Design of Built Up Plate Girders - p1 - 2per

AISC Live Webinar Design of Built-up Plate Girders
July 22, 2021 Lesson 1 – Bending
AISC Live Webinars

Thank you for joining our live webinar today.
We will begin shortly. Please standby.
Design of Built-up Plate Girder based on AISC 360-16

Lesson 1: Bending
July 22, 2021 •1
AISC Live Webinars

Today’s live webinar will begin shortly. Please stand by.
Today’s audio will be broadcast through the internet. Please be sure to turn up
the volume on your speakers.
Please type any questions or comments in the Q&A window.
Copyright © 2021
American Institute of Steel Construction
1
AISC Live Webinars

AIA Credit
AISC is a Registered Provider with The American Institute of Architects Continuing
Education Systems (AIA/CES). Credit(s) earned on completion of this program will be
reported to AIA/CES for AIA members. Certificates of Completion for both AIA members
and non-AIA members are available upon request.
This program is registered with AIA/CES for continuing professional education. As such, it
does not include content that may be deemed or construed to be an approval or
endorsement by the AIA of any material of construction or any method or manner of
handling, using, distributing, or dealing in any material or product.
Questions related to specific materials, methods, and services will be addressed at the
conclusion of this presentation.
AISC Live Webinars

Copyright Materials
This presentation is protected by US and International Copyright laws. Reproduction,
distribution, display and use of the presentation without written permission of AISC is
prohibited.
© The American Institute of Steel Construction 2021
The information presented herein is based on recognized engineering principles and is

for general information only. While it is believed to be accurate, this information should
not be applied to any specific application without competent professional examination
and verification by a licensed professional engineer. Anyone making use of this
information assumes all liability arising from such use.
Copyright © 2021
2
AISC Live Webinars

Course Description
Design of Built-up Plate Girders based on AISC 360-16 Specification for
Structural Steel Buildings, Part 1 – Bending
There are many situations in flexural member design where the geometrical or loading
conditions require the engineer to look beyond standard rolled wide-flange shapes. One
solution for such cases is built-up plate girders, which introduce their own design
challenges related to section slenderness that engineers rarely encounter when working
with rolled shapes. The first session in this two-part webinar will focus on designing built-
up plate girders for bending moments. We'll discuss plate girders with noncompact or
slender webs and both doubly and singly symmetric cross-sections. The lesson will
explore how the AISC Specification accounts for local buckling by using reduction factors
to modify the strengths determined from commonly considered limit states of yielding
and lateral-torsional buckling.
AISC Live Webinars

Learning Objectives
• Demonstrate how web slenderness is assessed for singly symmetric I-shaped

flexural members and compare this to those that are doubly symmetric.
• Explain how web local buckling affects the flexural limit states for built-up
plate girders.
• Describe how the web plastification factor varies as a function of web

slenderness.
• Compare the design procedures for plate girders with noncompact webs to
those with slender webs.
Copyright © 2021
3
Design of Built-up Plate Girders based on

AISC 360-16 Specification for Structural
Steel Buildings
Summer Webinar 2021

Lesson 1
Bending
Plate Girders
• Plate girders as a term has not been used
since the introduction of AISC 360-05.
• The previous ASD and LRFD
Specifications each had a separate
chapter, Chapter G, that dealt with them
by that name.
• Currently the provisions are found in
Chapter F for bending and Chapter G for
shear.
8
Copyright © 2021
4
Plate Girders
• A member made (built-up) from plates in
the form of a singly or doubly symmetric I-
shape is what we will be referring to as
plate girders
Compression
y1
y1
y1
Tension
S xc  S xt S xc  S xt S xc  S xt
Plate Girders
• For bending, plate girders are a part of
– F2. Doubly symmetric and compact
– F3. Doubly symmetric with compact web and
noncompact or slender flanges
– F4. Doubly symmetric or singly symmetric
with compact or noncompact webs
– F5. Doubly symmetric or singly symmetric
with slender webs
10
Copyright © 2021
5
Plate Girders
All rolled W-shapes
Doubly Symmetric Singly Symmetric
F2 Flange compact
Web compact
F3 Flange noncompact, slender
Web compact
F4 Flange all all
Web noncompact compact, noncompact
F5 Flange all all
Web slender slender
Plate girders could fall into any of these categories
11
Plate Girders
• For shear, plate girders are covered in
– G2.1 Shear strength of webs without tension
field action
– G2.2 Shear strength of interior web panels
with a / h  3 considering tension field action
Rolled W-shapes do not benefit from stiffeners.

Plate girders may benefit from stiffeners and
may benefit from tension field action.
12
Copyright © 2021
6
Plate Girders
• F13. for proportioning of I-shaped members
– Singly and doubly symmetric I-shaped
members with slender webs
a a
When  1.5 When  1.5
h h
h E h 0.40 E
   12.0 F13-3    F13-4
 tw  max Fy  t w  max Fy
For unstiffened girders h t w  260 and

ratio of web area to compression flange area  10
a  clear distance between transverse stiffeners 13
Plate Girders
• F13. for proportioning of I-shaped members
– Singly symmetric I-shaped members
I yc
0.1   0.9 F13-2
Iy
3
bfc = 5.7 in. 1.0  5.7 
I yc   15.4 in.4
12
3
20  0.5 
I yw   0.2 in.4
tfc = 1.0 in. 12
3
1.0 12.0 
I yt   144 in.4
tw = 0.5 in. h = 20.0 in. 12
tft = 1.0 in. I yc 15.4

  0.096
Iy 15.4  0.2  144
bft = 12.0 in. Not acceptable 14
Copyright © 2021
7
Plate Girders
• Bending Limit States
– Compression Flange Yielding
• Compact (may be influenced by web local buckling)
– Compression Flange Local Buckling

• Noncompact, slender (may be influenced by web local buckling)
– Tension Flange Yielding

• Sxt < Sxc (may be influenced by web local buckling)
– Lateral-Torsional Buckling
• Unbraced length (may be influenced by web local buckling)
– Web Local Buckling

• Compact, noncompact, slender (this limit state is doing the influencing)
15
Plate Girders
• For our purposes, we will not address those
plate girders that fall within the provisions that
also cover W-shapes, that is F2 and F3.
• We will first look at bending of doubly symmetric
plate girders.
• Then we will look at bending of singly symmetric
plate girders.
• We will conclude in Lesson 2 by looking at the
shear provisions.
16
Copyright © 2021
8
Plate Girders
• F4. for doubly and singly symmetric I-
shaped members with noncompact web
– The limit state of web local buckling does not
lead to a specific nominal strength
– Rather, web local buckling modifies the
strength determined for the other limit states;
yielding, flange local buckling and lateral-
torsional buckling, through the use of the web
plastification factors, Rpc and Rpt.
17
Plate Girders
• F4.1 Compression Flange Yielding
M n  Rpc M yc  Rpc Fy S xc F4-1
• F4.4 Tension Flange Yielding

M n  Rpt M yt  R pt Fy S xt F4-15
• F4.3 Compression Flange Local Buckling

    pf 
Noncompact M n  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc    F4-13
  rf   pf
 
0.9 Ekc S xc
Slender M n  F4-14 b
2   fc
2t fc 18
Copyright © 2021
9
Plate Girders
• F4.1 Compression Flange Yielding
M n  Rpc M yc  Rpc Fy S xc F4-1 For a doubly
symmetric
• F4.4 Tension Flange Yielding shape, these
are all equal
M n  Rpt M yt  R pt Fy S xt F4-15 since Sxc = Sxt
• F4.3 Compression Flange Local Buckling

    pf 
Noncompact M n  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc    F4-13
  rf   pf
 
0.9 Ekc S xc
Slender M n  F4-14 b
2   fc
2t fc 19
Plate Girders
plastic
inelastic
elastic
20
Copyright © 2021
10
Plate Girders
• The primary issue with plate girders is web
slenderness. Since we treat both singly
and doubly symmetric I-shapes, we need
to have a way to look at the portion of the
web that is in compression.
hc Compression
hc h y1 2
 hc ENA
y1
2 2
2
hc
ENA
y1 w 
ENA tw
Tension
S xc  S xt S xc  S xt S xc  S xt
21
Plate Girders
• Look at the web plastification factor, F4.2(6)
When I yc I y  0.23
M p  Fy Z x  1.6 Fy S x
h
When c   pw For doubly symmetric or singly
tw
symmetric, where Sxc is the
Mp Fy Z smaller section modulus,
R pc  
M yc Fy S xc Z
 Shape Factor
hc S
When   pw
tw
 Mp  Mp     pw   M p
R pc     1   
 
 M yc  M yc   rw   pw   M yc
22
Copyright © 2021
11
Plate Girders
• Look at the web plastification factor, F4.2(6)
When I yc I y  0.23
R pc  1.0
Z Rectangle = 1.5
 Shape Factor
S W-shapes = 1.1-1.3
As you add thickness to the flanges, the shape could approach a
rectangle, thus the shape factor will approach 1.5.
For doubly symmetric I-shapes we will not be concerned with this limit
M p  Fy Z x  1.6 Fy S x
23
Plate Girders
When Iyc/Iy > 0.23
Iyc/Iy range for

Mp
 1.6 Noncompact web W-shapes
M yc
0.49-0.50
If Iyc/Iy ≤ 0.23
then Rpc =1.0
Mp
 1.0
M yc
Compact web
p r
For a compact web

Mp
R pc M yc  M yc  M p  1.6 Fy S
addressed through F4, M yc
24
Copyright © 2021
12
Plate Girders
• F4.2 Lateral-torsional buckling For rolled W-shapes,
When Lp  Lb  Lr FL = 0.7Fy
  L  Lp 
M n  Cb  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc   b    R pc M yc F4-2
 L L
 r p  
When Lb  Lr
2
Cb 2 ES xc J  Lb  F4-3, F4-5
Mn  2
1  0.078    R pc M yc
 Lb  S xc ho  rt 
 
 rt 
For rolled W-shapes,
rt = rts
25
Example 1
• Determine the nominal moment strength of
the given doubly symmetric plate girder,
A36 steel. Section Properties
I x  30, 600 in.4
I y  2560 in.4
tf =0.875 in. S x  S xc  S xt  1230 in.3
h =hc= 48 in.
Z x  1330 in.3
tw =0.375 in. d  49.75 in.
b f  26.0 in.
tw  0.375 in.
bf = 26.0 in.
t f  0.875 in.
26
Without transverse stiffeners
Copyright © 2021
13
Example 1
• Check flange slenderness, Table B4.1b Case 11
b fc 26
  14.9
2t fc 2  0.875 
E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

 p  0.38  0.38  10.8  r  0.95  0.95 c ?
Fy 36 FL FL
4 4 (but no less than 0.35

kc  =  0.354 nor more than 0.76)
h tw 48 0.375
S xt
 1.0  0.7 therefore FL  0.7 Fy F4-6a
S xc
27
Example 1
kc E 0.354  29, 000 
 r  0.95  0.95  19.2
FL 0.7  36 
b fc Flange -
 p  10.8   14.9   r  19.2 noncompact
2t fc
• Check web slenderness, Table B4.1b Case 15
hc h 48 h 0.40 E F13-4
    128      322
tw tw 0.375  t max Fy
E 29, 000 E 29, 000
 p  3.76  3.76  107  r  5.70  5.70  162
Fy 36 Fy 36
Web - noncompact 28
Copyright © 2021
14
Example 1
• Since the web is noncompact, we must use
Section F4.
• The web plastification factor impacts all limit
states, so first determine Rpc.
3
I yc 0.875  26.0  12 1282
   0.50  0.23
Iy 2560 2560
Mp Fy Z 1330
   1.08 For this shape, the web
M yc Fy S xc 1230 contributes 0.2 in.4 to Iy
29
Example 1
• So Rpc becomes This inequality will
ALWAYS be satisfied
M M     pw   M p
R pc   p   p  1    F4-9b
 M yc  M yc    rw   pw   M yc
  128  107  
 1.08  1.08  1     1.05  1.08
  162  107  
30
Copyright © 2021
15
Example 1
• F4.1 Compression flange yielding
M n  R pc M yc  1.05  36 1230   46,500 in.-kips  3,880 ft-kips F4-1
• F4.3 Compression flange local buckling

– We found that the flange was noncompact
    pf 
M n  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc   F4-13
    
 rf pf 
 14.9  10.8 
 46,500   46,500  0.7  36 1230    
 19.2  10.8 
 38,900 in.-kips  3, 240 ft-kips
31
Example 1
• F4.4 Tension flange yielding
Since S xt  S xc this limit state does not apply
• F4.2 Lateral-torsional buckling

– Additional section properties
3 3
bt 3 2  26  0.875  48  0.375
J    12.5 in.4 See Design Guide 9
3 3
b fc
rt  F4-11 rt is the radius of gyration of the
 1  compression flange plus 1/6 the web
12 1  aw 
 6 
32
Copyright © 2021
16
Example 1
hc tw 48  0.375 
aw    0.791
b fc t fc 26  0.875  b fc
rt  F4-11
h  48 in.  1 
12 1  aw 
ho  48  0.875  48.875 in.  6 
26
d  48  2  0.875   49.75 in. 
 1 
12 1   0.791 
 6 
ho hc  h
 7.05 in.
d
33
Example 1
E 29, 000
Lp  1.1rt  1.1 7.05   220 in.  18.3 ft F4-7
Fy 36
2 2 F4-8
E J  J   FL 
Lr  1.95rt     6.76  
FL S xc ho S h
 xc o  E
2 2
 29, 000  12.5  12.5   0.7  36  
 1.95  7.05       6.76  
 0.7  36   1230  48.875  1230  48.875    29, 000 
 787 in.  65.6 ft
34
Copyright © 2021
17
Example 1
When Lp  Lb  Lr
  L  Lp 
M n  Cb  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc   b    R pc M yc F4-2
L L
  r p  
  L  18.3  
 1.0  46,500   46,500  0.7  36 1230    b 
  65.6  18.3  
 46,500  328  Lb  18.3 (in.-kips)
35
Example 1
When Lb  Lr
2
Cb 2 ES xc J  Lb 
Mn  2
1  0.078    R pc M yc F4-3, F4-5
 
 rt 
1.02  29, 000 1230   12.5   12 Lb 2
 2
1  0.078    
 12in./ft  Lb   1230  48.875    7.05 
 
 7.05 
1.22 108
 1  4.70 105 L2b (in.-kips)
L2b
36
Copyright © 2021
18
Example 1
• Nominal strength Compression flange
local buckling
R pc M yc  3880 ft-kips
M n  3240 ft-kips
M r  0.7 Fy S xc  2580 ft-kips
Lp = 18.3 ft
L’p = 41.7 ft
Lr = 65.6 ft Lp Lp Lr
37
Example 1
local buckling
Lp = 18.3 ft
L’p = 41.7 ft
Limiting Strength
38
Copyright © 2021
19
Plate Girders
• For singly symmetric girders, nothing will
change in our approach.
• However,
hc  h
S xc  S xt
• So, we must be careful when h and hc or S,

Sxc and Sxt are called for.
39
Example 2
• Determine the nominal moment strength of
the given singly symmetric plate girder,
A36 steel. Section Properties
bfc = 20.0 in.
y  25.78 in.
I x  32, 200 in.4 d  50.125 in.
hc I  2120 in.4 b fc  20.0 in.
y
tfc =1.25 in. 2 t fc  1.25 in.
S xc  1320 in.3
tw =0.375 in. h = 48 in.
b ft  26.0 in.
tft =0.875 in.
S xt  1250 in.3
t ft  0.875 in.
Z x  1380 in.3
tw  0.375 in.
bft = 26.0 in.
Changed the size of the top flange.
S xt  S xc 40
Copyright © 2021
20
Example 2
• Section F13 limitations
3
I yc 1.25  20.0  12 833
   0.39  0.1 F13-2
Iy 2120 2120
No stiffeners so a h  1.5 the same as for example 1
h 48.0 h 0.4 E

  128      322 F13-4
tw 0.375  tw max Fy
41
Example 2
• Check flange slenderness (compression flange)
b fc 20
  8.0
2t fc 2 1.25 
E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

 p  0.38  0.38  10.8  r  0.95  0.95 c ?
Fy 36 FL FL

kc  =  0.354 nor more than 0.76)
h tw 48 0.375
S xt 1250
  0.947  0.7 therefore FL  0.7 Fy F4-6a
S xc 1320
42
Copyright © 2021
21
Example 2
• Check flange slenderness, Table B4.1b, Case 11
kc E 0.354  29, 000 
 r  0.95  0.95  19.2
FL 0.7  36 
bf
 8.0   p  10.8   r  19.2 Flange - compact
2t f
• Check web slenderness, Table B4.1b, Case 16
hc 46.2 Less slender than Example 1
hc  2  48.0  0.875  25.78   46.2 in.   123
tw 0.375
hc E
hp Fy E 29, 000
p  2
 r  r  5.70  5.70  162
 Mp  Fy 36
 0.54  0.09 

 M y  43
Example 2
M y  Fy S x  36 1250   45, 000 in.-kips
M p  Fy Z x  36 1380   49, 680 in.-kips
hp  2  48.0  0.875  27.875  42.0 in.
bfc = 20.0 in. hc E

y  25.78 in. tfc =1.25 in. hp Fy
p  2
 r
hc hp
 Mp 
2 2  0.54  0.09 

 My 
tw =0.375 in. h = 48 in.
tft =0.875 in. y p  27.875 in. 46.2 29, 000

 42.0 36.0  122   r  162
2
 49, 680 
bft = 26.0 in.
 0.54 45, 000  0.09 
 
44
Copyright © 2021
22
Example 2
• Check web slenderness
hc 46.2 Less slender than Example 1
  123
tw 0.375
hc E
hp Fy E 29, 000
p  2
 122  r  5.70  5.70  162
 Mp  Fy 36
 0.54  0.09 

 M y 
• Thus, the web is just barely noncompact,

we again should use Section F4.
45
Example 2
I yc
 0.39  0.23
Iy
Mp Fy Z 49, 680 49, 680
    1.05
M yc Fy S xc 36 1320  47,520
M p  1.6 Fy S  1.6  36 1250   72, 000 in.-kips
46
Copyright © 2021
23
Example 2
Remember from
• So Rpc becomes Example 1, this
inequality will ALWAYS
be satisfied
M M     pw   M p
R pc   p   p  1    F4-9b
 M yc  M yc    rw   pw   M yc
  123  122  
 1.05  1.05  1     1.05  1.05
  162  122  
47
Example 2
M n  R pc M yc  1.05  36 1320   49,900 in.-kips F4-1
 4,160 ft-kips
bfc = 20.0 in.
tfc =1.25 in. f c  Fy  36 ksi
hc hp
c  24.35 in.
2 2 If it were an elastic
tw =0.375 in. h = 48 in. stress distribution
y  25.78 in. tft =0.875 in.
ft  38.1  Fy  36 ksi
bft = 26.0 in.
48
Copyright © 2021
24
Example 2
– We found that the flange was compact, so this
limit state does not apply
bf
 8.0   p  10.8   r  19.2 Flange - compact
2t f
49
Example 2
• F4.4 Tension flange yielding f c  34  Fy  36 ksi
Since S xt  S xc this limit state applies

Mp Fy Z 49, 680 49, 680
    1.10
M yt Fy S xt 36 1250  45, 000
ft  Fy  36 ksi
and Mp  Mp      pw   M p
R pt     1   F4-16b
 M yt  M yt        M
  rw pw   yt
Note that Rpc

  123  122  
 1.10  1.10  1     1.10  1.10 and Rpt are
  162  122   now different
50
Copyright © 2021
25
Example 2
M n  R pt Fy S xt  1.10  36 1250   49, 500 in.-kips F4-15
 4,130 ft-kips
But again, we do not actually have an elastic stress distribution
51
Example 2
3 3 3
bt 3 20 1.25    26  0.875   48  0.375
J    19.7 in.4
3 3
b fc
hct w 46.2  0.375  rt  F4-11
aw    0.693  1 
b fct fc 20 1.25  12 1  aw 
 6 
h  48 in.
20
ho  48  1.25 2  0.875 2  49.1 in. 
 1 
12 1   0.693 
d  48  1.25  0.875  50.1 in.  6 
 5.47
52
Copyright © 2021
26
Example 2
E 29, 000
Lp  1.1rt  1.1 5.47   171 in.  14.3 ft F4-7
Fy 36
2 2 F4-8
E J  J   FL 
Lr  1.95rt     6.76  
FL S xc ho S h
 xc o   E
2 2
 29, 000  19.7  19.7   0.7  36  
 1.95  5.47        6.76  
 0.7  36   1320  49.1  1320  49.1   29, 000 
 624 in.  52.0 ft
53
Example 2
  L  Lp  
M n  Cb  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc   b  R pc M yc
 L  L  
F4-2
  r p 
  L  14.3  
 1.0  49,900   49,900  0.7  36 1320    b 
  52.0  14.3  
 49,900  441 Lb  14.3 (in.-kips)
54
Copyright © 2021
27
Example 2
When Lb  Lr
2
Mn  2
1  0.078    R pc M yc F4-3, F4-5
 
 rt 
1.02  29, 000 1320   19.7   12 Lb 2
 2
1  0.078    
 12in./ft  Lb   1320  49.1   5.47 
 
 5.47 
7
7.85 10
 1  1.14 104 L2b (in.-kips)
L2b
55
Example 2
• Nominal strength Tension flange yielding
R pc M yc  4160 ft-kips M n  4130 ft-kips

Lp = 14.3 ft
L’p = 15.2 ft
Lr = 52.0 ft L p Lp Lr
56
Copyright © 2021
28
Example 3
• Reverse the flanges of the shape in
Example 2 so that the smaller width flange
is in tension. Section Properties
bfc = 26.0 in. y  25.78 in.
I x  32, 200 in.4 d  50.125 in.
I  2120 in.4 b fc  26.0 in.
y
tfc =0.875 in. hc
t fc  0.875 in.
tw =0.375 in.
2
S xc  1250 in.3
b ft  20.0 in.
S xt  1320 in.3
tft =1.25 in. y p  27.875 in. t ft  1.25 in.
Z x  1380 in.3
tw  0.375 in.
bft = 20.0 in.
57
Example 3
• Section F13 limitations
3
I yc 0.875  26.0  12 1280
   0.60  0.9 F13-2
Iy 2120 2120
No stiffeners so a h  1.5 the same as for examples 1 and 2
h 48.0 h 0.4 E F13-4

  128      322
tw 0.375  tw max Fy
58
Copyright © 2021
29
Example 3
• Check flange slenderness Note change from Example 2
b fc 26
  14.9
2t fc 2  0.875 
E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

 p  0.38  0.38  10.8  r  0.95  0.95 c ?
Fy 36 FL FL

kc  =  0.354 nor more than 0.76)
h tw 48 0.375
S xt 1320
  1.06  0.7 therefore FL  0.7 Fy F4-6a
S xc 1250
Note change from Example 2
59
Example 3
kc E 0.354  29, 000 
 r  0.95  0.95  19.2
FL 0.7  36 
b fc
 p  10.8   14.9   r  19.2 Flange -
2t fc noncompact
• Check web slenderness, Table B4.1b Case 16
hc 49.8
hc  2  25.78  0.875   49.8 in.   133 Change from Example 2
tw 0.375
hc E
hp Fy E 29, 000
p  2
 r  r  5.70  5.70  162
 Mp  Fy 36
 0.54  0.09 

 My  60
Copyright © 2021
30
Example 3
M y  Fy S x  36 1250   45, 000 in.-kips
M p  Fy Z x  36 1380   49, 680 in.-kips
hp  2  27.875  0.875  54.0 in.
bfc = 26.0 in. y  25.78 in. hc E

hp Fy
p  2
 r
hp hc  Mp 
2 2  0.54  0.09 

 My 
y p  27.875 in.
49.8 29, 000
tft =1.25 in.
 54.0 36.0  102   r  162
2
 49, 680 
bft = 20.0 in.  0.54 45, 000  0.09 
 
61
Example 3
• Check web slenderness
hc 49.8
  133
tw 0.375
hc E
hp Fy E 29, 000
p  2
 102  r  5.70  5.70  162
 Mp  Fy 36
 0.54  0.09 

 M y 
• Thus, the web is noncompact and we

again will use Section F4.
62
Copyright © 2021
31
Example 3
I yc
 0.60  0.23
Iy
Mp Fy Z 49, 680 49, 680
    1.10
M yc Fy S xc 36 1250  45, 000
63
Example 3
Remember this
• So Rpc becomes inequality will ALWAYS
be satisfied
M M     pw   M p
R pc   p   p  1    F4-9b
 M yc  M yc    rw   pw   M yc
  133  102  
 1.10  1.10  1     1.05  1.10
  162  102  
64
Copyright © 2021
32
Example 3
M n  R pc M yc  1.05  36 1250   47,300 in.-kips  3,940 ft-kips F4-1
bfc = 26.0 in. y  25.78 in.

f c  Fy  36 ksi
hp hc
2 2
If we were using an
elastic stress distribution
tft =1.25 in. y p  27.875 in.
ft  34  Fy  36 ksi
bft = 20.0 in.
65
Example 3
    pf 
M n  R pc M yc   Rpc M yc  FL S xc   F4-13
  rf   pf 
 
 14.9  10.8 
 47,300   47,300  0.7  36 1250      39, 600 in.-kips
 19.2  10.8 
 3,300 ft-kips
66
Copyright © 2021
33
Example 3
3 3 3
bt 3 20 1.25   26  0.875  48  0.375 
J    19.7 in.4
3 3
67
Example 3
b fc
hct w 49.8  0.375  rt  F4-11
aw    0.821  1 
b fct fc 26  0.875  12 1  aw 
 6 
h  48 in.
26
ho  48  1.25 2  0.875 2  49.1 in. 
 1 
12 1   0.821 
d  48  1.25  0.875  50.1 in.  6 
 7.04 in.
68
Copyright © 2021
34
Example 3
E 29, 000
Lp  1.1rt  1.1 7.04   220 in.  18.3 ft F4-7
Fy 36
2 2 F4-8
E J  J   FL 
Lr  1.95rt     6.76  
FL S xc ho S h
 xc o   E
2 2
 29, 000  19.7  19.7   0.7  36  
 1.95  7.04        6.76  
 0.7  36   1250  49.1  1250  49.1   29, 000 
 806 in.  67.2 ft
69
Example 3
  L  Lp  
M n  Cb  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc   b  R pc M yc
 L  L  
F4-2
  r p 
  L  18.3  
 1.0  47, 300   47,300  0.7  36 1250    b 
  67.2  18.3  
 47,300  323  Lb  18.3 (in.-kips)
70
Copyright © 2021
35
Example 3
When Lb  Lr
2
Mn  2
1  0.078    R pc M yc F4-3, F4-5
 
 rt 
1.02  29, 000 1250   19.7   12 Lb 2
 2
1  0.078    
 12in./ft  Lb   1250  49.1   7.04 
 
 7.04 
8
1.23 10
 1  7.27 105 L2b (in.-kips)
L2b
71
Example 3
local buckling
Lp = 18.3 ft
L’p = 42.4 ft
72
Copyright © 2021
36
Example 3
• Nominal strength
Ex 2
Ex 3
Ex 1
73
Plate Girders
• F5. for doubly and singly symmetric I-
shaped members with slender web
– As with F4, the limit state of web local buckling
does not lead to a specific nominal strength
– Rather, web local buckling modifies the
strength determined for the other limit states;
yielding, flange local buckling and lateral-
torsional buckling, through the use of the
bending strength reduction factor, Rpg.
74
Copyright © 2021
37
Plate Girders
M n  Rpg Fy S xc F5-1
• F5.4 Tension flange yielding, S xt  S xc

M n  Fy S xt F5-10

  
Noncompact F  F   0.3F  
pf
F5-8
    
cr y y
 rf pf 
M n  R pg Fcr S xc F5-7
0.9 Ekc
Slender Fcr  2
F5-9
 bf 
 
 2t f  75
Plate Girders
• Look at the bending strength reduction
factor, Rpg
aw h E 
R pg  1   c  5.7   1.0 F5-6
1, 200  300aw  tw Fy 
hc tw
aw   10.0 F4-12 plus the limit to 10
b fct fc
76
Copyright © 2021
38
Plate Girders
aw  0.79
aw  10
aw  2.0
aw  5.0
 pw  rw
77
Plate Girders
  Lb  L p 
Fcr  Cb  Fy   0.3Fy      Fy F5-3
 L L
 r p  
When Lb  Lr
Cb 2 E
Fcr  2
F5-4
 Lb 
 
 rt 
78
Copyright © 2021
39
Plate Girders
E
L p  1.1rt F4-7
Fy
b fc
rt  F4-11
 1 
12  1  aw 
E  6 
Lr  rt F5-5
0.7 Fy
79
Plate Girders
F2, F3 F4 F5
Noncompact
Mp
 1.6
M yc
Rpg
Mp aw  0.79
 1.0 Rpc
M yc aw  10
Compact Slender
 pw  rw
A user note in Section F4 says that Section F5 may conservatively

be used for shapes that fall under the provisions of Section F4
80
Copyright © 2021
40
Example 4
• Reconsider the plate girder from Example
1 using Section F5
Section Properties
I x  30, 600 in.4
I y  2560 in.4
tf =0.875 in. S x  1230 in.3
h = 48 in.
Z x  1330 in.3
tw =0.375 in. d  49.75 in.
b f  26.0 in.
tw  0.375 in.
bf = 26.0 in.
t f  0.875 in.
81
Example 4
• Flange and web slenderness are the same
as already calculated in Example 1
b fc
 p  10.8   14.9   r  19.2
2t fc
h
 p  107   128   r  162
tw
• Since the web is noncompact, we could use
Section F4 as we did in Example 1 but we are
permitted to conservatively use Section F5
82
Copyright © 2021
41
Example 4
• The bending strength reduction factor
impacts other limit states, so first determine
Rpg. From Example 1, aw = 0.791
aw h E 
R pg  1   c  5.7   1.0 F5-6
1, 200  300aw  tw Fy 
0.791  48.0 29, 000 

 1   5.7 
1, 200  300  0.791  0.375 36 
 1.02  1.0 therefore R pg  1 When using F5 in place of
F4, Rpg will always be 1.0
83
Example 4
M n  R pg M yc  1.0  36 1230   44,300 in.-kips  3, 690 ft-kips F5-1

    pf  M n  R pg Fcr S xc F5-7
Fcr  Fy   0.3Fy   F5-8
    
 rf pf 
 1.0  30.7 1230 
 14.9  10.8 
 36  0.3  36   
 19.2  10.8   37,800 in.-kips
 30.7 ksi
 3,150 ft-kips
Note that both of these are elastic 84
Copyright © 2021
42
Example 4

rt  7.05 F4-11
E 29, 000 F4-7

Lp  1.1rt  1.1 7.05   220 in.  18.3 ft
Fy 36
E 29, 000 F5-5
Lr  rt    7.05   751 in.  62.6 ft
0.7 Fy 0.7  36 
85
Example 4
  Lb  Lp 
Fcr  Cb  Fy   0.3Fy      Fy F5-3
 L L
 r p  
  L  18.3  
 1.0 36   0.3  36    b 
  62.6  18.3  
 36  0.244  Lb  18.3 (ksi)
86
Copyright © 2021
43
Example 4
When Lb  Lr
Cb 2 E
Fcr  2
 Fy F5-4
 Lb 
 
 rt 
1.02  29, 000 
 2
 12in./ft  Lb 
 
 7.05 
9.88 104
 (ksi)
L2b
87
Example 4
From this example, it does appear that using F5 in place of F4 is a bit conservative.
Is the simplicity worth it?
Section F4
Example 1
Section F5
Example 4
88
Copyright © 2021
44
Example 5
• Determine the nominal strength of a plate
girder with a slender web. This is Example
1 with a reduced web Section Properties
I x  29,500 in.4
I y  2560 in.4
tf =0.875 in. S x  1190 in.3
h = 48 in.
Z x  1260 in.3
tw =0.25 in. d  49.75 in.
b f  26.0 in.
tw  0.250 in.
bf = 26.0 in.
t f  0.875 in.
89
Example 5
• Check flange slenderness
b fc 26
  14.9
2t fc 2  0.875 
E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

 p  0.38  0.38  10.8  r  0.95  0.95 c ?
Fy 36 FL FL
4 4 A change from
kc  =  0.289
h tw 48 0.25 Example 1
(but no less than 0.35 nor more than 0.76)
kc  0.35
90
Copyright © 2021
45
Example 5
• Check flange slenderness
kc E 0.35  29, 000 
 r  0.95  0.95  19.1
FL 0.7  36 
b fc Flange -
 p  10.8   14.9   r  19.1 noncompact
2t fc
• Check web slenderness (limits from Example 1)
h 48
 p  107    192   r  162
tw 0.25
h
  
0.40 E
 322 F13-4 Therefore, the web is slender,
 t max Fy
and we must use Section F5
91
Example 5
• The bending strength reduction factor, Rpg.
hc tw 48  0.25
aw    0.527  10 F4-12
b fc t fc 26  0.875 
aw h E 
Rpg  1   c  5.7   1.0 F5-6
1, 200  300aw  tw Fy 
0.527  48.0 29, 000 

 1   5.7 
1, 200  300  0.527   0.250 36 
 0.988  1.0 therefore Rpg  0.988
92
Copyright © 2021
46
Example 5
M n  R pg M yc  0.988  36 1190   42,300 in.-kips  3,530 ft-kips F5-1

    pf  M n  R pg Fcr S xc F5-7
Fcr  Fy   0.3Fy   F5-8
    
 rf pf 
 0.988  30.7 1190 
 14.9  10.8 
 36  0.3  36   
 19.1  10.8   36,100 in.-kips
 30.7 ksi  3, 010 ft-kips
93
Example 5

b fc
aw  0.527 rt  F4-11
 1 
h  48 in. 12 1  aw 
 6 
ho  48  0.875  48.875 in. 26

d  48  2  0.875   49.75 in.  1 
12 1   0.527  
 6 
 7.20 in.
94
Copyright © 2021
47
Example 5

E 29, 000
Lp  1.1rt  1.1 7.20   225 in.  18.8 ft F4-7
Fy 36
E 29, 000 F5-5
Lr  rt    7.20   767 in.  63.9 ft
0.7 Fy 0.7  36 
95
Example 5
M n  R pg Fcr S xc  0.988 Fcr S xc F5-2
  Lb  Lp 
Fcr  Cb  Fy   0.3Fy      Fy F5-3
 L L
 r p  
  L  18.8  
 1.0 36   0.3  36    b 
  63.9  18.8  
 36  0.239  Lb  18.8  (ksi)
96
Copyright © 2021
48
Example 5
When Lb  Lr
Cb 2 E
Fcr  2
 Fy F5-4
 Lb 
 
 rt 
1.02  29, 000 
 2
 12in./ft  Lb 
 
 7.20 
1.03 105
 (ksi)
L2b
97
Example 5
Flange local buckling
R pg M yc  3530 ft-kips
M r  R pg  0.7 Fy S xc   2470 ft-kips
Lp = 18.8 ft
L’p = 41.3 ft Lp Lp Lr
Lr = 63.9 ft
98
Copyright © 2021
49
Example 5
• Look at the impact of reducing the web
thickness
Example 1: 0.375 in. web
Example 5: 0.250 in. web
99
Compare F4 and F5
• Compression flange yielding
M n  R pc Fy S xc F4-1 R pc  1 to M p M yc See Slide 70
(next)
M n  R pg Fy S xc F5-1 R pg  1.0
• Compression flange local buckling

Noncompact
    pf 
M n  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc    F4-13
  
 rf pf 
    pf 
 
M n  R pg M yc  R pg M yc  R pg  0.7 Fy S xc  
   F5-8 modified
 rf pf 
100
Copyright © 2021
50
Compare F4 and F5
F2, F3 F4 F5
Noncompact
Mp
 1.6
M yc
Rpg
aw  0.79
Rpc aw  10
Compact Slender
 pw  rw
101
Compare F4 and F5
• FL, nominal compressive stress above
which the inelastic buckling limit states
apply.
S xt
 0.7 FL  0.7 Fy F4-6a
S xc
S xt S xt
 0.7 FL  Fy  0.5 Fy F4-6b
S xc S xc
In Section F5, FL is not used but it is essentially 0.7Fy

102
Copyright © 2021
51
Compare F4 and F5
• Compression flange local buckling
Slender
0.9 Ekc S xc F4-14
Mn  2
 bf 
 
 2t f 
0.9 Ekc S xc
M n  R pg 2
F5-9 modified
 bf 
 
 2t f 
103
Compare F4 and F5
• Tension flange yielding
M n  Rpt Fy S xt F4-15 R pt  1 to M p M yt
M n  Fy S xt F5-10
• Lateral-torsional buckling
When L p  Lb  Lr
  Lb  L p 
M n  Cb  R pc M yc   R pc M yc  FL S xc      R pc M yc F4-2
L L
  r p  
  Lb  Lp  


M n  Cb  R pg M yc  R pg M yc  R pg  0.7 Fy S xc    L  L    R pg M yc
p 
F5-3 modified
 r 
104
Copyright © 2021
52
Compare F4 and F5
• Lateral-torsional buckling
When Lb  Lr
2
Cb 2 ES xc J  Lb  F4-3, F4-5
Mn  2
1  0.078    R pc M yc
 
 rt 
R pg Cb  2 ES xc F5-2, F5-4
Mn  2
 R pg M yc
 Lb 
 
 rt 
105
Summary
• We have determined the flexural strength of
doubly and singly symmetric girders with
noncompact webs.
• We have also looked at how girder strength
changed as we altered the flange size.
• We have treated doubly symmetric girders with
slender webs and noted how singly symmetric
girders would be treated.
• We compared the Section F4 and F5 equations.
106
Copyright © 2021
53
Lesson 2
• We will next address shear in plate
girders.
• We will consider shear strength in I-
shaped members with post buckling
strength modeled by the rotated stress
field theory.
• Then we will look at post buckling strength
through tension field action.
107
Thank You

130 East Randolph St., Suite 2000
Chicago, IL 60601
108
Copyright © 2021
54
PDH Certificates
For those participating at their own connection…
• Reporting attendance is not necessary.
• Certificates will be issued based on AISC’s attendance records.
• You will be receiving certificates via email from registration@aisc.org.
PDH Certificates
For those participating at one connection with a group…
• Registrant will report attendance via an online form. (The link will be
provided in an email from registration@aisc.org.)
– Username: Same as AISC website username.
– Password: Same as AISC website password.
• Once attendance has been reported, you will be receiving certificates via
email from registration@aisc.org.
Copyright © 2021
55
AISC | Thank you.
Copyright © 2021
56

Design of Built Up Plate Girders - p1 - 2per

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design of Built Up Plate Girders - p1 - 2per

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

Design of Built Up Plate Girders - p1 - 2per

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

AISC Live Webinar Design of Built-up Plate Girders

July 22, 2021 Lesson 1 – Bending

AISC Live Webinars

Design of Built-up Plate Girder based on AISC 360-16

AISC Live Webinars

Please type any questions or comments in the Q&A window.

AISC Live Webinars

AISC Live Webinars

© The American Institute of Steel Construction 2021

The information presented herein is based on recognized engineering principles and is

AISC Live Webinars

AISC Live Webinars

• Demonstrate how web slenderness is assessed for singly symmetric I-shaped

• Describe how the web plastification factor varies as a function of web

Design of Built-up Plate Girders based on

Summer Webinar 2021

Doubly Symmetric Singly Symmetric

Plate girders could fall into any of these categories

Rolled W-shapes do not benefit from stiffeners.

For unstiffened girders h t w  260 and

tft = 1.0 in. I yc 15.4

bft = 12.0 in. Not acceptable 14

– Compression Flange Local Buckling

– Tension Flange Yielding

– Web Local Buckling

• F4.4 Tension Flange Yielding

• F4.3 Compression Flange Local Buckling

• F4.3 Compression Flange Local Buckling

Iyc/Iy range for

For a compact web

E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

4 4 (but no less than 0.35

• F4.3 Compression flange local buckling

• F4.2 Lateral-torsional buckling

• So, we must be careful when h and hc or S,

No stiffeners so a h  1.5 the same as for example 1

h 48.0 h 0.4 E

E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

4 4 (but no less than 0.35

bfc = 20.0 in. hc E

tft =0.875 in. y p  27.875 in. 46.2 29, 000

• Thus, the web is just barely noncompact,

M p  1.6 Fy S  1.6  36 1250   72, 000 in.-kips

Since S xt  S xc this limit state applies

Note that Rpc

M n  R pt Fy S xt  1.10  36 1250   49, 500 in.-kips F4-15

But again, we do not actually have an elastic stress distribution

R pc M yc  4160 ft-kips M n  4130 ft-kips

M r  0.7 Fy S xc  2770 ft-kips

No stiffeners so a h  1.5 the same as for examples 1 and 2

h 48.0 h 0.4 E F13-4

E 29, 000 kc E k  29, 000 

4 4 (but no less than 0.35

bfc = 26.0 in. y  25.78 in. hc E

• Thus, the web is noncompact and we

bfc = 26.0 in. y  25.78 in.

• F5.4 Tension flange yielding, S xt  S xc

• F5.3 Compression flange local buckling

A user note in Section F4 says that Section F5 may conservatively