Design Example for Beams with Web Openings

R I C H A R D L. KUSSMAN AND P E T E R B. COOPER

D U E T O the increasing cost of energy and the difficuhy of branching out at right angles. For both architectural and
obtaining raw materials, economy has a high priority in all aesthetic reasons it is undesirable to run the H V A C system
aspects of design. In the design of multistory steel buildings, below the floor members, so they must penetrate them. It
savings can be realized by passing ductwork for heating, is also desirable to keep the H V A C system on a level plane,
ventilation, and air conditioning systems through steel floor thereby reducing installation costs by decreasing the
beams, rather than under them. Not only does this practice number of bends in the duct material. It is necessary to
save in the overall height of the structure, along with all the provide a duct area of 144 sq. in. with l-in.-thick insulation
related benefits in material savings, but it also saves in the on all sides. Vertical positioning of the ducts used in this
cost of heating and air conditioning by enclosing less volume example are shown in Fig. 2. T h e corner radius was de-
to be heated or cooled. Eccentric openings are of special termined from recommendations for members subjected to
interest because not all floor beams and girders are of the fatigue loadings.^ While structures designed by plastic
same depth at any given level. It is desirable to keep the methods are not subject to fatigue situations, these guide-
ductwork on a relatively level plane to cut down on the cost lines were used to provide a reasonable basis for deter-
of fabricating bends. It is doubtful that it costs any more to mining the corner radii of web openings. It is also possible
fabricate an eccentric opening in a steel beam than it does that a slightly smaller opening could have been used to
to fabricate a concentric opening. T h u s , even more savings accommodate the duct. T h e use of a smaller opening might,
can be realized by using the eccentric opening. T h e addition however, cause problems in the installation of the duct
of reinforcement is also sometimes desirable so that a insulation and thereby increase costs. A liberal clearance
heavier section is not required because of the opening. was therefore provided in this example.
Design formulas have been developed for beams with T h e floor system is to be designed to carry a live load of
concentric and eccentric web openings, both unreinforced 100 psf^ and a dead load of 80 psf (50 psf for the concrete
and reinforced;^ the purpose of this paper is to illustrate the slab and 30 psf for other dead loads). Using A36 steel and
application of these formulas in a typical design prob- the AISC Specification"^ for plastic design, along with
lem. current research results, the locations where openings can
be placed along the length of the floor beams and girders
PROBLEM STATEMENT will be explored with the opening reinforcement varying
as follows: (1) no opening reinforcement is provided, (2)
A portion of the floor system supporting a concourse in a
multistory building is shown in Fig. 1. T h e floor system
consists of girders spanning from column to column, with
floor beams supported by the girders. T h e floor beams and
girders support a 4-in. concrete slab, which in turn provides
continuous lateral support to the top flanges of the floor ink
members. M o m e n t connections are provided between the
columns and girders; therefore, the girder ends are assumed GIRDER- BEAMS- GIRDERzJ
to be fixed. It is further assumed that the columns are W14
sections and that the girder span is taken from column face
1^
to column face. T h e floor beams are attached to the girders
d
with shear connections; simple supports are therefore as- II

sumed. For architectural reasons the floor beams are lim- "cJ
ited to a 21-in. depth.
T h e heating, ventilation, and air conditioning ( H V A C ) rol

ducts r u n parallel to the girders, with service ducts BEAMS

Richard L. Kussman is Graduate Research Assistant, Dept. of

Civil Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kans.
Ui
k- 35'-0"
Peter B. Cooper is Professor of Civil Engineering, Dept. of Civil
Engineering, Kansas State University, Manhattan, Kans.
Fig. 7. Plan view offloor system

48
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 INSULATION i^lNSULATION

s DUCT t?
S
DUCT
r?

W2IX82

(a) Floor beam elevation at opening

Figure 2
W27X 8 4

(b) Girder elevation at opening

enough reinforcement is supplied to resist the maximum Calculation of Internal Beam Forces—The internal
shear force in the beam, and (3) the minimum reinforce- beam forces are described by the two expressions below,
ment required to develop the shear strength of the section based on Fig. 3. These forces are plotted in Fig. 4 along
is furnished. with the interaction diagrams for the floor beams.

FLOOR BEAMS V 64.2 - 3.67A:

V, 206
Selection of Beam Section
Uniformly Distributed Load: M _ 64.2^ - 1.84A:^
w = (1.7)(12)(0.10 + 0.08) = 3.67 kips/ft M. 576
Design Moment: Opening Locations for A^. = 0—Calculate the interaction
M = (3.67)(35)V8 = 562 kip-ft diagram coordinates, using formulas presented in the
Required Plastic Section Modulus: Appendix, with Ar = e = 0:
Z = (562)(12)/36 = 187in.3
Try W21 X 82 (Z = 192 in.^ > 187 in.^): \ 1 6 / V 9.5 / V 20.86/
Design Shear:
V = (3.67)(35)/2 = 64.2 kips 10.4 [/^ 12 \ 2 1 1i/2
Plastic Shear Force:
Vp = (0.55)(36)(20.86)(0.499)
= 206 kips > 64.2 kips
1 +
104 n _ / 1 yl
Use W21 X 82 7.12 [ 4 \20.86/ J
= 0.911
Properties for Investigating Local Strength 10.4
1 +
at the Opening (4)(7.12)
Opening Parameters:
h = 6 in.; a = 9.5 in.; e =0 /M_ 1 - 0.288
= 0.522
) , - 10.4
Cross Section Properties: 1 +
Af = (8.962)(0.795) = 7.12in.2 (4)(7.12)
A^ = (20.86)(0.499) = 10.4 in.2
Reference Values:
Mp= (192)(36)/12 = 576 kip-ft \VpJ\ LV2 20.86/ VlO.4/ ^ J
Vp = 206 kips (see above) = 0.158

49
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
 3.67 k/ft
\l/ \L \b \U si/ \1/ \]/ \1/ \]/
Vm, 77m,
NO OPENINGS ALLOWED
35'

17.5'
(a) Ar = 0

64.2 k

nz] nu
-64.2 k

Tt
10.5"
10.2'

(b)Ar= 1.26 in.^ i

zz\ 1
Fig. 3. Floor beam loading, shear, and moment diagrams
10.5 ^ 16,6; 'y\

'-1 {c)Ar = 2.81 in.^

Fig. 5. Permissible opening locations for floor beams

LU T h e above coordinates are plotted to form the approxi-

mate interaction diagram shown in Fig. 4 for A^ = 0. As
0.9
INTERNAL BEAM FORCES shown schematically in Fig. 5 and graphically in Fig. 4,
there are no positions along the beam where the opening
can be placed for A^. = 0. This is because all the points on
0.8 - \ \\ \ the internal beam force curve lie outside the failure envelope
for Ar = 0.

0.7
\ \\ \ Opening Locations for A^. Large Enough to Accom-
modate M a x i m u m Beam Shear—The following qua-
dratic equation in Ar is obtained from the generalized
0.6
\ \ \ \ equation for {V/Vp)\ presented in the Appendix, with Ar
— \^r Jmin '

Mp
- AAr^ -{- BAr-^ C=0
where
0.4 - ^ A r = 2.81 in.2
16a
A =
Ar = 0 2 ^ ^ A r = 1 . 2 > in.^ AJ{\ + a)
0.3
1/2

0.2 - ( l + a M ^ LV d) \Vp) J

0.1 ' \~~d) Vl -Va) ~ \V~J

Calculation of v4^:
1 1 i\ 1 1 1
0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 VmaJVp = 0.312
V
(16)(0.163)
A = = 0.0207
Fig. 4. Floor beam interaction diagrams (10.4)2(1.163)

50

ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION

 (8)(0.163) [-/ 12 \ 2 ,„,._]i/2 Opening Locations for {Ar)niin
^ " (1.163X10.4) L O " ^ -(0.312)2J _ (9.5)(0.499) _ 2
{A)mm -7= = 2.74 m.^
= 0.0311

0721 Use l-Bar 3 % X % a b o v e and b e l o w t h e o p e n i n g o n

V 20.86/ 1.163) ^ ' o n e side only.
{Ar = 2.81 in.2 > 2 7 4 in.2; ^y^^ = 5 0 < g.S)
-B ± VB^ - 4AC
Ar = - Calculation of interaction diagram coordinates using for-
2A mulas given in the Appendix with e = 0, Ar = 2.81 in.2:
- 0 . 0 3 1 1 ± \/(0.0311)2 - (4)(0.0207)(-0.072T) 2.81 / 12 \ 104 n _ / 6 \2"]
(2)(0.0207) 1 +
7.12 \ 2 0 . 8 6 / 7.12 [ 4 \20.86/ J
= 1.26 in.2
10.4
1 +
(4)(7.12)
Use l-Bar 3 X Vig above and below the opening on
= 1.08
one side only.
{Ar= 1.31 i n . 2 > 1.26 in. 2- br/tr = 6.9 < 8.5) 2.74
1 -
/ M 7.12
Calculation of interaction diagram coordinates using for- = 0.451
mulas given in the Appendix with A^ = 1.26 in.2, <? = 0: 10.4
1 +
(4)(7.12)
_ (2)(0.163) /1.26N
/1.26\ 10.4
Note that in the above calculation for (M/Mp)\, the
1.163 \7.12/ (2)(7.12)
calculated value of {Ar)min was used in place of the
r A _ 12 \ 2 _ J (16)(0.163) / 1 . 2 6 \ 2 l 1/2 area of the bar chosen. This is because Ar is subtracted
L\ 20.86/ 1.163 (1.163)2 \-^Q^) J from one in this equation, and logic tells us that more
reinforcement must increase the load carrying capacity
= 0.210
of a member, not decrease it. Therefore, the {Ar)min
value calculated as above should be used to prevent
1.26/ 12 \ 1(14 n _ / 6 \2"1
1 + overly conservative results.
/M\ _ 77.I2V2O.86/ 7.12 [ 4 \20.86/ J
VMJO" 10.4
1 +
(4)(7.12)
These coordinates are plotted on Fig. 4 to form the out-
= 0.986 side interaction diagram. With the reinforcing area set at
{^r)min, the Opening can be placed anywhere along the
beam as shown in Fig. 5.
1 _ L 2 6 _ 0.210
/M\ 7.12
= 0.449 GIRDERS
VM^/i 10.4
1 + (4)(7.12) Selection of G i r d e r Section
Load:
6 1/2 P = (3.67)(35) = 128 kips
(i),=4a-i^)^-e)^<-»>^]
^p/\ L\2 20.86 Design Moment:
M = (128)(11.4)/2 = 730kip-ft
= 0.313
Required Plastic Section Modulus:
These coordinates are plotted in Fig. 4 to describe the Z = (730)(12)/36 = 243in.3
center interaction diagram. It should be noted that the
T r y W27 X 84 (Z = 244 in.^ > 243 in.^)
m a x i m u m shear in the beam is just within the failure en-
velope of the diagram, as shown by the point on the internal Design Shear:
beam force curve corresponding to M/Mp equals zero. In V= 128 kips
the regions of higher moment, part of the internal beam
force curve falls outside the envelope, indicating that the Plastic Shear Force:
opening should not be placed in the areas shown in Fig. 5 Vp = (0.55)(36)(0.463)(26.69) = 245 > 128 kips
w i t h ^ ^ = 1.26 in.2 Use W27 X 84

51
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
Properties for Investigating Local Strength 128.4 k 128.4 k
at the Opening

Opening Parameters:
11.4" 12' 11.4'
/z = 6 in.; a = 9.5 in.; ^ = 3 in.
Cross Section Properties:
Af = (9.963)(0.636) = 6.34 in.2
A^, = (0.463)(26.69) = 12.4 in.2
Reference Values: 128.4 k
Mp = (244)(36)/12 = 732 kip-ft
Vp = 245 kips (see above)
-128.4 k

Calculation of Internal Beam Forces—The internal

beam forces form a discontinuous curve described by the
expressions below^, based on Fig. 6, w^ith the appropriate
limits. This curve is shown in Fig. 7.
128
= 0.522
245
Limits: 0 < x < 11.4 ft
M - 7 3 0 + 128x1 -770 kft

732 Fig. 6. Girder loading, shear, and moment diagrams

V
= 0
] Limits: 11.4ft < x < 17.4ft
M
= 0.997
M.
wrhere x is taken to be positive from the column face toward
midspan.

Opening Locations for A^. = 0—Calculation of interac-

tion diagram coordinates using formulas presented in the
Appendix with Ar = 0^ e = 3 in.:

3 /26.69\2 / 12

3 /2_6.69\2
26.69

12
26.69
r=»-
66 _ \ 2 _
157

0.889
26.69 26 .69/
12.4 [ / , 12 + 6\2 1 11/2
0T =
(2)(6.34) ( 1 ) =0.296
LV 26.69/ 1.157 J
12.4 f/i 12-6\2 1 11/2
13B =
(2)(6.34)LV 26.69/ 1.889 J ~

t +12.41-1 (6)2 + (2)(6)(3)]

/ M\ 6.34L4 (26.69)2 J
VMJO = 0.867
12.4
1 + (4)(6.34)

/_M 1 -0.552
)r 12.4
= 0.301
1 + (4)(6.34)
Fig. 7. Girder interaction diagrams

52
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 /2 the vertical leg of the interaction diagram for Ar — 0. This
t),=[(i-l^)^-0^»H'
= 0.060
indicates that a relatively large area of reinforcement is
required to include these points in the failure envelope.
After some preliminary trials, try Ar = 1.88 in.^
1/2
Use 1-Bar 3 X % above and below the opening on one
side only.
= 0.266 {Ar = 1.88 in.2; br/tr = 4.8 < 8.5)
Calculation of interaction diagram coordinates using for-
0.060 + 0.266 = 0.326 mulas presented in the Appendix with Ar = 1.88 in.2, e =
3 in.:
The above coordinates are plotted to form the approxi-
mate interaction diagram shown in Fig. 7 for Ar = 0. _ ( 2 X 0 1 5 7 )/1.88\
/!. 12.4
PT — — X
There are no positions along the beam where the opening V6.34/ (2)(6.34)
1.157
can be placed for the case where Ar = 0, since all points on ["/ 12 + 6\2 1 (16)(0.157)(1.88)21i / 2
the internal beam force curve lie outside the failure enve- L\ 2 6 . 6 9 / 1.157 (1.157)2(12.4)2 J
lope, as shown in Fig. 5.
= 0.135
Opening Locations for A^- Large Enough to Accom-
modate Maximum Beam Shear—To determine the (2)(0.889) /1.88\ , 12.4
reinforcing area required to reach the maximum beam &=—^(-l+^^^^x 1.889 V6.34/
shear, a trial and error process is used, since the equations
for eccentric web openings become quite unwieldy when I"/ 12-6\2 1 16(0.889) /1.88\2"| 1/2
the Ar term is isolated. L\ 2 6 . 6 9 / 1.889 (1.889)2 1,12.4/ J
A brief examination of Fig. 7 will show that the V/Vp = 0.186
values for the shear spans are a fairly large distance from
1.88 //_12_X
12
/ M\ ^ 6.34V26.69/
FL.BM. GIRDER \Mp/o _ . 12.4
COL. FACE
TMOC
1+
(4)(6.34)
12.4 n (6)2 + (2)(6)(3) - (3)2 (0.463)(3)2
NO OPENINGS ALLOWED
j 6.34 [ 4 (26.69)2 (3.463)(26.69> ]
12.4
M.4' 1+
^ 174;
(4)(6.34)
^—1

{a) Ar = 0 = 0.971

1.^
1 0.186
[ZD nn M \ 6.34 = 0.348
4 \MJX
p/ i 12.4
'^ 1+
(4)(6.34)
-^13.5"
1L ^ ^ 1/2

(f:),=[G-ii^)^-e)'<»'H
= 0.147

nil d ] /2

13^' 4.9'
© , = [(i-i^)^-(Tli)^»-)^]'
k-13.5"
1 9.4' 0.376

Fig. 8. Permissible opening locations for girders © . - • 147 + 0.376 = 0.523

53
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
{y/Vp)\ is greater than the m a x i m u m V/Vp ratio in the points on the internal beam force curve. However, it
girders (0.522); therefore, the trial Ar is o.k. would be uneconomical to try to include additional posi-
T h e above coordinates are plotted in Fig. 7 to describe tions along the beam, since little is gained for a signifi-
the interaction diagram for Ar = 1.88 in.^ It should be noted cant increase in Ar.
that, while the maximum shear alone and shear along with
low moment are within the failure envelope, as the moment SUMMARY AND DESIGN DETAILS
increases some regions of the girder cannot accommodate
T h e possible opening locations for the beams and gird-
the opening, as shown in Fig. 8.
ers are summarized in Figs. 5 and 8, respectively. T h e
positions where openings can be placed are obtained
O p e n i n g locations for {Ar)inin graphically from Figs. 4 and 7, noting that where the in-
ternal beam forces fall inside the failure envelope, an
_ (9.5)(0.463) _ , 2 opening can be placed. On the interaction diagram for
{Ar)min = "7= = 2.54 m.^ the floor beams. Fig. 4, it can be seen that if Ar were re-
duced from {Ar)min^ the sloping portion of the diagram
Use 1-Bar 3^l2 X % a b o v e a n d b e l o w t h e o p e n i n g o n could be brought closer to the internal beam forces.
o n e side only. Conversely, in Fig. 7, the interaction diagram for the
{Ar = 2.63 in.2 > 2.54 in.2; br/tr = 4.7 < 8.5) girders, a substantial increase in Ar over {Ar)min w^ould
provide a very minor expansion in the possible locations
Calculations of interaction diagram coordinates using
of the opening. In general, when concentrated loads are
Appendix formulas with Ar = 2.63 in.^^ ^ = 3 in.:
involved it would be difficult as well as uneconomical to
provide sufficient reinforcement to allow positioning the
2.63 / 12
1 +-6.34 \ 2 6 . 6 9 / opening at any desired location along the beam. Further
+ restrictions are placed on opening locations in the gird-
VMJO 12.4 ers, due to limited experimental data on web crippling
1 + (4)(6.34) in beams with web openings in the vicinity of concen-
trated loads and reactions. It is therefore recommended
12.4 r i (6)2 + (2)(6)(3) (3)2 (0.463)(3)2 that the edge of the opening be a distance of at least d/2
6.34 1 4 (26.69)2 (3.963)(26.69)2 from the points where concentrated loads or reactions
are introduced unless bearing stiffeners are provided.2
12.4
1+ T h e following suggestions for design details are pro-
(4)(6.34) vided to supplement the information in the example:
= 1.007 1. Bars were used on one side of the web only.
2.54 a. This gives approximately the same results as
1 -
6.34 bars placed on both sides of the web.^
= 0.403 b. T h e reinforcement is cheaper to fabricate, since
12.4
1 4- welding is required on one side only.
(4)(6.34)
2. T h e reinforcing bars should be checked for:
Note that in the above calculation for ( M / M p ) i , the a. Weld compatibility with web.
calculated value of {Ar)min was used in place of the b. T h e hr/tr ratio.
reinforcing bar area. This is because Ar is subtracted 3. T h e reinforcing bars should be extended beyond
from 1 in the equation, and logic tells us that more re- the edge of the opening:
inforcement must increase the load carrying capacity a. A sufficient length to develop the strength of the
of a member, not decrease it. Therefore the {Ar)min bar in the welds.
value calculated as above should be used to prevent b. A minimum of 3 in.
overly conservative results.
4. T h e welds should:
a. Be in accordance with the AISC Specification.
12
b. Have a weld stress of 1.7 times the allowable

a-
= 0.550
26.69 weld stress or less.
These coordinates are plotted in Fig. 7 to form the in-
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
teraction diagram for Ar = 2.63 in.2 With this area of
reinforcement, the center line of the opening can be u p T h e material presented in this report was developed as
to 8.6 ft from the supports in the shear spans and any- part of the research supported by the National Science
where in the center portion, as shown in Fig. 8. Foundation Grant GK-35762 and the Department of
If Ar were increased above {Ar)min, point 1 on the in- Civil Engineering at Kansas State University. This sup-
teraction diagram would move upward to include more port is gratefully acknowledged.

54
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 NOMENCLATURE REFERENCES

Area of one flange {bj X tj) 1. Wang, T. M., R. R. Snell, P. B. Cooper Strength of Beams
with Eccentric Reinforced Holes Journal of the Structural Di-
Ar Area of reinforcement above opening, vision, ASCE, Vol. 101, No. ST9, Proc. Paper 11540, Sept.
also area of reinforcement below opening 1975.
2. Subcommittee on Beams with Web Openings of the Structural
\-^r)min M i n i m u m area of reinforcement re-
Division Suggested Design Guides for Beams with Web Holes
quired to reach shear capacity of section
Journal of the Structural Division, ASCE, Vol. 97, No. ST11,
Ayj Area of web (d X t^) Proc. Paper 8536, Nov. 1971.
3. Uniform Building Code 1973 Edition, International Confer-
M Moment at center line of opening
ence of Building Officials, Whittier, Calif., 1973.
Mp Plastic moment of section 4. Manual of Steel Construction 7th Edition, American Institute
\M/Mpl Absolute value of moment to plastic mo- of Steel Construction, New York, 1970.
5. Redwood, R. G. Tables for Plastic Design of Beams with Rec-
ment ratio along beams and girders
tangular Holes Engineering Journal, AISC, Vol. 9, No. 1, Jan.
{M/Mp)o, Coordinates of points on ap- 1972.
{M/Mp), proximate interaction diagram
APPENDIX
P Concentrated load
V Shear force at center line of opening APPROXIMATE INTERACTION DIAGRAM
EQUATIONS
Plastic shear force of section
T h e equations presented below are used to construct an
I V/Vpl Absolute value of shear force to plastic
approximate interaction diagram similar to Fig. 9.^
shear force along beams and girders
Point 0 on the diagram has the coordinates [ 0 , ( M / M ^ ) -
(y/Vph Coordinate of point on approximate in- o], Point 1 is described by [ ( F / F ^ ) i , ( M / M p ) i ] , and the
teraction diagram point on the V/Vp-axis is (V/Vp)\ from the origin.
Ratio of shear force in bottom tee section These equations are for the general case of a reinforced
(Vs/Vph (VB) to plastic shear force for point 1 on eccentric web opening. T o obtain equations for other,
approximate interaction diagram less general cases, Ar, e, or both Ar and e, are taken
Ratio of shear force in top tee section equal to zero as appropriate.
(Vr/Vph ( VT) to plastic shear force for point 1 on For e < w.
approximate interaction diagram
Ar /2h\
(Ih ,4w/l__ h^ + 2he\
Plastic section modulus 1 + ^
\d) Af\A d^ )
One-half opening length
VMJO
Flange width
1 + AAf
br Width of reinforcement
c W e b thickness plus width of reinforce- For u<e<u-\-q-\- Ar/t-^j:
ment (br ~^ t^)
( M\
d
e
Beam depth
Eccentricity (distance between mid-
\M, X-
depth of section and mid-depth of open- Ar I2h\ , Ay, / I / i 2 + 2he-e'^ t
1 + —
ing) Af\d J2 cd^J
h One-half opening depth Aw
1 + 4Af
Flange thickness
Thickness of reinforcement
For e > u + q + A^/t-^
W e b thickness
U Distance from edge of opening to face of
reinforcement \MJO
w Uniformly distributed load A /2h + 2e _ Ar\ ,Aw/}__ h^ + 2he\
X Coordinate defining positions along Af\ d AJ Af U ^2 J
beams and girders Ayj
1 +•
Coefficients used in approximate design AAf
formulas with subscripts T and B to de-
note top and bottom tee sections, respec- atyj
min
tively V3

55
SECOND QUARTER / 1976
 For Ar > (Ar)
A.
1 -
/M_\ ^ Af^
where the A^ value is {Ar)r)
\Mp/i;) _ A
1 +
4Af

Figure 9 2h
\Vp)\ d

F o r Ar < {Ar)min' ^ 1 + a r V^// 2^/

r / 2/? + 2g\2 1 16ar / ^ r y ] ' /2
LV d / 1+ar (1 + a r ) H ^ J / J

4Af ^ 1 + aB\Af/ ) 2Aj

I"/ 2A-2e\2
2h-2eV 11 16ag (^rVA
\VpJ\ \VpJ\ \Vp)\ V\ d / 1+«B (H-aB)2U„/ J

3 /af\2 / 2/i 2e\

2A 2£\2
^ d)

56
ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION
 However, it is possible to make some comment on the ap-
plicability of the authors' approach to beams with more
slender webs and flanges than in any previously reported
tests, and in one case at least some caution is necessary.
The Canadian Specification governing the design of steel
structures for buildings^ differentiates between Class 1
(plastic design sections) and Class 2 (compact sections); the
former permit attainment of the plastic moment and sub-
sequent redistribution of bending moment, and flange and
web slenderness limits for these are close, but not identical,
to the AISC requirements'^ of Sect. 2.7. Class 2 sections
permit attainment of the plastic moment, but not necessarily
subsequent moment redistribution, and for these sections
the flange and web slenderness limits for flexural members
are, respectively^
bf/2tf < 64/VF^
and {d - 2tf)/t^ < 520/A
Failure of a beam near a hole has been observed in many
Design Example for Beams with Web tests to involve the development of four plastic hinges lo-
Openings cated at sections through the hole corners. These hinges
form more or less simultaneously, and locally, therefore,
Paper presented by RICHARD L. KUSSMAN and no requirement for moment redistribution arises. For this
PETER B. COOPER (2nd Quarter, 1976 issue) reason, it may appear justified to use results based on plastic
analysis, such as those presented by the authors, for Class
2 sections. There are, however, two other factors which
Discussion by R. G. Redwood should be considered: the first relates to the effect of the free
The authors have quoted Ref. 5 to justify placing the re- edges of the hole on local buckling within the web, and the
inforcement on one side only of the web, but it should be second concerns the effect of the forces due to reinforcement
noted that this reference suggests that this should only be anchorage on webs more slender than those specified in
done \i Ar/Aj < 0.333. In two of the authors' designs, this Sect. 2.7 of Ref. 4.
ratio is considerably exceeded, and the writer considers that The tests referred to above have been on beams with web
this cannot be justified on the basis of available knowledge slenderness ratios approximately equal to the limits spec-
of behavior. It should also be noted that the suggestion re- ified for Class 1 and Class 2 sections. In the case of holes
garding one-sided reinforcement was made strictly in the without reinforcement, it appears that a primary influence
context of plastic design, i.e., in beams conforming to Sect. on local web buckling is the slenderness of the web of the
2.7 of Ref. 4. tee section above or below the hole, and therefore there may
The equations presented in the Appendix cover the be some concern in the case of eccentric holes in Class 1
general case of a rectangular web hole located anywhere sections as well as holes in Class 2 sections. Local web
in a beam and reinforced or not reinforced. It should be buckling for unreinforced holes does not seem to be very
stressed that the basis of the derivation of these equations sensitive to the overall web slenderness. It is hoped that a
is plastic analysis, and it would appear to follow from this specific limitation on the tee section web slenderness ratio
that the application should be only to beams conforming can be identified such that the plastic design approach can
to the width-thickness limitations of Sect. 2.7 of the AISC be applied directly.
Specification (Ref. 4). Most of the experimental work If holes are reinforced with horizontal bars, without
which has been carried out to verify the plastic analysis of vertical reinforcement near the hole ends, there is a possi-
perforated webs has been on sections conforming to these bility of web buckling associated with the free vertical ends
limitations; in fact, very few of the test specimens have had of the hole, or of the web near the ends of the reinforcement.
web slenderness ratios near the limit for such sections. Some Neither of these appear to be very critical for Class 1 or
tests are currently being conducted in Canada with the aim Class 2 sections, particularly if the factored shear force at
of determining the likelihood of local web buckling and its the hole is not high.
effect on beam strength. These tests are not yet complete The final observation from the test program is that flange
and any conclusions drawn must necessarily be tentative. slenderness is not a critical factor, providing bf/2tf <

R. G. Redwood is Professor and Chairman, Dept. of Civil Engi- REFERENCE

neering and Applied Mechanics, McGill University, Montreal,
Canada. 6. Steel Structures for Buildings—Limit States Design Canadian
Standards Association, Standard S16.1-1974.
117

ENGINEERING JOURNAL / AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF STEEL CONSTRUCTION