Search results for query: *

I'd just model it in ETABs as a column frame, you can even define it as a composite section directly. 1500x1500mm concrete column doesn't seem too outlandish for a 200 story building ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what...

Didn't quite comprehend in the initial posts that it was beams stacked on beams, you can imagine my surprise scrolling down and realising that the steel equivalent of balancing a house of cards is going on ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in...

Really hope they're steel columns and not concrete.... ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what I'm talking about

I'd be looking to rearrange columns / add additional ones to reduce the loads going into that 450 zone and make this situation a lot more favourable. Given a choice I'd rather avoid this situation entirely very early on in the coordination stages and have that 1150 zone extend fully over any...

Looks like this thread has narrowed it down to a more likely intent. In typical sections/loading flanges aren't really contributing to vertical shear capacity, that was my unhelpful way of stating it. Seems like it must be a moment connection for the column whether the beam wants a moment...

I imagine it adds to shear capacity in the same way that any flange does ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what I'm talking about

I wouldn't be assuming the fixity at the base, my line of thinking was designing the base connection for it explicitly. I'm generally a concrete kind of guy so I'm not actually sure that sort of fixity works with baseplates and watnot

I'd design it as a 1m tall column fixed at the base, no restraint at the top. The self weight of the column above 1 metre can be taken as an additional applied load at the 1 metre height. I've never actually had to deal with this scenario in my work so I wonder...

Surely this picture is a joke??? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what I'm talking about

I'd also be destiffening the walls for out of plane moments (e.g 0.1) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what I'm talking about

I wouldn't be designing this as a "transmission through" case, the load is being applied to the slab and the slab has to transfer the load to the column. You might be able to take the overlapping region as a a portion of the load transferring through and putting the remaining load to the...

I'm not fond of using the squash load for transmission through the slab. If the column above and the column below are both having to account a minimum moment, the section confined inside the slab should be transferring that minimum moment through...

I take it there's at least some emphasis on "many years" because I haven't encountered them at all here (Sydney, mostly work on resi towers). There's almost no PT installers I'd consider competent these days ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do...

Had this happen on a recent job, mid way through building we changed it all the edge stressing to pans because the builder/client was finding it unsightly on the lower levels. Finishing it over with render or similar before painting will often still be prone to cracking at the live ends. I...

If my understanding of Greenalleycat's post is correct, I'd probably opt to apply ordinary modifiers to concrete with no modifiers to the steel, and multiply the output displacements. The inverse of a 0.8 stiffness modifier would be x1.25 I think, if I'm doing my math correctly...

Through what mechanism would a steel member lose stiffness? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what I'm talking about

Had the same thought looking at the EN figure posted above showing the typical strain graph and boundary length. It also seems a bit more intuitive to my eyes that we're installing boundary elements based on the concrete strain of spalling rather than stresses compared to the concrete strength...

I see I should have refreshed the page between loading this thread and when I posted, looks like some of what I said has been discussed in that time hahaha ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Why yes, I do in fact have no idea what I'm talking about

By this definition the entirety of every wall in any structure will be restrained as a boundary element. Being based on the gross section the neutral axis is always going to be in the centre of a wall, and you'll need to restrain both sides of the axis since the load acts in both directions...

Perhaps Perth has been assigned 0.09 because part of the region would be across the 0.09 boundary? I do hate how this map has been drawn however, they're not really contours and are more similar to the borders of regions (think 1170.2 zones)...