Hilit Profis - Rigid plate analysis sc not checked against ACI Max Bearing 4

Unfortunately, that is news to me.

Celt83 said:

Since they don't design the base plate you'd probably catch this during that design

Click to expand...

I wouldn't count on it. If the concrete bearing stress is out of whack, that pretty much invalidates the plat / anchor configuration, does it not.

Thanks for the PSA.

KootK said:

If the concrete bearing stress is out of whack, that pretty much invalidates the plat / anchor configuration, does it not.

Click to expand...

yep, but my hunch is they are expecting that you designed the base plate prior to jumping into their software and are just using it to do the anchorage checks. So if you designed the plate ahead of time then the geometry should have alreay limited the bearing stress and Hilti's bearing and anchor tensions should match your external design within a few percent. It's looking like their FEM option does check this so you have the option to turn that on if your a paying customer or still within the demo period.

My Personal Open Source Structural Applications:

Open Source Structural GitHub Group:

Hilti Check OK:

Hilti Compressive Stress > 0.65*.85*f'c*2 = 4972.5 psi:

Hand Check of Rigid Plate Analysis close agreement with Hilti, I use the density based Ec formula and maybe a higher decimal place on the bolt tension area:


Upsizing the plate so the hand check works:


Same in Hilti, again close agreement on the stress and anchor tension values:


My Personal Open Source Structural Applications:

Open Source Structural GitHub Group:

Does it trigger a fail if you increase the load further? The number you showed was less than 5% over at the peak. Could they be using a less simplified model to account for the varying stress? Quite possibly not in free software, but a thought.

That's what I've always done just because I've always done it that way... but, didn't realise there could be a problem if I didn't... Thanks for the heads up.

Rather than think climate change and the corona virus as science, think of it as the wrath of God. Feel any better?

-Dik

steveh49:
nope, interestingly enough if I pump the axial load another 60 kips in that example problem it reports a better utilization ratio but the compressive stress is now nearly 3,000 psi above the allowable. I'm almost certain they are doing a simple triangular stress distribution and maintaining strain compatibility between the plate bearing and anchor tensions.





My Personal Open Source Structural Applications:

Open Source Structural GitHub Group:

My biggest gripe with this is that the pressure is only reported in the detailed pdf report, which isn't the default report setting, if they were to display the bearing stress in the user interface along with the anchor utilization ratios it would be much less of an issue even still without warning the user. Ideally they add the pressure to the web interface and also make it green, yellow, red for below, at, or above the allowable bearing stress.

My Personal Open Source Structural Applications:

Open Source Structural GitHub Group: