QUALITY ASSURANCE CORNER

meeting and exceeding requirements and expectations

Tips for Designing Constructible Steel-Framed Structures

Part 1
By Clifford W. Schwinger, P.E., SECB and Todd R. Campbell, P.E. The term constructability denes the ease with which structures can be built. Why should designers care about constructability? They should care because a constructible design is an economical design. Thirty years ago there was little discussion about constructability. That was because most structural engineers were aware of the need to design buildings which could be easily built. Consideration of constructability was standard procedure. Attention to constructability diminished with the increased use of computers. Computer programs unfortunately do not print error messages warning of constructability aws. Recently there has been renewed focus on constructability what it is, how to achieve it and how to educate practicing engineers on this lost art. This article focuses on constructability of steel-framed structures. There are four basic tenets to the practice of designing constructible steel structures. They are: 1) Simplicity = economy 2) Least weight does not always equate to least cost 3) The fewer the pieces, the more economical the design 4) Efcient connection design = economical design Note that the terms economy and constructible are often used interchangeably in discussions of constructability. This is because the most economical design is usually one that is also highly constructible. Constructability problems fall into two general categories constructability aws due to framing congurations that are difcult to assemble (most often relating to connection issues) and constructability aws due to framing congurations that are inefcient (such as a oor faming layout with beams spaced at 6 feet o.c. versus a layout with beams spaced at 12 feet o.c.) Below is a list of suggestions which, if followed, will usually facilitate the fabrication and erection of steel structures. Some of these rules-of-thumb will vary depending on project location, labor cost and specic fabricator preferences based on available fabrication equipment. Designers should be familiar with

Figure 1: Simplify base plate geometry where possible.

preferred fabrication and construction practices common within the areas where their projects are located. 1) Show all actual reactions, moments and axial loads for which connections must be designed, and permit fabricators to design and detail the connections to suit their preferences. If readers follow only this rule, they will signicantly enhance constructability of the buildings that they design. Showing reactions, moments and member forces, and allowing fabricators to design and detail their preferred connections, will result in the most competitive bids. 2) Use square baseplates with symmetrical anchor rod patterns. Square plates, and symmetrical and repetitive anchor rod patterns, are easy to detail, fabricate and erect. This is a classic example of simplicity = economy. (Figure 1) 3) Frame girders to column anges. Its easier to maneuver beams (which are usually smaller than girders) into position between column anges than it is to frame girders to column webs. Likewise, beams usually have smaller reactions than girders. Economical August 2010

connections, such as single angle connections, can usually be used for light beam reactions. Single angle connections to column webs offer an additional benet of eliminating shared bolts with the beam connections on the opposing side of the web. 4) Do not prohibit one-sided shear connections, such as single angle connections, unless there are valid reasons for doing so. Some designers arbitrarily prohibit the use of one-sided connections. Properly designed singlesided connections are cost effective, strong and safe to erect. 5) Avoid complete joint penetration (CJP) welds when possible. Some designers arbitrarily require welds to be complete joint penetration welds when alternative welds will work. When designers opt not to design and detail welded connections on the contract documents, the best alternative is to provide steel fabricators with the design forces at welded connections and permit the fabricators connection engineer to design the most cost-efcient weld to resist the applied forces.

STRUCTURE magazine

54

Figure 2: Head off steeply skewed beams to facilitate design and detailing of connections.

Figure 4: Orient columns in braced frames to enable square bracing connections.

6) Avoid specifying that connections be designed for full strength of member. Requiring that connections be able to support the full strength of the member is both vague and usually unnecessary. A better solution is to show the member reactions on the framing plans. 7) Avoid using generic tables requiring beams of certain depths to be designed for conservative reactions. The use of a table listing beam depths, minimum rows of bolts and minimum required connection shear capacities is widespread. A better solution is to show all beam reactions on the framing plans. Connection cost is a signicant percentage of the total inplace cost of structural steel. Requiring connections to be designed to have capacities far greater than the actual reactions is wasteful of the owners budget and resources. 8) Size columns to avoid stiffener plates and web doubler plates. Stiffener plates and web doubler plates are costly to install. A better alternative is usually to upsize columns so that these plates are not required. 9) Favor bolted connections over welded connections. Most large fabricators use computer controlled beam and angle drill line machinery.

The only labor required is that of bolting connection angles to beams and columns. Welded connections introduce another level of complexity and increased chances for human error. While welded connections are ne where required, most fabricators with drill line machinery prefer bolted connections. Welded connections also require a greater level of inspection versus bolted connections. 10) Favor connections that do not require eld welding. Field welding is generally more expensive than eld bolting. 11) Check that connections are constructible and that bolts or welds can be physically installed. Engineers who delegate connection design to the steel fabricator are still obligated to make sure that their framing is congured in a manner that will permit the steel fabricators to efciently detail and fabricate the connections. 12) Minimize or avoid skewed connections where possible. While skewed connections can be fabricated, they are generally more expensive than square connections. 13) Avoid skewed connections with large reactions. Beams with large end reactions are often most efciently framed with double-sided connections specically double angle connections where the bolts are in double shear. Double sided skewed connections are more expensive than doublesided square connections, and bolt installation can be difcult depending on the angle of the skew. 14) Avoid steeply skewed beam-to-girder connections with skew angles less than 30 degrees. Steep skew angles often require very large beam copes, which can reduce the strength of the

member at the connection. Welds on the acute angle side of steeply skewed single plate connections can be difcult to install. Bolts can likewise be difcult to install. When steeply skewed beams cannot be avoided, heading them off will usually solve the connection problems that would otherwise occur. (Figure 2) 15) Orient columns to minimize skewed connections to columns. (Figure 3) 16) Orient columns in braced frames square with braced frame members. (Figure 4) The next QA Corner article will continue the discussion of constructability of steel-framed structures, with 25 additional tips and suggestions. If you have any comments about this article, please email the authors. Clifford Schwinger, P.E., SECB is a Vice President and Quality Assurance Manager at The Harman Group. He may be reached at cschwinger@harmangroup.com. Todd R. Campbell, P.E. is an Associate and Project Manager at The Harman Group. He may be reached at tcampbell@harmangroup.com.

ADVERTISEMENT For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

The easiest to use software for calculating wind, seismic, snow and other loadings for IBC, ASCE7, and all state codes based on these codes ($195.00). Tilt-up Concrete Wall Panels ($95.00). Floor Vibration for Steel Beams and Joists ($100.00). Concrete beams with torsion ($45.00). Demos at: www.struware.com

Figure 3: Orient columns to minimize the number of skewed connections.

STRUCTURE magazine

55

August 2010

QUALITY ASSURANCE CORNER

meeting and exceeding requirements and expectations

Tips for Designing Constructible Steel-Framed Structures

Part 2
By Clifford W. Schwinger, P.E., SECB and Todd R. Campbell, P.E. This article is a continuation of a discussion of tips and suggestions for improving the constructability of steel-framed structures, the rst part of which was in the August 2010 issue of STRUCTURE magazine. As readers may have observed in Part 1, seemingly small and innocuous changes in framing congurations can have a big impact on the ease and economy with which steelstructures can be erected. As noted in the Part 1 article, these tips and suggestions may vary around the country and are dependent on local fabrication and erection practices. The best way for engineers to know for sure how to best enhance the constructability of the projects they design is to pick up the phone and call local steel fabricators. This is a topic that most fabricators have strong opinions about and most are more than willing to share their opinions with you. 17) The fewer the pieces the better. In general, the fewer the pieces of steel there are to detail, fabricate, ship, erect and connect, the lower the cost of steel per ton. The easiest way to minimize the number of beams on a oor is to maximize the span of oor slabs and roof decks. 18) Repetition = economy 19) Avoid framing more than one member to each side of a column. Framing multiple members to one side of a column can complicate connections and lead to problems installing bolts and welds. (Figure 5) 20) Modify workpoints on braced frames to simplify connections. Orienting diagonal brace workpoints at the intersection of the faces of columns and beams may require upsizing members due to secondary moments, but doing so can simplify the connection design and reduce the number of bolts. (Figure 6) 21) When using W Shape columns, do not use columns smaller than W10s. W8 columns are too small to enable installation of single or double angle connections to the column web. W10 columns are the minimum size for which such connections can be used. Where space permits W12 columns are even better than W10s. (Figure 7, page 34) 22) Check that braced frame connections will t on the foundations, and that loads can be transferred from the braced frames to the foundations. This may sound so obvious as to not warrant mention; however, a lack of attention to connection details between braced frames and foundations is not uncommon. 23) Do not rely on anchor rods to transfer braced frame shear forces. Anchor rods are usually installed through oversized holes in column base plates. Anchor bolts cannot resist

Figure 5: Avoid framing more than one member to any one side of a column.

Figure 6: Adjust workpoint locations on braced frames to simplify connections.

shear until the base plate moves enough so that the anchor rods bear against the edges of the holes. Shear lugs welded to the underside of the base plate or embedded plates cast into the foundation (to which braced frame gusset plates are welded) are best for transferring lateral loads from braced frames into the foundation. 24) Do not specify slip-critical (SC) bolted connections where slip-critical bolts are not required. AISC 360-05 species where slip-critical bolts are required. The shear capacity of SC bolts is signicantly less than bearing bolts. Requiring SC bolts where they are not truly required will add unnecessary cost and complexity to connections. 25) Use R=3 for seismic design where possible. Using R=3 avoids expensive seismic connection detailing requirements. In areas of low to moderate seismicity where seismic base shear is the same or less than base shear due to wind, there is usually no benet to be gained by using a seismic response coefcient greater than R=3. 26) Do not use beams with anges less than 0.30-inch thick as composite beams. -inch diameter headed studs are most often used for composite beam design. The AISC specication requires that beam anges have a thickness not less than the stud diameter divided by 2.5 unless the studs are aligned over the beam web. Headed studs are normally installed on beam anges by welding through the metal deck. This usually makes precise alignment of studs over the beam web difcult to achieve. Accordingly, the use of very light beams (W8x10, W10x12, W12x14) as composite beams should

STRUCTURE magazine

33

November 2010

Figure 7: Columns should be at least W10s to permit bolted connections to the web.

be avoided. There is nothing wrong, however, in using these beams as noncomposite members. 27) Do not specify 105 ksi anchor rods unless absolutely required. Grade 105 material is difcult to bend and weld if anchor rod repairs are required. 28) Check that column baseplate anchor rods can be installed in piers, columns and footings. Failure to coordinate if anchor rods will t can

lead to RFIs and potentially costly eld modications. 29) Do not use ange plate moment connections on beams with anges less than 5 inches for -inch bolts or 6.5 inches for -inch diameter bolts. Bolts are difcult to install on beams with narrow anges. 30) Avoid using W shapes to resist torsion. Use rectangular or square HSS sections when torsion cannot be avoided. 31) Increase beam depth to avoid web reinforcing. Beams with large copes at connections should be increased in depth when required, to eliminate the need for web reinforcement or special connections. (Figure 8) 32) Understand local fabricator preferences with regards to preferred connection details. Designers should know the preferred practices of the steel fabricators in their area. Do local fabricators prefer to use -inch or -inch diameter bolts for standard connections? Do local erectors have any issues with regards to eld-welded versus eld-bolted moment connections? 33) Permit (and anticipate) that fabricators will want to use to use Short Slotted (SSL) or Oversized (OVS) holes to facilitate steel erection.
ADVERTISEMENT For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

34) Use tension only bracing in lightly loaded braced frames. Cross bracing using single angle braces designed for tension are easy to design, detail and erect. 35) Favor double angle diagonal bracing over HSS and W shape bracing where feasible in braced frames. The sizes of double angle bracing may be heavier than similar strength HSS or W shape bracing; however, the bolts at the ends of double angle bracing members are in double shear and the connections are easy to detail, fabricate and erect. 36) Do not use camber beams in braced frames. Cambering beams in braced frames can cause t-up problems with the connections. 37) Do not use camber beams that have moment connections. Cambering beams with moment connections can cause tup problems with the connections. 38) Consider gravity moments induced by xity created by drag strut connections. Drag struts are often required to transfer axial loads through oor framing members. Drag strut connections often provide rotational restraint at the ends of members similar to the restraint from moment connections. If drag strut connections provide such rotational restraint, then

STRUCTURE magazine

34

November 2010

Figure 8: Increase beam depth to avoid reinforcing webs at connections.

the gravity moment occurring due to connection xity must be considered in the drag strut connection and element design. 39) Consider implications of structural steel erection sequence for projects with unusual geometry or framing congurations. Whereas the contractor is responsible for temporary framing or shoring to support the steel while its being erected, designers should consider the implication of temporary loads on the framing during construction in order to minimize the likelihood that the steel erector will encounter difculty in conguring an erection sequence using the framing members required for the nal structure.

40) Avoid beam web penetrations where possible. Where unavoidable, try to keep web openings in beams within the middle third of the beam span, centered at mid-depth and no deeper than half the beam depth. 41) Use pipe columns to avoid complexities of skewed connections. Most connections to pipe columns are square connections. Pipe columns are ideal for short columns (no splices) with reasonably small loads. Please note: the numbering of graphics in this article begins with Figure 5, and is a continuation of the graphics numbering in the Part 1 article, August 2010 issue of STRUCTURE magazine.
ADVERTISEMENT For Advertiser Information, visit www.STRUCTUREmag.org

42) Avoid using W shape columns oriented in the weak axis in moment frames. When more frame stiffness is required, it is better to increase the sizes of those columns in the moment frame that are oriented in the strong axis rather than spending money on costly moment connections to columns bending about their weak axis. Most W14 columns are about three times stiffer in their strong axis than about their weak axis. This list is but a sampling of the ways that engineers can improve the constructability of steel-framed structures. There are many other ways to enhance constructability. One of the enjoyable aspects of structural engineering is that we are always learning. Do you have any constructability tips that were not mentioned or do you take issue with anything mentioned in this article? If so, email the authors. Clifford Schwinger, P.E., SECB is a Vice President and Quality Assurance Manager at The Harman Group. He may be reached at cschwinger@harmangroup.com. Todd R. Campbell, P.E. is an Associate and Project Manager at The Harman Group. He may be reached at tcampbell@harmangroup.com.

Restoration Team Experience Since 1978

Masonry Faade Re-Anchoring Solutions

SA VE THE W ALL!
Helical Wall Tie System for Stabilizing Veneers and Crack Repair

Strengthen and stabilize masonry faades while adding veneer stiffness for added decades of protection and comfort. CTP has engineered anchor performance solutions for claddings of brick and stone. A selection of corrosion resistant products are available to re-anchor brick to wood, concrete, steel, block, brick, metal stud, or tile back-ups.
CTP Stitch-Tie
Mechanical Anchors for Stabilizing Stone Panel Veneers

Dont Tear it Down or Cover it with Insulation and Stucco

CTP Grip-Max

For Brick Additions or Replacement; and for Brick Veneer Stud Cavity Wall Construction. Veneer Anchoring System That Keeps the Air Barrier Intact and the Veneer in Place.

CTP CT-16

Construction Tie Products, Inc. is committed to supplying the highest quality masonry tie and construction systems in North America and satisfying all stringent national codes and standards for today's building structures. CTP, Inc. promises to be a reliable product source along with on-time business integrity for all demanding builders.

ANOTHER ORIGINAL!

CTP

Shown Here With:

NEW!
CTP GRIP-MAX*
* Patent Pending

CTP Wall Tie

a Multifunctional Triangle Wall Tie That Can be Used in Standard or Seismic Veneer Anchoring Applications

CTP Grip-Tie
Mechanical Repair Anchors for Stabilizing Veneers

Contact our Technical Services Team with your repair application needs for a cost effective and performance targeted veneer stabilizing solution.

7974 W. Orchard Drive Michigan City, Indiana 46360-9390 USA Phone: (219) 878-1427 Contact: Steve Getz, BSCE www.ctpanchors.com
Engineered Anchoring Solutions Provider

Proudly Made In the USA!

STRUCTURE magazine

35

November 2010