Specifying Structural Steel Connection Design Douglas G. Ashcraft, P.E., S.E.

, ASCE Member1
1

Walter P. Moore and Associates, Inc, 3131 Eastside, 2nd floor, Houston, TX 77098; PH (713) 630-7300; FAX (713) 630-7393 email: dashcraft@walterpmoore.com Abstract

Just as an author of a book is communicating ideas when a book is written, so to is the structural engineer who is showing the contractor what to construct to comply with the engineers intent. The tools of the engineer to communicate these instructions are the drawings and specifications comprising the construction documents. This information must be clear and concise and in sufficient detail to afford the contractor every opportunity to properly interpret the designers intent. The type and amount of information that is required to properly specify the connection design for a structural steel project can be quite complex depending on the type of structure being built. This paper will describe how to properly convey the information needed by the steel fabricator and erector to connect the steel frame together. The Critical Nature of the Topic It is rare that a problem arises from an under-designed member in a steel frame. The majority of problems historically encountered in steel construction have been found in improperly constructed or mis-designed connection details. The most notorious of these failures was the Hyatt Regency walkway collapse in Kansas City. Any number of simple changes made to the hanger rod-box beam connection detail in that case would have prevented that tragedy. The problem there, as with many problems, can be boiled down to a lack of communication between the designer and the builder. It is imperative that the designer spend as much effort in communicating the requirements for the connections as is spent in defining the member sizes. Complete or Delegated Design The first decision regarding conveying connection design information in the documents deals with whether the connections shown on the drawings are fully designed or whether the details are showing only schematic relationships and connection types. In some geographic areas of the country, the standard is to show all the connections on the project as fully designed. In other areas, there is a mix of approaches that impact the way in which the connection information is communicated. There are pros and cons for each approach and the decision to use one approach over the other should consider such factors as what is the standard-of-practice in the geographic area in which the project is to be built?, what is the complexity of the connections in the project?, Is the design criteria for the connections too complicated to communicate within the contract documents?, what are the expectations of the owner, the general contractor and the steel fabricator, if known?, is it more efficient for the design engineer to expend the effort in the design phase designing the connections or during the contract administration phase approving the fabricators

1
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004

engineer-designed connections?, what approach is likely to enhance the ability of the fabricator to successfully bid and complete the project? The reasons that are stated in favor of showing complete connection designs on the drawings are 1) the design engineer is the most familiar with the behavior of the steel frame and the loads that are applied to it and is therefore the most capable of properly designing the connections for the loads that will be applied and 2) all bidders are bidding on the exact same set of connections and there are little, if no, assumptions needed to determine the cost of connections. The reasons given in favor of showing only schematic representations of connections and allowing the detailed design to be done by an engineer controlled by the fabricator are 1) the fabricator is most familiar with their internal shop processes and erection procedures and this approach allows the fabricator the flexibility to choose the connection type that best suits their fabrication and erection approach and 2) It is more efficient for a specialty connection design engineer to design connections for a prescribed set of design criteria than for the design engineer who may not be as knowledgeable about the multi-faceted aspects of connection design. Regardless of the approach taken regarding the design of connections, there are a specific set of instructions that must be included for each method of specifying the connection design process. The information must be clearly shown in the documents and must clearly show the intent of the design engineer regarding the connection design process. A Complete Design The commentary of the AISC Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges, March 7, 2000 lists what information must be included in order to call a connection completely designed: 1) All weld sizes and lengths and locations, 2) all bolt sizes, locations, quantities and grades, 3) All plate and angle sizes, thickness, and dimensions and 4) All work point locations and other relational information. In addition to this list, the bolt installation method that is required (snug-tightened, pretensioned, or slip-critical) must be specified. This is information that is used in determining the quantity and type of bolts, but it is also critical that this information be clearly conveyed to the erecting team so that the bolt installation procedure matches what was assumed in the design. The design engineer who is showing completed connection designs on the drawings must be aware of the erection process when detailing the joint. Adequate space for bolt-tightening, interferences with adjacent members, blind holes, and two members sharing the same set of holes on either side of a member in-between the two are just some examples of erection problems that can be caused by an improperly detailed connection. There all also OSHA requirements that affect certain connection types that the design engineer must be aware of when detailing connections. It is best to solicit the input from a fabricator when laying out a complex set of connections for a project that are to be completely designed on the drawings. That would certainly have benefit in avoiding the possible erection and fit-up problems that can arise from a poor detail. If the construction delivery method allows it, the design engineer would be well-served by engaging the fabricator and erector who will

2
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004

be constructing the project early in the connection design process so that the risk of detailing a connection that is hard or impossible to erect is minimized. Delegated Design The type and amount of information supplied on the drawings when some of the design is specified to be accomplished by a specialty connection design engineer hired by the fabricator must be sufficient to allow the fabricator to accurately bid the project and complete the design for the connection. The qualifications for the engineer who will be providing connection design services should be specified. The loads for which the connections are to be designed should be clearly shown. In addition, any limitations or requirements on the allowed types of connections, bolts, weld metals, or bolt installation methods should also be specified. The project specifications should list any qualification requirements for the engineer who will be providing connection design services for the fabricator. These qualifications should be tailored to meet the complexity of the project. It is recommended that this engineer be licensed in the proper jurisdiction to provide for legitimacy of the design. Engineering is definitely the activity that is occurring when weld sizes and lengths, number and type of bolts, and thickness of connection materials to resist shear and fracture are calculated to resist the applied loads or even if a determination is being made that the project design conditions match those assumed in a table from which connections are being chosen. That engineering should be performed by a qualified individual. Defining Design Criteria When showing loads for a connection, it should be clearly noted whether the loads are service loads or factored loads. Although it may be assumed that the design method used to design the connection is to match the type of load shown, it is still a good idea to specify whether the design calculations should follow the ASD or LRFD steel design code. Specifying a sufficient number of load cases for a connection involving multiple members is also important to obtain an economical design. The full set of loads for each member involved in the connection should be listed for each load case that gives the controlling load for every aspect of each individual member. For example, if there are three members framing into a joint and each member brings a moment, shear, and tension to the joint, then a total of 9 different load cases would completely describe the load affect on that joint and the joint could be analyzed with all the loads in equilibrium at each case. The design engineer should look very carefully at all of the load combinations to see the impact of deleting some of them from the presentation before doing so. The actual beam reactions for which the shear connection should be designed should be shown directly on the plan rather than relying on calculating the maximum allowable reaction from beam-span tables. This will avoid the often ridiculous requirement of providing a very large connection for a W8X10 beam spanning two meters. Often the specifications will provide for a minimum connection capacity in a member that is to apply even if the indicated load is less than that requirement. A common application of this concept is when members in a structural frame have been selected 3
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004

based on serviceability requirements causing the actual load to be small compared to the capacity of the member but there is a desire to obtain a connection capacity equal to some percentage of the total capacity of the member. Simple Shear Connection The most common connection for which a fabricators engineer is asked to provide design is the flexible shear connection that resist the shear reaction of floor beams to other beams or columns and that accommodates the end rotations of the simple-span beams. There are many tables in the AISC Manual of Steel Construction Load and Resistance Factor Design for different connection types that can be used to select the appropriate connection that has a load resistance greater than the applied load and that meet the fabricators and erectors requirements for compatibility with their processes. The only requirement for using these tables is that the project conditions match the conditions assumed in the tables and that a reference is made back to the tables in the submitted material sent for approval. Stiffeners and Doubler Plates It presents a dilemma to a fabricator trying to bid a project when the bid documents instruct the bidder that they are responsible for including any stiffeners or doubler plates that may be required by the design of the connections. If there is no indication on the drawings that would give a steel bidder a reasonable expectation of how many stiffeners or doubler plates might be required it forces the fabricators to be very liberal in their bid to cover this unknown factor. There certainly is not time to calculate all of these requirements during the bidding phase. If the design engineer wishes the fabricator to calculate and provide the required stiffeners and doubler plates, the design engineer should provide some expectation as to the amount of this material that should be provided, perhaps expressed as a tonnage allowance, so that all bidders will have the same information upon which to base their bids and the risk of the unknown is minimized. The irony concerning stiffeners and doubler plates required by calculation is that it is not often economically desirable to solve a local buckling or shear problem by adding expensive stiffeners or doubler plates. The most economical approach is often to increase the size of the member so as to avoid the added material and fabrication cost of additional plates. It seems that the approach that would best serve the economy of the project would be for the design engineer to assess the need for stiffeners and doubler plates to see if those needs can be economically ameliorated by increasing the member sizes and then documenting the larger-sized members and all other required stiffeners and doublers that remain. Removing the requirement of the fabricator to provide all stiffeners and doublers required by calculation but not shown on the drawings would create a much tighter bidding environment and lead to a more economical project. Defining Connection Types The design engineer should document what connection types will not be allowed on the project and which types are allowed. For instance, a design engineer may not wish to see a seated connection for a beam to a column flange or a shear tab connection to a girder if there is no similar connection opposite it. These types of restrictions should be clearly noted in the specifications. The recommended approach

4
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004

is to show schematic representations of the allowable connection types on the drawings and then state that those are the only allowable types unless otherwise agreed to in writing. This approach would certainly avoid time-consuming arguments during the submittal phase of the project. Defining Bolting Requirements Other limitations that a design engineer may wish to impose on the completed design of the connection are the size, grade, and installation method of the bolt to be used. Everyone should be aware by now that the default method of installing high-strength bolts is for the bolt to be snug-tight. This installation method and the attending higher shear value create the most economical way of bolting members together. Requiring bolts to be fully tightened when it is not required simply adds unneeded costs to the project. Refer to the Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts for specific direction as to when pre-tensioned or slip-critical joints are required. There are also requirements for the use of pre-tensioned joints in paragraph J1.11 of the Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings. A good method to specify the joint type in a set of documents is to set the snug-tightened joint as the default joint unless otherwise required by paragraph J1.11 and then note on the drawings all of the other locations where either of the other two joint types is required. The design engineer should also specify when something other than the standard bolt hole is required. An oversized or slotted hole may be desirable to help minimize fit-up problems in the field for a long-spanning element wherein thermal movements during erection might be excessive. The allowable methods of bolt-tightening should be specified, especially if any one or more of the four prescribed methods in the Bolt specification are not allowed. The ASTM standard F959 specifically addresses the direct tension indicators and should be referenced in the project specifications. It is important to specify the finish class for slip-critical connections. The coefficient of friction, , is set to 0.33, 0.50, or 0.35 for Class A, B, and C surfaces respectively and is directly proportional to the design slip resistance per bolt. A Class A surface is unpainted clean mill scale surface (SSPC SP2 or 3) or a Class A coating on blastcleaned steel (SSPC SP6). A Class B surface is unpainted blast-cleaned surface or a Class B coating on blast-cleaned steel. A Class C surface is hot-dipped galvanized and roughened surface. The type of surface required to match the design value of the bolt must be shown for each faying surface of a detail and the method of producing those surfaces should be specified by referring to the standards in the SSPC Steel Structures Painting Manual Volumes 1 and 2. Be careful that the specified paint applied to faying surfaces has the proper characteristic to match the bolt design criteria. Note that any Class A or B coating must be applied over a blast-cleaned steel surface (SSPC SP6). The surface preparation called for in each class must, at a minimum, be applied to the entire area surrounding the group of bolt holes up to 3 cm outside the outer-most holes. Defining Welding Requirements The desired type of welding must be shown on the connection details. The basic types are fillet welds, partial-penetration welds and complete-joint-penetration welds. Field-welding is generally avoided due to the expense and difficulty of achieving the

5
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004

same quality level as in shop welds, but is sometimes necessary when connecting large members to achieve full strength of the member. The type of electrode must also be consistent with the requirements of the connection and member strength. E70XX, F7X-EXXX, ER70S-X and E7XT-X are used for different welding procedures for grades up to grade 50. Usually the specifications will place no limitation on the welding procedures that can be used unless there is a specific project condition that warrants such a limitation. The corresponding matching electrodes for grades 60 and 65 steel are stated in the same format with an 8 replacing the 7 integer in each case. One may also wish to specify a Charpy V-notch toughness (expressed in J at C, (ft-lbs at F)) requirement for the weld metal in certain connection types or as the default. The AISC Specification, paragraph J2.6 calls for a CVN toughness of 27 J at 4 C for two special cases. The weld metal used to make the completejoint-penetration welds in the prequalified seismic zone moment connections must have a CVN of 27 J at -30 C (20 ft-lbs at -20 F). Other requirements regarding welding such as removing or leaving in place backing bars, grinding welds smooth, or back-gouging should also be specified as required. Special requirements for access holes, such as those that are prescribed for the prequalified seismic moment connections, should be detailed on the drawings as well. All welding should be performed in accordance with Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS) prepared in accordance with ANSI/AWS D 1.1. These specifications should be submitted and approved by an Independent Testing Laboratory and the design engineer. Tension Members Tension members have two limit states that govern the member selection. The member size can be proportioned based on yielding in the gross section based on 0.9Fy or by fracture in the net section based on .75Fu. In order to properly design the connection it is imperative to know and thus it is incumbent upon the design engineer to communicate what assumptions concerning the net area are made for member selection. For example, if no check is made for the fracture limit state and the connection creates a net area (Ae) that is lessthan (0.9F y/.75Fu) times the gross member area (Ag) at any cross section, a doubler plate will be required to increase the net area to prevent fracture. As recommended before, the most economical approach is to account for some reasonable connection bolt pattern in the member selection process and communicate that assumption on the drawing so that the expense of adding doubler plates possibly can be avoided. Moving or Adjustable Connections Another type of connection that has a special set of criteria that must be communicated is the connection that is required to move in the completed structure or to provide for adjustment during construction. The amount and direction of movement or adjustment that is to be detailed into the connection should be clearly noted. A special case of connections are those that provide attachment between the structural frame and architectural elements like exterior cladding or skylights. In that case, the adjustment is required to account for the difference in location tolerance between the structural frame and the likely tighter tolerance of the architectural element. If there are to be any slide-bearing elements included in the connection,

6
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004

they should either be completely detailed on the drawing or their presence noted and sufficient loading, movement information, and product specification provided to allow the fabricator to select the appropriate product. Any adjustability required in frame connections to allow the erection process to proceed in conformance with specified tolerances should be the strict responsibility of the fabricator working in conjunction with the steel erector. The requirement to coordinate this aspect of connection detailing should be required in the project specifications. Submittal Requirements The submittal requirements with which the fabricator is required to comply should be clearly noted in the project specifications. A preliminary connection review submittal is often required to facilitate the communication between the fabricator and design engineer before full-blown shop drawing preparation begins. This submittal allows variations and substitutions from details shown on the drawings to be discussed as well as clear up any confusion regarding the design conditions and specification requirements. Calculations, sealed by the engineer responsible for their preparation, should be submitted along with the shop drawings. Weld Procedure Specifications prepared in accordance with ANSI/AWS D1.1 should be required as well as the test results showing successful passage of qualification tests for non-prequalified WPSs. Conclusion Clear, concise, and complete communication of the intent of the design engineer to the steel fabricator regarding connection design is the key to a successful and safe structural steel project. References American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), Manual of Steel Construction Load and Resistance Factor Design, Third Edition, 2001, Chicago, IL American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), Load and Resistance Factor Design Specification for Structural Steel Buildings, 2001, Chicago, IL American Institute of Steel Construction (AISC), Code of Standard Practice for Steel Buildings and Bridges, 2000, Chicago, IL American National Standard Institute/American Welding Society (ANSI/AWS), Structural Welding Code AWS D1.1:2000, 2000, Miami, FL Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), 29 CFR Part 1926, Part R, Safety Standards for Steel Erection, (1999), Washington, D.C. Research Council on Structural Connections (RCSC), Specification for Structural Joints Using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts, 2000, Chicago, IL Steel Structures Painting Council, (SSPC), Steel Structures Painting Manual, Volumes 1, 2, 2000, Pittsburgh, PA

7
Copyright ASCE 2004
Downloaded 22 Feb 2012 to 222.66.182.103. Redistribution subject to ASCE license or copyright. Visit http://www.ascelibrary.org

Structures 2004