MSC

MODERNSTEEL CONSTRUCTION
IN THIS ISSUE
Sustainability
Thermal Mass
BIM
MSC
February 2013
Coast to coast
coverage
Steel joists, metal decking and castellated beams
Nationwide coverage, industry-leading BIM-based design, and local support for all your steel joist
and metal decking needs, plus cost-effective FreeSpan
castellated and cellular beams.

Free PDH/AIA course, BIM component, catalogs and more: www.newmill.com/course
4 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2013
MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION (Volume 53, Number 2. ISSN (print) 0026-8445: ISSN (online) 1945-0737. Published monthly by the American Institute of Steel
Construction (AISC), One E. Wacker Dr., Suite 700, Chicago, IL 60601. Subscriptions: Within the U.S.single issues $6.00; 1 year, $44. Outside the U.S. (Canada
and Mexico)single issues $9.00; 1 year $88. Periodicals postage paid at Chicago, IL and at additional mailing offices. Postmaster: Please send address changes to
MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION, One East Wacker Dr., Suite 700, Chicago, IL 60601.
AISC does not approve, disapprove, or guarantee the validity or accuracy of any data, claim, or opinion appearing under a byline or obtained or quoted from
an acknowledged source. Opinions are those of the writers and AISC is not responsible for any statement made or opinions expressed in MODERN STEEL
CONSTRUCTION. All rights reserved. Materials may not be reproduced without written permission, except for noncommercial educational purposes where fewer than
25 photocopies are being reproduced. The AISC and MSC logos are registered trademarks of AISC.
February 2013
ON THE COVER: The FireKeepers Casino Hotel in Battle Creek, Mich., p. 26. (Photo: Greg Hughes)
26
Winning Big
BY GREG MITTENDORF
Taking a BIM approach, a recent expansion
to a Michigan casino ended up not being a
gamble.
30
Embracing Complexity
BY KERMIN CHOK
Judicious use of a suite of design and analysis
tools on a stadium project gave a consulting
engineering firm a whole new way of looking
at engineering workflows.
34
Pilot Program
BY HUSSEIN KHALIL, P.E., ALEKSANDER
NELSON, P.E., AHMAD ABU-HAWASH,
BRENT PHARES, PH.D., AND TERRY
WIPF, PH.D.
A new arch span replaces a historic Iowa
bridge and serves as a pilot for a statewide
bridge performance-monitoring program.
40
Think Thermal
BY SEAN M. OBRIEN, P.E., LEED AP
Designing thermal mass to promote energy
efficiency in buildings.
44
Planning and Picking
BY WILLIAM W. MERRELL, P.E.
Planning a pick then executing that plan are
both important parts of steel erection.
48
Altering Alerts
BY LAWRENCE F. KRUTH, P.E.
How the new Hazard Communication Standard
will affect fabricators and erectorsand how
to prepare for it.
52
Setting Limits
BY MICHEL BRUNEAU, P.E., PH.D.
Slenderness limits for built-up box links in
EBFs in the AISC Seismic Provisions.
54
Healthy Collaboration
BY DAVID MERRIFIELD AND WILL IKERD,
P.E.
Owners and project teams can benefit from
early, in-depth collaboration on complex,
expensive and fast-paced projects.
steelwise
17
Blodgetts Treasures
BY ERIN CRISTE
Practical advice from a master of weld
design.
economics
20
A Green Roadmap
BY JOHN CROSS, P.E.
Navigating the ever-changing landscape of
green codes, standards and rating systems.
people to know
66
Scene: A Fabrication Shop
Ted Hazledine was destined for the stage,
traveling the world and the steel industry,
thanks to a family history of culture,
wanderlust and entrepreneurialism.
columns features
departments
6 EDITORS NOTE
9 STEEL INTERCHANGE
12 STEEL QUIZ
58 NEWS & EVENTS
resources
64 MARKETPLACE
65 EMPLOYMENT
in every issue
34
30
48
Editorial Offices
1 E. Wacker Dr., Suite 700
Chicago, IL 60601
312.670.2400 tel
312.896.9022 fax
Editorial Contacts
EDITOR & PUBLISHER
Scott L. Melnick
312.670.8314
melnick@modernsteel.com
SENIOR EDITOR
Geoff Weisenberger
312.670.8316
weisenberger@modernsteel.com
ASSISTANT EDITOR
Tasha Weiss
312.670.5439
weiss@modernsteel.com
DIRECTOR OF PUBLISHING
Areti Carter
312.670.5427
areti@modernsteel.com
GRAPHIC DESIGNER
Kristin Egan
312.670.8313
egan@modernsteel.com
AISC Officers
CHAIRMAN
William B. Bourne, III
VICE CHAIRMAN
Jeffrey E. Dave, P.E.
TREASURER
Richard Phillips
SECRETARY & GENERAL
COUNSEL
David B. Ratterman
PRESIDENT
Roger E. Ferch, P.E.
VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
STRUCTURAL ENGINEER
Charles J. Carter, S.E., P.E., Ph.D.
VICE PRESIDENT
Jacques Cattan
VICE PRESIDENT
John P. Cross, P.E.
VICE PRESIDENT
Scott L. Melnick
Advertising Contact
Account Manager
Louis Gurthet
231.228.2274 tel
231.228.7759 fax
gurthet@modernsteel.com
For advertising information, con-
tact Louis Gurthet or visit
www.modernsteel.com
Address Changes and
Subscription Concerns
312.670.5444 tel
312.893.2253 fax
admin@modernsteel.com
Reprints
Betsy White
The Reprint Outsource, Inc.
717.394.7350
bwhite@reprintoutsource.com
editors note
AS I SAT AT HOME READING MY MAIL RECENTLY, I WAS VERY SURPRISED BY A
LETTER FROM THE COMPANY FROM WHICH I HAVE A HOME MORTGAGE. Appar-
ently, I had a shortfall in my escrow and they gave me the option of either increasing my
payments just a little and making up the escrow in one payment or increasing my pay-
ments a bit more and making up the shortfall over time.
For years, Ive had my loan on auto pay
and the amount Ive designated to pay ex-
ceeded the loan in an effort to slowly but
surely pay down my mortgage. My surprise,
therefore, at the escrow shortage was due
to the amount; regardless of which payment
option I chose, my payments were still less
than I had already been paying! So how
could I have a shortfall in the rst place?
A call to the mortgage company quickly
cleared up my confusion, but not my sense
of disbelief. It seems that their system cred-
its a xed amount to the escrow payment
and any overage goes to principal. Even if
the required escrow payment increases, the
payment doesnt increase without specic
instructions to do so.
In other words, the system lacks any
common sense.
Almost every business, at one time or
another, forgets the obvious. I chuckle ev-
ery time I hear about an engineer specify-
ing a member size thats not big enough to
accommodate the required number of bolt
holes. And I shake my head when I hear
about specications requiring all welds to
be full penetrationa huge cost, often with
no rational reason behind it.
More generically, I wonder about the entire
construction industrys willingness to accept
obviously incomplete drawings. Its not just
that forces are lacking, but also that designs
proceed when there are huge gaps in require-
ments. How often have you seen a project al-
ready in the detailing stage, yet no one knows
where the mechanical equipment will be lo-
cated or what size units will be specied?
I started thinking about these common
sense issues and wondered why they occur.
Sure, some are just carelessness. But I
also think some of it occurs because there
arent enough opportunities for younger
engineers to learn from more experienced
designers. A lot of the information is readily
available. For example, you can visit www.
aisc.org/2012nascconline and listen to Cliff
Schwinger talk about Tips for Validating the
Results of Structural Engineering Software
or Duane Miller provide a primer on Fatigue
of Welded Structures. You can hear Bill
Merrill providing Tips on Designing Lifting
Beams and Hitches and Dave Ruby discuss
To Camber or not to Camber.
But while hearing the lecture is valuable,
its even more valuable to attend the semi-
narto be able to talk to the presenter as
well as others in the audience.
This years NASCC: The Steel Confer-
ence is being held April 1719 in St. Louis
and will offer more than 100 sessions simi-
lar to the ones above. Registration fees are
low (on February 1, it costs AISC members
just $380 to register; but register soon as
fees go up every week) and we even offer
a $150 discount for individuals who have
been working for ve years or less. For a
complete list of sessions and to register,
please visit www.aisc.org/nascc.
Its only common sense.
SCOTT MELNICK
EDITOR
www.sds2.com 800.443.0782 402.441.4000 e-mail: info@sds2.com
Copyright 2012 Design Data. All rights reserved.
sds2.com 800.443.0782 info@sds2.com
Smarter models. Diverse solutions.
Software that connects.
Design Datas SDS/2 software solutions are a
unique, discipline-driven family of software products
that provide the construction industry with a more intelligent
way to increase both productivity and profits. SDS/2 produces smarter
models and diverse solutions that empower users to analyze structures,
design connections, and detail steel to create the construction drawings.
The information stored in the SDS/2 model is valuable when utilized to
its fullest potential beyond the drawings. Priceless information
is accessible through the model, connecting owners,
engineers, detailers, fabricators, project managers,
erectors or anyone involved throughout the life
cycle of the project.
Learn more about SDS/2
software solutions at
sds2.com.
For decades, High Steel has been entrusted with the complex fabrication for many of the nations largest infrastructure and
building construction projects. From our founding in 1931 in a tiny welding shop to four state-of-the-art fabrication facilities
in two locations, we have continually expanded our facilities and know-how to meet our customers ever-changing needs.
From big city skyscrapers to clean energy projects, High Steel successfully partners with building and industrial
steel fabricators for the fabrication of large or complex built-up steel components.
Trusted Solutions for Plate Girders
With over 80 years experience fabricating the largest girders that can be shipped,
High Steel can easily take on the most challenging fabricated steel components in your job.
Call Rich Truxel at (717) 207-4303
t
Dedicated in-house engineering and detailing capabilities
t
Sophisticated multi-coat paint systems and dedicated blast and paint bays
t
Experienced supplier for Design-Build projects and Public Private Partnerships
t
*OIPVTFTIJQQJOHnFFUBOETQFDJBMJ[FEFRVJQNFOU
TT5 C| c Ph| | cce| ph| c P| k e - P. C. Bcx T8 - l cncc l er, P/ T75 - h| gh l ee| . ccm
Call Rich Truxel at (717) 207- 4303
or email RTruxel@high.net
160-ton fracture-critical pier cap, fabricated in 1979
for the I-95 / I-895 Interchange north of the Harbor
Tunnel in Baltimore, Maryland
FEBRUARY 2013 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION 9
P-Delta Effects and Second-Order Analysis
I am having difficulty applying the Direct Analysis
Method. If my computer program does a P- analysis
using reduced stiffnesses and I have added notional loads
to account for P- effects, are the results the required
strengths? If I do this, do I need to modify the required
strengths with B
1
or B
2
?
AISC 360 Section C1 requires that stability, including second-
order effects, must be considered. Accounting for second-
order effects is just one part of the stability analysis and design
requirements. The AISC Specification recognizes a rigorous
second-order analysis (typically performed by a computer
program) as one method of second-order analysis. It also provides
the approximate B
1
-B
2
method that is found in Appendix 8.
Note that the notional loads applied to the structure account
for initial out-of-plumbness of each story, but are not directly
representative of the P- effects as you implied in your question.
The notional loads are a way of accounting for one part of in
the design. The other part of is drift due to lateral loads. The
second-order analysis is what is used to determine the second-
order effects (both P- and P-) that result from the initial out-
of-plumbness and lateral drift of the structure.
So if your software is accounting for P-delta effects that
include consideration of initial imperfections with notional
loads and inelasticity using stiffness reductions per Chapter
C, there is no need to also apply B
1
and B
2
. The B
1
-B
2
method
can be used in lieu of the rigorous second-order analysis if the
software doesnt do it.
The Engineering Journal article A Comparison of Frame
Stability Analysis Methods in ANSI/AISC 360-05 (Q3 2008)
provides a good treatment of the stability analysis methods in
AISC 360. It is based on AISC 360-05; however, the concepts
still apply to AISC 360-10.
Erin Criste
Flow-Drilling of HSS
Page 7-14 in the 14th Ed. AISC Manual indicates that
shear and tension strengths of ASTM A325 bolts can be
developed for certain combinations of bolt size and HSS
wall thickness (see Figure 7-9). Looking at the figure,
it seems to say that a -in. A325 bolt may be developed
in HSS with
3
16-in. and -in. walls but not
5
16-in. walls or
greater. Am I reading this correctly?
You are understanding this figure correctly. Flow-drill equipment
manufacturers have noted that the maximum recommended
material thickness is half of the nominal bolt diameter. This
recommendation recognizes that the pressure needed to pierce
thicker material will likely break the bit. Customized procedures
can be used for thicker material, but within the range of normal
procedure, half of the bolt diameter is the limit.
Erin Criste
Beam-Column Design
If a member under combined compression and
bending moment is classified as compact for flexural
compression and slender for pure compression, then
what classification is used in design?
Because of the way the interaction equation in Chapter H
works, the section is classified twice: once for axial strength
calculations and once for flexural strength calculations. In
the general case, AISC 360-10 Table B4.1a is used to classify
the section as nonslender or slender, and the axial strength
is computed accordingly using the applicable section in
ChapterE. This process is the same regardless of whether the
member is subject to axial load only or axial load and moment.
Then, AISC 360-10 Table B4.1b is used to classify the
section as compact, noncompact or slender, and the flexural
strength is computed accordingly using the applicable section
in Chapter F. This process also is the same regardless of
whether the member is subject to moment only or axial load
and moment.
The effect of combined axial load and moment is addressed
using the above results for the individual loadings in the
interaction equations in Chapter H. The section classifications
do not have to be the same for compression and flexure when
using the interaction equation.
Brad Davis, S.E., Ph.D.
Prying Action in End-Plate Connections
I have been comparing the design procedures for
Extended End-Plates (EEP) in AISC Steel Design Guide 4
and AISC 358-10. The design procedure for prequalified
EEPs in AISC 358-10 does not seem to address prying
action, while the procedure in AISC Steel Design Guide 4
does. Is this correct?
That is not correct. AISC 358-10 does consider prying in the
design of moment end plates.
Equations (6.10-3) and (6.10-4) in AISC 358-10 and
Equation 2.7 in AISC Steel Design Guide 4 are the same
equation written in somewhat different forms.
Equation (6.10-5) in AISC 358-10 and Equation 2.10 in
AISC Steel Design Guide 4 are the same equation written
in somewhat different forms.
Equation (6.10-13) in AISC 358-10 and Equation 2.10
in AISC Steel Design Guide 4 are the same equation
written in somewhat different forms.
The above equations work together to ensure that the
connection designed is consistent with the thick plate model;
prying action need not be considered.
Larry S. Muir, P.E.
steel
interchange
If youve ever asked yourself Why? about something related to
structural steel design or construction, Modern Steel Constructions
monthly Steel Interchange column is for you! Send your
questions or comments to solutions@aisc.org.
steel interchange
Flange Bending
A new pipe rack will be attached to the bottom of an
existing plate girder, hung from the flange tips and
effectively applying a point load at the outside edges of
the existing flange. Is AISC Specification Section J10.1
Flange Local Bending applicable to this detail?
No, the Section J10.1 flange bending check doesnt apply to
the detail you have described. See AISC Steel Design Guide
13 Section 2.2.2 and the Commentary to AISC Specification
Section J10.1. The flange bending check is intended to
prevent stress concentrations at tension connection plates
welded across the flange.
For the case you have, here are some examples of how
others have addressed the bending:
In a contribution to the 12/1999 Steel Interchange, David
Ricker proposed a simplified procedure for underhung
cranes: www.modernsteel.com/121999_SI
The Material Handling Industry (www.mhi.org)
publishes CMAA 74, which provides a method for design
of underhung cranes that also addresses this topic.
Yield-line analysis could be used to compute the
strength, and the localized deflection can be determined
by finite element analysis or a manual approximation.
Carden et al. provide solutions that relate to this in
Investigation of Flange Local Bending Under Flexible
Patch Loading in the Q1 2008 issue of Engineering
Journal.
Also, dont forget to check the flange-to-web weld.
Several of the methods suggested above will provide enough
information to estimate the required strength of the weld.
Brad Davis, S.E., Ph.D.
Slip-Critical Joints with Fills
Can a slip-critical bolted connection be used with fillers
(or shims) up to 1 in. thick? Are multiple plies of shims or
fillers allowed to make up the 1-in. gap?
Yes, you can use slip-critical connections with 1-in.-thick fillers
as long as you meet the requirements of the AISC Specification.
There are two separate issues here: the use of fillers in slip-critical
connections and multiple fillers in slip-critical connections.
Regarding the use of fillers in slip-critical connections in
general, AISC Specification Section J5.2 provides an option
specific to slip-critical joints. Option (d) provides that the
filler can be accounted for by using SC Class B surfaces; it also
allows for SC Class A surfaces if the bolts are installed by the
turn-of-nut method. These two alternatives describe the cases
in which the variability of slip is low enough that the presence
of the filler will not affect the joint.
If you have SC Class A surfaces and the bolts are installed
by a method other than the turn-of-nut method, there is
enough variability in slip resistance that one of the other
options (a, b or c) in Section J2.5 will be required to address
the presence of the filler. As these other options are all related
to bearing strength, this may seem confusing. However, the
point is that this case has a greater likelihood of slip occurring
and the bolt shear strength must either be reduced (J5.2a) or
the number of bolts increased (J5.2b or c) to account for the
presence of the filler.
The second part of your question, about using multiple
fillers, also requires consideration because bolt bending can
occur when multiple fillers are used. Section J3.8 in the AISC
Specification specifies that the filler factor, h
f
, is 1.0 for a single
filler and 0.85 for multiple fillers.
Carlo Lini, P.E., and Charles J. Carter, S.E., P.E., Ph.D.
Diagonal Bracing Connection Design
The Section in the 14th Ed. AISC Manual entitled Force
Transfer in Diagonal Bracing Connections in Part 13
discusses three methods that have been shown to yield safe
gusset plate designs and gives a reference to a paper by
Thornton from 1991. The Manual has adopted one of these
the Uniform Force Method (UFM). Is the UFM the only
diagonal bracing connection design method allowed by AISC?
Does AISC deem the other two methods referenced in the
1991 Thornton paper (Method 2A and 4) acceptable?
The AISC Specification establishes requirements that become
law when they are adopted by the building code. Although
some of the AISC Manual incorporates these requirements,
the rest of the Manual is a compilation of recommendations,
not requirements.
The Uniform Force Method is a recommendation, not a
requirement. In the view of the AISC Committee on Manuals,
this method best predicts the available strength and critical limit
state of the connection. Note that it also allows for flexibility in
application of the method, including the special cases presented
and other practices, such as moving work points (with appropriate
compensating analysis requirements) for convenience in design.
The AISC Manual does not address the other methods, and
the use of these methods is a matter of engineering judgment.
The 1991 paper by Thornton referenced in the Manual
provides guidance for these alternative approaches. In general,
any method that satisfies equilibrium of internal forces and
uses materials and connections with sufficient ductility to
redistribute those forces is an acceptable method of design.
Thornton, W.A. (1991), On the Analysis and Design of
Bracing Connections, National Steel Construction
Conference Proceedings, pp. 26.126.33, AISC, Chicago,
IL.
Carlo Lini, P.E.
The opinions expressed in Steel Interchange do not necessarily represent an official position of
the American Institute of Steel Construction and have not been reviewed. It is recognized that the
design of structures is within the scope and expertise of a competent licensed structural engineer,
architect or other licensed professional for the application of principles to a particular structure.
If you have a question or problem that your fellow readers might help you solve, please
forward it to us. At the same time, feel free to respond to any of the questions that you
have read here. Contact Steel Interchange via AISCs Steel Solutions Center:
1 E Wacker Dr., Ste. 700, Chicago, IL 60601
rel: 8.ASK.ASC lox: 312.803.470
solutions@aisc.org
The complete collection of Steel Interchange questions and answers is available online.
Find questions and answers related to just about any topic by using our full-text search
capability. Visit Steel Interchange online at www.modernsteel.com.
Charlie Carter is vice president and chief structural engineer, Erin Criste is staff engineer,
technical assistance, and Carlo Lini is Steel Solutions Center advisor at AISC. Brad Davis
and Larry Muir are consultants to AISC.
THE POWER OF COMMUNITY
THE POWER OF SIMPLICITY
THE POWER OF TECHNOLOGY
THE POWER OF BIM
7 new users join the Advance Steel community every day
productive in a week, affordable price, incomparable ROI
3D, joints, plates, automated modeling tools, automatic drawings, and so much more!
IFC, CIS/2, SDNF, DSTV, Revit
, Tekla
, SolidWorks
, SolidEdge
, Inventor
, AutoCAD
G
r
a
i
t
e
c
,

G
r
a
i
t
e
c

A
d
v
a
n
c
e

a
r
e

r
e
g
i
s
t
e
r
e
d

t
r
a
d
e
m
a
r
k
s

o
f

t
h
e

G
r
a
i
t
e
c

g
r
o
u
p
.

A
l
l

o
t
h
e
r

b
r
a
n
d

n
a
m
e
s
,

p
r
o
d
u
c
t

n
a
m
e
s

o
r

t
r
a
d
e
m
a
r
k
s

b
e
l
o
n
g

t
o

t
h
e
i
r

r
e
s
p
e
c
t
i
v
e

h
o
l
d
e
r
s
.
Toll Free: 1 800 724-5678 x333
CANADA: sales@graitec.ca
USA: sales@graitec.us www.graitec.com
GET THE POWER
& SAVE
BIM software for structural steel
engineering, detailing and fabrication
H
e
l
i
c
o
p
t
e
r

b
a
s
e

-

M
o
d
e
l

c
o
u
r
t
e
s
y

o
f

S
t
a
h
l
b
a
u

Z
i
e
m
a
n
n

G
m
b
H
,
,
,
,
1 Which welding defect is depicted in the figure below?
a) Porosity
b) Base Metal Discontinuity
c) Spatter
d) Inclusions
2 True/False: Fins, scabs, seams and laps are all terms that
describe base metal discontinuities located in the heat-
affected zone of the weld and result from fabrication
operations.
3 Weld ____________ is the amount of a groove weld that
extends beyond the surface of a plate or weldment.
4 True/False: Excessive misalignment is a defect.
5 Which of the following terms describes the condition that
results when the molten weld metal does not fuse with the
base metal or with previously deposited weld passes?
a) Incomplete Fusion
b) Inadequate Joint Penetration
c) Cracks
d) None of the Above
6 True/False: A discontinuity is an interruption in the
physical consistency of a welded part.
7 When a discontinuity, by nature or accumulated effect,
can render a part or product unable to meet minimum
applicable acceptance standards or specifications, it is
called a _______.
8 The picture below shows what type of welding crack?
a) Transverse
b) Centerline
c) HAZ
d) Lamellar Tearing
a) Transverse
b) Centerline
c) HAZ
d) Lamellar Tearing
a) Transverse
b) Centerline
c) HAZ
d) Lamellar Tear
steel
quiz
Most of the answers to this months Steel Quiz can be found in the AISC Specifcation,
AISCSteel Construction Manual and AISC Steel Design Guides, as well as on the AISC
and Modern Steel Construction websites, www.aisc.org and www.modernsteel.com.
TURN TO PAGE 14 FOR ANSWERS
IES, Inc. | 519 E Babcock St. Bozeman MT 59715
800-707-0816 | info@iesweb.com
www.iesweb.com
Free 30-Day Trial
^^z^
Easy to Learn and Use
Analyze Just about Anything!
Design: Steel, Wood, Concrete,
Aluminum, and Cold-Formed

ANSWERS steel quiz
1 a) Porosity is caused by gases
t r apped i n t he mol t en wel d
metal, which creates volumetric
voi ds. I t can be avoi ded by
welding on clean substrate with
uncontaminated consumables. You
get bonus points if you also noticed
the lack of fusion at the root and
the crack.
2 False. These discontinuities are
located on the surface of the steel
and result from mill rolling. Routine
handling during fabrication may
cause these surface irregularities to
be revealed. Additionally, thermal
cutting, preheating and welding
may cause them to open up.
Grinding may reveal imperfections
that were hidden by mill scale.
3 The missing term is reinforcement.
The weld surface profile is affected
by position, amperage and speed
of welding. The figure defining
acceptabl e wel d profi l es was
revised in the 2010 AWS D1.1
welding code (see AWS D1.1-10
Figure 5.4).
4 True. A misalignment of 10% of
the thinner member is the limit
permitted by AWS D1.1 for butt
joints in plate (see clause 5.22.3).
5 a) I ncompl et e f us i on, al s o
called lack-of-fusion, is a planar
discontinuity. The most common
cause i s the use of i mproper
welding parameters. It also may
be caused by welding on materials
with excessive mill scale or by an
improperly selected or improperly
prepared weld joint detail.
6 Tr ue. A di scont i nui t y i s an
i nt er r upt i on of t he t ypi cal
structure of a material, such as in
its mechanical, metallurgical, or
physical characteristics. Examples
of discontinuities include cracks,
s eams , l aps , por os i t y and
inclusions. Discontinuities may or
may not be considered defects.
Some weld discontinuities, such as
porosity, have acceptable limits. In
the case of cracking, however, AWS
D1.1 permits none.
7 The missing term is defect. A defect
is an excessive condition, outside
the acceptance limits of deviations.
Defects are not acceptable.
8 a) A transverse crack occurs
perpendicular to the axis of the
weld, generally in weld metal that
is high in strength, and is driven by
excessive hydrogen, a susceptible
mi crostructure and appl i ed or
residual stresses. See Chapter
5 in AISC Steel Design Guide 21
for causes and solutions to weld
cracking.
9 b) A centerl i ne crack resul ts
from one of three phenomena:
segregation, the bead shape or the
surface profile.
10 c) A HAZ crack is characterized by
separation that occurs in the region
immediately adjacent to the weld
bead. It typically results from a
level of hydrogen, a susceptible
HAZ microstructure and applied or
residual stresses.
SWITCH TO AUTO-PILOT
WITH A VOORTMAN!
SAW
ING
DRILLING
LAYOUT MARKING
THERM
AL CUTTING
SHOT BLASTING
MULTI SYSTEM INTEGRATION
by Voortman
A V O O R T M A N S T E E L G R O U P C O M P A N Y
AUTOMATIC
MATERIAL HANDLING:
Loads and unloads the
processing system
Intelligently decides which
system to load next in a
Multi System Integration
Unmanned systems which
reduces man hours
SINGLE SOURCE
PROVIDER
Plasma & oxy-fuel cutting
Sawing and drilling
Layout marking
Shot blasting & painting
Punching & shearing
All products are designed
and manufactured in house
BRIAN RITCHIE FROM SHEPARD STEEL:
The Voortman V808 Robotic Cutting System
has been in use in our production facility for
over 5 months and has exceeded our
expectations. We are using the V808 as a
fabrication station cutting to size, burning holes and coping.
We could not be happier with the production, service and
support on all of our Voortman machines. Great equipment!
VOORTMAN USA CORP.
Building F - 450 South Spruce st. | Manteno, IL 60950
(t) 1 815 468 6300 | (f) +1 815 - 468 6333
info@voortmancorp.com | www.voortmancorp.com
BIM for
Miscellaneous Steel
Tekla BIM software
Mark (36) knows the most effcient way to design, detail, and fabricate a miscellaneous steel
structure. His company uses Tekla to model even the most complex stairs, handrails, and
other unique assemblies. With effcient drawing production, CNC data output, and project
coordination capabilities, he can guarantee the highest quality product to his clients.
Tekla BIM (Building Information Modeling) software solutions provide a data-rich 3D
environment that can be shared by contractors, structural engineers, steel detailers and
fabricators, and concrete detailers and manufacturers. Choose Tekla for the highest level
of detail, accuracy, constructability and integration in project management and delivery.
Visit our website to learn more about Tekla solutions and references.
a www.tekla.com
Scan QR code with your
smartphone to visit our
website.
IF YOUVE EVER DESIGNED a structural weld, youve likely
heard of Omer W. Blodgett. His book Design of Welded Struc-
tures remains a go-to reference even though it dates back more
than 40 years. But while you may know his name, you might not
know how Mr. Blodgett came to be the face of welding.
Blodgett frst started learning to weld on his grandfathers Lin-
coln welder at the age of 10, which he says began his lifes journey of
learning and teaching welding principles. (Much of this is captured
in an interview that is posted on AISCs Podcasts page at www.aisc.
org/content.aspx?id=25892; scroll down to Episode 9.)
Blodgett is known for his abil-
ity to distill complex concepts into
simple summaries. He also has
coined many memorable sayings
that are easily transferred from one
generation to another. Here, weve
presented a brief summary of some
of the key points pulled from
his books (particularly Design of
Welded Structures), papers, articles
and lectures.
Dont design with your heart.
Blodgett has said, Its OK to fall in love with your heart. But,
when it comes to making engineering decisions, dont design with
your heart. His point is that there are a variety of things that may
intuitively seem to be correct, but analysis might lead to another
answer. Take web penetrations or openings, for example. The
hearts frst reaction to any
opening or reduction in area
is to add reinforcing. While
reinforcing might be neces-
sary in some cases, it is not
needed in all cases. And
in cases where it is needed,
how do you determine the
reinforcing?
AISC Steel Design
Guide 2: Design of Steel
and Composite Beams with Web
Openings provides guidance
for compact wide-fange
beams. For non-compact
beams, Section 4.7 of Blodgetts Design of Welded Structures provides
guidance on designing beams and girders with web openings using
frst principles of engineering mechanics to check: web shear, web
buckling and Vierendeel bending. Next time you have a project
requiring an opening or want to see what effect a reduction in area of
the web has on your section, dont design with your heart; use some
analysis to see if reinforcement is required, using the procedures in
AISCDesign Guide 2 or as outlined by Blodgett.
Provide a path for the load to enter into the member
that lies parallel.
A typical oversight when design-
ing welded connections is the failure
to provide a proper load path so that
a transverse force can enter that part
of the member that lies parallel to
the force. The fexibility afforded by
the welding process permits materi-
als to be confgured and connected in
a variety of waysincluding ways in
which the loads cannot be properly
transferred between the members.
While this principle applies to many
situations, one common occurrence
is in the design of hangers and sup-
ports. Section 6.6 of Design of Welded
Structures provides guidance on
designing such weldments.
One must account for a proper load path and consider the
orientation of the weld to the force to minimize mistakes in
real-world applications. Providing a proper load path can be
more apparent when the section and the joints are square.
However, when designing a curved section (such as pipe and
supports/hangers) it might not be as obvious. In this case and
many others, it is important to think of how the force will
transfer through the weldment when selecting its details and
confguration. One must always provide a proper load path
so the force can enter into the section that lies parallel. There
are many examples and discussion throughout the Blodgett
resources, such as in Section 6.6 on hangers.
BLODGETTS
TREASURES
BY ERIN CRISTE
steelwise
Practical advice from
a master of weld design.
Erin Criste is a staff engineer
with AISC and can be reached
at criste@aisc.org.
steelwise
Understand distortion and shrinkage.
Blodgett provides explanation, details and examples of cal-
culating, controlling and designing for distortion and shrinkage
in Section 7.7 of Design of Welded Structures. While distortion in
welded connections is often visible, the principles of minimiz-
ing distortion are not always readily understood. In brief, dis-
tortion is caused when hot, expanded metal (whether the weld
metal or heated base metal) shrinks, causing fexible members
and their cross-sectional elements to move.
When it comes to controlling distortion, a key principle is
to minimize the weld metal volume. Decreasing the weld size
and length will reduce the shrinkage forces and help minimize
the overall distortion in the weldment. In the case of complete
joint penetration (CJP) groove welds, weld details such as root
opening and included angles can be optimized to reduce weld
metal volumes, as well as the corresponding distortion, while
maintaining the same weld strength.
Another important factor is not over-welding. Not only does
over-welding increase the amount of weld, it also increases the
heat input (which results in larger shrinkage forces) and the
overall cost and potential for additional repair costs. Blodgett
provides techniques that reduce distortion and can lead to cost
savings on a project. For more on over-welding, see Control
Costs by Avoiding Overwelding (07/2011).
There are many factors that affect the distortion and shrink-
age in a weldment, and distortion control principles go beyond
simply reducing the weld size. Balancing the welds around the
neutral axis of the member reduces the shrinkage moment and
reduces the overall distortion in the member.
Think outside the box.
There are discussions of torsion in Section 2.10 and 6.4 of
Design of Welded Structures. Three basic rules to address torsion
in weldment design are:
Use closed sections where possible. Closed sections, such
as hollow structural sections (HSS) and steel pipe, have
much higher strength and stiffness under torsional load-
ing than do open sections.
Use diagonal braces to restrain members against twisting.
Make rigid end connections to keep fanges from swinging.
Blodgett covers these points in detail in his book. Less com-
monly known is that he also provides a method he developed
to permit calculation of the angular twist along the length of
such members.
Use smaller llet welds.
There is a perception that more is better. However, when it
comes to welding, this is often not the case. Consider for exam-
ple a small fllet versus a CJP groove weld. If both are suffcient
for the design, the fllet weld option is typically better. While
for strength that might be true, there are other considerations
in determining the size of welds. Section 7.4 of Design of Welded
Structures discusses how to determine weld sizes.
Decreasing leg size of
weld decreases shrinkage force
Overwelding increases the
shrinkage force
Decreasing
length of weld
decreases shrinkage force
Longitudinal shrinkage of weld
l
l
Angular distortion
of llet weld
Transverse shrinkage of weld Angular distortion
of butt weld
l l
neutral
axis
Pulling effect of welds above neutral axis
neutral axis of member
pulling effect of welds
l l
l
neutral
axis
Pulling effect of welds below neutral axis
neutral axis of member
pulling effect of welds
l l
l
For economical designs, it is preferred to make fllet welds
smaller in size and longer in length; smaller fllet welds generally
provide economy over large fllet welds. Why is this? Because the
weight and cost of the weldment increases by the square of the
leg size of the weld. Thus, savings in the weight of the weld metal
for each weld and the arc time it takes to make each weld can be
achieved by specifying the smallest, longest fllet weldment. Not
only are there savings but the smaller, longer welds also help reduce
heat input and the distortion of the base metal. Its a win-win!
There are no secondary members in welded design.
This is a simple principle to remember but probably the
toughest lesson (or mistake) to make or realize in practice. A
weldment provides a path through which the stress fows. Sec-
tion 2.9 of Design of Welded Structures highlights how this can
cause concern or diffculty when designing for fatigue.
Discontinuous backing bars inside box members can lead
to stress risers that initiate crack growth in fatigue loading.
Prohibited by AISC for cyclically loaded structures and for all
structures by AWS D1.1, the unfused interface between seg-
ments of discontinuous backing can create stress concentra-
tions in the root of the weld. Accordingly, if backing must be
spliced, the AISC Specifcation requires CJP groove welds at the
butt joint and reinforcement ground prior to assembly.
Not a case of fatigue but another example of this principle
is steel backing. Left-in-place backing can, in some situations,
create stress concentrations in the weld root that may be prob-
lematic. Such an example is when backing bars are used at the
bottom fange of a high-seismic moment connection. AISC 341
refers to AWS D1.8 in this case, which requires the complete
removal of bottom fange backing bars (with some exceptions
in areas of anticipated low strain).
These are just a few of the many insightful design phi-
losophies expressed from a humble education enthusiast and
lifetime contributor to the steel industry. As Omer Blodgett is
known for saying, Experience is learning from past mistakes.
His teachings, articles and books have given us many of his les-
sons, insights and treasures.
steelwise
ReIax!
CompIere Pro]eer Supporr
St. Louis Screw & Bolt
2000 Access Blvd Madison, IL 62060
Phone: 800-237-7059 Fax: 314-389-7510
Email: salesstlouisscrewbolt.com
Web: www.stlouisscrewbolt.com
You dId order
your boIra trom
Sr. LouIa Serew O
BoIr... DIdn'r You ?
SL
1887
THE DESIRE OF FEDERAL, state and local offcials, as
well as project owners, for green, high-performance, sustain-
able buildings is a long-term reality in the building construc-
tion marketplace.
While the demand for green buildings by project owners is
balanced by the incremental construction costs to achieve spe-
cifc sustainability goals, there is little question that the three
traditional construction driverscost, speed and qualityare
being joined by sustainability. The balance that will be struck
between these four factors has yet to be determined, just as the
balance between energy consumption, environmental impacts,
human health concerns, economic considerations and social
outcomes is still under debate in the green community.
It is therefore critical that structural engineers and struc-
tural steel fabricators understand the additional expectations
and requirements that are being placed on their disciplines as a
result of the increasing demand for green buildings.
LEED, ASHRAE and the IgCC
The growing infuence of sustainability concerns in the
building design and construction marketplace has spawned an
increasing number of codes, standards and rating systems that
impact how projects are designed and constructed. Currently
the three most dominant of these are: the LEED rating system
developed by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC), Stan-
dard 189.1 for the Design of High-Performance Green Buildings
published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigeration
and Air-Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE) and the Interna-
tional Green Construction Code (IgCC) published by the In-
ternational Code Council. While all three of these documents
focus on similar topics, the requirements and methodologies
vary signifcantly between them. The IgCC is written in code
language designed to be adopted by local jurisdictions as either
part of their base building code or as incremental requirements
for projects required to be sustainable, or in order to obtain
certain incentives by opting to be sustainable. There are mul-
tiple compliance paths within the IgCC. The frst is what is
referred to as native IgCC, which spells out specifc project
requirements. However, in place of meeting the requirements
of the native IgCC language, a project owner can opt to comply
with either the requirements of ASHRAE 189.1 or ICC-700 (a
green standard published by the National Association of Home
Builders and the International Code Council).
It is important to recognize that if a project is being built
in a jurisdiction that has adopted the IgCC, it must meet the
requirements of native IgCC, ASHRAE 189.1 or ICC-700.
These documents were developed in a consensus-based process
and are written in code language for the purpose of defning
a minimum threshold for a building to be considered a high-
performance green building.
At present, three states (Oregon, Maryland and Rhode
Island) and municipalities in fve other states (New Hampshire,
Arizona, Florida, Colorado and Washington) have adopted
the IgCC as either an extension of their base building code or
specifcally for projects seeking classifcation as green, high-
performance buildings.
The LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Performance) program developed by the U.S. Green Building
Council is not a standard or a building code and is not written
in code language. It is a rating system designed to incentivize,
measure and reward green design and construction practices.
New versions of LEED will sit on top of the requirements of
green codes and standards such as the IgCC and ASHRAE 189.1.
It is the choice of the project owner if the project that is being
designed and constructed will pursue LEED certifcation and
what level of certifcation (certifed, silver, gold or platinum) will
be sought. Public agencies and jurisdictions may require LEED
certifcation for their own projects, and jurisdictions may incen-
tivize private projects meeting LEED requirements, but techni-
cally jurisdictions should not mandate that private projects be
built to LEED requirements. LEED credit requirements are
subject to change, are not developed in a consensus process and
are not written in code-enforceable language.
A GREEN
ROADMAP
BY JOHN CROSS, P.E., LEED AP
economics
Navigating the ever-expanding landscape of
green codes, standards and rating systems.
John Cross is an AISC vice presi-
dent. You can reach him at cross@
aisc.org.
LEED is an ever-changing target for building designers and
constructors. Today, two versions of LEED-NC (New Con-
struction) are currently in use for certifying new building con-
struction. LEED-NC V2.2 is still being used for projects that
were registered prior to June 27, 2009, with a sunset date for
fnal application and document submissions of June 27, 2015.
New building projects are being registered under LEED-NC
2009, which will remain open for project registration at least
until June 1, 2015. USGBC has not announced a sunset date
for LEED NC-2009 but if the pattern of earlier release cycles
is followed, it would be anticipated that a sunset date of June
1, 2021, would be likely. A new version of LEEDLEED V4
is currently being developed and has gone through fve public
comment cycles. It is anticipated that the new version will be
balloted in July of this year and, if approved by the USGBC
membership, will be available for project registration beginning
in August.
Materials and Resources Overview
Of primary interest to structural engineers and structural
steel fabricators are the sections in these green entities that deal
with materials and resources. Each system deals differently with
the methodology used to assess the sustainable use of materials
in general and structural steel specifcally.
The existing LEED-NC (V2.2 and 2009) rating systems
(note that there are multiple iterations of LEED, such as LEED
for Schools, Commercial Interiors, Healthcare, etc.) grant
credit points counting toward various levels of LEED certif-
cation. Credit MR-4 (MR stands for Materials and Resources)
addresses the recycled content of materials use in projects and
Credit MR-5 addresses the regional content of materials used
in projects. In both cases the cost of the materials, as delivered
to the project site, qualifying for the credit is taken as a percent-
age of the total cost of project materials (assumed to be 45% of
overall project costs). Two thresholds are defned in each credit.
If the project reaches the lower threshold, one point of credit is
earned. If the higher threshold is reached, two points of credit
are gained. It should be noted that LEED-NC 2009 is still sub-
ject to modifcation both in terms of changes to the actual cred-
its in the system and the interpretation of those credits. Sig-
nifcant changes have been made to the materials and resource
credits over the past six months in LEED-NC 2009.
ASHRAE 189.1 uses a different methodology. Projects must
meet one of three thresholds. Either the project must contain
10% recycled material (using the same calculation methodol-
ogy as LEED), 15% regional materials (using a slightly dif-
ferent calculation methodology than LEED) or 5% bio-based
materials. As an alternative, a life cycle assessment (LCA) may
be conducted for the project, showing environmental impact
improvements compared to an alternative design.
Native IgCC uses yet a different approach, requiring that
all projects attain a score of 55% by summing the percentage
contributions of all project materials in the areas of material
reuse, use of building materials made up of recycled content
(any material with a recycled content greater than 25%), the
recovery rate of materials, the use of indigenous materials and
the use of bio-based materials. The overall calculation can be
done based on cost, mass or volume. Just like ASHRAE 189.1, a
LCA may be conducted for the project showing environmental
impact improvements compared to a reference building.
The LEED V4 treatment of materials is still subject to
modifcation based on the latest round of public comments,
but the basic direction that LEED is taking is clear. USGBC
is positioning LEED V4 above the requirements of IgCC and
ASHRAE 189.1 and not directly addressing issues such as re-
cycled content and regional materials; rather the emphasis will
Is a greenhouse a green building? It all depends on whether
it meets the requirements of a given green code, standard or
rating system.
The National Renewable Energy Laboratorys Research Sup-
port Facility in Golden, Colo., is a steel-framed LEED build-
ing with the goal of becoming the greenest office building in
the world. (See Greening Steel Construction05/2011for
more on this project.)

economics
be on transparency of material information from both environ-
mental and chemical composition perspectives, the responsible
extraction and harvest of materials (including recycled mate-
rials) and the avoidance of materials with harmful impacts on
human health. LCAs are also fully integrated into the LEED
V4 credit program.
Each of these systems and the documents that describe them
are far more complicated than what is being described here. Id
encourage you to acquire copies of the actual program docu-
ments and associated users guides to gain a full understanding
of the requirements of each program. The AISC Steel Solu-
tions Center (solutions@aisc.org or 866.ASK.AISC) is also
prepared to provide support on questions relating to the mate-
rial sections of these systems.
What Should Fabricators Know?
Structural steel fabricators are often asked to supply infor-
mation regarding the recycled content and origin of materials
they supply to a project. While this may seem like a simple
request, it is actually a signifcant challenge on many projects,
particularly when the individual tasked with collecting infor-
mation for the general contractor may not fully understand
the scope of the information to be collected. The following
steps for collection and provision of information should sat-
isfy the vast majority of the various requirements (the details
of the calculations are not included here but are available at
www.aisc.org/sustainability along with a spreadsheet tem-
plate for reporting results).
1. Determine the contract requirements for sustainable
materials before bidding and accepting the project. Is this
project being constructed in a jurisdiction that has adopted the
IgCC? If so, is the native IgCC or ASHRAE 189.1 compliance
path being followed? Is the project pursuing LEED certifca-
tion and, if so, what level of certifcation? Does the contract
simply require the fabricator to document the recycled content
and source of materials or does it specify compliance thresholds
for the materials used on the project (i.e., the average recycled
content of all products delivered to the project site shall be 50%
and all products shall be sourced from within 500 miles of the
project site)? What materials must be separately reported (sec-
tions, connection material, bolts, deck, joists, etc.)? Contract
provisions and project specifcations control the requirements
for the material a fabricator acquires as well as the documenta-
tion that must be provided. To simply say this is a LEED proj-
ect does not defne material sourcing requirements or the level
of detail or completeness of material documentation.
It is not anticipated that, under any of the green systems,
all construction materials are required to report both recy-
cled and regional content values. Rather, during the design
phase of the project construction materials should be select-
ed and specifed that will typically meet the desired thresh-
olds. Too often advance planning is not performed relative
to materials, and the general contractor is left demanding
material data from all suppliers in an effort to reach a de-
sired threshold. This shotgun approach is unnecessary and
unwarranted resulting in additional costs, frustration and
confusion on the part of material suppliers. A more judicious
approach is to identify those materials providing the greatest
contribution to these credits (for instance, steel for recycled
content and concrete for regional content), then working
incrementally to the threshold level, looking sequentially at
other materials.
2. Verify with potential material suppliers that the re-
quired material or documentation is available. If materials
are being purchased from a service center, verify that the ser-
vice center can provide contact information or documentation
relating to both recycled content and regional sourcing for the
materials they provide. Note that industry average data is no
longer being accepted by USGBC.
One of the green tactics for NRELs Research Support Facility was
to use reclaimed steel oil pipe as structural columns; material reuse
is recognized by LEED, the IGCC and ASHRAE 189.1.
The NASA Sustainability Base, a LEED Certified steel-framed
office building at NASAs Ames Research Center in Silicon
Valley, Calif., features an external steel framing system from
which shading or solar elements can be hung.

3. Collect recycled content letters from all material sup-
pliers. In the past the domestic industry average recycled content
for steel produced from electric arc furnaces (EAF) and basic
oxygen furnaces (BOF) was accepted by all programs as suffcient
documentation. As of November 2012, LEED no longer accepts
industry average documentation but rather requires producer-
specifc documentation of the average recycled content of their
products. If specifc producer documentation is not available,
then a default recycled content value of 25% can be used for steel
products. The producer letter should distinguish the two different
types of recycled content and indicate the percentage of each. The
frst type is post-consumer recycled content, which includes any
material being recycled after it has recovered from a product used
by a consumer (i.e., an automobile). The second is pre-consumer
(post-industrial) recycled content, which is waste from an indus-
trial process other than the process producing the material (i.e.,
scrap bundles from an automobile production facility). A third
form of scrap, scrap that is recycled within the steel mill produc-
ing the product (called home scrap) is not considered recycled
material and does not enter into the calculation of recycled con-
tent. These calculations are done on the basis of mass. The calcu-
lated recycled content of the material varies by system. LEED and
ASHRAE-189.1 use the international methodology of calculating
recycled content as the post-consumer recycled content plus half
the pre-consumer recycled content. IGCC uses the simple sum of
the pre-consumer and post-consumer content.
4. Provide the general contractor with a recycled
content summary list. A spreadsheet template including
the appropriate calculations is available at www.aisc.org/
sustainability. It is important to recognize that while the
recycled content of a material is based on mass, the contribution
of that material to the overall recycled content of the building
is based on cost. The contribution of a structural steel frame to
the recycled content of the building is the recycled content of
the material (mass-based) multiplied by the cost of the structural
steel package excluding erection. This value is then added to
the contributions of other materials and divided by 45% of the
projects construction cost to determine the recycled content
attainment level of the building.
5. Document the regional material content of the proj-
ect. This is a complex challenge because of varying defnitions
of terms, variations within the structural steel supply chain and
differences in language between the various systems.
a) LEED. As of July 2012, LEED-NC 2009 MR-4 recognizes
two methods for calculating regional material. The frst re-
quires the point of extraction/recovery of feedstock material
and manufacture to be within 500 miles of the project site.
USGBC considers the point of manufacture for recycled ma-
terial products to be the location of the fnal fnished prod-
uct manufacturerwhich is the steel fabricator. The second
tracks the actual transportation distances of the material from
extraction/recovery to the mill to the service center to the
fabricator to the project site, with adjustments made for the
mode of transportation. Distances involving rail transport are
divided by 3, inland barge by 2 and ocean shipping by 15.
Under LEED the defnition of the point of extraction
for iron ore and coke is the location of the mine, while the
defnition of the point of extraction/recovery of scrap can
be the recycling facility, scrap yard, depository or stockpile.
This allows for two methodologies: a proportional method-
ology based on that percentage of mining or scrap sourcing
that occurs within 500 miles of the project site, or an all-
or-nothing approach that considers the mill location as the
recycling facility. Either approach can be taken but it must
be used consistently for all materials.
b) ASHRAE 189.1. This standard considers regional material
to be any material extracted, recovered or (not and) manu-
factured within 500 miles of the project site. Distances for
rail, barge or ship transportation are divided by a factor of
four. For structural steel this means that if the source of the
feedstock material, the mill or the fabricator is within an
adjusted distance of 500 miles of a project site, the material
qualifes as regional.
c) IGCC. The code considers regional material to be any
material extracted, recovered and (not or) manufactured
with 500 miles of the project site. Distances for rail, barge
or ship transportation are divided by a factor of four. For
structural steel this means that the source of the feedstock
material and the fabrication facility must be within an ad-
justed distance of 500 miles of the project site to qualify as
a regional material.
economics
The Ottawa Street Power Station in Lansing, Mich., reused
the majority of its steel framing system when it underwent
an adaptive reuse project that transformed it from a power
station to a modern office building. (See An Inside Job
12/2010 for more on this project.)
Douglas Steel
6. Provide the general contractor with a regional con-
tent summary list. It is very possible that a single project
may be required to meet the requirements of IgCC (native
or ASHRAE 189.1) and document contributions to LEED
thresholds, so each of the three methodologies may need to
be evaluated.
7. Include in the submissions the industry average re-
covery rate for structural steel materials used in building
construction. The current recovery rate, as documented by
the Steel Recycling Institute, for structural steel is 98.5%.
The require-
ments of these sys-
tems are continually
being modifed and
updated. LEED V4
will introduce cred-
its incentivizing the
provision of envi-
ronmental product
declarations (EPD)
and chemical disclo-
sure statements at
either the industry
or producer level for
a threshold number
of products for each
project. This will
not remove the need
for documenting re-
cycled and regional
content but rather
will increase the
amount of informa-
tion that a fabricator
will need to docu-
ment and report. For
updated information,
please check the
most recent infor-
mation at www.aisc.
org/sustainability
and download the
most current report-
ing templates.
What Should Engineers Know?
In many ways structural engineers have had little engage-
ment with the green codes, standards and rating systems. The
LEED program did not require any direct involvement from
the structural engineer. Documentation of recycled and re-
gional content levels was left to the general contractor and the
specialty contractors that supplied the material.
Certainly the framing system designs produced by struc-
tural engineers can impact the sustainable performance of a
building. Careful detailing can avoid thermal bridging issues
(see the 03/2012 supplement on thermal bridging, available
at www.aisc.org/sustainability). Proper material selection
can reduce environmental impacts and the embodied en-
ergy of the structure, although research has shown that dif-
ferences in embodied impacts between structural steel- and
concrete-framed structures are small (see And the Winner
is..., 08/2010). Collaborative design approaches that include
the steel fabricator in the design phase of the project can actu-
ally have a greater impact than material selection through the
optimization of ma-
terial usage and fab-
rication processes.
Yet up until now,
there was little the
structural engineer
was required to per-
form or document
to generate credits
in the LEED-NC
programs. That is
about to change.
The adoption of the
IgCC will require
structural engineers
to document the
anticipated contri-
bution of structural
materials to the re-
cycled and regional
material content of
the building during
plan review in order
for building permits
to be issued. These
estimates will be
made using typical
industry averages for
the recycled content
of construction ma-
terials, typical sourc-
ing options relative
to regional content
and the associated
portion of delivered
material costs to the overall structure cost. At the same time
documentation of anticipated material recovery rates and any
use of recovered material will need to be made to verify that
the required thresholds of the IgCC will be reached. And, if
the choice is made to perform these calculations based on mass
rather than cost, the structural engineer will need to estimate
the fnal mass of the structure.
But the real change will come with the increasing
requirement for the use of LCAs. LCAs attempt to quantify
economics
The IgCC is a product of the International Code Council and underwent multiple
public hearing sessions, all of which AISC and other steel industry representatives
attended and participated in.
Greenbuild is the worlds largest green building event (it routinely draws crowds of
around 30,000) and is run by USGBC, which also administers the LEED program.

the difference in environmental impacts between alternative
building designs for various impact categories, although
regretfully not all impact categories are typically considered.
LCAs are a key credit component in the draft version of LEED
V4 and an optional compliance path in IgCC and ASHRAE
189.1. The assessment is the product of two sets of data. The
frst set includes the life cycle inventories of the products used
in the construction of the building. The second set includes
the design quantities of the materials used in the building.
Signifcant challenges exist with respect to the completeness
and accuracy of these data sets.
Accurate life cycle inventories (LCI) of products are diff-
cult to identify. LCIs for different products may have selected
different boundary conditions in the calculation of their spe-
cifc inventories. Some products may only include impacts of
the production process (cradle-to-gate) while other products
may include all phases of a products life from production
through installation to demolition to reclamation (cradle-to-
cradle). Any building analysis comparing framing systems or
products with LCIs using different boundary conditions is
invalid. In addition, LCI data may be old, represent prod-
uct production techniques not in use in a specifc region or
use a different data collection and calculation methodology,
as documented in a study by Zygomalas and Baniotopoulus
titled Uncertainty in Life Cycle Assessments Induced by
LCI Data, the Case of Structural Steel. For example, the
current LCI data for hot-rolled structural steel uses global
data that includes a large production component related to
BOF facilitieswhereas all hot-rolled structural steel pro-
duced in the U.S. comes from EAF facilities. The difference
in the impact of these mismatched data sets was clearly seen
at a presentation at the recent Greenbuild conference in San
Francisco, where a comparative study was presented that
used a structural steel data set assuming that 60,000 gallons
of water were consumed in the domestic production of each
ton of structural steel. In reality, the water consumption rate
of structural steel produced in the U.S. is less than 70 gal-
lons per ton; the result was that the comparison was mis-
represented by a factor of nearly 1,000! Work is currently
underway to develop and publish a U.S.-specifc LCI data
set for structural steel.
The second challenge relates to determination of the
material quantities used in the LCA. Tools to accurately
perform LCAs are complex, cumbersome and expensive to
implement. In order to encourage the use of LCAs, estima-
tors have been developed that attempt to parametrically de-
termine the amount of material in a structure using a spe-
cific framing system approach. Regretfully, little flexibility
exists in the selection of these systems resulting in gross
approximations of material quantities and the possibilities
of significant errors. In a recent study by Ryerson Univer-
sity of actual quantities versus quantities used in the most
popular of these estimators, the ATHENA Impact Estima-
tor, it was found that concrete quantities were overstated
by 6% and structural steel quantities were overstated by
28%. Jennifer OConnor of the ATHENA Institute, speak-
ing at Greenbuild, summed up the issues surrounding the
implementation of LCAs stating that LCA is full of un-
certainties. Clearly, if LCAs are to become a significant
tool in building design, actual material quantities that flow
from the actual structural design coupled with accurate
LCI data will be necessary. As the structural engineer is
the only source of accurate design information, the task of
performing the LCA on structural frames of the building
will ultimately be their responsibility.
Additional topics specifcally related to the practice of struc-
tural engineering are beginning to be discussed within the
green community and are already making their way into niche
building segments such as healthcare facilities. These include
service life, adaptability for future modifcations and decon-
structability considerations.
All of this will require structural engineers to develop a
cheat sheet containing information on all structural materials
showing:
the typical pre- and post-consumer recycled content of
the material (hot-rolled structural steel pre-consumer
content = 19.5%, post-consumer = 69.0%)
recovery rates (structural steel = 98.5%)
typical sourcing and transportation of material in the
project locale
the availability of EPDs and chemical disclosure state-
ments
In addition, the structural engineer will ultimately need to:
Estimate building mass at each design stage
Assess the feasibility of alternative details to limit thermal
bridging
Perform preliminary recycled and regional content
threshold calculations
Evaluate the possibility of using recovered material
Prepare standard language for frame service life
Prepare to opine on the adaptability, resilience and de-
constructability of the structure
Learn about LCAs, their application and their limitations
Final Thoughts
Sustainable design and construction is not a passing trend. It
has become an issue for consideration on every building project.
Sustainable design practices and sustainable steel fabricating
practices will become a normal business activity independent
of whether they are codifed or recognized. The advent of base
level green codes and standards coupled with an escalation of
LEED requirements presents a variety of challenges for the
design and construction professional. But these changes create
an even greater challenge of understanding for local jurisdic-
tional bodies and building code offcials. Structural engineers
and structural steel fabricators can play a signifcant role in in-
troducing these individuals to the intricacies and limitations of
new requirements such as LCAs.
economics
BY GREG MITTENDORF
Taking a BIM approach,
a recent expansion to a Michigan casino ended up not being a gamble.
Winning
Big
THE DRIVE ALONG the busy I-94 expressway between Detroit
and Chicago is about four hours but can sometimes seem even
longer. FireKeepers Casino Hotel in Battle Creek, Mich., about
halfway between the two cities, hopes to serve as a brief stopping
point along the wayand maybe more.
Thanks to a recent expansion, the owners are banking
on the idea that the casino will attract visitors from outside
of the immediate area by upgrading from a locally focused
casino to a true destination resort. The addition includes a
242-room hotel, a bingo hall, a warehouse and more than
20,000 sq. ft of flexible event space. It transforms the casino
into an instant landmark along the I-94 expressway; the
50-ft-tall sign with 86,000 lights is hard to miss.
BIM, Inside and Out
The steel-framed expansion was fabricated by Douglas
Steel Fabricating Corporation in Lansing, Mich. Douglas
hired Nucor Vulcraft Group to model, manufacture and
deliver the open-web steel joists and metal decking for the
project. A building information modeling (BIM) approach
was used to ensure that all joists and deck were manufac-
tured to fit precisely, which minimized change orders upon
Greg Mittendorf (gmittendorf@
vulcraft-in.com) is business
development manager at Nucor
Vulcraft Group and is located
at the companys St. Joe, Ind.,
division.
delivery. Vulcraft supplied its model to Doug-
las Steel to incorporate into their own model,
which included all the details required by the
HVAC contractor to ensure the ductwork could
be precisely prefabricated and routed with no
interference. This clash-detection aspect of BIM
also helped the team avoid a potential field issue
between the joist bridging and structural hang-
ers supports for the movable room partitions in
the event center. Given the potential difficulty
to manufacture these elements, incorporating an
accurate model into the process was crucial and
ended up saving valuable time and more than
$60,000.
On the exterior, the expansion added an
instantly recognizable structure, also using
Vulcraft deck: the birds beak entry. Guests
are welcomed into the casino via this steel porte
cochere constructed of curved members, all
Greg Hughes
John Gilroy Photography
FireKeepers Casino Hotel, as seen from the front....
...from the air...
...and via a SDS/2 model.

modeled in SDS/2 so that the structure could first
be built virtually before being built physically.
The birds beak is fabricated from HSS2012
rolled to a 116-ft, 5-in. radius on the perimeter, with
HSS168 rolled to a 99-ft, 9-in. radius for the top
chord and a 99-ft, 2-in. radius for the bottom chord
of the center truss. The center truss is tied with inter-
mediate trusses to the perimeter HSS members. The
intermediate trusses are fabricated from HSS84
top chords and HSS44 bottom chords with HSS
round members in the webs.
While the hotel portion was framed with concrete,
the screen wall is structural steel that serves as a deco-
rative sign rolled to a 2,210-ft, 6.5-in. radius, comple-
menting the style of the entire structure. The exhibit
hall was framed with HSS columns and wide-fange
beams with the long-span joists completing the roof
framing.
The total weight for the expansions steel pack-
ageincluding joists, deck and bridgingwas more
than 400 tons. Long-span joiststhere were 55
spanning 120 ft long and ranging in depth from 88
in. to 120 in.were used for the event center, which
will be used for concerts and entertainment as well
as other large gatherings. These long-span joists
were shipped to the site in two pieces and spliced in
The "bird's beak," under construction (top) and com-

pleted (bottom).
Greg Hughes
Douglas Steel

the feld prior to erection. The expansion opened this past
December.
As designers look to add distinctive components to their
projectswhich will likely include special profle joists and
girders, if not birds beak structuresas with the FireKeep-
ers expansion, BIM will become an increasingly valuable tool.
An added beneft of BIM is being able to see the layers of
construction, making a daunting expansion simpler to visual-
ize, said Lawrence Kruth, vice president of engineering, tech-
nology and safety of Douglas Steel and chair of the AISC Safety
Committee. Not only was the Vulcraft team able to help us
take the owners vision and bring it to life, but we also saved
time and money.
Owner
FireKeepers Casino Hotel, Battle Creek, Mich.
Construction Manager
Clark Construction Company, Lansing, Mich.
Architect
Thalden Boyd Emery Architects, St. Louis
Structural Engineer
KJWWEngineering Consultants, St. Louis
Steel Team
Fabricator, Erector and Detailer
Douglas Steel Fabricating Corporation, Lansing, Mich.
(AISC Member/AISC Certied Fabricator and Erector)
Greg Hughes
Douglas Steel
Curved HSS and Vulcraft decking frame the bird's beak.
Douglas Steel
The clash-detection aspect of BIM helped the team avoid a

potential field issue between the joist bridging and structural
hangers supports for in the event center.

ELEGANT ENGINEERING IS often the byproduct of con-
scious and disciplined efforts to reduce complexity. However, in
certain situations, it is necessary to fully embrace itas well as
the opportunities it provides for new ways of thinking.
For example, Meinhardt Group recently completed a fnite
element analysis (FEA) of the Singapore Sports Hub Stadium
Roof, designed by Arup and scheduled to open in 2014. (The
analysis was actually done as a peer reivew; according to local
building regulations, all projects in Singapore are required to
undergo a second-party peer review certifying that the major
structural elements have been adequately designed and detailed.)
The review involved verifying that all members have adequate
capacity and the welded hollow structural section (HSS) connec-
tions (welds, joint cans, end thickening, etc.) have been appropri-
ately designed and detailed. The main stadium roof has a diameter
of approximately 300 m (984 ft) and rises to over 70 m (230 ft)
in elevation. The covered surface area of the stadium is approxi-
mately 71,000 sq. m (764,238 sq. ft) and will have a seating capacity
of 55,000. The roof is exclusively comprised of round HSS (main
chord members are approximately 18 in. in diameter and the sec-
ondary members are 11 in. in diameter; total steel tonnage for the
roof is 9,000). At the node points, thickened joint cans are intro-
duced to receive the incoming brace members. The three com-
ponents of the stadium are shown in Table 1 and illustrated in the
fgure. The scale of the project can be demonstrated by the size of
the structural analysis work, as illustrated in in Table 2.
A model of the roof (colors correspond to Table 1).
Table 2: Structural Analysis Dataset
BY KERMIN CHOK
Judicious use of a suite of design and analysis tools on a stadium project gave a
consulting engineering frm a whole new way of looking at engineering workfows.
Embracing
Complexity
Roof Component
Number of
Elements
Number of
Connection Nodes
Fixed (Blue) 13,102 4,490
Movable (Red) 5,394 2,178
Louvers (Yellow) 6,858 3,960
Total 25,354 10,628
Table 1: Stadium Roof Components
Total number of beams 25,354
Number of load cases 26
Number of load combinations 96
Number of models
(open/closed position, fixed/flexible
support condition)
4
Number of output stations (start, end) 2
Number of result types
(axial, moment, shear, torque)
6
Number of sets of beam results
25,354(96+26)42=
24.7 million
Total number of results items 24.76 = 148.2 million
Maximum number of MS Excel rows 1,048,576
Maximum size of MS Access database 2 GB
The primary codes of practice used on the project are listed
in Table 3. Depending on the type of check, enveloped forces or
load case forces were used for evaluation. Using an enveloped
set of forces condensed the result set of 24 million into a man-
ageable set of 25,000.
Louvers
Fixed Roof
Movable Roof
Images: Courtesy Meinhardt Group
Application Design Code/Procedure Comments Forces Required
Member Checks
BS 5950: Structural use of steelwork in
building
Primary code for verification of strength
verification of tubular members
Envelope Min/Max
Connection Checks
CIDECT Design Guide 1: Circular Hollow
Section (CHS) Joints under predominantly
static loading
Primary code of reference for standard
Joint configurations
Envelope Min/Max
Connection Checks AWS D1.1: Structural Welding Code-Steel
Secondary code of reference for
verification of joint can capacity
Load case
Connection Checks Finite Element Analysis
Procedure for evaluation of stress with
multiple overlapped members
Load case
Table 3: Design Codes
Storage and Checks
Traditional data storage means (MS Excel, MS Access)
were grossly inadequate for the analysis model dataset. Besides
simply storing the data, the team needed the ability to quickly
query the dataset to obtain specifc load case forces or envel-
oped forces for a particular set of members. More importantly,
any process automation depended on the ability to reliably
query the dataset in a structured manner. SQL Server 2008 was
chosen since our offce already had a license of this software
used in accounting and other back end offce roles.
CIDECT-based checks generally approach connections
based on their classifcation, depending on the incoming brace
geometry and force distributions. A subroutine was written in
VB.net, leveraging the Rhino geometry engine, to calculate rel-
ative angles, overlaps between incoming beams and any other
geometrical information required for code based checks; enve-
lope forces were used in this case.
When using AWS D1.1 to compute joint capacities, the
joint needs to be evaluated on a load case by load case basis.
Such an approach required more than 1,000,000 unique
code based evaluations. A complete AWS code check script
was thus written in VB.net, again using the Rhino geometry
engine for geometrical evaluations and SQL Server for brace
force extraction.
The fnite element approach was used for joints where com-
plicated overlaps between incoming beams occurred or addi-
tional verifcation was deemed necessary due to the criticality of
the joint or the magnitude of forces being transferred. The FEA
of a joint requires signifcantly more effort since the creation of
the surface geometry, transfer of geometrical information to an
FEA package and post-processing are traditionally very time-
consuming and manual tasks. As much of the FEA process as
possible was automated. The only thing that was not automated
was the verifcation of stress levels in the particular model after
it was run.
FEA Model Pre-Processing
Pre-processing was heavily automated and primarily
required the creation of a surface model from the base
wireframe information, which also required outer diameter
and thickness information of the incoming members. The
sequence of primary and secondary members was read from
the base engineers information (referred to as the cutting
sequence). The cutting sequence determined the continuous
brace and the other braces that get profle cut against the
primary member. The surface model was transferred to the
FEA package (Strand7) via a custom VB.net script hosted
in Rhino-Grasshopper. All analysis options and property
information (such as plate thickness) were automatically set,
and the only manual intervention was confrmation of the
fnite element mesh quality. FEA models typically consisted of
20,000 to 60,000 Quad8 fnite elements.
Kermin Chok (kc@meinhardt.

com.sg) is a technical director in
the Singapore ofce of Meinhardt
Group.
The various software packages used for the review.
Strand7
(Finite element
modeling)
Rhino-Grasshopper
(Custom script
deployment)
Excel
(Base engineer's information)
VB.Net
(Script development)
Rhino
(Geometry Engine)
SQL Server
(Storage and
retrieval of
data)
Load application of the 520 coincident load cases to the
model was also automated. The automation of load appli-
cation not only made the actual analysis possible but, once
qualifed and checked, also eliminated human error. While the
model was loaded with all 520 load cases, a select few cases
(approximately 30 to 50) were run due to time and practical
considerations of result fle size. The load cases were selected
based on minimum/maximum forces and previously estimated
AWS usage.
FEA Model Post-Processing
Documentation of the FEA models was required after the
manual verifcation of the stress contours. In traditional FEA
post-processing, an engineer typically takes screen shots of
various angles of the model and different performance mea-
sures such as stress and deformation. If only a small number of
models were involved in our analysis, a manual process would
have been acceptable. However, given the large number of FEA
models (more than 200), a systematic process was needed to
capture the stress contours and the model defnition. A stand-
alone program, which interacted with the Strand7 FEA model
through the application programming interface (API), was
developed. This program opened the model, captured images
of the individual beams from different angles and stored the
images in a JPEG format, with standard fle prefxes for easy
identifcation. This program allowed multiple models to be
queued up at the end of the workday for post-processing over-
night. Four viewing angles of a particular brace were captured,
which resulted in anywhere from 60 to 120 images per FEA
model being created.
New Approaches
Thanks to this project, weve been able to develop new
workflows based on other disciplines; our team tapped
database approaches (SQL Server) typically used in the
back end of many commercial applications such as account-
ing and web services. We also adopted 3D surface mod-
eling software typically used in architectural and marine
design applications (Rhino). However, creativity and flex-
ibility were the most important tools in our arsenal, and
the human mind was the indispensable judge to determine
which tasks could be and should be automated. Regular
engineering tasks will continue to be more efficient as tech-
nologies develop. However, the appropriate application of
the relevant technologies (human or computer) will ulti-
mately be the differentiating factor in the pursuit of engi-
neering excellence.
Pre-Processing of the FEA models.
Meshed FEA Model
(Structural Analysis)
Surface Geometry (Rhino)
Original Wireframe Geometry
(Structural Analysis)
FEA post-processing, indicating the stress contours of
an HSS node.
Sample of FEA connections and actual HSS.
CHS 457x10
CHS 457x36
CHS 457x50
CHS 3556x8
CHS 273x10
CHS 457x50
CHS 457x12
CHS 457x50
Theres always a solution in steel.
American Institute of Steel Construction
One East Wacker Drive Ste. 700
Chicago, IL 60601
312.670.2400 www.aisc.org
Digital Edition and Hard Copy
NOW AVAILABLE
Order your copy today!
$175 Members s $350 Non-Members
800.644.2400 s www.aisc.org/bookstore
SEISMIC DESIGN MANUAL
Second Edition
Get the latest
information on seismic design.
A new arch span replaces a historic Iowa bridge and serves as a pilot for a
statewide bridge performance-monitoring program.
Pilot
Program
REPLACEMENT DECISIONS ARENT ALWAYS EASY
especially when the structure in question is listed on the
National Register of Historic Places.
In the case of the Iowa Falls Bridge, which crosses the Iowa
River on U.S. Highway 65 in Iowa Falls, Iowa, it had to happen.
The bridge, a 235-ft-long reinforced concrete open spandrel
deck arch structure (with a 24-ft-wide roadway and 5-ft-wide
sidewalks on each side), was built in 1928 and was considered a
local landmark. The existing bridge had undergone rehabilita-
tion on seven different occasions, including major ones in 1976
and 2000. However, by 2007, the bridge had become structur-
ally defcient and the costs of repairs and strengthening were
deemed high enough to warrant replacing it rather than reha-
bilitating it yet again.
Under a contract with the Iowa Department of Transportation
(Iowa DOT), HDR Engineering, Inc., performed a study of fea-
sible replacement options and demolition concepts as well as fnal
design services for the new span. (In addition, and under a separate
contract, Iowa State University instituted a feld test program to
focus on the structural performance evaluation of several critical
components during construction of the new bridge for correlation
with expected design performance. See the sidebar for more.)
Iowa Falls prides itself as a scenic town with the Iowa River at
the center of its beauty, and is committed to historical preserva-
tion; any replacement option that did not ft the desired aesthetics
and community expectations would have faced strong opposition.
Through a brainstorming session between Iowa DOT and HDR,
it was decided that replacement options would be limited to girder
and arch type bridges. Four different bridge alternatives were con-
sidered and evaluated for cost, timeline for construction, aesthetic
value, constructability and impact on the community. The bridge
options evaluated were: a prestressed concrete girder, a haunched
steel girder, a concrete deck arch and a partial through steel arch.
In an effort to engage the community and solicit opinions on
the type of bridge to replace the existing arch bridge, the Iowa
DOT held a public information meeting to showcase each of the
options considered. The attendees favored the partial through
steel arch bridge, and this ended up being the chosen design.
BY HUSSEIN KHALIL, P.E.,
ALEKSANDER NELSON, P.E.,
AHMAD ABU-HAWASH,
BRENT PHARES, PH.D.,
AND TERRY WIPF, PH.D.
Iowa DOT
Chicago Metal Rolled Products Saved Their Customer
More Than 80,000 lbs. of 12 Sq. Tubing.
Terry Wipf serves as
the interim chair for
the Civil, Construction
and Environmental
Engineering Department
at Iowa State University.
Hussein Khalil is a
vice president and the
construction services
section manager for the
Transportation Group in
HDRs Omaha ofce.
Aleksander Nelson is a
senior project manager
for the Transportation
Group in HDRs Omaha
ofce.
Ahmad Abu-Hawash
is the chief structural
engineer with the
Iowa Department of
Transportation.
Brent Phares is associate
director for Bridges
and Structures at the
Center for Transportation
Research and Education at
Iowa State University.
The Iowa Falls Bridge replaces a reinforced concrete open spandrel deck arch structure.
A drawing of the longitudinal section of the new partial thru steel arch bridge.
HDR Engineering
Tight Quarters
The new bridge is approximately 30 ft wider than the existing
bridge, and with intersecting city streets just off each end, Saint
Matthews Episcopal Church on the northwest corner and private
property owners on both the southeast and northeast corners,
available room for the proposed span was a precious commodity.
With the arch foundations required to be set approximately 30 ft
below grade, coupled with the need to maintain access to the east
side of the church, vertical cuts in the rock were required to allow
room for the footings and yet leave suffcient space for access. In
addition, retaining walls were constructed to preserve and stabilize
the ground adjacent to the church and nearby properties.
The partial through steel arch is 67 ft, 10-in. wide between
the centers of the two arch ribs and 276 ft long between the
bearing pins. The structure supports a 63-ft, 8-in. bridge deck
consisting of a 5-ft, 2-in. wide sidewalk, 11-ft,10-in.-wide multi-
use trail and a 42-ft-wide clear roadway. For design and aesthetic
reasons, a height factor of 0.25 was used for the parabolic curve
of the arch ribs. The arch ribs are braced by four struts above the
bridge deck, two framed-in foor beams and one set of cross brac-
ing below the bridge deck at each end of the bridge.
The bridge deck is supported on a steel stringer and foor
beam system. Nine of the foor beams are hung from the arch
rib while the two end foor beams are framed directly into
the arch ribs. The interior stringers connect to the interior
foor beams with simple shear clip angle connections and run
continuous over the top of the end foor beams. The exterior
stringers are stiffening girders designed to distribute vehicu-
lar loads from the deck to multiple hanger cables, as well as
minimize local live load defections.
The stiffening girders were designed
in tandem with the hangers from both
a functional and a theoretical stand-
point. The arch ribs are protected from
vehicular traffc by a traffc separation
barrier, either a sidewalk or a multiuse
trail, and fnally by a steel handrail on a
raised concrete parapet. To allow ease of
maintenance and in case of damage to
the hanger cables, the cables were sized
to allow for full roadway traffc with any
one of the four cables in a set removed
or damaged.
The stiffening girder design was
governed by the effects of the live load
causing differential elongations in the
hanger cables as the load moves over
the bridge deck. A baseline analysis was
performed on a conventional girder
bridge on rigid supports, and the
hanger cable connections were mod-
eled as rigid supports in the vertical
direction. The results from this analy-
sis were used in the design of the end
spans where the stiffening girder passes
over the rigid end foor beam. How-
ever, for the locations where the inte-
rior foor beams are supported by the
hanger cables, a second model was cre-
ated to include the effects of the cable
elongation under load and the distrib-
uting effects of the stiffening girder.
The moment demand on the stiffening
girder generated by the live load was
approximately fve times higher than
the baseline analysis due to the effects
of hanger cable elongation.
Geometric Issues
The design of the arch rib had a few
added complications due to the geom-
etry of the bridge. There were situa-
tions in the bridge where conventional
design practices used to minimize out-
of-plane loads could not be followed.
One case is the wind bracing between
the arch ribs. In many arch bridges the
bracing system is trussed to limit weak
axis bending as a result of wind loads
perpendicular to the arch rib. However,
due to the bridge's width-to-span ratio,
a trussed bracing system was deemed
ineffcient and impractical. Therefore,
four struts were provided between the
arch ribs to allow them to share the lat-
eral loads, but the resistance to those
loads would be in the weak axis bend-
ing of the arch ribs. This resulted in
an arch rib with with minor tension in
the corners at service load. This com-
plicated the requirements for testing
on the arch rib as it became a fracture-
critical component.
Another area where the large bridge
width-to-span ratio caused the design
to diverge from conventional thinking
was with the end foor beams that frame
directly into the arch rib. A shorter
bridge span allows for a smaller arch
rib, but a larger bridge width requires a
larger end foor beam, and thus a larger
end foor beam connection. The result
was that the end foor beam needed to
be both as narrow and shallow as possible
and yet still impart signifcant out-of-
plane bending forces into the arch rib.
To minimize the size of the end
foor beam as well as provide it with
increased toughness and fatigue resis-
tance, it was designed to be made of
A709 Grade HPS50W. While the
design limits of HPS steel are similar
Healthy Bridges
As part of designing, building and
maintaining the bridge infrastructure in
Iowa, the Iowa DOT has in recent years
focused efforts on investigating the use
of new high-performance materials,
new design concepts and construc-
tion methods, and various new main-
tenance methods. These progressive
efforts are intended to increase the life
span of bridges in meeting the DOTs
objective of building and maintaining
safe, cost-effective structures. Bridge
testing and monitoring has been ben-
ecial in helping with these efforts, as
well as providing important information
to evaluate the structural performance
and safety of bridges.
The Iowa DOT testing and moni-
toring program, in coordination with
the Bridge Engineering Center (BEC)
at Iowa State University, collects per-
formance data to compare against
design-based structural parameters
to determine if the structural response
is appropriate. The data may also
be used to calibrate an analytical
model that may be used to provide
a more detailed structural assessment
(e.g., a load rating to determine safe
bridge capacity). Diagnostic testing
has also been used to help identify
deterioration or damage, or to assess
the integrity of an implemented repair
or strengthening method.
In cases where the Iowa DOT has
investigated the use of innovative
materials (e.g., high-performance steel,
ultra-high-performance concrete and
ber-reinforced polymers) and design/
construction methods, they have
used testing as part of a program for
evaluating the bridge performance. The
most challenging research program has
been related to developing structural
health monitoring (SHM) to determine
the real-time structural and continuous
condition of a bridge. An example of
such work that has been ongoing for
several years aimed to develop a SHM
system to identify crack development
in fatigue-prone areas of structural
steel bridges. The next step in the
evolution of bridge monitoring for the
Iowa DOT is to implement monitoring
systems that not only assess targeted
structural performance parameters, but
that can also be applicable to assessing
general conditions (both structural and
nonstructural) using multiple sensors
and sensor types.
The four bridge alternatives that were considered. Clockwise from upper-left: a
prestressed concrete girder, a haunched steel girder, a partial through steel arch
(the selected design) and a concrete deck arch.
HDR Engineering
With respect to the Iowa Falls Bridge project, the goal
was to implement a multi-sensor continuous SHM system.
This pilot monitoring system was developed for general
performance evaluation (structural, environmental, etc.)
so that it can be easily adapted to other bridge types and
other monitoring needs (the system has been functioning
successfully and plans are currently underway for imple-
menting it on a second bridge). It allows easy access to real-
time data and provides the data in a format that allows for
immediate implementation by the Iowa DOT.
The general attributes of the sensor system are as follows:
Environmental
Wind speed and direction
Bridge deck potential icing conditions
Structural
Corrosion potential on one micropile foundation
Corrosion potential in substructure element at one
bridge end expansion joint and at tie-back rod
connecting abutment to drilled shaft
Corrosion of bridge deck
Moisture in arch rib
Relative movement between south and north
abutments
Behavior of concrete anchors for rock cut support wall
Arch Forces (strain gages)
At mid-span
Just above base at south end
Type B oorbeam
Each ange splice location
At outer support plate of the hinge bearing at
south end
Rotation (tilt) at hinge bearing on south end
Hanger forces and oor beam connection
(cable type strain gage and/or accelerometers)
Hanger exceeds threshold stress
(or hanger breaks); send alert
Stiffening girder fatigue at transition
Collect data for ofine ofce use in updating bridge
superstructure rating (i.e., live load demand) and for
detection of heavy loads
Vehicle Classication System and other Communication
Vehicle geometry/volume, alert for delays, etc.
Web-based dashboard
Custom software was developed for this SHM system
deployment and was made to be generic enough such
that transfer to other applications is seamless. One critical
component is the proprietary damage detection algorithm
developed at the BEC. This algorithm is included in the soft-
ware such that the entire system provides operational data,
environmental data and a real-time check of conditions.
One critical product developed for this project was a web-
based dashboard (i.e., real-time reporting for operational
center management). There is one primary web page
containing web links designed for each appropriate DOT
ofce to use the SHM eld data. The format of the data is
based upon structural performance parameters (e.g., live load
distribution, member live load forces, vehicle position on the
bridge, etc.), which can be used directly in updating the rating.
The format of the data is also based upon critical inspection
performance indicators (e.g,. corrosion growth and moisture
accumulation), as well as structural response indicators, such as
stress, that might exceed acceptable thresholds.
Locations of the health monitoring instrumentation for the
Iowa Falls Bridge.
Iowa DOT
to those of standard weathering steel, it

inherently has higher fatigue and fracture
resistance. Initially, the potential for higher
yield strengths of the HPS steel were also
considered. However, to limit defections, a
higher moment of inertia and a lower yield
strength were deemed the better option for
this situation.
Another design challenge was decid-
ing on the type of bearing used to sup-
port the arch ribs. Often, with longer
spans, the reduced k value for the
kL/r ratio obtained by use of a fxed
bearing will more than offset the addi-
tional steel required to resist the higher
moments developed at the arch skewback
due to the fxity of the bearing. After
much iterative analysis, it was deter-
mined the overall weight of structural
steel for the bridge would not be signif-
cantly impacted by the choice of bearing.
However, the pinned bearing connection
removes the primary moment from the
footing, resulting in a smaller required
A stuation plan of the bridge.

Aerial rendering of the project. Avail-
able room on either bank was a precious
commodity.
A pinned bearing constructed in place.
Iowa DOT
Iowa DOT
HDR Engineering
HDR Engineering
footing. This beneft, in conjunction with the aforementioned
tight geometrics, was the ultimate reason for choosing a
pinned bearing connection.
Construction
The contractor, Cramer and Associates, Inc., of Grimes, Iowa,
accessed the bridge site from the city boat ramp identifed early
in the concept stage as a possible means of access. Cramer used
the ramp to foat barges onto the river to aid in the demolition
of the existing bridge and the construction of the replacement
bridge. On top of these barges were mounted cranes and aerial
lifts to grant the ability to access the water line of the rock walls
as well as assist in the erection of the arch.
Cramer frst constructed the micropile retaining wall on
the south side of the historic church. This walls purpose was
more than just replacing a crumbling wall impacted by the
bridge construction; it was also needed to stabilize the foun-
dation of the historical church to limit the risk from vibra-
tions during demolition of the existing bridge. Following this
construction, they proceeded with the demolition of the arch.
Conventional methods were used for the removal of the exist-
ing deck and columns. The concrete from the deck removal
was then used to line the channel underneath the bridge, as it
was Cramers intent to drop the arch pieces onto the rubble
pad built under the bridge. The arches were jackhammered
at a strategic location near the end, thus allowing them to
fall under their own weight onto the earthen pad constructed
underneath the existing bridge. The construction team then
proceeded to perform the excavation for the abutment and
construct the rock walls around the abutments. Concurrently
with the excavation and abutment construction, Cramer con-
structed the falsework supports to aid in the erection of the
steel arch and the deck framing.
The steel erection began with the placement of the south
bearings. Using falsework towers in the river, the frst two seg-
ments of the arch were erected from both sides of the river.
The falsework towers were designed to allow the segments of
the arch to be adjusted vertically to facilitate the setting of the
crown section. After both arch ribs were erected along with the
end foor beams, lower cross bracing and the cross struts, the
contractor started erecting the foor system. The foor system
was erected in a panel-by-panel method from south to north.
The new bridge used 835 tons of structural steel in all.
The Iowa DOT met its goals by replacing an existing func-
tionally obsolete and structurally defcient bridge with an eco-
nomical solution that met the community expectations. Cra-
mer was allotted 190 contract days to complete construction.
It opened the bridge to traffc on November 18, 2010, and was
therefore eligible for the No Excuse Bonus of $250,000 for
completing construction within the required timeframe.
Owner
Iowa Department of Transportation
Structural Engineer
HDR Engineering, Inc., Omaha, Neb.
General Contractor
Cramer and Associates, Inc., Grimes, Iowa
Demolition of the existing concrete bridge.

Erection of the new steel bridge.
Iowa DOT
HDR Engineering
THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION of a building can be reduced
by the effective placement of elements that contribute to a
buildings mass.
Lightweight building systems have long been considered
to be less energy effcient in this regard than mass-intensive
systems. That assumption was challenged by a Ryerson Uni-
versity research study conducted by Dr. Mark Gorgolewski
(see Framing Systems and Thermal Mass, in the January
2007 issue) that demonstrated that the quantity of mass was
not the only factor in determining the overall thermal eff-
ciency of a building system. Rather the thickness, placement
and exposure of building materials with high thermal mass
all impact the materials contribution to the buildings energy
effciency. The Ryerson study concluded that structural steel-
framed buildings can contain adequate quantities of high ther-
mal mass materials, such as concrete, to provide equivalent
energy savings to high-mass buildings.
Here, well extend that discussion by looking at the energy
impact that the amount and placement of insulation can have
for both mass and lightweight wall systems as well as the relative
impact of the thermal mass contributed by foor systems. What
weve discovered is that through proper material placement and
the use of energy modeling as a design tool, the amount of ther-
mal mass necessary to achieve energy benefts similar to those
of concrete-framed buildings is available in steel-framed build-
ings without a signifcant increase in project cost.
Thermal Mass: A History
Prior to the advent of modern lightweight construction,
which uses materials such as plywood, gypsum wallboard and
sheathing, corrugated steel decks and light-gauge steel framing,
building structures and elements of solid masonry were essen-
tially standard practice. As time has shown, these structures
had the advantage of being extremely durable and redundant,
capable of performing in harsh winters as well as hot and humid
summers. Their thick, massive walls and interior components
had signifcant thermal mass (also referred to as heat capacity),
allowing them to store and gradually release heat over time. In
winter climates heat stored during the day, when temperatures
are warm (relative to night conditions) and solar gains are high,
is released into the building at night. The opposite is true in the
summer; walls that cool off overnight retain their cool during
the day and help to even out peak high temperatures and solar
gains during the day.
Despite these benefts, solid masonry buildings had two
primary disadvantages. Although their thermal mass aided in
reducing peak heating and cooling loads, these typically un-
insulated buildings were still relatively ineffcient compared to
modern insulated construction. Second, and more timely to the
demise of this construction style, were the practical limits of
solid masonry construction. The growth of large cities in the
early 1900s created a need to build taller buildings faster and at
a lower cost than was possible with traditional building styles.
For example, when completed in 1893, the Monadnock Build-
ing in Chicago was the largest offce building in the world. The
north half of the building, at 16 stories in height, remains one
of the tallest structures in the world to be built solely from load-
bearing masonry. To support the weight of the structure, the
solid brick walls at the foundation level are over 1.8m (6 ft)
thick. This half of the building took nearly two years to com-
plete. In sharp contrast, the steel-framed Empire State Building
in New York City, the tallest building in the world (102 stories)
from its completion in 1931 until 1972, was built in just over a
year. This comparison, while extreme, highlights the limitations
of solid masonry construction and the need to use alternate
structural systems to support the needs of modern buildings.
BY SEAN M. OBRIEN, P.E., LEED AP
Designing thermal mass to
promote energy effciency in buildings.
Think Thermal
Sean M. OBrien (smobrien@sgh.
com) is an associate principal with
the New York ofce of Simpson
Gumperz and Heger.
The Thermal Challenge
Although for a time steel-framed buildings were still con-
structed with infll (non-load-bearing) walls of solid or hol-
low-core masonry, by the 1950s and 1960s lightweight wall
construction had all but taken over. Along with the need for
increased energy effciency came insulation in walls and roofs,
which helped reduce overall energy consumption but at the
same time eliminated the benefts of thermal mass. As is often
the case, the industry is starting to circle back on itself and look
to thermal mass as another piece in the energy effciency puz-
zle. The challenge lies in determining the most effective way
to make lightweight construction become thermally massive
without affecting other performance characteristics.
To evaluate the impact of thermally massive building ele-
ments on building energy use, we evaluated a series of whole-
building energy models using the Energy Plus computer pro-
gram (version 6). Energy Plus is a validated whole-building
simulation tool developed and maintained by the U.S. Depart-
ment of Energy. The structure used in the model was a generic
medium-sized offce building, part of a suite of typical build-
ing models created by the Pacifc Northwest National Labo-
ratory (PNNL) for use in comparative energy analyses. The
building is a three-story, steel-framed structure with approxi-
mately 30% glazing and 53,000 sq. ft of foor space.
The basic models in our analysis used wall, roof and window
U-values based on ASHRAE Standard 90.1-2010. Simulations
were run for three climate zones:
Zone 2: Orlando, Fla.
Zone 4: New York, N.Y.
Zone 7: Grand Forks, N.D.
As is often the case with computer element modeling, the
accuracy of energy models is more a function of inputs and
assumptions than the calculation method itself. The basic
equations for calculating heat losses, gains, etc. are extremely
accurate and, in the case of Energy Plus, extensively tested and
validated, but the accuracy of assumptions is hard to quantify.
As such, energy models are better for predicting trends and per-
forming parametric analysis of multiple options/alternates than
for calculating absolute values for energy use or cost.
Wall Systems and Insulation
Recognizing the energy impact of using mass walls, ASHRAE
90.1-2010 (as well as the International Energy Conservation
Code, IECC) allows for the use of higher U-values/lower R-val-
ues for mass walls as compared to lightweight walls. Mass walls
are defned as walls with heat capacities exceeding (1) 143 kJ/
m
2
K (7 btu/ft
2
*F) or (2) 102 kJ/m
2
K (5 btu/ft
2
*F) if the wall
has a material unit weight less than 1,920 kg/m
3
(120 lb/ft
3
).
Under this defnition, most concrete masonry unit walls qualify,
but brick veneer over lightweight (i.e., steel stud-framed) backup
walls do not. The allowable reduction in the effective R-value of
building walls varies by climate zone and position of insulation,
with the greatest reductions allowed when all of the mass wall
insulation occurs on the exterior side of the mass.
As shown in Figure 1, when placed on the exterior of the ther-
mal mass, insulation tends to make the interior masonry warmer
and more capable of exchanging energy with the interior. Con-
versely, interior insulation keeps the thermal mass cold and may
exacerbate heat loss from the interior. ASHRAE 90.1 and related
codes and standards typically focus on thermal mass in exterior
walls and do not offer guidance on the use of internal thermal
mass components such as foor slabs, which do not have any exte-
rior exposure.
A series of analyses were run using various levels of insula-
tion and thermal mass in both the exterior walls and interior
components (mass only). In the initial simulation, overall space
conditioning use (heating and cooling) was compared for the test
building using mass and lightweight walls. These results, illus-
trated in Figure 2, show that despite the effective R-values of
the mass walls being lower (by up to 40%), overall energy use in
the mass-walled buildings is actually slightly lower than for the
stud-framed options. This demonstrates the important principle
that the performance of thermally massive components must be
evaluated on a transient basis, as heat storage and release are pro-
Figure 1: Temperature distribution in a brick veneer/CMU backup
wall with either exterior (left) or interior (right) insulation. Dark
colors are colder, light are warmer. This shows that in a steady
state condition, the wall with interior insulation has a large cold
thermal mass on the outboard side, whereas in the exterior
insulation case the mass stays warm due to exposure to the
interior.
2500
2000
1500
1000
500
0
Zone 2 Zone 4 Zone 7
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
n
e
r
g
y

U
s
e

(
G
J
)
Lightweight
Mass
Figure 2:
Total Space Conditioning Energy by Climate Zone
cesses that happen over time and with changing
environmental conditionsunlike the steady-
state descriptors of R-value and U-value, which
are essentially time-independent.
Several specifc cases for climate zone 4
were reviewed to determine how the amount
and location of insulation affects overall space
conditioning energy. These comparisons are
illustrated to the left.
To demonstrate the benefts of thermal mass
(as shown in Figure 3), space conditioning energy
use for a lightweight-walled building with code-
minimum values for insulation was compared
with lightweight and mass wall systems having
identical U-values. The data indicate that energy
use, primarily heating, increases by approximately
8% if the mass wall R-values are used with light-
weight construction. The intent is to show that
the code allows the use of reduced R-values for
mass walls, and that this ends up using the same
or less energy as the higher R-value lightweight
walls, and demonstrates the benefts of thermal
mass at reducing energy use.
To demonstrate the importance of the posi-
tion of insulation (Figure 4), the energy use for
mass-walled buildings with interior insulation
was compared to the energy use with exterior
insulation (both with identical R-values). When
insulation is placed on the interior of the thermal
mass, heating energy demand increased by 16%
and cooling energy demand by 4%. As shown in
Figure 1, the exterior insulation helps to keep the
thermal mass warm and allows for more effcient
energy exchange with the interior. When placed
on the interior, insulation separates the thermal
mass from the space and creates a cold sink on
the outside of the building that leads to heat loss
from the interior for prolonged periods of time
(i.e., even when exterior temperatures increase,
the temperature of the thermal mass lags behind
and remains colder for longer).
The previous examples show the impact of
thermal mass when placed in the exterior walls
(i.e., concrete masonry unit walls in place of
light gage steel-framed walls). In those cases,
the benefts of thermal mass are maximized
when the mass is located inboard of the insu-
lation. However, it is not always possible to
achieve this. For example, in dense urban areas
lot line walls are often constructed of CMUs
(for fre resistance) but built from the inte-
rior, making exterior insulation impractical
or impossible. In these and similar cases, it is
important to look beyond the exterior walls as
sources of thermal mass and more towards the
building interiorwhere we know that it will
be most effective.
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Lightweight
Wall
Lightweight Wall with
Mass Wall U-value
Mass Wall
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
n
e
r
g
y

U
s
e

(
G
J
)
Heating Cooling
Figure 3:
Total Space Conditioning Energy
by Wall Type for Climate Zone 4
3%
1%
+8%
+2%
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Exterior Insulation Interior Insulation
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
n
e
r
g
y

U
s
e

(
G
J
)
Heating Cooling
Figure 4:
by Insulation Location for Climate Zone 4
+16%
+4%
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Steel Deck
Floors
4" Concrete
Floors
8" Concrete
Floors
A
n
n
u
a
l
E
n
e
r
g
y

U
s
e

(
G
J
)
Heating
Cooling
Figure 5:
by Insulation Location for Climate Zone 4
2%
6%
3%
5%
Floor Systems
Space conditioning energy use was compared for the sample
building, with lightweight exterior walls, for three foor con-
fgurations: steel deck only (rarely used in new construction
provided as a reference point to demonstrate the impact of the
concrete in the foor system); 4-in. (100-mm) normal weight con-
crete on steel deck; and 8-in. (200-mm) normal weight concrete
on steel deck. The results of this analysis are shown in Figure 5.
These results clearly show that the impact of thermal mass
in the foors can be signifcant, with about 5% reduction in
heating energy use just by using 4-in. concrete foors in place
of lightweight foor systems. There is a point of diminishing
returns after about 4 in., as energy use is only slightly reduced
when the slab thickness is doubled. Since most steel-framed
buildings contain concrete slabs (with 4 in. being common),
they already provide thermal capacity and may not require
specifc mass components in the exterior walls. Further, inte-
rior partitions in stairwells, which are often concrete masonry,
or interior shear walls of concrete masonry will further con-
tribute to the thermal mass of the building and help to pro-
mote energy effciency. The specifc balance of thermal mass
will depend greatly upon the building type, as tall buildings
with small foor-to-wall ratios may beneft more from massive
walls, or require impractical foor slab thicknesses. Design-
ers must be cognizant of the benefts of thermal mass and
understand how decisions such as exterior wall or partition
type, interior foor types, etc. can impact building energy use
despite being apparently disconnected from that aspect of
performance.
Signicant Impact
Thermal mass elements, whether in exterior walls or as
interior components, can have a signifcant impact on space
conditioning use in buildings. The impact of thermal mass
will depend on many factors, including climate zone, building
dimensions and most importantly the location of the mass with
respect to insulation. Given that the majority of the building
structure, including large components such as foors or stair-
well walls, is inboard of the insulation, these elements should
be considered when evaluating thermal mass benefts. Based
on the analysis presented here, there is a point of diminishing
returns when adding thermal mass, making comparative energy
modeling an important step in the building design due to the
cost impacts of adding mass to a building (increased loading,
additional structural requirements, etc.). Lastly, the amount of
thermal mass necessary to achieve moderate energy benefts
is practically achievable in lightweight (i.e., steel-framed as
opposed to concrete-framed) buildings, contrary to the typical
opinion that steel-framed buildings cannot beneft from ther-
mal mass effects without signifcant modifcation.
When you own a
Since 1968
AN INTERESTING, AND NOT SURPRISING, irony in the
structural steel industry results from two generally standard
industry practices:
a) Members (beams, columns, braces and trusses) are
designed without concern for how they will be picked
for erection placement
b) Members are picked and placed without concern for
how they have been designed
Ironic or not, we all like it that way! The structural engi-
neer of record does not want to be involved with the selection
and usage of hitches and lift beams any more than the erector
wants to be involved with the calculation of required element
strengths using Second Order Analysis by Amplifed First-
Order Elastic Analysis.
The engineers lack of responsibility related to the use hitches
and lift beams does not imply, however, that the erectors riggers
can perform all of their pick-related duties without some engi-
neering assistance. Jerry Klinke, in the 3rd Edition of his Rigging
Handbook, states, Suggested procedures (relating to the use of
slings) should not, therefore, be used without frst securing com-
petent engineering advice for any given application.
Lets explore some pick and placement options. Figure 1
shows a preliminary plan for the lift beam pick of a 110-ft-span
truss. The lift beam is classifed as a below-the-hook lifting
device that must be designed by a qualifed engineer. The engi-
neer, in addition to checking the adequacy of the lift beam, is
charged with establishing the adequacy of the truss members
and connections when picked at the specifed points. Because
the fnal pick plan would indicate the loads in the hook-to-beam
and beam-to-truss lift lines, the lift line sizes can be selected by
qualifed feld rigging personnel from published capacity stan-
dards in such documents as OSHA, ASME B30.9 and various
rigging handbooks.
The hitch types shown consist of a two-leg bridle hitch for
the hook-to-lift-beam lift lines and a basket hitch for the lift-
beam-to-truss lift lines. These hitch types, as well as the choker
type hitch, are further discussed below.
Bridle, Basket and Choker Hitches
The 25-ft lift lines in Figure 1 extend from the hook to the
lift beam to form a two-leg bridle hitch. As shown in Figure 2,
bridle hitches also can have three or four legs. In bridle hitches,
BY WILLIAM W. MERRELL, P.E.
Planning a pick then executing that plan
are both important parts of steel erection.
Planning and
Picking
William W. Merrell (wwmerrell@
gmail.com) has worked closely
with the structural steel fabrication
industry since 1966. He currently
specializes in the design of
connections and the preparation
of engineered erection procedures
for steel structures.
2S' Sllng - S1
LlfL 8eam - 8S1
20' Sllng - S2 8askeL Pl
Basket Hitch:
Typical
Lift Beam - BS1
25' Sling - S1
20' Sling - S2
Fig. 1: A two-leg bridle hitch.

the upper end of the sling
is attached to the lifting
device and the lower sling
end is attached to the load
to be picked by means of
an engineered connec-
tion. A typical connection
design consists of a lug
plate and shackle.
In three-leg bridle
hitches the picked load
is shared by all legs. Care
must be taken by the rig-
ging crew with four-leg bridle hitches to ensure that the load
can be shared equally by all legs. While ASME B30.9 tables
show all four legs as sharing the load, it is common practice by
many to design the hitch such that the load is carried by two
legs with the other two legs acting to provide pick stability.
ASME B30.9 defnes a basket hitch as a method of rigging a
sling in which the sling is passed around the load and both loop
eyes are attached to the lifting device. Implicit in this defni-
tion is the fact that the load is circular in cross section.
As shown in Fig-
ure 3, the lifting
device can consist
of either one or
two points of sling
attachment. When
there are two points
of sling attachment,
and the lift lines are
at an angle of 90
from horizontal,
the hitch is some-
times referred to
as a true basket
hitch. When there
is one point of
attachment, as shown in Figure 3B, an adjustment factor must
be applied to account for the lift angle. Published basket hitch
capacity data are presented in ASME B30.9 for lift angles of
90, 45 and 30.
The ratio of the diameter of the picked item (D) to the
diameter of the sling (d) is of signifcant importance. Capac-
ity tables in ASME B30.9 limit this ratio from 15/1 to 25/1
depending on the method that was used to fabricate the loop
eyes at the sling ends. For applications where the D/d ratio is
less than required, an effciency factor must be applied. Repre-
sentative effciency factors of 50%, 65%, 75%, 86% and 92%
are presented in Klinkes Rigging Handbook for D/d ratios of 1,
2, 5, 10 and 20, respectively.
Basket hitches are frequently used to pick loads with rectan-
gular cross sections. In such cases a D/d type effciency factor of
50% should be applied. Because the hitch will introduce com-
pressive forces to the picked load, the structural adequacy of the
picked load must be determined by a qualifed engineer. Addi-
tionally, OSHA requires that the sharp corners of the picked
load be padded or covered to protect the sling.
As shown in Figure 4, a choker
hitch is one in which the sling is
passed around the load, then through
one loop eye, with the other loop
eye attached to the lifting device.
ASME B30.9s published capacities
are applicable for choke angles that
are equal to or greater than 120.
Applicable capacity reductions for
choke angles less than 120 are 87%
at 90 to 120, 74% at 60 to 89,
62% at 30 to 59 and 49% at 0 to
29. D/d reductions must also be
made as discussed above.
Care must be taken to ensure that the choker hitch does not
distress the picked load. In some cases a qualifed engineer will
be required to confrm the adequacy of the picked item.
Lift Beams
Structural devices located between the crane hook and the
load to be picked are referred to as lift beams. These devices
also may be referred to as balance or spreader beams.
The governing codes and specifcations for lift beams
include ANSI/ASME B30.20-2010, Below-the-Hook Lifting
Devices, which provides guidance for administrative and inspec-
tion activities. B30.20 references the use of ASME BTH-1,
Design of Below-the-Hook Lifting Devices, for the design of the
lift beam itself. The design provisions of ANSI/AISC 360-10,
Specifcation for Structural Steel Buildings, can be conservatively
implemented if adjustments are made to ensure that the lift
beam safety factors are in the neighborhood of 3.
Central to the task of lift beam design is the determination
of the total load to be picked. That total includes the dead load
component of the picked load, slings, connection hardware and lift
beam plus an allowance for the more subjective loading resulting
from possible impact, load acceleration and load deceleration. In
an article in the 4th Quarter 1991 Engineering Journal, Design
and Construction of Lifting Beams (available online at www.aisc.
org/ej) author Dave Ricker proposed using a factor of 1.8 on the
calculated picked dead loads to cover these subjective items.
The ultimate load for slings with manufactured eyes is fve
times the working load limit, and the ultimate load for shack-
les is 6 to 1. In consideration of these large safety factors, the
appropriate safety factor for the design of the lugs that connect
the sling hardware to the lift beam comes into question. One
practical approach is to set the lug plate safety factor, for all
applicable lug limit states, to values that are comparable to the
safety factors used in the design of the lift beam.

Fig. 3: Basket hitch variations.
Lift
Angle
Fig. 2: Three-leg and

four-leg bridle hitches.
Fig. 4: A choker hitch.
Angle of
Choke
Keep in mind that lift beams may not always be the opti-
mum choice for long-span trusses. As shown in the photo, a
four-point, two-crane pick was planned by the steel erectors
engineer to pick the 140-ton, roughly 400-ft-long truss. The
use of two, two-sling bridle hitches with 60-ft-long slings pre-
cluded the need for lift beams.
Plan and Execute
The pick shown in Figure 1 was actually developed in 1967
for a steel mill project. The six trusses for that project were
shipped to the site fully assembled in a vertical orientation on
three railcar units. The erectors rigger, faced with offoading
the trusses, modifed the pick plan by eliminating the lift beam
and connecting the 25-ft lift lines as close to the prescribed truss
pick points as possible (see Figure 5). In the process the rig-
ger also changed the planned vertical basket hitch to a two-leg
bridle hitch with choker hitch connections to the truss chord.
Upon picking, the truss bottom chord buckled in the out-of-
plane direction and was totally destroyed. The remaining fve
trusses, still on the railcars, were totally destroyed in a domino
effect started by the lateral movement of the ill-picked frst truss.
The moral of the story is that picks must be planned and
plans must be executed.
Using two cranes, each with a two-sling bridle hitch, instead
of a lift beam.
Fig. 5: A modified set of rigging that led to multiple problems

lifting a long truss.
ChokrPLch:1
25' Sling - S1
Choker Hitch:
Typical
Something that is absolutely necessary.
USD
Ben Hur Construction
IMCA
sponsored by
To view the advance program, visit
www.aisc.org/nascc
St. Louis Missouri
April 1719 2013
AMERICA'S CENTER
convention complex
Incorporating the SSRC Annual Stability Conference and the
Technology in Steel Construction Conference
Learn. Meet. See.
Join more than 3,500 structural engineers, erectors,
detailers, educators and others involved in the
design and construction industry when they gather
this April at the NASCC: The Steel Conference,
incorporating the SSRC Annual Stability Conference
and the Technology in Steel Construction Conference.
One registration fee includes all three conferences.
Learn from more than 100 specialized sessions on
all aspects of steel building and bridge design and
construction. Meet with the nation's leading designers,
fabricators, and erectors. See the latest equipment and
software in the 200+ booth exhibit hall.
earn up to
27.5
PDHs!
BY LAWRENCE F. KRUTH, P.E.
How the new Hazard Communication Standard
will affect fabricators and erectorsand how to prepare for it.
Altering
Alerts
ON MARCH 26, 2012 OSHA published the frst major revi-
sion to the 1994 Hazard Communication Standard (HazCom)
(OSHA 1910.1200 & OSHA 1926.59) to align it with the
Globally Harmonized System (GHS).
When the standard was frst published in 1983, it was gener-
ally known as the Right to Know standard. The new standard
will come to be known as the Right to Understand standard.
There are many changes in the HazCom that will affect steel
fabricators and erectors, while other areas will remain the same,
with some enhancements.
The majority of the changes required by the new HazCom
will affect the manufacturers of the chemicals used by fabrica-
tors and erectors. Instead of material safety data sheets (MSDS)
manufacturers must now issue safety data sheets (SDS). When
the 1994 HazCom was published, there was a requirement that
MSDS contain eight sections:
Section I. Manufacturer's Name and Contact Information
Section II. Hazardous Ingredients/Identity Information
Section III. Physical/Chemical Characteristics
Section IV. Fire and Explosion Hazard Data
Section V. Reactivity Data
Section VI. Health Hazard Data
Section VII. Precautions for Safe Handling and Use
Section VIII. Control Measures
Although every MSDS contained this information, there
was no standard format for these items to appear on the MSDS.
The new SDS contain sixteen sections:
Section 1. Chemical Product and Company Information
Section 2. Composition/Information on Ingredients
Section 3. Hazards Identifcation
Section 4. First Aid Measures
Section 5. Fire Fighting Measures
Section 6. Accidental Release Measures
Section 7. Handling and Storage
Section 8. Exposure Controls/Personal Protection
Section 9. Physical and Chemical Properties
Section 10. Stability and Reactivity
Section 11. Toxicological Information
Section 12. Ecological Information
Section 13. Disposal Considerations
Section 14. Transport Information
Section 15. Regulatory Information
Section 16. Other Information
There is now an ANSI standard for the proper format of
a SDS (Z400.1/Z129.1-2010, Hazardous Workplace Chemicals
Hazard Evaluation and Safety Data Sheet and Precautionary
Labeling Preparation). This means that every SDS will have the
same format, which will make it easier for employees to fnd
Lawrence F. Kruth, P.E., (lkruth@
douglassteel.com) is vice president
of engineering, technology and
safety at Douglas Steel Fabricating
Corporation, Lansing, Mich. He is
also the chair of the AISC Safety
Committee as well as a member of
the AISC Board of Directors.
ases oder Fressure 8kio 6orrosioo/
uros
Eye aage
6orrosive to MetaIs
ExpIosives
8eII-8eactives
rgaoic Feroxides
heaIth hatard FIae ExcIaatioo Mark
6arcioogeo
Mutageoicity
8eproductive Ioxicity
8espiratory 8eosititer
Iarget rgao Ioxicity
Aspiratioo Ioxicity
xiditers
as 6yIioder 6orrosioo ExpIodiog ob
FIae ver 6ircIe Eovirooeot 8kuII
(Noo-Maodatory} aod 6rossbooes
FIaabIes
Fyrophorics
8eII-heatiog
Eits FIaabIe as
8eII-8eactives
rgaoic Feroxides
Irritaot (skio aod eye}
8kio 8eosititer
Acute Ioxicity (harIuI}
Narcotic EIIects
8espiratory Iract
Irritaot
hatardous to tooe
Layer (Noo-Maodatory}
Aguatic Ioxicity Acute Ioxicity
(IataI or toxic}
information, since each section
will be in the same location on
every SDS no matter what the
chemical.
Manufacturers will now be
required to have more informa-
tive and uniform labels (see the
sample label at right) on their
products, which will contain the
following:
1. Product Identifer
2. Supplier Identifcation
3. Signal Word(s)
4. Hazard Statement(s)
5. Precautionary Information
6. Pictogram(s)
These terms are defned in
the regulation, but the term
Pictogram may require some
clarifcation. A pictogram is a
black hazard symbol on a white
background with a red diamond
border. There are nine picto-
grams in all with symbols cor-
responding to fammables, oxidizers, compressed gases,
acute toxicity, health hazard, corrosives, irritants and envi-
ronmental hazards (see chart at right). Labels for many
products will contain more than one pictogram due to the
fact that the products meet the criteria for more than one
hazard category. These were developed to communicate
the hazard to employees without using words (the Right
to Understand).
All of these pictograms affect the manufacturers of
products, but how do they affect fabricators and erec-
tors? As stated previously, many areas remain the same in
HazCom with some slight adjustments. Every employer
must maintain a record of all of the hazardous chemicals in
their facility or on their jobsite. Instead of having copies of
MSDS, they must have copies of SDS. Generally, chemi-
cals used in fabricating and erecting steel are shipped by
the manufacturer in large containers. Most fabricators and
erectors transfer the chemicals from the larger container to
a smaller or secondary container for use.
There are two options for the use of these secondary
containers. The frst is that every secondary container must
be labeled the same as before but the label must contain
not only the name of the product but also state the haz-
ardous properties of the product and contain the same
pictogram(s), with the red border, as the label on the origi-
nal container as supplied by the manufacturer. The second
option is to have the secondary containers stored in an area
that is labeled with not only the name of the product but
also with the hazardous properties of the product and con-
tain the same pictogram(s), with the red border, as the label
on the original container as supplied by the manufacturer.
As the secondary container is removed for use to during
the work shift, the worker must maintain control of the
container and must be in visual contact with the container
Product
Identifier
Signal Word
Supplier
Identification
Hazard
Statements
Hazard Pictograms
Company Name_______________________
Street Address________________________
City_______________________ State_____
Postal Code______________Country_____
Emergency Phone Number_____________
Highly flammable liquid and vapor.
May cause liver and kidney damage.
Keep container tightly closed. Store in a cool,
well-ventilated place that is locked.
Keep away from heat/sparks/open flame. No smoking.
Only use non-sparking tools.
Use explosion-proof electrical equipment.
Take precautionary measures against static discharge.
Ground and bond container and receiving equipment.
Do not breathe vapors.
Wear protective gloves.
Do not eat, drink or smoke when using this product.
Wash hands thoroughly after handling.
Dispose of in accordance with local, regional, national,
international regulations as specified.
In Case of Fire: use dry chemical (BC) or Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
fire extinguisher to extinguish.
First Aid
If exposed call Poison Center.
If on skin (or hair): Take off immediately any contaminated
clothing. Rinse skin with water.
Fill weight:____________ Lot Number:___________
Gross weight:__________ Fill Date:______________
Expiration Date:________
Danger
}
CODE _______________________________
Product Name________________________
Directions for Use
__________________________________
__________________________________
__________________________________
Precautionary
Statements
}
Supplemental Information
}
}
SAMPLE LABEL
Manufacturers will be required to have more informative and uniform labels.

Sample pictograms of various hazards.
at all times. At break time or at the end of the shift, the container
must be returned to the labeled storage area unless it is empty.
Figures: OSHA
As part of the new HazCom, every employer must retrain
or train their employees in all aspects of the new standard
including how to identify hazards from just the pictogram.
This means that even if employees had been trained in the
past in the 1994 version, they must be retrained in the new
2012 version. In the past, training was generally required to
inform employees of the hazardous material in the fabrica-
tion facility or job site and let them know where the MSDS
were located. Under the 2012 version employees must be
informed of the same items but they also are required to
identify specifc hazards as portrayed by the pictograms(s)
on the label.
There are some critical compliance dates in the 2012
HazCom:
December 1, 2013 Employers must train employees on
the new label elements and SDS format.
June 1, 2015 Manufacturers must comply with all
modifed provisions of the 2012 Hazard
Communication Standard except
distributers may ship products labeled by
manufacturers under the old system until
December 1, 2015.
June 1, 2016 Update alternate workplace labeling and
hazard communication program as
necessary, and provide additional employee
training for newly identifed physical or
health hazards.
What does this mean for fabricators and erectors? Man-
agement of fabrication and erection companies will be
required to train their employees in all new label formats,
including the understanding of pictograms, and the new
SDS format by December 1, 2013. The challenge in per-
forming this is that manufacturers will not be required to
label their products with the new GHS label until June 1,
2015and they may not appear in facilities until Decem-
ber 1, 2015. Therefore, fabrication/erection management
will be required to train their employees and document that
training on a system that they may not see for up to two
years.
The actual workplace hazard communication program is
not required to be updated in accordance with the standard
until June 1, 2016. From a practical standpoint, a workplace
hazard communication standard may need to be updated prior
to December 1, 2013 so that there is a document for training
employees. Shops/erectors must also meet the requirements of
the new secondary labeling system by June 1, 2016; but again
employees must be trained in this system before the December
1, 2013 deadline.
For those of you that are fabricators and erectors, you will be
facing many challenges in complying with the 2012 HazCom
but with proper foresight and preparation you will be able to
comply and make your facility and jobsite a safer place for your
employees to work.
If you can draw it,
we will build it. In steel.
Dakota Brewer. Dale Brue. Steel
Fabricators. You got to appreciate
what you do, and like doing it, Brue
says. Otherwise, whats the purpose?
Were tryin to teach the new guys
what we do, and we do it in steel.
They lay out beams, holes, cuts,
angles and where the plates go on.
Fabricate big box beams with three-,
four-inch anges. A 29-ton piece not
uncommon. Couldnt even tell you
how many tons fabricated since 1976
when Dale started at Zalk Josephs
Fabricators. He gets up early. 3 AM.
Never been late. Never.
They say compound miters are
tough, but they handle them. Steels
forgiving. Weld it up, ll in little gaps.
Proud of every one of their jobs. Like
Ann & Robert H. Lurie Childrens
Hospital of Chicago. When the boss
sold the project, Zalk came up with
an innovative scheme: using cables to
support the 14th, 15th and 16th oor.
Shaved a couple of months off the
duration of the project because of it.
Dakota Brewer. Dale Brue.
Made in America.
Like the steel they fabricate.
312.670.2400
www.aisc.org/madeinamerica
BY MICHEL BRUNEAU, P.E., PH.D.
Slenderness limits
for built-up box links in EBFs in the AISC Seismic Provisions.
Setting
Limits
THE OPTION TO USE built-up box sections as links in eccen-
trically braced frames (EBF) is new to the 2010 AISC Seismic
Provisions for Structural Steel Building (ANSI/AISC 341-10).
Section F3 of the Seismic Provisions addresses the analysis and
design of EBFs, including such design considerations as link
stiffeners, member and welding requirements and the available
shear strength for links.
However, Table D1.1 lacks an explicitly stated width-to-
thickness ratio limit for webs of box-shaped links. While the table
does include limits for webs of built-up boxes used as beams or
columns, the limits for webs of box-shaped links are more strin-
gent so that they may sustain the repeated cycles of large inelastic
deformations anticipated in such links during severe earthquakes.
Section F3.5b of the Commentary provides guidance for the
use of box-shaped links by referencing the width-to-thickness
ratio criteria developed based on parametric studies and experi-
ments (see Tubular Links for Eccentrically Braced Frames, I and
II, both in the May 2008 issue of Journal of Structural Engineer-
ing). The purpose of this technical note is to illustrate these rec-
ommended criteria and suggest their inclusion in future editions
of the Seismic Provisions. (For a comprehensive presentation, see
Overview of the Development of Design Recommendations for
Eccentrically Braced Frame Links with Built-Up Box Sections,
in the First Quarter 2013 issue of AISCs Engineering Journal).
Recommended Limits
The Commentary to the Seismic Provisions recommends that:
1. For built-up box links with link lengths e 1.6M
p
/V
p
(defned interchangeably in the literature as short links
or shear links), it is recommended that the web width-
to-thickness ratio be limited to 1.67 E/F
y
.
2. For built-up box links with link lengths e > 1.6M
p
/V
p
(defned as intermediate and long links), it is recom-
mended that the web width-to-thickness ratio be limited
to 0.64 E/F
y
.
In the foregoing recommendations, e is the EBF link length,
M
p
and V
p
are the plastic moment and shear strength as specifed
Michel Bruneau is a professor in
the Department of Civil, Structural
and Environmental Engineering at
the University at Buffalo in Buffalo,
N.Y. He is also the 2012 AISC T.R.
Higgins Award winner. You can reach
him at bruneau@buffalo.edu.
Description of Element Width-to-Thickness Ratio

hd
Highly Ductile Members
md
Moderately Ductile Members
Webs of built-up box sections
used as EBF links
h/t
w
0.64 E/F
y
1.67 E/F
y
Table 1 Proposed Modication to Table D1.1 of the 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions
Table 2 Summary of Compactness and Stiffening Requirements
e 1.6M
p
/V
p
(short link)
e >1.6M
p
/V
p
(intermediate and long links)
Flange b/t b/t 0.64 E/F
y
(CASE A) b/t 0.64 E/F
y
(CASE A)
Web h/t
h/t 1.67 E/F
y
in all cases
(CASE B)
h/t 0.64 E/F
y
all cases
(CASE C)
if h/t > 0.64 E/F
y
then
stiffeners required (CASE D)
No stiffeners required (CASE E)
CASE A: Not covered by the 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions. The rst sentence of the
exception recommended above provides the limit appropriate for all link
lengths (i.e., short, intermediate and long links).
CASE B: Not covered by 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions. Together with the proposed
Table 1, the second sentence of the exception above will provide the proper
limit for short links.
CASE C: Not covered by 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions. The limits recommended
in Table 1, together with the second paragraph of AISC Seismic Provision
Section F3.5b(1) (which requires links to satisfy the requirement in Table
D1.1 for highly ductile members), would provide the limits appropriate for
intermediate and long links.
CASE D: Currently covered by 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions Sections F3.5b(5)(a) and
F3.5b(5)(b).
CASE E: Currently covered by 2010 AISC Seismic Provisions Section F3.5b(5)(c).
in the Seismic Provisions, E is the modulus of

elasticity and F
y
is the specifed minimum
yield strength of the steel.
A proposed modifcation is being
discussed for the Seismic Provisions. Table 1 in
this article refects the information proposed
for inclusion in Seismic Provisions Table D1.1.
Additionally, an exception is proposed for
inclusion in Section F3.5b(1):
Exception: Flanges of links with box-
shaped sections are permitted to satisfy
the requirements for moderately ductile
members. Webs of links with box-shaped
sections with link lengths, e 1.6M
p
/V
p
,
are permitted to satisfy the requirements
for moderately ductile members.
Findings from research by
Berman and Bruneau also led to the
following compactness and stiffener
recommendations:
1. All links should have fanges
satisfying: b/t 0.64 E/F
y
2. Short links should have webs
satisfying: h/t 1.67 E/F
y
3. Short links should have web
stiffeners if: h/t > 0.64 E/F
y
4. Webs of intermediate and long links
should satisfy: h/t 0.64 E/F
y
and
no stiffeners are required.
Table 2 systematically presents these
limits, cross-referencing (as Cases A to E)
how the issues are addressed either by the
Seismic Provisions or by the above proposed
changes that implement the recommenda-
tions included in the Commentary to Seis-
mic Provisions Section F3.5b.
Recommended
An additional entry into Table D1.1 of
the Seismic Provisions and an additional para-
graph to Section F3.5b(1) have been pro-
posed to ensure that box-shaped links incor-
porated into eccentrically braced frames will
be designed in compliance with the limits
supported by research and recommended
in Section F3.5b of the Commentary to the
Seismic Provisions. These limits are intended
to ensure that these links will be able to
sustain the large inelastic deformations
expected during large earthquakes.
The Seismic Provisions are available as a free
download at www.aisc.org/epubs.
Sir, can I interest you in
one of our hard to
nd domestics?
Ask About
Our Services...
Q FLAME CUTTING
Q SAWING
Q CAMBERING
888.538.9022
Q
Fax: 908.754.8728
At AZCO, specialties of
the house always include
unusual shapes,
sizes and grades
from a 30,000
ton domestic
inventory. Mill
certication is available
on all material as well as
24-36 hour delivery
even to Canada and Mexico.
A-588, A-992,
A-572, A-36
Jumbo Beams
MC Channels
Thick Plates
1-Beams
Bars, Angles
A Division Of Bushwick Metals, LLC.
HENRY FORD SAID, Coming together is a beginning.
Keeping together is progress. Working together is success.
While Fords experience was clearly based in the auto-
motive industry, the same way of thinking translates to
other industries. In construction, the delivery method of
integrated project delivery (IPD) embodies this concept of
coming together, staying together and working together
throughout a projectthough the success part really
depends on the team itself and other specifics of the project.
Healthcare projects can especially highlight the benefits
of IPD, as these buildings typically have high complexity,
require substantial investment and are almost always tied to
aggressive schedules. However, for owners to fully experi-
ence the benefits of an integrated team approach, they must
pay attention to the details of the team.
First on the Block
A building is viewed as the vessel for delivering goods
or services to the marketplace, and in the world economy
being frst to market can mark the frst step toward proft
and return on investment. A steel framing system can pro-
vide time savings to a project, and this is especially the case if
the contract takes advantage of involving the steel team early
in the design process. While the more traditional methods
of design-bid-build (DBB) and construction manager at risk
often tend to involve the fabricator later in the process, IPD,
like design-build (DB), brings the fabricator on board much
earlier.
A true IPD contract is a multi-party agreement between
owner, designer and contractor. It can include key sub-con-
tractors and is generally based on speed to market. Accord-
ingly, there is a risk-reward system within the contract.
Cost is based on GMP (guaranteed maximum price) and
the starting document for fabricator involvement is usually
the RFP (request for pricing).
Setting budgets involves historic costs and price per
square foot for the type project being built. One impor-
tant factor is deciding on how to carry contingencies. In
the more traditional methods, subcontractors and the con-
struction manager each carry separate contingencies. With
BY DAVID MERRIFIELD AND WILL IKERD, P.E.
Owners and project teams can beneft from early,
in-depth collaboration on complex, expensive and fast-paced projects.
Healthy
Collaboration
David Merrield (dmerrield@alphasteelusa.com) is senior vice
president with Alpha SteelFab, Inc., McKinney, Texas. Will Ikerd
(wikerd@ikerd.com) is principal at IKERD Consulting in Dallas.
He is a member of AISC's Technology Integration Committee and
co-chairs both the Structural Engineering Institutes national BIM
Committee and the Designers Forum of the AGC BIM Forum.
an IPD system, a pooled contingency is usually set and is
drawn on as changes to the design occur.
In both DB and IPD, fabricators see themselves as play-
ing dual roles of designer and supplier. This view requires
that the fabricator take ownership of the steel design
i.e., as a stakeholder in the budget, any additions, changes
and modifications result in changes to cost and profit.
However, as an active team member, the fabricator can
and should share insights with the design team to mold the
their choices and decisions to not only meet the project
requirements, but also to maintain its own profitability.
BIM as a Collaboration Tool
In nearly every delivery method today we see a BIM
(building information modeling) element specified in the
contract. It's mostly used for clash detection and for the
main structural elements the construction subcontractors
are working on around the steel frame. The problem almost
always is that the structural and architectural miscellaneous
steel that may not be included in the model, due to the cost
of detailing. This can be a significant issue in healthcare
projects in particular, due to the interstitial space between
the ceiling and the floor above. IPD projects should con-
sider a complete modeling approach to avoid it.
Each of the four project delivery methods mentioned
has a different approach to BIM. We have found that a true
IPD or DB project, where the steel fabricator is involved as
an original team member, also requires early steel modeling
and detailing. Because all the changes in design are happen-
ing at the same time as the fabrication model, it changes the
traditional role of detailing and may affect the final detail-
ing cost. Compensating the detailer and project manager to
interface with the design and construction team can lead to
sticker shock for those who are not prepared.
Even so, it is almost impossible to imagine a true col-
laboration process without BIM. Although some IPD pur-
ists may argue that IPD and BIM are completely separate
and that IPD can be done without BIM, truly collabora-
tive construction processes are more enabled by BIM-based
workflows. Structural modeling can only be as helpful for
coordination as the modeling of accompanying trades, such
as mechanical, electrical and plumbing (MEP). In an inte-
grated project, owners can substantially help the overall
project by bringing on competent BIM-enabled MEP trade
contractors alongside steel fabricators and detailers during
design for early coordination.
Shared Risk Concepts
For successful implementation, owners and their teams
must take a holistic view of the role of the structure in inte-
grated projects by looking at building system teams. This
is a difficult concept to adopt for those who have been using
the DBB model. But it can be done!
The concept behind these integrated system teams is to
look at a building project in the form of five clearly defined
scopes and sub-GMP target prices:
Exterior skin
Structure
MEP
Interior
Site
This approach recognizes that each of the fve system costs
Texas Health Harris Methodist Hospital Alliance, an IPD steel project, was detailed and fabricated by Alpha/SteelFab after they
assisted in converting the design from the original concrete concept.
is predominantly controlled by a clearly identifed group on
the project that crosses lines between design and construction.
A significant point for owners to observe is that the
steel team is the critical path for three other teams: MEP,
exterior and interior. These three following systems must
either fit around, hang from or be formed by the struc-
tural systems. This fact alone makes the value of this system
far more important than the 10% to 16% of project cost
that the structural system is thought to represent. The true
value of the structure can be seen only when viewed relative
to the project schedule.
What would the value of a structural team be if it could
deliver the structural system of a hospital three or even six
months ahead of a traditional schedule? That team is creat-
ing value that will often far exceed any perceived savings
through hard bidding and buyout of the structural system.
However, such results only come from owners changing the
traditional team alignment related to the structural system.
Instead of conceptually dividing a project between design
and construction, the team approach seeks to align and
reward groups with the building systems they should respec-
tively control. The key designers of each group should be
selected early in the conceptualization phase of the project
based on their understanding of the systems team concept.
Ideally all members of the structural team would be aligned
so that they had contractual incentives attached to structural
goals of overall structural cost, schedule and quality.
While teams cannot contractually create trust and a spirit
of collaboration, it is possible to cause contractual barriers to
a structural teams ability to work together. This is done when
lead designers or construction managers enter tri-party agree-
ments sharing risk and reward, but do not include any incen-
tives for their consulting engineers or specialty trade contrac-
tors. A less-than-ideal situation is when the structural engineer
is a sub-consultant to the architect in a traditional fxed-fee
contract and the fabricator has guaranteed a maximum price
to the construction manager. What can happen in such a case
is that the structural engineer and fabricator are cast into tra-
ditional roles that do not include the extra effort and fee for
them to properly plan in an integrated, collaborative way. Much
of the benefts of IPD can be undermined when this situation
occurs with structural engineers and fabricators in traditional
subcontracts. It is not surprising that part of the success of IPD
projects is due to the additional effort and planning that take
place early in the process. Part of this success is found in includ-
ing the structural engineer, fabricators and other members of
the structural team as full IPD partners.
Setting a New Course
One case that shows the potential for success is the Texas
Health Harris Methodist Hospital Alliance. The recently
opened facility, in Ft. Worth, was conceived as an IPD project
where the fabricator, Alpha SteelFab of McKinney, Texas, (an
AISC Member/AISC Certifed Fabricator), was instrumental
in the teams decision to convert the design from concrete
to steel. Alpha worked alongside the project architect Per-
kins + Will, The Beck Group (which provided construction
services) and structural engineer L.A. Fuess Partners to cre-
ate a solution that accelerated the project 12 weeks ahead
of a typical fabrication schedule (approximately 1,200 tons
of steel were used). Will Ikerd initially assisted Perkins and
Will in developing the projects BIM execution plan, while
he was founding director of Raymond L. Goodson, Inc.s
IPD department. (Later, with his own frm, Ikerd developed
4D scheduling models for Alpha from their detailing models
in SDS/2.) The IPD approach, powered by BIM, made the
project successful for all.
From Concept to Delivery System
Many contracts are looking to apply IPD without an
actual teaming agreement. The concept shows up in many
forms such as a BIM requirement or some form of collabo-
ration statement in the contract. These are certainly ben-
eficial tactics that can help foster a collaborative spirit, but
they are construction concepts or principles as opposed to
a true delivery system. For the most part owners are strug-
gling with the need for IPD and how to get the best value
and lowest price. In public projects the requirement of
multiple bids precludes pure IPD. However, in healthcare
projects, even if they are public in nature, teams should find
ways to implement as many of the IPD concepts as possible.
This is how owners and their projects will truly achieve
what Ford meant by his statement that working together
is success.
A 4D sequencing model of the Texas Health Harris Methodist

Hospital Alliance, prepared by IKERD Consulting in Navisworks.
A example of early conflicts on MEP coordination around
structural steel detailing models on an IKERD Consulting
project. This model highlights the need to include a BIM-
enabled MEP contractor that has 3D modeling capability for all
of their systems early in the design of healthcare buildings.
news
People and Firms
t Thor nt on Tomas et t i has
acquired Simon & Associates,
I nc . ( S&A) , a nat i onal l y
r ec ogni z ed s us t ai nabi l i t y
consul t i ng f i r m l ocat ed i n
Sa n Fr a nc i s c o. Si mon &
Associates team will become
part of Thornton Tomasetti s
B u i l d i n g S u s t a i n a b i l i t y
practi ce. S&A founder, Lynn
N. Simon, becomes a senior
vi ce presi dent at Thor nt on
Tomasetti and wi l l l ead the
West Coast ef f or t s of t he
practice. She will collaborate
wi t h t he f i r ms l eader shi p
i n Cal i forni a as wel l as wi th
pri nci pal Gunnar Hubbard,
who l ea ds t he Bui l di ng
Sustainability practice.
t Sc hoc k, an i nt er nat i onal
dev el oper of i nnov a t i v e
cons t r uct i on pr oduct s f or
thermal insulation, impact sound
insulation and reinforcement
technology, recently announced
the U.S. introduction of Isokorb,
a l oad-beari ng and thermal -
insulating element for building
ext er i or s. The t echnol ogy
reduces heat transfer through
the building envelope, providing
a higher interior temperature.
Thi s i nnovati ve approach to
thermal break technology saves
energy consumption, prevents
the formation of condensation
and mold, and improves living
comfort from warmer surface
temperatures.
t SidePlate Systems, Inc., a steel
connection technology company
and AISC Associate Member, has
hired Ryan E. Smith, P.E., as a
regional engineer. His territory
will be the area west of the
Rockies.
CORRECTIONS
In The Long Way Home (12/2012), Industrial Steel Construction (AISC
Member/AISC Certified Fabricator/NSBA Member) was accurately listed as the
projects fabricator. However, American Bridge Manufacturing in Coraopolis, Pa.
(AISC Member/AISC Certified Fabricator/NSBA Member), also performed some
fabrication services on the project.
In the second to last line of the left column of page 9 of Steel Interchange (1/2013),
we mistakenly omitted the square on the cosine term. The corrected equation is:
The remainder and conclusion of the calculation illustrated was correct as printed.
An interview
a b o u t
last years
S t e e l D a y
led a Kansas
radio station
to create a
new weekly
show hosted
by Mark
H a m a d e ,
c h i e f
o p e r a t i n g
officer of PKM Steel Service, Inc.,
an AISC Member/AISC Certified
Fabricator in Salina, Kan.
Called On the Mark with Mark
Hamade, the show will air at 5:30
p.m. (CST) on Wednesdays beginning
February 6 on 95.5 FM The Rock,
reported a recent article in the Salina
Journal.
According to the article, the show
will include business segments with
local and regional professionals and
address topics in management and
leadership. In addition, the program
will provide opportunities for listeners
to use online social media to send in
questions, as well as time for Hamade
to discuss his own approaches to
business and life.
Whether youre the CEO of a
major organization, a small business
owner, a foreman on a job site or a
third-shift lineman, this program will
speak to you and help move you closer
to both your personal and professional
goals, said Morgan Lillich, lead
business development executive for
95.5 FM.
Added Hamade, This can help
just about anybody. The show is
about business, but what makes you
successful in business can also make
you successful in life.
In addition to broadcasting the
show, the radio station will stream the
program online through its website,
www.salina-radio.com, and offer
previous shows online as podcasts.
Last years SteelDay event at PKM
Steel drew in about 2,500 people and
included tours of PKMs facilities
and more than 100 vendor booths on
site. In addition, it featured several
entrepreneurial speakers including
Nolan Bushnell, founder of the Atari
Corporation.
You can fnd AISCs interview
with Bushnell in our previous news
post, at www.modernsteel.com/
SteelInTheNews/?p=1929. And mark
your calendars! SteelDay 2013 is scheduled
for October 4.
MEMBER NEWS
AISC Member COO to Host Weekly Radio Show
K
x
=
F
x
2P
= cos
2

American Institute of Steel Construction
One E Wacker Drive, Ste. 700
Chicago, IL 60601
www.aisc.org 312.670.2400
Be Informed.
Be Efficient.
Be Better.
spring seminars
2013
AISC
Register today!
Early Registration
Discount
Register by 2.22.2013
to receive a $50
discount on seminar
registration.
Excludes group
registrants.
The Louis F. Geschwindner Seminar
Leverage your Knowledge with the 2010 AISC Specification
and the 14th Edition Steel Construction Manual
3.5 Edison, NJ
3.6 Grand Rapids, MI
5.1 Chicago, IL
5.22 Syracuse, NY
6.6 Bozeman, MT
14th Edition Steel Construction Manual available for $100!
All manuals must be pre-ordered and will NOT be for sale
on the day of the seminar.
Listen to the Steel: Duane Miller on Welding
3.13 Houston, TX
4.2 Pasadena, CA
4.4 Oakland, CA
Seminar registration includes Steel Design Guide 21:
Welded ConnectionsA Primer for Engineers.
Seismic Braced FramesDesign Concepts and Connections
4.10 Philadelphia, PA
5.14 Boston, MA
5.21 Columbia, SC
Effective Steel Design with Seismic Considerations
6.27 Sacramento, CA
Registration Pricing
$350 for Members, $550 to Bring-a-Buddy*
*Sign up two people and save $75 per registrant!
Each seminar is worth 0.8 CEUs/8.0 PDHs
Go to www.aisc.org/seminars for more information.
New Spring Schedule Just Announced!
INDUSTRY NEWS
Manufacturing May Be Comeback Player of the Year
The most recent FABTECH show,
which took place late last year in Las
Vegas, boasted a record attendance,
an array of new technologies and
product s and an unprecedent ed
number of manufacturing sessions
all signs that manufacturing in the
U.S. may have a bright future.
Show organizers reported that
nearly 26,000 people attended, and
exhibitors reported that sales activity
was brisk and leads were plentiful.
The conference al so featured
several special events, including a
State of the Industry roundtable with
manuf acturi ng CEOs concurri ng
that growth in manufacturing should
continue for the next year. However,
the panelists acknowledged that a
stumbling block to growth is the lack
of skilled workers in manufacturing,
and emphasized that manufacturers
need t o be more aggressi ve i n
influencing parents and students and
in giving schools a more active voice
in recruiting potential manufacturing
workers.
FABTECH al s o f eat ur ed a
Pos t - El ect i on Anal ys i s panel
featuring Washington insiders with
long track records in representing
manufacturing interests. The panelists
discussed the (at that time) looming
fiscal cliff and other issues that will
i mpact manufacturers. Al l agreed
that the manufacturing sector has
gained influence in Washington over
the past two years and encouraged
manufacturers to get i nvol ved i n
advocacy efforts for the industry via
their trade associations.
If you can take the pulse of
the economy by whats happening
i n manufacturi ng, then you have
to be optimistic that we are headed
for economic growth, said Mark
Hoper, FABTECH show co-manager.
A constant theme I heard both
on t he s how f l oor and at t he
seminars was that, while challenges
and uncert ai nt i es remai n, mos t
manuf acturers bel i eve that thei r
businesses are headed for continued
growth in 2013.
FABTECH i s co-sponsored by
five industry-leading associations: the
American Welding Society (AWS),
the Fabri cators & Manufacturers
Association, International (FMA), the
Society of Manufacturing Engineers
(SME), the Precision Metalforming
Association (PMA) and the Chemical
Coaters Associ ati on Internati onal
(CCAI).
Next years show will be held
November 18-21 at McCormick Place
in Chicago. More information on this
years FABTECH can be found at
www.fabtechexpo.com.
news
The Great Lakes Fabri cators &
Erectors Association (GLFEA) Board
of Directors announced that D. James
(Jim) Walker, Jr., their CEO, passed
away suddenly on December 5 at the
age of 58.
Walker began his 42-year-career in
the construction industry during high
school, when he worked for his familys
company, Goss Mechanical. He attended
Michigan State University, where he
was a member of Phi Delta Theta and
president of the Michigan State Scuba
Diving Club, and received a bachelors
degree i n busi ness i n 1976. He
subsequently studied law and received
his Juris Doctorate from the Detroit
College of Law.
After law school, he and his wife
Emily both went to work for Bechtel
Power in hopes of traveling the globe,
but only made it as far as Midland, Mich.
He later worked for the Association of
Underground Contractors before joining
GLFEA in 1994.
A lifelong resident of Michigan, Jim
was a strong advocate for the state and
the city of Detroit; he recently filmed
videos for the structural steel industry,
showing highlights from around the
city. He remained deeply committed
to the success of industry in Michigan
through the many roles he fulfilled
with numerous organizations. He was
in Washington, D.C., when he passed
away, working on pension issues for
The Association of Union Constructors
(TAUC). He served on the TAUC Board
of Directors, chaired the LEO Group
and was the representative for TAUC on
the Pension Reform Commission.
Walker is survived by his wife, Emily,
a son and a brother.
MEMORIAM
James Walker, Jr., GLFEA CEO, Dies Suddenly at 58
SOME
TALK THE TALK.
OTHERS
WALK THE
WALK.
Cutting its carbon footprint
nearly by 47% since 1990.
Reducing its energy use by
67% since 1980.
Reducing greenhouse gas
emissions by 45% since 1975.
Becoming recognized as one
of the best-performing U.S.
manufacturing industries by
the EPA.
And steel's environmental
impact continues to drop.
Sustainability has become a major
factor in the construction market.
And the domestic structural
steel industry has been making
environmental improvements for
decades by:
There's always a sustainable solution in steel.
312.670.2400
www.aisc.org/sustainability
news
NASCC
New Bridge Track at NASCC: The Steel Conference
In addition to the dozens of specialized
sessions on buildings that will take
place at NASCC: The Steel Conference
in St. Louis, April 17-19, this years
educational offerings also include
a comprehensive track of 10 sessions
focused on bridges.
The first day of the conference offers
two afternoon bridge sessions, The
Bridges of St. Louis and The Eggners
Ferry Bridge Emergency Replacement.
The latter discusses the strategies and
tactics used to design, fabricate and
erect the replacement span in just four
months.
Thursdays bridge-related sessions
include: The New Steel Bridge
Handbook, Design for Construction of
Curved and/or Skewed I-Girder Bridges,
Future Fabrication for Bridgesand
All Structures, The New Bridge QMS
Certification Program, Short-Span Steel
BridgesToday and in the Future, and
Using NSBAs LRFD SIMON Software
for Cost-Effective Steel I-Girder Design.
The bridge track concludes the last
day of the conference with two morning
sessions: Innovative Bridge Design
and 100-Year-Old Steel Bridge
Protecting Tomorrows Centurions.
To register for NASCC or to view
an advance program, go to www.aisc.
org/nascc. Be sure to register early!
The rate increases $10 every week until
the conference opens, when the price
becomes $480.
The single registration fee includes
admittance to all technical sessions,
the exhi bi ti on hal l , the keynote
address and the T.R. Higgins Lecture.
It al so i ncl udes admi ssi on to al l
Structural Stability Research Council
sessions, all of the Technology in Steel
Construction Conference sessions and
the full Bridge Track.
The Bridge Track is offered every
other year at The Steel Conference
when t he Wor l d St eel Br i dge
Symposium (WSBS) is not held. You
can find proceedings from last years
WSBS, whi ch coi nci ded wi th the
2012 Steel Conference in Dallas, at
www.steelbridges.org/wsbs.
The First Quarter 2013 issue of
Engineering Journal is now available online
in digital edition format. View the current
issue online by going to www.aisc.org/ej
and clicking the Digital Edition icon.
Papers in Engineering Journal 2013
Q1 include:
Calculation of Stress Trajectories
Using Fracture Mechanics
Bo Dowswell
In structures composed of plates
and plate-like elements subjected to
in-plane stresses, the stress flow around
discontinuities is an important design
consideration. Stress dispersion angles
are used extensively in gusset plate
design and calculations for web local
yielding of wide flange members. The
current design values are empirical, and
the variables affecting the dispersion
angles are not well understood. Due to
the wide range of angles published in
the literature, an analytical model that
accounts for all variables is necessary
for full understanding of the behavior
of these elements. Using fracture
mechanics principles, this paper shows
that the dispersion angle is dependent
on geometry, constraint and inelastic
deformation capacity. A versatile design
procedure, which explicitly accounts
for all variables affecting the stress
dispersion angle, is presented.
Keywords: gusset plates, stress flow,
discontinuities, fracture mechanics
Overview of the Development of
Design Recommendations for
Eccentrically Braced Frame Links
with Built-Up Box Sections
Jeffrey W. Berman and Michel Bruneau
Among the new additions to the
2010 AISC Seismic Provisions are design
requirements for eccentrically braced
frame links with built-up box sections.
Such links do not require lateral bracing
in many cases because built-up box
shapes have superior lateral torsional
stability relative to wide-flange sections.
The 2010 Seismic Provisions include
requirements for built-up box link
flange width-to-thickness ratio and
other important design considerations.
However, the limits on web width-to-
thickness ratio default to those used for
built-up box beams or columns and are
inadequate for links with large inelastic
shear and compression strains. Such
limits are important for preventing web
buckling under shear and/or flexural
compression. This paper presents an
overview of research on the design and
behavior of links with built-up box
sections, including the development
of recommendations for web width-
to-thickness limits and corresponding
web stiffener spacing requirements and
flange width-to-thickness limits for
these link sections. The highlighted
research program included derivation
of design requirements based on plate
buckling considerations; a full-scale,
single-story eccentrically braced frame
test; a parametric study on the impact of
link cross-sectional parameters on link
inelastic rotation capacity; and a series
of large-scale tests on isolated links.
Keywords: eccentrically braced
frames, built-up box sections, links,
width-to-thickness limits
A Comparison between the 2005
and 2010 AISC Specification
Eric J. Bolin, Thomas J. Dehlin and
Louis F. Geschwindner
I n 2010, AI SC publ i s hed a
revised version of its Specification
for Structural Steel Bui l di ngs that
replaces the 2005 edition. Changes
to the Specification were minimal and
improved the usability and accuracy
of the document. A detailed summary
of these changes are contained in this
article, providing an extension to the
historical reviews of previous AISC
specifications presented in Appendix
A1 of AISC Design Guide 15.
Keywords: design specifications
ENGINEERING JOURNAL
Engineering Journal 2013 Q1, 2012 Q4 Now Online
Continued
news
letter to the editor
Great article on the Levitt Pavilion
in the October issue (All the Worlds
a Stage)! An interesting side note
to that article is the fact that the
lead LVTA detailing checker for the
project is Leonard Gentilcore, who
has been involved in steel detailing for
over 60 years and he also worked on
some of the towering structures in the
background during his 36-year career
at Bethlehem Steel! I truly appreciate
all the knowledge Ive gained from
many of the experienced detailers
from Bethlehem, including Leonard.
It would be a great article to interview
these men and the experiences they
have to share with ussimilar to
the WWII project of recording the
veterans experiences before they are
lost forever.
Denton Johnson,
D. L. Johnson Drafting, LLC
(AISC Member) Manheim, Pa.
Applause for the Stage
And in case you missed it, here is the list
of papers in Engineering Journal 2012 Q4:
Axial Capacities of Eccentrically
Loaded Equal-Leg Single Angles:
Comparisons of Various Design
Methods
Yuwen Li
For most structural engineers, the
design of an eccentrically loaded single
angle without lateral restraint along its
length was considered to be a formidable
task prior to the publication of the 2005
AISC Specification for Structural Steel
Buildings. According to Section E5 of the
2005 Specification, the effects of eccentricity
on single-angle members are permitted
to be neglected by using the effective
slenderness ratio as specified, provided
that members are loaded at the ends in
compression through the same leg;
members are attached by welding or by a
minimum of two-bolt connections; there
are no intermediate transverse loads; the
leg length ratio is less than 1.7, if angles are
connected through the shorter leg; and the
modified KL/r is less than or equal to 200.
The 13th edi ti on AISC Steel
Construction Manual provided a design table
(Table 4-12) of the available strengths in
axial compression of eccentrically loaded
single angles, with the assumption that
the compressive force is applied at the
geometric y-y axis at a distance of 0.75t
from the back of the connected leg, where
t is the angle thickness. Table 4-12 has
been revised in the 14th edition AISC
Steel Construction Manual. The new table
corrects some numerical errors in the
calculations and moves the compressive
force to the midpoint of the connected leg.
The values of the axial compressive design
strength in Table 4-12 are developed on the
basis of bending about the principal axes
w-w and z-z.
Keywords: eccentrically loaded
single angles, design tables.
Bond Behavior of Concrete-Filled
Steel Tube (CFT) Structures
Jie Zhang, Mark D. Denavit, Jerome F.
Hajjar and Xilin Lu
To achieve internal force transfer
while avoiding the use of steel stud
anchors or a bearing mechanism within
concrete-filled steel tubes (CFTs), an
accurate assessment of the bond strength
of CFTs is required. However, calculation
of the bond within CFTs remains a
challenging problem due to lack of a
general procedure that can account for
the range of connection configurations
seen within composite construction. A
new approach for assessing the nominal
bond strength for both rectangular and
circular CFTs is proposed. Based on
the results of push-out experiments of
CFTs, the nominal bond stress is shown
to vary with tube shape and dimensions,
and formulas are proposed to capture
this behavior. The longitudinal bond
transfer length is derived by examining
the distribution of bond stress along
the height of the column as well as
experimental data from CFT connection
tests. The circumferential bond transfer
width is identified as the entire perimeter
of the interface, accounting for the
contribution to the bond strength from
the interface on the sides that do not
have girders or braces framing in. The
resulting nominal bond strength is then
shown to have a resistance factor of 0.45
for load and resistance factor design
(LRFD) and safety factor of 3.33 for
allowable strength design (ASD).
Keywords: concrete-filled steel
tubes, composite action, connections,
bond strength, critical bond stress, slip.
Beam Deflections and Stresses
During Lifting
R.H. Plaut, C.D. Moen and R. Cojocaru
The behavior of horizontally curved
beams during lifting is analyzed. The
beams are circularly curved, doubly
symmetric, prismatic and linearly
elastic, and they are suspended at two
symmetric locations. The two cables
lifting the beams may be vertical or
inclined symmetrically. Numerical
results are presented for steel I-beams.
Weak-axis and strong-axis deflections,
roll angle and cross-sectional twist,
internal forces, bending and twisting
moments, and longitudinal stresses are
calculated using newly derived analytical
solutions implemented as a freely
available spreadsheet at www.moen.cee.
vt.edu Lifting locations along the beam
that minimize displacements and stresses
are identified.
Keywords: lifting beams, twisting,
deflections.
Current Steel Structures Research
No. 32
Reidar Bjorhovde
Each quarterly current issue of EJ is
available in digital format and free to the
public until the next issue is published.
The compl et e col l ect i on of
Engineering Journal articles is searchable
at www.aisc.org/ej. Current and past
articles can be downloaded as PDFs and
are free to AISC members and ePubs
subscribers; just make sure you are
logged into the AISC website (www.
aisc. org) before searching. Non-
members will be directed to the AISC
Bookstore at www.aisc.org/store to
purchase articles.
Continued from previous page
To advertise, call 231.228.2274 or e-mail gurthet@modernsteel.com.
marketplace
Search employment ads online at www.modernsteel.com.
AISC Quality Certification
WHY STRUGGLE?
This year Get Certified!
Need Steel Erection Certification? Call Jim Mooney
Your Quality Certification Connection
JAMES M. MOONEY & ASSOCIATES
941.223.4332
jmmoon94@aol.com
p/NSITEASSISTANCE
p2EDUCEDRAWINGANDSHOPERRORS
p2EDUCEFIELDBACKCHARGES
p)NCREASEPRODUCTIVITY
p-AXIMIZEPROFIT
Genesis Quality Systems, Inc.
Transform strategies into a success story.
Call Genesis to customize your unique needs.
A|SC Ce|||||:a||c| AwS, |AS, CwB a|d \0A-1 Ce|||||:a||c|
R|| Aere|| |||e||a| Aud|| & Supp|] C|a|| Aud||
Oe|a||e| |a|aere|| 0ua|||] |a|ae| Se|.|:e
P|a|| |a|ae| Se|.|:e Bu||e E/:e||e|:e - Ba|||de C|||e||a
T|a|||| (Ccde & S|a|da|d, we|d||, Bc||||, Cca|||,
Cc||a:| V|j| |u|u.|||a |cda] a| 248-8//-1/88 c| 248-8/o-9800 |c| |||||a|
consultation. Visit us www.genesisqs.com for more information.
LATE MODEL STRUCTURAL
STEEL FABRICATING EQUIPMENT
Peddinghaus Ocean Avenger II 1000-1 CNC Beam Drill, (1) Drill
Head, Siemens CNC, 40 x 60 Beam Capacity, 2004 #20877
Peddinghaus BDL1250 CNC Beam Drill, 50 Max Beam, (3) 10 HP
Spindles, PC Ctrl (Upgrade 2005), 2000 #21739
Peddinghaus FDB 1500/3E CNC Plate Drill w/ Oxy/Plasma
Cutting Torches, Maximum Plate Width 60, 1998 #17696
Controlled Automation BT1-1433 CNC Oxy/Plasma Cutting
System, 14 x 33, (1) Oxy, (2) Hy-Def 200 Amp Plasma, 2002 #20654
Peddinghaus 623K Angle Punch/Shear Line, 6 x 6 x 1/2, 80 Ton
Punch, CNC , 250 Ton Shear, 1995 #19897
HEM DC-2038RB Double Column Horizontal Band Saw, 20 x 38,
45-60 Deg. Miter, 2 Blade, 15 HP, 75-400 SFPM, 2006 #22215
Tel: 631.249.5566 | Email: sales@prestigeequipment.com | www.PrestigeEquipment.com
Visit www.PrestigeEquipment.com for all our inventory & services
What will you do for the
New
Call: 312.861.3000
Email: Info@atema.com
www.atema.com
Write your Quality Manual & Procedures.
Assist with Weld Procedures (WPS)
Get all Application requirements ready
Atema can help:
AISC Bridge Standard Requirements
Visit steelTOOLS.org
Jc|| ||e :c|.e|a||c| a| A|SC' |eW
||e-|a|||, |||c|ra||c|-|a||| Weo||e.
He|e a|e ju| a |eW c| ||e |REE |ecu|:e |cW a.a||ao|e.
|c|e ||a| 1O0 |ee|T00|S u||||||e a.a||ao|e |c| dcW||cad||
O|:u|c| o|c W|e|e ]cu| :a| :c||e:| a|d |a|e |dea W|||
]cu| pee|
|||e pc|ed o] ]cu| pee| || pe:|a| |||e|e| ||o|a||e, ||:|ud||.
A Pc:|e| Re|e|e|:e |c w S|ape o] Oep||,
||e| ||a|e w|d||
we|d|| Capa:||] Ca|:u|a|c|
|cre||, S|ea| a|d Rea:||c| |c| Cc||||ucu B||de
V|dec. B||de E|e:||c| a| ||e SeaTa: A||pc||
c| 0ue||c|7 c| A|We|7
Pa|||:|pa|e W||| u a| steelTOOLS.org.
Advertiser Listing
A:e:ad Sc||Wa|e.......................................... WWW.a:e:adc||Wa|e.:cr...................................... 4O
A|SC............................................................ WWW.a|:.c|..................................88, 4/, o1, o9, O1
AZC0 S|ee| Cc............................................. WWW.a/:c|ee|.:cr ............................................... o8
AZZ a|.a||/|| Se|.|:e.............................. WWW.a//a|.a||/||.:cr.......................................... o
Be|||e] S]|er .......................................... WWW.oe|||e].:cr...................................... Ba:| Cc.e|
C||:ac |e|a| Rc||ed P|cdu:|...................... WWW.:r|p.:cr..................................................||e||
Cc|||c||ed Au|cra||c|.................................. WWW.:c|||c||edau|cra||c|.:cr.............................. 14
Graitec ........................................................ WWW.|a||e:.:cr................................................... 11
H|| S|ee| S||u:|u|e ||:. ............................. WWW.||||ee|.:cr.................................................. 8
H\T0RC...................................................... WWW.|]|c|:.:cr.................................................... 48
|ES.............................................................. WWW.|eWeo.:cr................................................... 12
\eW ||||e|||ur Bu||d|| S]|er................. WWW.|eWr|||.:cr.................................................... 8
Pedd|||au Cc|pc|a||c| ............................. WWW.pedd|||au.:cr............................................ 2
R|SA Te:||c|c|e........................................ WWW.||a.:cr........................................................ O/
SOS/2 Oe|| Oa|a ...................................... WWW.d2.:cr........................................................ /
S|deP|a|e S]|er, ||:. ................................ WWW.|dep|a|e.:cr................................................ 18
S|. |cu| S:|eW & Bc|| .................................. WWW.||cu|:|eWoc||.:cr...................................... 19
Te||a........................................................... WWW.|e||a.:cr...................................................... 1O
T|ue \c||| ................................................... WWW.||ue|c||||ee|.:cr......................................... o0
Voortman..................................................... WWW..cc||ra|.|e| ................................................. 1o
A|e ]cu |cc||| |c| c||Wa|e, p|cdu:|, c| e|.|:e |c| ]cu| |e/| p|cje:|7
You can find it in Modern Steel Construction' c||||e p|cdu:| d||e:|c|].
http://modernsteel.com/product_categories.php
|| ]cu'|e a p|c.|de| c| c||Wa|e, p|cdu:|, c| e|.|:e a|d Wcu|d
|||e rc|e |||c|ra||c| aocu| oe|| |||ed c| e||a|:|| ]cu| :u||e|| |||||,
:c||a:| |cu| u|||e| a|.
gurthet@modernsteel.com or 231.228.2274
employment
To advertise, call 231.228.2274 or e-mail gurthet@modernsteel.com.
Search employment ads online at www.modernsteel.com.
Structural & Misc. Steel Fabrication
Our organization has been recruiting for the Structural and Misc. Steel
Fabricating industry for over 20 years. Current positions include:
* Prcject Manager * 0eneraI Manager * 0uaIity 0cntrcI
* PIant 3uperintendents * stimatcrs * 0etaiIers
* 0hief 0raftsman * 0heckers
PIease send resume tc:
Richard Stauffer
united mpIcyment Asscciates, 232 Main 3treet, mmaus, PA 18049
phone: (610) 437-5040 fax: (610) 437-9650
e-mail: rstauffer@unitedemployment.com www.unitedemployment.com
ProCounsel, a member of AISC, can market your skills
and achievements (without identifying you) to any city
or state in the United States. We communicate with
over 3,000 steel fabricators nationwide. The employer
pays the employment fee and the interviewing and
relocation expenses. If youve been thinking of making
a change, now is the time to do it. Our target, for you,
is the right job, in the right location, at the right money.
RECRUITER IN STRUCTURAL MISCELLANEOUS
STEEL FABRICATION
Bu// Ta]|c|
PROCOUNSEL
TcII free: 866-289-7833 cr 214-741-3014
Fax: 214-741-3019
mailbox@procounsel.net
0etaiIing Prcject Manager
we a|e ee||| rc||.a|ed ||d|.|dua| |c |||| ||e pc|||c|
c| p|cje:| ra|ae|/de|a|||| :cc|d||a|c| || cu| S|. |cu|
c|||:e. P|cje:| ra|ae| a|e |epc||o|e |c| ra|a|| a|| ape:| c| de|a||||,
||:|ud|| :cc|d||a||c| W||| ||e |ao||:a|c|, de|| |ear, a|d c||e| upp||e| |c
||e p|cje:| a We|| a ra|||a|||| d|aW|| (ua|||], p|cje:| :|edu|e, :c|,
a|d c.e|a|| :u|cre| a|||a:||c|. |OS c||e| a oe|e||| pa:|ae, :crpe||||.e
a|a|], a|d |e|c:a||c| a||cWa|:e.
P|eae :a|| 814-8/2-1/91 c| era|| ]cu| |eure |c ||:|e||e Vcre]e| a|
mvossmeyer@ids-inc.net.
Structural Engineers
Are ycu Iccking fcr a new and exciting cppcrtunity in 2013?
we a|e a ||:|e |e:|u||e| ||a| pe:|a||/e || ra|:||| |ea| ||u:|u|a|
e|||ee| W||| u||(ue cppc||u||||e ||a| W||| |e|p ]cu u||||/e ]cu| |a|e|| a|d
a:||e.e ]cu| ca|.
we |a.e c.e| 80 ]ea| c| e/pe||e|:e Wc|||| W||| ||u:|u|a| e|||ee|.
we |a.e |e|a||c|||p W||| pecp|e |epc||o|e |c| ||||| de:||c| W|||
:crpa||e |||cu|cu| \c||| Are||:a.
we W||| a.e ]cu e|c|rcu ||re || ]cu| jco ea|:| a|d p|c.|de add|||c|a|
|||c|ra||c| a|d |e|p du||| ||e p|c:e c| |||d|| a |eW jco ||a| ]cu
:cu|d|'| |||d a|]W|e|e e|e.
Ca|| c| e-ra|| u T00AY |c |ea|| rc|e aocu| |cW We :a| |e|p ]cu!
|c| :u||e|| cpe|||, p|eae .||| cu| Weo||e a|d .|eW Hc| Jco.
SE Solutions, LLC
|a|| 0|||:e we| Cca| 0|||:e
8rian 0uinn, P.. Lisa WiIIard, P..
(O1O, o4O-9420 (80o, 482-848O
www.FindYourEngineer.com
Zalk Josephs Fabricators has an immediate need for a Senior Estimator
|c Wc|| || cu| S|cu||c| w|:c||| |a:||||] uppc|||| a |a| pa:ed ra|u|a:|u|||
e|.||c|re|| ||depe|de|||] d||.|| e/:ep||c|a| |eu|| a|d e|.|:e.
APPLY online at jobs.heicocg.com
0u| |dea| :a|d|da|e W||| |a.e ||e ao||||] |c d||.e a|e a|d e|.|:e W|||e p|c:e|| a|
e/pe||e|:ed :crra|d c| :c|||u:||c| :c| e||ra||| c||Wa|e a|d Ta|ec|| S]|er a|c|
W||| a ||c|cu| ||cW|ede a|d u|de||a|d|| c| e|e|a| a|d uo:c|||a:| dc:ure||,
d|aW||, pe:|||:a||c|, :c|||u:||c| rea|, re||cd a|d ra|e||a|.
Za|| Jcep| |ao||:a|c| c||e| a :crpe||||.e a|a|] a|d a :crp|e|e||.e oe|e||| pa:|ae.
Zalk Josephs Fabricators is EEO.
0heck cut A|30's Pcdcasts
WWW.a|:.c|/pcd:a|
PODCASTS PODCASTS
Brought to you by AISC Continuing Education
Structural Project Engineer Atlanta, Georgia
w|||e|| E|||ee||| Ccrpa|] (wEC, | a |||r W||| a ||c| |epu|a||c| ou||| c|
||u:|u|a| e|||ee||| a|a|]| a|d de||, :cup|ed W||| :||e|| a|d :c|||a:|c|
|||e|a:||c|. 0u| |||r |a o|cad e/pe|||e || ||e de|| c| p|cje:| |a||| ||cr
|e|a|| de|| |c r|d|/e :crre|:|a| de|| a|d ||du|||a| p|cje:| |c |||c||:a|
|e|c.a||c|. Ea:| reroe| c| cu| |a|| c||e| || c| |e| cW| pe|c|a| e/pe||e|:e
a|d |||| |c |c|r a| aWa|d-W||||| |ear c| p|c|e|c|a|.
Position Objective: 0u| de|| p|cje:| a|e |cW|| || d|.e|||] a|d |uroe|
a|d wEC | ee||| |c add a S||u:|u|a| P|cje:| E|||ee| |c e|||:|e|||] a||
|| ||| |cW||. Ca|d|da|e ru| p|c.e ||a| ||e] |a.e e/:e||e|| W||||e| a|d
:crru||:a||c| |||| a ||e pc|||c| e||a|| da||] :||e|| |||e|a:||c|.
Position Responsibilities:
B|a|||c|r W||| ||e :||e|| c| |||c.a||.e de|| ||a|e|e ||a| W|||
e|u|e :c|||u:||c| a.||
C|ea|e a|| ou||d|| p|a|, e:||c| a|d de|a|| c| Au|cCAO, u||||/|| a
p|e-e| ]|er c| |a]e| a|d /-|e|.
Oe|| a|d a|a|]| c| ||roe|, :c|:|e|e, |ee| a|d rac||] p|cje:|
Ccc|d||a|e p|cje:| W||| c||e| |ear reroe|
C|ea| :crru||:a||c| |c Cc|||a:|c| a|d 0W|e|' ||e|d |ep|ee||a||.e
Repc||o|e |c| ||a:||| a|d ra|a|| ru|||p|e p|cje:| |ru||a|ecu|]
P|eae era|| ]cu| |eure a|d 8 |e|e|e|:e |c hr@willettengineering.com.
Advertise Your Job Openings in MSC!
|SC erp|c]re|| ad a|c appea| c||||e!
www.modernsteel.com/classifieds.php.
(P|eae |c|e ||a| ||ee ad |c |c|e| appea| a| WWW.a|:.c|.,
0cntact: Lcu 0urthet at 231.228.2274
or gurthet@modernsteel.com
In-House Detailer/Checker
C0\STRUCT|0\ |ETA| PR0OUCTS, |\C, a 28 ]ea| c|d :crre|:|a| |ee|
|ao||:a|c| a|d e|e:|c| |c:a|ed || ||e Au|||, T/ a|ea | :u||e|||] ee||| |u||
||re |\-H0USE de|a||e|/:|e:|e| W|c | |ar|||a| W||| Au|c:ad SSOCP. |u|
|a.e e/pe||e|:e || ||u:|u|a| |ee|, |a||, |a|| c||e| r|:. re|a| |c| |ee|
:c|:|e|e ou||d||. ||cW|ede c| A|SC :c||e:||c| de|| oa|: de||
p|c:edu|e. Ao||||] |c |ead |||e|p|e| :c|||a:| d|aW|| pe:||:a||c|.
Se|d |eure |c ken@cmpinc.org
IT WAS PROBABLY PREORDAINED that I would
pursue a career in some form of metalworking, says Ted
Hazledine, president of Benchmark Fabricated Steel.
My namesake grandfather emigrated to the U.S. in 1880
after serving an apprenticeship as a blacksmith in the forges
and furnaces of the Severn River Valley of Shropshire County
in West Central England. This area is regarded as one of the
birthplaces of the Industrial Revolution and Coalbrookdale, my
grandfathers hometown, is the site of the first cast iron bridge
in the world (now simply called the Iron Bridge), constructed in
1779. There is some evidence that my ancestors worked in the
Darby Ironworks that built the bridge.
Edward T. Hazledine went on to found his own metal shop,
the E.T. Hazledine Company in Terre Haute, Ind., in 1887. By
the time Teds father, Kenneth, was born in 1908, the company
had acquired several pieces of machinery, as well as the forges
and trip hammers of the blacksmith trade. After his grandfather
died in 1941, his father assumed ownership of the business.
Despite the commitments dictated by running a machine
shop, welding shop and blacksmith shop, Teds father and
mother raised Ted and his sisters in an active and creative envi-
ronment, where passions like archery, theater, the arts, music,
horses and travel were pursued with gusto.
Travel was a big deal, says Ted. We went somewhere every
year. Before I went to college, Id been all over the U.S. and
Canada. I was fortunate enough to go to Europe with a friend for
nine weeks in the summer of 1963, visiting 16 countries and put-
ting nearly 7,000 miles on a car purchased by my friends father!
At 16, Ted started working at the company his grandfather
started, painting beams, sweeping floors and driving trucks. The
following summer he split time between the plant and the office
to get a better idea of what the business was all about.
After high school, he attended Purdue University, studying
industrial management with an emphasis in economics. In 1965
he secured a summer position at Inland Steel Co. in East Chicago,
Ind., an experience he said probably solidified my interest in fab-
ricated steel. He joined the family business in 1966 and went on
to start his own company, Benchmark (an AISC Member/AISC
Certified Fabricator, also in Terre Haute), in 1971.
Initially I was a one-man show working out of an office on
the second floor of a building owned by a contractor friend,
Ted recalls. I would make a take-off and estimate the project
to sell it, detail it and find somebody to make it. Eventually I
hired a recent Rose Hulman Institute of Technology gradu-
ate who had been out of school for a year working for a steel
fabricator. Within a couple of years we moved into a building
that had an overhead crane and adequate space, and began to
fabricate some of our own product.
Over the years the company has evolved into a full-service
fabricated and miscellaneous steel contractor. One of Hazledines
more memorable projects was an addition to the Community
Theatre of Terre Haute (CTTH) in the late 1990s (for more on
this project, see Command Performance, 10/2002). The build-
ing holds special meaning for Ted. He inherited a passion for
theater from his mother, and for several years he was involved
in many productions there as an actor, assistant director and set
builder. He has performed in productions of Guys and Dolls, That
Championship Season, Wait Until Dark, Man for all Seasons, Arsenic
and Old Lace, Curse You, Jack Dalton!, Case of Libel and A Shot in
the Dark, and even won a Talley Award (the community theater
equivalent of a Tony Award) in 1968 for his supporting role in
Period of Adjustment. That said, he hasnt had any serious involve-
ment with CTTH, other than facility planning and construction,
for about 30 years.
The time commitment was not compatible with my busi-
ness and family focus, so I have limited my theater work to
caring for CTTHs physical plant, which may be the finest in
Indiana for theater groups that own their own facility, he says.
Travel is one passion he is able to still take part in
directly, and he and his wife have recently been on cruises
around the United Kingdom and the Baltic region, includ-
ing Russia. The two have a long bucket list of places
to visit, including Italy, Southeast Asia, China, Japan,
Australia and New Zealand, and are also hopeful of going
on an African Safari and a walking tour of the Cotswolds in
England before we grow old and feeble. Mexico, Central
America and South America are also on the radar screen, as
is the southwestern U.S.
My wife lived all over the world with her Army family
but missed a lot of the U.S., so weve got some catching
up to do.
Ted Hazledine was destined for the stage,
traveling the world and the steel industry,
thanks to a family history of culture,
wanderlust and entrepreneurialism.
people to know
SCENE: A
FABRICATION
SHOP
Ted and family. From left to right, son David, Ted, wife Lynn
(front), daughter Lisa and son-in-law Kevin.
Intelligent
Structural Design
www.bentley.com/Structural
Having all the applications you need for the tasks at hand, along with the ability
to easily synchronize your work with the rest of the project information, helps
you get your job done right, fast and protably. And when the structural project
workow can be integrated, the whole team benets.
Bentleys new Passport Subscriptions for structural engineers provide access to
the full range of structural software (including upgrades) and training documents
and information that most projects require. These options are available as an
affordable alternative to traditional licensing.
Contact us to learn more.
Model, Analyze, Design, Document
and Deliverin an Integrated Workow
With RAM
, STAAD
and
Documentation Center, Bentley
offers proven applications for:
O
Steel/Steel Composite
O
Reinforced Concrete
O
Wood and Wood Products
O
Foundation Design
O
Post-Tensioned Design
O
Steel Connections
O
Structural Drawings and Details
all easily coordinated with the
Architect and other team members and
their design applications such as
AutoCAD, Revit, MicroStation
and more.
2010 Bentley Systems, Incorporated. Bentley, the B Bentley logo, MicroStation, RAM, and STAAD are either registered or unregistered trademarks
or service marks of Bentley Systems, Incorporated or one of its direct or indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries. Other brands and product names are
trademarks of their respective owners.

MSC

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

MSC

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

MODERNSTEEL CONSTRUCTION

castellated and cellular beams.

14 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2013

22 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2013

FEBRUARY 2013 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION 23

FEBRUARY 2013 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION 25

28 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2013

The "bird's beak," under construction (top) and com-

FEBRUARY 2013 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION 29

The clash-detection aspect of BIM helped the team avoid a

30 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION FEBRUARY 2013

Kermin Chok (kc@meinhardt.

to those of standard weathering steel, it

A stuation plan of the bridge.

Demolition of the existing concrete bridge.

FEBRUARY 2013 MODERN STEEL CONSTRUCTION 45

Fig. 2: Three-leg and

Fig. 5: A modified set of rigging that led to multiple problems

Manufacturers will be required to have more informative and uniform labels.

in the Seismic Provisions, E is the modulus of

A 4D sequencing model of the Texas Health Harris Methodist

Theres always a solution in steel.

Anda mungkin juga menyukai