Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures

ISSN: 1537-6494 (Print) 1537-6532 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/umcm20

Simplification of least-work solution to an

empirical method for prediction of shear lag stress
in steel box moment connections with internal
diaphragms

Piseth Doung & Eiichi Sasaki

To cite this article: Piseth Doung & Eiichi Sasaki (2020): Simplification of least-work
solution to an empirical method for prediction of shear lag stress in steel box moment
connections with internal diaphragms, Mechanics of Advanced Materials and Structures, DOI:
10.1080/15376494.2019.1710004

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2019.1710004

Published online: 07 Jan 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=umcm20
MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
https://doi.org/10.1080/15376494.2019.1710004

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Simplification of least-work solution to an empirical method for prediction

of shear lag stress in steel box moment connections with internal diaphragms
Piseth Doung and Eiichi Sasaki
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

In this paper, a method called “least-work solution” was empirically simplified to evaluate shear Received 11 October 2019
lag stress in the steel box moment connections with internal diaphragms in order to serve for the Accepted 25 December 2019
preliminary design. This approach considered the effects of column flange flexibility and depth of
KEYWORDS
the beam web, and their relations on the stress distribution. The stress equations were manually
Box moment connections;
obtained with a complicated form. Therefore, a simplified method was proposed to facilitate the column flange flexibility;
calculation procedure. The results showed that least-work solution could be simplified to provide empirical method; finite
valid stress distribution and can thus be authenticated by FEM and existing test. element method; internal
diaphragms; least-work
solution; shear lag

1. Introduction Least-work solution is one of the potential and simplest

Shear lag problem regularly occurs in thin-walled structures
under bending. For a rectangular box member the phenom-
enon exhibits the non-uniform stress distribution across the
section, which the maximum stress concentrates at the cor-
ner of section and the lowest stress resides at the mid-width
of the flange or web of the member [1–4]. The maximum
stress may enable yielding at the corner of the section while
the mid-width region is not ready. This issue is sensitive for
the connection when welding is utilized. Under fatigue load-
ing, the weld region might encounter cracking or failure
[5, 6]. To avoid such this concern, design of the connection
requires accurate stress evaluation. The steel box moment
connections are observed widely in steel bridge frame piers
in Japan. The Japan Road Association [7] provides excep-
tional design approach for the connection concerning with
the peak stress at the corner edges of the beam or the
column. The connection’s components, such as beam, col-
umn, and weld are checked to satisfy the peak stress. The
peak stress can be simplified by a combination of the nom-
inal stress by beam theory and additional stress due to shear
lag, and can be expressed as:
ry
rn þ rs 
c
where rn and rs are the nominal beam stress and additional
stress due to shear lag, respectively. rY denotes the yield
stress and c is the stress reduction factor. The additional
stress due to shear lag (rs) can be calculated using an empir-
ical shear lag parameter (g).
methods. Alternatively, it can predict stress due to shear lag
in rectangular box beams including box girder bridges, and
tube and wall [1–3, 8–15]. The method accompanies with
minimizing the potential energy of the system utilizing the
presumed longitudinal displacement functions of the beam
flange and web. Initially, numerous researches have used the
approach to evaluate shear lag stress in box beam and girder
bridge by assuming that the non-uniform stress occurred
only in the flange of the box member while the stress in the
web was linearly distributed. A few studies had pointed out
the effect of consideration of non-uniform stress in the web
of the box member [10, 16–18]. It showed that the peak
stress increased significantly as the depth of the web
increased. The warping deformation of the web was also
considered by Choi for the investigation of box beam using
higher-order beam theory [19]. However, there is no manual
prediction method given. For a steel box moment connec-
tion with internal diaphragms, the rigidity of the connection
allows engineers to consider that the beam system behaves
similarly to a fixedly-supported beam. This concept had
been adopted by Hwang et al. [20] for the evaluation of the
peak stress in box knee connections. Hwang et al. used the
stress results predicted using least-work solution of a canti-
(1) lever beam and simplified the peak stress into a shear lag
parameter. The shear lag parameter method is an empirical
method which was originally given by Okumura and
Ishizawa [21] for the application of box knee connections.
Nonetheless, the cantilever beam concept does not represent
the reality of a box moment connection with internal dia-
phragms and leads to misinterpretation of local behavior

CONTACT Piseth Doung doung.p.aa@m.titech.ac.jp Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in the article can be found online at www.tandfonline.com/umcm.
ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
2 P. DOUNG AND E. SASAKI

energy of the spring support. The total potential energy of

the system can be generally written as:
ð ð
1
UTOT ¼ Mw00 dx þ 2tw ðEe2w þ Gc2w Þdxdz
2
ð
1 1
þ 2tf ðEe2f þ Gc2f Þdxdy þ Kd2 (2)
2 2
where M is the bending moment. E and G denote Young’s
and shear modulus, respectively. ew and cw, and ef and cf
represent the axial and shear strain of web and flange,
respectively. tw and tf denote the thickness of the beam web
and flange, respectively. K and d denote the stiffness and
displacement of the column flange and diaphragm. x, y, and
z represent the coordinate system.
Figure 1. Shear lag problem in steel box moment connection with
The axial and shear strains of the beam web and flange
internal diaphragms. can be calculated using the presumed longitudinal displace-
ment of the beam flange and web (as seen in Figure 1), and
that may affect the shear lag at the joint. The local effect of are expressed as:
the column flange was revealed by Doung and Sasaki [16].
The study admitted that more flexible column flange @Uðx, yÞ @Uðx, yÞ
ef ¼ , cf ¼ for flange (3)
(included the internal diaphragm) engaged with the growing @x @y
peak stress. This disclosure was because the column flange is
able to generate a small displacement to the system and @Uðx, zÞ @Uðx, zÞ
ew ¼ , cw ¼ for web (4)
affected the calculation procedure of the stress due to @x @z
shear lag. By substituting Eqs. (3)–(4) into Eq. (2), the total potential
The study focused on the internal diaphragm box T-con- energy of the system becomes,
nections with the beam subjected to a point and uniformly ð ð ð
1 i
UTOT ¼ Mw00 dx þ EIw00 dx þ E Is u0 1 w00 dx
2
distributed loads. The investigation used a theoretical
approach called “least-work solution” in which the longitu- 2 iþ1
ð
2
dinal displacements of the beam flange and web were pre- þ E Iw u0 2 w00 dx
sumed to formulate the stress distribution equation. The 5h
ð !
evaluation process considered particularly the effects of i2 02 4 02
column flange flexibility, depth of the beam web, and their þ E Is u 1 þ Iw u 2 dx
ði þ 1Þð2i þ 1Þ 35h2
relations on the stress distribution. The stress distribution ð !
equations were manually obtained with a very complicated i2 Is 2 2
þ G u þ Aw u22 dx
form. In order to avoid solving the complicated mathemat- 2ð2i  1Þ b2 1 5h2
ical problems given by least-work solution, this study aims ð
1 1
GAw w0 dx þ Kd2
2
to provide a more simplified and empirical method for pre- þ
2 2
dicting shear lag stress to serve for the preliminary design.
(5)
The theoretical investigation was assessed to provide manual
stress equations, and thereafter, a more simplified and where Is ¼ 4btfh2 and Iw ¼ (4/3)twh3. b is the haft width of
empirical method was developed, discussed, and compared the beam flange. h and Aw denotes the height and sectional
with the numerical and existing test results in order to valid- area of the beam web, accordingly. By minimizing the total
ate the accuracy of the stress equations. potential energy, the equilibrium equations are obtained as
follows.
 
2. Least-work solution method for shear lag 00 i 0 2 0
M þ EIw þ E Is u 1 þ Iw u 2 ¼ 0 (6a)
stress prediction iþ1 5h
!
2.1. Stress evaluation i 000 2i2 00 i2 GIs
EIs w þ u 1  u1 ¼ 0
iþ1 ði þ 1Þð2i þ 1Þ ð2i  1Þ b2
The beam, column flange, and internal diaphragm were con-
sidered as the active components. The walls of the box col- (6b)
umn were assumed rigid bodies. Due to this assumption, the  
2 000 8 00 4
box moment connection can be modeled as a cantilever EIw w þ u 2  GAw u2 ¼ 0 (6c)
5h 35h2 5h2
beam with fixedly supported webs and axial spring support
for flanges. Hence, the total potential energy of a box The third term in Eq. (6a) represents the additional moment
moment connection with internal diaphragm maintains the due to shear lag. By substituting Eqs. (6 b)–(6c) into Eq.
strain energy of the beam, energy due to load systems, and (6a), the differential equations are obtained as:
 MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 3

Table 1. Beam section properties.

Series Section db/bb Iw (mm4) Is (mm4) I (mm4) Lb (mm) rb (MPa)
200 B200  200  6 1.00 7301384 21904152 29205536 1600 100
B200  300  6 1.50 25412184 50305752 75717936 1600 100
B200  400  6 2.00 61162984 90347352 151510336 1600 100
300 B300  300  8 1.00 33196117 99588352 132784469 1600 100
B300  400  8 1.33 80315051 179479552 259794603 1600 100
B300  600  8 2.00 276632917 409341952 685974869 1600 100
400 B400  300  16 0.75 61083477 247775232 308858709 2000 100
B400  400  16 1.00 150994944 452984832 603979776 2000 100
B400  600  16 1.50 531137877 1047724032 1578861909 2000 100

Table 2. Shear lag stress in cantilever box beam measured at support.

Point load Uniformly distributed load
Series Section P (N) u’ 1 u’ 2 rs (MPa) q (N/mm) u’ 1 u’ 2 rs (MPa)
200 B200  200  6 18253 0.0463 0.1485 8.83 22.817 0.0955 0.2809 17.68
B200  300  6 31549 0.0418 0.137 10.68 39.436 0.0827 0.2632 20.91
B200  400  6 47347 0.0331 0.1487 11.47 59.184 0.0653 0.2842 22.32
300 B300  300  8 55327 0.0458 0.2259 13.21 41.011 0.0966 0.4153 26.57
B300  400  8 81186 0.0453 0.2044 15.55 69.159 0.0898 0.3853 30.32
B300  600  8 142911 0.0332 0.2242 17.26 178.639 0.0649 0.4184 33.08
400 B400  300  16 102953 0.0713 0.1483 16.61 102.95 0.1387 0.2893 32.33
B400  400  16 150995 0.038 0.2278 14.21 150.99 0.079 0.4197 28.40
B400  600  16 263144 0.0333 0.2146 16.95 263.14 0.0654 0.4033 32.78

u00 1  k21 u1  p21 u2 ¼ u01 (7a) where rb is the bending stress calculated using the beam
theory (rb ¼ Mh/I).
u00 2  k22 u2  p22 u1 ¼ u02 (7b)
where k1, p1, u01, k2, p2, and u02 are the parameters represented
2.2. Application for cantilever beams
the geometry, material and load properties. To solve the sys-
tem of two second order differential equations above, we have In this study, a cantilever beam subjected to a point and
to rewrite this system as a system of four first order differential uniformly distributed loads was considered for the investiga-
equations by letting, u0 1 ¼ u3 and u0 2 ¼ u4 : Hence, we tion. The application aimed to predict the shear lag stress of
obtained the system of four first differential equations as: the rectangular box beam with the web depth-to-flange
u0 1  u3 ¼ 0 (8a) width ratio varied. Three series 200, 300, and 400 contained
the section properties as summarized in Table 1 below. All
0
u 2  u4 ¼ 0 (8b) series were subjected to a load which was equivalent to a
stress of 100 MPa at the support. By using the procedure in
u0 3  k21 u1  p21 u2 ¼ u01 (8c) Eqs. (9)–(11), the shear lag stress results are determined and
u0 4  k22 u2  p22 u1 ¼ u02 (8d) are shown in Table 2 below. As can be seen, additional
stress due to shear lag increased significantly in accordance
Eqs. (8a)–(8d) can also be written in forms of a matrix with the greater web depth for both the beam under a point
method as follows. and uniformly distributed loads. Moreover, it was observed
0 10 1 0 1 0 0 1
0 0 1 0 u1 0 u1 that with the same applied bending stress (100 MPa), the
B 0 0 0 1 CB u2 C B 0 C B u0 2 C cantilever beam under uniformly distributed load produced
B 2 CB C B C B C
@ k p2 0 0 A@ u3 A þ @ u01 A ¼ @ u0 3 A (9) twice shear lag stress greater than the cantilever beam under
1 1
p22 k22 0 0 u4 u02 u0 4 a point load.

The stress distribution across the beam flange and web cor-
responding to the additional bending moments due to shear 2.3. Simplification of stress distribution
lag can be summarized as:
" Calculations of shear lag stress following to Eqs. (10)–(11)
   #
yi i z z3 2 requires solving a complicated mathematical problem with
0
rs ¼ Eh 1  i  Is u 1 þ   Iw u0 2 multiple steps before reaching the final solution. The
b iþ1 h h3 5h
procedure is also time consuming. A simplified method
(10) allows us to modify the stress given by assuming that shear
The total peak stress at the corner of the beam section lag occurs only in the flange alone to represent the shear lag
(included bending stress) can be calculated by giving y ¼ b in both web and flange of the beam. The modification factor
and z ¼ h, and expressed as: (bs) represents the effect of shear lag in the web obtained by
  a compatible solution in a parametric study between the
i 2
rt ¼ rb 6Eh Is u0 1 þ Iw u0 2 (11) peak stresses in Eqs. (11) and (12) in relations with the ratio
iþ1 5h d/2b (b ¼ haft width of the beam flange).
4 P. DOUNG AND E. SASAKI

Figure 2. Shear lag modification factor bs.

i Is P
rt ¼ rb þ bs Eh An (12)
iþ1I k
2iþ1 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Figure 3. Column flange flexibility coefficient (af).
ðiþ1Þð2iþ1Þ G
where, An ¼ 2i n ¼ n
EI ,
1
1ð2iþ2Þ I
2iþ1 Is , and k ¼ 1
b 2ð2i1Þ E n:

The extensive study was carried out for the cantilever beam
under uniformly distributed load. The concept of simplifica-
tion is to modify the stress receiving from the assumption
that shear lag occurs in the flange alone. For a cantilever
beam under a uniformly distributed load, the simplified
peak stress can be expressed as:
 
i Is ql 1
rt ¼ rb þ bs Eh An 1 
iþ1I k kl
where q is the uniformly distributed load. l is the beam
length. The calibration between Eq. (11) and (13) corre-
sponding to the ratio d/2b provided a construction of modi-
fication factor (bs), as shown in Figure 2 below. As seen
earlier, there were no difference between the modification
factor bs for the cantilever beam under a point and uni-
formly distributed load, which meant that it did not depend
on load types, and the modification factor for the cantilever
beam with a point load is usable.
 
d
bs ¼ 1:3463 þ 0:0816 (14)
2b
3. Box moment connections with
internal diaphragms
A box moment connection (T- or X-connection) with
internal diaphragms deals with the shear lag problem that
enables cracking or failure at the joint when welding is uti-
lized. Prediction of shear lag stress of such a connection
accounted for local effect of column flange flexibility includ-
ing the diaphragm, as firstly revealed by Doung and Sasaki
[16]. It was observed that when the flexibility was very low,
the peak stress increased significantly. However, the flexible
column flange and diaphragm did not affect the stress
growth when the web depth of the beam was greater. This
investigation also included the relations between column
flange flexibility (included internal diaphragm) and web
depth of the beam on the peak stress due to shear lag and
aimed to provide suggestions for the diaphragm selection.
3.1. Shear lag stress due to column flange flexibility
The non-uniform forces transferred from the beam flanges
apply to the column flange and cause an initial displacement
that can lead to an increase in peak stress and decrease in
mid-width stress in the beam flange. In order to calculate
the stress due to shear lag, the displacement of the column
flange must be received ahead based on the active compo-
(13) nents, such as the column flange and diaphragm. The dis-
placement of the column flange can be determined using the
flexibility coefficient (af) corresponding to the column
width-to-thickness ratio, as shown in Figure 3. Then, the
displacement of the column flange is expressed as:
q0 b0 3
wf ¼ af (15)
D
where b0 denotes the width of the column flange and D ¼
Etc3/12(1  2). For a box moment connection with internal
diaphragm, the total displacement of the beam flange at the
joint can be calculated using the axial stiffness superposition
between the two active components and expressed as:
Fb Mb
d¼ ¼ (16)
K db ðKc þ Kd Þ
where bc expresses the column flange width. Mb represents
the bending moment of the beam at the connection. db
denotes the average depth of the beam. Kc and Kd denote
the axial stiffness of the column flange and diaphragm,
respectively. The stiffness of the diaphragm can also be
found in Doung and Sasaki [16, 22]. It could be noted that
the system represents a cantilever beam when d ¼ 0.
Using least-work solution with giving the system dis-
placement as an initial boundary condition, the simplified
stress distribution in the beam flange of the box moment
connection with internal diaphragms can be summarized
as follows.
For the connection with beam under a point load,
  
yi i Is P d:k
rtp ¼ rb  Ehbs 1  i  An þ (17)
b iþ1 I k h
For the connection with beam under uniformly distributed
load,

Figure 4. von Mises stress developed in internal diaphragm box moment connection with the beam depth 300 mm.
   
yi i Is ql 1 d:k
rtu ¼ rb  Ehbs 1 i An 1 
b iþ1I k kl
3.2. Finite element method
Finite element method (FEM) was carried out in order to
compare the stress distribution in the beam flange of the
box moment connection (T-connection) with internal dia-
phragms with the theoretically simplified formulation using
Abaqus [23]. To ensure the reliability of FEM results, com-
prehensive modeling must be carried out. The FEM consid-
ered a 3 D solid 8-node element (C3D8-R) incorporated
with the full model of the connections. The column was
restrained by pins at both ends. The steel material was char-
acterized as a multi-linear isotropic behavior with strain
hardening, as given by JSCE [24]. Young’s modulus of the
steel was assumed to be 205 GPa. A mesh size of one half
and one time of the element thickness was applied to the
thickness and the considerable portions of the connec-
tion’s components.
A rectangular box 300x300x8 mm was used for the col-
umn with the length of 2 m. The beam size was matched to
the column but the depth of the beam was varied as
300 mm and 450 mm. The beam (Lb ¼ 1.6 m) was subjected
to a point and uniformly distributed loads equivalent to a
bending stress of 100 MPa. The stress distribution was
recorded along the beam flange at the vicinity of the column
flange (at welding region).
The von Mise stresses in the internal diaphragm box con-
nections with 300 mm-beam depth are illustrated in
Figure 4. The stress distributions are also shown in Figures
5 and 6, respectively, and compared with the simplified
MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 5

equation. We observed that for all the internal diaphragm
þ
h box connections, the peak stresses given by FEM and man-
(18) ual equations provided well matching values. However,
stress distribution for the connection with the unequal web
depth-flange width was slightly different at the mid-width of
the beam flange. This situation admitted that the simplified
manual approach for the stress distribution is suitable for
the peak stress but has a slight difference at the mid-width
of the beam flange when the beam web depth is unequal to
the flange width. However, since the stress at the mid-width
of the beam flange is not necessary for design and check,
the manual approach is alternative to predict the peak stress
using either fourth or sixth order polynomial curve.
3.3. Relations between column flange flexibility and
web depth of beam on shear lag
The investigation observed that when the column flange
flexibility was very low, there was no significant effect by
the depth of the beam web. This status was exhibited by the
box connection without using diaphragms. The column
flange alone did not provide advantage in peak stress due to
the deep web of the beam. Moreover, the box connection
with very thin diaphragms may exhibit similar characteris-
tics. In this study, a numerical investigation has been con-
ducted to observe the relations between the column flange
flexibility (included internal diaphragm) and depth of the
beam web on the peak stress due to shear lag. Two sample
beam series (series 200 and 400) of the box X-connections
are assessed, with beam subjected to a point load that is
equivalent to a bending stress of 100 MPa at the connection.
The depth of the beam web varied from 0.75 b0 to 2 b0.
Similarly, the parametric study also considered the variation
of diaphragm flexibility by changing the thickness from 0.5tf
6 P. DOUNG AND E. SASAKI

Figure 5. Stress distribution in the beam flange for the internal diaphragm box moment connection with beam under a point load.

Figure 6. Stress distribution in the beam flange for the internal diaphragm box moment connection with beam under uniformly distributed load.

Figure 7. Normalized peak stress ratio for series 200.

to 2.5tf. The thicknesses of the beam and column for series and beam web depth-to-flange width ratio for series 200 and
200 and 400 are 6 mm and 16 mm, respectively. 400, respectively. As seen, the peak stress ratio decreased
The results showed in Figures 7 and 8 present the nor- according to the thicker diaphragm. At the same time, it
malized peak stress ratio in terms of diaphragm thickness was also observed that the peak stress increased when the
 MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 7

Figure 8. Normalized peak stress ratio for series 400.

web depth-to-flange width ratio of the beam was greater. 4.1. Connection with beam under a point load
However, when the diaphragm was thin, it was seemingly
The total peak stress due to shear lag is the combination
that the beam web depth did not affect much the peak
between the stresses derived by a cantilever beam and an
stress. From this study, it is suggested that when the dia-
initial displacement of the beam flange and can be seen in
phragm is thin (td  2/3tf), it is not required to modify the
Eq. (20).
peak stress by the modification factor bs.  
i Is P d:k
rs ¼ rs0 þ rsd ¼ Ehbs An þ (20)
iþ1I k h
4. Empirical stress evaluation
By substituting parameters Is, I, An, and k into Eq. (20), the
The empirically simplified method in this study focused on peak stress due to shear lag derived in by a cantilever beam
evaluating the simplified peak stresses given by Eqs. (17) can be simplified to
and (18) with an empirical chart associated with shear lag  
b0 P
parameter g. Okumura and Ishizawa initially introduced the rs0 ¼ bs g (21a)
d Aw 0
empirical method concerned with shear lag parameter, deal-
ing with the shear lag stress in rectangular box knee connec- rffiffiffiffi pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi!
E 4i2  1 S
tions. The method relates with the section properties of the g0 ¼ 9 rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

G iþ1
beam and the axial force in the column flange. The peak ð3 þ SÞ ð3 þ SÞ 3 þ 2ði þ 1ÞS
stress due to shear lag given by Okumura and Ishizawa is
expressed as: (21b)
Similarly, the peak stress due to shear lag in accordance
b 0 Fi with the initial displacement of the beam flange once, is
rs ¼ g (19) deduced as:
d Aw
E
rsd ¼ bs dg (22a)
where b0, d, and Aw are the width, depth, and total web area b0 d
of the beam, respectively. Fi is the total forces in the column rffiffiffiffi rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
G 2i þ 1 1
flange. g denotes the shear lag parameter, which propor- nd ¼ 6 :i rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

(22b)
E 2i  1
tioned with the ratio of flange-to-web area of the beam. The ð3 þ SÞ 3 þ 2ði þ 1ÞS
shear lag parameter g was further simplified to an empirical
chart. Further studies by Nakia et al. [25] and Hwang et al. where b0 represents the flange width of the beam. d and Aw
[20] were conducted in order to provide more precise pre- denote the depth and area of the beam web. S is the ratio of
diction of the peak stress due to shear lag in the box knee web-to-flange area of the beam (Aw/Af). i denotes the order
connections. They proposed the new empirical chart for the of exponent using in the presumed longitudinal displace-
shear lag parameter with redefining the connection model. ment of the beam flange. The shear lag parameters g0 and
For a box moment connection with internal diaphragms, gd for i ¼ 4 can be simplified to an empirical chart as shown
additional shear lag stress was also observed in relation to in Figures 9 and 10, respectively. As seen in Figure 9, the
the ratio of web-to-flange area of the beam. Herein, an shear lag parameter g0 increased to the peak at S ¼ 1.75, and
empirical method for shear lag parameter is proposed for then gradually decreased according to the great value of
both the connections with point and uniform loads. ratio of web-to-flange area of the beam. However, the shear
8 P. DOUNG AND E. SASAKI
Figure 9. Shear lag parameter g0 for internal diaphragm box moment connec-
tion with beam under a point load.
Figure 10. Shear lag parameter gd.
lag parameter gd in Figure 10 started with the highest value
and rapidly decreased when S  5. Nonetheless, the param-
eter gd steadily decreased when S > 5, as meant when the
area of the beam web is five times greater than the area of
the beam flange, the peak stress due to shear lag in accord-
ance with the initial displacement of the beam flange did
not change much. It could be noted that for a cantilever sys-
tem, the load P represents the shear force V, so that the
total peak stress can be calculated as:
"
   #
b0 V E formly distributed load is identical to that under a point
rs ¼ bs g þ d gd (23)
d Aw 0 b0
4.2. Connection with beam under uniformly
distributed load
The peak stress due to shear lag for the internal diaphragm
box moment connection with beam under uniformly distrib-
uted load can be further simplified using the same proced-
ure for a point load case. The total peak stress can be
calculated using Eq. (23). The shear lag parameter gd for a
point load can also be used for uniformly distributed load
case. However, it is required to calculate shear lag parameter
g0 as it depends on the length-to-haft flange width ratio of
the beam. The shear lag parameter g0 for the connection
with beam under uniformly distributed load is expressed as:
Figure 11. Shear lag parameter g0 for internal diaphragm box moment connec-
tion with beam under uniformly distributed load in terms of ratio S.
Figure 12. Shear lag parameter g0 for internal diaphragm box moment connec-
tion with beam under uniformly distributed load in terms of ratio L/b.
E 2i  1 S 1
g0 ¼ 9
G ði þ 1Þ2 ð3 þ SÞ2 ðL=bÞ
0 1
rffiffiffiffi sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 
@ði þ 1Þ: L : G: 2i þ 1 3þS
 1A
b E 2i  1 3 þ 2ði þ 1ÞS
(24)
The plot of g0 in Figure 11 showed that the parameter
depends on two geometric parameters such as the ratios of
web-to-flange area (S ¼ Aw/Af) and length-to-haft flange
width (L/b) of the beam. It was also observed that the shear
lag parameter g0 for the connection with beam under uni-
load when L/b ¼ 100. In accordance with the ratio L/b, the
parameter g0 in Figure 12 increased dramatically up to
L/b ¼ 10, and became stable when L/b > 10, for all values of S.
Using the manner from Figures 11 and 12, the simplified
chart was invented for the parameter g0 which involves with
the optimal parameters g1, g2, and g100 and can be seen in
Figures 13 and 14. The procedure requires, firstly, calculat-
ing the optimal parameters g1, g2, and g100 in Figure 13
with respect to the ratio S. After that, regarding to the ratio
L/b, the shear lag parameter g0 can be determined using the
empirical chart in Figure 14.
4.3. Results comparisons
The peak stress calculation was compared with the FEM and
the existing test results given by Tanabe [26] for the internal
 MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 9

diaphragm box moment connections with beam under a

Figure 13. Optimal shear lag parameter g for internal diaphragm box moment
connection with beam under uniformly distributed load in terms of ratio S.
point load. The FEM comparison was extended to a series
of connections with beam under a point and uniformly dis-
tributed loads. The FE models were divided into 4 series,
which each series consisted of 3 T-joint models, and the size
and thickness of the column and beam were changed. The
column length was set to be 2 m for series 200 and 300,
2.6 m for series 400, and 3.2 m for series 600. A point or
uniformly distributed load equivalent to a bending stress of
100 MPa was applied to the beam. The modeling and ana-
lysis methods were adopted from the existing FEM. The
comparison for the connection with beam under a point
and uniformly distributed load is summarized in Tables 3
and 4, respectively. The comparisons showed that the cur-
rent manual calculation provided close values of peak stress
compared with the existing test and FEM results. The max-
imum differences at about 8 to 12% were observed in the T-
joints with large section of the beam. However, these differ-
ences were not significant compared with the existing
Okumura method, which delivered very low peak stresses. It
is worth noting that the existing approach, which had been
used for decades for checking the peak stress in the knee
connections, turned out to be significantly different com-
pared with the test and FEM results.

Summary and conclusions

Figure 14. Simplified empirical chart for shear lag parameter g0 for internal dia-
phragm box moment connection with beam under uniformly distributed load. In this study, an extensively theoretical procedure of least-
work solution has been developed in order to provide

Table 3. Stress comparison for connections with beam under a point load.
Peak stress ratio, rma/rb
Series Model î0 îd rs Current FEM Test Diff. (%) Okumura Diff. (%)
200 B200  150  6 0.73 2.70 46.30 1.45 1.48 – 2.33 1.13 23.54
B200  200  6 0.80 2.34 53.83 1.55 1.64 – 5.52 1.12 31.56
B200  300  6 0.85 1.86 73.34 1.72 1.87 – 7.90 1.10 41.08
300 B300  200  8 0.70 2.85 44.93 1.45 1.55 – 6.45 1.14 26.38
B300  300  8 0.80 2.34 58.43 1.59 1.69 – 6.05 1.12 33.71
B300  450  8 0.85 1.87 76.81 1.77 1.87 – 5.23 1.10 41.00
400 B400  300  16 0.73 2.71 49.44 1.49 1.50 – 0.63 1.13 24.78
B400  400  16 0.80 2.34 60.45 1.60 1.62 – 1.16 1.12 31.09
B400  600  16 0.85 1.86 79.86 1.80 1.86 – 3.23 1.10 40.75
600 B600  400  20 0.70 2.86 48.46 1.48 1.64 – 9.56 1.14 30.68
B600  600  20 0.80 2.34 63.66 1.64 1.86 – 11.91 1.12 39.77
B600  800  20 0.84 2.00 77.11 1.77 2.00 – 11.60 1.11 44.77
Tanabe Test 2 0.80 2.34 131.70 2.07 – 2.10 1.37 1.45 31.01

Table 4. Stress comparison for connections with beam under uniformly distributed load.
Peak stress ratio, rmax/rb
Series Model î0 îd rs Current FEM Diff. (%) Okumura Diff. (%)
200 B200  150  6 0.73 2.70 52.34 1.52 1.57 3.13 1.18 25.05
B200  200  6 0.79 2.34 63.44 1.63 1.71 4.62 1.12 34.64
B200  300  6 0.85 1.86 82.88 1.83 1.92 4.95 1.07 44.52
300 B300  200  8 0.70 2.85 55.56 1.56 1.63 4.36 1.21 25.56
B300  300  8 0.79 2.34 72.14 1.72 1.76 2.32 1.12 36.43
B300  450  8 0.85 1.87 93.04 1.93 1.95 1.10 1.07 45.30
400 B400  300  16 0.73 2.71 61.36 1.61 1.59 1.29 1.18 26.11
B400  400  16 0.79 2.34 74.32 1.74 1.71 2.09 1.12 34.49
B400  600  16 0.85 1.86 96.55 1.97 1.96 0.37 1.07 45.53
600 B600  400  20 0.70 2.86 62.61 1.63 1.77 8.02 1.21 31.59
B600  600  20 0.79 2.34 81.30 1.81 1.99 8.72 1.12 43.64
B600  800  20 0.84 2.00 97.19 1.97 2.15 8.33 1.08 49.82
10 P. DOUNG AND E. SASAKI
a simplification for evaluating the shear lag stress in the
internal diaphragm box moment connections with beam
under a point and uniformly distributed loads. The compli-
cated mathematical problem given by least-work solution
was simplified to an empirical method, which allows us to
calculate the peak stress in accordance with the shear lag
parameters (î0, îd). The investigation described systematic
simplified procedure including factors that might affect the
stress distribution. The results were compared with
the existing test and FEM in order to provide the validity to
the developed method. The main findings in this study are
summarized below.
 The shear lag stress in the beam flange can be calculated using
least-work solution. To reduce calculation difficulty, the
stress was simplified by assuming that shear lag occurs only
in the flange alone. Then, the stress must be modified by a
factor bs which represents the shear lag in the beam web.
This simplification was acceptable for both the connections
with beam under a point and uniformly distributed loads.
 The relations between the column flange flexibility and
the ratio of web depth-to-flange width of the beam were
observed when the column flange flexibility was low
(thin diaphragm), the ratio of web depth-to-flange width
of the beam did not affect much the peak stress. It is
suggested that when the diaphragm is thin (td  2/3tf), it
is not required to modify the peak stress by the modifi-
cation factor bs.
 An empirically simplified method can be used to predict the
peak stress due to shear lag in accordance with the shear lag
parameters (î0, îd) described in the charts in Figures 9–14.
For the connections with beam under uniformly distributed
load, the ratio of length-to-haft flange width of the beam
must be considered. Structural designers may take advan-
tages from the empirical method by saving time for calcula-
tion and receiving accurate stress values.
This study is limited to the box moment connections with
internal diaphragms under in-plane bending, when the beam
is subjected to a point and uniformly distributed loads. In the
actual structures, the beam or column might be subjected to
various load types including distortion that can create the out-
plane bending. As the load type affected the empirically sim-
plified stress, further studies on the empirical method for
stress evaluation in the box moment connection with beam
under different load types are suggested. Moreover, investiga-
tion of the effects that can cause additional displacement of
the column flange, such as axial forces on the column and
beam is also suggested. In engineering analysis, the proposed
method can be developed for the purpose of design and check,
which the peak stress mainly depends on the column flange
flexibility and shear lag in the beam web, and load types and
geometric properties.
Funding
This work has been financially supported by Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA) under AUN/SEED  Net Program.
ORCID
Piseth Doung http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8833-7000
References
[1] L. Dezi, and L. Mentrasti, Nonuniform bending-stress distribu-
tion (shear lag), J. Struct. Eng., vol. 111, no. 12, pp. 2675–2690,
1985. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)20-9445(1985)111:12(2675).
[2] Q.Z. Luo, Q.S. Li, and J. Tang, Shear lag in box girder bridges,
J. Bridge Eng., vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 308–313, 2002. DOI: 10.1061/
(ASCE)20-0702(2002)7:5(308).
[3] E. Reissner, Least work solutions of shear lag problems, J.
Aeronaut. Sci., vol. 8, no. 7, pp. 284–291, 1941. DOI: 10.2514/8.
10712.
[4] G. Winter, Stress Distribution in and Equivalent Width of
Flanges of Wide, Thin-Walled Steel Beams, Cornell University,
New York, 1940.
[5] M. Fadden, and J. McCormick, Evaluation of HSS-to-HSS
moment connections for seismic applications, Structures
Congress, ASCE, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 2334–2345, 2013.
[6] C. Miki, and E. Sasaki, Fracture in steel bridge piers due to
earthquake, Int. J. Steel Struct., vol. 5, no. 4, pp. 133–140, 2005.
[7] JRA. Specifications for Highway Bridges, Part II: Steel Bridge
Design, Japan Road Association, Japan, 2002.
[8] S.T. Chang, and F.Z. Zheng, Negative shear lag in cantilever
box girder with constant depth, J. Struct. Eng., vol. 113, no. 1,
pp. 20–35, 1987. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)20-9445(1987)113:1(20).
[9] J. Chen, S.-L. Shen, Z.-Y. Yin, and S. Horpibulsuk, Closed-form
solution for shear lag with derived flange deformation function,
J. Construct. Steel Res., vol. 102, pp. 104–110, 2014. DOI: 10.
1016/j.jcsr.2014.07.003.
[10] K.-K. Lee, Y.-C. Loo, and H. Guan, Simple analysis of framed-tube
structures with multiple internal tubes, J. Struct. Eng., vol. 127, no.
4, pp. 450–460, 2001. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)20-9445(2001)127:4(450).
[11] Z. Lin, and J. Zhao, Least-work solutions of flange normal
stresses in thin-walled flexural members with high-order poly-
nomial, J. Eng. Struct., vol. 33, no. 10, pp. 2754–2761, 2011.
DOI: 10.1016/j.engstruct.2011.05.022.
[12] E. Reissner, Analysis of shear lag in box beams by the principle
of minimum potential energy, J. Quart. Appl. Mathemat., vol.
4, no. 3, pp. 268–278, 1946. DOI: 10.1090/qam/17176.
[13] Q.-X. Shi, and B. Wang, Simplified calculation of effective
flange width for shear walls with flange, J. Struct. Design Tall
Special Buildings, vol. 25, no. 12, pp. 558–577, 2016. DOI: 10.
1002/tal.1272.
[14] W.-T. Yan, B. Han, L. Zhu, Y.-Y. Jiao, and H.-B. Xie, A fiber
beam element model for elastic-plastic analysis of girders with
shear lag effects, Steel Composite Struct., vol. 32, no. 5, pp.
657–670, 2019.
[15] W.-B Zhou, L.-Z Jiang, Z.-J Liu, and X.-J Liu, Closed-form
solution to thin-walled box girders considering effects of shear
deformation and shear lag, J. Central South Univ., vol. 19, no.
9, pp. 2650–2655, 2012. DOI: 10.1007/s11771-012-20-8.
[16] P. Doung, and E. Sasaki, Local effect of column flange flexibility
on shear lag in steel box moment connections. 12th Regional
Conference in Civil Engineering. Langkawi, Malaysia, 2019.
[17] A. Kwan, Shear lag in shear/core walls, J. Struct. Eng., vol. 122, no. 9,
pp. 1097–1104, 1996. DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)20-9445(1996)122:9(1097).
[18] H.K. Takabatake, I. Takewaki, and A. Kishida, Structural
Properties of High-Rise Buildings, Simplified Dynamic Analysis
of High-Rise Buildings, Springer, Singapore, 2019.
[19] S. Choi, Unified Higher-Order Beam Analysis for Multiply-
Connected Thin-Walled Box Beams, Seoul National University,
Seoul, 2016.
[20] W.-S. Hwang, Y.-P. Kim, and Y.-M. Park, Evaluation of shear
lag parameters for beam-to-column connections in steel piers, J.
Struct. Eng. Mech., vol. 17, no. 5, pp. 691–706, 2004. DOI: 10.
12989/sem.2004.17.5.691.

[21] T. Okumura, and N. Ishizawa, The design of knee joints for
rigid steel frames with thin walled section, Trans. Japan Soc.
Civil Eng., vol. 1968, no. 153, pp. 1–18, 1968. DOI: 10.2208/
jscej1949.1968.153_1.
[22] P. Doung, and E. Sasaki, Load-deformation characteristics and
performance of internal diaphragm connections to box col-
umns, J. Thin-Walled Struct., vol. 143, pp. 106221, 2019. DOI:
10.1016/j.tws.2019.106221.
[23] Dassault-Systemes. Abaqus/CAE User’s Manual, Simullia,
Velizy-Villacoublay, France, 2017.
MECHANICS OF ADVANCED MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES 11
[24] JSCE. Standard specifications for steel and composite structures,
Japan Society of Civil Engineers, Japan, 2007.
[25] H. Nakai, T. Miki, and Y. Hashimoto, On limit state design
method considering shear lag phenomenon of corner parts of
steel rigid frames, Doboku Gakkai Ronbunshu (JSCE),
vol. 1992, no. 455, pp. 95–104, 1992. DOI: 10.2208/jscej.1992.
455_95.
[26] A. Tanabe, Fatigue retrofitting of steel bridge frame piers with
high seismic performance, Dissertation, Tokyo Institute of
Technology, Tokyo, 2005.