So we are assuming that a middle gusset plate like the one in picture wouldn't change the tension only assumption. It's not easy to my eyes because when using rods both bars are continuous and they can overlap one another without a middle connection.
Wouldnt The gusset plate at intersection create a brace point to the braces thus reducing their buckling length and making them more susceptible to compression?
Sorry, I forgot to mention. Those are 8m long. Also, I would have to add a gusset plate at intersection of the bars, wouldn't that afect the tension only hypothesis. Here is also a non-seismic área.
Hello Everyone.
I was asked to verify a design of a roof structure. Everything was fine till I started to check the braces. It was used a X bracing model and the bars where considered as tension only. But the profiles used where 3" starred angles (very common on industrial sites over here). For...
Good morning, Everyone.
I am trying to understand buckling factor analysis results. I've made this 11m truss and considered both top and bottom chords will be conected to a column. I have considered translation in all directions as fixed and rotation in the x axis restricted too. My analysis is...
Hello, everyone!
I am designing an endplate to be anchored on a concrete reinforced column with chemichal anchors. I am evaluating shear on the direction shown in attached picture (column height direction).
I have two analysis situation
(Situation 1)
According to ACI 318 for shear parallel to...
Thanks for answers. Thomas, mostly I want to find loads acting on top and bottom chord and on the beam in order to design the connection and members, so mostly yes, transfer load from truss and make sure the axial loads on the trusses are correct.
Hello fellow engineers. I am working on a big structure that at some point will have a truss beam connecting in the web of other beam that is transversal to it. Since I am working with a 3d analysis I am a little confuse on how to model this situation on the software. I've attached 3 pictures to...
Thanks for everyone contributing. I think on the Steel Structure department this is serving its proposal. My understandment is that it's not the most eficient structure but given the situation it was conceived, as far as strength and service checks it's doing the job. Now the ones designing the...
I did ran a deflection analisys of the column
Top deflection is 15mm. According to regulations It should remain lower then H/400 wich would be 22,5mm.
But there's something I am not conviced. From what I've studied, top flange is the one receiving the lateral loads from the crane. Since there...
Couple more informations.
That would be a 20t Class A - Standby or Infrequent Service Crane.
The column was specified as a 650x600mm welded I shape. Flanges and webs are 3/4" width.
As far as foundation, I am afraid I wont be able to give much information since that's not my department. In fact...
That's why I brougth this here, from my point of view this structure is unsafe due to only counting on this columns in order to deal with lateral loads, even those beeing relatively bulk columns...
I would like to add one more question. Since this is a free standing and is not connected to a building column etc, is it ok not to deal with Tie Back Links?
Hello fellow Engineers.
I was asked to review a free standing crane runway girder for a 20t crane. Due to space limitations the project was made with beam span of 14m and column height is 9m.
I did check the runway beam (simply supported) and the columns according to design guide 7 and in...
I am starting to study composite beams and I have some doubts on this subject.
First, from my understandment, as long as I am only working with positive moments I can consider both primary and secondary beam as composite beam. If I am working with moment frame beams I should ignore composite...
