CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
-
Upload
silvio-goncalves -
Category
Documents
-
view
263 -
download
0
Transcript of CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
1/17
Final Report5BF-10/98
Title of the Project: Analysis of Existing and ForthcomingData for Multi-Planar KK-Joints withCircular Hollow Sections
Sponsors: CIDECT
Ministry of Education, Science, Sports and Culture, Japan
Research Program: CIDECT 5BF
Application for research by: Nippon Steel Metal Products
Research carried out by: Sojo University
Kumamoto University
Date: July 1998
Period covered: January 1995-December 1996
Research team: Prof. Yoshiaki Kurobane
Sojo University
Department of Architecture
Ikeda 4-22-1, Kumamoto 860-0082, Japan
Phone: +81-96-326-3111
Fax: +81-96-325-8321E-mail: [email protected]
Prof. Yuji Makino
Kumamoto University
Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering
Kurokami 2-39-1, Kumamoto 860-8555, Japan
Phone: +81-96-342-3593
Fax: +81-96-342-3569
E-mail: [email protected]
KK
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
2/17
1
1. INTRODUCTION
Makino et al. (1984) reported the earliest experimental study on circular tubular KK-jointsunder symmetrical axial brace loading. The design formula for multi-planar KK-joints recom-mended in the current Cidect design guide (Wardenier et al. 1991) was based on these test results.Paul et al. (1992, 1994) succeeded Makinos research and proposed ultimate strength formulae forKK-joints under symmetrical loads. Mouty and Rondal (1992) also conducted a series of tests onKK-joints. However, the latter test results showed KK-joint capacities significantly lower thanthose predicted by Pauls formulae. This fact motivated the Cidect working groups to initiateResearch Program 5BF on Analysis of existing and forthcoming data for multi-planar KK-jointswith circular hollow sections. Subsequently Lee and Wilmshurst (1996) completed an extensiveseries of numerical analyses of KK-joints under symmetrical loads and proposed new ultimatestrength formulae using both numerical and experimental results. KK-joints under anti-symmetri-cal axial loads have also been studied extensively by Makino et al. (1994), Yonemura et al. (1996),Lee et al (1996) and Wilmshurst et al. (1997). The total number of joints studied as of May 1998reached 156 for joints under symmetrical loads and 112 for joints under anti-symmetrical loads.
This report proposes those further revised new ultimate strength equations for KK-jointsunder both symmetrical and anti-symmetrical axial loads, which are developed based on all the
existing test and numerical results. These formulae are applicable only to joints whose failures aregoverned by chord wall plastification. The new prediction formulae are compared with the Moutyand Rondal test results and with the AWS equation.
2. DATABASE
The screened database was constructed, by omitting the Mouty and Rondal test results aswell as the test and numerical results for specimens that failed in failure modes other than the chordwall plastification, from the database of Makinoet al. (1996) (accessible at the web site http://www.arch.kumamoto-u.ac . jp/maki_lab/ database.html). The other failure modes men-tioned above include flexural and local bucklingof compression braces, cracking at points wherestresses concentrate, and plastic deformation ofbraces. The screened database is summarized inTables 1 and 2, respectively, for joints under sym-metrical and anti-symmetrical axial loads. Thenumber designating each data set in Tables 1 and2 is identical to the serial number in Makinos da-tabase. The values of d0, t0, d1, t1,Fy,Fu, and
N1u,KKfor test specimens shown in these tables
and the values of gand gtfor test specimens inTable 1 are measured ones. The other geometricalvariables are given in nominal values. The defi-nition of symbols is shown in Appendix.
3. DERIVATION OF ULTIMATESTRENGTH EQUATIONS
3.1 Format of Ultimate Strength Equations
The ultimate strength equations proposedhere have a format of uni-planar K-joint strengthmultiplied by a correction factor. The strength of
UNIPLANAR JOINTS MULTI-PLANAR JOINTS
X
T
K
XX
TT
TX
KK
N1
N1
N1
N2
N2
N1
N1 N1
N1
N2
N2
N1
N1N2
N1
N1
N2
N2
X-JOINTS
T-JOINT
S
K-JOINTS
Fig. 1 Classification of multi-planar joints.
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
3/17
2
Table 1 Screened database for KK-joints under symmetrical loads.
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKS-1 216.1 7.90 76.3 6.60 85.8 36.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 404 460 398 346
DKS-2 216.1 7.90 76.3 6.60 58.5 89.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 404 460 385 344DKS-3 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 72.8 8.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 224 205
DKS-4 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 51.3 9.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 230 210
DKS-5 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 31.0 8.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 240 236
DKS-6 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 9.5 9.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 285 311
DKS-7 190.8 5.21 60.5 5.66 52.0 37.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 188 161
DKS-8 190.8 5.21 60.5 5.66 31.0 40.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 204 181
DKS-9 190.8 5.21 60.5 5.66 11.0 38.5 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 228 235
DKS-10 190.8 5.21 42.8 5.46 30.0 55.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 156 134
DKS-11 190.8 5.21 42.8 5.46 11.5 55.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 379 441 175 171
DKS-12 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 73.0 56.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 242 207
DKS-13 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 52.0 56.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 252 212
DKS-14 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 31.0 56.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 263 239
DKS-15 190.8 5.21 89.0 5.66 11.3 55.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 291 310
DKS-16 190.8 5.21 60.5 5.66 53.0 84.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 155 140
DKS-17 190.8 5.21 60.5 5.66 31.0 83.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 162 158
DKS-18 190.8 5.21 60.5 5.66 10.5 83.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 182 206
DKS-19 190.8 5.21 42.8 5.46 31.0 100.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 122 116
DKS-20 190.8 5.21 42.8 5.46 11.5 100.0 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 379 441 162 150
DKS-21 217.1 4.41 48.9 3.20 54.0 63.3 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 352 472 83 89
DKS-22 217.2 4.41 60.7 4.00 40.9 51.6 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 352 472 108 112
DKS-23 217.1 4.41 76.6 4.00 23.0 35.1 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 352 472 149 180DKS-25 217.0 4.45 60.1 4.00 75.0 87.1 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 432 556 114 120
DKS-26 165.3 4.39 48.9 3.20 28.4 36.9 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 385 490 136 119
DKS-27 165.0 4.29 48.3 3.20 3.5 9.3 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 278 402 127 137
DKS-28 165.0 4.21 48.5 3.20 62.2 76.5 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 278 402 71 71
DKS-29 165.2 4.21 60.2 4.00 41.5 56.4 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 278 402 97 92
DKS-30 139.8 4.37 48.4 3.20 16.2 24.2 63.4 63.4 30.0 0 386 475 136 139
DKS-31 216.2 4.48 60.7 3.80 74.9 103.9 90.0 50.6 30.0 0 472 521 106 112
DKS-32 216.2 4.54 76.5 4.00 47.2 72.2 90.0 50.6 30.0 0 472 521 139 151
DKS-33 216.0 4.49 76.6 4.00 60.0 90.0 90.0 50.6 30.0 0 472 521 131 141
DKS-34 165.4 4.32 60.7 3.80 21.6 52.9 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 409 483 139 145
DKS-35 165.4 4.42 60.6 3.80 30.3 66.3 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 409 483 126 130
DKS-36 165.4 4.32 76.4 4.00 11.6 50.4 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 409 483 198 215
DKS-37 165.3 4.41 76.3 4.00 12.0 51.1 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 409 483 179 220
DKS-38 139.9 4.12 60.7 3.80 7.4 36.2 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 371 469 165 171
DKS-39 140.5 4.08 60.6 3.80 12.1 42.2 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 371 469 163 155
DKS-40 140.1 4.05 60.6 3.80 15.2 46.5 90.0 49.1 30.0 0 371 469 152 144
DKS-41 215.9 4.36 101.7 5.24 52.8 7.9 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 388 470 179 183
DKS-42 215.9 4.36 101.7 5.24 52.8 7.9 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 388 470 189 183
DKS-82 139.7 4.00 48.3 3.20 71.4 23.7 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 322 451 112 96
DKS-86 88.9 4.00 33.7 2.60 41.2 11.9 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 320 448 80 79
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
4/17
3
Table 1 continued
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKS-87 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 18.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 109 118
DKS-88 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 28.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 104 108
DKS-90 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 100 102
DKS-91 120.0 4.00 28.8 4.00 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 71 70
DKS-92 120.0 2.86 28.8 2.86 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 41 40
DKS-93 120.0 2.40 28.8 2.40 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 31 30
DKS-94 120.0 2.00 28.8 2.00 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 23 22
DKS-95 120.0 1.71 28.8 1.71 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 17 17
DKS-96 120.0 1.50 28.8 1.50 38.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 14 14
DKS-97 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 48.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 99 99
DKS-98 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 58.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 99 98
DKS-99 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 68.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 99 97
DKS-100 120.0 6.67 38.4 6.67 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 206 207DKS-101 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 138 141
DKS-102 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 104 104
DKS-103 120.0 2.86 38.4 2.86 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 60 63
DKS-104 120.0 2.40 38.4 2.40 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 45 48
DKS-105 120.0 2.00 38.4 2.00 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 34 36
DKS-106 120.0 1.71 38.4 1.71 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 27 27
DKS-107 120.0 1.50 38.4 1.50 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 22 22
DKS-108 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 28.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 126 129
DKS-111 120.0 6.67 38.4 6.67 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 182 187
DKS-112 120.0 6.67 38.4 9.34 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 181 187
DKS-113 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 120 122
DKS-115 120.0 5.00 38.4 6.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 120 122
DKS-116 120.0 4.00 38.4 2.40 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 86 87
DKS-117 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 87 87
DKS-118 120.0 3.33 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 66 67
DKS-119 120.0 3.33 38.4 2.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 67 67
DKS-120 120.0 2.86 38.4 2.29 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 53 53
DKS-121 120.0 2.86 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 53 53
DKS-122 120.0 2.40 38.4 2.40 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 42 41
DKS-123 120.0 2.00 38.4 2.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 32 32
DKS-124 120.0 1.71 38.4 1.71 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 26 26
DKS-125 120.0 1.50 38.4 1.50 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 21 21
DKS-126 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 48.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 119 119
DKS-127 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 58.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 118 117
DKS-128 120.0 5.00 48.0 4.00 18.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 159 164
DKS-129 120.0 5.00 48.0 4.00 28.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 144 150
DKS-130 120.0 6.67 48.0 6.67 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 203 218
DKS-131 120.0 5.00 48.0 4.00 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 135 142
DKS-132 120.0 4.00 48.0 4.00 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 98 101
DKS-133 120.0 3.33 48.0 3.33 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 76 77
DKS-134 120.0 2.86 48.0 2.86 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 61 62
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
5/17
4
Table 1 continued
Note: Numerical results are distinguished from test results by showing them on halftone backgrounds.
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKS-135 120.0 2.40 48.0 2.40 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 48 48
DKS-136 120.0 2.00 48.0 2.00 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 37 37
DKS-137 120.0 1.71 48.0 1.71 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 30 30
DKS-138 120.0 1.50 48.0 1.50 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 25 25
DKS-139 120.0 5.00 48.0 4.00 48.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 133 138
DKS-140 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 12.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 83 91
DKS-141 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 18.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 87 91
DKS-142 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 24.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 90 91
DKS-143 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 30.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 92 92
DKS-144 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 36.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 89 90
DKS-145 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 42.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 87 89
DKS-146 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 24.0 60.0 60.0 33.8 0 355 510 92 91
DKS-147 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 24.0 60.0 60.0 37.5 0 355 510 95 91DKS-148 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 24.0 60.0 60.0 41.3 0 355 510 99 91
DKS-149 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 24.0 60.0 60.0 45.0 0 355 510 103 91
DKS-150 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 31.2 60.0 60.0 33.8 0 355 510 90 92
DKS-151 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 38.8 60.0 60.0 37.5 0 355 510 87 90
DKS-152 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 46.1 60.0 60.0 41.3 0 355 510 85 88
DKS-153 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 53.3 60.0 60.0 45.0 0 355 510 81 85
DKS-154 120.0 5.00 33.6 4.00 18.0 28.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 127 134
DKS-155 120.0 5.00 33.6 4.00 28.0 28.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 117 123
DKS-156 120.0 5.00 33.6 4.00 38.0 28.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 112 116
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
6/17
5
Table 2 Screened database for KK-joints under anti-symmetrical loads.
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKA-1 216.6 4.30 77.7 3.90 84.8 33.8 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 404 515 -119 122
DKA-2 217.0 5.80 77.7 3.90 85.1 34.0 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 387 474 -186 194DKA-6 216.6 4.30 77.0 4.00 58.8 88.7 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 404 515 -126 121
DKA-7 216.1 5.80 77.0 4.00 58.5 88.3 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 374 472 -189 187
DKA-8 216.1 7.90 76.2 7.00 59.5 89.1 54.7 54.7 45.0 0 404 460 -311 320
DKA-10 215.9 4.40 101.7 5.20 52.4 7.1 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 388 470 -212 194
DKA-14 318.2 4.50 60.5 3.20 232.6 312.4 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 413 528 -108 108
DKA-15 318.2 4.50 139.8 4.50 120.5 285.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 413 528 -235 218
DKA-16 216.3 6.30 89.1 5.40 69.4 21.4 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 387 472 -270 289
DKA-17 216.3 6.30 75.7 5.40 71.4 41.9 49.1 49.1 30.0 0 387 472 -220 200
DKA-21 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 48.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -78 85
DKA-22 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 58.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -77 84
DKA-23 120.0 5.00 28.8 4.00 68.0 33.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -76 83
DKA-25 120.0 2.86 38.4 2.86 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -50 46
DKA-26 120.0 2.40 38.4 2.40 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -35 33
DKA-27 120.0 2.00 38.4 2.00 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -25 23
DKA-28 120.0 1.71 38.4 1.71 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -19 17
DKA-29 120.0 1.50 38.4 1.50 18.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -15 13
DKA-30 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 28.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -113 116
DKA-31 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -105 110
DKA-33 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -70 72
DKA-34 120.0 2.86 38.4 4.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -38 39
DKA-35 120.0 2.40 38.4 2.40 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -28 28
DKA-36 120.0 2.00 38.4 2.00 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -20 20
DKA-37 120.0 1.71 38.4 1.71 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -16 15
DKA-38 120.0 1.50 38.4 1.50 38.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -13 12
DKA-39 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 48.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -101 107
DKA-40 120.0 5.00 38.4 4.00 58.0 23.6 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -98 106
DKA-44 120.0 3.33 48.0 3.33 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -74 76
DKA-45 120.0 2.86 48.0 2.86 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -57 57
DKA-46 120.0 2.40 48.0 2.40 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -42 42
DKA-47 120.0 2.00 48.0 2.00 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -30 30
DKA-48 120.0 1.71 48.0 1.71 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -23 23
DKA-49 120.0 1.50 48.0 1.50 38.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -18 18DKA-51 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 24.0 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -75 75
DKA-52 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 38.8 60.0 60.0 37.5 0 355 510 -77 79
DKA-53 120.0 4.00 38.4 4.00 29.7 53.3 60.0 60.0 45.0 0 355 510 -80 81
DKA-54 120.0 2.86 48.0 2.86 18.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -68 68
DKA-55 120.0 2.86 48.0 2.86 28.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -59 59
DKA-56 120.0 2.86 48.0 2.86 48.0 13.4 60.0 60.0 30.0 0 355 510 -55 57
DKA-58 216.8 5.52 76.9 3.98 108.1 202.7 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 330 436 -223 181
DKA-59 216.3 5.84 114.4 4.49 54.5 183.5 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 367 474 -385 333
DKA-62 216.5 5.39 76.9 3.98 36.2 202.4 60.0 60.0 90.0 0 332 432 -190 178
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
7/17
6
Table 2 continued
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKA-63 216.5 6.32 76.3 4.03 36.9 202.6 60.0 60.0 90.0 0 369 504 -224 270
DKA-65 216.5 9.02 52.0 10.82 75.8 111.9 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -364 343
DKA-66 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 75.8 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -483 464
DKA-67 216.5 9.02 97.4 10.82 75.8 67.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -669 582
DKA-68 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 108.3 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -455 453
DKA-69 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 75.8 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -520 493
DKA-70 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 32.5 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -584 596
DKA-71 216.5 9.02 52.0 10.82 75.8 210.2 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -383 374
DKA-72 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 75.8 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -515 513
DKA-73 216.5 9.02 97.4 10.82 75.8 193.3 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -641 652
DKA-74 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 108.3 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -505 501
DKA-75 216.5 9.02 97.4 10.82 108.3 193.3 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -627 637
DKA-76 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 32.5 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -150 148DKA-77 216.5 4.33 52.0 5.20 75.8 111.9 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -98 97
DKA-78 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 75.8 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -130 132
DKA-79 216.5 4.33 97.4 5.20 75.8 67.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -172 165
DKA-80 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 108.3 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -127 132
DKA-81 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 32.5 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -157 157
DKA-82 216.5 4.33 52.0 5.20 75.8 174.3 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -103 103
DKA-83 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 75.8 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -145 140
DKA-84 216.5 4.33 97.4 5.20 75.8 141.3 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -182 177
DKA-85 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 108.3 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -141 140
DKA-86 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 32.5 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -155 163
DKA-87 216.5 4.33 52.0 5.20 75.8 210.2 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -103 106
DKA-88 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 75.8 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -144 146
DKA-89 216.5 4.33 97.4 5.20 75.8 193.3 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -184 185
DKA-90 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 108.3 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -140 146
DKA-91 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 32.5 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -66 62
DKA-92 216.5 2.71 52.0 3.25 75.8 111.9 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -44 44
DKA-93 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 75.8 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -61 60
DKA-94 216.5 2.71 97.4 3.25 75.8 67.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -72 75
DKA-95 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 108.3 89.8 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 389 540 -59 60
DKA-96 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 75.8 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -64 64
DKA-97 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 32.5 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -69 66
DKA-98 216.5 2.71 52.0 3.25 75.8 210.2 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -44 48
DKA-99 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 75.8 202.8 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -65 66
DKA-100 216.5 2.71 97.4 3.25 75.8 193.3 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 389 540 -84 84
DKA-101 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 108.3 158.4 45.0 45.0 67.5 0 389 540 -62 64
DKA-102 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 75.8 35.8 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 389 540 -453 480
DKA-103 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 75.8 126.5 45.0 45.0 56.3 0 389 540 -513 480
DKA-104 216.5 9.02 75.8 10.82 75.8 184.1 45.0 45.0 78.8 0 389 540 -515 505
DKA-105 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 75.8 35.8 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 389 540 -113 126
DKA-106 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 75.8 126.5 45.0 45.0 56.3 0 389 540 -141 136
DKA-107 216.5 4.33 75.8 5.20 75.8 184.1 45.0 45.0 78.8 0 389 540 -144 143
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
8/17
7
K-joints is given by Kurobanes formula (1984), which afforded the basis for the Cidect designequation. The Cidect design guide also utilizes the same format for design equations for multi-planar joints. Although Lee and Wilmshurst (1996, 1997) have already derived accurate strength
prediction equations for KK-joints independently of K-joint strength, the new formulae were de-vised following the above format. The reason for this is that one of the easiest ways to providedesign formulae for various multi-planar joints is to classify them into 3 large groups of uni-planarX, T and K-joints as shown in Fig. 1 (Vegtevan der 1996). The behavior of each multi-planar joint is similar to that of the uni-planarcounterpart and thus relatively simple correc-tion factors suffice for accurate prediction ofstrength of multi-planar joints. Furthermore,with this format, one can derive the most reli-able prediction equations from the smallest da-tabase.
3.2 KK-Joints under Symmetrical Axial Brace Loading
KK-joints under symmetrical loads dem-onstrate two types of failure mode dependingon the out-of-plane angle , as shown in Fig.2. Paul (1992) distinguished between thesetwo failure modes and devised two differentultimate strength equations for the two fail-ure modes. The first failure pattern, which is
called the failure Type 1, shows no local de-flection in the chord wall in the region be-tween the two compression braces. Namely,the two compression braces act as one mem-ber and penetrate the chord wall together. Thesecond failure pattern, which is called the fail-ure Type 2, shows radial deflection of thechord wall in the region between the compres-sion braces, eventually creating a fold betweenthem. The Type 1 failure mode occurs whenis small. As soon as the failure mode
changes from Type 1 to Type 2, the capacityof KK-joints suddenly changes.Finite element analysis results were
Fig. 2 Failure modes for KK-joints under symmetrical axial loads.
(b) Failure Type 2
(a) Failure Type 1
Table 2 continued
Note: Numerical results are distinguished from test results by showing them on halftone backgrounds.
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKA-108 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 75.8 35.8 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 389 540 -50 54
DKA-109 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 75.8 126.5 45.0 45.0 56.3 0 389 540 -65 62DKA-110 216.5 2.71 75.8 3.25 75.8 184.1 45.0 45.0 78.8 0 389 540 -64 65
DKA-111 216.1 6.40 140.3 4.60 16.5 165.1 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 342 485 -560 655
DKA-112 216.8 4.30 165.2 5.60 -17.0 140.1 45.0 45.0 90.0 0 379 474 -543 618
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
9/17
8
found to reproduce well the behavior ofKK-joints observed in tests. Accurate ul-timate capacity prediction equations haverecently been developed for KK-joints bycombining both test and FEA results (Leeet al. 1996, Kurobane et al. 1996) Of these,the following two equations are selectedand proposed herein.
When a Type 1 failure occurs(gt/d00.215), the ultimate strength of KK-
joints is predicted by
(1)
where
COV=0.0613.
When a Type 2 failure occurs (g t/d0>0.215), the capacity prediction equationis:
(2)where
COV=0.0752.
In the above equationsN1u,KandN1u,KKdenotesultimate strength of K and KK-joints, respec-tively, given in terms of the maximum load inthe compression brace. The right-hand sidesof these equations signify the correction fac-tors.
The border between Type 1 and 2 failuremodes is at gt/d0=0.215 according to Lee et al.(1996). The correction factors given by Eqs. 1
and 2 become discontinuous at the border. Thecorrection factors when 2=20, 40 and 80 areplotted against gt/d0in Fig. 3. Numerical re-sults, classified into 2 groups according to 2,are compared with the correction factors asshown in Fig. 3. Test results are not includedhere because they scatter more than numericalresults, although both have about the samemean values. Figure 3 shows how abruptlythe capacity changes when failure mode var-ies from Type 1 to Type 2. Predicted ultimate
strengths are shown in Table 1. Ratios of testand analysis results to predictions are plottedagainst 2in Fig. 4. In the same figure are
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 20 40 60 80
2
test/prediction
AWSFORMULA
Eqs. 1 & 2
AWS MEAN
N1u,KKN1u,K
= 0.254 (2)0.376
N1u,KKN1u,K
= 0.438 (1 +0.833) (10.340gtd0
) (2)0.176
Fig. 4 Ratios of Test and analysis results to predictions plotted against 2 (symmetrical axial loading).
Fig. 3 Correction factors plotted against gt/d0 (symmetrical axial loading).
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0 0.2 0.4 0.6
gt/d0
correctionf
actor
2=18-362=42-80
2=80
2=40
2=20
0.215
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
10/17
9
also plotted the predictions according to theAWS formula, which will be discussed inlater part of this report.
3.3 KK-Joints under Anti-Symmetrical Axial Brace Loading
KK-joints under anti-symmetricalloads also show two failure types. When gt/d0is small, the axial loads in the braces aretransmitted directly through the transversegap regions of the chord walls. When gt/d0becomes large, KK-joints behave moreclearly as two independent K-joints (See Fig.5). These two failure types are designated asTypes 3 and 4 respectively. The ultimatestrength equations for KK-joints under anti-symmetrical axial loads were derived following thesame procedures as those for KK-joints under symmetrical axial loads. The two simple prediction
equations shown by Eqs. 3 and 4 are herein proposed.When a Type 3 failure occurs (gt/d00.215), the ultimate strength of KK-joints is predicted
by
(3)
where
COV=0.0622.
N1u,KKN1u,K
= 1.222.36gtd0
Fig. 6 Correction factors plotted against gt/d0(anti-symmetrical axial loading).
Fig. 5 Failure modes for KK-joints under anti- symmetrical axial loads.
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
corr
ection
factor
2=24-30
2=50-80
2=80
2=40
2=20
2=24-80
0.215
gt/d0
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
11/17
10
When a Type 4 failure occurs (gt/d0>0.215), the capacity prediction equation is:
(4)
where
COV=0.0663.
The correction factors are again com-pared with numerical results in Fig. 6. Pre-dicted ultimate strengths are shown in Table2. Ratios of test and analysis results to pre-dictions are plotted against 2in Fig. 7.
3.4 Further Assessment of Prediction Equa- tions
The ranges of variation of importantgeometrical variables included in the screeneddatabase are:
0.22 0.4718 280
0.03 gt/d00.9945190
602180
The COVs of observed strengths aboutthe mean strength equations (Eqs. 1, 2, 3 and4) are even smaller than COV=0.101 foundin K-joints. Therefore, resistance factors to be used for the design of KK-joints may not need to besmaller than that used for design equations for K-joints.
All the test and finite element analysis results (both under symmetrical and anti-symmetricalloading) are plotted overall against corresponding predictions in Fig. 8. Correlation between thetwo looks excellent. The test or analysis result to prediction ratios give the following statistics:
Data Source Mean Sample Standard Deviation
Test 1.016 0.099FE Analysis 0.997 0.047
No significant difference exists between the means of test and analysis results, while the standarddeviation of analysis to prediction ratios is significantly smaller than that of test to prediction ra-tios.
Test and numerical results divided simply by corresponding K-joint capacities give the fol-lowing statistics.
Data Source Mean Sample Standard DeviationKK-Joint under symmetrical axial loads 0.955 0.137
KK-Joint under anti-symmetrical axial loads 0.887 0.115
The above results demonstrate that the current Cidect design equations for KK-joints, which speci-
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2.0
0 20 40 60 80
2
test/prediction
AWSFORMULA
Eqs. 3 & 4
AWS MEAN
N1u,KKN1u,K
= 0.376 (1 +1.05) (1 + 0.221gtd0
) (2)0.112
Fig. 7 Ratios of Test and analysis results to predictions plotted against 2(anti- symmetrical axial loading).
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
12/17
11
fies a constant value of 0.9 as the correc-tion factor, are found still reasonable, al-though less accurate than Eqs. 1, 2, 3 and4.
4. KK-JOINTS IN TRIANGULAR TRUSSES
Lets assume a triangular truss (aninverted delta truss) with 3 chords asshown in Fig. 9. Under the vertical shearload V, the KK-joint sustains axial braceloads symmetrical about the vertical sys-tem plane. Under the horizontal shear load
Hthe KK-joint sustains axial brace loadsanti-symmetrical about the vertical systemplane. The strength of KK-joints under the
shear load Qwith an inclination of canbe predicted by using the following inter-polation technique. When=, the bracesin one plane carry the shear load and thebraces in the other plane are free from anyaxial load. The strength of KK-joints with =can be given as that of planar K-joints. Thestrength of general KK-joints can be represented by straight lines linking the points at =0(sym-metrical load), =(uni-planar K-joint) and =90(anti-symmetrical load).
An example calculation is made in the following. Assume KK-joints with d0=300mm,t0=10mm, d1=d2=100mm, and 1=2=60. All the member axes are assumed to meet at one point(no eccentricity in the joint). Then the longitudinal gap is calculated as g=57.7 mm. The materialproperties of the chord is assumed asF
y=350 kN/mm2andF
u=500 kN/mm2. The ultimate strength
of a uni-planar K-joint included in these KK-joints is calculated asN1u,K=656 kN from Kurobanesformula. Now, the out-of-plane angle 2of KK-joints is varied as 30, 60, 90, 120and 180.The nondimensionalized transverse gap gt/d0is calculated by:
(5)
The above equation is valid when the eccentricity et=0 (See Makino et al. 1996). Although, insome of the joints included in Tables 1 and 2, etis not equal to zero, it is better to design joints withet=0 in practice. This is to avoid complicating fabrication processes.
The strengths of example KK-joints can be calculated by Eqs. 1. 2, 3 and 4 as follows:
2 (degrees) gt/d0 2 Failure Type Correction Factor Ultimate Strength (kN)
30 0.33 -0.08 30 1 0.912 599
Symmetrical 60 0.33 0.18 30 1 0.912 599
Loads 90 0.33 0.43 30 2 0.869 570
120 0.33 0.65 30 2 0.793 521
180 0.33 0.94 30 2 0.692 454
30 0.33 -0.08 30 3 1.404 921
Anti-Symmetrical 60 0.33 0.18 30 3 0.789 518
Loads 90 0.33 0.43 30 4 0.814 534120 0.33 0.65 30 4 0.850 557
180 0.33 0.94 30 4 0.898 589
gtd0
= sin (sin1)
Fig. 8 Test and analysis results compared with predictions for all KK-joints.
TEST AND FEA RESULTS(KN)
PREDICTION(KN)
10
100
1000
10 100 1000
FEA
TEST
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
13/17
12
The ultimate shear loads can be calcu-
lated by the following equations:Under a symmetrical shear load,
(6)
When =,
(7)
Under an anti-symmetrical shear load,
(8)
Figure 10 illustrates how ultimateshear loads vary with the direction ofshear load.
5. COMPARISON WITH MOUTY AND RONDALS TEST RESULTS
Results of the test by Mouty
and Rondal (1992) and predictedstrengths are shown in Table 3. Thespecimens that failed by chord wallplastification only are selected. Testto prediction ratios are plotted againstgt/d0and compared with the databaseincluded in Table 1. As seen in thisfigure the Mouty and Rondal test re-sults show not only significantlylower strengths than the other test andnumerical results but also a tendency
to decrease the strength as gt/d0in-creases.It is suspected that in the tests
CL
V
H
Q
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
1.2
-0.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6
gt/ d0
test/p
rediction
Mouty and Rondal
Database in Table 1
Fig. 9 Cross section of triangular truss.
Fig. 11 Mouty and Rondals test results compared with database included in Table 1.
Fig. 10 Strength of KK-joints under shear load in general.
V= 2N1u,KKsin 1cos
H= 2N1u,KK
sin 1
sin
Qmax
(kN)
(degree)
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
0 20 40 60 80 100
2=30
2=60
2=90
2=120
2=180
Q=N1u,Ksin 1
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
14/17
13
by Mouty and Rondal the whole loading system became instable as local stiffness of joints decayeddue to plastification of the tube walls. If this was the case, ultimate loads were determined by thestiffness of joints rather than by plastic shell bending capacity of the chord wall. Further, jointssustained not only axial loads but also primary bending moments due to eccentricity in joints in-duced by rigid body rotations of the chords. Thus, strengths of joints could have been lower thanthose observed in the tests conducted under axial brace loading conditions (See also Kurobane1993).
6. COMPARISON WITH AWS EQUATIONS
The AWS code (1996) is one code that shows definite design criteria for multi-planar tubularjoints. The AWS design equation is the only exception that proposes general design criteria appli-cable to any type of non-overlapping multi-planar joints without a need of joint classification. It isworth while comparing the AWS equation with the present database.
The AWS equation in ultimate strength format is shown as :
(9)
with
Pu = 61.7 +
0.18
Q0.7(1)
Q fyt0
2
sin
= 1 + 0.7
Psincos 2exp ( z0.6
)all bracesat a joint
Psin reference brace forwhichapplies
Data No. d0 t 0 d1 t 1 g g t 1 2 n 0 F y F u N 1u,KK Prediction
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (mm) (deg) (deg) (deg) (MPa) (MPa) (kN) (kN)
DKS-43 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 71.4 23.7 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 .00 322 451 151 183
DKS-48 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 24.9 58.5 60.0 60.0 45.0 0 .00 353 494 131 217DKS-55 139.7 6 .30 76.1 4.00 32.1 -7.3 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 .00 342 479 279 297
DKS-56 139.7 6 .30 76.1 4.00 32.1 29.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 0 .00 323 452 215 280
DKS-59 139.7 6.30 76.1 4.00 -7.2 -7.3 60.0 60.0 30.0 0.00 341 477 285 334
DKS-60 139.7 6 .30 76.1 4.00 -7.2 29.0 60.0 60.0 45.0 0 .00 341 477 258 334
DKS-61 139.7 4.00 48.3 3.20 71.4 23.7 45.0 45.0 30.0 0.00 322 451 80 96
DKS-62 139.7 4.00 33.7 2.60 92.0 38.6 45.0 45.0 30.0 0.00 322 451 50 71
DKS-63 139.7 4 .00 76.1 4.00 32.1 -7.3 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 .00 320 448 110 140
DKS-67 88.9 4.00 33.7 2.60 41.2 11.9 45.0 45.0 30.0 0.00 320 448 68 79
DKS-68 219.1 6 .30 76.1 4.00 111.5 36.8 45.0 45.0 30.0 0 .00 331 463 170 244
DKS-69 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 71.4 23.7 45.0 45.0 30.0 -0.11 322 451 152 176
DKS-71 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 71.4 23.7 45.0 45.0 30.0 -0.19 322 451 117 171DKS-72 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 71.4 58.5 45.0 45.0 45.0 -0.11 367 514 121 206
DKS-73 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 71.4 58.5 45.0 45.0 45.0 -0.15 367 514 123 202
DKS-74 139.7 6 .30 48.3 3.20 71.4 58.5 45.0 45.0 45.0 -0.19 367 514 117 199
Table 3 Summary of test by Mouty and Rondal (1992).
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
15/17
14
where
The parameter in the above equation plays a role of incorporating not only a multi-planar effectdue to chord wall overlizing (circumferential bending) but also a membrane shell effect due toloads at positionsLdistant from the reference brace. The value of is evaluated separately foreach brace for which the ultimate limit state capacity is checked (the reference brace), with thesummation being taken over all braces present at the node for each load case. The spacingLismeasured longitudinally between the centers of foot prints of two braces. The symbols and inthe above equation, respectively, are equivalent to 2and according to the definition in Appen-dix.
Multiple regression analyses on both numerical and test results showed that: the multi-planareffect due to chord ovalizing was strongly correlated with geometrical variable gt/d0; and it wasdifficult to relate the multi-planar effect with only. Therefore, the AWS equations involve sig-nificant errors in the evaluation of the multi-planar effects, especially when 2=180in anti-sym-metrical loading. However, these errors due to inappropriate modeling of multi-planar effects areeven less influential as compared with systematic errors due to thickness squared strength formula-
tion in the AWS equations.Test and numerical results divided by AWS predictions are plotted against 2in Figs. 4 and 7.
These figures reveal that AWS predictions not only scatter widely but also shows a systematiccomponent erring on the unsafe side as 2decreases. Note that the AWS formula give lower boundpredictions, with the mean equal to 1/0.74 (See AWS D1.1 Commentary 2.40.1.1). The systematiccomponent is even steeper for KK-joints than for K-joints (See Kurobane et al. 1997); the capacityof KK-connections actually varies as the 1.3 to 1.7 power of thickness.
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Ultimate strength equations for KK-joints under both symmetrical and anti-symmetrical axialbrace loading were derived from a large database consisting of experimental and numerical results.These equations have a format of ultimate strength of planar K-joints multiplied by a correctionfactor. The correction factors proposed herein are simple functions of geometrical variables butenable prediction of ultimate strength with good accuracy (COV=0.06-0.08). The database coversa wide range of geometrical variables. These equations therefore are considered to be readilyapplicable to design. The resistance factor and range of application to be assumed for design,however, should be decided with some other engineering judgments. For example, KK-joints witha too small transverse gap size may sustain premature development of cracks at the weld toes underanti-symmetrical loading (See Makino et al. 1997).
Mouty and Rondals test results showed significantly lower strengths than the other experi-mental and numerical results, probably because their loading system allowed a rigid body motion
of the chord. Since in actual trusses the chord ends are restrained by neighboring braces, Moutyand Rondals test results are not considered to be reproducing the behavior of KK-joints in a truss.Although the AWS design formula is unique in its capability to automatically evaluate the strengthof any multi-planar joints, accuracy in prediction was found to be insufficient (COV=0.28). Espe-cially the AWS formula errs on the unsafe side as the chord becomes heavier.
REFERENCES
AWS (1996) Structural welding code/steel. ANSI/AWS D1.1, American Welding Society, Miami,Fla., USA
Kurobane, Y., Makino, Y. & Ochi, K. (1984) Ultimate resistance of unstiffened tubular joints.J.Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 110(2), 385-400Kurobane, Y. (1993) Assessment of double K-joint tests by Mouty and Rondal.IIW Doc. XV-E-93-
z=L/ d0t0/2
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
16/17
15
194, Kumamoto Univ., Kumamoto, JapanKurobane, Y., Makino, Y. & Ochi, K. (1996) Analysis of existing and forth coming data for multi-
planar KK-joints with Circular hollow sections. Cidect Report 5BF-11-96Kurobane, Y. & Ochi, K (1997) AWS vs international design rules for circular tubular K-connec-
tions.Engineering Structures, 19(3), 259-266Lee, M.M.K. & Wilmshurst, S.R. (1996) A parametric study of strength of tubular multiplanar KK-
joints.J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 122(8), 893-904.Lee, M.M.K. & Wilmshurst, S.R. (1997) Strength of multiplanar KK-joint under anti-symmetrical
loading.J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 123(6), 755-764.Makino, Y., Kurobane, Y. & Ochi, K. (1984) Ultimate capacity of tubular double K-joints.Proc.
Int. Conf. IIW on Welding of Tubular Structures, Pergamon, New York, N.Y., 451-458Makino, Y., & Kurobane, Y. (1994) Tests on CHS KK-joints under anti-symmetrical loads. Tubu-
lar Structures VI, Grundy, Holgate and Wong eds., A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands,449-456
Makino, Y., Kurobane, Y., Ochi, K., Vegte van der, G.J, & Wilmshurst, S. (1996), Database of Testand numerical analysis results for unstiffened tubular joints.IIW Doc. XV-E-96-220, KumamotoUniv., Kumamoto
Makino, Y., Wilmshurst, S., Lee, M.M.K. & Kurobane, Y. (1997) Test and numerical analysis re-
sults for CHS KK-joints under anti-symmetrical axial brace loads. Memoirs, Fac. Eng.,Kumamoto Univ., Kumamoto, Japan
Mouty, J & Rondal, J. (1992) Study of the behaviour under static loads of welded triangular andrectangular lattice girders made with circular hollow sections. Cidect Report 5AS-92/1
Paul, J.C. (1992), The ultimate behavior of multiplanar TT and KK-joints made of circular hollowsections. Ph. D. Thesis, Kumamoto Univ., Kumamoto, Japan
Paul, J.C., Y. Makino & Y. Kurobane (1994), Ultimate resistance of unstiffened multi-planar tubu-
lar TT and KK-joints.J. Struct. Engrg., ASCE, 120(10), 2853-2870Vegte van der, J.G. (1995) The static strength of uniplanar and multiplanar tubular T- and X-joints,
Ph. D. Thesis, 1995, Delft University Press, Delft, NetherlandsWardenier, J., Kurobane, Y., Packer, J.A., Dutta, D. & Yoemans, N. (1991)Design guide for circu-
lar hollow section (CHS) joints under predominantly static loading, Cidect ed., Verlag TVRheinland GmbH, Kln, GermanyWilmshurst, S.R., Makino, Y. & Kurobane, Y., (1997), Further numerical analyses of KK-joints
under anti-symmetrical axial loading,Proc. 7th Int. Offshore and Polar Eng. Conf.Hawaii,USA, pp. 58-64
Yonemura, H., Makino, Y., Kurobane, Y. & Vegte van der, G.J. (1996) Tests on CHS Plane KK-joints under anti-symmetrical loads. Tubular Structures VII, Farkas and Karoly, eds., A.A.Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, 189-195
APPENDIX Notation
0,1,2 = subscripts signifying chord, compression brace and tension brace respectivelyCOV = coefficient of variationd = outside diameter of tubeset = eccentricity between intersection of brace axes and chord center
Fy = yield strength of chord materialFu = ultimate tensile strength of chord materialg = longitudinal gap in K or KK-jointgt = transverse gap in KK-joint
H = horizontal shear load applied to KK-joint
L = longitudinal distance between foot prints of two bracesN1u,K = ultimate strength of K-joint given in terms of axial load on compression brace
N1u,KK = ultimate strength of KK-joint given in terms of axial load on compression bracen0 = axial to yield stress ratio in chord
-
8/12/2019 CIDECT 5BF-10_98.pdf
17/17
Pu = ultimate strength of tubular joints according to AWS CodeQ = shear load applied to KK-jointQf, Q = functions of explaining variables in AWS equationst = wall thickness of tubesV = vertical shear load applied to KK-joint = chord ovalizing parameter = d1/d0: diameter ratio = d0/(2t0): chord thinness ratio = inplane angle between chord and braces = out-of-plane angle between planes in which braces lie = angle between direction of shear load and vertical plane
SYSTEMPLANE
d1
t1
1
gtg
L
d0t0
N1
gtet