You are on page 1of 20

Sixteenth International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures Orlando, Florida USA, October 17-18, 2002

DESIGN OF CHANNELS SUBJECTED TO CONCENTRATED BEARING LOAD


Ben Young! and Gregory J. Hancock 2

ABSTRACT

A test program on cold-formed steel channels subjected to concentrated bearing load is presented in this paper. The web slenderness values of the channel specimens ranged from comparatively stocky webs of 15.3 to relatively more slender webs of 62.7. The tests were performed under end and interior loading conditions, and the test setup was different from the one specified in the North American Specification and the AustralianlNew Zealand Standard for cold-formed steel structures where the loading support is assumed free to rotate in the plane of the beam. The test specimens were seated on fixed flat solid steel base plate, and a concentrated load was applied through a bearing plate to the top flange of the channels. The test setup closely simulated the floor joist members subjected to concentrated load. The test strengths are compared with the design strengths obtained using the North American Specification and the Australian/New Zealand Standard. It is concluded that the design strengths predicted by the North American Specification are generally conservative for endtwo-flange and interior-two-flange loadings, and these design rules are shown to be reliable using reliability analysis. However, the design strengths predicted by the AustralianlNew Zealand Standard that is similar to the American Iron and Steel Institute Specification are generally unconservative.

INTRODUCTION

Transverse stiffeners are often difficult and uneconomical to install on structural steel members. In the absence of stiffeners, the webs of cold-formed steel members may cripple due to concentrated bearing load. Therefore, web crippling (bearing failure) must be accounted for in the design of cold-formed steel members. However, theoretical analysis of web crippling for cold-formed steel members is rather complicated because it involves a number of factors, such as elastic and inelastic stability of the web element, local yielding in the immediate region of load application, initial imperfections of plate elements and other factors (Yu, 2000). Hence, the web crippling design rules in the North American Specification (NAS, 2001) for the design of cold-formed steel structural members and the AustralianlNew Zealand Standard (ASINZS, 1996) for cold-formed steel structures are formulated based on experimental results conducted by numerous researchers as detailed in Yu (2000). These tests were performed under four loading conditions, namely, end-oneflange (EOF), end-two-flange (ETF), interior-one-flange (IOF) and interior-two-flange (ITF). Prabakaran and Schuster (1998) and Beshara and Schuster (2000) developed a unified web
I

Assistant Professor. Department of Civil Engineering, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong. BHP Steel Professor of Steel Structures, Department of Civil Engineering, University of Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia.

200

201

crippling equation for the four loading conditions of various section geometries. The unified equation is in a normalized format, and it can accommodate any units. The unified equation has been used in the NAS Specification (2001). The four loading conditions specified in the NAS Specification (2001) and the AS/NZS Standard (1996) do not directly simulate the floor joist members seated on a solid foundation subj ected to concentrated bearing load since the support points are assumed free to rotate in the plane of the beam. Zhao and Hancock (1992, 1995) performed a series of tests on square and rectangular hollow sections subjected to concentrated load, where the specimens were seated on a fixed solid steel base plate. The tests closely simulated the support to floor joist members. The objective of this paper is to assess the appropriateness of the web crippling design rules in the NAS Specification and the AS/NZS Standard for channel sections that were tested differently from the four loading conditions specified in the specifications. Three series of tests on cold-formed steel channels were conducted under end loading and interior loading using the same test setup as Zhao and Hancock (1992, 1995). The test strengths are compared with the design strengths predicted using the NAS Specification and the AS/NZS Standard. Furthermore, the web crippling design rules are evaluated using reliability analysis. A companion series of tests has been conducted by Young and Hancock (1998, 2001) using the four loading conditions specified in the NAS Specification and the AS/NZS Standard where the support point is free to rotate.

EXPERIMENTAL INVESTIGATION
Test Specimens and Bearing Plates The test program consisted of three series of cold-formed steel unlipped channels subjected to concentrated bearing load. The test specimens of Series SI and S2 were rolled from structural steel sheets having nominal yield stresses of 300 MPa and 250 MPa respectively, while Series S3 were brake-pressed from zinc-coated structural steel sheets having a nominal yield stress of 450 MPa. The Series SI sections have in-line galvanizing, which increases their nominal yield stress to 450 MPa when combined with roll-forming. The specimens of Series S 1 consisted of six different section sizes, having nominal thicknesses ranging form 4 mm to 6 mm, nominal depth of the webs ranging from 75 mm to 300 mm, and nominal flange widths ranging from 40 mm to 90 mm. Series S2 consisted of four different section sizes, having nominal thicknesses of 4 mm and 5 mm, nominal depth of the webs ranging from 80 mm to 150 mm, and nominal flange widths ranging from 40 mm to 75 mm. Series S3 consisted of two different section sizes, having a nominal thickness of 1.5 mm, a nominal depth of the web of 96 mm, and nominal flange widths of 36 mm and 48 mm. The web slenderness (hIt) values ranged from 15.3 to 45.1 for Series SI, from 16.3 to 34.6 for Series S2, and from 60.8 to 62.7 for Series S3. The web slenderness values were obtained using the measured cross-section dimensions. The specimens of Series S 1 and S2 are considered to have stocky webs, whereas the specimens of Series S3 have relatively more slender webs. Tables 1, 2 and 3 show the measured test specimen dimensions for Series SI, S2 and S3 respectively, using the nomenclature defined in Fig. 1. The loads were applied by means of bearing plates. The bearing plates were fabricated using high strength quench and tempered steel having a nominal yield stress of 690 MPa. The

202

bearing plates were machined to specified dimensions having a thickness of 50 mm. All bearing plates were designed to act across the full flange width of the channels excluding the rounded corner. The length of bearing (N) was generally chosen to be the full flange width of the channels for all test series, although other bearing lengths were also used for Series S 1 and S3. The flanges of the channel specimens were not fastened (restrained) to the bearing plates during testing. The specimen length (L) was determined according to the NAS Specification (2001) and the AS/NZS Standard (1996). Generally, the distance from the edge of the bearing plate to the end of the member was set to be 1.5 times the overall depth of the web (d) rather than .1.5 times the depth of the flat portion of the web (h), the latter being the minimum specified in the specifications. The specimen lengths are defined in Figs 2a and 3a for end loading and interior loading respectively. Specimen SlI-125N65L has a longer length than other specimens, where the distance from the edge of the bearing plate to the end of the member was 4.5 times the overall depth of the web. Specimen Labeling The test specimens were labeled such that the series, the type of loading, the depth of the web and the length of the bearing could be identified from the label. For example, the labels "SlI-200N37(l)" and "S2E-80N40" define the following specimens: The first two letters indicate that the specimens belonged to test Series S 1 and S2 respectively. The third letter indicates the type of loading, where "I" refers to interior loading and "E" refers to end loading. The specimen label is then separated by a hyphen. The next three digits "200" and "80" are the overall depth of the web in mm. The notation "N37" and "N40" indicate the length of the bearing in mm. If a test was repeated, then "(1)" indicates the first test, "(2)" indicates the second test and "(3)" indicates the third test. If a letter "L" is used in the suffix letter, then it refers to a specimen having a long specimen length. Material Properties The material properties of the test specimens were determined by tensile coupon tests. The coupons were taken from the centre of the web plate in the longitudinal direction of the finished specimens. The tensile coupons were prepared and tested according to the Australian Standard AS1391 (1991) for the tensile testing of metals using 12.5 mm wide coupons of gauge length 50 mm. The coupons were tested in a 300 kN capacity MTS displacement controlled testing machine using friction grips. A calibrated extensometer of 50 mm gauge length was used to measure the longitudinal strain. A data acquisition system was used to record the load and the gauge length extensions at regular intervals during the tests. The static load was obtained by pausing the applied straining for one minute near the 0.2% tensile proof stress and the ultimate tensile strength. This allowed the stress relaxation associated with plastic straining to take place. The material properties obtained from the coupon tests are summarized in Table 4, which includes the nominal and the measured static 0.2% tensile proof stress (0'0.2), the static tensile strength (O'u) and the elongation after fracture (Eu) based on a gauge length of 50 mm. The 0.2% proof stresses were used as the corresponding yield stresses.

203

Test Rig The specimens were tested under end loading and interior loading, as shown in Figs 2 and 3 respectively. The specimens were seated on a fixed flat solid steel base plate, and a concentrated load was applied through a bearing plate to the top flange of the channel specimens. As mentioned in the introduction, Zhao and Hancock (1992, 1995) performed a series of tests on square and rectangular hollow sections using the same testing method. This testing method is different from the one specified in the NAS Specification (2001) and the ASINZS Standard (1996). However, the tests closely simulated the floor joist members subjected to concentrated bearing load. The test arrangement of end loading is shown in Figs 2a and 2b for the front and end views respectively. A bearing plate was positioned at the end of each specimen. Three transducers were used to record the web deformations of the specimen. The web deformations were obtained by the average values of the three transducers. Photographs of the end loading test setup are shown in Figs 4 and 5 for the front and end views respectively. For the interior loading tests, the test setup is similar to the end loading tests, where a bearing plate was positioned at the mid-length of each specimen. A schematic view of the interior loading test arrangement is shown in Fig. 3. Photographs of the interior loading test setup are shown in Figs 6 and 7 for the front and end views respectively. A 2000 kN capacity DAR1EC servo-controlled hydraulic testing machine was used to apply a concentrated compressive force to the test specimens. Displacement control was used to drive the hydraulic actuator at a constant speed of 0.8 mmlmin for test Series Sl and S2, and 0.25 mmlmin for test Series S3. A SPECTRA data acquisition system was used to record the load and the transducer readings at regular intervals during the tests. The static load was recorded by pausing the applied straining for one minute near the ultimate load. This allowed the stress relaxation associated with plastic straining to take place.
Test Results

The experimental ultimate web crippling loads (PExp ) are shown in Tables 5-10. The tests of specimen Sl-200N37 were repeated, and the test results for the repeated tests are very close to the first test value, with difference of 0.4% and 2.8% for the second and third tests respectively. The small difference between the repeated tests demonstrated the reliability of the test results. The specimen SlI-125N65L having longer member length than the specified length in the NAS Specification failed at 69.9 kN, whereas the specimen SlI-125N65 having the specified length failed at 65.2 kN. Hence, the specimen having the longer member length had a 7.2% increase of ultirriate web crippling load compared with the specimen having specified length.

COMPARISON OF TEST STRENGTHS WITH DESIGN STRENGTHS

The web crippling strengths obtained from the tests are compared with the nominal (unfactored) web crippling strengths predicted using the NAS Specification (2001) and the ASINZS Standard (1996) for cold-formed steel structures. The ASINZS Standard has adopted the web crippling design rules from the American Iron and Steel Institute (ArSI, 1996) Specification for cold-formed steel structures. Four loading conditions are specified in the NAS Specification and the ASINZS Standard. These loading conditions are end-one-flange

204

(EOF) and end-twa-flange (ETF) for end loading as well as interior-one-flange (IOF) and interior-twa-flange (ITF) for interior loading. Tables 5-10 show the comparison of the test strengths (PExp) with the unfactored design strengths predicted using the NAS Specification (PNAS) and the ASINZS Standard (PAS/Nzs). The design strengths were calculated using the measured cross-section dimensions of each specimen and the measured material properties as detailed in Tables 1-3 and 4 respectively. For end loading, the design strengths predicted by the NAS Specification are generally conservative for ETF loading, but not for the EOF loading as shown in Tables 5, 7 and 9. The mean values of P Exp I P NAS ratio are 1.14, 1.29 and 0.98 with the coefficients of variation (COV) of 0.116, 0.079 and 0.055 for ETF loading of Series SI, S2 and S3 respectively. However, the mean values of P Exp I P NAS ratio are 0.74, 0.80 and 0.55 with the COY of 0.092, 0.088 and 0.039 for EOF loading of Series SI, S2 and S3 respectively. The design strengths predicted by the ASINZS Standard are generally unconservative for all specimens, except for Series S3 specimens having relatively more slender webs. The mean values of P Exp I P AS/NZS ratio are 0.80, 0.71 and 1.07 with the COY of 0.099, 0.126 and 0.047 for ETF loading of Series SI, S2 and S3 respectively. The mean values of PExpl PAS/NZS ratio are 0.87, 0.78 and 1.12 with the COY of 0.100, 0.116 and 0.048 for EOF loading of Series SI, S2 and S3 respectively. Similar results were obtained for the interior loading as shown in Tables 6, 8 and 10.

RELIABILITY ANALYSIS The reliability of the web crippling design rules is evaluated using reliability analysis. A target reliability index (13) of 2.5 for structural members in the United States is recommended as a lower limit for the NAS Specification. The design rules are considered to be reliable if the reliability index is greater than 2.5. The resistance (capacity) factor (<jJw) recommended by the NAS Specification and the ASINZS Standard are shown in Tables 5-9. In the NAS Specification, the <jJw factor for the American and Mexico is used. The <jJw factor ranges from 0.75 to 0.85, and these factors are used to calculate the 13 values. The load combinations of 1.2DL + 1.6LL and 1.25DL + I.5LL as specified in the American Society of Civil Engineers Standard (ASCE, 1998) and the Australian Standard AS 1170.1 (AS, 1989) respectively, are used in the reliability analysis, where DL is the dead load and LL is the live load. The statistical parameters are obtained from Table Fl of the NAS Specification for web crippling strength, where Mm = 1.10, Fm = 1.00, VM = 0.10 and VF =0.05, which are the mean values and coefficients of variation for material properties and fabrication factors. The statistical parameters Pm and Vp are the mean value and coefficient of variation of tested-topredicted load ratios respectively, as shown in Tables 5-9. A correction factor Cp in the reliability analysis is to account for the influence due to small number of tests (Pek6z and Hall, 1988; Tsai, 1992). Reliability analysis is detailed in the commentary of the NAS Specification (2001). For NAS Specification, the reliability indices (13) are generally greater than the target value of 2.5 for the design rules of ETF and ITF loadings, while the reliability indices are less than the target value for the EOF and IOF loadings, as shown in Tables 5-9. For ASINZS Standard, the reliability indices are less than the target value for the four loading conditions, except for Series S3. Hence, the design rules of ETF and ITF loadings in the NAS Specification are reliable.

205

CONCLUSIONS AND DESIGN RECOMMENDATIONS


The paper presents an experimental investigation of cold-formed steel channels subjected to concentrated bearing load on a fixed surface. The channel specimens had nominal yield stresses of 450 MPa and 250 MPa with different web slenderness ranging from 15.3 to 62.7. The specimens were tested under end loading and interior loading, which had a different testing method from the one specified in the North American Specification (NAS, 2001) and the AustralianlNew Zealand Standard (ASINZS, 1996) for cold-formed steel structures where the bearing points are free to rotate in the plane of the beam. The test strengths are compared with the unfactored web crippling design strengths obtained using the NAS Specification (2001) and the ASINZS Standard (1996). The ASINZS Standard has adopted the web crippling design rules from the American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI, 1996) Specification for cold-formed steel structures. The flanges of the channel specimens were not fastened to bearing plates. The conclusions and design recommendations are summarized as follows: It is demonstrated that the design strengths predicted by the NAS Specification are generally conservative for end-two-flange and interior-two-flange loadings, but not for the end-one-flange and interior-one-flange loadings.
It is shown that the design strengths predicted by the ASINZS Standard and the AISI Specification are generally unconservative for all four loading conditions, except for the specimens having relatively slender webs.

The reliability analysis shows that the web crippling design rules of end-two-flange and interior-two-flange loadings in the NAS Specification are reliable for the tested channels. It is recommended that the web crippling design rules of end-two-flange and interiortwo-flange loadings in the NAS Specification be used for the design of channel sections floor joist members subjected to concentrated load. Reduced resistance factors will need to be used for end-one-flange and interior-oneflange loadings in the NAS Specification for the design of channel sections floor joist members subjected to concentrated load.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors are grateful to the Australian Research Council and BHP Steel Structural and Pipeline Products (now OneSteel Market Mills) for their support through an ARC Collaborative Research Grant. Test specimens were provided by BHP Steel Structural and Pipeline Products (now OneSteel Market Mills).

206

APPENDIX-REFERENCES
AISI. (1996). Specification for the design of cold-formed steel structural members, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C. AS. (1989). SAA loading code, Part 1: Dead and live loads and load combinations. AS 1170.1-1989, Standards Association of Australia, Sydney, Australia. ASCE. (1998). Minimum design loads for buildings and other structures, ASCE Standard 7-98, American Society of Civil Engineers Standard. AS/NZS. (1996). Cold-formed steel structures, AustralianlNew Zealand Standard, AS/NZS 4600:1996, Standards Australia, Sydney, Australia. Australian Standard. (1991). Methods for tensile testing of metals, AS 1391, Standards Association of Australia, Sydney, Australia. Beshara, B., and Schuster, R.M. (2000). "Web crippling data and calibrations of cold-formed steel members." Final Report, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada. NAS. (2001). Commentary on the 2001 North American specification for the design of coldformed steel structural members, Draft, Commentary North American Cold-formed Steel Specification, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C. NAS. (2001). Specification for the design of cold-formed steel structural members, Draft, North American Cold-formed Steel Specification, American Iron and Steel Institute, Washington, D.C. Pekoz, T.B., and Hall, W.B. (1988). "Probabilistic evaluation of test results." Proceedings of the 9th International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Mo. Prabakaran, K., and Schuster, R.M. (1998). "Web crippling of cold-formed steel members." Proceedings of the 14th International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Mo, 151-164. Tsai, M. (1992). "Reliability models of load testing." PhD thesis, Department of Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Urbana, Ill. Young, B., and Hancock, G.J. (1998). "Web crippling behaviour of cold-formed unlipped channels." Proceedings of the 14th International Specialty Conference on Cold-Formed Steel Structures, University of Missouri-Rolla, Rolla, Mo, 127-150. Young, B., and Hancock, G.J. (2001). "Design of cold-formed channels subjected to web crippling." Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 127(10), 1137-1144. Yu, W.W. (2000). Cold-formed steel design. 3rd Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New York. Zhao, X.L., and Hancock, G.J. (1992). "Square and rectangular hollow sections subject to combined actions." Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 118(3),648-668.

207

Zhao, X.L., and Hancock, GJ. (1995). "Square and rectangular hollow sections under transverse end-bearing force." Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, 121(9), 13231329.

APPENDIX NOTATION
The following symbols are used in this paper:

bl
Cp

= overall width of flange; = correction factor in reliability analysis;

COY
d

DL Fm h
L

LL Mm
N
PASlNZS

Eu

<!Jw
0"0.2

O"U

=coefficient of variation; = overall depth of web; = dead load; = mean value of fabrication factor; =depth of flat portion of web measured along the plane of web; =length of specimen; =live load; = mean value of material factor; =length of bearing; = nominal web crippling strength calculated using AustralianlNew Zealand Standard (unfactored design strength); = experimental ultimate web crippling load (test strength); = mean value oftested-to-predicted load ratios; = nominal web crippling strength calculated using North American Specification (unfactored design strength); =inside comer radius of specimen; = thickness of channel section; = coefficient of variation of fabrication factor; = coefficient of variation of material factor; =coefficient of variation of tested-to-predicted load ratios; = reliability index (safety index); =elongation (tensile strain) after fracture based on gauge length of 50mm; = resistance (capacity) factor; =static 0.2% tensile proof stress; and =static ultimate tensile strength.

208

Web d (mm) SlE-75N40 74.7 SlE-75N20 74.4 SlE-I00N50 99.1 SIE-100N25 99.1 SlE-125N65 125.5 SIE-125N32 125.4 SlE-200N75 198.5 SlE-200N37 198.7 SlE-250N90 249.3 SlE-250N45 249.5 298.7 SIE-300N90 SIE-300N45 298.6 SlI-75N40 74.6 SlI-75N20 74.5 SlI-100N50 99.3 SlI-100N25 99.3 SlI-125N65 125.0 SlI-125N65L 124.9 125.1 SlI-125N32 SlI-200N75 198.6 SlI-200N37(l) 198.8 S 1I-200N37(2) 198,.7 S 1I-200N37(3) 198.9 SlI-250N90 249.1 SlI-250N45 249.3 SlI-300N90 298.7 SlI-300N45 298.8 Note: 1 m. = 25.4 mm.

Specimen

Flanges br (mm) 40.5 40.4 50.4 50.4 65.3 65.3 75.9 76.0 89.9 90.0 90.9 91.1 40.5 40.4 50.4 50.3 65.5 65.5 65.6 75.9 76.0 75.9 75.9 89.8 89.7 90.7 90.9

Thickness t (mm) 3.86 3.84 3.83 3.84 3.84 3.84 4.72 4.71 5.99 5.98 6.00 6.00 3.84 3.84 3.84 3.83 3.85 3.86 3.84 4.73 4.72 4.72 4.72 6.01 6.00 6.00 5.99

Radius
Ti

Length
L

(mm) 3.9 3.9 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.9 4.2 4.2 7.9 7.9 8.4 8.4 3.9 3.9 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.2 7.9 7.9 8.4 8.4

(mm) 151.8 133.3 199.6 175.1 252.0 219.6 374.5 337.1 465.2 420.8 541.0 495.2 264.7 243.0 349.8 326.1 439.7 1192.3 407.9 674.8 637.6 638.0 637.8 838.2 795.2 990.3 943.9

Table 1. Measured specimen dimensions for Series Sl

209

Web d (mm) S2E-80N40 80.3 S2E-100N50 99.8 S2E-140N50 140.0 S2E-150N75 149.2 S2I-80N40 80.3 S21-100N50 99.7 S21-140N50 139.9 149.2 S21-150N75 Note: 1 m. =25.4 mm.

Specimen

Flanges br (mm) 39.8 49.9 49.8 75.4 39.7 50.0 49.7 75.3

Thickness t (mm) 3.86 4.82 3.86 3.86 3.80 4.82 3.88 3.86

Radius
ri

Length
L

(mm) 4.0 5.8 4.0 4.0 4.0 5.8 4.0 4.0

(mm) 160.3 202.5 261.2 302.5 280.3 352.5 470.9 527.4

Table 2. Measured specimen dimensions for Series S2

Web d (mm) S3E-96N50 94.7 S3E-96N37 96.5 S3E-96N25 96.7 S31-96N50 94.0 S31-96N37 96.8 Note: 1 m. =25.4 mm.

Specimen

Flanges br (mm) 49.7 36.9 36.8 50.1 36.9

Thickness t (mm) 1.47 1.47 1.48 1.47 1.47

Radius
ri

(mm) 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85 0.85

Length L (mm) 198.2 185.0 169.8 341.5 324.9

Table 3. Measured specimen dimensions for Series S3

Channel Nominal dx brx t 0'0.2 (mm) (MPa) Sl 450 75 x40x4 Sl 450 100 x 50x 4 Sl 450 125 x 65 x4 Sl 450 200 x 75 x 5 Sl 450 250 x 90 x 6 Sl 450 300x90x6 S2 250 80x40x4 S2 250 100 x 50x 5 S2 250 140x50x4 S2 250 150x75x4 S3 450 96 x48 x 1.5 S3 450 96x 36 x 1.5 Note: 1 in. =25.4 mm; 1 ksi =6.89 MPa.

Series

Measured
0'0.2

O'u

Eu

(MPa) 450 440 405 415 445 435 280 295 290 275 510 550

(MPa) 525 545 510 520 530 535 370 370 380 375 540 570

(%)

20 20 23 24 21 23 35 36 39 37
11

10

Table 4. Nominal and measured material properties

Specimen Ratio
ASINZS andAISI
PAS I NZS P Exp P NAS

Measured NAS
P NAS

Design NAS

Test End Loading Nih


P Exp

Comparison ASINZS andAISI

hit r/t (kN) (kN) (kN)

Bearing Proof Length Stress 0"0.2 N (mm) (MPa) Nit

~
PAS I NZS

15.3 1.01 10.4 450 SIE-75N40 40.0 1.02 15.3 5.2 SlE-75N20 20.0 450 21.7 1.07 13.1 440 SlE-100N50 50.0 440 21.7 1.07 6.5 SIE-I00N25 25.0 65.0 405 28.7 1.02 16.9 SIE-125N65 405 28.6 1.02 8.5 SlE-125N32 32.5 38.3 0.89 15.9 415 SlE-200N75 75.0 415 38.4 0.89 8.0 37.5 SlE-200N37 445 37.0 1.32 15.0 SlE-250N90 90.0 1.32 45.0 445 37.1 7.5 SlE-250N45 45.0 1.40 15.0 435 SlE-300N90 90.0 435 45.0 1.40 7.5 SlE-300N45 45.0 Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa; 1 kip = 4.45 kN.

0.68 0.34 0.60 0.30 0.59 0.30 0.42 0.21 0.41 0.20 0.33 0.17

26.5 23.1 30.1 25.4 34.5 27.8 42.6 41.6 63.0 53.8 63.5 52.1

EOF 41.5 33.1 41.2 33.2 41.5 32.9 63.6 50.2 93.9 74.4 87.6 69.7 ETF 25.1 20.9 25.5 21.3 25.4 20.9 38.5 31.6 63.8 52.6 61.8 51.2

EOF ETF EOF 32.2 35.7 0.64 30.4 33.6 0.70 35.0 31.9 0.73 30.2 33.2 0.77 32.7 35.7 0.83 30.3 33.1 0.85 48.7 52.5 0.67 45.1 48.7 0.83 80.8 0.67 74.8 69.7 75.3 0.72 73.2 78.3 0.72 73.2 0.75 68.4 Mean, Pm 0.74 COY, Vp 0.092 Reliability Index, ~ 1.45 Resistance Factor, <l>w 0.85

ETF 1.06 1.10 1.18 1.19 1.36 1.33 1.11 1.31 0.99 1.02 1.03 1.02 1.14 0.116 3.43 0.75

EOF 0.82 0.76 0.94 0.84 1.06 0.92 0.88 0.92 0.84 0.77 0.87 0.76 0.87 0.100 2.30 0.75

ETF 0.74 0.69 0.86 0.76 0.97 0.84 0.81 0.85 0.78 0.71 0.81 0.71 0.80 0.099 1.98 0.75

Table 5. Comparison of web crippling test strengths with design strengths for end loading of Series SI

Specimen Ratio NAS


P NAS PAS I NZS PExp P NAS PExp P AS1NZS

Measured Test futerior


Loadin~

Design
ASINZS andAISI

NAS

Comparison ASINZS andAISI

hit rlt
PExp

Nit

Nih

Bearing Proof Length Stress N 0"0.2 (mm) (MPa) (kN)


ITF ITF

(kN)

(kN)

ITF

SlI-75N40 40.0 450 15.4 1.02 10.4 SlI-75N20 20.0 450 15.4 1.02 5.2 SlI-100N50 50.0 440 21.7 1.07 l3.0 21.8 1.07 SlI-100N25 25.0 440 6.5 SlI-125N65 65.0 28.4 1.01 16.9 405 SlI-125N65L 65.0 405 28.3 1.01 16.8 SlI-125N32 32.5 405 28.5 1.02 8.5 -75.0 SlI-200N75 415 38.2 0.89 15.9 SlI-200N37(l) 37.5 415 38.3 0.89 7.9 415 38.3 0.89 SlI-200N37(2) 37.5 7.9 SlI-200N37(3) 37.5 415 38.4 0.89 7.9 445 36.8 1.31 SlI-250N90 90.0 15.0 36.9 1.32 SlI-250N45 45.0 445 7.5 SlI-300N90 90.0 435 45.0 1.40 15.0 SlI-300N45 435 45.1 1.40 7.5 45.0 Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa; 1 kip = 4.45 kN. 0.68 0.34 0.60 0.30 0.59 0.59 0.30 0.41 0.21 0.21 0.21 0.41 0.20 0.33 0.17 52.9 51.7 64.6 61.9 65.2 69.9 60.1 103.7 94.1 94.5 91.5 155.6 143.7 150.4 148.9

IOF 74.3 69.0 73.2 67.2 70.7 71.1 64.3 110.6 100.9 100.9 100.9 172.4 157.7 163.7 149.8 69.2 60.1 67.1 57.4 65.6 66.0 55.5 101.0 85.8 85.8 85.8 143.6 122.3 l30.1 110.9

IOF ITF IOF 89.2 117.5 0.71 86.1 116.7 0.75 88.7 114.1 0.88 84.5 112.5 0.92 87.1 108.6 0.92 87.6 109.2 0.98 82.1 106.8 0.94 l30.5 160.8 0.94 123.5 158.4 0.93 123.5 158.4 0.94 123.5 158.4 0.91 213.1 264.3 0.90 202.3 260.8 0.91 206.6 252.4 0.92 196.1 249.0 0.99 Mean, Pm 0.90 COY, Vp 0.084 Reliability fudex, ~ 2.25 Resistance Factor, <l>w 0.85

0.76 0.86 0.96 1.08 0.99 1.06 1.08 1.03 1.10 1.10 1.07 1.08 1.17 1.16 1.34 1.06 0.126 2.87 0.8

IOF 0.59 0.60 0.73 0.73 0.75 0.80 0.73 0.79 0.76 0.77 0.74 0.73 0.71 0.73 0.76 0.73 0.081 1.71 0.75

0.45 0.44 0.57 0.55 0.60 0.64 0.56 0.65 0.59 0.60 0.58 0.59 0.55 0.60 0.60 0.57 0.100 0.73 0.75

.....

Table 6. Comparison of web crippling test strengths with design strengths for interior loading of Series SI

Specimen Ratio NAS


ASINZS

Measured Design andAISI


P NAS PAS I NZS

Test End Loading


Nih
P Exp

NAS
PExp P NAS

Comparison ASINZS andAISI

hit rlt
(kN) (kN)

Nit
(leN)

Bearing Proof Length Stress 0"0.2 N (mm) (MPa) 0.62 0.64 0.40 0.56 17.8 32.6 22.9 24.5 EOF 25.4 39.7 26.9 29.2 ETF 15.6 25.4 16.9 18.0 EOF ETF 27.1 30.0 42.5 47.0 27.7 30.1 28.4 30.8 Mean, Pm COY, Vp Reliability Index, 13 Resistance Factor, </lw

~
P AS1NZS

S2E-80N40 40.0 S2E-100N50 50.0 S2E-140N50 50.0 S2E-150N75 75.0 Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 ksi

280 16.7 1.04 10.4 295 16.3 1.20 10.4 32.2 1.04 13.0 290 275 34.6 1.04 19.4 = 6.89 MPa; 1 kip = 4.45 leN.

EOF 0.70 0.82 0.85 0.84 0.80 0.088 1.57 0.85

ETF 1.14 1.29 1.36 1.36 1.29 0.079 3.73 0.75

EOF 0.66 0.77 0.83 0.86 0.78 0.116 1.53 0.75

ETF 0.59 0.69 0.76 0.80 0.71 0.126 1.21 0.75

tv

Table 7. Comparison of web crippling test strengths with design strengths for end loading of Series S2

Specimen Ratio andAISI


P NAS P AS1NZS P Exp P NAS

Measured NAS

Design

Comparison

ASINZS
NAS

ASINZS
andAISI

Test Interior Loading

hit rlt
P Exp

Nit
(kN) (kN) (kN)

Bearing Proof Length Stress 0"0.2 N (mm) (MPa)

Nih

~
PAS I NZS

ITF

280 17.0 1.05 10.5 S2I-80N40 40.0 S2I-100N50 50.0 295 16.3 1.20 10.4 S2I-140N50 50.0 290 32.0 1.03 12.9 S2I-150N75 75.0 275 34.6 1.04 19.4 Note: 1 in. = 25.4 mm; 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa; 1 kip =4.45 kN. 0.62 0.64 0.40 0.56 33.9 62.8 48.7 52.1

IOF 44.8 73.4 49.1 48.7

ITF 41.2 65.3 43.6 44.7

IOF ITF IOF ITF 65.4 85.9 0.76 0.82 108.2 142.4 0.86 0.96 88.0 0.99 1.12 69.6 68.8 83.8 1.07 1.17 Mean, Pm 0.92 1.02 COY, Vp 0.152 0.153 Reliability Index, 13 1.57 1.99 Resistance Factor, <Pw ~L 0.8
-

IOF 0.52 0.58 0.70 0.76 0.64 0.171 0.75 0.75

0.39 0.44 0.55 0.62 0.50 0.206 0.14 0.75

u.>

Table 8. Comparison of web crippling test strengths with design strengths for interior loading of Series S2

- -

Specimen Ratio rlt


PExp PAS I NZS P NAS

Measured NAS
P Exp P NAS P ExP PAS I NZS

Design
ASINZS andAISI

Proof Stress Nit (kN) 0.56 0.41 0.27 6.1 5.5 4.8 EOF 10.6 10.2 8.9 ETF 5.9 5.8 5.1 ETF EOF 5.3 5.5 4.8 5.0 4.5 4.7 Mean, Pm COY, Vp Reliability Index, /3 Resistance Factor, <pw EOF 0.58 0.54 0.54 0.55 0.039 0.33 0.85 ETF 1.04 0.96 0.94 0.98 0.055 2.87 0.75 (kN) (kN) Nih

Test End Loading NAS

Comrarison ASINZS and AISI

Bearing Length N (mm) EOF 1.16 1.15 1.06 1.12 0.048 3.28 0.75

<JO.2

hit

(MPa)

510 61.3 0.58 34.0 S3E-96N50 50.0 550 62.5 0.58 25.5 37.5 S3E-96N37 62.2 0.57 16.9 25.0 550 S3E-96N25 Note: 1 in. =25.4 mm; 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa; 1 kip =4.45 kN.

ETF 1.10 1.10 1.01 1.07 0.047 3.12 0.75


~

Table 9. Comparison of web crippling test strengths with design strengths for end loading of Series S3

..,.

Specimen Ratio rlt


PExp

Measured NAS
P NAS

Design
ASINZS andAISI
PAS I NZS

Bearing Length Nit (kN) 0.56 0.41 14.8 13.4 Nih

Proof Stress

Test Interior Loading (kN) IOF 15.8 16.2

NAS
P Exp

Comparison ASINZS and AISI


P Exp

<JO.2

hit

N (mm)

(MPa)

(kN)
ITF 15.6 15.4

P NAS

PAS I NZS

510 60.8 0.58 34.0 S31-96N50 50.0 550 62.7 Q2L 25.5 S31-96N37 37.5 Note: 1 in. =25.4 mm; 1 ksi = 6.89 MPa; 1 kip = 4.45 kN.

IOF 14.8 14.4

ITF 16.1 16.1 Mean

IOF 0.94 0.83 0.88

ITF 0.95 0.87 0.91

IOF 1.00 0.93 0.97

ITF 0.92 0.83 0.88

Table 10. Comparison of web crippling test strengths with design strengths for interior loading of Series S3

215

rI
.1
Fig. 1. Definition of symbols

1------

Loading Ram Transducer Test Specimen

n-*----

50
d

~~S~=~~ End Bearing Plate


l.5d L

:1

(a) Front view

Loading Ram Transducer

End Bearing Plate 'lest Specimen

(b) End view Fig. 2. Schematic view of end loading test arrangement

216

~---- Loading Ram


~----

1fansducer Test Specimen

~=..:gm~==:;-- Bearing Plate


d

1.Sd
(a) Front view
Loading Ram Transducer

Bearing Plate Test Specimen

(b) End view Fig. 3. Schematic view of interior loading test arrangement

217

Fig. 4. Front view of end loading test setup

Fig. 5. End view of end loading test setup

218

Fig. 6. Front view of interior loading test setup

Fig. 7. End view of interior loading test setup

You might also like