Professional Documents
Culture Documents
M..
Fig. 2. Initial and modified initial stiffness for M,^^ Fig. 3. Typical top- and seat-angle with double web-angle
calculations. connection.
d^ = d -\- - + k,
2 M 1 - Column Curve
2V -\- V t 2 - Connection Curve
d, -^ ^^ i„ -T Ll -r —
3 - Beam-Line Curve
4 - Column-f-Connection Curve
XKu + Ka) 2
Using the initial connection stiffness Z?^, and the ultimate MF
moment capacity M^ of the connection, the moment-
rotation M—6^ relationship can be adequately represented
by:'^
RkiO,
M = (3.3)
[1 + (e,/ej''V'
GA K <^a GA K Gg 1
oo
1 ^ p 1 0
oe
oo — F 20 0 30 1
50 0 - 3 F= 50 0 1000 - - 10 0 - 1000
100 -5 E- ' 0 0 50 0 - r 50 0
50 - - 50 30 0 — - 50 - 30 0
40 —
30 - -09 - 30 20 0 - - 40 - 20 0
20 - - 20
100 — - 30 - 100
-08 80 - - 80
1 0 ~ - 1 0 70 - - 70
60 — - 60
08 - - 08
50 - - 501
07 ~ - 07
1
06 - - 06 40 ~ - 20 - 40
- 0 7
05 - - 05
30 — - 30
0 4 - — 04
03 - - 03 20 - - 20
- 15
-06
02 - ~ 02 1 "
10 - - 10
0.1 - - 0 1
0 — ^05 L- 0 0 — - 10 - 01
i b l S>dt*swtiy not |KCvc(ili*d
(Brjced frjmc) (Unl)f;iced (rainel
Fig. 5. Alignment charts for the determination of the effective length factor K.
-n
(4.1) G that accounts for frame flexibility is similar to that pro-
vided for rigid frames.^ The model used for this purpose is
sum of column stiffnesses meeting at the joint
shown in Fig. 6 which illustrates an assumed deflected shape
sum of beam stiffnesses meeting at the joint at the bifurcation state of a subassemblage of a braced frame.
In practical terms of the AISC LRFD design format, the Semi-rigid connections are modeled as elastic springs
concept of effective column length is embedded in the ampli- attached to the ends of beam members. The column under
fication factors 5, and B2 (Eqs. 2.3 and 2.5) in which consideration is Column C2. The assumptions used for the
TT^EI model are:
P., is expressed by . To be able to implement this 1. All members are prismatic and behave elastically.
(KLf 2. Beam-to-column connections behave linearly with iden-
concept in the design analysis of flexible frames, and to tical stiffness parameters in each floor.
justify the adoption of the AISC format for such frames,
3. The axial force in beam members is negligible.
proper modifications have to be made to account for the
4. All columns in the frame buckle simultaneously.
reduced amount of restraint at column ends due to the pres-
5. At a joint, the restraining moment provided by the beam
ence of semi-rigid connections. This can be achieved by
is distributed among the columns in proportion to their
expressing the apparent effects through a modified represen-
stiffnesses.
tation of the relative stiffness factor G which, consequently,
6. At buckling, the rotations at the near and far end of
provides for an updated effective length factor K.
beams are equal in magnitude and opposite in direc-
Since the design format of the B^ and B2 method involves
tion (beams are bent in single curvature). Using the
standard form of the slope-deflection equations and the
modified form for relative joint translation or elastic
and restraints^ as applicable, the equilibrium equations
for the subassemblage can be written in the form:"^
Sii +
G:
(4.2)
Sii +
G^
where
EI
G' (4.3)
EI
UcxJ^
m)b
£7
(a„r)w = (4.4)
1 + 2-
mH'^)i 2 tan(7r/2iO
1
1 -
tan(7r/^
0
(4.5)
can be expressed by an alignment chart as used in the AISC
LRFD Specification (Fig. 5). Realizing that Eq. 4.6 repre-
sents a linear relationship, the same alignment chart can be
TT/K used for determining the effective length factor of an elasti-
Equation 4.5 is identical to that developed previously by cally restrained column by entering the values of G^ and
Julian and Lawrence'^ for rigid frames, except that G at G^.
each member end is now replaced by G'. The modified rela-
tive stiffness factor G' accounts for the presence of elastic 4.3 Modified Relative Stiffness Factor for
beam-to-column connections. A relationship G' and G can Sway Frames
now be established in the form Following a similar procedure, we proceed now to derive
G' = a.,G (4.6) the relationship governing the end restraint factors for sway
frames with semi-rigid connections. The model used for this
where purpose is shown in Fig. 7 which illustrates an assumed
deflected shape at the bifurcation state of subassemblage of
.I'f a flexible frame where lateral translation is not prohibited.
Again, the column under consideration is Column C2. The
Oinr = (4.7)
assumptions used for this model are the same as for the non-
sway case except for point 6 which is modified to the fol-
lowing: At buckling, the rotations at the near and far ends
a^t is the scaling factor by which the relative stiffness fac- of the beam are equal and in the same direction (i.e., the
tor G' for members in flexible frames with no lateral trans- beams are bent in double curvature).
lation is obtained from G. Similar to the case of nonsway frames described in Sec.
4.2, the state of bifurcation leads to the following governing
equation:
G'^G^i-K/Kf - 36 {TT/K)
(4.8)
6(G; + G's) tan(7r//0
where
G' =
m (4.9)
Oilr (4.11)
"EI
Sections 4.2 and 4.3 showed the applicability of the exist- EIV
ing alignment charts for determining the effective length fac- MB = - \ S:j(e^ - e,^) + SrXde - ^BU (5.2)
tor of columns in a linearized flexible frame analysis. This
was achieved by deriving the governing equations (Eqs. 4.5 MA , . MB
and 4.8) relating G^, G^ and K. This section employs a Substituting d^A = — and•rB
d,j, = . we get:
similar but much simpler approach that focuses on the beam
member only to show that the effects of elastic joint flexi-
bility can be taken into account by using a reduced beam M, = jh'A + side'] (5.3)
stiffness {EI')},. Since the modulus of elasticity £" is a con-
stant parameter for steel members, the actual change will
only involve the second moment of inertia of the beam ele-
MB =J\'2^A + sieB~\ (5.4)
S = (5.5)
^IcA^lcB + ^iii^kA + ^ICB) + '^/7 -4
^kA^kB^ij
Si (5.6)
^kA^kB + ^iii^kA + ^IB) + '^// -4
^kBi^kA^ii + '^;7 ~ ^ij)
Si (5.7)
RURkB + •S/iC^W + % ) + •5,7
a) Beam-Column With No Relative Joint Traslation
where
0.1488kips/in
0.155kips/in
2.88kips
5.456kips
(D I W21X44 tjy
1( §
in
l(D W16x31 d] d) CO
3l HI i
S"^ 0.1488kips/in |4]
0.225kips/in
5,76kips
^X. f t ?
I t (Ut w
5.456kips
^M
(D
M
W21x44
Mi;;01
H]
W21X44 0
Id) CO
00
X
CO
m
X
o m 00
[D
0
7/7/7 TTTTT - ^ ' ^ ^
(D
777"
288in 300in
d)
f6l
El
Ael
(D
0
Ei
0.2117 kips/in
Ir^ ^
(D 0
n
mn
<g> El
E^ I 00
7.6 kips
(D 0
-^
®
IEl aK^
(D El
'dKi
% 0
m [H m pi
® J®
77777
TTTTT
^ 0 . 1 7 5 kip/in
1800
® W18X40 gg I® W18x40 61 ©
o 1600 h
m d
^ 0 . 2 1 5 kip/i 1400
B [I] X
00
X
(O
m 1000 h
/-0.215 kip/ii
UHIHHflJ«^IHHHH^
|@ W18X40 gg W18X40 0 @
800 h
CO 600 h
X
00
m 5 5 m 2 400 h
J®
200
240" 240"
K 10 15 20
O : Node No. Q : Element No.
Rotation (9^)
Fig. 11. Partially-restrained frame FR-4. Fig. 12. Experimental connection curves (Kishi and Chen, 1986).
500
a 1 I 1 \
1000 ! i" \
1 O 1 1 800 -
400 \ o i l
600 -
300 1 1 a t \ 1 1 0
400 •
200 j 2* a [ 2 1 ° a •\ 1 1 a 1
• 1 -^ 1 I A ^ 1 0 !
200 a 1 A 1 B J
100 a 1
* • : : ! " I
0 —1—1—1—1—1—t—1—«—1—1—1—1—A—1—i—1—4_ 1 0 L.
i—1—1—1—1
1 ^ .i
2 4 2 4 6 2 5 7 10 2 3 5 6 8 g 2 4 2 4 6 21 6 1 7 1 t
10 1 1
2 1 3 1 5 16 81 01 1
Fig. 13. Comparison of column moments due to nonsway loads Fig. 15. Comparison of column moments due to sway loads in
in frames with connection III-14 of medium rigidity. frames with connection 111-14 of medium rigidity.
I I — I — I — I — I — I — I I—I I I I— —I 1 r-
M -f- — 1 — 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 r 1 1 1 1 1 1—
400
800 - -
600
300 I a ! ! A
I I 1 a
200 400
j a j j o
a ! B 1 a
100 200
B ! a 1 • 1 *
1 1 B 1 B
1 1 m t
0 JB I I L. 0 J i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I
2 4 2 4 6 2 5 7 10 2 3 5 6 8 9 2 4 2 4 6 2 5 7 10 2 3 5 6 8 9
Column Number Column Number
Fig. 14. Comparison of column moments due to nonsway loads Fig. 16. Comparison of column moments due to sway loads in
in frames with the more rigid connection 111-17. frames with the more rigid connection 111-17.
Table 5.
Moments in Frame FR-1 Determined by the Proposed IVIethod
Using the LRFD B^ and B2 Factors (Normalized by Exact Solution)
Flexible Frame
Connection Column
Connection Stiffness Taken As
Code No. Rigid
(Fig. 12) (Fig. 9) Frame ^ki ^ki & ^kb ^ko & ^kb
Table 6.
Moments in Frame FR-2 Determined by the Proposed Method
Using the LRFD B^ and S2 Factors (Normalized by Exact Solution)
Connection Column Flexible Frame
Connection Stiffness Taken As
Code No. Rigid
(Fig. 12) (Fig. 9) Frame f^ki ^ki & ^kb ^ko & ^kb
2 1.0016 1.1096 1.0559 1.0226
111-11 4 1.6101 1.3586 1.3619 1.2868
6 1.1965 1.0487 1.0551 0.9770
2 1.0480 1.0883 1.1003 1.0587
111-14 4 1.5110 1.3049 1.3129 1.2416
6 1.1536 1.0352 1.0492 0.9675
2 1.0916 1.0849 1.1710 1.1096
111-16 4 1.3523 1.2449 1.2670 1.1561
6 1.1006 1.0411 1.0743 0.9763
2 1.1640 1.1956 1.1992 1.1598
111-17 4 1.1881 1.1371 1.1484 1.0894
6 1.0285 0.9899 1.1530 0.9706