PUBLICATIONS A11107 S51757

NafioSai Bureau of Standards CQO

Library NBS SPECIAL PUBLICATION Oc^O

JUL 3 1 1985

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE /National Bureau of Standards

A Workshop on

STEEL RESEARCH NEEDS

FOR BUILDINGS
J m he National Bureau of Standards' was established by an act of Congress on March 3, 1901. The

g[ Bureau's overall goal is to strengthen and advance the nation's science and technology and facilitate their effective application for public benefit. To this end, the Bureau conducts research and provides: (1) a

basis for the nation's physical measurement system, (2) scientific and technological services for industry and

government, (3) a technical basis for equity in trade, and (4) technical services to promote public safety.

The Bureau's technical work is performed by the National Measurement Laboratory, the National

Engineering Laboratory, the Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology, and the Center for Materials

Science.

The National Measurement Laboratory

Provides the national system of physical and chemical measurement;

coordinates the system with measurement systems of other nations and

furnishes essential services leading to accurate and uniform physical and

chemical measurement throughout the Nation's scientific community, in- dustry, and commerce; provides advisory and research services to other Government agencies; conducts physical and chemical research; develops,

produces, and distributes Standard Reference Materials; and provides

calibration services. The Laboratory consists of the following centers:

• Basic Standards^

• Radiation Research

• Chemical Physics

• Analytical Chemistry

The National Engineering Laboratory

Provides technology and technical services to the public and private sectors to address national needs and to solve national problems; conducts research in engineering and applied science in support of these efforts; builds and maintains competence in the necessary disciplines required to carry out this research and technical service; develops engineering data and measurement

capabilities; provides engineering measurement traceability services; develops

test methods and proposes engineering standards and code changes; develops

and proposes new engineering practices; and develops and improves

mechanisms to transfer results of its research to the ultimate user. The

Laboratory consists of the following centers:

Applied Mathematics

Electronics and Electrical EngineeringManufacturing Engineering

Building Technology

Fire Research

Chemical EngineeringThe Institute for Computer Sciences and Technology

Conducts research and provides scientific and technical services to aid • Programming Science and

Federal agencies in the selection, acquisition, application, and use of com- Technology

puter technology to improve effectiveness and economy in Government • Computer Systems

operations in accordance with Public Law 89-306 (40 U.S.C. 759), relevant Engineering

Executive Orders, and other directives; carries out this mission by managing

the Federal Information Processing Standards Program, developing Federal ADP standards guidelines, and managing Federal participation in ADP

voluntary standardization activities; provides scientific and technological advisory services and assistance to Federal agencies; and provides the technical foundation for computer-related policies of the Federal Government. The Institute consists of the following centers:

The Center for Materials Science

Conducts research and provides measurements, data, standards, reference

materials, quantitative understanding and other technical information fundamental to the processing, structure, properties and performance of materials; addresses the scientific basis for new advanced materials technologies; plans

research around cross-country scientific themes such as nondestructive

evaluation and phase diagram development; oversees Bureau-wide technical programs in nuclear reactor radiation research and nondestructive evaluation; and broadly disseminates generic technical information resulting from

its programs. The Center consists of the following Divisions:

Inorganic Materials Fracture and Deformation'

Polymers

Metallurgy Reactor Radiation

'Headquarters and Laboratories at Gaithersburg, MD, unless otherwise noted; mailing address

Gaitiiersburg, MD 20899. 'Some divisions within the center are located at Boulder, CO 80303. located at Boulder, CO, with some elements at Gaithersburg, MD.
Steel Research Needs for Buildings

Proceedings of a Workshop Sponsored By:

National Bureau of Standards

National Science Foundation

American Institute of Steel Construction

American Iron and Steel Institute

Metal Building Manufacturers Association

Held at the National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg, Maryland

March 5-6, 1985

Edited by:

Charles Culver

National Bureau of Standards

Nestor Iwankiw

American Institute of Steel Construction

Albert Kuentz

American Iron and Steel Institute

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, Malcolm Baldrige, Secretary

NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS, Ernest Ambler, Director

Issued May 1985
Library of Congress Catalog Card Number: 85-600546

National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 693

Natl. Bur. Stand. (U.S.), Spec. Publ. 693, 89 pages (May 1985)

CODEN: XNBSAV

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON: 1985
ABSTRACT

This report identifies experimental and analytical research

needed to advance the state-of-the-art and improve safety and

economy in the design, fabrication and construction of steel

buildings, A five year plan for a coordinated research program

is included. Recommendations for research projects dealing with

the following topics are presented: total building systems,

connections and members, frames, seismic design, load and

resistance factor design, fire protection, and design loads. The

recommendations were developed at a workshop involving

participation by steel industry representatives, design

professionals. Federal agency representatives and university

researchers

,

Keywords: buildings, design, fire protection, loads, research,

steel, structural engineering.

iii
CONTENTS

ABSTRACT , . . INTRODUCTION , . Background

« • • 9 0

» « • Q m • • « «1X1

Steel Industry Building Research ........... 4

Research Needs Workshop . , ....,«.. 8

Coordinated Research Program . . » 9

RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES , .

A. Total Building System

« O 9

Al

A2

A3

A4

On-site Fabrication

Erection Procedures

Innovative Systems . Large-scale Testing

B, Connections and Members

Bl: Steel Structures Exposed to Severe

Environments

B2: Performance of Connections in Weatheri

Steel Structures ..........

B3s Web Stiffeners ...

B4: Seated Beam Connections

B5s Semi-Rigid Connections , . . B6: Beam-to-Column Connections

B7: Load Deformation Behavior of Welds . , B8s Moment Connections to Column Webs . . B9! Lateral and Local Instability of Beams

BlOs Strength of Webs and Plates Under Fill

Weld Groups . « * Bll: Composite Columns , , « . B12: Composite Floor Systems » . B13j Bar Joist Systems , , B14: New Structural Members ,

ng

et

• «

• «

C. Frames

CI: Three Dimensional Behavior

C2s Influence of Connections . C3s Cladding and Infilling . . C4: Lateral Deflection « . . .

11

11

11

12

12

13

13

13

14

14

15

16

16

17

18

18

19

19

20

20

21

21

21

22

22

23

IV
C5: Field Measurements 24

C6: Composite Construction . 24

C7i Cold-Formed Construction 25

C8: Non-Compact Sections 2 5

D. Seismic Design 26

Dl: Behavior of Semi-Rigid Connections 26

D2: Drift Control Criteria 27

D3; Seismic Performance 28

D4s Steel Stud Walls 28

D5: Beam-Column Joints 2 9

D6: Beam-Columns 30

D7: Tubular Members 31

D8: End-Plate Beam-to-Column Connections , . , . 32

D9: Bolted Web Moment Connections 33

DlOj Bracing Connections 34

Dll: Viscoelastic Damping 35

D12: Ductility Demand 36

D13: Braced Frame Stability 36

D14s Lateral Bracing 37

D15: Overall System Response 38

D16: Evaluation of Existing Buildings 39

E. Load and Resistance Factor Design 40

El: Connections With Oversize Holes 40

E2: Web Crippling 40

E3: Technology Transfer 41

E4: Resistance Factors ..... 41

E5j Serviceability Criteria 42

E6: Lateral Motion Criteria 43

E7: Vibration Control for Light Floor Systems . 43

E8: Plastic Design 44

E9: System Reliability 44

ElO: Wind and Seismic Effects 45

Ell: Existing Buildings 46

F. Fire Protection 47

Fl: Fire Resistant Design 47

F2: Design Aids 47

F3: Shop Applied Fire Protection 48

F4: Large Area/Large Volume Structures 49

F5: Fire Research Review 49

G. Design Loads 49

Gl: Crane Loads 50

G2: Drifted Snow 50

G3: Cladding Behavior 50

V
G4s Wind Loads on Low Rise Buildings 51

G5s Internal Pressure Loading « 51

G6: Building Response to Winds . , 52

G7j Large Area Roofs 52

ACKI9OWLE06I1EN!FS 9s»c*«««»»ae««»««»*** 54

APPBMDIOSS «»9«a«3*»»»«««e*cs»««««« 55

Appendix A - Workshop Keynote Session . 55

Appendix B - Workshop Program « ..... 67

Appendix C - Workshop Participants 71

vi
INTRODUCTION

BACKGROUND

Steel construction is an important segment of the U.S.

economy. Approximately 94 percent of the output of the

fabricated structural metal industry is consumed by construction

markets. Industrial and commercial building construction account

for about two-thirds of this output. Over the past decade the

fabricated structural steel market has varied from 3.5 million

tons per year to almost 6 million tons per year.

Since its formation more than 60 years ago, the American

Institute of Steel Construction, Inc. (AISC) has been the U.S.

trade association for the structural steel fabrication industry.

The Institute has provided information for structural steel

engineering and construction such as the much referenced design

specification, standard shape properties and design aids, which

are published in the AISC Manual, and has provided services in

the form of technical seminars and conferences, marketing and

research. The latter activity, sponsored at leading universities

and laboratories, has contributed the substance that makes the

AISC Specification a world-class design standard. The steel

industry has continued to provide funds for research programs

even throughout the recent recession. The commitment of AISC and

its membership to future research is strong. This research will

help advance the state-of-the-art of steel design towards a new

generation of AISC Specifications, starting with the Load and

Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Specification and, improved

design procedures.

Eight editions of the AISC Manual and Specification provide

clear historical evidence of the technical work that has been

done and the progress achieved. Plastic design, composite

construction, and now LRFD are some of the significant advances.

Beginning in 1964, AISC began publishing the quarterly

ENGINEERING JOURNAL, which contains articles of current interest

to practicing designers. This publication provides a convenient

outlet for distribution of new design criteria based on recently

completed research and it describes in greater detail the

developments in steel design practice.

In addition to its Manual and ENGINEERING JOURNAL, AISC also

periodically publishes special texts on particular topics.

During the past 2 years, two books have been prepared: Detail ing

for SteeJt Construct ion and Engineering for Steel Construction

which contain updated steel design and detailing practice.

Ongoing AISC research has provided important input to these

books

.

The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) , incorporated

in 1908, is a non-profit association of the iron and steel

industry. Its purposes are 1) to collect statistics and other

1
information about the industry? 2) to engage in investigations

and research; 3) to provide a forum for the exchange of

information and discussion of problems relating to the industry;

and 4) to promote the use of iron and steel. Institute

activities embrace research and technology, engineering,

collection and dissemination of statistics, public distribution

of information about the industry and its products, public

affairs, and discussion of industrial relations including health

safety, and hygiene. The Institute has members in the United

States, Canada and Latin America.

Promotional activities of the Institute include applied

research, product publicity, booklets, trade show participation,

motion pictures, seminars, and educational programs. Many of

these activities are carried out in cooperation with important

customer associations such as the American Institute of Steel

Construction (AISC).

AISI staff engineers work with public agencies and private

organizations to promote maximum use of steel mill products in

construction. They are responsible for industry activities

related to construction codes and regulatory standards, and for

research and studies on fire protection of steel in buildings and

seismic-resistant design. These activities benefit architects,

design engineers, and the public, and have helped introduce new

standards for steel construction and the revision of many

obsolete code requirements. These changes have broadened the use

of conventional steel construction, stimulated the development of

new types of cold-formed steel floor, roof, and wall

construction, and reduced building and highway costs. In order

to carry out this code-related responsibility more effectively,

the Institute maintains field offices in cities throughout the

United States.

Thirteen Product Promotion Committees within AISI carry on

selected research and promotion programs of specific interest to

their members who produce a particular product. Committee

members include producers of specialty steels such as stainless

steel and tool steel, and producers specifically interested in

such mill products as hot rolled and cold finished bars, sheet

and strip, large diameter line pipe, steel plate, and structural

steel

.

The Metal Building Manufacturers Association, Inc. (MBMA)

,

organized in 1956 with 13 companies, grew to 35 member firms in

1980. As the industry matured, the number of Association members

decreased to 27 in 1985, principally due to mergers consumated

between member companies. Association members presently maintain

71 manufacturing plants in 25 states, plus additional facilities

in Canada, Europe, Australia, South America and the Middle East.

Pre-engineered metal building systems are sold through a network

of over 8,800 building contractors.

At present, MBMA manufacturers account for well over 50% of

the total market for low-rise, non-residential construction.

2
Achieving a high in 1983 of 55.1%, pre-engineered metal buildings

must now be regarded as the "conventional" way to build 1 and 2

story commercial, community, and industrial buildings. Sales of

metal building systems by MBMA members, who presently represent

approximately 90% of the pre-engineered market, have topped the

billion-dollar mark in five of the past six years. Since a metal

building system only accounts for approximately 20% of the total

cost of a building project, the 1984 industry sales high of $1.33

billion represents about $6.7 billion of in-place construction.

Steel tonnage rose 33% in 1984 to a record high of 1,14 million

tons

.

In close cooperation with AISC and AISI, MBMA attacks a broad range of problems facing the steel industry. Through

various standing committees, MBMA marshalls its forces through

research and other activities to develop and support new design

standards, improve the provisions of model building codes,

develop new construction practices and safety regulations as they

apply to the metal building industry, and generally advance the

state-of-the-art in the design and construction of steel

buildings. The MBMA Committees include the Technical,

Construction, Mill Relations, Marketing Communications, Fire

Protection and Related Insurance Matters, Public Relations, and

Post-Disaster Committees, to name just a few. Although the

Technical Committee is charged with the primary responsibility

for developing and monitoring the research effort, appropriate

interaction between all committees is maintained to ensure that

the industry produces a high quality, reliable building while, at

the same time, adequate attention is given to the need to

safeguard economy.

Recently, MBMA joined with AISI to explore ways to obtain

greater acceptance of metal building systems by industrial park

developers and the financial community. MBMA is also working to

assist the Metal Building Dealers Association (MBDA) and its

members in reaching these and other important interests.

One of the primary objectives of the Metal Building

Manufacturers Association, Inc., is to collect, analyze, and

disseminate information. These data are then offered to member

companies, customers, architects, engineers, and students at

engineering schools across the country in the most comprehensive

manner possible. By sharing and publishing the results of

research, MBMA seeks to generally improve the understanding and

acceptance of metal building systems. The data collected through

research are published in various documents. The METAL BUILDING

SYSTEMS MANUAL, which was updated for the third time in 1981 by

the Technical Committee, incorporated the codified standards on

wind load criteria from the Western Ontario wind tunnel research

project. The Technical Committee also published a structural

design text book entitled. The Design of Sing le Story Rigid

Frames f a Crane Manua l for Metal Building Systems , and cooperated

with MBDA in the publication of the book entitled. Metal Building

Systems . This year will mark the completion of an entirely new

publication, Low Rise Building Systems Manual , which is a primer

3
on design and construction practices for low-rise, nonresidential construction and reflects the end result of three

decades of research by the industry. Many of the provisions

contained in the Design Practices section of the Manual are

generally applicable to all types of low-rise construction.

STEEL IliDDSTRY BOILDIHG RESEARCH

There is a continuing need for steel research related to

building construction. The steel industry^ through the American

Institute of Steel Construction (AISC) , the American Iron and

Steel Institute (AISI), the Metal Building Manufacturers

Association (MBMA) and individual companies, has sponsored

research on steel building construction for over 70 years.

Currently, the industry is pursuing an aggressive program of

collaborative research and development with a variety of

organizations

.

The AISC research activities have always been well defined

and regularly monitored by its Committee on Steel Structures

Research and the engineering staff. Smaller project task groups

composed of industry personnel and outside experts also helped to

guide research progress. In most cases, university graduate

student teams performed the work under the leadership of an

experienced faculty investigator. Results of the research are

not only documented in a detailed final report, but are also

disseminated in useable form to the structural engineering

profession through AISC seminars, publications, and Specification

revisions

.

The main thrust of steel research in the 1950's was plastic

design. Annual funding in the $100,000 to $200,000 range was

committed by AISC to research in those years, which culminated

with the introduction of the AISC Specification Part 2 on plastic

design, and with several beneficial changes in allowable stress

design due to a recognition of steel's ductility.

From the mid-60's to the 70's, the AISC total research

funding declined to about $60,000 - $70,000 per year. In the

1980's, during a very competitive construction market

environment, greater resources were again devoted to steel

research on the order of $150,000 - $200,000 per year.

Typically, a single AISC research contractor receives

$20,000 to $50,000 annually, thereby permitting AISC to support 5

to 10 different projects.

Since the heyday of plastic design studies, the last 20

years of AISC research has been primarily focused on connections

- their reliability and economy. The members of AISC, including

steel fabricators and professional members, recognize that the

integrity of steel structures depends, to a large extent, on the

performance of connections. High strength bolts, weldments,

composite beams, end plate and shear plate connections have been

4
included in the AISC research program during recent years.

Considering the number, complexity, and potential scope of

the various technical questions posed by engineers, architects,

and fabricators, the AISC research budget by itself does not

permit much broadly based basic research in structural steel.

Most AISC studies are short range and aimed at developing answers

to immediate design problems. Interspersed with this necessary

reactive work are some developmental projects aimed at innovative

concepts or procedures that will improve the design of steel

structures. This AISC effort is extended by cooperative

sponsorship of larger scale projects with organizations such as

the National Science Foundation (NSF) , the National Bureau of

Standards (NBS) and the Metal Buildings Manufacturers Association

(MBMA), Special attention is given to the coordination of AISC

research with that of the American Iron and Steel Institute

(AISI). The latter organization is making significant

contributions towards longer range building research. To

maintain technical liaison with related research councils, AISC

also supports the work of the Research Council on Structural

Connections, the Structural Stability Research Council, the

Welding Research Council^ and the Steel Structures Painting

Council

.

The AISI structural steel research program is monitored by

the Committee of Steel Plate Producers and the Committee of

Structural Steel Producers. The program has been in operation

since 1963. The research covers markets which utilize structural

steel and steel plate, with special emphasis on heavy

construction. To serve the needs of the majority of users,

concentration has been on buildings and bridges,

A prime objective of this research in steel utilization is

the creation of new or improved design procedures for structural

steel and plate. These procedures frequently form the basis of

industry specifications and government codes, A secondary

objective is the development of data to mitigate unnecessarily

stringent provisions in various design specifications.

The program began with a budget of $250,000 per year and

climbed to $600,000 by 1970, Then in the 70's the research

funding gradually declined back to the $250,000 figure. The

1980's have seen an increase to $350,000 to meet new challenges

in the building construction market. The program consists of an

ongoing series of projects - typically 12 are underway at any

time - encompassing analytical studies, physical testing and

preparation of design manuals. Some are started and finished the

same year. More complicated studies can encompass a four- to

six-year period. The program recently marked an important

milestone with completion of over 100 individual projects since

its inception.

The selection of research projects begins with a recommendation from an Engineering Subcommittee consisting of

engineers from AISI member steel companies. The final approval

5
is made by consensus of the Committees of Structural Steel and

Steel Plate Producers.

Once a project is approved, a member of the Engineering

Subcommittee is appointed project supervisor, overseeing a task

force that will plan and direct the project from commencement to

completion to ensure that its objectives are met. Task force

members can include consultants, educators, engineers, scientists

government and code officials, and steel industry personnel.

The research is performed primarily by universities, with

some done by private research and consulting organizations, and

some by steel company research laboratories. Over 20

universities have taken part in the program.

When a project has been completed, the results are widely

disseminated. One technique is to hold seminars in key cities to

discuss the project findings. Frequently, the full project

report is printed in an AISI "Steel Research for Construction"

bulletin - 27 have been printed to date - with copies made

available in response to requests.

AISI's research over the years on beam, column and frame

behavior has resulted in significant improvements to the

provisions of various design specifications - increasing both the

economy and safety of steel construction. Significant research

accomplishments includes

Load and Resistance Factor Design

Studies begun in 1970 resulted in new limit state criteria

containing provisions for loads and load-combinations and

rules for the proportioning of structural members and connections. Work continues to improve the reliability of

the design format.

Typg. 2 Construction with Wind Moment Connections

The investigation begun in 1977 demonstrated the viability

of the design procedure and led to a better understanding

of the effect of connection flexibility on frame stability.

Connections

Studies on single plate framing connections resulted in

publication of guidelines for the design of these

economical connections and provided a clear understanding

of their ductility and moment rotation capacity.

In addition, the Institute's studies of fire hazards and fire

protection have contributed to new regulatory concepts relative

to the use of non-combustibles, matching protection requirements

to the severity of hazards, and avoidance of imbalance in fire

risks. The result is greater fire safety, often at lower

building costs.

6
The MBMA research activity has culminated in new and

improved design specifications introduced from time to time into

the AISC and AISI Specifications and the MBMA Design Practices

Manual. The current provisions contained in these documents

relative to end-plate connection design, web crippling, the

design of tapered members, stability and strength of cold-formed

purlins and girts, are but a few of the more notable examples.

The recent trend in research activity by MBMA is to focus on

building "system" behavior as compared to that of individual

components. Thus, new specification provisions are presently

being prepared with regard to the required strength, stiffness,

and bracing requirements for complete roof systems.

In 1976, MBMA assumed a leadership role in developing new

wind load criteria for the design of low-rise buildings. During

the ensuing period, extensive research has been conducted in the

Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory at the University of

Western Ontario under the joint sponsorship of MBMA, AISI and the

CSICC. This research has culminated in new wind load provisions

which have been accepted in the United States and Canada by a

number of the appropriate code bodies. Research on wind effects

is continuing at the present time.

MBMA research activities are originated and closely

monitored by various small task groups or subcommittees composed

of industry personnel, outside experts, representatives from AISC

and AISI, and staff personnel, Inspite of recent dips in the

economy, MBMA's basic commitment to research has been steadfastly

maintained through the years and the present level of activity is

in the $100,000 - $150,000 per year range. The number of

individual projects vary from year to year. During the current

year, for example, six separate projects are underway.

Additionally, MBMA awards two fellowships annually to engineering

students pursuing a course of study related to steel buildings.

The fellowship objective is to encourage creative design

investigation of specialized areas relative to fabricated metal

building systems.

The MBMA research effort is extended by cooperative efforts

with organizations such as AISC, AISI, and hopefully, in the

immediate future, NSF. MBMA also supports the research

activities of, and maintains technical liaison with, the Wind

Engineering Research Council, the Structural Stability Research

Council, the Welding Research Council, the Research Council on

Structural Connections and the Building Seismic Safety Council.

Although the steel industry is now experiencing difficult

economic conditions, its commitment to continued and expanded

steel research is evident. With the cooperation and assistance

of government and the engineering community, the industry is

confident that this effort will lead to new technological

advances that will enhance the state-of-the-art of steel design

and construction.

7
RESEARCH NEEDS WORKSHOP

Recognizing the importance of steel research and the need

for a coordinated, well-planned program, AISC, AISI, MBMA and the

National Bureau of Standards (NBS) decided in 1984 to organize a

workshop for the purpose of identifying needed research. The

AISC Research Committee, the AISI Building Task Force and the NBS

Center for Building Technology developed the initial plan for the

workshop. Subsequently, a steering committee consisting of

design professionals, industry representatives, government

representatives and university researchers was established to

plan the technical details.

This report constitutes the proceedings of the workshop on

Steel Research Needs for Buildings. The workshop objective was

to develop recommendations for experimental and analytical

research needed to advance the state-of-the-art and improve

safety and economy in the design, fabrication and construction of

steel buildings. The recommendations are intended for use by

government, industry, and the research community in establishing

a cooperative program. Research in the following areas is

considered:

Total Building System -

Connections and Members

Frames

Seismic Design

Load and Resistance Factor Design

Fire Protection

Design Loads

Workshop participants included representatives from the steel

industry, design professionals. Federal agency representatives

and university researchers.

The opening session of the workshop included presentations

by representatives from the Office of Science and Technology

Policy, the National Bureau of Standards and the steel industry.

These presentations are included in Appendix A. They provide a perspective on structural steel usage in buildings, consider

cooperative research efforts involving industry and government,

and provide background material for the workshop recommendations.

The recommendations were developed in two days of intensive

subcommittee meetings and plenary sessions. Draft

recommendations developed by the participants prior to the

workshop served as a starting point for the subcommittee

discussion. Each subcommittee focused on one of the seven

research areas covered by the workshop, A plenary session

8
following the subcommittee meetings provided all participants

with the opportunity to comment on recommendations developed by

each subcommittee. This procedure was repeated to achieve

consensus among the participants on the final recommendations.

CQORDIMATED RESEARCH PROGRAM

The workshop recommendations provide the basis for a comprehensive program to improve safety and economy in the

design, fabrication and construction of steel buildings.

Activities in this direction are underway. AISC is planning a special educators session on May 21, 1985 in Chicago prior to its

International Engineering Symposium on Structural Steel with the

theme, "Opportunities for Structural Steel Research". Industry

and government speakers will outline the major problem areas.

Approximately 100 faculty from across the country are expected to

attend.

The level of effort required for each workshop

recommendation is indicated in terms of man years. A precise

estimate of the funds required cannot be determined without

detailed planning for each project. Costs for test specimens,

computer time, laboratory personnel, etc., need to be

established. The total program represents a substantial effort.

A well planned multi-year effort using results obtained in each

phase to plan subsequent work is clearly more cost effective than

simultaneous initiation of work on each recommendation.

Recognizing this, the workshop Steering Commmittee developed the

five-year plan given in Table 1. Recommended funding

requirements were established on the basis of the immediacy of

the need for the information by the design profession, the

ability to achieve synergism between research projects and the

opportunity to obtain results as rapidly as possible. It is

anticipated that funding would be provided by the private sector

and government organizations.

An effective research program requires a coordinated effort.

Industry representatives, government representatives, design

professionals and researchers should be involved. This can best

be achieved by establishing a steering group to provide guidance

in establishing required funding levels for the various

activities. The goal of the group would be to provide a vehicle

for implementing the research results to achieve rapid

improvement in the design and construction of steel buildings.

This group would meet on a regular basis, monitor progress of the

research and update the research needs. Establishing this

steering group should be given priority consideration.

9
TABLE 1

FIVE YEAR PLAN

Structural Steel Research for Buildings

FUNDS (in thousands of dollars)

Program

Area

Year

1

Year

2

Year

3

Year

4

Year

5

Total Building

System

300 300 200 200 200

Connections and

Members

800 1000 1000 600 600

Frames 700 800 1000 900 500

Seismic Design 700 1000 1000 600 300

Load and Resistance

Factor Design

600 800 800 1000 1000

Fire Protection 300 400 300 200 100

Design Loads 600 700 700 500 300

TOTAL 4000 5000 5000 4000 3000

10
RESEARCH OPPORTUNITIES

The workshop recommendations provide opportunities for

constructing safer and more economical steel buildings. They

represent a comprehensive program with emphasis on:

o characterizing the behavior of individual

structural components

o establishing the performance of total building

systems

o developing improved design procedures and

design criteria

They cover the important areas of building design. Synthesis of

existing information, experimental work and analytical studies

are included.

The individual recommendations should not be considered in

isolation. Although they are grouped according to the research

areas dealt with at the workshop, other groupings are possible.

In addition, many of the recommendations are interrelated. For

example, the research cn frames and total building systems should

draw upon the work on connections and individual members.

Similarly, work on load and resistance factor design encompasses

both structural elements and systems.

Each recommendation deals with an important problem area.

It is assumed they will all be included in a coordinated research

program and therefore they are not listed in priority order. The

level of effort for each recommendation represents an estimate of

the professional manpower required. Detailed research plans for

each project are required to establish specific funding

requirements

,

A. TOTAL BUILDING SYSTEM

Much of the research in the past has concentrated on the

behavior of individual components and subassemblages of portions

of building systems. Consideration should be given to the total

building system and various aspects of the building process,

including fabrication and erection, to achieve economy for steel

buildings.

RECOMMENDATION Al: ON-SITE FABRICATION

STUDIES SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO EXPLORE THE

FEASIBILITY OF ON-SITE FABRICATION OF

STRUCTURAL STEEL COMPONENTS.

The construction industry has made considerable progress in

11
developing improved techniques for the fabrication and erection

of concrete buildings. Similar innovative erection practices

should be developed for steel buildings. One possibility

includes utilizing mobile fabrication plants set up at the

building site to manufacture large units that could not

ordinarily be transported.

Needed research includes identification of fabrication

activities more economically carried out on-site rather than in a

fabrication shop. Possibilities include fabrication of steel

plate shear walls and large tilt-up frame assemblies.

Constraints imposed by weather conditions, on-site space

limitations, etc, should be considered. Costs associated with

each possible on-site activity should be established and compared

with current fabrication and transportation costs.

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMEBiDATION A2: ERECTION PROCEDURES

IMPROVED COST EFFECTIVE TECHNIQUES SHOULD

BE DEVELOPED FOR ERECTING STEEL BUILDINGS.

A research program should be undertaken to develop a

coordinated approach to the fabrication and erection of steel

buildings. The program should involve a mul tidiscipl inary group

composed of designers, detailers, fabricators, and mill and

erection engineers. Techniques used on a recently completed 72-

story building in Toronto, Canada such as the use of oversized

elevators and the panel izations of the steel and granite skin can

provide background data. Opportunities to minimize field welding

and simplify connection details and development of new framing

design concepts should be studied.

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION A3s INNOVATIVE SYSTEMS

INNOVATIVE STRUCTURAL FRAMING SYSTEMS SHOULD

BE DEVELOPED FOR STEEL BUILDINGS.

Development of the tube concept as a more efficient

mechanism than traditional moment resistant or braced frames for

resisting lateral loads resulted in more economical high rise

structures. New structural systems employing innovative concepts

that take advantage of the unique attributes of steel elements

should be developed.

A task force composed of architects and structural engineers

should be established to identify innovative structural framing

concepts. Analytical studies of these concepts should be carried

12
out and cost comparisons made with traditional framing systems,

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION A4s LARGE-SCALE TESTING

LARGE-SCALE TESTS SHOOLD BE CONDUCTED TO

ESTABLISH THE PERFORMANCE OF INNOVATIVE

STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS AND SYSTEMS.

Innovative systems may employ concepts not amenable to

traditional structural analysis. In these cases, experiments are

required to evaluate the performance of such systems, identify

the limit states and establish adequate levels of safety. Largescale tests will be required to minimize scale effects inherent

in testing small-scale laboratory specimens or to determine how

the scale effects can be taken into account.

A mechanism should be established for conducting these

experiments utilizing existing large-scale structural research

facilities throughout the United States.

A multi man-year level of effort is required.

B. CONNECTIONS AND MEMBERS . From the fabricators' point of view, except for the cost of

material, freight, shop drawings, and cutting members to length,

all other costs are associated with providing connections. From

the erectors' point of view on a high rise building, about 30 to

40 percent of the erectors' cost is in making the connections.

Connection design is important in achieving safe structures.

Continued research is needed for improved understanding of

connection behavior to achieve more economical and safe

structures.

RECOMMENDATION Bl: STEEL STRUCTURES EXPOSED

TO SEVERE ENVIRONMENTS

RESEARCH IS NEEDED TO DETERMINE THE EFFECTS

OF SEVERE ENVIRONMENTS (COLD AND MOISTURE)

ON COMMONLY-USED FABRICATION PROCEDURES.

Commonly used fabrication procedures and steel materials

have resulted in several failures in steel structures exposed to

low temperatures. These are design, fabrication and construction

relatd issues.

Commonly used cutting techniques often result in plate edge

conditions that are not suitable for low temperature service.

13
Welded details can result in crack-like conditions with backing

barsy runoff tabs or flame cut preparations and transitions.

High deposition submerged arc weldments can result in low

fracture resistance.

Experimental and analytical studies are needed to evaluate

the suitability of using current fabrication procedures for

exposed building structures with comonly used steel materials

(i.e., A36, A572, A588).

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOHMESiDATION B2: PERFORMANCE OF CONNECTIONS IN

WEATHERING STEEL STRUCTURES

DESIGN RECOMENDATIONS NEED TO BE DEVELOPED FOR

BOLTED CONNECTIONS IN BARE WEATHERING STEEL

STRUCTURES, SUCH AS BUILDINGS OR TOWERS, TO

INSURE THAT THE INTEGRITY OF THE CONNECTIONS

IS NOT DEGRADED WITH CONTINUED EXPOSURE TO

WEATHERING.

Guidelines have been developed for bolt spacing and edge

distance limitations that appear to be required to prevent severe

bowing caused by corrosion between faying surfaces of lapped

connection elements. This condition arises because the corrosion

resistance of weathering steel within such lapped areas is no

better than that of carbon steel.

Tests of connections that have been exposed for significant

time periods should be conducted to determine how such weathering

has affected strength and ductility. Important variables would

include bolt spacing and edge distance, bolt type and

installation method, time and conditions of the exposure, type of

loading (tension, compression, shear-static or cyclic), etc.

Possible repair methods for such joints should also be

investigated. Evaluations of improved methods for making such

details (washers for self-draining features; coatings or sheets

of adhesives or mastics for the lapped areas) should be made.

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION B3: WEB STIFFENERS

PROCEDURES NEED TO BE DEVELOPED FOR BOTH DESIGN

AND DETAILING OF BEARING AND TRANSVERSE WEB

STIFFENERS

Significant research has been completed on the strength of

webs subjected to concentrated loads or shear. The design rules

in the AISC specification give, with reasonable reliability, the

14
strength of unstiffened webs. When stiffeners are required to

support the loads or shear, the current methods for detailing

stiffeners are difficult to document because little research is

available. For example, bearing stiffeners are commonly fitted

between the flanges at great expense, but no data are available

to support this practice. The bearing stiffeners are sometimes

designed to carry all the load in spite of the ability of the web

itself to carry a significant portion of the load. The design of

the bearing stiff ener-web combination as a column is based on

rules of thumb for K factors and the portion of the web acting

with the stiffener. When stiffeners are required to improve the

shear buckling capacity of a web, they must have enough moment of

inertia to prevent the web from buckling at the stiffener

location. Rules of thumb or approximate energy solutions are

used to develop design rules. No experimental evidence is

available to verify the recommendations.

An analytical and experimental program is needed to study

the problem of bearing stiffener and transverse stiffener

behavior and design for static loading. Different web depththickness ratios should be considered to cover the range of

rolled beams and practical plate girders. Specific attention

should be given to the effect of the detail at the far end of the

stiffener on the stiffener behavior, A few full size specimens

should be tested to verify the analytical studies.

A two to three man-year level of effort is required.

RBCOMMEHDATION B4s SEATED BEAM CONNECTIONS

TABULATED ULTIMATE STRENGTH DESIGN VALUES ARE

NEEDED FOR BOLTED AND WELDED SEATED BEAM

CONNECTIONS.

Seated connections are often used in steel construction as

an erection necessity. Although allowable stress values have

been tabulated in the AISC manual for many years, there are few

recorded tests. The tabulated values are based on a hypothetical

static model. Both welded and bolted seated connections are

involved. It is thought that the present load tables may be

excessively conservative.

Experimental and analytical studies are required to develop

an ultimate strength design basis for seated connections. Both

welded and bolted connections should be considered and the

studies should include both stiffened and unstiffened seats.

A one man-year level of effort is required.

15
RECOMMENDATION B5s SEMI-RIGID CONNECTIONS

MOMENT-ROTATION AND DUCTILITY CHARACTERISTICS

FOR VARIOUS TYPES OP CONNECTIONS ARE NEEDED TO

FACILITATE TYPE 3 CONSTRUCTION.

Analytical techniques are now in existence and are being

refined via the computer to analyze and design steel frames with

flexible connections. However, a major shortcoming that has

prevented regular design office use of Type 3 semi-rigid

construction has been lack of reliable data on the structural

characteristics of flexible connections, namely their momentrotation curves. Detailed published information on the nonlinear

moment-rotation performance of the connection is limited and not

readily available to the practicing engineer. Thus, only

idealized Type 1 (rigid) and Type 2 (simple) framing have been

employed in buildings. More use could be made of simple low cost

semi-rigid connections, with full recognition of their stiffness,

strength and ductility, if more complete information was

available on their moment-rotation characteristics.

Additional tests are needed to determine typical momentrotation curves for a given type of connection and their

sensitivity to the major design variables. This work, if

supplemented by extensive computer analyses should provide a

solid basis for generalized methods to approximate momentrotation properties for any connection. Flexible flange plate

and cap and seat angle connections have been studied to some

extent. Continuation of this work is desirable to establish a

valid and complete moment-rotation data base for future design

application. It is expected that such research would provide the

necessary impetus for more efficient and economical steel design

by demonstrating a good alternative to the often restrictive and

expensive fully rigid frame,

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION B6: BEAM-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS

A COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO DEVELOP PROBABILITY-BASED DESIGN CRITERIA

FOR BEAM-TO-COLUMN CONNECTIONS.

Continued research on connections has led to the development

of design procedures for designing frames with partially

restrained connections. Parallel to this analytical advancement,

a coordinated effort is necessary to collect reliable momentrotation data, and to produce optimal data for the development of

probability-based design criteria.

An experimental and analytical research program including

the following work should be undertaken:

16
o Collection of moment-rotation data for connections

and evaluation and development of analytical models

(see RECOMMENDATION B5)

.

o Systematic categorization of all connection types

and the classification of all relevant limit states.

o Development of a computerized data bank on all available

experimental and analytical research results relating to

connections.

o Identification of the gaps in the available data. Modern

tests on many types of connections, performed on the

basis of statistical methods, are not available (e.g.,

column bases, anchorages).

o Development and implementation of a plan to obtain the

needed data.

o Development of a logical design method for proportioning

the beams, connections and the columns.

o Verification test of a full-scale flexibly- joined frame.

o Systems reliability analysis of all connection types to

determine the reliability against the limit states.

o Development of design criteria which result in optimal

reliabiity and economy.

A multi year level of effort is required.

RECONNENDATION B7: LOAD DEFORMATION BEHAVIOR

OF WELDS

ACCURATE DETERMINATION OF THE LOAD-DEFORMATION

BEHAVIOR FOR ALL WELDING PROCESSES, WELD

STRENGTHS, AND LOAD CONDITIONS IS NEEDED.

Analytical work has been published which substantiates

experimental results indicating that transversely loaded fillet

welds are stronger than longitudinally loaded welds. In

addition, stress concentrations are known to affect weld

strength. Current information is based on tests under near

optimum conditions using E60 electrodes.

Research should be undertaken to investigate the range of

variables which affect weld strength. In particular, strength

and ductility should be investigated considering load orientation

with respect to weld axis, weld wire strengths, and welding

processes. In addition, single-pass versus multipass welds

should be studied to determine the effect of the root pass and

mixing of base metal with weld metal. Finally, the effects of

17
stress concentrations with regard to load orientation should be

investigated.

A one to two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOHHENDATIOH B8s MOMENT CONNECTIONS TO COLUMN

WEBS

DESIGN CRITERIA AND DETAILING PROCEDURES ARE NEEDED

FOR MOMENT PRODUCING CONNECTIONS MADE DIRECTLY TO

THE COLUMN WEB,

In cases where end plate connections or other moment

producing connections (such as single plate framing connections)

are framed into a column web, little is known regarding the

effect on the web.

Research should be initiated to determine allowable beam

moments for various web and end plate configurations.

Determination should also be made as the most economical

fabrication method to be used to strengthen the column web if

required. The project would require both physical testing and

analytical work.

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION B9: LATERAL AND LOCAL INSTABILITY

OF BEAMS

THE EFFECT OF SIMULTANEOUS LATERAL AND LOCAL

INSTABILITY ON STRENGTH AND DEFORMATION CAPACITY

OF BEAMS SHOULD BE STUDIED FOR LRFD.

The lateral and local instability provisions for beams in

the proposed LRFD specification are similar to those in the

current allowable stress design (ASD) for compact beams, not

those required for beams in plastic design (PD). Which set of

provisions to adopt depends on the inelastic deformation capacity

to be achieved or required in design.

Research is needed to examine the inelastic behavior of

beams with width-to-thickness ratios of flange and web and

lateral bracing spacings at the limits specified in ASD and PD.

Special factors to consider include:

o High strength steel beams, repeated and reversed

loading, etc.

o The range of parameters to be studied include:

bf/2tf , di/t^ and and the values should

range between those specified in ASD and PD.

18
An experimental program of research should include fulltesting of continuous beams and single-story frames,

analytical research should include nonlinear, inelastic

analysis to determine required deformation capacity,

A two to three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION BlOs STRENGTH OF WEBS AND PLATES

ONDER FILLET WELD GROUPS

DESIGN AND DETAILING PROCEDURES ARE NEEDED FOR

DETERMINING WEB OR PLATE THICKNESS REQUIRED TO

MATCH FILLET WELD STRENGTH,

Current practice uses a method which equates fillet throat

allowable stress to web or plate allowable shear stress in order

to determine the web or plate thickness required to match the

fillet weld strength. For shear alone, this method is correct

for a directly welded web connection, but is excessively

conservative for a connection using web framing angles. However,

when connections are subjected to axial as well as transverse

loads, the method referred to above is excessively conservative

for both types of connections.

Research is needed to determine accurate procedures and

criteria for determining the web or plate thickness required to

match fillet weld strength. The parameters to be studied

include loads ranging from pure shear to pure axial, coped and

uncoped beams, length of connections ranging from 5 1/2 in. to 29

1/2 in, and various clip and angle leg sizes. Testing of full

size components is required. An analytical counterpart may also

be desirable.

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION Bll: COMPOSITE COLUMNS

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD

BE CONDUCTED TO DEVELOP IMPROVED DESIGN

PROVISIONS FOR COMPOSITE COLUMNS,

There is a lack of up-to-date information on the strength of

composite columns. Existing test data were obtained from

laboratory specimens. Design rules included in the LRFD

specification are an extension of the Structural Stability

Research Council studies concerned with allowable stress design.

These formulas may be unnecessarily conservative especially for

eccentrically loaded columns.

Experimental studies should be conducted on full-scale

composite columns. The tests should include the following range

19
of parameters: eccentricity ratio - 0 to 2; slenderness ratio -

30 to 90? steel area - 5 to 20 percent. Analytical models should

be developed for predicting the ultimate strength behavior,

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATIOM B12g COMPOSITE FLOOR SYSTEMS

A COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM SHOULD BE

UNDERTAKEN TO ESTABLISH STRENGTH CRITERIA FOR

COMPOSITE BEAMS AND FLOOR SYSTEMS AND THE

DEVELOPMENT OF INNOVATIVE SYSTEMS USING SUCH

CONSTRUCTION.

Past research has provided the supporting data for the

current design provisions of the proposed LRFD Specification.

These provisions govern the design of beam sections subjected to

positive or negative bending. Work is needed to establish the

strength of continuous composite beam and floor systems including

the effect of connections with partial rigidity and strength.

Preliminary work is underway to investigate the moment-rotation

behavior and low-cost composite beam-column connections that rely

on the floor reinforcing steel to resist the tension force

created by the moment.

The research program on composite construction should

consider the following: The effects of construction loads and

service loads on permanent deflections; models for predicting the

deflection behavior of partially composite systems? the behavior

of low cost beam-column connections for composite members; the

use of pos t-tens i oned concrete slabs and/or steel beams.

Applications to braced frames with composite floors and

structures with prefabricated composite units should be studied,

A multi year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION B13: BAR JOIST SYSTEMS

EXPERIMENTS SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO ESTABLISH

SHEAR CAPACITY AND MINIMUM SIDE COVER IN

COMPOSITE BAR JOIST SYSTEMS.

Economies can be obtained in bar joist construction if the

floor slab can be made to act compositely with the girder

supporting the bar joists by using shear studs on the girder

flange. Information is not available on the performance of shear

studs in this condition with bar joists supported on the girder

flange in the vicinity of the studs.

Pushout tests on stud assemblies and several full-scale

girder tests should be conducted to establish stud capacities and

20
side cover requirements for the studs,

A one-half man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION B14s NEW STROCTURAL MEMBERS

NEW STRUCTURAL SHAPES SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR

IMPROVING THE ECONOMY OP STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS.

The use of large built-up structural members for framing

systems is increasing. Economies could be achieved if larger

rolled sections with higher moments of inertia were available.

Studies should be conducted to determine the feasibility of

producing larger rolled structural shapes, identify the potential

market for these shapes and evaluate the savings in fabrication

costs

.

A one-man year level of effort is required.

C. FRAMES

Considerable research has been carried out on the behavior

of individual structural elements and on plane frames of small to

moderate size. There is also a large body of information

available on the behavior of connections, floor systems,

partitions, and cladding - elements that affect the loading on

frames and their resistance. As indicated by recommendations in

other sections of this report, much additional research is needed

on all of these elements. But there is a primary need for

research directed towards correlating and integrating these

influences. Improved understanding of the three dimensional

behavior of total building systems involving more realistic

assessment of strength, stability, and stiffness is required to

reduce costs of steel buildings. The recommendations of this

section are intended in various ways to support the attainment of

this basic objective.

RECOMMENDATION Cls THREE DIMENSIONAL BEHAVIOR

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE

CONDUCTED ON THE THREE DIMENSIONAL BEHAVIOR OF

STEEL FRAMES.

The response of bare steel frames to given loads has been,

and will probably remain, the basis for the development of design

equations. This response - the stiffness and strength of the

bare frame - is affected by a number of things: imperfections,

residual stresses, material nonl inear it ies , loading history,

large deflections, post-buckling strength, and connection

21
behavior

Analytical and experimental studies are needed to improve

the presently inadequate level of understanding of bare frame

behavior* Realistic analytical modeling of three dimensional

frames that includes these effects is needed. Parallel

laboratory testing of three dimensional subassemblages and small

buildings should be conducted to provide information needed to

calibrate or to confirm these models. The physical research

should be on multistory frames ~ of the order of three to eight

stories -• and should include both service load and ultimate load

behavior

o

A multi man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION C2s INFLUENCE OF CONNECTIONS

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE

CONDUCTED TO EVALUATE THE INFLUENCE OF SEMI-RIGID

CONNECTIONS ON THE BEHAVIOR OF STEEL FRAMES.

Connection behavior, the most important factor influencing

bare frame behavior, requires special attention. It is the

subject of several other recommendations in this report, e,g.,

B5, B6, and Dl. A separate topic should be the influence of

connections on frame behavior - as distinct from studies of the

characteristics of connections as individual elements. Of

particular concern is the influence of partially rigid

connections. This research should include an evaluation of the

available analytical models and experimental data on the moment

rotation characteristics of semi-rigid connections. Existing

computer programs for including connection flexibility should be

studied, evaluated, and extended. Further research should be

conducted on the influence of connection rigidity on column

stability. A major effort should be made to extend this research

into the determination of the influence of connection rigidity on

overall, three dimensional frame behavior. This should be

related to the analytical and experimental research called for in

RECOMMENDATION CI.

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION C3: CLADDING AND INFILLING

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE

CONDUCTED ON THE INFLUENCE OF FLOORS, PARTITIONS,

AND CLADDING ON STIFFNESS AND STRENGTH.

It is well known that the various types of infilling control

the ways in which loads are transmitted to the steel frame and

that they often interact structurally with the frame in resisting
these loads. Infilling can offer major - even dominant - resistance to displacement at service loads and it can also

contribute significantly to the ultimate resistance of the total

building system. At present this influence is either ignored,

accounted for by judgment, or calculated in some ad-hoc

approximate way. Many studies have been made on the stiffness

and strength of different types of floors, partitions, and

exterior cladding in direct tension and compression, flexure, and

shear (racking and diaphragm action). Relatively little

quantitative research has been done on inf i 1 1 ing-f r ame

interaction however.

There is a need to extend analytical models of the type

called for in RECOMMENDATION CI to include the effect of

infilling. Associated with this is the need to collect and

correlate available quantitative information on the structural

characteristics of major types of infilling. Laboratory testing

of three dimensional steel frames containing representative

infill elements should be conducted for the purpose of

calibrating or confirming analyses.

A multi man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION C4s LATERAL DEFLECTION

ANALYTICAL METHODS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR

CALCULATING LATERAL DEFLECTIONS OF BUILDINGS.

Related to the previous three recommendations but having a

different major thrust is the need to develop improved analytical

methods for the calculations of lateral deflection under both

static (or quasi-static) and dynamic (wind and earthquake) loads.

Experience has shown that the lateral deflection of low to medium

rise steel buildings subjected to wind loading is often far less

than predicted by conventional analytical methods. Recent

studies suggest that the discrepancies between observed and

calculated drift are not due to the methods of assessing wind

loading but must be accounted for by structural actions.

Conversely, some tall buildings have experienced undesirable,

uncalculated lateral motion effects. Analytical methods that

include the features described in RECOMMENDATION CI to C3 (three

dimensional behavior and the influence of connections and

infilling) and realistic first and second order elastic static

and dynamic response characteristics are needed. These methods

should be used in studies directed toward the establishment of

realistic drift criteria or guidelines for wind loading and

moderate earthquake loading.

A multi man-year level of effort is required.

23
RECOMMENDATION C5: FIELD MEASOREMENTS

FIELD MEASOREMENTS OF THE RESPONSE OF ACTUAL

BUILDINGS SHOULD BE MADE.

Most research is effectively conducted under the controlled

conditions obtainable either in the laboratory or in analysis of

systems of specified geometry, element properties, and support

conditions, under prescribed loading. Nevertheless, studies of

analytical or physical models can never fully duplicate the

behavior of actual buildings. Although field measurements of

building response cannot be the primary basis for research, they

are essential for the purpose of calibrating, correcting, or

exposing the imperfections of laboratory and analytical research.

Buildings in earthquake and hurricane regions have been

instrumented, but additional efforts of this type are needed.

They should be long range studies and they should be correlated

with controlled environment (laboratory or analytical) research.

The phenomena studied should include relative resistance of frame

and infilling, frequencies, drift, twist, acceleration and other

factors that influence the serviceability or strength of the

total system*

A multi man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION C6: COMPOSITE CONSTRUCTION

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE

CONDUCTED TO ESTABLISH THE BEHAVIOR OF COMPOSITE

STEEL-CONCRETE FRAMING SYSTEMS AND ELEMENTS,

One of the most pronounced recent trends in tall building

construction has been in the direction of using structural steel

and reinforced concrete in combination as primary structural

elements. The composite tubular system has become increasingly

popular in the construction of tall buildings over the past few

years. In this system the framed tube, consisting of closely

spaced reinforced concrete exterior columns and deep spandrel

beams made of reinforced concrete or structural steel, resists

lateral loads produced by wind and/or earthquake. Structural

steel framing supports the gravity loads. The steel floor

members are connected to small steel columns which are embedded

in the reinforced concrete exterior columns. The efficiency of

this system is attributed to the advantageous use of the best

characteristics of both steel and concrete. The steel floor

framing is light and,, as a result, smaller interior steel columns

are needed. In addition, the light framing provides flexibility

for space planning, particularly in the core. Above all, the

steel frame can be erected rapidly. The economy of the tube

system with steel spandrels has been proven, and a few buildings

24
in Dallas and Houston, Texas have already been constructed with

this combination. In about 90 percent of the tube designs to

date, reinforced concrete spandrels have been used mainly because

of the uncertainties associated with the connection between a steel beam and a concrete column.

Research is needed on the overall performance of composite

framing systems in addition to work on individual composite

elements such as beams and columns. The three-dimensional

performance of these systems, time-dependent changes in

stiffness, damping characteristics, and stiffness changes under

dynamic loads require study. An experimental and analytical

parametric study is also needed to determine efficient means of

developing the moment capacity of the steel spandrel beams at the

steel beam-concrete column joint and to determine the rigidity of

the joint itself.

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION C7: COLD-FORMED CONSTRUCTION

EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO

ESTABLISH THE BEHAVIOR OF MULTI-STORY FRAMING

SYSTEMS USING COLD-FORMED STEEL MEMBERS.

Cold-formed members are starting to be used for multi-story

buildings up to five stories. Such construction offers

opportunities for innovative design concepts including

"monocoque" construction, improvements in incorporating

architectural and mechanical elements with the structural system,

and more effective use of material and improved structural

efficiency resulting from the ability to control the shapes of

members

Analytical and experimental research is needed to address

aspects of the following problems unique to cold-formed members

in building frames: local and overall stability of members,

connections including adhesive bonding, diaphragm action,

composite construction using mixed materials (wood-metal, fiber

reinforced materials - metal, etc.) and prefabricated assemblies.

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION C8: NON-COMPACT SECTIONS

RESEARCH SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO DETERMINE IF

MOMENT REDISTRIBUTION CAN BE UTILIZED TO

ADVANTAGE IN FRAMES COMPOSED OF NON-COMPACT

SECTIONS

A large percentage of low-rise steel construction utilizes

25
non-compact members in the framing systems. Significant costsavings could be achieved if the principles of moment

redistribution commonly used in plastic design could be applied

to such structures.

The following research is needed:

o Study of analysis methods to determine failure mechanisms

in typical low-rise frames composed of non-compact

sections.

o Comparison of frames designed using moment redistribution

with frames using elastic analysis.

o Full-scale tests of frames designed using moment

redistribution to confirm procedures.

A two man-year level of effort is required.

D. SEISMIC DESIGN

Approximately three-fourths of the annual construction

investment in the United States is in some 40 states that have

experienced moderate or major earthquakes in the past. Seismic

design is obviously an important consideration for steel

buildings. Earthquake related research has been conducted on

steel structures. Additional work is needed to estblish the

behavior of connections and individual members and the

performance of structural systems subject to large inelastic

cyclic deformations of the type produced by earthquake loading.

RECOMMENDATION Dls BEHAVIOR OF SEMI-RIGID

CONNECTIONS

AN EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM

SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO EVALUATE THE INELASTIC

CYCLIC PERFORMANCE OF SEMI-RIGID BUILDING

CONNECTIONS

Studies are needed to quantify the cyclic hysteretic

behavior of semi-rigid beam-to-column connections in building

structures designed for conditions of low to moderate earthquake

loadings. Specific topics of needed research include:

26
o Cyclic tests of various types of semi-rigid connections

(end plates, cap and seat angles) to determine their

mode(s) of distress (local instability, fatigue),

and to quantify their moment-rotation response and

hysteretic energy absorption capability under repeated

displacement excursions,

o Develop analytical models to predict the non-linear

response of connections of varying stiffness, and

generate computer programs to assess the inelastic

cyclic response, including resistance to incremental

collapse, of a complete building system.

o Determine efficacy of available low cycle fatigue

relationships and cumulative damage models to predict

the cumulative effect of seismically induced inelastic

displacement excursions on the connections.

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D2: DRIFT CONTROL CRITERIA

STUDIES SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO CORRELATE

SERVICE LOAD WIND DRIFT CONTROL CRITERIA

WITH LATERAL DISPLACEMENT PERFORMANCE UNDER

EARTHQUAKE LOAD HISTORIES FOR FLEXIBLYCONNECTED BUILDING FRAMES DESIGNED IN

REGIONS OF LOW TO MODERATE SEISMICITY.

Flexibly-connected (AISC Type 2) frames are common in low

rise building structures designed primarily for drift control

from wind at service loads. Research is needed to evaluate their

inelastic lateral displacement behavior under seismically induced

ground motions. Studies are required in the following areas:

o Develop a rational method for calculating lateral

displacements (wind drift) at service loads in

Type 2 building structures, including the

contribution of cladding and other non-structural

elements to overall frame behavior (see RECOMMENDATION

C2 and C4)

.

o Develop analytical models to assess the inelastic

cyclic lateral displacement performance (including

consideration of frame instability and incremental

collapse) of flexibly-connected frames under

earthquake load histories.

o Formulate design guidelines for flexibly-connected

building frames (including connection strength and

ductility requirements, panel zone shear deformation

limits, bracing requirements, etc.) to ensure adequate

drift control at service loads, and to satisfy

27
ductility, strength, and stability demands for

extreme loads during a seismic event.

A multi man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D3: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE

A RESEARCH PROJECT SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO

SUMMARIZE EXISTING PERFORMANCE DATA FOR

STEEL BUILDINGS SUBJECTED TO SIGNIFICANT

EARTHQUAKES.

Steel buildings which were not designed in accordance with

today's seismic design criteria have survived significant

earthquakes sustaining little or minor damage. Examples of

earthquakes where steel buildings survived and data are available

include San Francisco, Caracas, Mexico City, Managua, Guatamala

and several Japanese cities. The design profession and code

writers do not have the resources to evaluate past performance

because documentation is scattered. The work should include:

o Review reconnaissance reports and identify types

of steel building construction and relative damage.

o Compare types of construction with current seismic

design procedures and determine if the structures were

in general conformance with code philosophy. If not,

identify reasons for lack of expected damage.

o Identify information that can be readily used for

code development and design.

o Analyze past performance of various construction

systems and review the need for fully ductile

systems

,

A one man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D4: STEEL STUD HALLS

A COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM SHOULD BE

UNDERTAKEN TO DETERMINE THE ALLOWABLE SHEAR

RESISTANCE OP WALL SHEETING MATERIALS COMMONLY

USED WITH COLD FORMED STEEL STUD WALLS.

Load-bearing steel stud wall systems are commonly designed

for lateral force resistance using flat strap acting as in-plane

bracing. Limited work has been done to determine the allowable

shear force resistance provided by sheeting material such as

wallboard, lath and plaster and plywood.

28
Past research has provided limited data for use with lath

and plaster, plywood and wallboard shear walls. No work has been

done to evaluate the effectiveness of the bracing systems used in

conjunction with these common sheeting materials. An advantage

of steel studs in building construction is their non-combustible

classification. However, only plaster or wallboard materials

are currently used in these non-combustible classifications since

plywood is combustible. Unfortunately, plaster and wallboard

have relatively low shear resistance. Other options need to be

investigated. The following work is needed:

0 Develop a wide range of shear values for common

sheeting materials by studying the effects of

varying attachment spacing, steel stud base

metal gage and various anchorage details,

o Develop a methodology for calculating the

allowable shear value for untested materials.

0 Study the effects of combining the braced frame

and wall sheeting materials.

o Investigate anchorage details and their impact

on allowable loads.

o Develop new non-combustible shear resisting

systems such as steel sheet shear walls using

tension field action.

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D5: BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS

AN INTEGRATED EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL

RESEARCH PROGRAM SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO

CLARIFY CYCLIC BEHAVIOR AND RELIABILITY OF

BEAM-COLUMN JOINTS HAVING BEAM-TO-COLUMN

FLANGE CONNECTIONS AS WELL AS THOSE ATTACHED

TO A WEAK COLUMN AXIS.

Moment-Resistant Frames are predominant in seismic design

of steel frames. In addition to their conventional use, they are

also employed in the perimeter framing of tall buildings. The

critical element in such framing is the joint, i.e., the entire

assemblage at the intersection of members. The connection

consisting of those elements that connect the member to the

joint, which may be affected by the behavior of the entire joint,

is usually the most critical element of the assemblage. In spite

of the wide use of such joints, the seismic design criteria are

poorly defined, and there is a considerable degree of uncertainty

regarding their capacity. Very limited research information is

available on the cyclic behavior of joints of realistic size.

Due to competitive pressures, inadequate designs are sometimes

29
accepted even for new frames. There is no real consensus, and it

is essential to clarify for the designers the proper bounds.

The following research is needed:

o Carry out analytical studies for the design of

experiments to simulate the relevant size range

of beam-column connections. This study should be

supplemented with inelastic dynamic frame analyses

to determine the bounds on joint loadings.

o Design and carry out two-dimensional experiments

on joints of realistic sizes (approximately

half-size and larger) for connections of two

types:

a. Beam-to-column flange connections

b. Beam-to-column web connections

For either type, the all-welded as well as connections

with bolted web and welded flanges should be

studied. The possibility of reinforcing bolted

webs with welding to inhibit bolt slip should be

explored,

o Extend the the two-dimensional studies to

three dimensions.

o Formulate practical rules for sizing panel zones,

stiffeners (continuity plates) , as well as flange

and web connections.

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D6: BEAM-COLUMNS

A COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM INVOLVING

EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL STUDIES SHOULD

BE UNDERTAKEN IN ORDER TO GAIN REALISTIC

KNOWLEDGE OF THE CYCLIC INELASTIC BEHAVIOR

OF BEAM-COLUMNS.

Although it would not be desirable to design beam-columns

for inelastic cyclic buckling, analytical tools are needed to

represent their behavior when studying inelastic dynamic response

of structures subjected to severe earthquake motions. In braced

frames with relatively heavy bracing members the columns may be

subjected to large cyclic axial forces and moments which may lead

to overall structural instability. The research work to date on

beam-column behavior has been almost exclusively devoted to

unidirectional loading. In the absence of data on the cyclic

behavior of beam-columns, a few attempts have been made to

formulate simple models derived from the knowledge of behavior of

beams and bracing members.

30
The research should involve the following:

o Effect of end conditions.

o Effect of strength and stiffness of columns in

comparison to that of beams.

o Loading history to include ratio of end moments as

well as their magnitudes relative to axial force.

o Effect of geometrical properties.

o Experimental work should include small scale and

full scale members, as well as subassemblages and

prototypes.

o Analytical work should be aimed at development of

realistic and practical hysteresis models for

analysis purposes, as well as development of

design criteria to alleviate structural instability.

A three to five man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D7: TUBULAR MEMBERS

A COMPREHENSIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM INVOLVING

EXPERIMENTAL AND THEORETICAL STUDIES SHOULD

BE UNDERTAKEN IN ORDER TO EVALUATE THE

DUCTILITIY AND ENERGY DISSIPATION CAPACITY

OP STEEL TUBULAR MEMBERS SUBJECTED TO LARGE

CYCLIC DEFORMATIONS.

Cold formed rectangular steel tubes have gained popularity

in recent years especially as bracing members in multistory

frames. Lighter structures utilize these shapes for columns and

beams as well. In a few past studies it has become quite clear

that under cyclic loading severe cross section deformation in

regions of plastic hinges leads to local buckling and premature

failures. Concrete filling is one way to delay this mode of

failure. The concrete inside the tubes prevents severe local

buckling of steel tubes while the tube itself gives excellent

confinement to concrete. Some preliminary work has produced very

promising results. Research is needed to study the hysteresis

behavior and modes of failure under different cyclic load

conditions. Theoretical procedures should be developed to

synthesize the hysteresis models and establish design criteria

for such composite members.

The research should involve the following:

o Effect of confinement via relationship between the

area or volume of steel and concrete.

31
o Effect of bond between steel tube and concrete.

o Effect of relative strength of steel and concrete.

Normal strength, high strength and light weight

concrete should be included,

o Effect of width-thickness ratio of tube walls.

o Effect of different loading histories,

o Experimental work should involves

a. Reduced scale as well as full scale specimens

b. Beams, columns, and bracing members

c. Connections

d. Subassemblages and prototypes

o Development of analysis techniques and design criteria,

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D8: END-PLATE BEiyi-TO-<:OLUMN

CONNECTIONS

DESIGN CRITERIA AND PROCEDURES SHOULD BE DEVELOPED

FOR END-PLATE MOMENT CONNECTIONS SUBJECTED TO

EARTHQUAKE NOTIONS.

In recent years, considerable experimental and analytical

research has been conducted on the behavior of end-plate moment

connections under static loading. Some limited work has been

done in Italy and New Zealand on the behavior of moment end-plate

connections under cyclic loading; however, design rules have not

been formulated. Still these connections are being used in

buildings located in moderate to severe earthquake areas. Thus,

there is need for a comprehensive study of the cyclic behavior of

end-plate connections for safety reasons.

Research is needed on the cyclic behavior of moderate to

large capacity, 4- and 8-bolt, extended configurations as used in

multi-story frames. End-plate thicknesses for these connections

are typically between 3/4 in. and 2 in. and corresponding bolt

diameters are between 3/4 in. and 1-1/2 in. The experimental

work should consist of subjecting full-scale, end-plate connected

beam and column assemblies to severe cyclic loading. The loading

must simulate the effects of strong earthquakes. Major

parameters of the study should be end-plate geometry, grade of

steel, bolt diameter and bolt type, and the random nature of

earthquake cyclic effects. Analytical studies should include the

development of a finite element model and associated coding to

predict the connection behavior. The finite element model must

account for the effects of nonlinear material properties and

possible plate separations at the end-plate/column flange

interface. Portions of both the beam and column must be modeled.

32
A two to three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D9: BOLTED WEB MOMENT CONNECTIONS

LOW CYCLE FATIGUE LIFE OP BEAM-TO-COLDMN MOMENT

CONNECTIONS MOST BE INVESTIGATED TO PROVIDE A

RELIABLE BASIS FOR SEISMIC DESIGN.

In seismic design of ductile moment resisting frames, beamto-column moment connections must be capable of developing the

full plastic capacity of the beam section unless it can be shown

that adequate ductility is provided by a lesser connection. For

reasons of economy, it is common practice to use full-penetration

flange welds and friction-type bolted web connections. Due to

slippage of the bolted web connections under a combination of

high moment and shear, the beam flanges must develop the plastic

moment capacity of the section at the beam-to-column connection.

While welded-f lange, bolted-web connections have been found to

exhibit considerable ductility, their low-cycle fatigue life

under large inelastic deformations is not as good as that found

for fully welded connections. In a strong motion earthquake,

even a symmetrical structural system is likely to behave

unsymmetr ical ly. In reality, then, the welded-f lange connections

will be subjected to out-of-plane bending and torsion. The lowcycle fatigue life of the beam-to-column connections will be

influenced by the additional stresses. For a reliable prediction

of the three-dimensional behavior of real buildings, the

hysteretic behavior of moment connections under three-dimensional

deformations must be known. Since such predictions must be

carried out by computer, a reliable analytical model of

connection behavior is necessary.

The proposed study would have a comprehensive experimental

program and an analytical counterpart. The experimental work

would require testing of a variety of connection configurations,

under several three-dimensional load histories. The

configurations should represent a range of member sizes and the

loads should simulate the inelastic three-dimensional response of

a real building under a strong motion earthquake. The

development of an analytical model for the representation of

connection behavior should be carried out in conjunction with the

experimental program. The analytical model should capture the

dominant behavior of this type of connection under extreme cyclic

deformations. When implemented in a computer program, the model

should permit a reliable assessment of the behavior of a complex

structure including its resistance to incremental collapse.

A three to four man-year level of effort is required.

33
RECOMMENDATION DIO: BRACING CONNECTIONS

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD

BE UNDERTAKEN TO ESTABLISH THE PERFORMANCE

OF GUSSETED BRACING CONNECTIONS.

Diagonal bracing provides an efficient means of resisting

lateral loads both in tension and compression. The ability of

these members to yield and buckle in a controlled manner provides

substantial increased energy absorption to the structural system.

Much work is needed to understand the fundamental behavior and

modes of f ai lur e of gusseted bracing connections and their

influence on the response of the bracing and total structural

system.

The research should include: >

o Single diagonal and X-braced diagonal configurations

with various structural shapes, such as single angles, - double angles, channel sections, rectangular tubes,

circular tubes (pipes), and wide flange sections,

o In-plane and out-of-plane buckling behavior should

be studied to determine the connection detail

differences and bracing behavioral differences

for these systems,

o Both concentric and eccentric brace connection

details should be included in this program.

o Gusset plate connections should include the

appropriate attachments to the associated beams

and columns as well as to the braces. Welded and

bolted connection details are needed.

o Experimental studies at full and reduced scales

should be conducted to establish reliable data

for the development of design recommendations.

o Theoretical and analytical studies to explore the

dominant behavioral characteristics of gusset plate

connected bracing members should be conducted in

concert with the experimental studies

o Design procedures, recommendations, and specifications

should be developed to ensure satisfactory performance

of the connections under severe earthquake ground

motions

.

A four man-year level of effort is required.

34
RECOMMENDATION Dll: VISCOELASTIC DAMPING

A RESEARCH PROGRAM IS NEEDED WHICH (1) WILL

DESCRIBE AND DOCUMENT THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN

VISCOELASTIC MATERIAL PROPERTIES AND DAMPING

PROVIDED BY MECHANICAL SYSTEMS, (2) WILL

PERFORM EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES TO ESTABLISH

AND VERIFY APPROPRIATE ANALYTICAL ALGORITHMS

FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS, AND (3)

WILL DEMONSTRATE THROUGH TYPICAL STRUCTURAL

CASE STUDIES THE EFFECTIVENESS OF MECHANICAL

VISCOELASTIC DAMPING SYSTEMS FOR EARTHQUAKE

RESISTANT DESIGN.

Mechanical damping systems can dissipate significant amounts

of energy during vibratory motions. It is well known that

structures subjected to severe earthquake ground motions must

dissipate some of the input earthquake energy through nonlinear

material damping. By adding mechanical viscoelastic damping it

is possible to reduce the structural vibrations caused by

earthquakes and the amount of structural and nonstructural

damage.

The following research is needed:

o Develop mechanical damping systems which utilize

viscoelastic materials for energy absorption.

These can be of the direct shear type, rotary shear

type, or other,

o Experimentally determine the characteristics of full

size mechanical viscoelastic damping systems.

o Establish appropriate analytical algorithms for these

damping systems. The analytical algorithms would be

used for design purposes and analytical verifications

of the dynamic response characteristics of complete

building systems.

o Conduct a parameter study to determine the optimum

amount of mechanical damping to be added to various

structural systems in order to minimize economically

the earthquake hazard for these systems.

o Develop recommended procedures for the design of

mechanical damping systems considering ease of

application by the design profession.

o Extend the results to retrofit of existing buildings

and design for strong winds.

A multi man-year effort is required.

35
RECOMMENDATION D12s DUCTILITY DEMAND

RESEARCH SHODLD BE COIDOCTED TO QUANTIFY

DUCTILITY DEMANDS AND CAPACITIES FOR

STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS, ELEMENTS AND CONNECTIONS

AND DEVELOP CRITERIA FOR PERFORMANCE

ASSESSMENT.

Deterioration in strength of elements of steel structures is

often a consequence of localized failures, such as crack

propagation and fracture at connections, or localized

instabilities (local and lateral torsional buckling) within

members. The deterioration caused by these localized failures is

a function of the number and magnitudes of inelastic excursions.

The profession and code writing bodies need information that

permits a quantitative assessment of seismic performance in order

to develop acceptable detailing criteria. Consideration must be

given to the randomness of seismic input and the cumulative

effects of inelastic excursions on structural damage. Cumulative

damage models, of the type used extensively in mechanical

engineering, can provide much of the needed information.

The following research is needed:

o Evaluation of the number and magnitudes of inelastic

excursions a structure or structural element is

expected to experience in an earthquake.

o Development of cumulative damage models for

structural elements based on low-cycle fatigue

concepts.

o Conduct laboratory tests to validate damage models,

o Development of representative cyclic loading histories

for testing, so that test results can be generalized to

damage prediction under random loading histories.

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION D13: BRACED FRAME STABILITY

ANALYTICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE

CONDUCTED TO DETERMINE THE STABILITY OF BUILDING

SYSTEMS WITH THE LATERAL FORCE RESISTANCE PROVIDED

BY K OR CHEVRON BRACING.

One of the basic concepts of seismic design is that if the

building system is designed to respond in an inelastic manner to

ground shaking having an intensity much larger than the yield

level of the structures, the structure should yield without

undergoing collapse. Building systems using K or Chevron bracing

36
for lateral resistance of seismic forces and movements frequently

have been used in areas of high probability of strong seismic

shaking. In the K braced system, the column to which the apex of

the brace is connected continuously supports vertical dead and

live loads. If the compression segment of the brace were to

buckle, the column would have additional forces induced by the

remaining brace segment which are not usually accounted for in

design. Similarly, the Chevron brace would induce forces into

the horizontal flexural member which are not usually considered

in design.

Analytical and experimental work should determine the

inelastic behavior of these bracing systems and appropriate

design criteria should be established to provide adequate

stability during large intensity earthquakes,

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMEKDATIOl D14s LATERAL BRACING

AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY SHOOLD BE CONDUCTED

TO DETERMINE LATERAL SUPPORT REQUIREMENTS

FOR MEMBERS SUBJECT TO SIGNIFICANT INELASTIC

RESPONSE DURING EARTHQUAKES.

There have been numerous tests of subassemblages composed of

steel beams and columns. In almost all cases the lateral

supports of the members tested were not under study. Thus the

lateral supports provided were essentially rigid and closer

together than needed. Over the years there have been many

studies to determine the spacing of lateral support members.

These tests, however, do not provide the information needed to

evaluate the requirements for lateral bracing properly for

members undergoing the potentially large inelastic deformations

required for members in areas of high seismicity.

New experimental research should be conducted to determine

the design requirements for members of seismic frames having

reversing, high moment gradients and non-linear response

characteristics. The tests should also consider the lateral

support offered by a composite floor slab, A variety of bracing

configurations should be studied,

A multi man-year effort is required.

37
RECOMMENDATION D15: OVERALL SYSTEM RESPONSE

AN INTEGRATED ANALYTICAL RESEARCH PROGRAM SHOULD

BE UNDERTAKEN TO DETERMINE THE THREE-DIMENSIONAL

EFFECTS IN THE NONLINEAR RANGE OF ARCHITECTURAL

AND STRUCTURAL CHARACTERISTICS OF IRREGULAR

BUILDINGS IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THEIR CAPACITY

TO RESIST EARTHQUAKES OF VARYING LEVELS OF

SEVERITY.

Architects are becoming conscious of the importance of

including earthquake resistance considerations in their

conceptual designs. Architectural concepts take advantage of the

versatility of steel framed structures, and the use of

configurations involving setbacks, asymmetry, and combinations of

shear walls and moment frames is quite common. There is very

limited quantified information on strength and drift for various

types of building concepts. Architects as well as engineers need

data on bounds for irregularity, interaction of structural and

non-structural elements, and effects of mixed structural systems.

Torsion, relative importance of shear walls and frames in the

nonlinear range, and interaction of the structural frame with

non-structural elements, such as curtain walls, are effects that

are best investigated through three-dimensional models. Analyses

that utilize computer software for three-dimensional nonlinear

analyses can be very helpful in determining drift and strength

characteristics of structures that cannot be reliably modeled in

two dimensions. An additional benefit of three-dimensional

analyses is to establish limits on setbacks, asymmetry, etc.,

within which two-dimensional modeling gives acceptable results.

The following research is needed:

o Documentation of architectural systems for low-rise

buildings that incorporate features which require

three-dimensional evaluation.

o Classification of structural systems into groups

that are susceptible to analysis with existing software,

o Evaluation of structural systems for which new software

or modified software needs development.

o Analysis of typical structures from each classification

to determine their response characteristics into the

nonlinear range.

o Engineering investigations, utilizing the results of

analysis, to establish bounds on drift and strength

requirements for categories of building concepts,

o Guideline documents that architects and engineers

can use for design.

38
A five man-year level of effort is required.

RECOHNENDATION D16: EVALUATION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS

AN EXPERIMENTAL AND ANALYTICAL STUDY SHOULD BE

CONDUCTED TO ESTABLISH LEVELS OF SEISMIC RESISTANCE

OF LOW-RISE STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS, AND PROCEDURES

SHOULD BE DEVELOPED TO STRENGTHEN THEM WHERE

NECESSARY TO ACCEPTABLE LEVELS.

Initial emphasis on retrofit and strengthening of existing

buildings has been on unreinforced masonry buildings. Whereas it

was originally felt that such buildings had to be demolished,

recent experimental and analytical work showed that it was

possible to strengthen them and make them earthquake resistant.

The economics of strengthening such buildings was a major

consideration in this evaluation. Although low-rise structural

steel buildings are less susceptible to damage, their level of

earthquake resistance has not as yet been demonstrated through

experiments and analysis. Dynamic analyses of buildings to

calculate their response to earthquake excitations is now a

routine procedure, but the emphasis has been on the analysis of

structures that are being designed for new construction.

It is necessary to investigate existing structures to find their

earthquake resistance capacity and to develop methods of retrofit

to bring their resistance up to acceptable levels.

An extensive analytical and experimental program should be

carried out to identify the seismic resistance capacity of

existing steel structures of various typical configurations that

have not been designed to present seismic codes. The

experimental work should consist of testing existing buildings

and laboratory experiments of framing that corresponds to the

structural systems of typical classes of existing buildings.

Since existing buildings cannot be tested to destruction,

information obtained from such tests must be supplemented by

laboratory tests to determine the capacity of major elements of

the structures. Subsequently, concepts should be developed for

strengthening buildings found susceptible to damage at practical

seismic excitation levels. Criteria should then be developed for

economic methods of strengthening and procedures should be

recommended for analysis and design to meet these criteria,

A six man-year level of effort is required.

39
E. LOAD AND RESISTANCE FACTOR DESIGN

The proposed AISC Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD)

specification for structural steel buildings was released for

review and trial use in 1983. The LRFD specification is the

prototype for a new generation of structural design codes.

Research opportunities exist for facilitating and expediting

implementation of the LRFD specification. They range from

assembly of existing data to laboratory testing to resolve

specific questions on topics where the new specification may be

overly conservative.

RECOMMENDATION El: CONNECTIONS WITH OVERSIZE

BOLES

AN ANALYTICAL STDDT SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO

DETERMINE THE INFLUENCE OF SLIP IN BOLTED

CONNECTIONS ON FRAME GEOMETRY AND FRAME

STABILITY,

The slip critical high-strength bolted joints are designed

in LRFD at service loads and the nominal specified shear strength

is the same as the allowable shear for such bolts in ASD. Thus,

slip may occur at overloads. Is slip at overloads a

strength/safety problem in such joints when built with oversized

holes? The question arises in bracing connections in high rise

buildings. It has been suggested that slip at overloads could

distort the frame to such a degree that instability may occur.

Research along two lines of attack is needed: First,

considering the random alignment of holes, how much slip will

realistically occur in a mul tifastener joint? A reexamination of

the existing test data is needed to assure that this problem is

handled adequately in the specifications. Second, an analytical

study is needed on the influence of slip in bolted connections

with oversize holes on frame geometry to determine whether frame

instability problems could result. The type and size of buildings

for which higher bolt design values can be used in slip-critical

connections should be determined,

A one-half man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION E2 i WEB CRIPPLING

EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO

EVALUATE WEB CRIPPLING BEHAVIOR OF LIGHT

BEAM SECTIONS WITH SEATED CONNECTIONS.

The proposed LRFD formula for web crippling at bearing ends

of beams (i,e,, seated connections or wall bearing beams) may

seriously affect the use of seated connections. The web

40
crippling capacity of some of the lighter sections (W14x22,

W12xl4, W10xl2) will be reduced well below the equivalent ASD

capacity.

The LRFD specification requires that lateral support be

provided at bearing ends. The present AISC manual infers that

side clips or top clips must be used with seated connections.

For the lighter sections, a typical side clip will not only

provide the required lateral support but also will provide

significant vertical load reaction capacity.

Tests should be conducted for the lighter beam sections to

evaluate the contribution of the side and or top clip to web

stability (see also RECOMMENDATIONS B3 and B4).

A one-half man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION E3: TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

TEACHING MATERIALS AND DESIGN AIDS SHOULD

BE PREPARED TO ACQUAINT BUILDING OFFICIALS

WITH THE USE OF LRFD.

Rapid acceptance and use of LRFD is contingent upon building

officials having a thorough understanding of the principles and

details of this new design procedure.

Educational material should be prepared to teach the use of

LRFD to building officials. It should include any special

information or design aids needed by building departments to

review and check LRFD designs. Video cassette type lectures and

the establishment of a point of contact to respond to questions

on details of the specification should be considered. Material

should be prepared for administrative level officials and plan

examiners

,

A one-fourth man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION E4: RESISTANCE FACTORS

A SYSTEMATIC STUDY SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO

COLLECT INFORMATION ON ACTUAL PRODUCTS AND

STRUCTURES FOR USE IN COMPUTING RESISTANCE

FACTORS FOR STRUCTURAL MEMBERS.

Data have been collected on the variation of geometrical and

mechanical properties of steel members. A systematic assembly of

these data for the broad range of steel products and fabricated

structural elements has not been reported. Higher ^ factors

could be used for those cases where higher mean values or smaller

coefficients of variation than presently used are obtained.

41
The following research is needed:

o Systematic collection of data on the variations in

the geometric properties of the major rolled shapes,

tubes, fabricated sections, bolts and welds.

o Systematic collection of data on the variations in

the mechanical properties of rolled shapes, plates,

cold-formed and hot-rolled tubes, bolts, welding

electrodes, and welds,

o Systematic collection of data on as-built imperfections,

such as out-of-plumb , sweep, camber, etc., as a function

of quality control.

o The calculation of <^ based on the above data base for

the various products and class of members and/or

structures

,

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION E5: SERVICEABILITY CRITERIA

RESEARCH SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO DEVELOP THE

DATA BASE AND ANALYSIS PROCEDURES NEEDED TO

PREPARE RATIONAL AND PRACTICAL SERVICEABILITY

CHECKING PROCEDURES FOR LRPD.

The use of the computer as a design tool and modern

architectural requirements have led to building systems that are

flexible and lightly damped. Since structural stiffness has

remained the same or declined as strength has increased, modern

buildings and building systems are increasingly susceptible to

objectionable static or dynamic structural movement. Present

codes and standards offer little guidance on these problems.

Serviceability is more an economic than safety issue, and

serviceability requirements are negotiable between engineer,

architect and building owner. Serviceability criteria need to be

flexible and adaptable to different building use requirements.

However, the present lack of any meaningful criteria may be

interpreted by some to mean that serviceability is not important,

which raises questions of professional responsibility. With the

move to limit states design, serviceability will become an

increasingly important and delicate regulatory and design

problem.

The following research should be conducted?

o Serviceability limit states should be identified

through surveys of building owners and occupants,

and correlated with measurements of structural

loading and response. Serviceability limits

should be related to occupancy.

42
o Dynamic properties of structural systems must be

identified through a program to measure in situ

static and dynamic structural response,

o Load combinations should be developed for checking

deflections under static loads against tolerable

limits.

o Simple serviceability checks must be developed to

control objectionable structural motions, taking

into account the load levels, the dynamic

characteristics of the load, and the structural

response,

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION E6: LATERAL MOTION CRITERIA

LIMIT STATE CRITERIA SHOULD BE DEFINED FOR THE

LATERAL MOTION OF BUILDINGS AND PERFORMANCE

CRITERIA DEFINED.

Drift or lateral motion of buildings is an important design

consideration. These criteria become a controlling factor for

buildings greater than two to three stories. In the absence of

wind tunnel tests, arbitrary limits are imposed for this drift in

design. There is no information available to substantiate these

limits. In many cases, these limits result in an economic

disadvantage for steel structures.

Research should be conducted to define drift values

associated with the following limit states: internal partition

failure, elevator tolerances, human comfort and building crane

operation.

A two man-year effort for three years is required.

RECOMMENDATION E7: VIBRATION CONTROL FOR LIGHT

FLOOR SYSTEMS

TECHNIQUES ARE NEEDED TO INCREASE THE DAMPING IN

FLOOR SYSTEMS WHICH WILL ALLOW REDUCTION IN

WEIGHT WITHOUT ADVERSELY AFFECTING THE

ACCEPTABILITY OF THE FLOOR WITH REGARD TO

ANNOYING, OCCUPANT-INDUCED FLOOR VIBRATIONS.

If the weight of steel beam- or steel joist-concrete slab

floor systems is reduced, the savings in building costs can be

significant due to the pyramiding effects of beam, column, and

footing sizes. The obvious maximum effects on weight reduction

are to decrease the concrete slab thickness, reduce the unit

43
weight of the concrete or substitute a lighter material. The

resulting reduction in mass will, however, have an adverse effect

on the vibration characteristics of the floor system. Since

damping is the most important vibration parameter for floor

systems excited by normal office or residential human occupancy,

the acceptability of an ultra-light floor system can be improved

by increasing the system damping.

Research is needed on methods and/or materials that can be

used to increase the damping in floor systems. The problem is

difficult because of the extremely small amplitudes (0.030 to

0.050 in.) that are perceived by humans to be annoying. Fullscale floor systems would have to be used in the research and

particular attention paid to the economics of the damping

materials selected, as well as the cost of the installation

technique. Pilot applications in existing buildings will also be

needed.

A two to three man-year level of effort is required.

RECONHENDATION B8; PLASTIC DESIGN

STUDIES SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO DETERMINE

IF THE LRFD SPECIFICATION CONTAINS ADEQUATE

PROVISION FOR THE USE OF PLASTIC DESIGN.

The LRFD Specification rules for plastic design have been

incorporated as an integral part of the overall design provisions

rather than presented in a section of their own. As a result,

plastic design using LRFD is not as readily apparent as with the

1978 and earlier AISC Specifications.

A study is needed to develop guidance for plastic design

using LRFD. The results should be presented in a series of

papers illustrating the use of plastic design concepts with the

LRFD provisions.

A one-quarter man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION E9: SYSTEM RELIABILITY

RESEARCH SHOULD BE UNDERTAKEN TO DEVELOP THE

ANALYSIS PROCEDURES AND DATA NEEDED TO TAKE

ADVANTAGE OF SYSTEM BEHAVIOR IN LRFD.

Development of LRFD and supporting reliability analyses have

focused on behavioral models and statistics for individual

members. While these behavior models are believed to be

realistic for describing response of individual members under

design loads, they ignore the fact that such members are integral

to a system, the behavior of which under extreme loads is

44
complex. In certain highly redundant structures the system

reliability is considerably higher than that of any individual

member; in other systems, the system reliability may be less.

Since one of the ultimate goals of LRFD is more uniform

reliability for all structures, it is plain that systems effects

should be considered in some way.

The following research is needed:

o Establish realistic limit states for systems in

terms of the member limit states which are

known.

o Develop and validate procedures for computing

system reliability,

o Develop criteria to take systems effects into

account in design through the use of partial

factors or other simple devices to reflect the

mode and consequence of system failure,

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOHHENDATION ElO: WIND AND SEISMIC

EFFECTS

RESEARCH SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO ESTABLISH A

RATIONAL AND CONSISTENT BASIS FOR WIND AND

SEISMIC EFFECTS IN LRFD.

The application of LRFD to buildings subjected to wind and

seismic effects has not been thoroughly considered. In

considering wind effects, wind directionality and structural

enveloping have been taken into account only in an approximate

fashion. The seismic analyses consider the ability of the

structural system to dissipate energy through inelastic cyclic

deformation in a rudimentary way. Moreover, unlike the limit

states for gravity loads, the limit state for seismic effects

consists of some poorly defined deformation limit. The present

s tat ic-f or-dynamic reliability analyses indicate lower

reliabilities for wind and seismic effects than for other loads.

Research data presently are insufficient to determine whether

these discrepancies are real or only apparent, and they could not

be resolved in developing the current LRFD specification.

The following research is needed:

o Identify appropriate limit states for earthquakes,

o Develop reliability analyses that take into account

time-dependent nonlinear behavior explicitly.

45
o Examine wind-directionality effects on the

reliability of wind-sensitive structures.

o Develop equivalent lateral force requirements and

performance requirements.

o Coordinate LRFD with wind and earthquake engineering

communities

A multi man-year effort is required.

RECOHHENDATION Ell: EXISTING BDILDINGS

RESEARCH SHOULD BE CONDUCTED TO EXTEND LRFD

TO INCLUDE STRENGTHENING AND REHABILITATION

OF EXISTING STRUCTURES.

The proposed LRFD Specification was developed essentially

for the design of new buildings. For example, the material

characteristics used in the development of LRFD were derived from

tests of current and recently replaced materials. However,

everyday design practice requires the application of

specification provisions to older structures for repairs,

renovation etc. Research specifically directed to this problem

will extend the applicability of LRFD to this area of design.

The following work is needed:

o Development of a systematic method for evaluation

of material properties of existing structures.

Note that these properties are likely to be very

different from present day materials, and a statistically based sampling procedure may be

desirable.

o Development of methods of evaluating resistance

factors and reliability indices for structural

components that were built by very different

construction methods as well as factors for ''j- different classes of connections.

o Possible consideration of reduced life expectancy

for existing structures and evaluation of such

implications on load factors and reliability.

Consideration of the value of past performance of the

building on the LRFD evaluation.

o Formal application of the method to existing structures

through development of an applications manual or

example calculations.

A multi man-year effort is required.

46
F. FIRE PROTECTION

Research opportunities exist for reducing the costs of

providing fire protection for steel structures while maintaining

current levels of safety. The work would also provide a more

rational basis for fire protective design. It includes the

development of analytical design procedures, design aids, new

fire protective materials and fire models for special structures.

RECOMMENDATION Fl: FIRE RESISTANT DESIGN

A COMPREHENSIVE ENGINEERING DESIGN PROCEDURE

SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR EVALUATING THE PERFORMANCE

OF STEEL FRAME BUILDINGS UNDER FIRE EXPOSURE

CONDITIONS.

In many cases current design criteria based on arbitrary

limits such as the imposition of limits on steel temperature are

overly conservative. During the past two decades, our

understanding of fire phenomena and their impact on buildings has

increased dramatically to the point where it is now possible to

design specific buildings for anticipated fire conditions in a manner analogous to current structural design. Unfortunately,

the procedures and techniques for accomplishing an integrated

fire resistant design are not readily available to the design

community. Performance criteria such as deflection limits and

required strength conditions have not been developed. Current

fire resistance requirements also do not take into account the

probabilistic nature of fire occurrence in a manner comparable to

other extreme loads such as earthquakes and extreme winds,

A design procedure should be developed using a load and

resistance factor format. This will involve an analytical study

modeling structural response taking into account stability

problems, large deflection theory, occupancy and fire loading,

influence of other fire protection features, and compartment

geometry and ventilation. Design limit states and load

combinations will need to be definied. The Fire Analysis of

Steel Building Systems (FASBUS II) computer program should be

used as a basis for this work,

A five man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION F2: DESIGN AIDS

DESIGN AIDS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR CALCULATING

FIRE PROTECTION MATERIAL THICKNESSES FOR STEEL

BUILDING ELEMENTS.

Hundreds of ASTM E119 fire tests for establishing fire

resistance ratings for steel columns, beams, floors, roofs and

47
walls have been conducted. Such tests are expensive and time

consuming, and each test has a limited application by virtue of

the construction details of that particular tested construction.

Test data are available which can provide a basis for developing

analytical methods to predict fire resistance ratings for these

building elements. This will provide an economical method for

determining fire resistance ratings for untested steel

constructions which differ in construction details from those

tested. In addition, the ASTM E119 test of floors and roofs

identifies two fire resistance ratings - restrained and

unrestrained. In order to prove that most steel floor designs in

a building are restrained, AISI developed the FASBUS II computer

program. Many code authorities require an analysis of the floor

system using FASBUS II to prove the floor system is restrained.

Design aids can reduce the need for an analysis of every floor

construction.

Analyses should be conducted to determine the structural

response of typical steel floor systems under fire exposure

conditions. FASBUS II can be used for this. Full-scale fire

tests may be required to provide additional data or verification

of equations for an engineering guide. This information should

be used to develop a simple guide for the structural engineer and

building official to agree on the use of restrained test results

to establish fire protection material thicknesses on steel floors

and steel framing,

A two man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION F3: SHOP APPLIED FIRE PROTECTION

NEW FIRE PROTECTION MATERIALS SUITABLE FOR SBOP

APPLICATION TO STEEL MEMBERS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED,

Field application of fire protective coatings for steel

structures is costly. Material and application cost can amount

to as much as 15 % of the cost of the steel frame. Existing

materials cannot withstand the rigors of transportation and

erection and are not suitable for shop application. Ablative

coatings which could be applied in the shop are prohibitively

expensive

,

Background information should be collected to stimulate

materials manufacturers to develop new coatings. This

information would include a definition of the size of the

potential market for such materials and the characteristics

required to insure adequate performance during shop application,

transportation, erection and subsequent fire conditions,

A two man-year level of effort is required.

48
RECOMMENDATION F4: LARGE AREA/LARGE VOLUME

STRUCTURES

MATHEMATICAL MODELS SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR

MODELING FIRE GROWTH IN LARGE AREA OR LARGE

VOLUME STRUCTURES.

During the past two decades, a considerable amount of

research has been done on the modeling of fully developed

compartment fires. Much of this work is empirical and is based

on experiments involving relatively small compartments. There

are many large area/large volume structures which are

commercially important to the steel industry. Examples include

atriums, covered shopping malls, transportation terminals,

covered stadiums and sports complex's and indusrial plants. It

is questionable whether currently available models are applicable

to such structures.

Fire models should be developed for large area/large volume

structures taking into account the following factors:

ventilation, plume theory, relatively low fire loading, heat

dissipation, and the probability of occurrence of fully developed

fire conditions (flash over).

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION F5: FIRE RESEARCH REVIEW

A COMPILATION AND ASSESSMENT OF FIRE RESEARCH

AROUND THE WORLD SHOULD BE PREPARED ON A

PERIODIC BASIS.

There is a great deal of fire research being conducted

throughout the world. It is important that this work be

summarized to minimize duplication of effort and enhance the

opportunity for synergism. The summary should deal with all

aspects of fire research of importance to building design. It

should be updated on a periodic basis, perhaps every 3-5 years,

A one man-year level of effort is required.

G. DESIGN LOADS

Loading characteristics such as load magnitude, duration and

probability of occurence are important elements of design

criteria for producing safe, economic structures. Research is

needed to characterize snow loads, wind loads and crane loads.

Information is also needed on the response of structures and

structural elements to these loads.

49
RECOMMENDATION Gl: CRANE LOADS

DESIGN LOADS SHOULD BE DETERMINED FOR OVERHEAD

AND ONDERHUNG CRANE SYSTEMS.

There is a lack of information available on the lateral

forces developed by crane systems in industrial buildings.

Research involving field investigations should be conducted

to determine the magnitude of these loads. Information should be

obtained on the probability of occurence of various load

combinations. Using this information, analytical and

experimental studies should be carried out to establish fatigue

requirements, serviceability and strength design criteria.

Design requirements should also be established.

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION G2: DRIFTED SNOW

DESIGN LOAD DATA SHOULD BE DEVELOPED FOR

DRIFTED SNOW ON MULTI-LEVEL ROOFS.

Drift snow loads account for about 75 percent of snow

related roof collapses. The problem is particularly important

for low rise steel buildings with a change in roof elevation such

as industrial or manufacturing buildings with attached offices,

school buildings, etc.

Needed research includes snow load measurements from fullscale structures and statistical analysis of drift snow load case

histories to determine the effects of geometrical and

environmental parameters and establish annual probabilities of

exceedance

.

A one man-year level of effort is required for a two to

three year period.

RECOMMENDATION G3 : CLADDING BEHAVIOR

RATIONAL DESIGN PROCEDURES FOR CLADDING SHOULD

BE DEVELOPED TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE

CHARACTERISTICS OF FLUCTUATING WIND PRESSURES,

CLADDING MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES.

Pressure coefficients contained in current loading standards

and building codes reflect improvements in wind tunnel modeling

of buildings. The techniques and instrumentation used to measure

surface pressures on wind tunnel models have not been

50
standardized. However, data obtained in full-scale and model

scale tests suggest that peak pressure coefficients based on

localized fluctuations may be underestimated in the wind tunnel

by 15 to 25 percent. Certain phenomena associated with flow

separation are not observed on wind tunnel pressure models

because of instrumentation limitations.

Research should be conducted to validate wind tunnel

modeling techniques (including the associated instrumentation)

through carefully conducted measurement programs in both model

and full-scale. The behavior of cladding elements subjected to

fluctuating loads needs to be investigated systematically.

Special laboratory equipment capable of duplicating actual load

time histories obtained from field measurements will be needed.

This information should be synthesized and rational design

procedures should be developed that account for fluctuating

pressures, cladding geometry and type of material, and fastener

details

.

A three man-year level of effort is required for the fullscale measurements and a five man-year level of effort for the

behavior of cladding materials and development of design

procedures

.

RECOMHENDATION G4: WIND LOADS ON LOW RISE BUILDINGS

THE VARIABILITY OF WIND LOADING ON LOW RISE

BUILDINGS SHOULD BE BETTER DEFINED.

Additional information is needed on the effects of geometric

and environmental factors on the variability of wind loads for

low rise buildings.

The required research includes a synthesis of information

available in the literature and wind tunnel studies.

A two to three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION G5: INTERNAL PRESSURE LOADING

MODELS FOR MEAN AND PEAK INTERNAL PRESSURES

ASSOCIATED WITH WIND LOADS ON BUILDINGS SHOULD

BE VERIFIED.

Internal pressures affect the design of cladding on low rise

buildings and curtain wall systems in high rise buildings.

Current analytical models for the mean and peak internal

pressures are based on assumptions of the leakage distribution of

the building envelope, the presence of large openings in the

exterior, the distribution of interior leakage paths (doors,

walls, etc.) and the building flexibility.

51
Experiments at both model scale and full-scale should be

conducted to evaluate these models and develop improved design

criteria

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION G6: BUILDING RESPONSE TO WINDS

MEASUREMENTS SHOUI^ BE MADE OF THE RESPONSE OF

FULL-SCALE STRUCTURES SUBJECTED TO WIND LOADS,

Serviceability requirements and building performance as

perceived by the occupants for high rise buildings subject to

wind loads are important design considerations. Additional

information on the dynamic performance of full-scale structures

is needed to develop improved design criteria.

Research should be conducted on full-scale high rise

structures subjected to wind loads to obtain information on the

following; effective structural damping (nominal values

available to the designer give concrete buildings an advantage),

evaluation of building periods and comparison with calculated

values, building drift and rotation, and building accelerations.

The work should be carried out in hurricane prone areas where

there is a high probability of experiencing strong winds.

A three man-year level of effort is required.

RECOMMENDATION G7; LARGE AREA ROOFS

MEASUREMENTS SHOULD BE MADE ON THE DISTRIBUTION

OP SNOW IN THE PRESENCE OF STRONG WINDS ON

ROOFS OF LARGE AREA.

Snow loads for roofs of low rise industrial, commercial or

public buildings where the roof system represents a major portion

of the construction cost are an important design consideration.

Current research in the United States and Canada includes fullscale monitoring programs, probabilistic modeling of the

formation and statistical variability of snow loads and physical

model studies. The presence of strong winds, however, can cause

significant non-uniform deposition and drifting.

Snow load monitoring programs should be conducted on fullscale structures, with emphasis on roofs of large area or unusual

shape, to obtain information on the joint occurrence of extreme

snow and wind loads, snow load distributions, and the duration of

design snow loads. The program should include re-examination of

existing data to develop correlations with climatic information,

development of improved physical modeling techniques for wind

tunnels and/or water flumes, and evaluation of existing

52
mathematical models.

A three man-year level of effort is required.

53
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The success of the workshop was due to the enthusiastic

participation of all the attendees.

The workshop Steering Committee played a key role in

defining the research areas for the individual working groups and

selecting the participants. The workshop was sponsored and

jointly funded by the American Institute of Steel Construction,

the American Iron and Steel Institute, the Metal Building

Manufacturers Association, the National Science Foundation and

the National Bureau of Standards, Funding for participation of

the university researchers was provided by the National Science

Foundation through the efforts of Dr, John Scalzi,

Several participants, who were unable to attend the

workshop, contributed problem statements for the working groups

to consider. We appreciate the contributions received from

Theodore Galambos, Hal Iyengar, Arthur Arndt, and Harry Weese.

John Gross assisted in preparing the report and Bruce

Ellingwood reviewed the final draft.

Mrs. Wanda Eader from the National Bureau of Standards

provided administrative support in planning and conducting the

workshop and typing the proceedings.

54
APPENDIX A

WORKSHOP KEYNOTE SESSION

Remarks

by

Dr. Ernest Ambler

Director, National Bureau of Standards

I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to

welcome you to the National Bureau of Standards. NBS is pleased

to sponsor this workshop along with the National Science

Foundation, the American Institute of Steel Construction, the

American Iron and Steel Institute, and the Metal Building

Manufacturers Association.

This workshop has been convened to develop consensus

recommendations for steel building research, and to establish

priorities for consideration by industry and government. In

these two days you will begin to establish the basis for a collaborative relationship among federal agencies, university

researchers, design professionals, and the U.S. steel industry.

Here at the National Bureau of Standards we are very proud

of our participation in many strong and productive cooperative

research efforts with industry, universities, and other federal

agencies. We are all working together to assure the continued

growth and strengthening of our economy, especially through the

application of science and technology to our industries. Our

research programs at NBS are enriched by the type of cooperation

and collaboration in which you are expressing an interest by your

presence here today.

I would like to give you some background on the rather long

history of cooperation between NBS and the steel industry. For

more than 80 years, NBS has been working with the steel industry

to improve the durability and performance of metals and alloys.

Starting in 1903, NBS began work to determine the melting points

of pure metals as part of our mission to perform basic

measurements. In 1912, because of an alarming number of railroad

accidents. Congress appropriated special funds for NBS to conduct

materials investigations on railroad iron and steel. By 1913,

our Metallurgy Division had been formed. In 1919, NBS provided

the first explanation of the phenomenon of age hardening of

metals. By 1930, through improved technology, better steels were

being used for rails and car£ and the railroad accident rate fell

by 2/3, from a high of 36,000 accidents in 1920.

World War II brought national concern for conservation of

strategic raw materials such as chromium, tungsten, and

55
molybdenum used in steel manufacturing. NBS investigated "lean

alloy" steels and developed new coatings and processes to help

meet these concerns.

Since the post-war years, NBS has been actively pursuing our

present mission. We provide industry, government agencies, and

scientific organizations with data, measurement methods, standard

reference materials, concepts, and information on the fundamental

aspects of processing, structure, physical properties, and

performance of metals and alloys.

Currently there are quite a few NBS programs supportive of

the U.S. steel industry. For example: Steel producers use our

Standard Reference Materials (SRM's) to provide quality assurance

for their materials. These samples have specific chemical or

physical properties certified by the Bureau. They are used in

calibrating instruments, checking chemical composition, and

controlling production of various steels. Today, approximately i 30 percent of the 40,000 SRM's sold annually are to producers and

users of steel and metal alloys. ; NBS is working with the American Iron and Steel Institute | (AISI) to develop process control sensors for rapid measurement

of temperature distributions and automatic detection of porosity

during manufacture. Also with AISI we are working to develop

diagrams that will help designers select A36 structural steel

products for load-bearing capacity and other performance

characteristics related to fire safety.

The American Society for Metals (ASM) has raised $4 million

to cover its participation in a collaborative effort in which NBS

is providing technical guidance on alloy phase diagrams. In 1982

the National Association of Corrosion Engineers (NACE) and NBS

established a cooperative corrosion data program to help reduce

corrosion damage to the nation's infrastructure — its bridges,

buildings, industrial plants, vehicles, and utilities.

In our welding research program, NBS scientists are working

side-by-side with researchers sponsored by the Welding Research

Council (WRC) and the American Welding Institute (AWI) , formerly

known as the American Welding Technology Application Center

(AWTAC). NBS welding research is developing the scientific basis

to control the formation of flaws during welding, to

nondestructi vely inspect welds to measure flaw size, and to

develop models to predict the effect of weld flaws on structural

integrity. Most of those examples are collaborations involving

the NBS Center for Materials Research.

In the Center for Building Technology (CBT) our research has

supported the development by the American Institute of Steel

Construction (AISC) of load and resistance factor design for

steel structures. CBT is currently working with AISC on a I project to determine the performance of connections in steel ' braced frames. We have good reason to be proud of our support

for the steel industry. We are delighted now to have the

56
opportunity to focus more attention on structural engineering.

We are particularly excited about this new focus because of the

current interest in testing large scale structural components and

systems

.

This afternoon you are scheduled to visit our 12-million

pound capacity Large Scale Structural Research Facility and the

3-Dimensional Structural Testing Facility. The Large Scale

Structural Research Facility will be used later this year to test

the performance of full-scale bridge and building components

subjected to earthquake loads. NBS research facilities are

available for cooperative work with industry and, under certain

conditions, facilities are even available for proprietary

research.

In closing, I would like to state that we look forward to

continued cooperation with the steel industry. I trust you will

have a productive workshop and that you will enjoy your meeting

here at NBS.

57
Remarks

by

Dr. John McTague

Deputy Director y Office of Science and

Technology Policy

Thank you for the opportunity to get outside the Beltway for

a brief period. It's nice to see real scientists and engineers

again. Even the air is dif f erent~-there's no odor of fire and

brimstone coming from our neighbors in the Executive Office

BuildingI

This workshop involving industry, government, and university

participants to discuss research needs for steel buildings comes

at a highly symbolic time. Just over a month ago, the

President's Commission on Industrial Competitiveness reported to

the President on ways to improve the U.S. position in an

increasingly international and increasingly competitive world

market. These eminent indi viduals--corporate CEO's, bankers,

labor leaders, lawyers, and government officials—deliberated for

some eighteen months. They identified eight major factors which

affect this, or any other. Nation's ability to compete.

They were items such as the cost of labor, the cost of

capital, exchange rates, trade policies, etc. They then rated

these as advantageous, neutral, or disadvantageous for the U,S,

competitive position. The cost of labor is obviously

disadvantageous for the U.S. competitive position, and we

wouldn't have it any other way--we want American workers to be

the most prosperous in the world. None of the others I

enumerated possess potential advantage for us, either. The only

advantages we have lie in technology and talent. To quote from

the report:

America owes much of its standard of living to U.S.

preeminence in technology. In order to make technology a continuing competitive advantage for the United States, we

need to do three basic things: (1) create a solid

foundation of science and technology that is relevant

to commercial uses? (2) apply advances in knowledge to

commercial products and processes? and (3) protect

intellectual property..."

So here you are today, one step ahead of the President's

Commission. You are already using the combined strengths of the

three sectors to cooperate to the advantage of all. If you are

successful in handling cooperative government-industry-university

research to advance the art in your field, and if your efforts

are repeated in other fields, we as a Nation can be confident of

success in this global competion.

58
It is also particularly fitting that you should convene at

the National Bureau of Standards, which has such a long and

successful track record in cooperative ventures to strengthen our

technology base. As the slogan of a former employer of mine

goes, this is "Where Science Gets Down to Business."

Best wishes for a stimulating and successful workshop.
Remarks

by

John H. Biisch

Chairman

American Institute of Steel Construction

Thank you for inviting me to be with you today. It is my

pleasure to welcome you on behalf of a very important segment of

the steel construction industry, the American Institute of Steel

Construction. Most of you are familiar with AISC^ what it does,

and where it has been. This morning I would like to use my time

to tell you about some of the things AISC is doing, where we

could be headed, and offer a few challenges.

First, a little background information. AISC is the trade

group that represents the fabricated structural steel industry

with over 430 active member firms in the United States. AISC

member firms are involved in the fabrication of diverse

structures for a wide range of building and non-building

construction applications. The most prominent of these are

custom designed steel framed buildings and steel bridges.

Throughout its 63 year history, AISC has been highly engineering

oriented with a strong emphasis on steel research and steel

design techniques. It has published many technical publications

including the "bible** of the industry - the AISC Manual of Steel

Construction - which contains the well known AISC Code of

Standard Practice and the AISC Specifications for the Design,

Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings.

These documents are the basis for most steel building contracts

and designs in this country as well as other parts of the world.

Currently the fabricated structural steel industry is

shipping over 4.5 million tons annually worth over 5 billion

dollars. This is down from nearly 7.0 million tons and 8 billion

dollars four years ago. This industry has been in a free fall

and the slide has not ended for many. Building steel represents

approximately 65% of the total tonnage shipped for our standard

industrial classification No, 3441.

AISC operates on a budget of nearly $4,0 million annually

with a staff of over 55 people including its highly prized 20

regional engineers located in key cities throughout the United

States. In a word, AISC is a "technical" organization.

A few years ago, AISC Headquarters were moved from New York

to Chicago, A change, and as part of that change, AISC decided

to market its technical expertise. That marketing effort, based

on statistical data and backed by hard core engineering and

research studies, is gradually reaping benefits. This, despite

the overall decline in the capital sector of the economy and its

negative impact on the fabricated structural steel industry. Our

objective is to gain a bigger share of a shrinking pie for the

60
fabricated structural steel industry.

To organize for this goal a long range strategic planning

task group was formed over a year ago. Detailed studies are

being developed, and the current schedule calls for this

strategic plan to be presented to the industry by December of

this year. The plan will incorporate five key objectives:

- Market Share Penetration

Technology

- Membership Enlargement and Involvement

- Government Relations

Public Image

As you may note, technology is a vital factor in this

planning

.

The American Association of Engineering Societies in a recent paper points out that the United States is faltering in

the area of research and development and concludes that the

activities which move new technology from research to defined

commercial potential are inadequate. This group goes on to

report the strong correlation between research and improved

productivity in manufacturing. Economist Edward F. Denison rates

the various contributions to productivity as follows:

Technology 38%

Capital 26%

Quality of Labor 14%

Economies of Scale 12%

Resource Allocation 10%

Again, technology is the largest single factor to secure

strength for our industry in the market place through

productivity improvements. Some of the technological areas that

have been identified for progress include:

Computer - Aided Engineering

- Flexible Manufacturing Systems

- Office Operations

- Advanced Manufacturing Methods

- Advanced Software Systems

61
Computers

Materials Technology

Energy

The American Association of Engineering Societies asks the

key questions Who is going to do these studies? They point out

that these long term programs require patience, organized and

steady administration along with continuous funding. They

further suggest that new imaginative cooperative arrangements

deriving support from many sources, deserve urgent consideration.

In Japan and Germany, institutes from many industries not only

work closely with the academic experts but have substantial

government support as well. We need to look closer at these

possibilities in the United States,

As a mature industry, we cannot compete dollar for dollar

with the high growth sectors of the economy in our research

efforts. But we can compete with them conceptually in our

research direction. Let's look at a leading technical company

for comparative purposes. United Technologies is a 16 billion

dollar company with an after tax return on equity of over 16

percent. Its growth rate for the past five years averages about

8 percent per year (despite a major downturn in 1982). United

Technologies employs over 200,000 people and includes the

following companies in its conglomerate portfolio:

Carrier Air Conditioning

Otis Elevator

Essex

Building Systems Company

Pratt & Whitney

Elliott : Sikorsky

Norden, Inmont

Mostek and others

In their 1984 annual report. United Technologies states,

"High technology is the common denominator of all

we do. Through the successful management of technology

we are able to grow and to contribute to the world

economy. Few corporations spend as much as we do on

research and development. Our long standing policy is

to invest wisely substantial amounts of company funds in

62
advanced technology to yield superior products at the

lowest possible cost,"

Conceptually, despite the flair for high technology, their

goals of superior products at the lowest possible cost should not

be that much different from ours. This appears to match my

earlier remarks about having an improved position in the market

through innovative technology.

So, as you meet here today and tomorrow, the challenge is

not only to involve your detailed and specific thoughts, but also

to encourage creative new thinking. Traditionally, the research

done in our industry has been more market reactive than that of

anticipating the markets needs. AISC needs to provide you with

more help in this area so that our research dollars can be spent

in the direction that meets the needs of the market to secure the

best results. I encourage you to consider these facts during

your deliberations. From a fabricator's viewpoint, there are

many factors that affect cost, but five major variables need to

be collectively optimized to find the lowest cost. They are:

Engineering Labor

Drafting Labor

Shop Labor

Erection Labor

Raw Material Cost

Many steel designers correlate total cost savings with the

reduced weight of the structure as it relates to raw material

cost only and totally neglect the other variables. How many

researchers are guilty of the same process? In other words, we

need to be practical and consider all the factors that will

affect our products and services in the reality of the market

place, I feel confident that this workshop can be an important

step in that direction. Thank you.

63
Remarks

by

Robert B. Peabody

President, American Iron and Steel Institute

On behalf of the American Iron and Steel Institute, I want

to extend to all of you a warm welcome to this workshop on Steel

Research Needs for Buildings^ We at AISI are genuinely pleased

to be one of the sponsors and to join with the American Institute

of Steel Construction, the Metal Building Manufacturers

Association, the National Science Foundation, and the National

Bureau of Standards in an effort to identify realistic programs

that will advance the state-of-the-art and improve safety and

economy in building design, fabrication and construction.

Building construction is a large market for steel. We

estimate some 4 million tons of steel are consumed each year in

buildings of all types. You can understand, then, the importance

we place on this workshop.

This morning I would like to spend a few minutes to tell you

something about AISI - who we are, what we do. Then I would like

to comment on AISI structural research over the years and the

impact of this research on building construction. Finally, I

hope to leave you with some thoughts that you may wish to

consider during your deliberations over the next two days.

Who are we? AISI is an association of steel producing

companies. It is truly "American" in that its membership

includes companies from North, Central and South America who

account for 90% of the raw steel production in the Western

Hemisphere.

Our activities embrace research and technology to improve

the steel manufacturing process, the collection and dissemination

of statistics, public affairs, international trade and industrial

relations including health, safety and hygiene. In addition, the

Institute maintains field offices in cities throughout the United

States, staffed by engineers who are responsible for industry

activities related to building codes and regulatory standards

that effect the use of steel mill products in construction.

A key part of our code work has been the Institute's

continuing studies of fire hazards and fire protection. The

object here is greater fire safety at lower building costs. In

fact, I see that one of your workshop sessions is dedicated to

the subject of needed fire research for buildings. We consider

this to be an area where real economies can be effected.

The Institute also engages in promotional activities of

general interest to the steel industry. These include publicity.

64
booklets, trade show participation, motion pictures, seminars and

educational programs. In addition, special promotion programs

are carried out by individual product promotion committees whose

company members produce a particular steel mill product - hot

rolled and cold finished bars, sheet and strip, large diameter

line pipe, steel plate, structural steel and wire rope, to name a

few.

With this brief description, you can see that AISI is a multifaceted organization engaged in all aspects that effect the

steel industry.

This, then, briefly, is who we are«

Now let's be specific and turn our attention to AISI's

structural research. This, after all, is why we are here.

AISI's research in the structural area began in earnest about 20

years ago and it has embraced a number of topics included in this

workshop - connections and members, frames, seismic design, and

load and resistance factor design. Throughout this period, the

main objective has been to increase the economy and safety of

steel construction by (1) developing new structural concepts, (2)

improving and updating the provisions of various design

specifications and (3) preparing design guidelines and

recommendations for use by the engineer.

The eccentrically braced frame is an example of a new

structural concept developed through AISI research. The load and

resistance factor design specification, another AISI project,

will give engineers a rational guide for building design,

I should note here our cooperative research programs with

government agencies, notably the Federal Highway Administration

and the National Science Foundation. We have a joint program now

underway with the Federal Highway Administration to test a onehalf scale model of a prototype bridge designed using innovative

structural concepts. The model is to be tested sometime this

year at the FHWA Turner-Fairbank Research Center, McLean,

Virginia. Also, over the years, we have collaborated in projects

of the National Science Foundation relating to the design of

earthquake-resistant structures.

These joint efforts with the government have been an

important part of our research program.

In closing, I would like to leave you with a few thoughts.

In the past, the steel producing and fabricating industries have

been a major source of funding for structural related research.

At one time these industries were able to freely support most

proposals that were submitted for consideration by various

research agencies. But, as you know, recent severe economic

pressures have eroded the funds that were once available.

Obviously, we must now evaluate and prioritize projects on a more

precise basis. Economy and safety now become essential factors

when considering a research topic for funding. In fact, the

65
words "economy" and "safety" are used in the stated objective of

this workshop, I would urge you to keep these words in mind

during your discussions within each working session. Please

remember that the research priorities you set during the next two

days will become important guidelines upon which the steel

industry will base its future building research program.

The industry sincerely thanks you for the valuable time you

are spending in its behalf and wishes you success in the arduous

task to which you have committed yourself. I know the results of

your work will provide benefits for all. Thank you.

66
APPENDIX B

STEEL RESEARCH NEEDS FOR BUILDINGS

Program

TUESDAY, MARCH 5. 1985

9:00-

9:45

Opening Remarks

- Ernest Ambler

Director, National Bureau of Standards

- John McTague

Deputy Director, Office of Science and

Technology Policy

- John Busch

Chairman, American Institute of Steel

Construction

- Robert Peabody

President, American Iron and Steel Institute

Geerhard Haaijer

American Institute of Steel Construction

Charles Culver

National Bureau of Standards

9:45 - 10:00

Workshop Introduction

10:00 - 10:30

Coffee Break

67
10s30 ~ Working Group Sessions

1:00

Group 1 - Total Building Systems

Chairman, Joseph Colaco

Group 2 - Connections and Members

Chairman, Robert Disque

Group 3 - Frames

Chairman, William McGuire

Group 4 - Seismic Design

Chairman, Mike Agbabian

Group 5 - Load and Resistance Factor Design

Chairman, Ivan Viest

Group 6 - Fire Protection

Chairman, Richard Gewain

Group 7 - Loads

Chairman, Dale Perry

Is 00 - Lunch

1:45

1:45 - Working Group Sessions

4:00 (continued)

4:00 - Plenary Session

5:00 Lecture Room A

5:00 - Structures Laboratory Tour

5:30

6:30 - Social Hour and Dinner

Speaker

Dr. Nam Suh

Assistant Director of Engineering

National Science Foundation

"Cooperative Government/Industry/

University Research"

68
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 6

9:00 - Working Group Sessions

1:00 (continued)

1:00 - Lunch

1:45

1:45 - Plenary Session

4:00 Lecture Room A

Develop final recommendations

4:00 - Closing Remarks

4:15- Adjourn

69
LOCATION

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg , Maryland

SPONSORED BY:

National Bureau of Standards

National Science Foundation

American Institute of Steel Construction

American Iron and Steel Institute

Metal Building Manufacturers Association

OBJECTIVE:

To develop consensus recommendations for steel building

research and establish priorities for industry and

government consideration.

PARTICIPANTS:

Invited representatives from the steel industry, design

professionals. Federal agency representatives and

university researchers.

STEERING COMMITTEE:

Charles G. Culver, NBS (Chairman)

Joseph P. Colaco, CBM Engineers

Robert 0. Disque, AISC

Richard Gewain, AISI

Geerhard Haaijer, AISC

Nestor R, Iwankiw, AISC

Albert C. Kuentz, AISI

William McGuire, Cornell University

Dale C. Perry, MBMA

Werner H, Quasebarth, Atlas Machine and Iron Works

Ivan M. Viest, Consulting Engineer

70
APPENDIX C

WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS

DESIGN PRQFE,q<;iQWAr.«;

Mr. Horatio Allison

President

Allison, McCormac & Nickolaus, P. A,

11810 Parklawn Drive

Rockville, Maryland 20852

Mr. Irwin G. Cantor

Office of Irwin G, Cantor

919 Third Avenue

New York, New York 10022

Dr. Joseph P. Colaco

President

CBM Engineers, Inc.

1700 West Loop South - Suite 830

Houston, Texas 77027-3092

Mr, Henry J. Degenkolb

H. J. Degenkolb Associates, Engineers

350 Sansome Street, Room 500

San Francisco, California 94104

Dr. James M. Fisher

Vice President

Computerized Structural Design, Inc.

5678 W. Brown Deer Road

Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53223

Mr. Jerome S.B. Iffland

President, Iffland Kavanagh Waterbury

1501 Broadway

New York, New York 10036

Mr. Socrates loannides

Senior Engineer

Stanley D. Lindsey & Associates, Ltd.

1906 West End Avenue

Nashville, Tennessee 37203-2371

Dr. Stanley D. Lindsey

President

Stanley D. Lindsey & Associates, Ltd.

1906 West End Avenue

Nashville, Tennessee 37203-2371

71
Dr. Walter P, Moore, Jr.

Chairman & President

Walter P. Moore & Associates, Inc.

2905 Sackett Street

Houston, Texas 77098

Mr. Clarkson W. Pinkham

President

S.B. Barnes & Associates

2236 Beverly Blvd.

Los Angeles, California 90057

Mr. Dell Shields

Vice President

Herrick Corporation

P.O. Box 3007

Hayward, California 94540

Mr. Leslie V. Shute

Vice President

Turner Construction Company

633 3rd Avenue

New York, New York 10017

Dr. John D. Stevenson

President, Stevenson & Associates

9217 Midwest Avenue

Cleveland, Ohio 44125

Mr. Edward J. Teal

Seismic Engineering Associates, Ltd.

1300 4th Street

Santa Monica, California 90401

Mr. Raymond H.R. Tide

Wiss, Janney, Elstner, Associates, Inc.

330 Pfingsten Road

Northbrook, Illinois 60062

Dr. Ivan M. Viest

Consulting Engineer

P.O. Box 1428

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016

Mr. Kenneth B, Wiesner, P.E.

LeMessurier Associates/SCI

1033 Massachusetts Avenue

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02238

72
IMDDSTRY REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. Edward P. Becker, P.E.

Chief Engineer

Lehigh Structural Steel Company

Box 626

One Allen Street

Allentown, Pennsylvania 18015

Mr. Delbert F. Boring

Regional Director, Construction

Codes & Standards

American Iron and Steel Institute

4937 West Broad Street

Columbus, Ohio 43228

Mr. Roger L. Brockenbrough

Research Consultant

Heavy Products Division

U.S. Steel Corporation

Technical Center

One Tech Center Drive

Monroeville, Pennsylvania 15146

Mr. John H. Busch

President, Haven-Busch Company

3443 Chicago Drive, S.W.

Grandville, Michigan 49418

Mr. Andrew K. Courtney

Chief Engineer

Owen Steel Company, Inc.

801 Blossom Street

P.O. Box 1698

Columbia, South Carolina 29202

Mr, Robert 0. Disque

Assistant Director of Engineering

American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.

The Wrigley Bldg.

400 North Michigan Avenue

Chicago, Illinois 60611-4185

Mr. William Y. Epling

Director of Government Affairs

American Institute of Steel Construction, Inc.

Suite 400

1629 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20006

73
Mr. Walter H. Fleischer

Senior Structural Consultant

Bethlehem Steel Corporation

255 SCO

Bethlehem^ Pennsylvania 18016

Mr. Richard Gewain

Chief, Fire Protection Engineer

American Iron & Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Mr. Michael Gilmor

Manager of Engineering

Canadian Institute of Steel Construction

201 Consumers Road

Suite 300

Willowdale, Ontario, M2J 4G8

Canada

Mr, John D. Griffiths

Vice President - Engineering

Paxton & Vierling Steel Co.

P.O. Box 1085

Omaha, Nebraska 68101

Mr. Joshua Gurman

American Iron and Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Dr. Geerhard Haaijer

Vice President

American Institute of Steel Construction

The Wrigley Bldg.

400 North Michigan Avenue

Chicago, Illinois 60611-4185

Mr, J. W. Hotchkies

Manager, Market Development Engineering

The Algoma Steel Corporation, Ltd.

Mississauga Executive Center, Suite 900

Four Robert Speck Parkway

Mississauga, Ontario

Canada L4Z ISl

74
Mr, Nestor Iwankiw

Assistant Director of Engineering

American Institute of Steel Construction

The Wrigley Bldg,

400 North Michigan Avenue

Chicago, Illinois 60611-4185

Mr. Juris Jauntirans

3210 Watlong Street

Inland Steel Company

East Chicago, Indiana 46312

Mr. David C. Jeanes

American Iron and Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Mr, Donald L, Johnson

Senior Research Engineer

Butler Manufacturing Companny

Research Center

135th Street and Botts Road

Grandview, Missouri 64030

Mr, Larry Kloiber

Vice President

L. L. LeJeune Company

118 West 60th Street

Minneapolis, Minnesota 55419

Mr. Henry V. Kominek

Regional Director

Construction Codes & Standards

American Iron & Steel Institute

1150 Wilmette Avenue

Wilmette, Illinois 60091

Mr. Albert C. Kuentz

Staff Representative

American Iron & Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

75
Mr. Hank Martin

Regional Director, Codes &

Standards

American Iron & Steel Institute

671 Newcastle Road^ Suite 1

Newcastle, California 95658-9702

Mr. Daniel M. McGee, P.E.

Regional Director, Construction Codes

& Standards

American Iron & Steel Institute

P.O. Box 311

Matawan, New Jersey 07747

Mr. William E. Moore

Vice President - Engineering

Taurrier Street and Bredford

P.O. Box 753

Ferro Products Company

Charleston, West Virginia 25323

Mr, Heinz Pak

Engineering Consultant

United States Steel Corporation

600 Grant Street

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230

Mr. Robert B, Peabody

President, American Iron &

Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Dr. Dale C. Perry

Metal Building Manufacturers Association

Director of Engineering and Research

1230 Keith Building

Cleveland, Ohio 44115

Mr. Werner H. Quasebarth

Pres ident

Atlas Machine & Iron Works, Inc.

7308 Wellington Road

Gainesville, Virginia 20065

76
Mr, Bill Richey

Vice President Engineering

Havens Steel Company

7219 East 17th Street

Kansas City, Missouri 64126-2890

Mr. Robert E. Roll

Manager of Structural Shapes & Piling Marketing

Bethlehem Steel Corporation

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18016

Mr. Dell Shields

Vice President

Herrick Corporation

P.O. Box 3007

Hayward, California 94540

Mr. Gary F. Tilson

Regional Director, Codes & Standards

American Iron & Steel Institute

798 Rays Road, Suite 105A

Stone Mountain, Georgia 30083

Dr. William Thornton

Chief Engineer

Gives Steel Company

411 Rouse Lane

P.O. Box 768180

Atlanta, Georgia 30338

Ms. Lisa Vornholt

Regional Director

American Iron and Steel Institute

13500 Midway Road, Suite 111

Dallas, Texas 75234

Mr. Walter G. Wells

American Iron and Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Mr. R. T. Willson

American Iron and Steel Institute

1000 16th Street, NW

Washington, DC 20036

Mr, James Wooten

Chief, Structural Design Engineer

AFCO Steel

P.O. Box 231

1423 East Sixth Street

Little Rock, Arkansas 72201

77
UNIVERSITY RESEARCHERS

Dr. Joel I, Abrams

Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering

University of Pittsburgh

949 Benedum Hall

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261

Professor Mihran S, Agbabian

Chairman, Department of Civil Engineering

University of Southern California

Los Angeles, California 90089

Dr. Wai Fah Chen

Professor & Head, Structural Engineering

School of Civil Engineering

Civil Engineering Building

Purdue University

West Lafayette, Indiana 47907

Professor John W, Fisher

Fritz Engineering Laboratory

Building 13

Lehigh University

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015

Professor Kurt H, Gerstle

Department of Civil Environmental and

Architectural Engineering

University of Colorado

Campus Box 428

Boulder, Colorado 80309

Dr. Robert D. Hanson

Professor of Civil Engineering

University of Michigan

Department of Civil Engineering

304 West Engineering Bldg.

Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109-1092

Professor Helmut Krawinkler

Department of Civil Engineering

Stanford University

Stanford, California 94305

78
Professor Le-Wu Lu

Civil Engineering Department

Fritz Engineering Laboratory

Lehigh University

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania 18015

Professor William McGuire

Cornell University

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering

Hollister Hall

Ithaca, New York 14853

Professor Thomas M, Murray

University of Oklahoma

School of Civil Engineering

202 W. Boyd Street, Room 334

Norman, Oklahoma 73019

Dr. Michael J. O'Rourke

Associate Professor, Civil Engineering

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

Troy, New York 12181

Professor Egor Popov

Professor Emeritus of Civil Engineering

University of California, Berkeley

College of Engineering

Berkeley, California 94720

Dr. James B. Radziminski

University of South Carolina

Department of Civil Engineering

College of Engineering

Columbia, South Carolina 29208

Dr. Charles W. Roeder

Department of Civil Engineering

University of Washington

233 More Hall, FX-10

Seattle, Washington 98195

79
Dr. D. Surry

Boundary Layer Wind Tunnel Laboratory

Faculty of Engineering Science

London, Ontario

Canada N6A 5B9

Professor Joseph A, Yura

Warren Bellows Professor of Civil Engineering

University of Texas at Austin

Department of Civil Engineering

10100 Burnet Road

Austin, Texas 78758-4497

80
GOVERKMEHT REPRESENTATIVES

Mr. Gifford Albright

National Science Foundation

1800 G Street, NW

Washington, DC 20550

Dr. Hans Ashar

Research Manager

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NL 5650)

Washington, DC 20555

Dr. Charles G. Culver

Chief, Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg , Maryland 20899

Dr. Robert M, Dinnat

Associate Technical Director

Construction Engineering Research Laboratory

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Box 4005

Champaign, Illinois 61820

Dr, Bruce Ellingwood

Leader, Structural Engineering

Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899

Mr. Michael Gaus

National Science Foundation

1800 G Street, NW

Washington, DC 20550

Dr. John L, Gross

Research Engineer

Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899

Dr. H. S. Lew

Leader, Construction Safety

Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899

Dr. Edgar V, Leyendecker

Leader, Earthquake Hazards Reduction

Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg, Maryland 20899

81
Dr. Richard D„ Marshall

Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg y Maryland 20899

Dr. John McTague

Deputy Director

Office of Science & Technology Policy

Executive Office of the President

Room 5005

New Executive Office Building

Washington, DC 20506

Mr, Irving E. Minkin, P.E.

Deputy Commissioner

NYC Department of Buildings

120 Wall Street

New York, New York 10005

Dr. Jack Scalzi

National Science Foundation

1800 G Street, NW

Washington, DC 20550

Dr. Emil Simiu

Structural Research Engineer

Structures Division

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg , Maryland 20899

Dr. Nam Suh

Assistant Director of Engineering

National Science Foundation

1800 G Street, NW

Washington, DC 20005

Mr. Michael Yachnis

Chief Engineer

Naval Facilities Engineering Command

(04B)

Department of the Navy

200 Stovall Street

Alexandria, Virginia 22332-2300

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1 985- 461- 105 = 20139

82
3. Publication Oat«

May 1985

U.S. Ok^t. of comm. BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA

SHEET (See Instrvctlons)

1. PUBLICATION OR

REPORT NO.

NBS/SP-693

2. Parformint Ortan. Report No4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

A Workshop on Steel Research Needs for Buildings

5. AUTHOR(S)

Culver, C,G., Iwankiw, N. , and Kuentz, A.

6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION (If joint or other than NBS. see instructions)

National Bureau of Standards

U.S. Department of Commerce

Gaithersburg, riD 20899

7. Contract/Grant No.

8. Type of Report & Period Covered

Fi nal

9. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND COMPLETE ADDRESS (Street. City. State, ZIP)

See title page

10. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Library of Congress Catalog Card Number :85-G00546

I I Document describes a computer program; SF-185, FlPS Software Summary, is attached.

11. ABSTRACT (A 200-word or less {actual summary of most si gnif'cant information. If document includes a si gnificant

bibliography or literature survey, mention it here)

This report identifies needed experimental and analytical research to advance

the state-of-the-art and improve safety and economy in the design, fabrication

and construction of steel buildings. A five year plan for a coordinated research

program is included. Recommendations for research projects dealing with the

following topics are presented: Total building systems, connections and members,

frames, seismic design, load and resistance factor design, fire protection, and

design loads. The recommendations were developed at a workshop involving

participation by steel industry representatives, design professionals, Federal

agency representatives and university researchers.

12. KEY WORDS (Six to twelve entries; alphabetical order; capitalize only proper names; and separate key words by semicolons)

Buildings; design; fire protection; loads; research; steel; structural engineering.

3. AVAILABILITY

I xl Unlimi ted

I I For Official Distribution. Do Not Release to NTIS

[J1 Order From Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington. D.C.

' 20402.

[X] Order From National Technical Information Service (NTIS). Springfield. VA. 22161

14. NO. OF

PRINTED PAGES

89

15. Price



Technical Publications

Periodical

Journal of Research—The Journal of Research of the National Bureau of Standards reports NBS research and development in those disciplines of the physical and engineering sciences in which the Bureau is active. These include physics, chemistry, engineering, mathematics, and computer sciences. Papers cover a broad

range of subjects, with major emphasis on measurement methodology and the basic technology underlying

standardization. Also included from time to time are survey articles on topics closely related to the Bureau's

technical and scientific programs. Issued six times a year.

Nonperiodicals

Monographs—Major contributions to the technical literature on various subjects related to the Bureau's scientific and technical activities. Handbooks—Recommended codes of engineering and industrial practice (including safety codes) developed in cooperation with interested industries, professional organizations, and regulatory bodies.

SpeciaJ Publications—Include proceedings of conferences sponsored by NBS, NBS annual reports, and other

special publications appropriate to this grouping such as wall charts, pocket cards, and bibliographies.

Applied Mathematics Series—Mathematical tables, manuals, and studies of special interest to physicists,

engineers, chemists, biologists, mathematicians, computer programmers, and others engaged in scientific and

technical work.

National Standard Reference Data Series—Provides quantitative data on the physical and chemical properties

of materials, compiled from the world's literature and critically evaluated. Develop>ed under a worldwide pro- gram coordinated by NBS under the authority of the National Standard Data Act (Public Law 90-3%).

NOTE: The Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data (JPCRD) is published quarterly for NBS by

the American Chemical Society (ACS) and the American Institute of Physics (AIP). Subscriptions, reprints,

and supplements are available from ACS, 1155 Sixteenth St., NW, Washington, DC 20056.

Building Science Series—Disseminates technical information developed at the Bureau on building materials,

components, systems, and whole structures. The series presents research results, test methods, and perfor- mance criteria related to the structural and environmental functions and the durability and safety

characteristics of building elements and systems.

Technical Notes—Studies or reports which are complete in themselves but restrictive in their treatment of a

subject. Analogous to monographs but not so comprehensive in scope or definitive in treatment of the subject

area. Often serve as a vehicle for final reports of work performed at NBS under the sponsorship of other government agencies.

Voluntary Product Standards—Developed under procedures published by the Department of Commerce in Part 10, Title 15, of the Code of Federal Regulations. The standards establish nationally recognized re- quirements for products, and provide all concerned interests with a basis for common understanding of the

characteristics of the products. NBS administers this program as a supplement to the activities of the private

sector standardizing organizations.

Consumer Information Series—Practical information, based on NBS research and experience, covering areas of interest to the consumer. Easily understandable language and illustrations provide useful background

knowledge for shopping in today's technological marketplace.

Order the above NBS publications from: Superintenderd of Documents, Government Printing Office,

Washington, DC 20402. Order the following NBS publications—FIPS and NBSIR 's—from the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.

Federal Information Processing Standards Publications (FIPS PUB)—Publications in this series collectively constitute the Federal Information Processing Standards Register. The Register serves as the official source of

information in the Federal Government regarding standards issued by NBS pursuant to the Federal Properts' and Administrative Services Act of 1949 as amended, Public Law 89-306 (79 Stat. 1 127), and as implemented

by Executive Order 11717 (38 FR 12315, dated May 11, 197i) and Part 6 of Title 15 CFR (Code of Federal

Regulations).

NBS Interagency Reports (NBSIR)—A special series of interim or final reports on work performed by NBS

for outside sponsors (both government and non-government). In general, initial distribution is handled by the sponsor; public distribution is by the National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161. in paper copy or microfiche form.
U.S. Department of Commerce

National Bureau of Standards

Gaithersburg. MD 20899

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300