Agreed. I've been talking to software vendors about similar positions on and off for years. I was even offered a cool gig at Sideplate that, unfortunately, would have been too disruptive for my family. I'm hoping that, eventually, remote work options will make something like this available as...
Who cares if it's understood by framers? It's the engineers executing the structural designs that need to understand stability a the role of the diaphragms.
Feisty!
This will be pedantic in a way that is sure to annoy you but I don't see any way around it.
In my book, neither your bar stool example nor its predecessor constitute a meaningful example of structural stability.
I consider meaningful structural stability problems to be those with the...
Firstly, thank your for that. Color me flattered. I do it for the money and for the opportunity to be useful. Seriously.
I have worked in a great variety of structural engineering environments. Boutique shops, national firms, on my own...
Unfortunately, not one of those work environments...
I consider that concern moot for the practical situations that we've been discussing. This is because the bulk of the load in those situations will be first delivered to the top side sheathing. As such, any component of those loads that is not perpendicular to the sheathing will be resisted by...
Thanks for this. I'm having the kind of day that can only be made more fun with a mental experiment.
It depends on the type of "stability" being evaluated. For Euler-esque buckling between the ends of the dowels, the taller dowels are obviously more prone to buckling. And the "why" is just...
Obviously, it is a dangerous thing to admit to rubber stamping on this forum. Many members here feel that no version of rubber stamping is acceptable. They will want to chastise me and quote a whole bunch of state regulations justifying their stance. And I encourage that to some degree.
That...
And fine, design the boundary struts for some weak axis. That's no so hard. But you'll also need lateral connections that go someplace at the ends of those struts. That could result in some objectionable hardware in your average deck.
The O86 seems to say that. The SDPWS2021 seem to say something else: that it's the chords that need attention over the cord spanning over the members distributing load to the diaphragm. So is it both?? O86 also seems to not be explicit in defining the load that the struts ought to be designed...
What I find particularly interesting is that the diagonal sketch indicates curvature not of the chords, but of the struts. And that's somewhat intuitive if we are doing the weird truss thing. So, presumably, the struts need to be designed for out of plane load as well as the chords. And with...
I'm also on team repair for all of the trusses. That said, it has to be done in a way that pays homage to the original design:
1) Moving the forces in an out of the joints between the webs and chords in a compatible way.
2) Acknowledging that the chord will have been designed with a flexural...
Fascinating. I'll need to withdraw all of my contributions here as it's clear that I don't understand the system on a mechanistic level. I'm getting the sense that this setup is treated as some kind of non-concentric truss but I've not yet reconciled myself to it.
Not sure I agree. In the context of diaphragms "out of plane" usually means perpendicular to the diaphragm, so vertical. That said, I've not checked O86 myself.
If you're to design the boundary members for loads about their own weak axes, what loads then? If it's the lateral load on the...
No specific number of joists unless I'm trying to spread out a concentrated load, similar to what @XR250 has described.
This, like many load distribution situations in structural engineering, is really more a matter of good practice than the specific attribution of loading.
There's really no...
Each deck board to joist connection has at least two fasteners. Those function as a bunch of little, highly questionable moment connections. So it's kind of like a Vierendeel truss of sorts.
With respect to the calculation of boundary element forces, this changes nothing relative to a...
Way back in 2007, I received carte blanche from CISC to use AISC for anything not covered in CISC. I've kind of extended that to now using AISC for anything where I feel that CISC does not cover it as well as AISC. Naughty me. I feel that one of the nifty feature of Newtonian physics is that...
Not sure. I usually go straight to the AISC design guide on HSS connections for this kind thing. Most of that was developed by Dr. Packer at the University of Toronto anyhow.
