Search results for query: *

Is there a way to justify this through available code? As far as I can tell, it's tough to get rid of this requirement.

Would side-face blowout apply if the failure cone is no longer intercepting the element face? See crude sketch below...[bigcheeks] My initial thoughts are "no", but I have nothing to support this based on the literature available.

I understand this part, but I guess my question or issue is that I'd like to try to avoid reinventing the wheel (as you may know, AISC's Design Guide 9 is very long-winded and doesn't cover this scenario). I have software that is capable of designing members in torsion but it's limited to only...

I have a calculation that is capable of doing torsional analysis of an unbraced beam, but how about in the case where there are bracing elements at third points? There are almost no examples that I can find on this and virtually no piece of software can do this. Is it reasonable to use a force...

Thanks all, I appreciate the good responses. Will definitely get the architect involved.

I have a concrete corbel that supports a slab. The contractor wants to simplify the formwork by just making it a straight wall down instead of forming the actual corbel shape (essentially providing a thicker wall). Do you think I'd need to change the reinforcement pattern, or will the added...

When a grade beam is designed as simply supported between pile caps, in reality, how are the loads from the columns not being transferred into the beam (assuming unbalanced vertical loads)? My intuition tells me that when the beam is connected to the pile caps by extending the rebar into it...

I am indeed using rigid body constraints on the nodes, which is what I'm finding weird about this whole thing. The way I thought those worked was that it simply grouped the nodes and allows them to move as "one", but it seems to lock/couple certain DOFs together. The shells are sort of behaving...

I applied an SDL load on the corner of a shell element that should, in theory, rotate the piece. It still only translated when it should be rotating + translating, which is the same problem I've been describing. I am beginning to think nodal constraints are not the way to go about this.

Perhaps I didn't explain the problem well enough. I am looking to find the equilibrium position of the suspended shell elements, but when I run the nonlinear analysis, the elements are translating when I would expect them to translate and also rotate as well to find equilibrium. I'm wondering...

Hi, I am working on a problem where I am using rigid body constraints on shell element nodes in SAP2000 (to simulate rigidity without increasing stiffness modifiers and diverging the analysis). However, when I run the analysis and look at the deformed shape, it seems the shell is only...

The only reason I went down the cable element path is because when I used frame elements, the deformed shape did not look correct (the cables began sagging but the hanging load did not displace along with them like I'd expect), but when I used cable elements it looked much more realistic and the...

I'm looking to model vertical/angled cables in SAP2000 that support individual, freely-hanging thin shell elements. Has anyone done this before? Most examples I see are for horizontal cables. Which "Cable Type" should I be using in this scenario? The options are: Minimum tension at I-End...