Idea Statica Connection Theoretical Background PDF

IDEA StatiCa Connection

Theoretical background

March 2017

www.ideastatica.com
Content
1 Introduction.......................................................................................................................................... 4
2 CBFEM components ............................................................................................................................. 5
2.1 Material model.............................................................................................................................. 6
2.2 Plate model and mesh convergence ............................................................................................. 8
2.2.1 Plate model ............................................................................................................................ 8
2.2.2 Mesh convergence................................................................................................................. 8
2.3 Contacts ...................................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Welds .......................................................................................................................................... 11
2.4.1 Direct connection of plates.................................................................................................. 11
2.4.2 Plastic welds ........................................................................................................................ 13
2.5 Bolts ............................................................................................................................................ 15
2.6 Preloaded bolts ........................................................................................................................... 16
2.7 Anchor bolts ................................................................................................................................ 17
2.8 Concrete block ............................................................................................................................ 18
2.8.1 Design model ....................................................................................................................... 18
2.8.2 Resistance ............................................................................................................................ 18
2.8.3 Deformation stiffness .......................................................................................................... 21
3 Analysis ............................................................................................................................................... 22
3.1 Analysis model ............................................................................................................................ 22
3.2 Bearing member and supports ................................................................................................... 23
3.3 Equilibrium in node ..................................................................................................................... 25
3.4 Loads ........................................................................................................................................... 27
3.4.1 Import loads from FEA programs ........................................................................................ 31
3.5 Strength analysis ......................................................................................................................... 32
3.6 Stiffness analysis ......................................................................................................................... 32
3.7 Member capacity design ............................................................................................................. 35
3.8 Design joint resistance ................................................................................................................ 36
3.9 Stability analysis .......................................................................................................................... 37
3.10 Deformation capacity................................................................................................................ 39
4 Check of components according to Eurocode.................................................................................... 41
4.1 Plates ........................................................................................................................................... 41
4.2 Welds .......................................................................................................................................... 42
4.2.1 Fillet welds ........................................................................................................................... 42
4.2.2 Butt welds ............................................................................................................................ 43
4.3 Bolts ............................................................................................................................................ 44
4.4 Preloaded bolts ........................................................................................................................... 45
www.ideastatica.com
4.5 Anchors ....................................................................................................................................... 46
4.6 Concrete block ............................................................................................................................ 48
4.7 Shear in concrete block ............................................................................................................... 49
5 Check of components according to AISC ............................................................................................ 50
5.1 Plates ........................................................................................................................................... 50
5.2 Welds .......................................................................................................................................... 51
5.2.1 Fillet welds ........................................................................................................................... 51
5.2.2 CJP groove welds ................................................................................................................. 52
5.3 Bolts ............................................................................................................................................ 53
5.3.1 Tensile and shear strength of bolts ..................................................................................... 53
5.3.2 Combined Tension and shear in bearing type connection .................................................. 53
5.3.3 Bearing strength in bolt holes ............................................................................................. 53
5.4 Preloaded bolts ........................................................................................................................... 54
5.5 Anchors ....................................................................................................................................... 55
5.5.1 Concrete breakout strength ................................................................................................ 55
5.5.2 Concrete breakout strength of anchor in shear .................................................................. 55
www.ideastatica.com
IDEA StatiCa Connection Theoretical background 4
1 Introduction
Beam members are preferred by engineers when designing steel structures. But there are many
points on the structure, where the theory of members is not valid, e.g. welded joints, bolted
connections, footing, holes in walls, tapering height of cross-section and point loads. The structural
analysis in such points is difficult and it requires special attention. The behaviour is non-linear and
the nonlinearities must be respected, e.g. plasticisation of material of plates, contact between end
plates or base plate and concrete block, one-sided actions of bolts and anchors, welds. National
codes, CSN EN1993-1-8 and also technical literature offer engineering solution methods. Their
general feature is derivation for typical structural shapes and simple loadings. The method of
components is used very often.
Components method
The components method solves the joint as system of interconnected items – components. The
corresponding model is built per each joint type to be able to determine forces and stresses in each
component – see the following picture.
Components in joint with bolted end plates, described by springs.
Each component is checked separately using corresponding formulas. Because the proper model
must be created for each joint type, the method usage has limits when solving joints of general
shapes and general loads.
IDEA RS together with project team of Department of Steel and Timber Structures of Faculty of Civil
engineering in Prague and Institute of metal and timber structures of Faculty of Civil Engineering of
Brno University of Technology developed new method for advanced design of steel structure joints.
Name of the method is CBFEM – Component Based Finite Element Model – and it is:
• General enough to be usable for most of joints, footings and details in engineering practice.
• Simple and fast enough in daily practice to provide results in time comparable to current
methods and tools.
• Comprehensive enough to provide structural engineer clear information about joint
behaviour, stress, strain and reserves of individual components and about overall safety and
reliability.
The CBFEM method is based on the idea, that the most of verified and very useful parts of CM should
be kept. The weak point of CM – its generality when analysing stresses of individual components –
was replaced by modelling and analysis using finite elements method.
www.ideastatica.com
2 CBFEM components
FEM is a general method commonly used for structural analysis. Usage of FEM for modelling of joints
of any shapes seems to offer directly (Virdi, 1999). The elastic-plastic analysis is required. Steel
plasticises ordinarily in the structure. In fact, the results of linear analysis are useless for joints
design.
FEM models are used for research purposes of joint behaviour, which usually apply spatial elements
and measured values of material properties.
FEM model of joint for research. It uses spatial 3D elements for both plates and bolts.
Both webs and flanges of connected member are modelled using thin plates in CBFEM model, for
which the known and verified solution is available.
The fasteners – bolts and welds – are the most difficult in the point of view of the analysis model.
Modelling of such elements in general FEM programs is difficult, because the programs do no offer
required properties. Thus special FEM components had to be developed to model the welds and
bolts behaviour in joint.
CBFEM model of bolted connection by end plates
www.ideastatica.com
Joints of members are modelled as massless points when analysing steel frame or girder structure.
Equilibrium equations are assembled in joints and after solving the whole structure internal forces on
ends of beams are determined. In fact, the joint is loaded by those forces. The resultant of forces
from all members in the joint is zero – the whole joint is in equilibrium.
The real shape of joint is not known in the structural model. The engineer only defines, if the joint is
assumed to be rigid or hinged.
It is necessary to create the trustworthy model of joint, which respect the real state, to design the
joint properly. Ends of members with length of 2-3 multiple of maximal cross-section height are used
in CBFEM method. These segments are modelled using plate/wall elements.
Theoretical (massless) joint and real shape of joint without modified member ends.
For better precision of CBFEM model, the end forces on 1D members are applied as loads on
segment ends. Sextuplets of forces from the theoretical joint are transferred to the end of segment –
the values of forces are kept, but the moments are modified by the actions of forces on
corresponding arms.
Segment ends at the joint are not connected. The connection must be modelled. So called
manufacturing operations are used in CBFEM method to model the connection. Manufacturing
operations especially are: cuts, offsets, holes, stiffeners, ribs, end plates and splices, angles, gusset
plates and other. Fastening elements are added to them – welds and bolts.
2.1 Material model

The most common material diagrams, which are used in finite element modelling of structural steel,
are the ideal plastic or elastic model with strain hardening and the true stress-strain diagram. The
true stress-strain diagram is calculated from the material properties of mild steels at ambient
temperature obtained in tensile tests. The true stress and strain may be obtained as follows:
σtrue = σ (1 + )
true = ln(1 + )
where σtrue is true stress, true true strain, σ nominal stress and nominal strain. The elastoplastic
material with strain hardening is modelled according to EN1993-1-5:2005. The material behaviour is
based on von Mises yield criterion. It is assumed to be elastic before reaching the yield strength fy.
www.ideastatica.com
The ultimate limit state criteria for regions not susceptible to buckling is reaching of a limiting value
of the principal membrane strain. The value of 5% is recommended (e.g. EN1993-1-5 app. C par. C8
note 1).
Material diagrams of steel in numerical models
The limit value of plastic strain is often discussed. In fact that ultimate load has low sensitivity to the
limit value of plastic strain when ideal plastic model is used. It is demonstrated on the following
example of a beam to column joint. An open section beam IPE 180 is connected to an open section
column HEB 300 and loaded by bending moment. The influence of the limit value of plastic strain on
the resistance of the beam is shown in following picture. The limit plastic strain is changing from 2 %
to 8 %, but the change in moment resistance is less than 4 %.
Loads Stress Strain

Example of prediction of ultimate limit state of a beam to column joint
43
40.4 40.8
Resistance [kNm]
41 39.65
39.25
39
37 CBFEM
CM
35
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Plastic strain [%]
Influence of the limit value of plastic strain on the moment resistance
www.ideastatica.com
2.2 Plate model and mesh convergence

2.2.1 Plate model
Shell elements are recommended for modelling of plates in design FEA of structural connection. 4-
node quadrangle shell elements with nodes at its corners are applied. Six degrees of freedom are
considered in every node: 3 translations (ux, uy, uz) and 3 rotations (φx, φy, φz). Deformations of the
element are divided into membrane and flexural components.
The formulation of the membrane behaviour is based on the work by Ibrahimbegovic (1990).
Rotations perpendicular to the plane of the element are considered. Complete 3D formulation of the
element is provided. The out-of-plane shear deformations are considered in the formulation of the
flexural behaviour of element based on Mindlin hypothesis. The MITC4 elements are applied, see
Dvorkin (1984). The shell is divided into five integration points along the height of the plate and
plastic behavior is analyzed in each point. It is called Gaus - Lobatto integration. The nonlinear elastic-
plastic stage of material is analyzed in each layer based on the known strains.
2.2.2 Mesh convergence

There are some criteria of the mesh generation in the connection model. The connection check
should be independent on the element size. Mesh generation on a separate plate is problem-free.
The attention should be paid to complex geometries such as stiffened panels, T-stubs and base
plates. The sensitivity analysis considering mesh discretisation should be performed for complicated
geometries.
All plates of a beam cross-section have common size of elements. Size of generated finite elements is
limited. Minimal element size is set to 10 mm and maximal element size to 50 mm. Meshes on
flanges and webs are independent on each other. Default number of finite elements is set to 8
elements per cross-section height as shown in figure.
Mesh on beam with constrains between web and flange plate
The mesh of end plates is separate and independent on other connection parts. Default finite
element size is set to 16 elements per cross-section height as shown in figure.
Mesh on end plate, with 7 elements on width
www.ideastatica.com
Following example of a beam to column joint shows the influence of mesh size on the moment
resistance. An open section beam IPE 220 is connected to an open section column HEA200 and
loaded by bending moment, as shown in following picture. The critical component is column panel in
shear. The number of finite elements along the cross-section height is changing from 4 to 40 and the
results are compared. Dashed lines are representing 5%, 10% and 15% difference. It is recommended
to subdivide the cross-section height into 8 elements.
h
beam height
Beam to column joint model and plastic strains at ultimate limit state
50
49 15%
Resistance [kNm]
48
47 10%
46
45
5%
44
43
42
41
40
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40
Number of elements on edge [-]
Influence of number of elements on the moment resistance
Mesh sensitivity study of a slender compressed stiffener of column web panel is presented. The
geometry of the example is taken from section 6.3. The number of elements along the width of the
stiffener is changed from 4 to 20. The first buckling mode and the influence of number of elements
on the buckling resistance and critical load are shown in following picture. The difference of 5% and
10% are displayed. It is recommended to use 8 elements along the stiffener width.
www.ideastatica.com
330
Joint's resistance [kNm]

10% CBFEM - M
320
5% CBFEM - Mcr
310
10%
300
290 5%
280
270
bs 0 4 8 12 16 20
stiffener width Number of elements [-]
First buckling mode and influence of number of elements along the stiffener
on the moment resistance
Mesh sensitivity study of T-stub in tension is presented. The geometry of the T-stub is described in
section 5.1. The half of the flange width is subdivided into 8 to 40 elements and the minimal element
size is set to 1 mm. The influence of number of elements on the T-stub resistance is shown in
following picture. The dashed lines are representing the 5%, 10% and 15% difference. It is
recommended to use 16 elements on the half of the flange width.
200
T-stub resistance [kN]
195
190 15%
185
10%
180
175
5%
170
165
bf
160
half of flange width
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40
Number of elements [-]
Influence of number of elements on the T-stub resistance
42
40.8
41 40.4
Resistance [kNm]
39.65
40 39.25
39
38
37 CBFEM
36
CM
35
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Plastic strain [%]
Influence of the limit value of plastic strain on the moment resistance
www.ideastatica.com
2.3 Contacts
The standard penalty method is recommended for modelling of a contact between plates. If
penetration of a node into an opposite contact surface is detected, penalty stiffness is added
between the node and the opposite plate. The penalty stiffness is controlled by heuristic algorithm
during nonlinear iteration to get better convergence. The solver automatically detects the point of
penetration and solves the distribution of contact force between the penetrated node and nodes on
the opposite plate. It allows to create the contact between different meshes as shown. The
advantage of the penalty method is the automatic assembly of the model. The contact between the
plates has a major impact on the redistribution of forces in connection.
Example of separation plates in contact between web and flanges of two overlapped Z sections purlins
2.4 Welds
There exist several options how to treat welds in numerical models. Large deformations makes the
mechanical analysis more complex and it is possible to use different mesh descriptions, different
kinetic and kinematic variables, and constitutive models. The different types of geometric 2D and 3D
models and thereby finite elements with their applicability for different accuracy levels are generally
used. Most often used material model is the common rate-independent plasticity model based on
von Mises yield criterion. Two approaches which are used for welds are described.
2.4.1 Direct connection of plates

The first option of weld model between plates is direct merge of meshes. The load is transmitted
through a force-deformation constrains based on Lagrangian formulation to opposite plate. The
connection is called multi point constraint (MPC) and relates the finite element nodes of one plate
edge to another. The finite element nodes are not connected directly. The advantage of this
approach is the ability to connect meshes with different densities. The constraint allows to model
midline surface of the connected plates with the offset, which respects the real weld configuration
and throat thickness. The load distribution in weld is derived from the MPC, so the stresses are
calculated in the throat section. This is important for the stress distribution in plate under the weld
and for modelling of T-stubs.
www.ideastatica.com
Equivalent load
Multi point constraint
Constraint between mesh nodes
This model does not respect the stiffness of the weld and the stress distribution is conservative.
Stress peaks, which appear at the end of plate edges, in corners and rounding, govern the resistance
along the whole length of the weld. To eliminate the effect three methods for evaluation of the weld
can be chosen
1. Maximal stress (conservative)
2. Average stress on weld
3. Linear interpolation along weld
Weld stress evaluation for direct connection

Program calculates precise values in weld link. User can decide how to evaluate the value for the
check.
Method 1 can be too conservative in many cases. Method 2 simulates the situation when the whole
weld can be plastic. In majority of cases it is close to the reality, but for instance for long welds this
method is not appropriate. Similar situation is with method 3.
1. Maximal stress
www.ideastatica.com
2. Average stress
3. Linear interpolation
𝑞=𝑎.x
𝐿/ 𝐿
= ∫−𝐿/ 𝑞 𝑥 𝑥 =
M
𝑎=
2.4.2 Plastic welds

To express the weld behavior an improved weld model is applied. A special elastoplastic element is
added between the plates. The element respects the weld throat thickness, position and orientation.
The equivalent weld solid is inserted with the corresponding weld dimensions. The nonlinear
material analysis is applied and elastoplastic behavior in equivalent weld solid is determinate. Ideal
plastic model is used and the plasticity state is controlled by stresses in the weld throat section. The
plastic strain in weld is limited to 5% as in the plate (e.g. EN1993-1-5 app. C par. C8 note 1). The
stress peaks are redistributed along the longer part of the weld length.
www.ideastatica.com
Equivalent load
σ
τ
Weld throat
section Weld element
Equivalent solid
Multipoint constraint
Constraint between weld element and mesh nodes
Weld stress evaluation for plastic welds

Fully plastic model of welds gives real values of stress and there is no need to average or interpolate
them. Calculated values are directly used for checks.
www.ideastatica.com
2.5 Bolts
In the Component based finite element method (CBFEM) is component bolt with its behavior in
tension, shear and bearing by the dependent nonlinear springs. The bolt in tension is described by
spring with its axial initial stiffness, design resistance, initialization of yielding and deformation
capacity. The axial initial stiffness is derived analytically in guideline VDI2230. The model corresponds
to e peri e tal data, see Gödri h et al . For initialization of yielding and deformation capacity
is assumed that plastic deformation occurs in the threated part of the bolt shank only. The force at
beginning of yielding Fy,ini is
Fy,ini = fy,b At
where, fy,b is yield strength of bolts and At tensile area of the bolt. Relation gives for materials with
low ratio of the ultimate strength to yield strength higher values than design resistance Ft,Rd. To
assure a positive value of plastic stiffness it should be taken
𝑦, ≤ ,𝑅
Deformation capacity of the bolt c consists of elastic deformation of bolt shank el and plastic one of
the threated part only pl.
= + 𝑝
,𝑅
=
where kini is initial deformation stiffness of the bolt in tension according to guideline VDI2230, and
𝑝 = 𝑝
where, pl is limiting plastic strain, given by value 5%, and lt is length of threated part. The tensile
force is transmitted to the plates by interpolation links between the bolt shank and nodes in the
plate. The transfer area corresponds to the mean value of the bolt shank and the circle inscribed in
the hexagon of the bolt head.
The initial stiffness and design resistance of bolts in shear is in CBFEM modelled according to in cl. 3.6
and 6.3.2 in EN1993-1-8:2006. Linear behavior up to failure is considered.
The spring representing bearing has bi-linear force deformation behavior with initial stiffness and
design resistance according to in cl. 3.6 and 6.3.2 in EN1993-1-8:2006. Deformation capacity is
considered according to (Wald et al 2002) as
𝑝 =
Initialization of yielding is expected, see following figure, at
Fini = / Fb,Rd
F
Fb,Rd
2/3 Fb,Rd ks
el pl
Relative deformation,
Force deformation diagram for bearing of the plate
www.ideastatica.com
Interaction of axial and shear force in the bolt is considered according to Tab. 3.4 in EN1993-1-
8:2006. Only the compression force is transferred from the bolt shank to the plate in the bolt hole. It
is modelled by interpolation links between the shank nodes and holes edge nodes. The deformation
stiffness of the shell element, which models the plates, distributes the forces between the bolts and
simulates the adequate bearing of the plate.
Interaction of axial and shear force can be introduced in directly the analysis model. Distribution of
forces better reflects the reality (see enclosed diagram). Bolts with high tensile force take less shear
force and vice versa.
2.6 Preloaded bolts

Preloaded bolts are used in cases when the minimizing of deformation is needed. The tension model
of bolt is the same as for standard bolts. Shear force is not transferred by bearing, but by friction
between gripped plates.
The design slip resistance of a preloaded class 8.8 or 10.9 bolt is subjected to an applied tensile force,
Ft,Ed
Preloading force of bolt with tensile stress area As to be used EN 1993-1-8 3.9 (3.7)
Fp,C = 0,7 fub As.
Design slip resistance per bolt EN 1993-1-8 3.9 (3.8)

Fs,,Rd = ks μ Fp,C – 0,8 Ft,Ed / γ M3
Where ks is a coefficient given in Table 3.6, μ is slip factor, n is number of the friction surfaces and
γM3 is a safety factor.
IDEA StatiCa Connection checks Service Limit State of preloaded bolts. If there is a slipping effect,
bolts do not satisfy the check. Then the Ultimate limit State can be checked as a standard bearing
check of bolts.
User can decide which limit state to be checked. Either it is resistance to major slip or ultimate state
in shear of bolts. Both checks on one bolt are not combined in one solution. It is assumed, that bolt
has standard behaviour after major slip and can be checked by standard bearing procedure.
www.ideastatica.com
Moment load of connection has small influence to the shear capacity. But, we solved simply friction
check on each bolt separately by the equations (3.8). This check is implemented in FEM component
of bolt. There is no information in general way, if external tension load of each bolt is from moment
or from tension load of connection.
Stress distribution in standard and slip-resistant shear bolt connection
2.7 Anchor bolts

The anchor bolt is modelled with similar procedures as structural bolts. The bolt is on one side fixed
to the concrete block. Its length Lb is taken according to EN1993-1-8:2006 as sum of washer thickness
tw, base plate thickness tbp, grout thickness tg and free length embedded in concrete, which is
expected as 8d, where d is bolt diameter. The stiffness in tension is calculated as k = E As/Lb. The
load-deformation diagram of the anchor bolt is shown in following figure. The values according to
ISO 898:2009 are summarised in table and in formulas below.
Force in anchor bolt, kN
Ft,Rd
Ft,el kt
Fc,Ed
k
uel ut,Rd
Deformation, mm
Load–deformation diagram of the anchor bolt
www.ideastatica.com
,𝑅
, =
∙ − +
𝑅 −𝑅
= ∙ ; =
𝑅
∙𝐴− ∙
,
=
𝐴∙
,𝑅 = ∙ ; =
∙𝑅
Rm Re = Rp02 A E c1 c2
Grade
[MPa] [MPa] [%] [MPa] [-] [-]
4.8 420 340 14 2,1E+05 0,011 21,6
5.6 500 300 20 2,1E+05 0,020 35,0
5.8 520 420 10 2,1E+05 0,021 12,5
6.8 600 480 8 2,1E+05 0,032 8,8
8.8 830 660 12 2,1E+05 0,030 9,5
10.9 1040 940 9 2,1E+05 0,026 5,0
Anchor bolt parameters, based to ISO 898:2009
The stiffness of the anchor bolt in shear is taken as the stiffness of the structural bolt in shear. The
anchor bolt resistance is evaluated according to ETAG 001 Annex C or prEN1992-1-4.2015. Steel
failure mode is determined according to cl. 6.2.6.12 in EN 1993-1-8.
2.8 Concrete block

2.8.1 Design model
In component based finite element method (CBFEM), it is convenient to simplify the concrete block
as 2D contact elements. The connection between the concrete and the base plate resists in
compression only. Compression is transferred via Winkler-Pasternak subsoil model, which represents
deformations of the concrete block. Tension force between the base plate and concrete block is
carried by anchor bolts. Shear force is transferred by friction between a base plate and a concrete
block, by shear key, and by bending of anchor bolts and friction. The resistance of bolts in shear is
assessed analytically. Friction and shear key are modelled as a full single point constraint in the plane
of the base plate-concrete contact.
2.8.2 Resistance
The resistance of concrete in 3D compression is determined based on EN 1993-1-8:2006 by
calculating the design bearing strength of concrete in the joint fjd under the effective area Aeff of the
base plate. The design bearing strength of the joint fjd is evaluated according to Cl. 6.2.5 in EN 1993-
1-8:2006 and Cl. 6.7 in EN 1992-1-1:2005. The grout quality and thickness is introduced by the joint
coefficient jd. For grout quality equal or better than quality of the concrete block is expected jd =
www.ideastatica.com
1,0. The effective area Aeff under the base plate is estimated to be of the shape of the column cross-
section increased by additional bearing width c
fy
c=t
3 fj  M0
where t is the thickness of the base plate, fy is the base plate yield strength, c is the partial safety
factor for concrete and M0 is the partial safety factor for steel.
The effective area is calculated by iteration until the difference between additional bearing
widths of current and previous iteration | − − | is less than 1 mm.
The area where the concrete is in compression is taken from results of FEA. This area in
compression Acom allows to determine the position of neutral axis. The intersection of the area in
compression Acom and the effective area Aeff allows to assess the resistance for generally loaded
column base of any column shape with any stiffeners. The average stress σ on the effective area Aeff
is determined as the compression force divided by the effective area. Check of the component is in
stresses 𝜎 ≤ 𝑓 .
This procedure of assessing the resistance of the concrete in compression is independent on
the mesh of the base plate as can be seen in figures bellow. Two cases were investigated: loading by
pure compression 1200 kN, and loading by combination of compressive force 1200 kN and bending
moment 90 kN.
www.ideastatica.com
70%
68%
66%
σ/fjd
64%
62%
60%
0 5 10 15 20 25
No. of elements Aeff [m2] σ [MPa] fjd [MPa]
4 0,06 18,5 26,8
6 0,06 18,2 26,8
8 0,06 18,5 26,8
10 0,06 18,4 26,8
15 0,06 18,5 26,8
20 0,06 18,5 26,8
Influence of number of elements on prediction of resistance of concrete in compression in case of pure compression
105%
100%
σ/fjd
95%
90%
0 5 10 15 20 25
No. of elements Aeff [m2] σ [MPa] fjd [MPa]
4 0,05 26,0 26,8

6 0,04 25,8 26,8
8 0,04 26,1 26,8
10 0,05 25,9 26,8
15 0,04 26,3 26,8
20 0,04 26,6 26,8
Influence of number of elements on prediction

of resistance of concrete in compression in case of compression and bending
www.ideastatica.com
2.8.3 Deformation stiffness

The stiffness of the concrete block may be predicted for design of column bases as elastic
hemisphere. A Winkler-Pasternak subsoil model is commonly used for a simplified calculation of
foundations. The stiffness of subsoil is determined using modulus of elasticity of concrete and
effective height of subsoil as
 
 
k
Ec
  1
 4  (3.7.2)
Aeff  h 
(1   )     d  3 
Aref  2 
where, k is stiffness in compression, Ec is modulus of elasticity, n is Poisson coefficient of concrete

foundation, Aeff is effective area, Aref is reference area, d is base plate width, h is column base
height, and αi are coefficients. The following values for coefficient were used: Aref =10 m2; α1 = 1,65;
α2 = 0,5; α3 = 0,3; α4 =1,0.
www.ideastatica.com
3 Analysis
3.1 Analysis model
New components method (CBFEM – Component Based Finite Element Model) enables fast analysis
of joints of several shapes and configurations.
The analysis FEM model is generated automatically. The designer does not create the analysis FEM
model, he creates the joint using manufacturing operations – see the picture.
Manufacturing operations/items which can be used to construct the joint
Each manufacturing operation adds new items into the connection – cuts, plates, bolts, welds.
www.ideastatica.com
3.2 Bearing member and supports

O e e er of joi t is alwa s set as eari g . All other members are o e ted . The bearing
member can be chosen by designer. The eari g e er a e o ti uous or e ded i the
joi t. E ded e ers are alwa s ter i ated i the joi t.
Connected members can be of several types, according to the load, which the member can take:
• Type N-Vy-Vz-Mx-My-Mz – member is able to transfer all 6 components of internal forces.
• Type N-Vy-Mz – member is able to transfer only loading in XY plane – internal forces N, Vy,
Mz.
• Type N-Vz-My – member is able to transfer only loading in XZ plane – internal forces N, Vz,
My.
• Type X – member is able to transfer only loading in X direction– normal force N.
Plate to plate connection transfers all components of internal forces
Fin plate connection. The connection can transfer only loads in XZ plane – internal forces N, Vz, My.
www.ideastatica.com
Gusset connection – connection of truss member. The connection can transfer only axial force N.
Each joint is in the state of equilibrium during analysis of the frame structure. If the end forces of
individual members are applied to detailed CBFEM model, the state of equilibrium is met too. Thus it
would be not necessary to define supports in analysis model. However, for practical reasons, the
support resisting all translations is defined in the first end of bearing member. It does influence
neither state of stress nor internal forces in the joint, only the presentation of deformations.
Appropriate support types respecting the type of individual members are defined at ends of
connected members to prevent occurrence of instable mechanisms.
www.ideastatica.com
3.3 Equilibrium in node

Each node of 3D FEM model must be in equilibrium. The equilibrium requirement is correct, but it is
not necessary for design of simple joints. One member of joint is always „ eari g a d the others are
connected. If only the connection of connected members is checked, it is not necessary to keep the
equilibrium. Thus there are available two modes of loads input:
• Simplified – for this mode the bearing member is supported (continuous member on both
sides) and the load is not defined on the member.
• Advanced (exact with equilibrium check). The bearing member is supported on one end, the
loads are applied on all members and the equilibrium must be found.
The mode can be switched in ribbon group Advanced mode.
The difference between modes is shown on following example of T-connection. Beam has end
bending moment 41kNm. There is also pressure normal force 100kN in column. In case of simplified
mode the normal force is not taken into account because the column is supported on both ends.
Program shows only effect of bending moment of beam. Effects of normal force are analysed only in
full mode and they are shown in results.
Simplified input, normal force in column is NOT taken into account
www.ideastatica.com
Advanced input, normal force in column is taken into account
Simplified method is easier for user, but it can be used only in case, when user is interested in
studying of connection items and not the behaviour of whole joint.
For cases where the bearing member is heavily loaded and close to its limit capacity the advanced
mode with respecting of all internal forces in the joint is necessary.
www.ideastatica.com
3.4 Loads
End forces of member of the frame analysis model are transferred to the ends of member segments.
Eccentricities of members caused by the joint design are respected during transfer.
The analysis model created by CBFEM method corresponds to the real joint very precisely, whereas
the analysis of internal forces is performed on very idealised 3D FEM 1D model, where individual
beams are modelled using centrelines and the joints are modelled using immaterial nodes.
Real shape of joint Theoretical shape in 3D FEM model

Joint of vertical column and horizontal beam
Internal forces are analysed using 1D members in 3D model. There is an example of courses of
internal forces in the following picture.
Bending moment Shear force

Course of internal forces on horizontal beam. M and V are the end forces at joint.
The effects caused by member on the joint are important to design the joint (connection). The
effects are illustrated in the following picture:
www.ideastatica.com
1D member model CBFEM model – dark blue color

Effects of member on the joint. CBFEM model is drawn in dark blue color.
Moment M and force V act in theoretical joint. The point of theoretical joint does not exist ni CBFEM
model, thus the load cannot be applied here. The model must be loaded by actions M and V, which
have to be transferred to the end of segment in the distance r
Mc = M – V . r
Vc = V
In CBFEM model, the end section of segment is loaded by moment Mc and force Vc.
When designing the joint, its real position relative to the theoretical point of joint must be
determined and respected. The internal forces in the position of real joint are mostly different to the
internal forces in the theoretical point of joint. Thanks to the precise CBFEM model the design is
performed on reduced forces – see moment Mr in the following picture:.
Course of bending moment on CBFEM model. The arrow points to the real position of joint.
When loading the joint, it must be respected, that the solution of real joint must correspond to the
theoretical model used for calculation of internal forces. This is fulfilled for rigid joints, but the
situation may be completely different for hinges.
www.ideastatica.com
1D members model CBFEM model

Position of hinge in theoretical 3D FEM model and in the real structure
It is illustrated in the previous picture, that the position of hinge in the theoretical 1D members
model differs from the real position in the structure. The theoretical model does not correspond to
the reality. When applying the calculated internal forces, significant bending moment is applied into
the shifted joint and the designed joint is overlarge or cannot be designed either. The solution is
simple – both models must correspond. Either the hinge in 1D members model must be defined in
the proper position or the courses of internal forces must be shifted to get the zero moment in the
position of hinge.
Shifted course of bending moment on beam. Zero moment is at the position of hinge.
The shift of internal force course can be defined in the table for internal forces definition.
The location of load effect has big influence for the correct design of the connection. To avoid all
misunderstandings we allow user to select from options – In node/ In bolts/ In position.
www.ideastatica.com
www.ideastatica.com
3.4.1 Import loads from FEA programs

IDEA StatiCa takes during the import from third-party FEA programs calculated results (internal
forces, deformations, reactions). Description of load combinations is taken as well. List and content
of combinations is shown in wizard (or in BIM application).
FEA programs use to work with envelope combinations. IDEA StatiCa Connection is a program which
resolves steel joints nonlinearly (elastic/plastic material model). It means that envelope
combinations cannot be used. IDEA StatiCa searches for extremes of internal forces (N, Vy, Vz, Mx,
My, Mz) in all combinations at the ends of all members connected to the joint. For each such
extreme value are determined also all related internal forces on all remaining members. This set of
internal forces is used as a load case for the model of joint in IDEA StatiCa Connection.
User can modify this list of load cases. He can work with combinations in wizard (or BIM) or he can
delete some cases directly in IDEA StatiCa Connection.
www.ideastatica.com
3.5 Strength analysis

The analysis of joint is non-linear. The load increments are applied gradually and the state of stress is
searched. There are two optional analysis modes in IDEA Connection:
• Response of structure (joint) to the overall load. All defined load (100%) is applied in this
mode and the corresponding state of stress and deformation is calculated.
• Analysis termination at reaching the ultimate limit state. The state is found in which all
checks of structure are still satisfactory. In the case that the defined load is higher than the
calculated capacity, the analysis is marked as non-satisfying and the percentage of used load
is printed.
The second mode is more suitable for practical design. The first one is preferable for detailed analysis
of complex joints.
3.6 Stiffness analysis

The CBFEM method enables to analyse the stiffness of connection of individual joint members. For
the proper stiffness analysis, the separate analysis model must be created for each analysed
member. Than the stiffness analysis is not influenced by stiffness of other members of joint, but only
by the node itself and the construction of connection of the analysed member. Whereas the bearing
member is supported for the strength analysis (SL in), all members except the analysed one are
supported for the stiffness analysis (Chyba! Nenalezen zdroj odkazů. and Chyba! Nenalezen zdroj
odkazů. for members B1 and B3).
Supports on members for strength analysis
www.ideastatica.com
Supports on members for stiffness analysis of member B1
Supports on members for stiffness analysis of member B3
Loads can be applied only on the analysed member. If bending moment My is defined, the rotational
stiffness about y-axis is analysed. If bending moment Mz is defined, the rotational stiffness about z-
axis is analysed. If axial force is defined, the axial stiffness of connection is analysed.
Program generates complete diagram automatically, is directly displayed in GUI and can be added
into the output report. Rotational or axial stiffness can be studied for specific design load. IDEA
StatiCa Connection can also deal with the influence of other internal forces.
Diagram shows:
• Level of design load
• Limit value of capacity of connection for 5% equivalent strain
• Limit value of capacity of connected member (useful also for seismic design)
• 2/3 of limit capacity for calculation of initial stiffness
• Value of initial stiffness
• Limits for the classification of connection – rigid and pinned
www.ideastatica.com
Rigid welded connection
Semi-rigid bolted connection
www.ideastatica.com
After reaching the 5 % strain in the column web panel in shear

the plastic zones propagate rapidly
3.7 Member capacity design

IDEA Connection checks the connection on applied design load. In many regions with the danger of
seismicity is required to check the connection on the maximal moment which can be taken by
connected member. We calculate that moment in the software and apply it on specific member. All
other members in the joint are supported.
The value of moment is calculated and cannot be changed.
www.ideastatica.com
Moment is calculated differently for EN and AISC.
Capacity design EN 1998

Rd >= , * γov * Rfy
Rd – Resistance of non-dissipative connection
γo - 1,25
Rfy – Yield strength
Capacity design AISC 341-10

Mpe = 1,1 * Ry * Fy * Zx
Mpe - The expected moment at the plastic hinge
Fy – Yield strength
Ry - Ratio of the expected yield stress to the specified minimum yield (table A3.1)
Zx - is the plastic section modulus
Connections designed on maximal moment usually need to be much more stiffed than connections in
regular structures.
Connected member is not checked. It has to be properly designed in the global analysis of the
structure.
3.8 Design joint resistance
www.ideastatica.com
Designer usually solve the task to design the connection/joint to carry the know design load. But it is
also useful to know how far the design from the limit state is, in fact how big is the reserve in the
design and how safe it is. This can be done simply by the new type of analysis – Design joint
resistance.
User input design load like in standard design. Software automatically proportionally increases all
load components until one of checks does not satisfy. User gets the ratio of maximal load to the
design load. Also simple diagram is provided.
3.9 Stability analysis

The design codes EN 1993-1-5 and EN 1993-1-6 provides five categories of finite element analysis
with following assumptions:
1. Linear material, geometrically linear
2. Nonlinear material, geometrically linear
3. Linear material, linear loss of stability – buckling
4. Linear material, geometrically nonlinear using imperfections
5. Nonlinear material, geometrically nonlinear using imperfections
A design procedure, which combines approaches 2 and 3 – material nonlinearity and stability analysis
– is mentioned in chapter 8 of EN 1993-1-6. The verification of buckling resistance based on the
obtained FEM results is described in Annex B of EN 1993-1-5. This procedure is used for wide range
of structures except very slender shells, where geometrically nonlinear analysis with initial
imperfections is more suitable (4 and 5).
The procedure uses load amplifiers α, which are obtained as results of FEM analysis and allows to
predict the post buckling resistance of the joints.
The load coefficient αult,k is determined, which is caused by reaching of the plastic capacity without
considering of the geometrical nonlinearity. The check of plastic capacity has been already
implemented into the software. The general automatic determination of αult,k is currently being
implemented into the developed software.
www.ideastatica.com
The critical buckling factor αcr is determined, which is obtained using FEM analysis of linear stability.
It is determined automatically in the developed software using the same FEM model as for
calculation of αult,k. It should be noted that the critical point in terms of plastic resistance is not
necessary assessed in first critical buckling mode. More buckling modes need to be assessed in a
complex joint, because they are related to different parts of the joint.
The non-dimensional plate slenderness λp of the examined buckling mode is determined:
 ult,k
p  (1)
 cr
The reduction buckling factor ρ is determined according to Annex B of EN 1993-1-5. The reduction
factor is depending on the plate slenderness. The used buckling curve shows the influence of
reduction factor on the plate slenderness. The provided buckling factor applicable to non-uniform
members is based on the buckling curves of a beam. The verification is based on the von-Mises yield
criterion and reduced stress method. Buckling resistance is assessed as:
 ult,k .
1 (2)
 M1
1.2
Buckling reduction factor ρ [-]
1.0
0.8
Annex B
0.6
0.4
0.2
0.0
0 1 2 3 4
Plate slenderness p [-]
Buckling reduction factor ρ according to EN 1993-1-5 Annex B
Although the process seems to be trivial it is general, robust and easily automated. The advantage of
the procedure is the advanced FEM analysis of the whole joint, which can be applied to general
geometry. Moreover it is included in valid Eurocode standards. The advanced numerical analysis
gives quick overview of the global behaviour of the structure and its critical parts and allows fast
stiffening to prevent instabilities.
The limit slenderness λp is provided in Annex B of EN 1993-1-5 and sets all cases which must be
assessed according to previous procedure. The resistance is limited by buckling for plate slenderness
higher than 0.7. With the decreasing slenderness is the resistance governed by plastic strain. The
limit critical buckling factor for plate slenderness equal to 0.7 and buckling resistance equal to plastic
resistance may be obtained as follows:
 ult,k 1
 cr  2
  2.04
p 0,7 2
www.ideastatica.com
It is recommended to check the buckling resistance for critical buckling resistance smaller than 3. The
influence of plate slenderness on the plastic resistance Mult,k and buckling resistance MCBFEM is shown
in figure bellow. The diagram shows the results of a numerical study of a triangular stiffener in a
portal frame joint.
350
300
M / V [kNm / kN]
250
200
150
100
MCBFEM
50
Mult,k
0
0.0 0.7 1.4 2.1 2.8
Plate slenderness p [-]
The influence of plate slenderness on the resistance of portal frame joint with slender stiffener
3.10 Deformation capacity

The deformation capacity/ductility Cd belongs with resistance and stiffness to the three basic
parameters describing the behaviour of connections. In moment resistant connections is achieved
the ductility by a sufficient rotation capacity φCd. The deformation/rotation capacity is calculated for
each connection in the joint separatelly. The prediction of deformation capacity Cd of connections is
currently studied by component method (CM), but is not offered as standardised procedure.
Compare to well accept methods for determination of the initial stiffness and resistance of many
t pes stru tural joi ts, there are o ge erall a epted sta dardised pro edures for the
determination of the rotation capacity. The deemed to satisfy criteria are selected to help the
engineers in cl 6.4.2 of EN1993-1-8:2006.
A beam-to-column joint in which the design moment resistance of the joint Mj,Rd is governed by the
design resistance of the column web panel in shear, may be assumed to have adequate rotation
capacity for plastic global analysis, provided that:
d/tw ≤ 69 ε (3.11.1)
where d the column web panel width, tw is the web thickness and ≤ √ /𝑓𝑦 is the steel yield
strength ratio.
In cl 6.4.2(2) is limited the plastic distribution between the bolt rows, for joints with a bolted end-
plate connection provided that the design moment resistance of the joint is governed by the design
resistance of the column flange or the beam end-plate in bending or the thickness t of either the
column flange or the beam end-plate or tension flange cleat satisfies:
≤ , √𝑓 /𝑓𝑦 (3.11.2)
where d and fu.b are the diameter and strength of the bolt and fy is the yield strength of the relevant
plate.
The rotation capacity φCd of a welded beam-to-column connection may be assumed to be not less
that the value given by the following expression provided that its column web is stiffened in
www.ideastatica.com
compression but unstiffened in tension, and its design moment resistance is not governed by the
design shear resistance of the column web panel, see 6.4.2(1):
φCd = 0,025 hc / hb ... (3.11.3)
where hb is the depth of the beam and hc is the depth of the column. An unstiffened welded beam-
to-column joint designed in conformity with the provisions of this section, may be assumed to have a
rotation capacity φCd of at least 0,015 radians.
The estimation of the rotation capacity is important in connections exposed to seismic, see (Gioncu
and Mazzolani, 2002) and (Grecea 2004), and extreme loading, see (Sherbourne AN, Bahaari, 1994
and 1996). The deformation capacity of components has been studied from end of last century (Foley
and Vinnakota, 1995). Faella et al (2000) carried out tests on T-stubs and derived for the deformation
capacity the analytical expressions. Kuhlmann and Kuhnemund (2000) performed tests on the
column web subjected to transverse compression at different levels of compression axial force in the
column. Da Silva et al (2002) predicted deformation capacity at different levels of axial force in the
connected beam. Based on the test results combined with FE analysis deformation capacities are
established for the basic components by analytical models by Beg et al (2004). In the work are
represented components by non-linear springs, and appropriately combined in order to determine
the rotation capacity of the joint for the end-plate connections, with an extended or flush end-plate,
and welded connections. For these connections, the most important components that may
significantly contribute to the rotation capacity column were recognised as the web in compression,
column web in tension, column web in shear, column flange in bending, and end-plate in bending.
Components related to the column web are relevant only when there are no stiffeners in the column
that resist compression, tension or shear forces. The presence of a stiffener eliminates the
corresponding component, and its contribution to the rotation capacity of the joint can be therefore
neglected. End-plates and column flanges are important only for end-plate connections, where the
components act as a T-stub, where also the deformation capacity of the bolts in tension is included.
The questions and limits of deformation capacity of connections of high strength steel was studied by
Girao at al (2004).
www.ideastatica.com
4 Check of components according to Eurocode

CBFEM method combines advantages of general finite elements method and standard method of
components. The stresses and internal forces calculated on the accurate CBFEM model are used in
checks of all components.
Individual components are checked according to Eurocode EN 1993-1-8.
4.1 Plates
The resulting equivalent stress (HMH, von Mieses) and plastic strain are calculated on plates. The
stress check cannot be performed, because the stress reaches the yield strength only. Thus the check
of equivalent plastic strain is performed. The limit value 5% is suggested in Eurocode (EN1993-1-5
app. C par. C8 note 1), this value can be modified in project settings.
Plate element is divided to 7 layers and elastic/plastic behaviour is investigated in each of them.
Program shows the worst result from all of them.
CBFEM method can provide stress rather higher than yield strength. The reason is the slight
inclination of plastic branch of stress-strain diagram, which is used in analysis to improve the stability
of interaction calculation. This is not problem for practical design. The equivalent plastic strain is
exceeded at higher stress and the joint does not satisfy anyway.
www.ideastatica.com
4.2 Welds
4.2.1 Fillet welds
Design resistance
The stress in the throat section of fillet weld is determined according to art. 4.5.3. Stresses are
calculated from shear forces in weld links. Bending moment round the weld longitudinal axis is not
taken into account.
σw,Ed = [σ⏊2 + τ⏊2 + τ||2)] 0.5
σw,Rd = fu / βW γM2)
0.9σw,Rd = fu / γM2
Weld utilisation
Ut = min (σw,Ed/σw,Rd, σ⏊/ .9σw,Rd)
where:
• βW - correlation factor tab 4.1
Stresses in the weld
All values required for check are printed in tables.
www.ideastatica.com
4.2.2 Butt welds

Welds can be specified as butt welds. Complete joint penetration is considered for butt welds, thus
such weld are not checked.
www.ideastatica.com
4.3 Bolts
Design tension resistance of bolt:
FtRd = 0.9 fub As / γM2
Design shear resistance at punching of bolt head or nut EN 1993-1-8:

BpRd = 0.6 π dm tp fu / γM2
Design shear resistance per one shear plane:

FvRd = αv fub As / γM2
Design bearing resistance of plate EN 1993-1-8:

FbRd = k1 ab fu d t / γM2
Utilisation in tension [%]:

Utt = FtEd / min (FtRd, BpRd)
Utilisation in shear [%]:

Uts = V / min (FvRd, FbRd)
Interaction of shear and tension [%]:

Utts = V / FvRd + FtEd / 1.4 FtRd
where:
• As - tensile stress area of the bolt,
• fub - ultimate tensile strength,
• dm - bolt head diameter,
• d - bolt diameter,
• tp - plate thickness under the bolt head/nut,
• fu - ultimate steel strength,
• αv = 0,6 for classes (4.6, 5.6, 8.8) ,
• αv = 0,5 for classes (4.8, 5.8, 6.8, 10,9),
• k1 = 2.5,
• ab = 1.0,
• FtEd - design tensile force in bolt,
• V - resultant of shear forces in bolt.
www.ideastatica.com
4.4 Preloaded bolts

The design slip resistance of a preloaded class 8.8 or 10.9 bolt is subjected to an applied tensile force,
Ft,Ed
Preloading force to be used EN 1993-1-8 3.9 (3.7)

Fp,C = 0,7 fub As
Design slip resistance per bolt EN 1993-1-8 3.9 (3.8)

Fs,,Rd = ks μ Fp,C – 0,8 Ft,Ed / γ M3

Uts = V / Fs,,Rd where

• ks – coefficient given in Table 3.6; ks = 1,
• μ - slip factor obtained,
• n - number of the friction surfaces. Check is calculated for each friction surface separately,
• γ M3 - safety factor,
• V - shear force,
• Ft,Ed - design tensile force in bolt.
www.ideastatica.com
4.5 Anchors
Concrete cone failure resistance of anchor or group of anchors ETAG-001 5.2.2.4:
NRkc = N0Rkc AcN/ A0cN sN reN
Initial value of characteristic resistance:

N0Rkc = 7.2 fck0.5 hef 1.5
where:
• A0cN - area of concrete cone of an individual anchor. Circle of radius 1.5 * hef,
• hef - length of anchor in concrete,
• fck - characteristic concrete compressive strength,
• AcN - actual area of concrete cone of the anchorage at the concrete surface respecting
influence of edges and adjoining anchors,
• sN = 1,
• reN = 1.
Anchors shear resistance in case of transfer of shear forces. Friction is not taken into account. Valid in
case, that the anchor failure precedes the concrete failure ETAG-001 5.2.3.2:
VRks = 0.5 fy As
Concrete pry-out failure ETAG-001 5.2.3.3:

VRkcp / γMc <= V
VRkcp = k * NRkc
where:
• V - shear force,
• k = 1 for hef < 60,
• k = 2 for hef >= 60.
www.ideastatica.com
Concrete edge failure ETAG-001 5.2.3.4:

VRkc / γMc <= V
VRkc = V0Rkc AcV/ A0cV sV reV
α β
V0Rkc = 1.7 d lf fck0.5 c11.5
α= . lf / 1)0.5
β= . d / 1)0.2
where:
• lf = hef,
• c1 - edge distance,
• d - anchor diameter,
• sV = 1,
• reV = 1,
• A0cV - area of concrete cone of an individual anchor at the lateral concrete surface not
affected by edges (4.5 c12),
• AcV - actual area of concrete cone of anchorage at the lateral concrete surface.
www.ideastatica.com
4.6 Concrete block

Concrete resistance at concentrated compression:
Fjd = βj kj f k / γC
Average stress under the base plate:

σ = N / Aeff
Utilisation in compression [%]

Ut = σ / Fjd
where:
• fck - characteristic compressive concrete strength,
• βj = 0.67,
• kj - concentration factor,
• γC - safety factor,
• Aeff - effective area, on which the column force N is distributed.
Effective area is calculated according to the real course of contact stress and assumptions defined in
Eurocode. Graphical representation shows the way of checking. Calculated effective area is marked
as green. Final effective area for contact stress check is highlighted as shaded.
Effective area of contact stress
www.ideastatica.com
4.7 Shear in concrete block

Shear forces are evaluated in this table only in case of shear transfer by friction or shear iron.
1. Shear is transferred only by friction
VRdy = N Cf
VRdz = N Cf
2. Shear is transferred by shear iron and friction
VRdy = N Cf + Avy fy / ( 30.5 γM0)
VRdz = N Cf + Avz fy / ( 30.5 γM0)
Utilisation in shear [%]

Ut = min ( Vy/VRdy, Vz/VRdz)
where:
• Avy - shear area Ay of shear iron cross-section,
• Avz - shear area Az of shear iron cross-section,
• fy - yield strength,
• γM0 - safety factor,
• Vy - shear force component in the base plate plane in y-direction,
• Vz - shear force component in the base plate plane in z-direction,
• N - force perpendicular to the base plate,
• Cf - friction coefficient.
www.ideastatica.com
5 Check of components according to AISC

CBFEM method combines advantages of general finite elements method and standard method of
components. The stresses and internal forces calculated on the accurate CBFEM model are used in
checks of all components.
Individual components are checked according to AISC 360-10
5.1 Plates
The resulting equivalent stress (HMH, von Mieses) and plastic strain are calculated on plates. The
stress check cannot be performed, because the stress reaches the yield strength only. Thus the check
of equivalent plastic strain is performed. The limit value 5% is suggested in Eurocode (EN1993-1-5
app. C par. C8 note 1), this value can be modified in project settings.
Plate element is divided to 7 layers and elastic/plastic behaviour is investigated in each of them.
Program shows the worst result from all of them.
CBFEM method can provide stress rather higher than yield strength. The reason is the slight
inclination of plastic branch of stress-strain diagram, which is used in analysis to improve the stability
of interaction calculation. This is not problem for practical design. The equivalent plastic strain is
exceeded at higher stress and the joint does not satisfy anyway.
www.ideastatica.com
5.2 Welds
5.2.1 Fillet welds
The design strength, ΦRn and the allowable strength, Rn/ of welded joints are evaluated in
connection weld check.
Φ = .7 LRFD
= . ASD
Available strength of welded joints is evaluated according to AISC 360-10 table J2,5
Rn = Fnw Awe
Fnw = 0.60FEXX . + . si . Θ
where:
• Fnw - nominal stress of weld material,
• Awe - effective area of the weld,
• FEXX - electrode classification number, i.e., minimum specified tensile strength,
• Θ - angle of loading measured from the weld longitudinal axis, degrees.
For end-loaded fillet welds with a length up to 100 times the weld size, it is permitted to take the
effective length equal to the actual length. When the length of the end-loaded fillet weld exceeds
100 times the weld size, the effective length shall be determined by multiplying the actual length by
the redu tio fa tor, β, deter i ed as follows:
β = . - 0.002 (l / w)
where:
• l - weld length,
• w - size of weld leg.
When the length of the weld exceeds 300 times the leg size, w, the effective length
is taken as 180w.
All values required for check are printed in tables.
www.ideastatica.com
5.2.2 CJP groove welds

AISC Specification Table J2.5 identifies four loading conditions that might be associated with JP
groove welds, and shows that the strength of the joint is either controlled by the base metal or that
the loads need not be considered in the design of the welds connecting the parts. Accordingly, when
CJP groove welds are made with matching-strength filler metal, the strength of a connection is
governed or controlled by the base metal, and no checks on the weld strength are required.
www.ideastatica.com
5.3 Bolts
5.3.1 Tensile and shear strength of bolts
The design tensile or shear strength, ΦRn, and the allowable tensile or shear strength, Rn/ of a snug-
tightened bolt is determined according to the limit states of tension rupture and shear rupture as
follows:
Rn = Fn Ab
Φ = .7 LRFD
= . ASD
where:
• Ab - nominal unthreaded body area of bolt or threaded part, in2 (mm2)
• Fn - nominal tensile stress, Fnt, or shear stress, Fnv, from Table J3.2, ksi (MPa)
The required tensile strength includes any tension resulting from prying action produced by
deformation of the connected parts.
5.3.2 Combined Tension and shear in bearing type connection

The available tensile strength of a bolt subjected to combined tension and shear is determined
according to the limit states of tension and shear rupture as follows:
Rn = F'nt Ab (AISC 360-10 J3-2)
Φ = 0.75 (LRFD)
= . ASD
F nt = 1,3Fnt - frv Fnt/ ΦFnv (AISC 360-10 J3-3a LRFD)

F nt = 1,3Fnt - frv Fnt/Fnv (AISC 360-10 J3-3b ASD)
where:
• F nt - nominal tensile stress modified to include the effects of shear stress
• Fnt - nominal tensile stress from AISC 360-10 Table J3.2
• Fnv - nominal shear stress from AISC 360-10 Table J3.2
• frv - required shear stress using LRFD or ASD load combinations. The available shear stress of
the fastener shall be equal or exceed the required shear stress, frv.
5.3.3 Bearing strength in bolt holes

The available bearing strength, ΦRn and Rn/ at bolt holes is determined for the limit state of bearing
as follows:
Φ = 0.75 (LRFD)
= . ASD
The nominal bearing strength of the connected material, Rn, is determined as follows:
For a bolt in a connection with standard, oversized and short-slotted holes, independent of the
direction of loading, or a long-slotted hole with the slot parallel to the direction of the bearing force
www.ideastatica.com
When deformation at the bolt hole at service load is a design consideration

Rn = 1.2 lc t Fu ≤ 2.4 d t Fu (AISC 360-10 J3-6a)
When deformation at the bolt hole at service load is not a design consideration
Rn = 1.5 lc t Fu ≤ 3.0 d t Fu (AISC 360-10 J3-6b)
where:
• Fu - specified minimum tensile strength of the connected material,
• d - nominal bolt diameter,
• lc - clear distance, in the direction of the force, between the edge of the hole and the edge of
the adjacent hole or edge of the material,
• t - thickness of connected material.
5.4 Preloaded bolts

The design slip resistance of a preloaded class A325 or A490 bolt without of effect of tensile
force Ft,Ed
Preloading force to be used AISC 360-10 tab. J3.1.

Tb = 0,7 fub As
Design slip resistance per bolt AISC 360-10 par. 3.8

Rn = . μ Tb Ns

Uts = V / Rn

• - slip factor obtained,
• Ns - number of the friction surfaces. Check is calculated for each friction surface
separately.
• V - shear force.
www.ideastatica.com
5.5 Anchors
The following resistances of anchor bolts are evaluated:
• Steel strength of anchor in tension
• Steel strength of anchor in shear
• Concrete breakout strength in tension
• Concrete breakout strength in shear
5.5.1 Concrete breakout strength

Concrete breakout strength is designed according to the Concrete Capacity Design (CCD) in ACI 318-
02 – Appendix D. In the CCD method, the concrete cone is considered to be formed at an angle of
appro i atel ° to . slope . For simplification, the cone is considered to be square rather than
round in plan. The concrete breakout stress in the CCD method is considered to decrease with an
increase in size of the breakout surface. Consequently, the increase in strength of the breakout in the
CCD method is proportional to the embedment depth to the power of 1.5. Note that no equivalent
ASD solution exists for concrete capacity design.
Φ Ncbg = Φ ψ3 24 √fc hef 1,5 An/An0 for hef < 11 in
Φ Ncbg = Φ ψ3 16 √fc hef 1,66 An/An0 for hef >= 11 in
where:
• Φ = 0.70,
• ψ3 = 1.25 considering the concrete to be uncracked at service loads, otherwise =1.0,
• hef - depth of embedment,
• An - concrete breakout cone area for group,
• An0 - concrete breakout cone area for single anchor.
5.5.2 Concrete breakout strength of anchor in shear

Concrete breakout strength of an anchor in shear is designed according to ACI 318-02 – D.6.2.
Φ Vcbg = Φ Av/Avo ψ5 ψ6 ψ7 Vb
where:
.
.
• 𝑉 = √ √𝑓 ′
• Φ = 0.70,
• Av – Projected concrete failure area of an anchor or group of anchors
• Avo – Projected concrete failure area of one anchor when not limited by corner influences,
spacing or member thickness
• 𝜓 = . – Modification factor for eccentrically loaded anchor group
• 𝜓 = . + . . ≤ . - Modification factor for edge effect
• 𝜓 – Modification factor for concrete cracking
• ≤ – Embedment length
• – Anchor diameter
• 𝑓 ′ – Concrete compressive strength
• – The edge distance in the direction of load
• – The edge distance in the direction perpendicular to load
www.ideastatica.com

Idea Statica Connection Theoretical Background PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Idea Statica Connection Theoretical Background PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Idea Statica Connection Theoretical Background PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What components are used to model the structural elements?

What components are used to model the structural elements?

What factors affect the concrete breakout strength of anchors?

What factors affect the concrete breakout strength of anchors?

IDEA StatiCa Connection

Components in joint with bolted end plates, described by springs.

CBFEM model of bolted connection by end plates

2.1 Material model

Material diagrams of steel in numerical models

Loads Stress Strain

2.2 Plate model and mesh convergence

2.2.2 Mesh convergence

Mesh on beam with constrains between web and flange plate

Mesh on end plate, with 7 elements on width

Influence of number of elements on the moment resistance

Joint's resistance [kNm]

Influence of number of elements on the T-stub resistance

2.4.1 Direct connection of plates

Multi point constraint

Constraint between mesh nodes

Weld stress evaluation for direct connection

2.4.2 Plastic welds

Constraint between weld element and mesh nodes

Weld stress evaluation for plastic welds

2.6 Preloaded bolts

Design slip resistance per bolt EN 1993-1-8 3.9 (3.8)

Stress distribution in standard and slip-resistant shear bolt connection

2.7 Anchor bolts

Force in anchor bolt, kN

Load–deformation diagram of the anchor bolt

4.8 420 340 14 2,1E+05 0,011 21,6

5.6 500 300 20 2,1E+05 0,020 35,0

5.8 520 420 10 2,1E+05 0,021 12,5

6.8 600 480 8 2,1E+05 0,032 8,8

8.8 830 660 12 2,1E+05 0,030 9,5

10.9 1040 940 9 2,1E+05 0,026 5,0

Anchor bolt parameters, based to ISO 898:2009

2.8 Concrete block

No. of elements Aeff [m2] σ [MPa] fjd [MPa]

4 0,06 18,5 26,8

6 0,06 18,2 26,8

8 0,06 18,5 26,8

10 0,06 18,4 26,8

15 0,06 18,5 26,8

20 0,06 18,5 26,8

No. of elements Aeff [m2] σ [MPa] fjd [MPa]

4 0,05 26,0 26,8

Influence of number of elements on prediction

2.8.3 Deformation stiffness

where, k is stiffness in compression, Ec is modulus of elasticity, n is Poisson coefficient of concrete

Manufacturing operations/items which can be used to construct the joint

3.2 Bearing member and supports

Plate to plate connection transfers all components of internal forces

3.3 Equilibrium in node

The mode can be switched in ribbon group Advanced mode.

Simplified input, normal force in column is NOT taken into account

Advanced input, normal force in column is taken into account

Real shape of joint Theoretical shape in 3D FEM model

Bending moment Shear force