Search results for query: *

In some ways I like this better than wrapping around the anchor bolts as that's always felt a little sketchy to me. You're right though in that the connection between the hairpins and the U-bar lack a commonly available design method. I doubt bearing is a problem so long as the bits are kept...

I doubt that but it's difficult to tell from the photos. Do you have any photos that show those connections more close up? Put that fear aside. The diaphragm will absorb any in plane deck forces and prevent them from being transmitted axially through the beams.

The trick to this is to recognize that, if the reinforcing does not extend over the supports, then there will be a concentrated demand for fastening at the ends of the reinforcing. Both shear and tension. So you may need grouped fastening at the ends (which you are already showing). This is...

Google the concept of shear flow. You'll be looking for an equation of the sort that is VQ/It to determine the fastener spacing and capacity demand. It's generally thought that welds are the most appropriate form of fastening unless your bolts will be slip critical.

These kinds of infill beam to wall connections are typically: 1) modelled as pinned and; 2) detailed to keep end moments modest. As a result, to my knowledge, designers will not explicitly consider the weak axis moments induced in the supporting walls. I disagree that embed plate shear...

For what it's worth, I valued what you were doing with the FAQs. How many times does one have to explain the difference between a fixed and a pinned connection after all?? At least quarterly it seems. The tension only bracing was a good fit for FAQ treatment.

It's been done. But you'll have to pay close attention to making sure that your load path is complete and that your analysis accounts for any flexibility introduced by the stingers likely being dog-legged etc.

It likely won't be practical to restrain the tip of the cantilever vertically. So you're down to calculating the deflection of the cantilever and trying to judge whether or not that amount of movement will damage the neighboring stuff. Enough stiffness in the beam will eventually make this ok.

You get creative if you really do feel that the beam needs bracing: 1) Run posts moment connected from this beam to the beam a floor above or below. This is akin to the "roll beam" bracing concept just done as a "roll post". 2) "Brace" the beam by increasing it's torsional stiffness. Weld a...

I think that you might be making a mistake in considering the use of these columns in real life. Too small for ties, fire rating...

I would say that: 1) Splitting the moments into T/C couples is almost always going to be a better reflection of reality. 2) Often, splitting the moments into T/C couples is unnecessary. 3) Sometimes splitting the moment into T/C couples is the only way to capture important aspects of the...

To me, the description of the movement sounds less like cross section distortion and more like pure torsion/twist. If it is torsion/twist, I would not expect stiffeners to be very effective. Instead, I would focus on making effective roll beams out any transverse framing present. And perhaps...

@cam_b: sure. It's really the same phenomenon that we recently discussed here in some detail: Link

Will you be able to remove the equipment while the reinforcing is being done?

I'm not sure that there's anything to be done other than to jump into a real project and learn on the fly. One of the big differences between drafting and modelling is the importance of node / member connectivity in modelling. That said, you should be fine with that given your structural...

I imagine that the highlighted blurb in the second clip is really speaking to not underestimating the rebar in tension in the web of the wall shape for fear that would underestimate flexural overstrength in the wall for seismic. I don't think that it is forbidding parts of the wall from being...

Or a shallow beam crossing under the corner of the thicker slab? This, also, will be unpopular and may cause head height issues.

Nobody likes a field cast corbel but, if you can't move or enlarge the column, perhaps this is a viable option. Based on the relative stiffness of things, I feel that it would be prudent to assume that all of the load delivered by the transfer slab comes into the column through that little...

Ew. If this is new build, I would seriously consider finding a way to just not do this. How much of your punching shear comes in from the transfer slab vs the thinner one?

It's obviously better structurally if the studs can line up with the trusses. We call that "advanced framing" here. That said, it is also much more common here to not align the studs with the trusses but, rather, let them transfer through the top plates. And, of course, this is made possible...