Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Plastic moment capacity of concrete filled steel pipe

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Anand Nene wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 98-03-17 23:26:57 EST, Bruno Cotes writes:
> 
> << I don't think you need studs for a concrete filled pipe.
> 
>  This is different than a composite steel girder with concrete slab on
>  top. When the girder deflects, there is a very small relative movement
>  between the girder and the slab. This movement engages the stud. Once
>  the stud engaged, the composite action develops.
> 
>  For the case of a pipe filled with concrete, I can't imagine the
>  relative movement between the concrete and the pipe happening. This is
>  due to the confinement of the concrete inside the pipe. The composite
>  action develops without the studs.If you had studs, I don't think they
>  would be engaged at all.
> 
>  The same principle applies when steel girders are encased in a concrete
>  slab. I am aware of old structures designed according to this principle
>  which are still standing.
> 
>  Bruno Côté
>  BOCTE(--nospam--at)ibm.net >>
> 
> Thank you Bruno for your response.  I understand your reasoning.  However,
> would shrinkage of concrete make any difference?  Many old structures where
> steel beams were encased in concrete have reinforcing around steel girder
> which makes it more monolith (in my opinion).  In the case I am reviewing,
> there is no reinforcement inside the pipe.
> 
> I wonder if there is any test data or established procedures / criteria for
> such applications?  Does Caltrans or any other industry use combined capacity?
> 
> Anand Nene, S. E.
> 

Good point, I will have to think about that. Perhaps, the answer is in
Charley Hamilton's e-mail.

I would be curious to know the difference between the moment capacity of
the steel column and the composite column if you have these handy. 

Bruno Côté
bocte(--nospam--at)ibm.net