It occurs to me also that annular base plates for circular or tapered
circular columns are going to have a great deal different mechanism. After
all, one can simply "multiply anchor bolts" in a serene manner, and there'll
be little to no significant bending in the annular base plate.
I wonder if those who were doing this stuff simply "transferred" their
thinking to the rectangular base plate with four bolt topology (love that
word), just as I without really wondering about it, transferred MY building
column base plate design methodology (i.e. grouted).
But I'm STILL left wondering why the TxDOT specification CLEARLY STATES "No
grouting under base plates". I mean, that makes it sound like they really
thought it through (like that's never happened before, high-sounding
rhetoric in a building or design code, in reality signifying nothing!)
I'm going to give this guy a grouted base plate, and tell him, politely, to
If the band of geniuses here assembled can't give me a definitive answer,
then I'm convinced there's probably not one!
It's the "4/3 of allowable stress due to wind" phenomenon!
From: Rogers, Robert [mailto:Robert.Rogers(--nospam--at)Woolpert.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2000 4:02 PM
Subject: RE: More On Ungrouted Baseplates for Traffic Signal/Signage
Struc ture s
I'm with you Bill; still puzzled about the
engineering analysis behind all of this.
I don't know exactly what the analysis approach is without utilizing the
distribution of the compressive force. I asked the question once before on
this list to a proponent of the "no grout" design method but never got a
reply. It may be one of those things that's been used but never quantified
by hard numbers. Of course the argument goes... if it hasn't failed it must
be okay. I disagree since just because something doesn't fall down doesn't
mean that the item is overstressed and may be fatigued by such