Hi!
Is there some good book you'd recommend for implementing computer codes for numerical analysis (read: FEM, finite differences, and/or their relatives) of geotechnical analysis (specially topics related to buildings, such as: settlement, soil failure, slope stability, seepage, altering the...
Hi!
I'm not able to find what's the most common word in English to describe the act of an older building code being annulled by a newer code. In Spanish we say that the older code has become "derogado". Searching Wordreference, it suggests "repeal", "abrogate" or "abolish" as translations to...
Oh, what a big variation of values across authors...
@TiCl4: I need the thermal diffusivity too, because there's also a fluid simulation going on, with air-to-air transfer. My initial interest was to relate both values (air-to-air and air-to-surface), in order to avoid redundancy in the input...
But you said "I believe the general recommendation of 25 W/m2K is the recommendation for heat transfer to surfaces because the thermal boundary layer for air is usually the governing resistance to heat transfer. People have run these calculations for a variety of reasons and found this to be a...
That was it, thanks a lot. So, in conclusion, it seems it makes sense to have two different inputs: one, the thermal diffusivity for the fluid simulation, and two, the U-value for considering the air-to-surface transfer within the thermal boundary layer, and consider them as independent and...
Ok, ok, point taken about the thickness.
However, forget about the U-value for a moment, because there's another problem that seems to come first: the thermal conductivity of air seems to be anyway in the order of 25 W/mK instead of the 0.0258565 W/mK that I'm getting in my calculations above...
Why don't you see a relationship? U and k are related. And alpha and k are related. Therefore, alpha and U are related. That's what I was doing in my post.
I've been told to assume that the U-value of air is 25 W/m2K. However, in other calculations I'm using the thermal diffusivity of the same volume of air (2.208*10-5 m2/s at 30ºC), and, since both values are related, I'd rather prefer to obtain the U-value from the thermal diffusivity, so that my...
Hi,
I'm implementing a simple CFD simulator following the book "Numerical Simulation in Fluid Dynamics - A Practical Introduction" by Griebel/Dornseifer/Neunhoeffer and I was obtaining the weird behaviour that temperature was changing in the fluid just because of velocity gradients (I mean, the...
There are situations where the overlap of knowledge and research between radiative heat transfer and radiosity confuses me. While radiosity (a computer graphics technique) was developed using radiative heat transfer as its base ground (acknowledged fact by the early/pioneering radiosity...
Thanks a lot for your drawing and explanation, KootK, but now I really don't understand how you calculate the "anchorage length".
A quick thought: maybe you call "development length" to what we call "basic anchorage length" (which depends on just the concrete strength, the steel yield...
When extra bars from curtailed reinforcements are cut-off at different points, how do you usually call each "set" of extra bars that have the same length?
"Set"? "Family"? "Bundle"?
For example, at the picture above, would you say that there are three (sets/families/bundles/or what?) of...
Perhaps the reason for these different approaches is that, for us (Europe), bond is made of three causes:
1) molecular forces (adhesion),
2) mechanical friction at the steel/concrete interface,
3) mechanical interlock in the compressed struts at the ribs.
If I'm understanding you correctly...
I understand, although I feel a bit surprised about how things are treated differently at each side of the Atlantic.
I think the key point is how much concrete thickness are you talking about when you say "the reinforcement rips from the parent concrete, taking a chunky cone of concrete with it...
Oh, maybe you call it "development" when it's about a straight rebar, and "anchorage" when you use a standard bend/hook? If that's the case, I can understand your will to argue they are different, but we have always considered both within a homogeneous formulation (with coefficients that...
In the EC-2, the anchorage length is the length that a reinforcement needs for the stress to be transferred safely to concrete (ie: without failure of the bond). There's no "development length" in the EC-2. And, when I read its meaning in US books, it's the same meaning as the anchorage length...
Coming from Europe, I'm very used to the term "anchorage length" (and in fact I've never seen it called "development length" in my day to day environment). Now, reading some RC books published in the US, I see they tend to prefer "development length" (and... doing an Internet search, I even...
Nevermind: just got the confirmation that hs is actually hf (it's a typo in modern editions of the book, while it was supposedly correct in older editions).
The conditions shown above, meant for limiting lateral buckling in T-shaped beams, are from a very popular RC book in Spain, popularly known as the "Jiménez Montoya", where all terms are defined in the book, except for hs (hf is the flanges thickness, h is the beam total depth, bw is the web...
Thanks a lot for all your replies!! I like taper, haunches, and perhaps eased internal corner... but I need to think better about what term I choose :-)
@BAretired: You're right that the translation from "cartabón" is "square", but, to be more exact it's not a square, but the ruler with the 30...
