wide-flange brace to wide-flange column connect. design

huangyhg

wide-flange brace to wide-flange column connect. design...
i am a new engineer and have found it fairly difficult to find a good connection design resource (unfortunately, they don't seem to teach but the basics in undergrad level courses).  currently, i need to design a wide-flange (w10x49) brace that comes into a wide-flange (w10x30) column at a steep 13 degree angle relative to the vertical position.  i've been advised by my counterparts to just make the connection "stout" and not to worry about it; but i don't think this is the responsible way to work.  any advise on what resources i might be able to use in this situation and or what limit states as per the aisc spec i need to check?  thank you!!!

is this a knee brace?
do you checked geometry? for such steep angle, it will take a lot of load, and shear (at column face) would be the focus of design.
there have been a few posts on this type of thing recently, i would suggest you use the google search option at the top of the page and look at advice from similar topics (start with the words brace connection).
the aisc specification section j covers design of this type of connection.
i would look at, at the very minimum, the following points:
bolts
welds
bolt bearing
plate tearout/shear
plate buckling
transfer of these loads to the column/base plate.
i would definately recommend that you do a full calculation the first time you encounter a connection. you will soon get a feel for what is critical.

thanks for the advice; i guess what i am specifically worried about is analyzing the additional load that will be transferred by the incoming bracing to the column.  the column is currently stressed to 80% capacity and i would like to evaluate if the additional force introduced by the brace will overstress the connecting column flange or column cross-section in general (the incoming brace is bringing roughly 150 kips of compression into the column).  i was contemplating looking at the columns max. allowable stress it can take in compression as well as evaluating what the max. allowable strong axis bending stress it can take using (my/i), and then adding the additional stressed caused by the incoming brace.  i'm just not sure exactly how the stress distribution will look.  i tried looking up some resources for this type of connection and have been unsucessful thus far, but will keep trying.  last week i spoke with a p.e. from aisc, and he had very little to contribute.   
if the centre line of the brace and the column intersect at the center line of the supporting member then there will be no additional stress in the column, the force will go directly into the supporting   
on a connection that steep, i would tend to provide an end plate on the brace and a welded bracket on the column.  that way you don't have to design a long connection depending on bolts in shear and long fin plates acting as columns.
obviously, the column takes the vertical component of the brace load in compression. the column can also experience bending from the brace depending on connection geometry. your column sounds a little light for the brace size.
an excellent reference for your situation, and steel connections in general, is handbook of structural steel connection design and details, by akbar r. tamboli (mc graw-hill).
with brace connections, it's best (and easiest) to use the uniform force method, which eliminates bending in the connection. the uniform force method is explained in the book.
jochav5280-
the advice you have been given by your counterparts is not necessarily bad advice. you will find that for something like that, the money you save by detailing an efficient connection is far outweighed by the time it takes you to properly analyze and design it; consequently, your time is not being utilized efficiently.
in an marketplace that's ever more competitive, you need to find areas where you can save a little time. i'm certainly not suggesting doing anything even remotely suspect. sometimes, however, you may be able to make a few simplifying, conservative assumptions, use a little bit more material and save yourself a lot of time.
i'm sure you've seen something like this already. columns are a good example. in our area, from a strictly structural perspective, columns could frequently be much more efficient than what we use. for ease of constructibility, however, they are typically oversized. again, this goes to the bottom line. the quicker you can build something and the less hassle you have connecting other   
frv,
good lord! you're advising jochav5280, a self-professed "new engineer", to take a shortcut on something he doesn't even understand! it's not a matter of an "efficient" connection vs a "conservative" one, it's a matter of having a connection that actually can take the forces present. 150 kips of vertical brace force is a serious amount of load.
i occasionally design connections for steel fabricators, particularly bracing connections. sometimes the steel detailer takes a "wack" at the connection first, and ask me to verify their "design". you wouldn't believe the differences between their "design" and mine in a lot of instances!
spats-
i urge you to fully read my post. please tell me where i advised jochav5280 to take a shortcut.
my post was intended to address his comment regarding the "responsible" way to work. if you had taken the time to fully read my post, this would become obvious.
i am a fairly inexperienced engineer myself. i have never once taken a shortcut or even made a simplifying assumption without satisfying two things: 1) i have designed whatever it is before properly without any simplifications and 2) i fully understand the effect of my simplification on the design.
my only intent was to point out that the advice he received was not unreasonable, as his post insinuates.