ICC Structural Steel Inspection

By 803056

Date 03-23-2006 02:26

Both answers should be in the AISC Steel Construction Manual.

Al

By old-N-ugly (*)

Date 03-23-2006 02:40

Not on any pages I have read

By vonash

Date 03-23-2006 04:14

This thead is outside the prametrers of AWS. However, I Recommend manufacturer's tests and data for bolt installation tolerances regarding bolt diameters exceeding those recommended by the AISC standard. Otherwise conduct abd document any acceptability tests; submit satisfactory results to AISC gorerning body.
Hope this is received in good spirits,

Vonash

By jwright650 (*****)

Date 03-23-2006 13:51

9th edition of the Manual of Steel Construction(ASD) page 1-8 Table 2 gives the Groupings of Structural Shapes.

Dimensions for Threaded Fasteners are on page 4-143

I have the latest AISC book but haven't had time to thumb through it yet, so I'm not certain of the page numbers to help you out with your questions.
John Wright

edit: to answer your questions per the older ASD book;
Quest#1 = C
Quest#2 = B

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-23-2006 14:06

James, John

Due to improved rolling practices over the last seventeen years since the green ASD manual publication, the AISC has relaxed its CVN requirements in the new manual for what was previously designated as Group 4 and 5 rolled shapes. The green ASD Manual, (A3.1.c) indicated that any Group 4 or 5 steel that was to be splice welded using complete joint penetration, regardless of thickness, was required to be indicated in the contract documents to be supplied with CVN testing, which is at an additional cost to the fabricator.

Now, the new manual has excluded the rolled shapes chart (page 1-8 Table 2) that indicated the rolled sizes and their group designations, and in A3.1c, the words "Group 4 and 5" is eliminated and replaced with “rolled heavy shapes with a flange thickness exceeding 2”.........

There's even a footnote in the shapes listings that states"Flange thicknesses greater than 2" special requirements may apply. See A3.1c".

I realize that we are bound by the requirements of the contract documents, but now, CVN testing is only required when the flange thickness exceeds 2", and that member is spliced using complete joint penetration welds.

Some engineers will not be aware of this change and will continue to require CVN testing for the old Groups 4 and 5, but, there's no point in paying for CVN testing if we're no longer required to. A quick phone call to the EOR for verification might save some money.

So, to answer your question # 1, group designations 1 through 5 no longer exist.

The answer to your question #2 can be found in the new manual on page 7-80. The height of a 3/4" A563 heavy hex nut is 47/64. It will not vary from manufacturer, because it has to meet ASTM A563 criteria.

John, there are other fabrication changes regarding the heavier shapes. One change is that there is now a specific height requirement for weld access holes, along with a minimum and maximum height limit.

By henri

Date 03-23-2006 15:47

If the structure is designed using the AISC-ASD 9th edition handbook, wouldn't Group designations will still be valid?

The 2003 IBC still allows design of structural steel using ASD. IBC Sec 2205.1. Also D1.1(up to 02 edition at least) Sec 5.17.1 gets into some provisions for Group 4 and 5 shapes.

By swnorris (****)

Date 03-23-2006 16:06

Yes. Although the 9th edition is seventeen years old, it would definitely still be valid if designs and drawings were prepared based on it, but in light of the new edition, I'm just suggesting that a phone call to the EOR might save some money on CVN verifications. It's essentially brand new and there's going to be engineers, etc out there that are not aware of the changes. We are supposed to abide by the latest editions of all publications. There are going to be projects designed and released between publications. Even though something was designed based on an old publication, and we know that there have been changes to the newer publication, I think it is part of our job and responsibility to question what's on the drawings. Sometimes it could be to our advantage, and sometimes not, but it's a team effort and it's important to work together with the EOR. A good example is that for heavy shapes (formerly group designation shapes) there is now a specific height requirement for weld access holes, along with a minimum and maximum height limit, where there wasn't before. It is the fabricator's responsibility in this case to follow the new publication, rather than the 9th edition, because evidently there have been some weld access hole size problems over the last seventeen years that warranted the restrictions.

By henri

Date 03-23-2006 16:37

Unless approval is granted by the AHJ/BO, IMHO, it may not be legally prudent to design or inspect to the latest version of a design code(AWS, AISC, ACI etc) if the applicable building code of the enforcing jurisdiction does not reference that edition. Some building departments will not accept a design based on a code edition not referenced in chapter 35 of the version of the IBC they have adopted.

By thcqci

Date 03-23-2006 20:41

My copy of ASTM A6-01 says,
"3.1.10 grouping for tensile property classification - in some material specifications, the tensile property requirements vary for different sizes of shapes due to mass effect, etc. For the convenience of those using the specifications, the various sizes of shapes have been divided into groups based on section thickness at the standard tension test location (web of beams, channels and zees; legs of angles; and stems of tees). The material specifications designate shape size by reference of the group designations. The groupings are shown in Table A."

There are 5 Groups in the table. Heavier sections are in higher groups. AWS D1.1 references this table for determining required NDE on beam copes and weld access holes for Group 4 & 5 sections, etc. A W14x426 is in Group 4. This table and verbiage is not found in my ASTM A6-04a. To tell you the truth I did not realize it had been edited out since we never use sections in the higher groups.

The dimensions of heavy hex nuts are to meet the requirements of ANSI/ASME B18.2.6 according to the Specification for Structural Joints using ASTM A325 or A490 Bolts, June 23, 2000, 2.4.2. I do not have that document. If you interpolate from Table C-2.1, you could assume your answer B would be correct.

Hope this helps.

By henri

Date 03-23-2006 16:30

Question 1 is the same as question 3.1 in the workbook(IBC version) while question 2 is the same as question 3.7 and the 2 inches you typed is for diameter. Answers to both questions are found on page 130. The answers in the workbook seem correct and they provide references for both the ASD and LFRD version of the AISC handbook.

I understand the ICC structural steel/welding exam will soon be discontinued and in its place they will have two separate 3-1/2 hour exams; one dealing with welding and the other with steel erection and bolting. Both exams will have open book and plan reading parts. Here's the link http://www.iccsafe.org/certification/pdf/2006NationalCertificateCandidateBulletin.pdf

Good luck.

By old-N-ugly (*)

Date 03-24-2006 04:58

Yes you are right and it is unfortunate on my part to have not listed the correct information as I sent out the request to be posted.

I did look in the back and found the answers to the question but as I stated I purchased the new 13th edition of the AISC manual, only to find out that most of the information was omitted although with the purchase of the book came a CD loaded with past issues of the manuals and various commentaries in a .PDF format.

As for the question regarding the nut height dimension it is not listed in the book up to the 2 inch bolt diameter, and there is no mention of any other reference for study material to take the test, so one can only interpret that the height of all nuts are equal to or less then the bolt diameter.

Thank you for your information on the new testing, I will call the testing organization to verify the criteria for testing, it appears to me with the two categories a CWI would only need to take the structural Steel and Bolting test to be qualified for all three process, but I have been known to be wrong on many of occasions.

By henri

Date 03-24-2006 10:27

The AISC handbook references required for the exam are either the 3rd edition of the LFRD version(bluish gray I believe) or the 9th edition of the ASD version (green book) with 2000 code of standard practice and 2000 RCSC specification for high strength bolts updates. Refer to page 32 of the candidate bulletin (which is page 38 of 56 of the pdf file) and it will list references required. http://www.iccsafe.org/certification/pdf/2006NationalCertificateCandidateBulletin.pdf

The 13th edition of the AISC manual provisions for both allowable stress design (ASD) and load factor resistance design (LFRD). Part 6 of this manual includes the 2004 RCSC Spec for high strength bolts and the 2005 Code of standard practice. http://www.bookmarki.com/AISC_Steel_Construction_Manual_13th_Edition_p/156424055x.htm

No need to panic and purchase another AISC manual if you can answer most of the questions (related to AISC provisions) in Robert Shaw's field practices workbook as the open book portion is relatively straightforward, provided you have studied effectively.

Now to the matter of whether an ICC certification is required for performing structural steel and welding special inspection on steel framed buildings under construction. It will depend on the regulations of the governing jurisdiction.

In some parts of the country they do not recognize ICC certification and require AWS CWI. In western states some jurisdictions only want ICC, some want CWI for welding and ICC for steel erection and bolting.

Increasingly, many structural engineers are now stipulating in their specs that the special inspector possess a CWI certification (especially for FEMA type connections) even if the jurisdiction only requires ICC certification. This is why many special inspectors in western states have obtained CWI in addition to the ICC structural steel/welding certification. And when the ICC exam is separated into welding and steel erection/bolting exams, I imagine aspiring special inspectors in western states will strive for both certifications in addition to the CWI.