Bent Plates in RAM Connection

Question

I noticed that a skewed shear tab wouldn't work for a particular beam to beam connection, but a bent plate with the same bolts and eccentricity did. Looking at the results with View Formulas enabled, I see that the equivalent bolt factor C = the number of bolts for the bent plate (no reduction for eccentricity) while the shear tab takes the normal reduction in C based on bolt layout. This seems a little suspicious that we don't have to take any reduction for the bent plate like we do the shear tab. Anybody (at Bentley or another user) aware of where that is specifically allowed? Otherwise, I would err on the side of caution and assume they're both reduced. This is a bent plate welded to the support and bolted to the supported beam, compared to the normal shear tab, both with a=3", SSLT holes, t=3/8", 2-3/4" A325, AISC-LRFD-2010 code in version 10.0.0.129. 
 Thanks, 
 Jason

Seth Guthrie · Answer

I think the situation here is that AISC 360-10, Table 10-9 is used in the case of a single plate connection only. We opted to only implement this for shear tabs since it's within that specific section of Chapter 10, but it would be a good question for AISC if it was also intended for bent plates.

Seth Guthrie · Answer

For bent plates design and for the bolt shear capacity on the beam side, RAM Connection neglects the beam bolt eccentricity when these conditions are met: 
 
 Bolt columns = 1 
 Bolt distance to support <= 3 
 
 So if those conditions are met then e = 0 and then C = Number of bolts . In other cases, e = bolt distance to support (in the case of bolt columns =1). 
 This approach is the same used for single angle connections as described in the AISC Manual v13 p.10-123 and AISC Manual v14 p.10-133: 
 
 The only reference for bent plates design gives us the idea to design it as single angles, AISC Manual v13 p10-150 and AISC Manual v14 p10-160: