I 237 peL 89
292' LBL F
Z93 -STIFF TTL=-
294 AYIE
238
t 239 RCL 19
248 I
Z4 1 PCl II
295 m 24
296 \IX
297 STO 25
345' LBL 14
346 -CHt AS lOC-Y H'-
Z42 EHTm
298 VIEW 25 347 QYIEW
I W :;
244 Y X
299 PSE
389 ADY
391 ADY
348 P~E
3-9 XEQ -v , ~·
245 I 358 X=Y"
392 •• 351 GTO a~

--
246 12
247 •
248 STO 19 393. LBL G 352' LBL 15
249 V!EW 19 394 ' CKG BASE-'I/~? ' 353 ' CHG BP-Y/H"
I· 259 PSE 395 RVIEW
386 PSE
354 RYIEW

• 251 ' EP,UY='

252 AYIEW
387 XEg ' V / ~'
398 Y=Y?
3~5 PSE
3~6 XEQ 'y ,~.

I 253 .Cl 19
254 peL 14
255 I
389 GTO 16
319 ' CHG LOADS-V/H"
357 ~=Y'
353 cTa 86
311 PVIEW 3S1 . .. SL 16
m QCL 15
J 257
258
259
I
5TO 2B
VIEW 2,
312 PSE
313 XEQ ' YlN'
31 4 X=V?
369 ' CHG COEF-IH"'
::bl ~VIEW
362 PSE
I 2,a
261
2.2
PSE
qnv
AOV
315 GTO @S
31. RTH
301 XE~ .y ~.
364 x=Y'
365 GTO @-
317' LBL 18 366 GTO 88
~
2,,: - •
318 -CHG FTG-Y/H" -
264tLBL D 319 AYIEW 367 ' LBL -Y"
265 -THETA ;Tc=- 328 PSE 31,8 -.-

I 321 XEQ -V ' H-

, 266 QVIEW 36. PSTa y

26 ;'CL 10 322 X=Y? 379 C~A
323 GTO 81 311 AON
268 RCL 13
269 • 372 PP.O~PT
l78 RCi 1~
324' LSL 11 373 ASTO •
271 • m -CHG SUB~OD -Y i H'- 37' CQ·;
2i2 STC 28
326 AV!EW m PTN
I 273 VIEW 2e
2;" tSE
327 PSE
328 XEQ -v'
329 x=r 1
376 END

1
275 RDV
<~6 ADY 338 CTO 82
~n ..
331 ' L'L 12
332 -CHG AB-Y /N"'
27S' LBL E
} 279 ' F~EX TL;
218 ~V!E~
231 ~CL 2~
333 PYlE
334 PSE
335 XEQ ' Y/ N'
33b X=~?
I
,
232 QCl 1<
m GTO 83
183
284 ~CL ,5
338' LBL 13
laS
339 ' eHG COL-YIN"
286 STO 24 348 AYIEW
287 V;EW 24
341 F~E
m PSE 342 XEQ ' Y/H-
I ~89 ADY
298 ADY
291 • •
343 ~;V'
344 GTO 84

t
 V'I
J

I
t RXIRL LOAD?
X!::Q ·SRSFLE). AXIAL LOAD?
I ORIN ER ON
~~R~AL ODE?
298. 9geee9&
ECCEHTRICITY?
12.88999999
RU'

RU~'
2e9.9eee9 e
ECCEHTRICITY'
36. 999ge98B
FUN

R~'

1 UHITS
THETA FTC:
9.895358ZE '
KI PS. INCHES 8.8169 75:8:
I FTGFLEX:
9.99B882m
FTGFLEX:
8.9~898223:

• orG WIDTH?
72. e88889ge RU~
THETA AS:
e.988985494
THETR RB:

I FTG LE GTH?
SUB
72.9888eee9
~OrULUS?
Rl'" A8FLEX:
8.ge999963!
BFLEX:
e.8826S96~~

•28Be88999 RU~
THETP BP: THETA SP:
J P6 LEHGTH?
RS RPE~'
24.ee989899 ~ ~oj
8PFLEX:
8.991335462

9.98~e8e5~o
9PFLEX:
9.99ge8 zQe
I RS ~OD
4.88B@8B888
ELAST?
29889.888BB
iWH

PU>:
THETq TTL: THETR TTL:
COL DEP ~?
8.ge6779324 8.9288531e,
~ COL ax'
14.eeBBeege PU'
.' 3 4eeBee ~ R~H
FLEX TTL: < LE~ TTL:

I e.ege992 82~

,
ALPhR?
. 385~8~8e8 ~U'
RS OFFSE - 5 IF" TTL:
4.988eeeeee , UN STIFF T L:
B? OD EcPST' 35481?6ee l 345272.3~b~
298BUe8.le R';.•
go Wi~T~'
CHC SASE-YIN?
I So
H. 98889988
T~I CK HE SS?
~ w;

H
CHG BRSE-Y/H?

1.5e8e88e8~ ~~~

1 BE7A?
L~ ~BDR"
1.989899898 PU,
c~c LOADS-Y ~?

' "..
/"
eHC FTC-YIN"
,FTC WIDTHo ~ .~

19.999geea9 RU~

I 72.89 ge8BB
FTC L!::HCTH?
96.B899Be8~
~ J"

p~,

I
J
I
t
 .I ~'.M
I ., eHG SU8~OD-V/K?

N RUh

t eHG RS-V/N?

K
eHG COL-V/H?
I H RUh
eHG RS LOr-VIM
?

1 K
CHG BP-V/H'

! I H

I-I eHGCOEF-Y ' ~?

~
RXl~L LORD"
28e. 88ee880
ECCE~T RI CIT 0

J 12.8888ee8e RUN

I THETA FTC:

..
8.88226856 :
FTGFLEX:
THETA RB:
8.80828689-
RBFLEX=

I
, THETR BP=

BPFLEX=
8.898734W

I THETR TTL=

1 FLEXTTL=

} STIFF TTL=
749542.e38 ~·

I CHG BRSE-V/H?

J K
CHG LOADS-Y/H'i
~~

N ~.

I
t
.. a:>
...
..-
V'
..0

I APPENDIX C. - TABL.E.~ ):;:)e. Af>Pe.OX1MATrN~ BAsE

FLE.~\B\L.1T'1 AtJD ~T1FrNES.$.

t
I
1 FOOTING

PI", EN S I<lN 100 15"0 200

K"
2.",0
(/~/<..·)
300 3..-c 4-00 45"0

I qa.4-22
• Z'xZ' 3G.1. t.~o 2+1./27 /f?(H+S' /404 . '71. IZa.5'3 103.3+0 gO.n4-

I 3x3
, ,
71.44S' 47.430 3G'.7Z2 ZIl.G'7B 23. ~/S' 2t>.4/3 17. '81.' I':>. ~77

J 4'><4' z.z .~' IS". 070 11.303 '1.04-2 7.'S35 ~.4S''1 S:4S'"/ 5':02.3

I s'x 5' ~ . 2.S'~ b./13 4,G.30 3 . 7114 3 .011(, 2.,4(, 2..3/5' 2 .0S'S

'" x~' 4-.4bS' 2 ,n7 2 .233 I.n, 1.4·g'l 1.27(, I. I I (, 0.'1112

4
7')(7' 2 .410 U.07 I. lOS'" O.'r'4 O.'g03 O.61i'~ O. (,03 0.53b
I
~'x? ' 1.4/3 O.'¥4Z 0.706 0.51.5 0.4-71 0.404 Q353 0.3 1f
1 q' x'! I o.nz o.sef 0.44/ 0.35'3 O.z<14 0.2$2- 0.22 1 0./ 'I'
I lO'xlO' O. S'7~ O.3gb O.2.i'l 0.231 0.1'13 O.lbS' O.lfS' 0.12.'1

1 /f'XII ' O.3QS' O.Ut O./'li 0.158 0.132 0.1/3 0.0'1'1 O. O Ii'~

I IZ'x/z' O.27'l O.lir. O.l4{) 0.//2 0.0'/3 O.aiO O.f)70 0. 0'2

.1 /3 'X I3 ' 0.l03 OB~ 0./01 O.ot; I tJ. Ob Ii' 0.05'; 0.05/ 0.04S'

:J 14'x /4 ' O./S'I 0.100 0.075" D.llM 0.050 O.OH 0.031 0.033

I
:t
L
.. a>
....a>....
a>
TABLE t.2. - FLe.)(II"I,IT'1

BoL..-r
DUE -T-o ANCHO,"- 13.01,1'

J='US><'I ~ILJr'1
EL.t)NGAT70N &,1

I ~wt.~OIt \!.O",.
/vJt!..110i!. (IO-")<M. -,')

l:.ocE:~'c.,T'i
COI..U",1J
A6=Z~~ Aa=4-' I\~',." A. ~ 'il~L A, = /D ~ l

11 L.E: >J G..". s'c!:.

e. = 12 • .:),OS"l 0,027 o.al? O.OI:I 0.011
O. IJ~
11
e= tJ.H·7 0./71- O.tJ l7 o .a40'l
I Wl4
e",~,"
2..4-
tJ.44S' 0.223 O./4-i 0.111 O.OV'I
e=4S" O.+'It 0.2.407 0.1f.!: 0 .1 24- o.Oq'l

-- L6 ,. 18" Wl2
e: 12. '
e· 2'1-'
O./l'!
0.453
a.tJt.!:
O. l2 t.
0.04~

0.15:1
0.0'32
0.113
a.oz~

O. aq/

I e .. 3,,' 0.S'1.0 O. Ut> O. 1'67 0./40 O./IZ-

• e:4S" 0.1./4- tH07 O.lOS" 0.15'+ O.IZ~

I WID
e.-\Z,"
e.= 7.+'
0.23'1
as-qq
O.llO
a.2'1'l
0 .t>90
O.lOO
a.Il'o
O./ SO
0.049
0 .12.0

e- 3"" 0.7/g O.3S, ~. 2.1'1 0.1'0 0 . 1#

J e.",+S"

~"I2. '
0.77'
a,071
O.!II'l
O. {JJ~
O.ZS',!

O.oz.4
a. ''IS''
a.ol'i
tJ. IS'"
o,Olf

I e=2.4" 0."""3 o.uz 0./S'4- D.I" 0.0'13

..,.
Wl4
e:ox," " a.slIt 0,2.'17 0./'1'1 0./4i 0.11 1
e ': 4'i" 0.(,,5'1 0330 0.2.7.0 0./,,5 0,132.

e. .. 12." 0../72 O.DSI. O.0S'7 0.':)4J O.Os4-

ew24" 0. ~03 0.3tJ1- O.WI O./S'I 0 .121

, L!o '" 24- " WIZ

e"zl. · 0,7+7 0.374 tJ. Z+'l O,I'il7 0. 14-'1

e-~" 0.91'1 0 .40,! 0. 2. 7 3 O. ZOS' a.1 ('4

el: ll. 'l O.3IQ O./~O tJ.ltJ(' O.OiO 0 .0&.4-
e=2.4' a:m 0.3'1'1 O.ZI.t.. f).ZOO O.l~O
WID
I e" 3'1. "
e =+11"
O.'1SV
/'0 :$1
0 .4-7'1
a.S/ '!
O. ~I'!

0,34"
D .Z.:!;'!
O. ZS''1
0,/'1 z.
0..20'1

1 WI+
e=Iz
e=z.··
,. O.tJ i'1
O. '57'1
,:),74z
a.of!:
O.U1
0371
o .a JO
0.1'13
0.247
0 .0 2.'2.
tJ.I+~
O.I'iit.
0 . 011l
iJ.1I ,
0.14-9
I! =3' "

} e;~ '

e" 12 '
tJ.124-
D.2.14
0.+12
O.I Og
O:z..7S
0.072
O. lOlO

D.OS'+
O./~5'

0.043

I
, e" Z4- " O. Z'5/ O. leq 0.1 ~/
La = 30' Wil.
e: 3'1,"
0.754-
(:J,q$4
03n
~.4/"7 0. 31/ tJ.2~3 0.1'il7
e "4~ ' /.OZ+ O.S'/z 0,341 o.z~' f), Z~5:'

e=l7. • 0,3q~ 0.2.00 O./:IZ 0.1 (){) D.OVO

e::::. '2.40 1
0.'1'1 'i 0.4'l'1 0.333 iJ24'l 0.2.00
I
'

WID
e ·.34 ,. J ./Q7 o.S-qq ~ . 3'1q o.ZQq a. 23'1
e. -= 4i " 1.217 0. 1.4~ O.HZ 0.32.4- O.ZS~

t
 ...
I TABLE ~3 - FLEl(IBII...IT'f DulS T"D BA'E. E:. Pt..A1"E. BENDING.. .

J<.,;. .-')
t COLUM>.I Ec<:-f: o.>n,<n
s.:ce:
BA'5(;. Pt..AT"E FI...cXI811. /Ttt

t.,.=-I.O " t,:.I.ZS· 1:p :. I.Q>" 1;=1.75"

(10-<'

,
t·2.() ' t , :2oS' '' t~ =3.0"

I e ·i 2. • 1. ?S1 O/isz OSSI 0.3+7 tJ.2JZ o.m IU)/,'f

1 Wl4
e.,2.'!-" 1.%7 UOZ ().~O 0.31.> ~.z'!-~ O. /2.!; 0.072

I e:Y.,' I.qq 0 /.01'1 O.StlO 0.37/ 0 . 24'1 0.127 0 .074-

• .
I e:H " Z .Ot)? 1.02.7 0.5'5 0.174 0.2.>1 O.IZQ 0.074-

o.•s,
J e:lz "

e:z+"
2.ZH

2 .30Z.
/.13i

1.17'1 [J.bS 2.
0.41S"

0.4-10
O. 2.7'i

0.29fl
0./42

0./4-7
O. o~z.

O.Og!;'
I Wll
e: 31. ' 1./42.
2.32' 0." 'I 0 a.H!; 0.2'11 0 .14'1 O. O~~

~ e.+~ ' 2.3+2. /.144 0.''14 0.H7 tJ.HI O. /!;o O.Og7

I
, WID
e: IZ "

e:2.+"
Z.7'Tz.

2..VOJ
1.4a4

1.435'
O. r; 1'1.

a.Btl
OS/2

0.~Z3
0.343

0.350
0./75

0.17'1
0.102.

O.IOt

I e:3,,' 2 .22.! 1.#5 O.nb O.~2.7 0.35'3 a./i I 0 .105'

1 e:~' Z.H3 I.¥/ O. ~40 0.5'2. 'I 0 .35'+ 0 .1 9 I 0.105'

I NOtE: TIl ls rAe-I.E

0." 4·
A'iOS UMe5 771= ;::Ct,.LLlWING.. VA LUES J

I b =2.4'
Ep= 2." 000 I" ';
f5 =/. 0
J ). = 5:0

I
t
..
I ~
..:
J>
&3

t IHE.
INt>USTRI AL
F~Al-1e
au J(..DIN<S,
SHOIAJN ~cP~ESENl'S
ilJlrll A ~~AN~.
,4 8A'f ()F AN

I , .
1
2.4" g I

2' I
12 ~

-- -- ----- ---
I j I I I .....
~

--,,;.' I

,,
.wI< I
I 1.od'
I
I

• 1+
(
1
I
I
I I
I
I
1
I
I

J I
I
I
I
I
I

/ I
I ~ ~
77'. po
" ',"

~ 40'

I
, P/?EL/P.HJAi.'1
{)~UR. .itT POIIJn
ANAL'ISIS
4-Pt
-
~/(OM
ASSUME
POINT"

,.7."1,
PdINT"S
B AN l>
OF ~aNnAFLI!.)«)~e
8# J::I!OM ~.

I t L L

1 ,...1 2ll'
·L
, 24)<.

1'1:: ISl'"
I.t 1\1,

..
27.Z
k
1.7.2"
\.l~\

t\ -;. 573 t<'

I 4O·t··~ '"(\ -z.DI

2'
-+'
J
I
t
--

.. ~ .-
0>

I RESULrs IN -rilE. PtJLLOf.)J/NG, FOU.ES AND MOMENTS.

t ~= 2.7.ll<

I
1
I
•
I
J
I
.. M ~5731<1 ASSI)fo1C Ju/4- :. rn'" J.7
I
P.H :. Po +- rn M" '" 2.2&. +- 1.7 {n3)
1 ~ :. 1200/(

I
1 P~OM tOLU/o1N fABLES

J , . = S/32.2. 17....X = 313;'" ~

I ~I!Q 0

J
I
t
,------ - --

.. ~ ;T>
s:.
I ~WMN BASeS - Af..8'''''~M. IL '1 C)f~SE:
/) =8' d I~"~ A"

t B= 8'
.K.s" ZOO %. s
&

B~ c ()'/I~
Ill:: T

C, :: Z'~Of)u,;
b", 2+'
&'\ "" tU i~

I tp= 1.5;'

1 FeofV1 7A&L.E t./ -

FRiJM IA8L.E. tz
IQ,::: tJ.7tJ 7 x ItJ-' (k.,,,) -/
rs "" tJ.232 x/o-, (A,.r'
I FROM TABLE C3 - ~:::. O.sva x 10-1. (U~) - '

• 'l'l?mtL= I. ~/'I x 10-' {Ict'.)- I

I
J
I [)cleRMI tVt: Dls1"'1!.18IJ77tJN ~ACr(},( RJIe. ~LU/o1N BA~E.:

.. I<C#L.. ;:: 4/Z'IO()OX71'10)

2+{IZ)
=- 2 "'S': 'f
) ) 72. It. ....
.

I
,
I
1
I
I ANALI.fS/S
RE!:SI)Ln.
B'f
SIfOWN
MM1~r
ON
/J lsrR IBurN'"
T7fE!: FoI..L ow 1tJ<$.
qJVi=~
SHEEr
rHE

II Fo~ ~Hc;

Rcsl~A/NElJ
PINNEE.J)
8Ase:.
BAse: AND /JtlE: PIt~rl.4LL'f

II
It
.I ;:; *t.
I
~,

,~

t 11/'

I
--
I
•
I
J PINNEJ:> BASE.S

I
~
/DDI<I
I
1
I
1
I 4~ It l 114/tJ

•
I ?AK.il ALI.. 'f ;:;/xeD BASeS

J
I
t
~
a>
.....
.-
r:T>
0'1

I ;::INAL

t
I IOO~1 '5121<.1

",.((1... ' 'ZCOJ f~~

".
1
22"3 )<.
I 5: =- o'lZ x 12.. .. 323;"'~
t,1.l"
0'/2>: (Z. _ ;2 7'f
• ~\.I 2.2 S~·1/.1 -:: 22
",1

I -;;., U)3tJx lIt. I-dr b.!~rn

5~2jUrr+"
J ~.11<.

I
1--
I - 2.4.7 I<

11 t:230.+It..
,,+It.,

II 8#::. 2.30.4 +- 1.7(5"'IZ ) P.:Fi = ;J.26.3 1- /.7{5IZ)

1 P..U::' 12.37 I< Peff = 1097 t.

h .. r,=2.D fDr 1< =-2.0

J /,-~ WI4-X 5"~O ~,.. ~'U,.,,\ r,. a /).} 14 x. 45'5" ~ r ~ (f),...."
I
Re. vIS c. I<
J G ::: z,gq£; 972 - 4-.4~
I a ~~SJ~zg

t
 ..,.
.. r'
~

-..J

I G,.,.. 7/11tO
41J10
= /.4t.

t ~..,., E':':f!f.c.n vE. }..EN6n1 P"WI c!=F'lEt:nvEE. t.6N6'H

Na~c~eA6H u:y 5lbESlJJir'1 ~()Nl06R..APH iAf-:::IDESWALf
I
,
I
•
I
J
I :. BIf fA /cIN G. At..c() urJr of- PM,77M.. 12 E.Sr"A-INr Itr

.. 11+E:
BE.~N
CiJWMN 8.A-~EE~)

RE./tL..1 ceO
.4
OF :
5AIIING.S J+A~ ItLRCAlJ'f

I 8 Ibs./ft of B&+f.1

¢
1 • 13D Ibs. Iff dl' 6WIo1N
I
1 No1"E.: 8Ero~e tHIS D~I ~fJ ~A-N b Eo /tu.E.PT1:: f)

J I*~
V5/rJ6.
AD~UAC~
17rE.. IrJs~
o~ me: M&"",u.t.$
INT1::r<Pd..T10N
~MULD
EE4 ult170/VS.
VE.R. /,:/lE.{J

I
.I
I
t
 \\
- \
DATE:

-
\
\.~ ~~J~
Z. , <:~ ~ )""""",..

(D

A IERICA I TIT TEor TEELCO STRUCTION , I

The Wrigley Building 400 North Michigan Ayenue / Chlcago, illinois 60611-4185
312'670-2400