Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Moment Frames with Slip Critical Shear Connection

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Charlie,

It does not appear to be a matter of semantics, but of two approaches to
engineering: one theoretical and, one pragmatic, both valid, both
respected, both indispensable, each needing to be informed by the other.

The designer needs to think pragmatically as well as theoretically.  The
designer need to know what works well and how to apply that knowledge to the
problem at hand; and the designer also needs to think through, what's
different about "this" problem that may call for details differing from what
has worked well before.

Nels Roselund
Structural Engineer
South San Gabriel, CA
njineer(--nospam--at)att.net

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carter, Charlie" <carter(--nospam--at)aisc.org>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 8:45 AM
Subject: RE: Moment Frames with Slip Critical Shear Connection


Well, we're just going in semantic circles at this point. I'll prefer to
leave it until the differences of opinion can be settled by something
tangible. If you can offer that, I am all ears.

Charlie



-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, William [mailto:ShermanWC(--nospam--at)cdm.com]
Sent: Monday, August 02, 2004 9:09 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Moment Frames with Slip Critical Shear Connection

Charlie Carter wrote:  "I'd like you to show me how to erect a beam so
that
bolts are not in bearing due to dead weight."

My Response (Bill): I think you answered this question in your own
answer
regarding "banging bolts" in the 07/01/1999 Steel Interchange: "Leaving
the
drift pin in as bolts are installed and tightened tends to center the
holes
in the connected plies and increases the potential for slip in the
connection."

Charlie: "Load reversals are covered under a separate requirement in the
specification, so need not be used to confuse the questions here."

Bill: If a roof is subject to wind uplift, the vertical reaction at the
beam
connections may reverse from downward to upward. If bearing bolts are in
bearing for a downward load, won't they need to slip for an upward load?
Why
isn't that an issue here?

Charlie: "I was asking why you disagree with the rational thought that
went
into the AISC recommendations you questioned."

Bill: Clearly the snug-tight condition for bearing bolts is not intended
to
prevent slip - otherwise a slip-critical bolt must be used, by
definition.
In my opinion, assuming that bearing bolts are always in contact in any
connection where the bolts are on a different faying surface than the
welds
is not "rational". I have offered my opinions as rational thought until
offered clear evidence that reality is different.

Charlie: "But all that has been offered to date is theory and opinion,
which
is counter to the long-standing performance record of what is being
questioned."

Bill: So far, no clear evidence that bearing bolts may always be assumed
to
be in bearing has been offered - just "theory and opinion". The "banging
bolts syndrome" seems to raise questions regarding the "long-standing
performance record" of such connections. Per R. Schwein's article on
"The
Banging Bolt Syndrome": "The moment resisting connections with welded
flanges and bolted webs would be less prone to this bolt slip because
the
flange welds, being stiffer, would attract and resist most of the strain
before the load would cause bolt slips in the web." Please explain how a
welded flange can deform sufficiently for bolts to slip into bearing at
a
web connection, such that the weld will not carry "an indeterminately
larger
share of the load". To date, I do not think that AISC has presented a
clear
case for its apparent position on this issue.


William C. Sherman, PE
(Bill Sherman)
CDM, Denver, CO
Phone: 303-298-1311
Fax: 303-293-8236
email: shermanwc(--nospam--at)cdm.com


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********






******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********