Search results for query: *

The f'ce you calculate is just for the sandwiched section of slab. You may need additional reinforcement, at the column-slab junction, if your axial on the columns and being transfer through the slab is greater than 9880kN (using your 300x1000 column with about 1% reinforcement). Your slab...

It's not that NSW don't require registration, it's that the Building Commissioner doesn't like EA so is choosing to ignore them as a professional body for registration. I agree with Just Some Nerd. I see little benefit in being CPeng or RPeng, save for the need for accreditation.

Hi Rapt, I think the photos still show the same thing. See attached for reference. That crack shown in the photo on the left is hidden or shadowed by the direction the photo was taken on the right. But I believe the crack can still be...

Are you designing a concrete floor, steel, timber, something else? Incremental deflections aren't really a load combination, it's more of a load condition. It is the difference between the total deflections and the initial deflections: Delta.Inc = Delta.Total - Delta.Initial Your total...

I'd be looking towards the concrete code where they recommend designing for an incremental deflection of L/500 or 15mm (industry standard) for brittle finishes. Incremental deflection is total - initial (where initial is deflection under dead load and prestress). Obviously this is for a concrete...

See attached a paper from the ASI for steel deflections, extracts from a portal frame design textbook, recommendations from Timber design handbook HB108-2013 and AS 1720.3:2016. I find the criteria from AS 1720.3 confusing as most other references allow L/360 for dead load and a less strict...

If only we had the code commentary we could put it to bed..... I jest. Well, I'm happy to be wrong. I can see why using the wording in the code it could be read that way. When the 2018 requirements first came out the company I was working for 'borrowed' another companies details to form the...

Definitely applies to a closed core box too. As 14.6.2.3 states "in any area of the wall".

For a building to have a period of >5s it would have to be in the order of 200m tall or 50 storeys (using the old approximations). Surely there would be issues with accelerations exceeding occupancy comfort in the structure?

That initially wasn't how I would have read that clause but would agree with what you have said. See below clause C7.4.2.4(a) from the 1993 commentary to AS 1170.4 "The Clause requires the base shear force resulting from a dynamic analysis be increased to that required by Section 6. All...

I believe AS 1170.4 (R2018) states that the base shear from a rigorous structural analysis should not be less than 70% of the value obtained from using the code period (i.e. static analysis). Refer to clause 6.2.3 As far as I am aware, this clause has not been removed.

Columns and walls should be designed using Lu, "unsupported length of a column, taken as the clear distance between the faces of members capable of providing lateral support to the column." In short, 4m would be the correct height for your wall. Apologies if I am assuming too much, but if you...

Be wary if this wall is designed for lateral EQ loads (which unless very specifically detailed, all walls are), section 14 of AS 3600-2018 requires a slenderness ratio of less than 20, Cl 14.6.5.

Hi liongalahad, The draft amendment 2 altered the equation: phi.Vu > min [(1.6 x Mu)/M* ; (mu/Sp).V*] This means the upper limit (if using mu=2 and Sp=0.77) is now 2.6 x V*

As people have already told you, your building does not appear to have a large enough core. A very basic calc you can do to check the fundamental natural period of the structure is T = h/46 where h is the height of the building above ground or T = n/10 where n is the number of storeys. This...

Hi Dik, 20% is a reasonable assumption. AS 3600 requires a a minimum value of 20% of the vertical force when designing corbels or nibs

Coming out of left field here, is the reason it states that earthquake serviceability actions need not be considered because the building is not expected to remain serviceable in Australia after an earthquake unless it is importance level 4. In AS1170.0 clause 2.3 there is no mention of...

Hi all, Thanks for the replies. I have spoken to a couple of other guys in the office and they have had similar sorts of issues in not being able to calculate the capacity factor. I have tried what was recommended above and still came up empty handed. See attached an example of the results...

Hi all, When using a program like Microstran for steel design, it provides me with a capacity factor or utilisation ratio which is essentially capacity/load. If the capacity factor is greater than 1, it suggests the member has sufficient capacity for the applied loads. However, when the member...

Hi All, This is an awesome discussion, I truly am learning a ridiculous amount as a 2nd year graduate. AS4100 is currently under revision and maybe this 'murky' clause will be rewritten or clarified. Coming out of uni, they are teaching the points that Tomfh and Agent666 are putting forward in...