Recommended Design Procedures for Beams with Web Openings
JOHN E. BOWER
This paper was presented at the AISC National Engineering Conference, Cleveland, Ohio, May 6-7, 7977.
IN TODAY'S construction practice, architects and
engineers are specifying more and more frequently t h a t
holes be provided in the webs of both main and secon-
dary girders and beams of buildings to accommodate
the passage of utility components, and thereby minimize
the story height and the cost of the building. For this
reason, A I S C is considering including provisions for such
beams in a future addition to its Specification for the De-
sign, Fabrication and Erection of Structural Steel for Build-
ings.1 T o aid in preparing this addition, an ASCE Sub-
committee on Beams with W e b Openings (Task Com-
mittee on Flexural Members) developed suggestions for
the addition. This paper summarizes these suggestions.
This is not the first time t h a t the A I S C has considered
holes in b e a m webs. I n a 1956 A I S C publication, Welded
Tapered Girders,2 some design rules were given. T h e ex-
perimental d a t a available at that time was meager,
however, and consequently the design rules are, in gen-
eral, not precise.
SCOPE OF DESIGN RULES
I n this paper, design rules are given for both allow-
able-stress design (elastic design) and maximum-strength
design (plastic design). Plastic design has been recom-
mended by m a n y engineers as the more rational ap-
proach to designing steel beams with holes because the
strength of such beams is often limited by the beam's
capability to deform. Because only elastic design is per-
mitted for some steels (such as the A S T M A514 steels),
a n d because the fatigue strength of a steel b e a m with web
hole is identified with the elastic strain range to which the
b e a m is subjected, elastic design rules have been in-
cluded.
T h e scope of the rules is shown in Fig. 1. Rectangular
holes and circular holes are provided for quite generally.
However, the rules are restricted to nonreinforced holes,
a n d to holes whose center line coincides with the b e a m
axis. Also, because of the sparse experimental information
John E. Bower is Associate Research Consultant, Application Re-
search, United States Steel Applied Research Laboratory, Monroe-
ville, Pa.
132
AISC ENGINEERING JOURNAL
available about their behavior, beams with holes deeper
t h a n about % of the b e a m depth should not be used,
although there is no specific restriction on hole size.
W i t h regard to reinforced holes, however, A I S I
has sponsored a project in which design tables for beams
with reinforced, rectangular holes have been prepared,
and these tables 3 will soon be published. Also, some tests
on nonreinforced beams with eccentric holes have been
completed, 4 although the results are not yet finalized.
DESIGN METHOD
I n developing the design guides, the ASCE Sub-
committee decided on the following procedure as most
convenient to account for the reduced section at a hole.
For allowable stress design, first the stress at the
center line of the hole is computed on the basis of gross
b e a m section, assuming the hole did not exist. Second,
the computed stress is compared with a reduced allow-
able stress that accounts for the hole. A "hole factor"
to compute the reduced allowable stress is provided.
T h e method is illustrated by the following equations,
using the case of shear stress as an example:
(H A A\
f < F
where
Fv = A I S C m a x i m u m allowable shear stress
FvH = reduced allowable shear stress
</> = hole factor ( < 1)
fv = computed shear stress with no hole
and the geometric parameters in the hole factor are
H/D = depth ratio of hole height to beam height
A/H = aspect ratio of hole length to hole height
Af/Aw = area ratio of flange area to total web area
This technique has both a disadvantage and an ad
vantage. T h e disadvantage is t h a t since the enginee
does not compute the actual stresses in the reduced sec
tion at the hole, he may miss the physical significance c
 Apply to-

4=5 e- 7
1.0

0.8

Do not apply t o : 0.6

E:::::|V Shear stress
criterion

F
vH
{-*> 0.4
(Sect. 1.5.1.2)
I i i A
^
1-4-+--+-
0.2
L ! ! !!
0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
DESIGN RULES

Figure 7
Figure 2

the effect of the hole on beam behavior. T h e advantage

FVH
is t h a t by examining the hole factor, the relative strength
of the various geometric parameters in the hole factor 1.0
are quickly evident.
T h e hole factors insure that the factor against yielding 0.8
is no less with a hole than when no hole exists, except at
(-#('-*) 0.6
^ \ \ ys v Shear stress
points of local stress concentration. Also, the hole factors FVH* criterion
4Af H
are, for the most part, direct results of the familiar Vier- L * D H\' 0.4 (Sect. 1.5.1.2)
endeel analysis. 0.2 SrA- 1 - 5
For plastic design, a similar technique is used: [=3.0-
0.0 __L...
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
(H A A\ H
15

Figure 3
M< MVH

where the moment at the center line of the hole, M, is M

compared with a reduced plastic moment, MpH, that is 0.6
obtained by using a hole factor \p ( < 1 ) , and the plastic
moment of the gross beam, Mv.
0.5
ALLOWABLE STRESS DESIGN WI6x36 Compressive
2ry A36 Steel stress
2Cc2 A. criterion
T h e elastic design criteria will be examined first. FSH H "- 2 . 0 (Sect. 1.5.1.3)
0.4
O n the gross section of rolled and fabricated shapes with
web holes, the shear stress on a transverse section at the
hole shall not exceed, first of all, the linear criterion given
in Fig. 2. 0.3 _1_
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
I n Fig. 2 and similar figures t h a t follow, the equation H.
for the reduced allowable stress and the hole factor is D
shown at the left of the figure. T h e equation is plotted
Figure 4
so t h a t the ordinate shows the ratio of the reduced maxi-
m u m allowable stress to the A I S G allowable stress, and
the abscissa shows the height ratio, H/D. O t h e r p a r a m - A second limitation on shear stress is indicated in
eters included in the hole factor appear on the graph, Fig. 3, and is a function of the aspect ratio of the hole,
usually as a specific value used in developing the graph. A/H, as well as the area ratio, Af/Aw. Physically, this
T h e linear shear stress criterion places a limit on the criterion limits the Vierendeel bending caused by the
shear stress that is based on a straightforward reduction shear force at the hole. For deep holes, this second crite-
of web area. T h e dashed lines outline the usual range of rion controls, while for shallow holes the linear criterion
hole size and corresponding stress level. controls.

133
OCTOBER/ 1971
 self, as shall be seen, it is recommended that the factor
0.66 be reduced by the ratio of the reduced plastic
moment to the plastic moment of the beam.
For noncompact beams, the allowable stress should
be reduced as shown in Fig. 5.* I n regions of pure bend-
ing (fv 0), very little reduction is needed. For in-
0.6 h Bending creasing shear force, though, the allowable bending
FbH-fl"
Uf) WI6x36 stress
stresses must be significantly reduced, as indicated by
FVH 6A, 4-2.0 criterion
0.4 (Sect. 1.5.1.4) the lower curve, where the computed shear stress equals
the reduced m a x i m u m allowable shear stress.
0.2 T h e A I S C lateral buckling formulas must also be
modified when there is a hole. Figure 6 shows the hole
0.01 1 1 i I i factor for A I S C Formula (1.5-7) t h a t is based on tor-
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 sional stiffness. For the usual range of hole sizes, the
reduction in allowable stress will be small. T h e addi-
tional A I S C Formula (1.5-6), t h a t considers the com-
Figure 5
pression flange as a column supported in the plane of the
web, should also be modified, b u t only if the hole is
deeper than % of the b e a m depth. T h e specific reduction
is given in the ASCE committee paper. 5
!2,000Cb
I n addition to lateral buckling, vertical buckling ol
the compression tee into the plane of the web can occui
when web holes become too long. T o examine this condi-
tion, the previous formulas for members in compressior
should be used, again replacing Kl/R by}^(A/RH).
Criterion for There are also design criteria for three possible mode:
compression
FbH !
. A H
-WI6x36 in flexural of web buckling: T o prevent local buckling of the stem o
members the compression tee sections at the hole, it is sufficient t<
(Sect. 1.5.1.4.6)
use the present A I S C width-thickness ratio for the stem
of unstiffened tees, \21/\/Fy. T o prevent web cripplini
due to concentrated loads placed too near a hole, Fig. 7
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 end-reaction and interior loads should be placed awa 1
from the edge of a hole by at least half the beam depth
D
Also, concentrated loads should not be placed over thi
Figure 6 hole. Lastly, for beams with multiple holes, a minimun
clear web width between holes should be maintained t<
prevent web shear buckling. Using the relationshi]
s = p{\ H/D), where s is the m i n i m u m clear web widtl
For compression members with web holesmem- and p is the center-to-center spacing (or pitch) of t b
bers with isolated web holes rather t h a n columns with holes, yielding would occur in a tee section before shea
perforated platesit is recommended that the AISG buckling occurred in the web between adjacent holes.
formulas be used in two ways: (1) Choose a member t h a t
satisfies the A I S C formulas without regard for the hole.
(2) As shown in Fig. 4, replace Kl/R in the A I S C formu- * In Fig. 5, the ratio fv/FvH should be multiplied by 0.2.
las with the ratio %(A/RH), where A is the length of the
hole, RH is the m i n i m u m radius of gyration of a tee sec-
tion at the hole, and Y2 *s t n e effective length factor.
Curves are shown in Fig. 4 for RHx, which is the radius
of gyration about an axis parallel to the flange, and RHy,
>*H-
r=a
which is for an axis in the plane of the web. Generally, 1i

the reduction is quite small.

For bending stresses, several new criteria are required
D
1
1
* >
a ]
when there is a hole. For compact sections, the m a x i m u m
allowable bending stress is generally 0.66 X yield
strength. However, because the plastic moment of a
5J

b e a m with a hole is reduced below t h a t of the b e a m it- Figure 7

134
AISC ENGINEERING JOURNAL
 MpH
A s, s
Mp r WI6x36:-Hr -0'Tr-
VuH 0.
I.Op
-WI6x36:
WI6x36:4 = 2.0:-r^-=0.l VuH
H VUH
0.8
WiexSS^'IO: ]
^-...oHi
Plastic
shear force
MpH = l ijtM^khm)
4A f
Plastic
moment
criterion
criterion A*

'WW (Sect. 2.5)

0.0
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
D
o.oi
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
H Figure 9
D

Figure 8

FATIGUE
So far, nothing has been said about cutting the hole.
PLASTIC DESIGN However, this is a most critical aspect, particularly if the
beam is subjected to fatigue loadings. Therefore, the
For plastic design, the hole factors result from lower-
corner radius and preparation details for the hole must
b o u n d ultimate-strength analyses for beams with an
be specified on the plans. It is recommended that all
elastic-perfectly plastic stress-strain behavior. T h e ana-
holes be machine oxygen cut, and t h a t m a n u a l cutting
lytical bases (and the experimental verification) are pre-
be disallowed. Figure 10 indicates why. T h e u p p e r sur-
sented elsewhere, 6 but basically the collapse mechanism face is the edge of a machined hole; the middle surface
is completed with the formation of four hinges near the is the edge of a machine oxygen cut hole; and the bottom
corners of a hole. surface is the edge of a manually oxygen cut hole. T h e
T h e reduced plastic shear force for a beam with a web differences in roughness and notch effect are striking.
hole is shown in Fig. 8. It resembles the linear relation- W i t h regard to corner radius, the recommended mini-
ship for allowable shear stress except for the term with a. m u m radius is %-in. or 2 X web thickness, whichever is
It depends on both the length and height of the hole, as greater. This is a marked change from the 1956 A I S C
can be determined from the multiple curves. publication, 2 which called for a m i n i m u m corner radius
T h e reduced plastic moment at the hole is shown in of 2 in.
Fig. 9. T h e hole factor depends on the shear force as well These recommendations are based on fatigue-test
as on b e a m geometry. T h e top curve in the figure is for a results. W i t h them, and with calculated stresses <FvH,
W16X36 shape in pure bending. I n this case, only FbH, etc, it is possible to use the A I S C provisions for
H/D has an effect. T h e next two curves, which are prac- "stress category A " in fatigue-loading situations.
tically coincident, show the further reduction caused by a
slight a m o u n t of shear (in this case, 0.1 of the reduced
plastic shear force). Since the only difference attributed
to these two curves is hole size (a square hole versus a
' 2 : 1 rectangular hole), it is concluded that the shear-force
ratio has a stronger effect than aspect ratio on the re-
duced plastic moment.
T h e peculiar shape of the two lower curves, which are
for two different beams, both subjected to the m a x i m u m
shear force ratio, is due to the fact that as the hole gets
deeper, it must be placed more and more towards a
region of pure bending. Thus, although the shear force
ratio is maximum, the actual shear force decreases. I n
fact, the curve for the W16X36 b e a m would join the
uppermost curve if extended to the largest H/D. Figure 70

135
OCTOBER/ 1971
 CIRCULAR HOLES Properties for investigating local strength at the hole:
T h u s far, the design criteria have emphasized geo- W14X38:
metric parameters that obviously belong to rectangular Mm ZxFy = 184.5 kip-ft
holes. There is adequate information, 6 however, to use Vu = 87.5 kips
these same criteria for circular holes, provided that the Aw/Af= 1.27
circular hole is replaced by a rectangular hole whose A/H= 12/8 = 1.5
height is 0.9 X the diameter of a circular hole and whose H/D = 8/14.12 = 0.565
total length is 0.45 X the diameter of the circular hole.
Thus, the substitute rectangular hole would have an 0.1975
aspect ratio of 0.5. These criteria should be used with (!)'(!-)'
both elastic and plastic design.
W16X36:
Mp = 192.0 kip-ft
Vu = 93.8 kips
F> F> AjAf = 1.58
A/H= 1.5
H/D = 8/15.85 = 0.505

Q:3
t L,
a = 0.321
As a trial, locate the hole in the shear span:
V (factored) = 22.1 kips
L 8 8' 8' TryW14X38:
M
Vu = 87.5 kips ;V/VU = 0.253
Figure 77
1
^ ( l - ' ) f ^ = 0A77<^ = 0.253
u \ Dj^l +a Vu
DESIGN EXAMPLE :.VUW<V g-
T h e non-reinforced hole cannot be placed in the shear
T o illustrate the design rules, a design example is
span of the W14X38 beam.
considered. As shown in Fig. 11, it is required to place a
nonreinforced 12 in. by 8 in. hole in a simple beam. TryW16X36:
There is no fatigue loading or lateral buckling problem. Vu = 9 3 . 8 k i p s ; F / F M = 0.236
A36 steel is being used. T h e shear force is 13 kips.
= 0.244 > 0.236 VUH>V o.k.
Solution (plastic design):
Select beam section:
M a x . factored shear force V = 1.7 (13) = 22.1 kips Use W l 6 X 3 6
M a x . factored moment = 22.1 (8) = 176.8 kip-ft Determine reduced plastic moment:
R e q ' d plastic modulus = 176.8 (12) / 3 6

TryWHX38:
= 59.0 in. 3
MpH
1 -
(0
i i -h
V
. /
ll+a
I+ H
+ =1
_

Check plastic modulus: Mv 1 + aJ

ZT = 61.5 > 59.0 in. 3 o.k.
1 +4
w
Check shear: = 0.488
Vu = 0.55 FvtD = 87.5 > 22.1 kips o.k.
MVH = 1.7PL = (1.7)(13)L = 0.488 (192.0)
TryWl6X36: L = 4.24 ft = 50.9 in.
Check plastic modulus: Therefore, the distance from the end reaction to the
z = 64.0 > 59.0 in. ; o.k. center of the hole must not exceed 50.9 in.

Check shear: Check edge distance to ensure web crippling:

Vu = 93.8 > 22.1 kips o.k. L D/2 = 7.9 in. o.k.

Both W l 4 X 3 8 and W16X36 shapes have adequate Check deflection analysis (see full ASCE subcommittee
section modulus and shear strength for the beam report):
without a hole. Also, both beams are compact in A t (no hole) = 0.850 in.
A36 steel. A t (with hole) = 1.102 in.

136
AISC ENGINEERING JOURNAL
T h e following detail notes would be added to the draw- CONCLUSIONS
ing. Sufficient suitable analytical and experimental
Corner radius: Machine oxygen cut. analyses of steel beams with circular and rectangular web
Hole at midheight. holes have been m a d e to enable design rules for such
N o reinforcement required. beams to be developed. An ASCE Subcommittee de-
If allowable stress design were used, the extended ex- veloped these rules in a form that is suitable for use with
pression for the reduced allowable shear stress (see Fig. the A I S C Specification for the Design, Fabrication, and
3) would indicate that the W16X36 shape is not satis- Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings.
factory with allowable stress design:
REFERENCES
f, = - = 2.74ksi 1. Specification for Design, Fabrication, and Erection of
Structural Steel for Buildings American Institute of Steel Con-
struction, Inc., New York, N. Y., Feb. 12, 1969.
F = 0AFv= 14.4 ksi 2. Welded Tapered Girders American Institute of Steel Construc-
tion, Inc., New York, N. Y., 1956.
fv/Fv = 0.190 3. Redwood, R. G. Tables for Plastic Design of Beams with
Rectangular Holes Report of Project 777 to the American Iron

FVH
F,
\ D/ \
. fK\/A\f.
Aw
, AA,
-D*A = 0.148
and Steel Institute, February 7977.
4. Private communication, United States Steel Applied Research Lab-
oratory, Monroeville, Pa.
1+4 5. Suggested Design Guides for Beams with Web Holes Report
of the ASCE Subcommittee on Beams with Web OpeningsTask
Committee for Flexural Members, J. E. Bower, Chairman. Sub-
FVH<fv n.g. mitted to ASCE for Publication, April 75, 7977.
6. Redwood, R. G. Plastic Behavior and Design of Beams with
If the elastic analysis were completed, one would find Web Openings Proceedings, First Canadian Structural Engineer-
that either a W18X35 or a W16X50 shape would be ing Conference, Canadian Steel Industries Construction Council,
satisfactory. Toronto, Ontario, February 7968.

137
OCTOBER/ 1971