›

Part 8

30 TheStructuralEngineer Technical
August 2014 Composite/Steel compendium

Composite and Steel

Construction compendium
Part 8: Bolted steel connections
This article is part of a series
that will gradually build to form a
Composite (steel-concrete) and
Steel Construction compendium.
Written by leading experts
from the SCI, the articles aim
to provide a real insight into
composite and steel construction,
to help practicing engineers get
the most from these materials.

Introduction
The choice of connections influences the majority of the cost of
detailing and fabrication of a steel frame and also impacts the ease
and speed of erection. The appropriate selection of beam-to-column
and beam-to-beam connections has the potential to substantially
reduce the overall cost of a steel frame.
Simple connections are generally easy to design and economical to
fabricate; hence simple construction is a popular framing solution.
Although moment-resisting connections require more effort, they are
used where resistance to lateral loads cannot be provided by bracing,
e.g. in portal frames.
In general, the function of a connection is not only to link members
together—providing a load path for the design actions applied to
the structure—but also for tying the structure together to provide
structural integrity.
This article discusses connection behaviour, design methodology
and the classifications given in BS EN 1993-1-81. Connection design
for structural integrity and the use of preloaded assemblies are
introduced. Challenges connected with multi-member or unorthodox
connections are also discussed.
Connection behaviour – design assumptions and reality
With the variety of connection types available, choosing the
appropriate design method can be confusing. Key to making the
correct choice is to understand the characteristics of particular joint
types and the relationships between modelling assumptions and
connection behaviour.
Simple connections
Most structural frames utilise simple design—where the connections
are assumed to transmit end shear only and have negligible resistance
to rotation. The connections therefore do not transfer significant
moments at the ultimate limit state.
 Figure 1
Fin plate connection
It is necessary to ensure that the ductility of the connection material
allows the rotation to occur while the transfer of the shear force is
maintained. In general, flexibility and ductility are provided by detailing
the connection with relatively thin components. Standard connections
of this sort are the flexible end plate, a fin plate (Figure 1) or double
angle cleats.
In reality, simple connections do have a degree of fixity. Although this
is not usually taken into account, the design is often sufficient to allow
erection to take place without the need for temporary bracing.
Moment connections
The most commonly used moment resisting connections are bolted
beam-to-column end plate connections, in which the resistance is
provided by a combination of tension in the bolts adjacent to one
flange, with compression in the other flange (Figure 2).
The ductility and flexibility of the column flange or end plate allows
each bolt to achieve its full design strength, leading to a more efficient
connection design. To ensure adequate ductility, a limit is set on the
thickness of the connecting part relative to the strength of the bolts2.
If the connection is not ductile, the bolt row forces must be limited
(Figure 3).
Design approach
Eurocode 3 uses a component-based design approach. Generally,
the procedure is to calculate the design resistance of each
component. The design resistance of a particular joint can be derived
by considering the resistance of the individual components and
assembling these into a joint model.
For example, a satisfactory design of an end plate moment resisting
connection requires 15 principal checks (Figure 4). These include

TSE32_30-33 CSCC-8 v2.indd 30 24/07/2014 11:43

 www.thestructuralengineer.org

31

F r1

F r2

F r3 M V

Fc Triangular limit

checks on the supported beam, supporting beam or column, the bolts

and the welds.  Figure 2
Forces in end plate
connection
Classification by stiffness
The rotational stiffness of a joint determined
from the flexibility of its basic components is
Classification of connections compared with the classification boundaries
In order to identify the influence of joint behaviour on the frame, three described in clause 5.2.2.5 of BS EN 1993-1-8.
simplified joint models may be considered:  Figure 3
Triangular limit to
bolt forces (extended end
The joint can be classified as rigid, semi rigid
plate) when connection or nominally pinned.
is not ductile enough to
• Simple joints, used in braced multi-storey frames allow plastic distribution
• Continuous joints (the most common example are haunched Classification by strength
connections in portal frames) The design moment resistance of a joint is
• Semi-continuous e.g. ‘wind-moment connections’ described in detail compared with moment resistances of the
in Wind-moment design of low rise frames3 members to which it connects. A joint may
be classified as full strength, partial strength
According to BS EN 1993-1-8, when the effects of the behaviour of the or nominally pinned. Table 1 illustrates the
joints on the analysis of the structure are sufficiently small, they may relationship between the selected joint model
be neglected. and analysis type.
Adopting the simple joint model ignores any stiffness the joint may
have, while the continuous joint models allow only full strength The Eurocode allows designers to classify
connections. The semi-continuous model recognises that most joints on the basis of previous satisfactory
connections provide some degree of stiffness and that their moment performance. The UK National Annex refers
resistance may be limited. the reader to the Joints in Steel Construction
series of publications4,5, which provides
BS EN 1993-1-8 requires that connections are classified by both practical guidance on design of joints which
stiffness and strength. The stiffness classification is relevant for conform to the Eurocode classification,
elastic analysis, while the strength classification is used for plastic without the necessity of calculating
analysis. If the elastic-plastic method of global analysis is selected, connection stiffness or strength.
the connections are classified according to both their strength and
stiffness. Structural integrity
The UK Building Regulations require that
all buildings should be designed to avoid
disproportionate collapse6. Approved
Table 1: Joint models in various analysis types
Document A7 sets out required levels of
Global analysis type robustness for different classes of building.
The requirement for robustness and structural
Joint model Elastic Plastic Elastic-plastic integrity is reflected in the Eurocodes and is
Simple Nominally pinned Nominally pinned Nominally pinned additional to the ultimate and serviceability
limit state requirements. Commonly, this is
Continuous Rigid Full-strength Rigid and full-strength achieved by designing the joints in a steel
frame (the beam-to-column connections and
Semi-rigid and partial- the column splices) for tying forces.
Partial-strength and strength
Semi-continuous Semi-rigid
ductile Semi-rigid and full strength The check for tying resistance is entirely
Rigid and partial-strength
separate to the check for vertical shear

TSE32_30-33 CSCC-8 v2.indd 31 24/07/2014 11:43

 ›
Part 8

32 TheStructuralEngineer Technical
August 2014 Composite/Steel compendium

c
a
 Figure 4
Mark up of joint
components requiring
b evaluation

f
e
d
g m N
b
a M
n V
h

j
k j. Beam flange compression
p k. Beam flange weld

a. Bolt tension l. Column web buckling

b. End plate bending f. Flange to end plate weld m. Web to end plate weld in

c. Column flange bending g. Web to end plate weld in shear zone

d. Beam web tension tension zone n. Bolt shear

e. Column web tension h. Column web panel shear p. Bolt bearing (plate or flange)

on the clamping force, and the condition of the contact surfaces. Most
commonly, the contact surfaces are shot blasted and left unpainted,
although other surface finishes may be adopted.

Compared with the use of bolts in clearance holes, friction grip

assemblies are generally considered to be more expensive. However,
there are situations where the use of preloaded assemblies is
recommended:

• Where fatigue is a design consideration. The high level of preload

N Figure 5
Horizontal ties provide catenary action when
column 1 is removed
resistance — the two design forces do not occur in the same design
situation and therefore should not be considered in combination. It
should also be recognised that when calculating the tying resistance,
substantial permanent deformations are anticipated. The design
checks are therefore generally based on ultimate strengths and use an
appropriate material factor (Figure 5).
means that the tension in the bolt does not vary significantly, provided
the plies are stiff and truly in contact at the bolt
• In structures subject to severe, continued vibration the pre-tension in
the bolts prevents the bolt loosening
• Where significant load reversal may take place in structures
supporting moving loads, such as cranes. In such instances, slip in the
connections should be prevented
• To ensure dimensional stability and avoid accumulated slip where it
may lead, for example, to loss of fall on roof trusses with shallow slopes
For most building structures the use of ordinary, non-preloaded bolts
in clearance holes is satisfactory. Even in moment connections, the
small amount of slip associated with clearance holes has no practical
consequences for the structure.

Connections using pre-loaded assemblies Multi-member connections

An ‘ordinary’ bolt assembly transmits applied forces by shear in the
bolt and bearing between the shank of the bolt and the connected ply.
This means that a small amount of slip takes place as the connection
is loaded, and as the bolt and plies reach equilibrium in bearing, some
small deformation will also occur.
High Strength Friction Grip (HSFG) connections transfer force quite
differently. Although HSFG connections still use bolts in clearance holes,
load is transferred by frictional resistance between the contact surfaces
of the plies (frequently called the faying surfaces). The frictional
resistance is achieved by preloading the bolt in considerable tension,
which clamps the plies together. The connection resistance depends
Structural members are usually designed on the assumption that all
forces intersect on member centroids, but if this assumption is carried
out in the connection design then it may produce a large connection.
It is often more convenient to arrange the member intersections to
make a more compact joint and to then check locally for the effects of
eccentricities (Figures 6 and 7).
The general design process is:
• identify the load path through the connection
• arrange the connection to ensure that the design intent of the
members is realised (e.g. the beam connections remain nominally pinned)

TSE32_30-33 CSCC-8 v2.indd 32 24/07/2014 11:43


W Figure 6
Multi-member
connection
N Figure 7
Example of positive eccentricities (Case 1)
and negative eccentricities (Case 2)
• include the effects of any significant eccentricity
• check the components in the connection
Unorthodox connections
A departure from standard connections inevitably results in an
increase in overall cost. The need for special connections can often
be avoided by rationalisation of member sizes. It is good practice
that steelwork is placed with centrelines on established grids. Where
possible, top flanges of beams should be at a constant level, but this
is less critical to cost than eccentric connections.
When designing a non-standard connection, engineers need to
consider the feasibility of their design, ensure access for bolting
is available and that principles of ensuring ductility are followed.
It is recommended to consult a steel fabricator for advice on best
practice in detailing.
Use of slightly modified versions of standardised connections
(subject to a few additional design checks) is often the solution for
unorthodox connections. Chapter 9 of Joints in Steel Construction:
Simple joints to Eurocode 34 provides guidance on special
considerations and possible solutions for some of the most common
unorthodox connections.
Addendum
As an addendum to Technical Guidance Note No. 12 (Level 2)
‘Introduction to steel portal frames’ (The Structural Engineer, June
2014) the following points need to be addressed with respect to the
information given on certain aspects of steel portal frame design:
• Under gravity loads, the column inner flange is in compression. In the
rafter the inner flange is in compression towards the column and the
outer flange is in compression towards the apex
TSE32_30-33 CSCC-8 v2.indd 33
www.thestructuralengineer.org
33
References and further reading
1) British Standards Institution (2010) BS EN 1993-1-8 Eurocode
3: Design of steel structures. Parts 1-8: Design of joints
(incorporating corrigenda December 2005, September 2006,
July 2009 and August 2010), London: BSI
2) British Standards Institution (2008) NA to BS EN 1993-
1-8:2005 UK National Annex to Eurocode 3. Design of steel
structures. Design of joints, London: BSI
3) Steel Construction Institute (1999) Wind-moment design of
low rise frames (P263) [Online]
Available at: www.steelconstruction.info/index.php?title=Special
:ImagePage&t=SCI+P263.pdf (Accessed: July 2014)
4) Steel Construction Institute (2011) Joints in Steel
Construction: Simple joints to Eurocode 3 (P358), Ascot, Berks:
SCI
5) Steel Construction Institute (2013) Joints in Steel
construction: Moment-resisting joints to Eurocode 3 (P398),
Ascot, Berks: SCI
6) legislation.gov.uk (2014) The Building Regulations 2010,
Available at: www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/
(Accessed: July 2014)
7) Gov.UK (2013) Approved Document A – Structure (2004
edition incorporating 2010 and 2013 amendments) [Online]
Available at: www.planningportal.gov.uk/buildingregulations/
approveddocuments/parta/documenta#Download
(Accessed: July 2014)
Further reading
Davison B. and Owens G. (Eds) (2012) Steel Designers’ Manual
(7th ed.), Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
Steel Construction Institute (2001) AD 248: Use of high strength
friction grip connections, Ascot, Berks: SCI
SteelConstruction.info (2014) Simple connections [Online]
Available at: www.steelconstruction.info/Simple_connections
(Accessed: July 2014)
SteelConstruction.info (2014) Moment resisting connections
[Online] Available at: http://www.steelconstruction.info/
Moment_resisting_connections (Accessed: July 2014)
• Two plastic hinges are necessary for collapse of portal frames
with pinned-foot columns. Four are commonly shown for reasons of
symmetry
• Limiting values of α cr: the UK National Annex currently gives a limiting
value for αcr of 10; above which 2nd order effects can be ignored for
plastic analysis. (For certain proportions of frame, the limiting value is 5
for plastic analysis)
24/07/2014 11:43