Not too concerned with the cranked bar bearing stress as others have said.
I would possibly hook the bar ends on the supporting beam up into the section for some extra "suspenders".
Thanks Josh. My thought was also to mesh it but I dont think I am there yet.
I was going to just take the dimension perp to the flange and call it all the thinner section.
I have a beam that has a welded center section with a thinner web. The beams are on a 7% slope. The fabricator spliced the beams perpendicular to the horizontal.
Euler-Bernoulli beam theory states plane sections remain plane etc. Perpendicular to neutral axis.
Wondering some opinions on how...
Its manitoba so I would just pick a conservative value nearest to you. Unless it super far it is fine.
I would say this is reasonable because if they deemed your area was a niche 'climate' they should have added it in. Or else it is assumed to just be blended into the rest of the contours.
I think you will have issues with the connection overtime. The steel will not allow moisture to leave, so humidity will collect. The post will shrink and swell.
The post will never dry out in the socket. Even if it does not rain on it the timber will hold moisture as it is a sponge. If it...
I do agree with most who say the detailing is not proper. But my counter is that how we design retaining walls, it is a pretty conservative method and thus why it has not become an issue.
If you want to make thinner walls and use some new method to analyse/design them. Then yes you need to be...
Is it really that hard to put the design force (moment,shear etc) for each connection? Even if you try to envelope a worst case for certain types, that may be a bit overkill for some locations but the connection designer will be able to be much more economical.
But in my area it is more common...
It seems light to me. But I have not run the numbers.
FYI in bridge construction our jacking designs are the max of factored D+L or unfactored 2*D. whichever is greater. Loads in construction can be hard to predict.
I have lifted a bridge and it was almost 1.6 times what the estimated dead...
Not needed to become a structural engineer at all.
If you want to become an actual practicing engineer, experience in the work is probably the most valuable. But a masters probably helps you fight the analysis paralysis of the common problem better.
Dont let the USA influence us anymore. Just use ULS/SLS design as required with LRFD.
We need to train our geotechs to understand LRFD. If we dont we will be stuck in a loop of figuring out what they are saying and what we should do.
Just for my knowledge. When they design these with the larger tensile bar in the center. Is it basically a simpler way to design a pile/piletop where there is moment and tension? So you just plunk a large bar in the center for tension and then the cage for the moment?
@Bridgesmith Yes I agree if we are talking about a bridge, with many large girders. This is not that. But could not be a 'small job' either.
I agree, give them the option and let them choose which is best for them. Doesn't matter to me which type they use.
Turn of nut can be done with normal HS bolts. You dont need to buy the fancy bolts.
Its rly not thatttt much slower to install, they have snug tighters and then markers after. And from my inspectors point of view it is speedy. You can argue over some number of hours I guess but who cares about...
I would argue turn of nut is not hard to QC or install for contractors. You need a paint marker to mark the zones, that is all.
It could be argued that it is not as 'accurate' as others. But we had done enough testing and that is why we have the requirements set for the method.
It is not feasible to put a physical barrier on every bridge.
In my area if you haul over a certain size (width or height) you need a permit.
Dont try and 'solve' this unsolvable issue. It keeps us employed after all :)
