Search results for query: *

thanks kingnero

Thanks Dekdee on this advice. B etter safe than sorry

I appreciate your effort to explain. Thanks a lot, kingnero. The spreader beam is to be carrying a max of 100 tons WLL resulting in a thick pad eye. Yes, we provided stiffeners for a good load path. Your idea about a thinner pad eye was noted. We will just increase the round washer to...

you may also need to see an ASCE publication about petrochem structures where there is specific coeff recommendation on the condition you mentioned.

thanks kingnero. A full penetration weld should have saved me calcs preparation. While the flange base weld is only 17mm x2, if I imagine correctly, the the addition of 7mm fillet would not do any extra for the eye pad plate. The weld contact on the partial groove would just be 10*sqrt(2) x...

I am asked to support my team in Poland to assemble our own spreader/ lifting beam so we can transfer max of 84-ton tank/horizontal vessel. My exposure was more on industrial/ petrochem facilities but haven't used to welding thick plates. I generally proposed CJP to connect the 50mm top and...

In my understanding, stress magnification by durability factor and verification of actual fs of the 2006 edition (ACI 350) had already replaced the z factor procedure by Gergely-Lutz expression of the older edition(as noted by R10.6.4). If such Gergely-Lutz expression had now became only as an...

Hi Josh, i actually had the automatic meshing for the counterfort just to take its stiffness effect, as i was only taking the stresses or the direct walls from staad to take up most likely in two way action (which i made a regular mesh as per my intended widths. Since i was uncertain with the...

Hi WARose, it were plates,i modeled if myself. As with your reply that forces are just there (straight forward), you might be telling the out of plane stresses (Mx, My Mxy). But please take note that the counterforts were in plane with the main wall forces, and this is not what i need to have.

Hi guys. I am trying to make a STAAD model a counterfort geometry as per my attached sketch, but then i was stucked when i was trying to find my bending moment for the cantilever behavior of of the counterfort. Any way staad could give me the stress i...

Thanks Seth. I'll check that out

Thanks a lot for this guidance Jed

Thanks a lot for this Jed. I may need to economize some minor walls. They are just interior walls only around 5 ft. Interior wall ( not necessary to put waterstop) and not highly stressed, w/c i could still detail to ensure cracking is controlled. But i'll take note on the the "stinger"...

I have a recent discussion with a consultant about minimum concrete cover for walls for a waste water containing tank. I read in ACI350 it could be only 2", but our Consultant insisted to use 3". We wish to keep my 2" as the code prescribed. I have also some minor low walls inside which is...

Thanks Jed. But could you guide me where how to get 2.21 for bending? is this about durability factor? Sorry im not good with tank design. Also, as with this Sd, i read from ACI350 that Sd could be ignored when load combination is with seismic. I was thinking maybe the reason was that...

I just wonder how could STAAD consider controlling maximum soil bearing pressure in order to transfer remainder loads in to stiffer support? To make my inquiry more visual, i had a tank illustrated in my attachment, where i have a base slab sitting on fill, while the walls are directly...

Hi guys, i was designing a wastewater RC tank on ground. I am taking 1.4(D+F) for operation case, F as fluid load. My design basis calls for American Codes (ASCE. ACI350) and such operation load case is clearly defined. But i could not find in the codes on how to deal with leak test load...

Hi Dik, its OK for strength, but its construction detail does not conform with ACI requirement to have cross ties. Is there any acceptable repair on this other than demolishing? Say when you have the pedestal carbon fiber wrapped, could that escape from the rule somehow?

Hi guys. I reviewed an existing steel frame tower (for a food processing plant) on piled foundation. My initial check goes fine by strength and serviceability, but i was worried that the RC pedestals did not follow appropriate seismic detailing (located at high seismic risk zone). It was like...

thanks guys, especially with wannabeSE's FEMA P-751. I now realized that judgement of structure, being similar to building or not, shouldn't be taken literally, but rather as to how the frame behaves.