The results show that as the shear load increases but remains small, the inflection point moves

toward the bolt line until it reaches a relatively constant value. Once the beam web begins to
yield, the inflection point moves back toward the support. This occurs because of the decrease
in capacity of the beam, therefore redistributing the forces to the supporting column.

Furthermore, the results showed that in general, having more bolts in a single row leads to higher
eccentricities and therefore higher moment. However, it also means higher capacity. In the case
of two vertical rows of bolts, larger rotations are reached. They also showed that the plate
thickness had minimal effect on the bolt eccentricity (distance between the inflection point and
the centre of the bolt group). The connection capacity decreases approximately linearly with an
increase in a distance. This decrease is due to large rotations and deformation of the shear tab.
It was found that providing lateral restraint at the connection location was as effective as
providing lateral restraint along the entire beam length. Finally, increasing the web slenderness
of the column resulted in increasing the eccentricity of the bolt group and consequently reducing
the connection shear capacity. This was particularly noticed at slenderness ratios above 30 (h/w
> 30). Overall, Abou-zidan and Liu (2015) concluded that the AISC design method (2011) provides
better accuracy in predicting the strength of connections with a higher number of bolts in a single
row. Therefore, they suggest a modification to the eccentricity of connections with fewer than 6
bolts in a single row.

Suleiman et al. (2017) performed FEM analysis using Abaqus 2010 software on extended beam-
to-column flange connections to examine their failure modes. In contrast to the modelling
approach used by previous researchers, Suleiman et al. applied the bolt pretension using a
temperature change on the bolt shank. Various monitoring techniques were used to observe the
behaviour of the connection to determine the controlling failure mode. These included
monitoring stresses in the bolt shank to detect bolt shear failure, principle stresses around bolt
lines to detect net shear and bending interaction, stresses around bolt holes to detect bolt
bearing and finally angle of twist of the shear plate.

30
 Current Design Procedures

In this section, a presentation is provided of the current design procedures for shear tab
connections in Canada and USA.

2.5.1 CISC Handbook of Steel Construction 11th Edition (2015)

The Canadian Institute of Steel Construction (CISC, 2015) contains limited information on the
design of shear tab connections. The information is based on research by Astaneh et al. (1989)
and assembled into tabular form. The design procedure addresses only conventional shear tab
connections; these include shear tabs with 2-7 bolts in a single vertical row. The procedure
excludes any configuration with multiple vertical rows of bolts. There are also dimensional
limitations for the bolts and bolt holes, as well as specified steel and electrode grades. Essentially,
the CISC provides a table giving plate thickness and weld size required to achieve a given factored
load resistance based on the number of bolts and whether the support is flexible or rigid.
Therefore, many questions remain unanswered for designing shear tabs according to Canadian
standards. Consequently, Canadian engineers tend to look to the American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC, 2017) for further guidance.

2.5.2 AISC Steel Construction Manual 15th Edition (2017)

The American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) provides a more detailed design procedure
as compared to the CISC. It differentiates between conventional and extended shear tab
connections, each with a unique design method. The conventional configuration resembles that
in the CISC’s Handbook of Steel Construction and is described as having:

 Single vertical row of bolts (2-12 bolts),

 Distance a must be less than or equal to 3 ½” (a: horizontal distance from the weld line
to the bolt line closest to the support) (Figure 2.5),

31
  Standard holes or short-slotted holes transverse to the direction of the supported
member reaction are permitted,

 Vertical edge distance must satisfy AISC Specification 360-16 (2016) Table J3.4
requirements. Horizontal edge distance should be greater than or equal to 2d for both
the plate and the beam web, where d is the bolt diameter,

 Either the plate thickness or the beam thickness must satisfy the maximum requirement
given in Table 10-9 (AISC, 2017). This requirement follows from previous editions of the
AISC. The thickness is limited to one-half the diameter of the bolts + 1/16” (Muir and
Thornton, 2011). This allows bolt plowing to occur (bolts can cause elongation of the bolt
holes due to local buckling of the beam web or plate).

Figure 2.5: Conventional Shear Tab Configuration (AISC 15th, 2017)

The design checks for the conventional configuration are listed below:

1. Bolt shear is checked in accordance with AISC Specification 360-16 (2016) Section J3.6
assuming the eccentricity, e, shown in Table 10-9 (AISC, 2017). The bolt shear capacity is
computed based on the reaction force, R, and the corresponding bending moment, M =
R e (AISC, 2017). (e: horizontal distance from the weld line to the centroid of the bolt
group).
2. Plate bearing and tearout are checked in accordance with AISC Specification 360-16
(2016) Section J3.10 assuming the reaction is applied concentrically.

32
 3. Plate buckling will not control for the conventional configuration. The reason is the small
distance between the bolts and welds therefore leaving only a minor area for plate
yielding (Muir and Thornton, 2011).

If the dimensional limitations of the conventional configuration are not satisfied, then the shear
tab is considered an extended shear tab (Figure 2.6). Listed here are the dimensional limitations
for extended shear tabs:

 Number of bolts n is not limited,

 Distance a is not limited,

 The use of holes must satisfy AISC Specification 360-16 (2016) Section J3.2 requirements,

 Horizontal and vertical edge distances must satisfy AISC Specification 360-16 (2016) Table
J3.4 requirements.

a) b)

Figure 2.6: Extended Shear Tab Configurations a) Flexible Support b) Rigid Support (AISC, 2017)

33
The design procedure for single-plate extended shear tabs was developed by Muir and Hewitt
(2009). Their suggested equations were based on past research. It was noted that the moment
distribution throughout the connection was not well understood. Therefore, Muir and Hewitt
developed an equation for the maximum shear plate thickness. The purpose of this equation is
to limit the plate strength, to guarantee it acts as a fuse since it is the most ductile element in the
connection (2009). Furthermore, the limit ensures forces in the connection will redistribute,
allowing the connection to have enough rotational ductility. In other words, the internal and
external forces are in equilibrium while the external forces are below the critical load causing
failure. This confirms that the limit states are satisfied, therefore enough rotational ductility is
provided to redistribute the force (Muir and Hewitt, 2009).

Extended configuration shear tab connections follow six design checks. The design checks apply
to unstiffened shear tab connections. Due to a lack of any other methodology, practicing
engineers use these guidelines for stiffened connections as well. Some information was provided
in the literature by Fortney and Thornton (2016) on the use of stabilizer plates (which create a
stiffened connection), however these recommendations have yet to be validated through
experimental or numerical studies. The design checks are listed below and Figure 2.7 illustrates
the possible failure modes.

1. Bolt group must satisfy bolt shear, bearing and tearout with the eccentricity, e, defined
as the distance from the support to the centroid of the bolt group or alternative
eccentricities when justified.

2. Maximum shear plate thickness such that the plate moment strength does not exceed
the moment strength of the bolt group in shear. This limit is placed to ensure that plowing
of the bolts occurs rather than bolt shear failure since a ductile failure mode is desirable
over a more brittle failure mode.

3. The plate is checked for the limit states of shear yielding, shear rupture, block shear
rupture and flexural rupture. The beam web is checked against the same limit states, as
applicable.

34