Yongjiu Shi, Xianglin Yu. Comparisons Between Chinese and American Standards on End-Plate Connection Design[J]. STEEL CONSTRUCTION(Chinese & English), 2021, 36(12): 44-72. doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS21110202
Citation: Yongjiu Shi, Xianglin Yu. Comparisons Between Chinese and American Standards on End-Plate Connection Design[J]. STEEL CONSTRUCTION(Chinese & English), 2021, 36(12): 44-72. doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS21110202

Comparisons Between Chinese and American Standards on End-Plate Connection Design

doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS21110202
  • Received Date: 2021-11-02
    Available Online: 2022-03-12
  • Bolted end plate connections are one of the main joints in prefabricated steel structures and composite structures. They are widely used in multi-story steel frame structures and portal frame steel structures. Bolted end plate connection has the unique merits of using fewer bolts, easy assembly, and less factory welding. In addition, the on-site erection is fully completed with bolt connection and less affected by weather conditions. Bolted end plate connections are applicable for member splicing, beam-column connection, column base, and steel-plate shear wall connection. Bolted end plate connections can be designed as rigid joints, semi-rigid joints, or hinged joints. The current Specification for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 360-16) and Standard for Design of Steel Structures (GB 50017-2017) actively recommend the application of end plate connections. Other Chinese and American technical standards for steel structures, such as Technical Code for Steel Structure of Light-weight Building with Gabled Frames (GB 51022-2015), Technical Specification for High Strength Bolt Connections of Steel Structures (JGJ 82-2011), Seismic Provisions for Structural Steel Buildings (ANSI/AISC 341-16), and Prequalified Connections for Special and Intermediate Steel Moment Frames for Seismic Applications (ANSI/AISC 358-16) specify in details the design method and construction requirements of end plate connection joints. This paper analyzes and compares the provisions and calculation formulas related to the end plate connections in the current Chinese and American technical standards for steel building structures, and discusses in details the structural form, stiffness characteristics, bolt calculation, end plate calculation of end plate connection joints, as well as the local resistance of beam-column joint panel zone, focusing on the realization of the design concept, calculation content, and structural requirements of "strong joints" with end plate connection. Based on summarizing the available design rules of end plate connections in China and the United States, the similarities and differences of the technical standards in the two countries on the regulations of the resistance and stiffness of bolted end plate connections are quantitatively analyzed through examples.
    The analysis results show that the current technical standards in China and United States have provided complete design methods of bolted end plate connection applying to steel structures, and they have similar calculation content and structural requirements. However, the design resistance of a single high-strength bolt given by American standards is higher than the result given by Chinese standards. Therefore, thicker end plates and more bolts are required to implement "strong joint" designed according to Chinese standards.
  • [1]
    AISC. Specification for structural steel buildings:ANSI/AISC 360-16[S]. Chicago:American Institute of Steel Construction, 2016.
    [2]
    中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 钢结构设计标准:GB 50017-2017[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2018.
    [3]
    中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 门式刚架轻型房屋钢结构技术规范:GB 51022-2015[S]. 北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2015.
    [4]
    中华人民共和国住房和城乡建设部. 钢结构高强度螺栓连接技术规程:JGJ 82-2011[S].北京:中国建筑工业出版社, 2011.
    [5]
    AISC. Seismic provisions for structural steel buildings:ANSI/AISC 341-16[S]. Chicago:American Institute of Steel Construction, 2016.
    [6]
    AISC. Prequalified connections for special and intermediate steel moment frames for seismic applications:ANSI/AISC 358-16[S]. Chicago:American Institute of Steel Construction, 2016.
    [7]
    Thomas M M, Emmett A S. Extended end-plate moment connections:seismic and wind applications[M]. 2nd ed. Chicago:American Institute of Steel Construction, 2003.
    [8]
    Thomas M M, Shoemaker W L. Flush and extended multiple-row moment end-plate connections[M]. Chicago:American Institute of Steel Construction, 2002.
  • Relative Articles

    [1]Genshu Tong. A Fast Computation of Extended End-Plate of Beam-to-Column Connection[J]. STEEL CONSTRUCTION(Chinese & English), 2024, 39(8): 52-54. doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS24031921
    [2]Yanxia Zhang, Tianhao Shi, Binglong Wu, Zhengqi Lin. Comparisons of Seismic Performance of Fully-Bolted Column Joints of Steel Tubular Columns with Built-in Cross-Shaped Core Barrels and Built-in Octagonal Core Tube[J]. STEEL CONSTRUCTION(Chinese & English), 2024, 39(12): 38-48. doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS24011101
    [3]Dengke Yu, Jingbo Yang, Zhengliang Li, Zhengqi Tang, Haibing Wu. Analysis on Stability Bearing Capacity of Steel Tubular Members Considering Semi-Rigid Joints in Transmission Towers[J]. STEEL CONSTRUCTION(Chinese & English), 2022, 37(5): 36-43. doi: 10.13206/j.gjgS2112301
  • Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Amount of accessChart context menuAbstract Views, HTML Views, PDF Downloads StatisticsAbstract ViewsHTML ViewsPDF Downloads2024-052024-062024-072024-082024-092024-102024-112024-122025-012025-022025-032025-040255075100125
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Class DistributionFULLTEXT: 7.6 %FULLTEXT: 7.6 %META: 85.1 %META: 85.1 %PDF: 7.3 %PDF: 7.3 %FULLTEXTMETAPDF
    Created with Highcharts 5.0.7Chart context menuAccess Area Distribution其他: 12.9 %其他: 12.9 %Central District: 0.1 %Central District: 0.1 %China: 2.9 %China: 2.9 %Egypt: 0.2 %Egypt: 0.2 %Germany: 0.1 %Germany: 0.1 %Rochester: 0.1 %Rochester: 0.1 %United Kingdom: 0.1 %United Kingdom: 0.1 %[]: 0.1 %[]: 0.1 %上海: 6.8 %上海: 6.8 %东莞: 0.3 %东莞: 0.3 %临沂: 0.4 %临沂: 0.4 %丽水: 0.2 %丽水: 0.2 %乌鲁木齐: 0.1 %乌鲁木齐: 0.1 %佛山: 0.3 %佛山: 0.3 %保定: 0.3 %保定: 0.3 %兰州: 0.2 %兰州: 0.2 %包头: 0.1 %包头: 0.1 %北京: 6.3 %北京: 6.3 %十堰: 1.1 %十堰: 1.1 %南京: 1.9 %南京: 1.9 %南昌: 0.2 %南昌: 0.2 %南通: 0.5 %南通: 0.5 %厦门: 0.4 %厦门: 0.4 %台北: 0.1 %台北: 0.1 %台州: 0.2 %台州: 0.2 %合肥: 0.4 %合肥: 0.4 %吉林: 0.1 %吉林: 0.1 %吉隆坡: 0.1 %吉隆坡: 0.1 %周口: 0.1 %周口: 0.1 %唐山: 0.2 %唐山: 0.2 %商洛: 0.2 %商洛: 0.2 %嘉兴: 0.7 %嘉兴: 0.7 %墨尔本: 0.2 %墨尔本: 0.2 %大连: 0.1 %大连: 0.1 %天津: 2.8 %天津: 2.8 %太原: 0.7 %太原: 0.7 %宁波: 0.3 %宁波: 0.3 %宣城: 0.2 %宣城: 0.2 %巴黎: 0.1 %巴黎: 0.1 %常州: 0.8 %常州: 0.8 %常德: 0.1 %常德: 0.1 %平顶山: 0.1 %平顶山: 0.1 %广州: 1.1 %广州: 1.1 %张家口: 1.8 %张家口: 1.8 %徐州: 0.2 %徐州: 0.2 %德州: 0.1 %德州: 0.1 %德阳: 0.1 %德阳: 0.1 %成都: 1.9 %成都: 1.9 %扬州: 1.4 %扬州: 1.4 %新乡: 0.2 %新乡: 0.2 %无锡: 0.5 %无锡: 0.5 %昆明: 0.8 %昆明: 0.8 %晋城: 0.2 %晋城: 0.2 %朝阳: 0.2 %朝阳: 0.2 %杭州: 2.7 %杭州: 2.7 %桂林: 0.2 %桂林: 0.2 %榆林: 0.2 %榆林: 0.2 %武汉: 1.2 %武汉: 1.2 %水原: 0.2 %水原: 0.2 %江门: 0.1 %江门: 0.1 %沈阳: 0.2 %沈阳: 0.2 %沧州: 0.1 %沧州: 0.1 %泉州: 0.3 %泉州: 0.3 %泰州: 0.2 %泰州: 0.2 %洛阳: 0.1 %洛阳: 0.1 %济南: 0.1 %济南: 0.1 %济宁: 0.1 %济宁: 0.1 %浦那: 0.2 %浦那: 0.2 %淄博: 0.2 %淄博: 0.2 %淮南: 0.2 %淮南: 0.2 %深圳: 0.4 %深圳: 0.4 %温州: 1.2 %温州: 1.2 %湖州: 0.2 %湖州: 0.2 %湘潭: 0.1 %湘潭: 0.1 %湛江: 0.1 %湛江: 0.1 %滨州: 0.2 %滨州: 0.2 %漯河: 6.2 %漯河: 6.2 %濮阳: 0.2 %濮阳: 0.2 %盐城: 0.1 %盐城: 0.1 %石家庄: 0.5 %石家庄: 0.5 %福州: 0.3 %福州: 0.3 %秦皇岛: 0.4 %秦皇岛: 0.4 %绍兴: 0.3 %绍兴: 0.3 %绵阳: 0.1 %绵阳: 0.1 %芒廷维尤: 9.2 %芒廷维尤: 9.2 %芝加哥: 0.7 %芝加哥: 0.7 %苏州: 0.8 %苏州: 0.8 %茂名: 0.2 %茂名: 0.2 %莫尔兹比港: 0.2 %莫尔兹比港: 0.2 %衡水: 0.2 %衡水: 0.2 %襄阳: 0.1 %襄阳: 0.1 %西宁: 12.8 %西宁: 12.8 %西安: 0.8 %西安: 0.8 %西雅图: 0.1 %西雅图: 0.1 %贵阳: 0.1 %贵阳: 0.1 %达州: 0.4 %达州: 0.4 %运城: 0.5 %运城: 0.5 %连云港: 0.1 %连云港: 0.1 %邯郸: 0.2 %邯郸: 0.2 %邵阳: 0.1 %邵阳: 0.1 %郑州: 1.2 %郑州: 1.2 %酒泉: 0.1 %酒泉: 0.1 %重庆: 1.0 %重庆: 1.0 %金华: 0.2 %金华: 0.2 %长春: 0.6 %长春: 0.6 %长沙: 2.1 %长沙: 2.1 %阜新: 0.1 %阜新: 0.1 %阳泉: 0.5 %阳泉: 0.5 %青岛: 0.6 %青岛: 0.6 %马湾: 0.2 %马湾: 0.2 %龙岩: 0.1 %龙岩: 0.1 %其他Central DistrictChinaEgyptGermanyRochesterUnited Kingdom[]上海东莞临沂丽水乌鲁木齐佛山保定兰州包头北京十堰南京南昌南通厦门台北台州合肥吉林吉隆坡周口唐山商洛嘉兴墨尔本大连天津太原宁波宣城巴黎常州常德平顶山广州张家口徐州德州德阳成都扬州新乡无锡昆明晋城朝阳杭州桂林榆林武汉水原江门沈阳沧州泉州泰州洛阳济南济宁浦那淄博淮南深圳温州湖州湘潭湛江滨州漯河濮阳盐城石家庄福州秦皇岛绍兴绵阳芒廷维尤芝加哥苏州茂名莫尔兹比港衡水襄阳西宁西安西雅图贵阳达州运城连云港邯郸邵阳郑州酒泉重庆金华长春长沙阜新阳泉青岛马湾龙岩

Catalog

    通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
    • 1. 

      沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

    1. 本站搜索
    2. 百度学术搜索
    3. 万方数据库搜索
    4. CNKI搜索

    Article Metrics

    Article views (1113) PDF downloads(98) Cited by()
    Proportional views
    Related

    /

    DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
    Return
    Return