Professional Documents
Culture Documents
STEEL CONSTRUCTION
JOURNAL OF THE AUSTRALIAN STEEL INSTITUTE
VOLUME 36 NUMBER 2 SEPTEMBER 2002
ISBN 0049-2205
Print Post Approved
pp 255003/01614
ASI Members -- The best in Steel Detailing and Modeling
New South Wales & ACT Steeltech Steel Detailers P/L
Acooma Design & Drafting 24 Curzon Street Tennyson 4105 07 3848 6464
South Coast Mail Centre 2500 02 4226 5502 South Australia
Ahaust Steel Detailers Pty Ltd Sasteel Drafting Service P/L
111 Best Road Seven Hills 2147 02 9831 6511 33 Maxwell Road Pooraka 5095 08 8349 9622
Centreline Drawing Services Pty Ltd USDSA
6/21 Oaks Avenue Dee Why 2099 02 9981 4432 16 Drury Terrace Clovelly Park 5042 08 8374 4999
Elmasry Steel Design And Detailing Warradale Drafting Service P/L
88 Arthur Street Strathfield 2135 02 9764 6660 1 Boulder Court Woodcroft 5162 08 8322 5533
Enterprise Drafting Company P/L
Suite 2 Level 1 163 King St Newcastle 2300 02 4929 6910 Victoria
Evan Swan Pty Ltd Bayside Drafting (Aust) P/L
7 Rutledge Ave Dapto 2530 02 4261 8763 PO Box 647 Frankston 3199 03 9781 4011
Hunter Drafting Service Pty Ltd Engineering Design Resource
Unit 8 57 Crescent Road Waratah 2298 02 4967 6500 68 Hotham St Traralgon 3844 03 5174 0255
Leading Edge Drafting Services Pty Ltd Fabcad Drafting P/L
85 Bottlebrush Drive Glenning Valley 2261 02 4388 6768 68 Hotham St Traralgon 3844 03 5174 9026
Manwaring Design & Drafting Service Flexsteel Drafting Service
PO Box 22 Binalong 2584 02 6227 4215 3 Monterey Cresc Donvale 3111 03 9842 1737
Monaro Drafting Innovative Drafting Pty Ltd
PO Box 299 Cooma 2630 02 6452 2337 17 Bunyip Court Morwell 3840 03 5133 0362
PM Design Group
Production Line Drafting Pty Ltd
Gore Place Portland 3305 03 5521 7204
104a William St Bathurst 2795 02 6334 3500
Precision Design Pty Ltd
Southtech
Level 1 75--89 High St Cranbourne 3977 03 5995 2333
PO Box 270 Moruya 2537 02 4474 2120
USD Australia
Supadraft
PO Box 129 Wendouree 3355 03 5339 9690
PO Box 716 Brookvale 2100 02 9975 1777
Western Australia
Queensland
Cadstruction Drafting
Amalgamated Drafting Suite 4 First Floor East Victoria Park 6101 08 9472 7457
PO Box 419 Spring Hill 4000 07 3831 0099
Carnegie Associates Pty Ltd
BDS Technical Services Unit 3 46 Hasler Road Osborne Park 6017 08 9244 1311
80 Tribune Street South Brisbane 4101 07 3844 8093
Multiplan
Brice Engineers Pty Ltd Unit 12 4 Queen St Bentley 6102 08 9356 5993
7--8 Brice Court Mt Louisa 4814 07 4774 8322
Perth Drafting Company (WA)
Cad Systems Australia Pty Ltd 48 Kishorn Road Applecross 6153 08 9364 8288
Unit 35 5 Hill Street Coolangatta 4225 07 5536 7004
Steelplan Australia Pty Ltd
Hempsall Steel Detailing Pty Ltd 15/885 Albany Highway East Victoria Park 6101 08 9362 2599
Suite 1\67 Redcliffe Parade Redcliffe 4020 07 3284 3020
Universal Drafting
Online Drafting Services Qld 7/175 Main St Osborne Park 6017 08 9440 4750
Unit 6 Pacific Chambers,
3460 Pacific Highway Springwood 4127 07 3299 2891 Westplan Drafting
Unit 3/11 Robinson Road Rockingham 6168 08 9592 2499
Paul Anderson Drafting Service Pty Ltd
39 Lurnea Crescent Mooloolaba 4557 07 5478 0186 New Zealand
Q E I Pty Ltd 4D Steel Detailing
104 Wellington Road East Brisbane 4169 07 3891 6646 PO Box 13772 New Zealand 64 3 377 5880
Steelcad Drafting Pty Ltd Ormond Stock Associates Ltd
PO Box 1456 Coorparoo DC 4151 07 3844 3955 PO Box 1048 New Zealand 64 6 356 1088
STEEL CONSTRUCTION - EDITORIAL
This paper is one of a planned series which deals with the
design and use of rationalized structural connections. It
draws heavily on the excellent work done in the publication
“Design of Structural Connections” by Tim Hogan and Ian
Thomas. Since that time, there has been new research,
some variations to the design models, new steel grades
introduced and some minor changes in section properties.
We have also seen the adoption of sophisticated 3D
modeling software which has the capability to generate
many different connection types. The ASI, through this
project is endeavouring to provide an industry wide
rationalized set of dimensions, models and design
capacities.
STEEL CONSTRUCTION is published biannually by the Australian Steel Publication by any person, whether that person is the purchaser of this
Institute (ASI). Publication or not. Without limitation, this includes loss, damage, costs
and expenses incurred if any person wholly or partially relies on any part
The ASI was formed in September 2002 following the merger of the of this Publication, and loss, damage, costs and expenses incurred as a
Australian Institute for Steel Construction (AISC) and the Steel Institute of result of the negligence of the Authors, Editors or Publishers.
Australia (SIA). The ASI is Australia’s premier technical marketing
organisation representing companies and individuals involved in steel Warning: This Publication should not be used without the services of a
manufacture, distribution, fabrication, design, detailing and construction. competent professional person with expert knowledge in the relevant
Its mission is to promote the efficient and economical use of steel. Part of field, and under no circumstances should this Publication be relied upon
its work is to conduct technical seminars, educational lectures and to to replace any or all of the knowledge and expertise of such a person.
publish and market technical design aids. Its services are available free of
charge to financial corporate members.
Contributions of original papers or reports on steel design, research and
For details regarding ASI services, readers may contact the Institute’s allied technical matters are invited from readers for possible publication.
offices, or visit the ASI website www.steel.org.au
The views expressed in these papers are those of the authors and do not
Disclaimer: Every effort has been made and all reasonable care taken to necessarily reflect the views of the ASI.
ensure the accuracy of the material contained in this publication. Submissions should be in electronic format including all diagrams and
However, to the extent permitted by law, the Authors, Editors and
equations in two columns, using Times font (size 10.5 points). A clean,
Publishers of this publication: (a) will not be held liable or responsible in
camera ready printout at 600dpi should also be forwarded.
any way; and (b) expressly disclaim any liability or responsibility for any
loss or damage costs or expenses incurred in connection with this
Contents
This paper deals with the design of pinned base plates. The design actions considered are
axial compression, axial tension, shear force and their combinations. The base plate is
assumed to be essentially statically loaded, and additional considerations may be required
in the case of dynamic loads or in fatigue applications.
1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
1.1. Design actions in accordance with AS 4100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2. NOTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
3. BASE PLATE COMPONENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4. AXIAL COMPRESSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
4.2. BASE PLATE DESIGN - LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4.3. RECOMMENDED MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. AXIAL TENSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.2. BASE PLATE DESIGN - LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.3. DESIGN OF ANCHOR BOLTS - LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.4. RECOMMENDED MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
6. SHEAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.1. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.2. TRANSFER OF SHEAR BY FRICTION
OR BY RECESSING THE BASE PLATE INTO THE CONCRETE -
LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.3. TRANSFER OF SHEAR BY A SHEAR
KEY-- LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
6.4. TRANSFER OF SHEAR BY THE ANCHOR BOLTS -
LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
6.5. RECOMMENDED MODEL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
7. BASE PLATE AND ANCHOR BOLTS DETAILING . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
8. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
9. REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
10. APPENDIX A - Derivation of Design and Check Expressions
for Steel Base Plates Subject to Axial Compression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
11. APPENDIX B-- Derivation of Design and Check Expressions
for Steel Base Plates Subject to Axial Tension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
12. APPENDIX C - Determination of Embedment Lengths and Edge Distances . . . . 49
13. APPENDIX D - Design Capacities of Equal Leg Fillet Welds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
14. APPENDIX E - Design of Bolts under Tension and Shear . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
Design of Pinned Column Base Plates
Gianluca Ranzi
School of Civil and Environmental Engineering
The University of New South Wales
Peter Kneen
National Manager Technology
Australian Steel Institute
d 0 = outside diameter of CHS weld between column and base plate in one
f′ c = characteristic compressive cylinder strength of horizontal direction in the plane of the base plate
concrete at 28 days and in the vertical direction respectively per unit
length
f *p = uniform design pressure at the interface of the
v w = design action on fillet weld per unit length
*
base plate and grout/concrete
V des = design shear capacity of the base plate
f uf = minimum tensile strength of bolt
connection
f uw = nominal tensile strength of weld metal
V s = design shear force to be transferred by means
*
f yi = yield stress of the base plate used in design of the shear key
f ys = yield stress of shear key used in design W i and W e = internal and external work
k r = reduction factor to account for length of welded Ô = capacity factor
lap connection Ôf (i) = maximum bearing strength of the concrete at
b
L d = minimum embedment length of anchor bolt the i--th iteration in Murray--Stockwell Model
L h = hook length of anchor bolt Ôf b = maximum bearing capacity of the concrete
L s = length of shear key based on a certain bearing area A 1
Lw = total length of fillet weld ÔN c = design axial capacity of the concrete
m p = plastic moment capacity of the base plate per foundation
unit width ÔN c.lat = lateral bursting capacity of the concrete
m s = nominal section moment capacity of the base ÔN cc = design pull--out capacity of the concrete
plate per unit width foundation
m sk = nominal section moment capacity per unit ÔN s = design axial capacity of the steel base plate
width of shear key ÔN t = axial tension capacity of the base plate
m *c = design moment per unit width due to N *c ÔN tb = design capacity of the anchor bolt group
m *sk = design moment to be carried by the shear key under tension
per unit width ÔN th = tensile capacity of a hooked bar
m t = design moment per unit width due to N *t
*
ÔN w = design axial capacity of the weld connecting
the base plate to the column section
m *c = ≤ = Ôm s (4)
b id i 2 4
Figure 4 Cantilever Model (Ref. [26])
yields a maximum design axial force of:
ti ≥ am 2N *c
0.9f yi b id i
(6) di dc 0.95d c
di dc 0.95d c
a1
0.95b c
a2 a2
a1
Dashed lines
0.8d o do di d1
indicate yield lines
b es
a1
a2 0.8d o a2
θ βb es
Figure 9 Possible yield line pattern (Ref. [37])
β = tan θ
4.2.2. Fling Model
Fling, in [25], presents a design model applicable to base Figure 10 Fling Model -- Yield Line Pattern
plates with similar dimensions to the ones of the (Ref. [25])
connected column and reviews the design philosophy of
the Cantilever Model. Only H--shaped columns are The internal and external work produced under loading
considered in this model. are calculated as follows:
He recommends to apply both a strength and a W i = 1 (2d 1 + 4βb es)Ôm p + 1 4b esÔm p (7)
serviceability criteria to the design of base plates. b es βb es
Regarding the Cantilever Method, which is based on a
strength criteria, he recommends to apply also a W e = 2f *p(d 1 − 2βb es)b es 1 + 4 f *pβb 2es (8)
2 3
serviceability check by limiting the deflection of the
cantilevered plate. He argues that, while increasing the where:
size of the plate, deflections of the cantilevered plate m p = plastic moment capacity of the baseplate per
would increase reducing the ability of the most unit width
deflected parts of the plate to transfer the assumed
uniform loading to the supporting material. Thus the f p = uniform design pressure at the interface of the
*
load would re--distribute to the least deflected portions base plate and grout/concrete which is assumed
of the plate which may overstress the underlying to be equal to the maximum bearing strength of
support. His proposed deflection limit intends to the concrete Ôf b
prevent such overstressing. He also notes that such limit W i and W e = internal and external work
should vary depending upon the deformability of the
supporting material. Fling suggests 0.01 in. (0.254 mm) d 1, β and b es = as defined in Fig. 10
to be a reasonable deflection limit to be imposed for Fling introduces the following parameter λ to simplify
most bearing plates, even if he clearly states that it is the notation:
beyond the scope of his paper to specify deflection
limits applicable to various supporting materials. [25] d1
λ= (9)
b es
Regarding the design model for base plates with similar
dimensions to the ones of the connected column he Equating the internal and external work yields:
recommends to apply the following strength and
serviceability checks. Ôm p(2λ + 4β + 4) = f *pb 2es( λ − 2 β) (10)
β 3
The strength check is based on the yield line theory and
the assumed yield line pattern is shown in Fig. 10. The The value of β which maximises the required moment
procedure is derived for a base plate with width and capacity of the base plate is as follows:
length equal to the column’s width and depth (therefore
b i and d i equal b fc and d c respectively). β= 34 + 4λ1 − 2λ1
2
(11)
The support conditions assumed for the plate are fixed
along the web, simply supported along the flanges and which is obtained by differentiating for β the expression
free on the edge opposite to the web. of the plastic moment derived from equation (10).
The required base plate thickness t i is then calculated as:
[25]
t i ≥ 0.43b fcβ f *p
0.9f yi (1 − β 2)
= 0.43b fcβ Ôf b
0.9f yi(1 − β 2)
(12)
ti ≥ a3 2N *c
0.9f yi A H
(20) do
yi i i
(21) The expression of the plate thickness of Fling Model,
re--derived in [42], is simplified by Thornton in [43] in
order to reduce the complexity of the yield line solution.
where: His simplification introduces an approximation in the
a m = max(a 1, a 2, λa 4) value of a 4 with an error of 0% (unconservative) and
17.7% (conservative) for values of d c∕b fc ranging from
λ = min 1,
2 X
1 + 1 − X
3/4 to 3. The value of N *0 represents the portion of the
total axial load N *c acting over the column footprint
a 4 = 1 d cb fc (d cb fc) under the assumption of uniform bearing
4 pressure under the base plate. Murray--Stockwell Model
N *0 = portion of N *c acting over the column footprint is concatenated in equation (21) to carry a design axial
load equal to N *0 (not on N *c) over the assumed H--shaped
N*
= c b fcd c bearing area inside the column footprint.
b id i
4b fcd c N *c
X=
(d c + b fc) 2 Ôf bd ib i
d cb fc
= 24 N *0 = 24 N *c
a 5Ôf b a 5Ôf b d ib i
Table 2 Murray--Stockwell Model
(refer to Figs. 4, 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13 and 14 for the definition of the notation)
SECTION A (1) a3
1 AH
H--shaped section b fcd c (d c + b fc) − (d c + b fc) 2 − 4A H 2b fca 3 + 2a 3(d c − 2a 3)
[21] 4
Channel [26] b fcd c
(2b fc + d c) − (2b fc + d c) 2 − 8A H 2b fca 3 + (d c − 2a 3)a 3
4
RHS SHS
(d c + b c) − (d c + b c) 2 − 4A H d cb c − (d c − 2a 3)(b c − 2a 3)
[21][26] b cd c = 2(d c + b c)a 3 − 4a 23
4
CHS [21][26] d 20
d o − d 2o − 4A H∕π π(d 2o − d 23)∕4 = π(d oa 3 − a 23 )
π
4 2 where : d 3 = d o − 2a 3
4.2.5. Eurocode 3 Model Requirement of the EC3 is to provide a base plate
adequate to distribute the compression column load
Clause 6.11 and Annex L of Eurocode 3 deal with the
over an assumed bearing area.
design of base plates. [23]
The EC3 Model assumes an H--shaped bearing area as
shown in Fig. 15(a). It requires that the pressure
c = ti f yi
3f j.EC3γ MO
(22) c c
c
otherwise as aabb 1 1
a1
a 1 and b 1 = dimensions of the effective area as
shown in Fig. 16
a 1 = mina + 2a r, 5a, a + h, 5b 1 ≥ a
b b1
b 1 = minb + 2b r, 5b, b + h, 5a 1 ≥ b
f cd = design value of the concrete cylinder br
compressive strength = f ck∕γ c
ar a Plan
f ck = characteristic concrete cylinder compressive
strength (in accordance with Eurocode 2)
γ c = partial safety factor for concrete material Figure 16 Column base layout [23]
properties (in accordance with Eurocode 2)
4.3. RECOMMENDED MODEL
γ MO = 1.1 (boxed value from Table 1 of [23])
In the case of large or short projections the bearing area 4.3.1. Design considerations
should be calculated as shown in Figs. 15(b) and (c). The recommended design model is a modified version
[23] of the one proposed by Thornton in [43] and also
[23] requires that the resistance moment m Rd per unit adjusted to suit Australian Codes AS 3600 [10] and AS
length of a yield line in the base plate should be taken as: 4100 [11]. The Thornton Model is currently
recommended by the AISC(US) Manual [5].
t 2i f yi
m Rd = (23) Unfortunately the Thornton Model presented in [5],
6γ MO [42] and [43] is suitable for the design of H--shaped
columns only. His formulation has been here modified
No specific expression for the sizing of the steel base for H--shaped sections and extended for channels and
plate are provided. hollows sections adopting a similar approach as in [43]
N *c which is outlined in Section 10.
The modification to the Thornton Model introduced
here regards the manner in which Murray--Stockwell
Model is implemented. It is in the authors’ opinion that
the calculation of A H and consequently of λ (refer to the
literature review for further details regarding the
≤c ≤c notation) should be calculated based on N *c (total axial
c c compression load) and not N *0 (portion of the total load
c N *c acting over the column footprint under the
c Bearing area assumption of uniform bearing pressure). This intends
to ensure that Murray--Stockwell Model would govern
the design only for base plates of similar dimensions to
≤c the ones of the connected columns and for lightly loaded
This area not included columns, which represents the actual base plate layout
(a) General Case in bearing area for which the model has been developed. The design
would then be based on only one assumed pressure
1
c (26)
where:
a a a a
a Ô = 0.6
A 1 = b id i
a
The axial capacity of the concrete foundation ÔN c is
then obtained multiplying the maximum concrete
bearing strength Ôf b by the base plate area A i as follows:
Ineffective areas
ÔN c = Ôf bA i
b
It is interesting to note from equation (26) that
b increasing the supplementary area A2 increases the
b b b b concrete confinement which yields larger design
capacities ÔN c. The loss of bearing area due to the
b presence of the anchor bolt holes is normally ignored.
[21]
b
4.3.4. Steel Base Plate Design
Figure 17 Possible assumed bearing areas (Ref.
[34]) The base plate thickness required to resist a certain
design axial compression N *c is calculated as follow:
4.3.2. Design criteria
There are two different design scenarios which are
considered here:
ti = am 2N *c
0.9f yi d i b i
(27)
Section a1 a2 a4 k Y a5
H--shaped
sections
d i − 0.95d c
2
b i − 0.80b fc
2
d cb fc
4
dd bb
2 i i
c fc
4N *c
Ôf ba 25
b fc + d c
2d23b 1.7
RHS d i − 0.95d c b i − 0.95b c i i db i i
4N *c bc + dc
2 2 db c fc
Ôf ba 25
SHS d i − 0.95b c b i − 0.95b c bc 3 d ib i 4N *c 2b c
2 2 3 2 bc Ôf ba 25
CHS d i − 0.80d 0 b i − 0.80d o d0 2 d ib i 4N *c −
2 2 2 3 d0 Ôf bπd 20
Thicknesses of base plates with dimensions similar to 0.6 for all GP welds (Table 3.4 of AS 4100)
those of the connected column section calculated with f uw = nominal tensile strength of weld metal (Table
equation (27) might be quite thin, especially in the case 9.7.3.10(1) of AS 4100)
of lighlty loaded columns (where Murray--Stockwell
Model applies). It is therefore recommended to specify t t = design throat thickness
plate thicknesses not less than 6mm thick for general k r = 1 (reduction factor to account for length of
purposes and not less than 10mm for industrial welded lap connection)
purposes. Lw = total length of fillet weld
Similarly a procedure to evaluate/check the capacity of Refer to Section 13. for tabulated values of the design
an existing plate is carried out as follows: capacity of fillet welds Ôv w.
0.9f yi d ib i t 2i
ÔN s = 2
(28) 5. AXIAL TENSION
2a′ m
5.1. INTRODUCTION
where:
There is not much guidance available in literature for the
λ′ = max1,
1 2 k a4
k 2 t i Y
0.9f2 d b − 1
yi i i
design of unstiffened base plates subject to uplift.
The literature presented here outlines the available
guidelines for the design of base plates and of anchor
a′ m = max a 1, a 2,
a4
λ
bolts. Two models presented here for the design of base
plates for hollow sections, which are the IWIMM Model
(named here after its authors) and Packer--Birkemoe
a 1, a 2, a 4, k and Y are tabulated in Table 3. Model, were firstly derived for bolted connections
This model is applicable to column sections as outlined between hollow sections. [37] and [36] suggest their
in Table 3 with the exception of H--shaped sections for suitability also for the design of base plates. These
which b fc∕2 is greater than d c as a different yield line models include also guidelines for determining the
pattern from those considered would occur. required number of anchor bolts. Such guidelines are
incorporated in the literature review for the design of the
4.3.5. Weld design at the column base steel base plates as their application is only suitable for
The design of the weld at the base of the column is the particular base plate model they refer to and as they
carried out in accordance with Clause 9.7.3.10 of AS do not account for the interaction between the anchor
4100. [11] The weld is designed as a fillet weld and its bolts and the concrete foundation, which is dealt with in
design capacity ÔN w is calculated as follows: the literature review on anchor bolts.
ÔN w = Ôv wL w = Ô0.6f uwt tk rL w (29) 5.2. BASE PLATE DESIGN -- LITERATURE
REVIEW
where:
The models presented here differ for their assumptions
Ôv w = design capacity of the fillet weld per unit regarding the failure modes investigated. It is
length interesting to note that the design guidelines currently
Ô = 0.8 for all SP welds except longitudinal fillet available deal with a limited number of base plate
welds on RHS/SHS with t < 3 mm (Table 3.4 of layouts.
AS 4100) For each model outlined here, the column sections and
0.7 for all longitudinal SP fillet on RHS/SHS the number of bolts considered by the model are
with t < 3 mm (Table 3.4 of AS 4100) specified after the model name.
b fc
W i = Ôm p 2 2b′ + 1 4 2
b′ b fc
d c∕2 d c∕2
b′ = 2 (b fc∕2) ≤ d c∕2
4b′ 2 + 2b 2fc
= Ôm p (30)
b′b fc
1 unit
N* sg 2 N *ts g
b fc∕2
We = t = (31)
2 2 b fc 2b fc
b′
b′
where:
Figure 18 Murray Model Assumed Yield Line
N *t = design tension axial load Patterns (Ref. [32])
s g and b′ = as defined in Fig. 18
5.2.2. Tensile Cantilever Model
Equating the external and internal work the expression (Generic Model)
of Ôm p can be written as follows:
Tensile Cantilever Method, as it is referred here,
N sg*
t
b′b fc assumes that the tension in the anchor bolts spreads out
Ôm p = (32) to act over an effective width of plate (b e ) which is
2 b fc 4b′ + 2b 2fc
2
assumed to act as a cantilever in bending ignoring any
The value of b′ which maximises the required plate stiffening action of the column flanges.
plastic capacity is obtained differentiating equation (32)
for b′ and is equal to:
b 1 bt
b′ = fc (33) 1
2
The presence of the flanges requires b′ to remain always bt dh bt
less or equal to d c∕2 and therefore the value of b′ which
maximises the plate plastic capacity varies depending be
upon the column cross--sectional geometry as follows:
b b d Figure 19 Tensile Cantilever Model (Ref. [26])
b′ = fc for fc ≤ c (34)
2 2 2
It can be applied to generic base plate layouts.
dc b d Nevertheless it provides conservative designs as it
b′ = for fc ≥ c (35) ignores the two way action of the base plates.
2 2 2
Reference [47] suggests a 45 degree angle of dispersion
The minimum plate thicknesses required under a certain as shown in Fig. 19. This is based on considerations of
axial load N *t are obtained substituting equations (34) elastic plate theory as described in reference [13].
and (35) into equation (32) as shown below: The design moment and the design moment capacity are
ti ≥ N *t s g 2
0.9f yib fc4
b
2
d
for fc ≤ c
2
(36)
then calculated as:
N*
m *t = n t b t (38)
b
ti ≥ N *t s gd c
0.9f yi(d c + 2b fc)
2 2
b
2
d
for fc ≥ c
2
(37)
Ôm s =
0.9b e t 2i f yi
4
(39)
ti = 4N *t b t
0.9f yi b e n b
(41) nb ≥
N *t
ÔN tf1− 1 + 1
f 3 f lnr 1 (43)
3 r 2
5.2.3. IWIMM Model where:
(CHS with varying number of bolts)
Ô = 0.9
The IWIMM Model has been named here after the N tf = nominal tensile capacity of the bolt
initials of the authors of the model. [27] The model was
firstly derived for the design of CHS bolted d
r 1 = 0 + 2a 1
connections. [37] and [36] suggest its use also for the 2
design of base plates of CHS columns. d0
r2 = + a1
The base plate layout considered by this model is shown 2
in Fig. 20. a1 = a2
The plate thickness is calculated based on the design This procedure does not verify the capacity of the
axial tension load N *t as follows: concrete foundation and its interaction with the anchor
bolts needs to be checked.
ti ≥ 2N *t
Ôf yi π f 3
(42)
Assumptions adopted by this model are an allowance
for prying action equal to 1/3 of the ultimate capacity of
the anchor bolt (at ultimate state), a continuous base
where: plate, a symmetric arrangement of the bolts around the
column profile and a weld capacity able to develop the
Ô = 0.9
full yield strength of the CHS.
d 0 = outside diameter of a CHS
[28] notes that adopting the above prying coefficient for
t c = thickness of column section the bolted CHS connection in the base plate design is
conservative due to the greater flexibility of the concrete
f 3 = 1 k 3 + k 23 − 4k 1
2k 1 foundation when compared to the steel to steel
connection. [36]
k 1 = ln r 2
r
3 5.2.4. Packer--Birkemoe Model
k3 = k1 + 2 (RHS with varying number of bolts)
d The Packer--Birkemoe Model is here named after the
r2 = 0 + a1 authors of the model. [36] This model deals with base
2
d0 − tc plate for RHS as shown in Fig. 21 and it has been
r3 = validated only for base plates with thickness varying
2
a 1 and a 2 as defined in Fig. 20 between 12mm and 26mm.
[27] recommends to keep the value of a 1 as small as The model includes prying effects in the design
possible, i.e. between 1.5d f and 2d f (where d f is the procedure. The prying action decreases while
nominal diameter of the bolts), while ensuring a increasing a 2 as shown in Fig. 21. The value of a 2 should
minimum of 5 mm clearance between the nut face and be kept less or equal to 1.25 a 1, as no benefit in the base
the weld around the CHS. plate performance would be provided beyond such
value. a 1 is defined as the distance between the bolt line
and the face of the hollow section.
Generally 4--5 bolt diameters are used as spacing of the
bolts s p but shorter spacing are also possible.
Based on the design loads the required number of
anchor bolts should be calculated assuming that the
α= KN *t
t 2i n b
−1 1
δ
EC3 considers that the capacity of a T--stub may be
governed by the resistence of either the flange, or the
bolts, or the web or the weld between flange and web of
a 4 = min 1.25a 1, a 2 +
df
2
T--stub. The failure modes considered are three as
shown in Fig. 23. The axial capacity is calculated as
follows:
where: Mode 3
1
4M pl.Rd Mode 2
F t.Rd1 = m 2λ
2M pl.Rd + nΣB t.Rd 1 + 2λ
F t.Rd2 =
m+n
Mode 1
F t.Rd3 = ΣB t.Rd
0.25lt 2f y 1 2
M pl.Rd = γ f 2λ β
MO 1 + 2λ
n = e min ≤ 1.25m
l = equivalent effective length calculated in 4M plRd l t 2ff y∕γ MO
λ = n∕m β= =
equations (50), (51), (52) and (53) m B t.Rd m B t.Rd
bp 0.2
w Equivalent T--stub
for extension 0.1
ex 0
l eff.a
mx 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9
ex mx λ1
l eff.b m1
λ1 =
p m1 + e m2
l eff.c m2
λ2 =
p m1 + e
e m1
l eff.d
Figure 27 Value of Effective lengths of α to
calculate equivalent T--stub flanges
(Ref. [23])
e m
e m
Portion between flanges 5.3. DESIGN OF ANCHOR BOLTS --
LITERATURE REVIEW
bp b p∕2 l eff.a
Available design guidelines regarding the behaviour of
anchor bolts in tension distinguish between the
behaviour of anchor bolts with an anchor head and of
hooked anchor bolts and therefore these will be
l eff.a discussed here separately. For the purpose of this paper
an anchor head is defined as a nut, flat washer, plate, or
bolt head or other steel component used to transmit
anchor loads from the tensile stress component to the
concrete by bearing. [2]
Transformation of extension to equivalent T--stub 5.3.1. Anchor bolts with anchor head
Figure 26 Effective lengths of equivalent T--stub The first detailed guidance on the design of anchor bolts
flanges representing an end plate is provided by the American Concrete Institute
(Ref. [23]) Committee 349 in 1976 in [3]. These recommendations
are produced for the design of nuclear safety related
structures. Some of the ACI Committee 349 members,
very active in the preparation of [3], publish an article
[17] where the guidelines provided in [3] are modified
to suit concrete structures in general.
s
s
Transverse
Ld splitting
Ld
2 cos −1 2Ls πL 2
Figure 31 Transverse splitting failure mode
L − s4
d
Shaded = πL 2 − d
+s 2
2
(Ref. [2])
Area d
360 0 2 d
(a) Two Intersecting Failure Cones It is interesting to note that in the case of shallow anchor
bolts the angle at the bolt head formed by the failure
− Ld cone tends to increase from 90 degrees to 120 degrees.
Ld An anchor bolt is classified as shallow when its length
s = is less than 5in. (127 mm). Nevertheless for design
2 Ld + Ld purposes caution should be applied is using angles
greater than 90 degrees as cracks might be present at the
2 cos −1 2Ls πL 2 concrete surface. It is recommended not use angles other
L − s4 than 90 degrees. [2][17]
d
d
+s
2
Area = πL 2d − 2
2
d
360 0 The previous considerations assume the concrete
Circle -- Sector + Triangle element to be stress--free and only subjected to the
(b) Failure Cone Near an Edge anchor bolts loading. [2] and [17] consider the case
when there is a state of biaxial compression and tension
(Note: the inverse cosine term listed in the in the plane of the concrete. The former loading
equations is in degrees) condition would be beneficial to the anchor bolt’s
Figure 29 Calculation of the projected area of strength while the latter loading state would lead to a
two intersecting failure cones or one significantly decrease in strength. Nevertheless, it is in
failure cone near an edge (Ref. [30]) the opinion of the ACI 349 Committee that a failure
cone angle of 90 degrees can still be utilised as it is
Simple procedures to calculate the effective tensile
assumed that any cracking would be controlled by the
areas of bolt groups are provided in [30], i.e. the
main reinforcement designed in accordance with
procedure to calculate two intersecting cones is shown
current concrete codes, i.e. AS 3600 [10].
in Fig. 29. [30]
The design procedure proposed by ACI 349 and [17] is
Depending upon the bolt group layout other possible
also recommended by DeWolf in [21].
failure modes could take place such as the one shown in
Fig. 30 where an entire part of the concrete foundation [21] notes that the use of cored holes, such as shown in
would pull--out. In such cases the effective tensile area Fig. 32, should not reduce the anchorage capacity based
should be calculated selecting the smallest projected on the failure cone, provided that the cored hole does not
area due to the possible concrete failure surfaces as extend near the bottom of the bolt. This situation should
shown in Fig. 30. A similar average tensile strength as be avoided if the dimensions shown in Fig. 32 are
in the case of the pull--out cones can be adopted. [2][17] followed. [26]
3d f
Figure 30 Potential Failure Mode but ≥ 75mm
Ld
with limited depth (Ref. [2])
Transverse splitting is another failure mode which can df
occur between anchor heads of an anchor bolt group
when their centre--to--centre spacing is less than the
anchor bolt depth and is shown in Fig. 31. This failure
mode occurs at a load similar to the one required to cause Figure 32 Suggested layout for Cored Holes
a pull--out cone failure in uncracked concrete and to Permit Minor Adjustments in
therefore no additional design checks need to be Position on Site (Ref. [26])
considered. [2][17]
45 o
cone
ae = df f uf
6 f′ c
(58)
Failure
surface Equation (58) has also been recommended in [26] and
[47].
Figure 33 Failure Surface of Blow--out Cone
due to Lateral Bursting of the Tension Force
Concrete (Ref. [31])
Lateral bursting of the concrete can occur when an
anchor bolt is located close to the concrete edge as
shown in Fig. 33, which is caused by a lateral force
present at the bolt head location.
This lateral force may be conservatively assumed to be
one--fourth of the nominal tensile capacity of the anchor Potential Spiral
bolt for conventional anchor heads which can be Failure reinforcement
calculated in accordance with Clause 9.3.2.2 of AS 4100 Zone
[11] as follows:
d 2f π
N tf = A sf uf = 0.75A 0f uf = 0.75 f (54)
4 uf
where: Figure 34 Reinforcement Against Lateral
Bursting of Concrete Foundation
A s = tensile stress area in accordance with AS1275
(Ref. [2])
[9] and conservatively approximated with 0.75
A0 Based on the guidelines provided in reference [3],
d2 π simplified design guidelines regarding minimum
A 0 = f = shank area embedment lengths and minimum edge distances are
4
presented in reference [39]. These minimum
f uf = minimum tensile strength of a bolt
embedment lengths are calculated with an additional
The failure surface has the shape of a cone which safety factor of 1.33 when compared to the guidelines
radiates at 45 degrees from the anchor head towards the presented in reference [3]. These simplified guidelines
concrete edge. The concrete capacity is calculated as the are as follows:
average concrete tensile strength Ô0.33 f′ c applied for Grade 250 bars and Grade 4.6 bolts:
over the projected cone area as follows: [2][3][17] L d ≥ 12d f
ÔN c.lat = Ô0.33 f′ c π a 2e (55) a e = min(100, 5d f)
for Grade 8.8 bolts:
where: L d ≥ 17d f
Ô = 0.65 in Ref. [3], 0.85 in Refs. [2] and [17] a e = min(100, 7d f)
ÔN c.lat = lateral bursting capacity of the concrete where:
a e = side cover L d = minimum embedment length
Equating the assumed lateral force (equal to 0.25 N tf) to These minimum embedment lengths and edge distances
the concrete lateral bursting capacity allows to express have also been recommended in references [18], [21]
the minimum required side cover as a function of both and [26].
the concrete and anchor bolt strengths as shown below:
Reinforcement needs to be specified in the case anchor
0.25N tf = ÔN c.lat = Ô0.33 f ′c π a 2e (56) bolts are located too close to a concrete edge (the edge
distance a e is less than the one required by equation
and solving equation (56) for a e yields: (58)) or their embedment length is less than the one
required to develop the bolt’s full tensile strength. Such
ae = df f uf
Ô7 f′ c
(57)
reinforcement should be designed and located to
intersect potential cracks ensuring full development
length of the reinforcement on both sides of such cracks.
The placement of the reinforcement should be
where: concentric with the tensile stress field. [2]
= πd 22 × 1 − 360
2 cos −1(s∕2L 2)
+ s L 22 − s 2∕4
2
Figure 38 Hook, embedment lengths and edge
distances for anchor bolts (Ref. [26])
A ps.4 = effective projected area of 4 anchor bolts with The minimum embedment length Ld for an isolated
overlapping of their failure cones. In this case anchor bolt should be calculated as follows: (refer to
each failure cone overlaps with all other 3 failure Fig. 38)
cones as shown in Fig. 37(c). − d 2f + d 2f + 4γ
= πd 24 0.75 −
2 cos −1(s∕2L 4)
360
where:
Ld =
2
≥ 100 (66)
Figure 40 Yield line layout near the bolt hole Figure 41 Yield line pattern (a) H sections
s
H--SHAPED COLUMN -- 4 anchor bolts
The yield line patterns considered by the recommended ab
model are shown in Figs. 41, 42, 43, 44 and 45. y
In the case of yield line patterns (a), (b) and (c) the y
derived model does not assume that the oblique lines sp
intersect the bolt hole. This should be verified and
y
considered in a similar manner as previously outlined in
the case of H--shaped column with 2 anchor bolts (refer y ab
to equation (71) and Fig. 40).
The recommended design procedure is as follows:
b fc
ÔN t = 0.9f yit 2i α (72) Figure 42 Yield line pattern (b) H sections
s
ti ≥ N *t
0.9f yiα
(73)
ab
y
y=
b fc1 − d h
b fc1 (74) sp
2
y
and the value of α is calculated as follows:
ab
sp
α = max(α a, α b) when y <
2
sp b fc
= α b when y < and y > a b
2 Figure 43 Yield line pattern (c) H sections
sp
= max(α c, α d, α e) when y ≥
2 s
where:
2b 2 − 2b fc1d h + 4y 2 ab
α a = fc1 y
2sy
b fc1(b fc1 − d h)(a b + y) + 2(y + a b)a by
αb = sp
2sa by
b 2fc1 − d hb fc1 + 2y 2c + s py c
αc =
2sy c y ab
b fc1s − d hs + 2y 2d + s py d − d hy d
αd = sy d
b fc1s − 2d hs + 4a 2b + 2a bs p − 2a bd h b fc
αe =
2a bs Figure 44 Yield line pattern (d) H sections
ab
ti ≥ N *t
0.9f yiα
(76)
sp
y = min d2 , (2b
c1
fc1 − d h)b fc1 (77)
where:
y ab 2b 2fc1 − b fc1d h + y 2
α=
2sy
b fc y and s = as defined in Fig. 47
ab ab
y
y
sp sp
y
y ab ab
b fc
b fc
Figure 48 Yield lines (a) Channels, 2 bolts Figure 52 Yield lines (e) Channels, 2 bolts
s HOLLOW SECTION (RHS, SHS, CHS) --
2 anchor bolts
ab
The yield line patterns considered by the recommended
y model are shown in Figs. 53 and 54.
sp In the case of yield line pattern (a) the derived model
does not assume that the oblique lines intersect the bolt
y hole. This should be verified and considered in a similar
ab manner as previously outlined in the case of H--shaped
column with 2 anchor bolts (refer to equation (71) and
Fig. 40).
b fc
The recommended design procedure is as follows:
Figure 49 Yield lines (b) Channels, 2 bolts ÔN t = 0.9f yit 2i α (81)
s
y ab ti ≥ N *t
0.9f yiα
(82)
y
s4 sp li
s3
y
li
s2
s1
s4
s3 y
sp li
li y
ÔN t =
Ôf yi π f 3t 2i
2
(87)
α= KÔN tf
t 2i
−1 a 2 + d f∕2
δ(a 2 + a 1 + t c)
(92)
6. SHEAR μ = 0.55
μ = 0.7
6.1. INTRODUCTION
The shear action may be assumed to be transferred from
the column to the concrete base either: Figure 57 Coefficients of Friction (Ref. [26])
1. by friction between between base plate and
concrete/grout base or by recessing the base 6.3. TRANSFER OF SHEAR BY A SHEAR
plate into the concrete footing; KEY-- LITERATURE REVIEW
2. by a shear key (or shear lug); Available design guidelines agree that in the presence of
3. by the anchor bolts; a shear key, the shear force is transferred through the
4. by a combination of two or more of the above. shear key acting as a cantilever and bearing against the
concrete surface as shown in Fig. 58 while no bearing is
Available design information regarding the transfer of assumed to occur against the grout. The bearing
shear by each of these means with and without axial capacity of the concrete is calculated in accordance with
loading is now outlined. It is interesting to note how AS 3600 [10]. Uniform bearing pressure is assumed to
there are still very different opinions regarding the occur at the interface between the shear key and the
ability of anchor bolts to transfer shear actions. For concrete equal to the maximum bearing capacity of the
clarity, the literature review regarding the behaviour of concrete. The shear key is designed as a cantilever to
anchor bolts is further divided into the case of anchor carry the assumed bearing pressure. [26]
bolts subject to shear only or to shear and axial
compression and the case of anchor bolts subject to The required area of the shear key is determined based
shear and axial tension. on the bearing concrete strength 0.85Ôf′ c as shown in
Fig. 58:
6.2. TRANSFER OF SHEAR BY FRICTION
OR BY RECESSING THE BASE PLATE V *s
A sk = (98)
INTO THE CONCRETE -- 0.85Ô cf′ c
LITERATURE REVIEW where:
There is general agreement regarding the determination Ô = 0.8
of the shear capacity of a base plate which can be
A sk = area of the shear key
ts = 4m *sk
0.9f ys
= V *s b s + t g
2
L s 0.9f ys
(101)
could cause a concrete wedge to form as shown in Fig.
59. It has been observed that the depth of the concrete
wedge can be approximated to be one quarter of the
or equivalently the shear capacity of a shear key is anchor bolt diameter. In the presence of a base plate the
calculated as: translation of the concrete wedge is prevented by a
clamping force provided by the base plate and anchor
0.9f ys t 2sL s bolts. While the anchor’s behaviour remains in the
ÔV s = (102) elastic range the clamping force applied by the anchor
bs + tg 2
bolt and base plate is proportional to the shear force.
where: Applied Shear
ÔV s = design shear capacity of the shear key
d f∕4 Concrete Wedge
ts
V *c
tg bs df
Shear Key
0.85f′ c
Figure 59 Concrete wedge failure mode under
Figure 58 Forces acting on Shear Keys anchor bolt shear force (Ref. [31])
(Ref. [26])
Locating an anchor bolt near the concrete free edge
In the presence of combined shear and axial could lead to another failure mode to occur as shown in
compression actions, the shear key is normally assumed Fig. 60. The concrete failure surface is determined by
radiating at 45 degrees from the anchor bolt at the
* -- Development
length from AS3600
*
where:
Ô = 0.7 (based on as Ô required for Clause 9.2.3 of Figure 66 4--bolt base plate to UB/UC column
AS3600) (Ref. [26])
A psk = projected area over the concrete edge
ignoring the shear key area
sp
The shear capacity of the shear key based on its nominal
section moment capacity ÔV s.b is calculated as follows:
0.9f ys t 2sL s
ÔV s.b = (114)
bs + tg 2
The capacity of the fillet weld connecting the shear key
to the base plate ÔV s.w calculated in the direction Figure 67 2--bolt base plate to channel column
perpendicular to the shear key is determined as follows (Ref. [26])
(assuming the shear key is welded all around):
Ôv w2L s
ÔV s.w = (115)
bs+ts
1+ t
s
2
where:
Ôv w = design capacity of the fillet weld per unit
Legend:
length (as calculated in equation (110) or as
tabulated in Section 13.) Anchor Bolt Location
Hole to allow grout
7. BASE PLATE AND ANCHOR BOLTS egress
DETAILING
Figure 68 2--bolt base plate to hollow columns
Typical base plate layouts considered in this paper are (Ref. [26])
shown in Figs. 65, 66, 67 and 68.
Typical anchor bolts used in base plate applications are Preferred anchor bolt gauge (sg) and pitch (sp) are given
cast--in anchors of category 4.6/S and of diameter either in Reference [12].
M16, M20, M24 or M30. Masonry anchors of diameter The ”weld all round” philosophy sometimes adopted in
M16, M20, M24 may also be used. the weld design of base plates can lead to over--welding
and can become very expensive. The details shown in
Figs. 65, 66, 67 and 68 can, if designed for light
loadings, tend to the other extreme and some fabricators
Component may prefer to increase the amount of welding above that
to suit shown on the design drawings in order to prevent
damage during handling and shipping. There is usually
Grout pad a compromise possible between these two extremes.
Another design consideration is the likelihood of a
Typical nominally pinned base being subjected to some bending
moment in a real situation. [26]
Prior to erecting the column/base plate assembly, the
sg Typical level of the base plate area should be surveyed and shims
placed to indicate the correct level of the underside of
the base plate as shown in Fig. 69. For heavier column
Figure 65 2--bolt base plate to UB /UC column / base plate assemblies, levelling--nut arrangements may
be used in order to allow accurate levelling of the base
(Ref. [26])
plate as outlined in [7] and [38]. Hole sizes in base plates
Level of U/S
Baseplate
Tack weld 10mm
Concrete surface
Shims reinforcing bars to
form cage -- no
Figure 69 Use of shims for levelling purposes tacks on HS bolts.
(Ref. [26])
Holes require a special plate washer of 4 mm minimum
thickness under the nut if the bolt hole is more than 3 mm
larger than the anchor bolt diameter.
Figure 70 Locating Holding Down Bolts
Base plates should be provided with at least one grout with a Cage (Ref. [26])
inspection hole through which the grout will rise
indicating a satisfactory grouting operation.
Anchor bolts are usually galvanized, even for an interior 1 2 3
application, in order to avoid corrosion during the Specified dimension (+/-- 6 in every 30m
construction period where the steel columns may stand but not greater than +/-- 25 overall)
for some time in the open air.
The size and location of any permanent steel shims Max deviation +/-- 6
under the base plate should be shown on the drawings.
Temporary packers which are used for erection
purposes until the underside of the base plate is grouted
or concreted should be left to the erector to detail.
The minimum space between the underside of the base
plate and the concrete foundation should be: C/L Anchor bolts
25 mm for grouting; Max deviation +/-- 6
50 mm for mortar bedding; Max deviation +/-- 6
75 mm for concrete bedding.
C/L Anchor bolts
Tolerances on anchor bolt positions and level of base
plate should conform to the provisions of Clause 5.12 of +/-- 3
AS 4100.[11]
[24] notes that possible design and detailing problems C/L Grid
for base plates include: +/-- 3
Detail of off--centre
inadequate development of the anchor bolts for
location of anchor bolts C/L Grid
tension and of concrete reinforcing steel;
improper selection of anchor bolt material;
inadequate base plate thickness; 4
poor placement of anchor bolts; Unless otherwise Main
specified, dimensions column
shear and fatigue loading on anchor bolts.
C/L grid
Based on a survey carried out in the UK [29] notes that are in millimetres
poor fit of base plates onto holding down bolts is among
one of the four most commonly reported problems of Max deviation +/-- 6 if
lack of fit on site. column offset from main
column line.
To ensure that the bolt centres match the nominated
centres and the hole centres drilled in the base plate, the
bolts are often caged into a group as shown in Fig. 70.
Also useful is the provision of cored holes usually
formed by using polystyrene which allow the Figure 71 Tolerances in Anchor Bolt Location
adjustment of anchor bolt positions once the concrete is after AS 4100 (Ref. [26])
cast in order to exactly match the hole centres in the base [19] and [38] present a discussion of a number of
plate as already shown in Fig. 32. practical aspects of the use of anchor bolts and should
Anchor bolt centres must comply with the tolerances set be referred to if problems arise on site. [19] deals with
out in Clause 15.3.1 of AS 4100 as shown in see Fig. 71. general aspects regarding design, installation,
anchorage, corrosion of anchor bolts, bedding and
grouting as well as the responsibilities of all parties in
4Ôf b
2f *p
t i = 1 d cb fc
4 0.9f yi a5
= 1 − 1 − X (125)
= a4 2N *c
0.9f yid ib i
(120) where:
4
4N *c
where: X=
Ôf ba 25
a 4 = 1 d cb fc Substituting the value of a 3 calculated in equation (125)
4
into equation (122) yields, after simplifying, the
A.1.2 DETERMINATION OF λ following expression for the H--shaped bearing area
(Murray--Stockwell Model) A H:
The thickness of the base plate calculated according to a 25X
Murray--Stockwell Model is determined as follows: AH = (126)
4
ti = a3 2N *c
0.9f yiA H
(121)
The required plate thickness can now be calculated
substituting the values of A H and a 3 calculated from
equations (125) and (126) into equation (121).
It is interesting to note how, in the formulation presented
in [5], [42] and [43], the load adopted in equation (121)
would have been equal to N *0 instead of N *c, where N *0
ti =
a5
4
1 − 1 − X 8N *c
0.9f yi a 25X
is the portion of full column load N *c acting over the
column footprint under the assumption of uniform
bearing pressure, while in the derivation presented the
full column load N *c is assumed to be applied on the
= λa 4 2N *c
0.9f yid ib i
(127)
H--shaped area A H.
where:
Referring to Fig. 11 the H--shaped bearing area A H can
be expressed as follows:
A H = 2a 3a 5 − 4a 23 (122)
λ=2 d ib i X
d cb fc 1 + 1 − X
1
c (123)
pattern would otherwise occur.
where:
Ô = 0.6
Dashed lines
A 1 = bearing area equal to the base plate area A i
indicate yield lines
The H--shaped area A H is defined as the area able to
support the applied axial compression load N *c at a
uniform pressure of Ôf b.
N *c
AH = (124)
Ôf b
Figure 73 Yield line pattern for Channels
where:
Referring to Fig. 12 the assumed bearing area AH can be
η = d c∕b fc expressed as follows:
Similarly to the case of H--shaped column sections the
A H = a 3a 5 − 2a 23 (134)
uniform load f *p is calculated as follows:
N *c where:
f *p = a 5 = 2b fc + d c
d ib i
The value of the maximum bearing strength of the
The required design plastic moment Ôm p to support a concrete Ôf b is calculated as follows:
uniform pressure of f *p is obtained by re--arranging
equation (128) as follows:
9η − 4 4 + 9η + 8
2 2
Ôf b = min Ô0.85f′ c AA , Ô2f′
2
1
c (135)
Ôm p = f *pb 2fc
244 + 9η 2 − 2 where:
Ô = 0.6
= f *pb 2fcα 2 (129) A 1 = bearing area equal to the base plate area A i
The assumed area A H is defined as the area able to
where:
support the applied axial compression load N *c at a
9η 2 − 4 4 + 9η 2 + 8 uniform pressure of Ôf b.
α2 =
24 4 + 9η 2 − 48 N *c
AH = (136)
Ôf b
The value of α introduced in equation (129) can be
2
approximated by the following expression with an error Substituting equations (134) and (135) into equation
of --0% (unconservative) and +6.7% (conservative) for (136) and solving for a 3 the following expression for a 3
values of η (which is equal to d c∕b fc ) between 1.25 and is obtained:
4 (which include the channel sections available in
Australia): Ôf ba 5 − (Ôf ba 5) 2 − 8Ôf bN *c
a3 =
4Ôf b
α = 1 η (130)
3
a5
The required plate thickness to support f *p can be
=
4
1 − 1 − X (137)
determined by equating the nominal section moment where:
capacity of the plate Ôm s (per unit width) to the required
design plastic capacity (per unit width) as follows: 8N *c
X=
Ôf ba 25
0.9f yit 2i
Ôm s = ≥ f *pb 2fcα 2 = Ôm p (131)
4 Substituting the value of a 3 calculated in equation (137)
and re--arranging equation (131) in terms of the required into equation (134) yields, after simplifying, the
plate thickness yields: following expression for the assumed bearing area A H:
a 25X
ti =
2d cb fc
3
2f *p
0.9f yi
AH =
8
(138)
where: ti =
a5
4
1 − 1 − X 16N *c
0.9f yi a 25X
λ=3
2
d ib i X
d cb fc 1 + 1 − X ti = 2d23b 0.9f
c c2f *
p
yi
N*
f *p = c
24η 2
Ôf b = min Ô0.85f′ c AA , Ô2f′
2
1
c (145)
d ib i
η = d c∕b c where:
Ô = 0.6
dc
A 1 = bearing area equal to the base plate area A i
The assumed area A H is defined as the area able to
support the applied axial compression load N *c at a
bc uniform pressure of Ôf b.
N *c
AH = (146)
Ôf b
Figure 74 Yield line pattern for Rectangular Substituting equations (144) and (145) into equation
Hollow Sections (146) and solving for a 3 the following expression for a 3
is obtained:
The plate is assumed to be simply supported along all
the edges. 2Ôf ba 5 − 4(Ôf ba 5) 2 − 16Ôf bN *c
The value of α 2 introduced in equation (140) can be a3 =
8Ôf b
approximated by the following expression with an error
of --0% (unconservative) and +11.1% (conservative) for a5
values of η (which is equal to d c∕b c) between 3/4 and =
4
1 − 1 − X (147)
4:
where:
α= η
23
(141)
X=
4N *c
Ôf ba 25
The required plate thickness to support f *p can be
Substituting the value of a 3 calculated in equation (147)
determined by equating the nominal section moment into equation (144) yields, after simplifying, the
capacity of the plate Ôm s (per unit width) to the required following expression for the assumed bearing area A H:
design plastic capacity (per unit width) as follows:
ti =
a5
4
1 − 1 − X 8N *c
0.9f yi a 25X
= a4 2N *c
yi
(152)
0.9f yid ib i
= λa 4 2N *c
0.9f yid ib i
(149) where:
where:
a4 = 10.7
1 b
c ≈ 1 bc
3
1
c (154)
required design plastic moment Ôm p under a uniform
pressure f *p can be expressed as follows (based on [35] where:
and [46]): Ô = 0.6
f *pb 2c A 1 = bearing area equal to the base plate area A i
Ôm p = (150) The assumed area A H is defined as the area able to
21.4
support the applied axial compression load N *c at a
where: uniform pressure of Ôf b.
N *c
f *p = N *c
d ib i AH = (155)
Ôf b
bc
In a similar manner as previously carried out the value
of a 3 can be determined as follows:
bc
a3 = 1 − 1 − X (156)
2
bc where:
4N *c
X=
Ôf ba 25
1
c (163)
carried out for circular hollow sections.
A.5.1 DETERMINATION OF a 4 where:
(Yield line theory) Ô = 0.6
The yield line pattern considered in the case of circular A 1 = bearing area equal to the base plate area A i
hollow sections is shown in Fig. 76 and the required The assumed area A H is defined as the area able to
design plastic moment Ôm p under a uniform pressure f *p support the applied axial compression load N *c at a
can be expressed as follows (based on [35]): uniform pressure of Ôf b.
f *pd 20 N *c
Ôm p = (159) AH = (164)
24 Ôf b
where: In a similar manner as previously carried out the value
Nc * of a 3 can be determined as follows:
f *p =
d ib i d0
a3 =
2
1 − 1 − X (165)
where:
4N *c
do X=
d 20πÔf b
ti =
d0
2 3
2f *p
0.9f yi
= a4 2N *c
0.9f yid ib i
(161) ≈2
d ib i
d0
X
1 + 1 − X
where: A.6 DERIVATION FOR CHECK PURPOSES
d0 -- ALL SECTIONS
a4 =
2 3 The base plate capacity for a given base plate according
to each Model considered is first determined and then a
unique expression which concatenates them is derived.
t i = λa 4 2ÔN c.4
0.9f yid ib i
Here the yield lines are conservatively assumed to
remain inside the internal faces of the column profile,
while in Murray Model they extend to the centerline of
the web and to the outside faces of the flanges.
=
ÔN c.4 Y
1 + 1 − ÔN c.4Y
ka 4 0.9f2 d b
yi i i
(171) The derivations of the capacity or required thickness for
the yield line patterns considered have been carried out
for various combinations of column sections and
where: number of anchor bolts as listed in Section 5.4.7. The
X derivation for the case of a H--shaped column with
λ=k anchor bolts, as shown in Fig. 77, is outlined below. All
1 + 1 − X other cases are considered in a similar manner and the
relevant expressions of their derivation are summarised
X = ÔN c.4Y in Table 6. Similar considerations outlined for the
validity of the Yield Line Model for the case of a
and re--arranging equation (171) yields:
H--shaped column section with 2 bolts can be applied to
0.9f yib id i the other base plate configurations considered.
ÔN c.4 = t 2i λ′ (172)
2a 24 B.1 H--SHAPED COLUMN WITH 2
ANCHOR BOLTS
where:
In the case of H--shaped column sections with two
λ′ = 12
k
2ka 4
t Y
i
0.9f2 b d − 1
yi i i
anchor bolts the yield line pattern assumed is shown in
Fig. 77. It is the same as the one considered in Murray
Model. The base plate dimensions are conservatively
assumed to be equal to the outside column dimensions
The design capacity of the base plate is then calculated unless noted otherwise.
as follows:
ÔN c = min(ÔN c.1, ÔN c.2, ÔN c.5) (173)
where:
ÔN c.5 = max(ÔN c.3, ÔN c.4)
and ÔN c.1, ÔN c.2, ÔN c.3 and ÔN c.4 area calculated as
shown in equations (168), (169), (170) and (172).
y d c1
2
ti ≥ 4syN *t
0.9f yi2b 2fc1 − 2b fc1d h + 4y 2
(181)
dN *b 2b − 2d h Web
diameter of hole = d h
= − fc1 2 + 4 =0 (177)
dy y b fc1
l1
Solving equation (177) for y yields:
l2
y= b fc1 − d h
2
b fc1 (178)
y = min d c1
2
, b fc1 − d h
2
b fc1 (179)
Substituting a nil value for the diameter of the bolt hole
d h in equations (179) and (181) would lead to the
determination of plate thicknesses t i similar to those
The design axial tension capacity of the base plate ÔN t obtained with Murray Model.
is then obtained re--arranging equation (176) as follows:
0.9f yit 2i
ÔN t = 2b 2fc1 − 2b fc1d h + 4y 2 (180)
4sy
Section / Wi We y Restraints
No. Bolts
H--shaped
section
2--bolts
Ôm p 2b fc1 − 2d h
y +
4y
b fc1
2N *b s
b fc1 min d c1
2
, b fc1 --d h
2
b fc1
H--shaped
section 2Ôm p 2b fc1 − 2d h
y +
4y
b fc1
4N *b s
b fc1 b fc1 − d h
2
b fc1
y ≤ a b,
sp
2
4--bolts (a)
H--shaped
section Ôm p 2b a --2d + 2b
fc1
b
h fc1 --2d h
y +
4y+4a b
b fc1
4N *b s
b fc1 b fc1 − d h
2
b fc1 y≤
sp
2
4--bolts (b)
H--shaped
section
4--bolts (c)
Ôm p 2b fc1 − 2d h
y +
4y + 2s p
b fc1
4N *b s
b fc1
min a b, b fc1 --d h
2
b fc1
H--shaped
section
4--bolts (d)
Ôm p 2b fc1 − 2d h 4y + 2s p − 2d h
y + s 2N *b
min a b, b fc1 --d h
2
s
H--shaped
section Ôm p b fc1 − 2d h 4a b + 2s p − 2d h
ab + s 2N *b
4--bolts (e)
Channel N *b s
2--bolts Ôm p 4b fc1 − 2d h
y +
2y
b fc1
b fc1 min d c1
2
, (2b fc1 --d h)b fc1
Channel 2N *b s (2bfc1 − d h)b fc1 sp
4Ôm
2b fc1 − 2d h 2y b fc1 y ≤ a b,
4--bolts (a) p y + 2
b fc1
Channel 2N *b s sp
4--bolts (b) Ôm p 4b fc1 --2d h 4b fc1 --2d h 2y+2a b
ab + y +
b fc1
b fc1 (2bfc1 − d h)b fc1 y≤
2
Channel 2N *b s
4--bolts (c) Ôm p 4b fc1 − 2d h
y +
2y + s p
b fc1
b fc1 mina b, (2b fc1 --d h)b fc1
Channel
4--bolts (d)
Ôm p
4b fc1 − 2d h 4y + 2s p − 2d h
y + s
2N *b
min a b, 2b fc1 − d h
2
s
Ôm
Channel 2b − 2d 4a + 2s − 2d p 2N *b
fc1 h b h
4--bolts (e) p a + s
b
s
Ôm +s
Hollow 4s − 2d 2y (2s2 − dh)s2 2y ≤ l i
2 h N *b s 1
2--bolts (a) uy 2 2
Hollow l s
Ôm p s i N *b s 3
2--bolts (b) 4 4
s
Hollow
4--bolts (a) Ôm u 4s −y 2d + 2y +s s
2 h
2
p 2N *b s 1
2
(2s2 − dh)s2 2y + s p ≤ l i
Hollow s
l 2N *b s 3
4--bolts (b) Ôm p s i 4
2
Table 15 Minimum concrete edge distances Re--arranging equation (189) the ratios a e∕d f for
for anchor bolts Grade 4.6 bolts and different combinations of concrete and bolt strengths for
Grade 250 rods (fuf = 400 MPa) different values of Ô are obtained as shown below.
subject to shear with Ô = 0.85 Table 17 Grade 4.6 bolts and 250 Grade rods
New South Wales and ACT National Engineering Pty Ltd Central Engineering Pty Ltd
Almar Industries Pty Ltd PO Box 437 Young 2594 02 6382 1499 19 Traders Way Currumbin 4223 07 5534 3155
9 Cheney Place Mitchell ACT 2911 02 6241 3391 Piper & Harvey Steel Fabrications D A Manufacturing Co Pty Ltd
Baxter Engineering Pty Ltd PO Box 821 Wagga Wagga 2650 02 6922 7527 7 Hilldon Court Nerang 4211 07 5596 2222
PO Box 643 Fyshwick ACT 2609 02 6280 5688 Ripa Steel Fabrication Pty Ltd Darra Welding Works Pty Ltd
Ace High Engineering Pty Ltd 4 Warren Place Silverdale 2752 02 4774 0011 PO Box 47 Richlands 4077 07 3375 5841
67 Melbourne Rd Riverstone 2765 02 9627 2500 Riton Engineering Pty Ltd Factory Fabricators Pty Ltd
Algon Steel P/L 101 Gavenlock Road, 63 Factory Road Oxley 4075 07 3379 8811
9 Arunga Drive Beresfield 2322 02 4966 8224 Tuggerah 2259 02 4353 1688
Fritz Steel (Qld) Pty Ltd
Align Constructions & Engineering Pty Ltd Romac Engineering PO Box 12 Richlands 4077 07 3375 6366
PO Box 747 Moss Vale 2577 02 4869 1594 PO Box 670 Armidale 2350 02 6772 3407
J K Morrow Sales
Allmen Engineering Saunders International Pty Ltd PO Box 59 Earlville 4870 07 4035 1599
35--37 Anne St St Marys 2760 02 9673 0051 PO Box 281 Condell Park 2200 02 9792 2444
M C Engineering
Antax Steel Constructions P/L Steeline Fabrications PO Box 381 Burpengary 4505 07 3888 2144
93 Bellambi Lane Bellambi 2518 02 4285 2644 PO Box 296 Woy Woy 2256 02 4341 9571
Milfab
B & G Welding Pty Ltd Tenze Engineering PO Box 3056 Clontarf 4019 07 3203 3311
12 Bessemer St Blacktown 2148 02 9621 3189 PO Box 426 Greenacre 2190 02 9758 2677
Morton Steel Pty Ltd
Beltor Engineering Pty Ltd Tri--Fab Engineering Pty Ltd 47 Barku Court Hemmant 4174 07 3396 5322
PO Box 4187 Edgeworth 2285 02 4953 2444 Lot 1 Ti--Tree Street,
Noosa Engineering & Crane Hire
Wilberforce 2756 02 4575 1056
Bosmac Pty Ltd PO Box 356 Tewantin 4565 07 5449 7477
64--68 Station Street Parkes 2870 02 6862 3699 UEA Industrial Engineers Pty Ltd
PO Box 6163 Queanbeyan 2620 02 6299 3238 Oz--Cover Pty Ltd
Boweld Constructions Pty Ltd 35 Centenary Place,
PO Box 52 Bomaderry 2541 02 4421 6781 Universal Steel Construction Logan Village 4207 07 5546 8922
52--54 Newton Road,
Charles Heath Industries Pacific Coast Engineering Pty Ltd
Wetherill Park 2164 02 9756 2555
18 Britton Street Smithfield 2164 02 9609 6000 PO Box 7284 Garbutt 4814 07 4774 8477
Combell P/L Walpett Engineering Pty Ltd
52 Hincksman Street, Podevin Engineering Co P/L
PO Box 5038 Prestons 2170 02 9607 3822 PO Box 171 Archerfield 4108 07 3277 1388
Queanbeyan 2620 02 6297 1277
Coolamon Steelworks Queensbury Steel Pty Ltd
PO Box 102 Coolamon 2701 02 6927 3296 Weldcraft Engineering ACT Pty Ltd
79 Thuralilly Street, 3 Queensbury Avenue,
Cooma Steel Co. Pty Ltd Queanbeyan 2620 02 6297 1453 Currumbin Waters 4223 07 5534 7455
PO Box 124 Cooma 2630 02 6452 1934 Rimco Building Systems Pty Ltd
Z Steel Fabrications Pty Ltd
Cosme--Australia Stainless Steel Fab Pty Ltd PO Box 7274 Lismore Heights 2480 02 6625 1717 20 Demand Avenue Arundel 4214 07 5594 7322
19 Lasscock Road Griffith 2680 02 6964 1155 Spaceframe Buildings Pty Ltd
Davebilt Industries Northern Territory 360 Lytton Road Morningside 4170 07 3370 6500
116 Showground Rd N Gosford 2250 02 4325 7381 M&J Welding And Engineering Stewart & Sons Steel
GPO Box 2638 Darwin 0801 08 8932 2641 11 Production St Bundaberg 4670 07 4152 6311
Designed Building Systems
144 Sackville Street Fairfield 2165 02 9727 0566 Trans Aust Constructions P/L Sun Engineering Pty Ltd
Edcon Steel Pty Ltd PO Box 39472 Winnellie 0821 08 8984 4511 113 Cobalt St Carole Park 4300 07 3271 2988
52 Orchard Rd Brookvale 2100 02 9905 6622 Queensland Taringa Steel P/L
Flame--Cut Pty Ltd AG Rigging & Steel Pty Ltd 17 Jijaws St Sumner Park 4074 07 3279 4233
PO Box 6367 Wetherill Park 2164 02 9609 3677 PO Box 9154 Wilsonton, Thomas Steel Fabrication
Gale Bros Engineering Pty Ltd Toowoomba 4350 07 4633 0244 PO Box 147 Aitkenvale,
PO Box 6013 South Penrith 2750 02 4732 1133 Alltype Welding Townsville 4814 07 4775 1266
Jeskah Steel Products PO Box 1418 Beenleigh 4207 07 3807 1820 W D T Engineers Pty Ltd
23 Arizona Rd Charmhaven 2263 02 4392 7022 Apex Fabrication & Construction PO Box 115 Acacia Ridge 4110 07 3345 4000
Kermac Welding & Engineering 164--168 Cobalt Street, Walz Construction Company Pty Ltd
Cemetery Street Goulburn 2580 02 4821 3877 Carole Park 4300 07 3271 4467 PO Box 1713 Gladstone 4680 07 4972 4799
Leewood Welding Austin Engineering P/L
PO Box 1767 Orange 2800 02 6362 8797 173 Cobalt Street, South Australia
Carole Park 4300 07 3271 2622 Advanced Steel Fabrications
Lifese Engineering Pty Ltd 61--63 Kapara Rd Gillman 5013 08 8447 7100
5 Junction Street Auburn 2144 02 9748 0444 Beenleigh Steel Fabrications P/L
41 Magnesium Drive, Ahrens Engineering Pty Ltd
Mario & Sons (NSW) Pty Ltd
Crestmead 4132 07 3803 6033 PO Box 2 Sheaoak Log 5371 08 8524 9045
189--193 Newton Road,
Wetherill Park 2164 02 9756 3400 Belconnen Steel Pty Ltd Bowhill Engineering
11 Malton Street The Gap 4061 07 3300 2444 Lot 100, Weber Road Bowhill 5238 08 8570 4208
Mecha Engineering Pty Ltd
PO Box 477 Wyong 2259 02 4351 1877 Brisbane Steel Fabrication Magill Welding Service Pty Ltd
Morson Engineering Pty Ltd PO Box 7087 Hemmant 4174 07 3893 4233 33 Maxwell Road Pooraka 5095 08 8349 4933
PO Box 244 Wyong 2259 02 4352 2188 Cairns Steel Fabricators P/L Manuele Engineers Pty Ltd
National Engineering Pty Ltd PO Box 207b Bungalow 4870 07 4035 1506 PO Box 209 Melrose Park 5039 08 8374 1680
72--74 Bayldon Road, Casa Engineering (Qld) Pty Ltd RC & Ml Johnson Pty Ltd
Queanbeyan 2620 02 6299 1844 PO Box Ge 80 Garbutt East 4814 07 4774 4666 671 Magill Road Magill 5072 08 8333 0188
ASI Members -- The best in Steel Fabrication