Search results for query: *

Hokie66- That is a possibility. Any comments on the 125mm mm distance to engage stirrups? Is this a real concept that needs to be followed? It just does not make alot of sense to me.

Thanks Hokie66 for your input. A couple of additional questions When you say deliver the forces in direct bearing down the side of the column. What exactly do you mean? Steel side plates on the side of concrete pier with bolts in shear into the pier? Agreed the shear is the same the full...

The load transfer is via 10- Anchor bolts

I can get several ties within the top 5" of the peir. However, I cant get enough stirrup area within the 5" for the full load. The full amount of steel needed for the S and T method can only fit witin the upper 7-8" of the peir. My understanding that only the steel in the top 5" of the pier...

I have a large concrete pier/foundation (2'x3'x5'High) and a large lateral force around 720KN. I have provided stirrups at the top of this pier to take this lateral force, however due to construction realities, I can only get the required stirrups within the top 7-8" of the pier and not the top...

JAE- Thanks for the information.

JAE, I appreciate your pointing out the difference. Unfortunately I don't really know if they are soil nails or ties. I am leaning towards soil ties as the drawings reference helical piles and indicate "chance" or approved equivalent. They also indicate "set anchor by torque, secure plate tight...

I am not trying to fix the wall, just provide an explanation as to why it failed. To me the way the original engineer tried to retain the soil was bound to fail from the start.

Yes this is what I am saying. It appears that they are using the 1x10 vertical wood planking as their « structural wall » in which the soil nails /anchors are attached to. There is no whaler to tie this vertical wood planking together. It makes little sense structurally how they were holding...

PEinc I don’t really understand your post. I know the wall has failed because the dry stack stone is lying on the ground in front. You can see the remaining stone wall in both pictures. Also I mentioned in both my posts that the anchors don’t tie back the stone wall they appear to tie back the...

My apologies for the lack of details, I was running off to a site. I have attached a photo below. Some clarifications. The drystack wall does not appear to be retaining in any fashion. Its just a stone wall infront of an embankment that appears to have been stabillized with helical...

I am a structural engineer, not geotechnical, so some of my terminology may be off. I have project that involves the failure of a dry stack stone wall, approximately 9 feet high. The original drawings call for 6 helical soil anchors to stabilize an approximate 8 foot high soil elevation...

I am analyzing whether a new generator pad is required for a 26,000lb (wet weight) generator. I have read the other post on this subject, however mine situation is somewhat different. The existing slab is 30' x 20' x min. 9" thick, and is founded directly on rock. This pad currently houses 3...

No easy way to move the beam, it frames into a column which holds up the roof structure.

HotRod10- I envisioned I would have to use maybe a 1/2" thick HSS to make the radius work. Still in the early stages of this idea. I thought using an HSS would be simpler, and would not be sharing stresses in the top flange of the beam (ie, torsion stress and bending stress). I think the beam...

See sketch below. The bin manufacturer doesn't want any additional load into his bin framing. The reason I dont want to use plates is the size of the W sections. 18 and 30" deep plates are a significant cost and would be difficult to install. The HSS or Angle is simpler.

KootK- I thought I was sure, what am I missing. The shear center/ centroid of the HSS is closer to the load than the web of the beam thereby reducing the moment arm.

hokie66 (Structural)22 Oct 18 21:38 Just one caveat...the torsion to be resisted should be based on the lever arm between the force and the closed section. Yes, I agree, and this reduces arm and the torsion by doing this.

Thanks for the ideas and comments. We did think about the angle, but it would likely be a lot of welding to get the angle and existing W section to behave as a HSS section. With the HSS in the corner, we believed we may be able to reduce the welding significantly, though only the numbers will...

Unfortunately, no beams framing into the side of the beam under torsion and none can be installed due to hopper bins.