Prying with two flexible members 9

[TEDstruc]

Lets say you have two intersecting beams bolted flange to flange, where the upper beam is supporting the lower beam. You check prying for both beams, and both have resulting prying forces due to their thin flanges... Would the prying forces for both beams be additive to bolt tension? Or would just the worst case prying force be added to bolt tension?

 

[dik]

I'm not sure if they are ineffective at all. If I were going to model them, I'd check deflections using Roark or other reference for a plate fixed end supported on two adjacent sides with one that was cantilevered.

I'd then calculate the equivalent stiffness plate thickness that would give the two side supported model the same deflection. I'd use that reduced thickness for my prying action thickness to calculate tension. Alternatively, use the cantilevered thickness with the two side supported model to determine the reduced prying action force.

As I noted, "I suspect the prying action will be reduced substantially." That's the reason I sent on the query.

As far as double Q forces, I just checked my SMath program of 21/11/26, and both forces are included.

-----*****-----
So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[TEDstruc]

I would be interested to see a compilation of all of these modeling results as well as a comparison of model results to aisc calculation results for the same scenarios...

 

[human909]

I would be interested to see a compilation of all of these modeling results as well as a comparison of model results to aisc calculation results for the same scenarios...

This has already been done, I provided the link earlier.

That is for a 4 bolt T-stub to T-stub connection so equivalent to beams parallel to each other. I don't see the need for additional comparison of IdeaStatic to AISC. Nor do I see a need to consider beams 90degs to each other as the difference isn't significant.

Ideastatica looks like a very interesting piece of software.

When it comes to connection design it really is game changing. I almost sound like a salesman with that pitch! It really is excellent and simple to use. Of course like any piece of software it has it's limitations, and should be used unquestionably, but it really is good.

(I'm a "lazy" engineer. I like having software do the heavy lifting for me as much as possible. There is still plenty of room in my workflow for engineering judgment, just less time spent crunching numbers!)

 

[DaveAtkins]

So which one of us is willing to write a paper summarizing all of this work and then submit it to an engineering journal

DaveAtkins