SE II question for KEVO or ARLORD or MOOK...

[McEngr]

Shouldn't the SE II sample exam have consideration for prying action for the flexible wind connection. They don't even consider the thickness of the flange being an issue. This is addressed in the construction spec on page 9-10 to 9-13.

I'll be checking in periodically, so any comments you have or a reference somewhere on T-connection Moment connections would be appreciated.

Thanks.

 

[kevo_55]

McEngr,

One important topic of note when looking at what has changed with the AISC 13th edition and the 9th edition for moment frame is PR vs FR connections.

For something to have any possibility of prying action, it would have to be a FR type connection and bolted.

When looking at all of the examples, I am seeing more and more welded connections for all sorts of MF connections. Part of me says that you simply just need a prequalified connection from Appendix P from the AISC Seismic provisions. The part that knows better is thinking that there are no prequalified bolted joints and you'd have to have it tested.

I don't have my seismic design manual with me, but I'll look at work if I have some free time.

I know this doesn't add too much but I hope this helps.

 

[McEngr]

kevo,

After reading your post, I'm beginning to think that it's a judgement based on how flexible the connection is. When you stated PR vs. FR moment connections, it relieved me a little. The relief came from the fact that I'm not completely missing the boat. I wish that prying action is not considered a critical design concern would have been a part of the exam.

I don't have the seismic design manual with me here at home, so I'll look into the prequalified stuff in the morning.

I really appreciate you taking the time to answer this one. Usually when someone else has a question, it doesn't take too long to get my take on it if I respond. But, I think this one takes a little more thought.

 

[kevo_55]

McEngr,

No problem man.

Some news for you! Please see in the commentary C10.2 (p. 6.1-169) of the seismic provisions/seismic design manual.

I guess that bolted connections are "prequalified" and are able to be used in OMF and IMF type frames. (These connections are called "WUF-B.")

This does not say anything about hanger type connections and prying but I suspect that the thickness to negate prying is out of scope for this type of connection.

I hope this helps!

 

[jta]

Shouldn't the SE II sample exam have consideration for prying action for the flexible wind connection. They don't even consider the thickness of the flange being an issue. This is addressed in the construction spec on page 9-10 to 9-13.
I'll be checking in periodically, so any comments you have or a reference somewhere on T-connection Moment connections would be appreciated.

Thanks.

As I recall that problem specifically states not to design the WT or the bolts to the flange.

 

[MOOK]

Shouldn't the SE II sample exam have consideration for prying action for the flexible wind connection. They don't even consider the thickness of the flange being an issue. This is addressed in the construction spec on page 9-10 to 9-13.
I'll be checking in periodically, so any comments you have or a reference somewhere on T-connection Moment connections would be appreciated.

Thanks.

McEngr, I do not have SEIS home, I will check in work tomorrow.

 

[MOOK]

I did not find anything might help answer your question. However, you may check Chapter 15 and Table 15-1a and 15-1b that provides suggested thickness for the hangers.