Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Fw: base plate bending

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
No, EC is definitely not "1.5 times safer than the other". I am afraid you are mixing apples and oranges here. EC is being needlessly conservative, since the bt2/6 limits the maximum (extreme fiber) stress to yield. Allowing plastic or elastic analysis has nothing to do with the issue here, since (yield stress times bt2/6) = yield moment, which means that using bt2/6 is elastic.

To deal with an end plate moment connection you'll have to be much more specific than just using the Mp of the beam. So you cannot just use the plastic section modulus of the beam.

Reidar Bjorhovde

At 07:58 AM 11/26/98 +0200, you wrote:
-----Original Message-----
prosteel <<mailto:prosteel(--nospam--at)>prosteel(--nospam--at)>
To: seaint <<mailto:seaint(--nospam--at)>seaint(--nospam--at)>
Date: 25 Kasým 1998 Çarþamba 09:28
Subject: base plate bending

dear sirs
my original message was

"while eurocode 3 uses w=b.t2/6 for base plates,lrfd uses w=b.t2/4. both follow load resistance factor design procedures.
your valuable comments are welcome."

i received several comments , may be i was misunderstood.
it is obvious that the first one is the elastic modulus, and the other is plastic.
does that mean in this case ec is 1.5 times safer than the other.

apart from this there are some cases that the following question comes to mind
can we use plastic section modulus ( following eurocode or lrfd ) for endplate moment connections in case of no prying force (no pretension in the bolts)

both codes permit either elastic or plastic analysis

rauf akbaba



Dr. Reidar Bjorhovde
The Bjorhovde Group
P. O. Box 37168
Tucson, Arizona 85740-7168

Telephone 1-520-797-1463
Telefax 1-520-797-0314

Email rbj(--nospam--at)