Connection column - beam

[1greg1]

I like to have an option of using WT sections for column to beam or beam to beam connection in addition to shear tabs & clip angles.

I have requested this update years back to Graitec & as of today have not seen updated option.

Most leading steel detailing software such as SDS2 & Tekla have this connection option & why we should not?

Hope to see this improvement in next release.

Regards,

Greg Daneshvar 

[1greg1]

I like to have an option of using WT sections for column to beam or beam to beam connection in addition to shear tabs & clip angles.

I have requested this update years back to Graitec & as of today have not seen updated option.

Most leading steel detailing software such as SDS2 & Tekla have this connection option & why we should not?

Hope to see this improvement in next release.

Regards,

Greg Daneshvar 

[Anonymous]

I saw this connection once on a drawing once upon a time, and was really mystified by it.

Since it sounds like something you'd use, why would you choose this design over perhaps a double clip angle design?

It seems like the double clip angle does add an additional part to keep track of, but it'll keep your connection symmetrical. In addition, I can't imagine two pieces of angle cost more than a WT.

Hoping you can expound on it.

As to why it isn't in AS, I would think that as it's an uncommon connection, they haven't implemented it yet. Custom connections seem like a hopeful choice!

[Anonymous]

I saw this connection once on a drawing once upon a time, and was really mystified by it.

Since it sounds like something you'd use, why would you choose this design over perhaps a double clip angle design?

It seems like the double clip angle does add an additional part to keep track of, but it'll keep your connection symmetrical. In addition, I can't imagine two pieces of angle cost more than a WT.

Hoping you can expound on it.

As to why it isn't in AS, I would think that as it's an uncommon connection, they haven't implemented it yet. Custom connections seem like a hopeful choice!

[Anonymous]

I agree with you Greg. It would be nice to have this connection included in the next version. About 30% of my projects have this connection detail. When they create this connection we should have the option of using WT or 2 plates that acts like the WT. That is how usually the engineers specify these connections and the fabricator decides to use one or the other. So if we want to take full advantage of this connection we need both options.

[Anonymous]

I agree with you Greg. It would be nice to have this connection included in the next version. About 30% of my projects have this connection detail. When they create this connection we should have the option of using WT or 2 plates that acts like the WT. That is how usually the engineers specify these connections and the fabricator decides to use one or the other. So if we want to take full advantage of this connection we need both options.

[1greg1]

Thanks for reply

WE use this connection in California a lot because of seismic condition we have it here. I have talked to several engineers in this regards & all agree with WT connection. If you have a HSS 3x3x1/4 column as supporting member how would you apply a single or double clip angle?

The WT connection is part of contract document.

Regards,

Greg 

[1greg1]

Thanks for reply

WE use this connection in California a lot because of seismic condition we have it here. I have talked to several engineers in this regards & all agree with WT connection. If you have a HSS 3x3x1/4 column as supporting member how would you apply a single or double clip angle?

The WT connection is part of contract document.

Regards,

Greg 

[Anonymous]

I guess that connection makes a lot of sense. I've just never come across or heard of it.

Learn something new every day, I guess.

[Anonymous]

I guess that connection makes a lot of sense. I've just never come across or heard of it.

Learn something new every day, I guess.