Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]
Re: Lateral Brace Deflection
[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]- To: "INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: Re: Lateral Brace Deflection
- From: Mark Gilligan <MarkKGilligan(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Aug 1999 11:10:13 -0400
Paul The difference between our statements is based on the assumption of the buckled shape. You are assuming that the brace suppresses all displacement in the brace in which case your statement is true. On the other hand if you use more braces, each somewhat less stiff, you will get a different buckling mode shape that has displacements at the bracing points. Salmon & Johnson 3rd Edition has a figure that shows this. The capacity of the chords will depend on the size of the chords and the stiffness and distribution of the braces. With buckling it is not necessarily all or nothing. The standard formulas are based on the assumption of a stiff brace. What I am refering to might be thought of as distributed braces. It is the difference between a simple beam and a beam on elastic foundation. To get an answer for a system with more but fewer braces you will probably need to perform a more general stabilkity analysis. Mark Gilligan --------------------------------------------- Message text written by INTERNET:seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org >> From: Mark Gilligan <MarkKGilligan(--nospam--at)compuserve.com> > you could sustain the same chord forces with smaller values of bracing > stiffness if the braces were placed closer together. if one wanted to > explore this approach the standard formulas are probably not directly > applicable. If you put in more braces (e.g. reduce your unbraced length), the buckling mode increases (e.g. from 1/2 sine wave to 1 sine wave, etc.). With each added brace the stiffness required to hold that point in place against the new out-of-plane buckling mode will increase but the restraint force may decrease. This is easy to see since the reduced allowable lateral deflection is related to the reduced unbraced length although the compression load is unchanged. Check the work by Yura et al. I fail to see why the standard formulas would not apply. Adding more bracing against "compression buckling" can become very inefficient but designers frequently do this because if one brace is good, more can only be better. This is acceptable to the extent that you do not assume a reduced unbraced length and you provide adequate strength/stiffness at the points of original bracing. So, in other words, the added braces, which may support a nominal load, become aesthetic - we sleep better at night and architects/laypeople are happy that all appears to be right in the universe.
- Prev by Subject: Re: Lateral Brace Deflection
- Next by Subject: Re: Lateral Brace Deflection
- Previous by thread: Re: Lateral Brace Deflection
- Next by thread: Re: Lateral Brace Deflection
- About this archive
- Messages sorted by: [Subject][Thread][Author][Date]