@BulbTheBuilder
Got you! so your numbers are base on the 1st picture.
For the 1st picture, if the column only has moment, what's the punching load? my case is a post with 4 thru bolts (Top & bottom plates), not a concrete column
@JoshPlumSE @BulbTheBuilder
Thanks! Just want to be on the same page, assume the post is on the top of the slab, tension is on the bottom.
I am still confused.
Just the questions in my mind which could be simple to your talents, but I want to know it clearly myself. Thanks
For example, the punching load on top of 8" slab,
1. if the slab horizontal reinforcement is 2" from top, what's the d value.
2. if the slab horizontal reinforcement is 6" from top...
Hi maybe this is simple for you guys, but I want to confirm it's correct as I marked.
There are some complicate building shapes, so I just thinking about this maybe helpful.
Thanks
@rowingengineer Thanks
@phamENG great you got a summary here, however, I dont understand what the conclusion is. Maybe it only tested one condition, i.e. when the balcony is 2m, and the building is high enough to have big wind speed, it should be designed as parapet. Correct me if I'm wrong. It...
@phamENG to your wall c&c option, you mean only winward load to the railing, almost 0 leaward load on the back of railing? That's what I need to know.
From code, I only know if the sign is hanging on the wall, the gap from the sign to the wall is small, only wall c&c is considered.for the sign wind
@Eng16080 I dont think you can use "Solid Freestanding Walls and Solid Signs" per ASCE 7-16 since it's a main wind force resisting system, not c&c.
C&C elements with tributary areas greater than 700 ft2 (65 m2) shall be permitted to be designed using the provisions for main wind force resisting...
Glass railing wind load at balcony is supposed to be the same as the parapet wind load design (both faces have load, positive from face of wall plus negative from roof/wall, say 100psf c&c).
But the railing has 6" gap at bottom, is the wind load condition still the same as parapet? That's the...
@BridgeSmith,
You are the expert! But I am a bit more confused. Is that the tall bearing is not for the thermal movements? Nowadays new bridges no longer use the tall bearings any more?
Hi I only deal with buildings. When I pass by the bridges, I can see all the beams are sitting high above the abutments. It looks like some details to lift it up at the support bearing. What's the considerations? For building beams, it only sits on a thin bearing plate.
Thanks
@rapt, You are right too, this is an old building, guessing 50ksi steel, not sure, here is the plan attached.https://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=f9b0e416-84ea-42e7-a184-e028c94dbe25&file=STR.pdf
@BAretired, just follow up and what you said is correct. The other two engineers dont even understand the question. After we check CRSI and it clearly states the distribution of moment between column and middle strips for two way slab is NOT CRITICAL, as long the total area of reinforcement...
Hi it's actually the UPS Manhanton building. The top bar #5@20 is because the slab is 16" hollow block with 4" rib, only one top bar @ each rib. The bottom bar is 2#4 @ each rib.
Yes it has expansion joints, probably 8 bays max each section.
No, the strength of the middle strip is way less than the loads as I said above.
I repeated myself many times. The column strip is over design, and middle strip is under design, will the strength of column strip compensate for the middle strip. If not, how will the middle strip fail. This is an...
