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

RE: Steel Beam Reinforcing

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Roger,

My fingers mis-spoke.  I too, do not design elements to yield.  What I meant
to say was design to a given stress represented as a percentage of yield
strength.  The whole point of Tides work was that you get a significant
amount of stress redistribution in a welded composite member resulting in
the strength predicated on the composite shape and is not predicated on the
initial elemental stresses.  The limitations are buckling and deflections.  

Tide cites some interesting tests including a truss reinforced in the loaded
and unloaded condition.

Regards,
Harold Sprague


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Roger Turk [SMTP:73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, July 19, 2000 2:42 PM
> To:	seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject:	RE: Steel Beam Reinforcing
> 
> Harold,
> 
> Since I do not design for steel to yield, I worry very much about what 
> the stress is in each part of a built-up beam at each stage of loading.
> 
> A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
> Tucson, Arizona
> 
> Harold Sprague wrote:
> 
> >>Roger,
> 
> You might want to review "Reinforcing Steel Members and the Effects of
> Welding", by R. H. R. Tide, AISC Engineering Journal 4th Quarter 1990, and
> some of the other works by Tide and Spraragen (referenced in Tide's
> paper).
> 
> Tide discusses at length reinforcing members both unloaded and loaded.  He
> also presents several listed references.  After discussing reinforcing
> issues with Mr. Tide several years ago and reading various references, my
> practice has been to not worry too much about which component of a
> reinforced element is stressed to yield and which ones are not stressed as
> much.  I look more at the average stresses of the composite member.  As a
> result, the initial stress in the parent member is not as important.  It
> can't be totally ignored (like buckling), but it is not all that
> important.
> 
> When it comes to anticipated deflections, that is a different issue.
> 
> All of these issues came to a head several years ago when I had to
> reinforce
> several trusses and beams that were highly stressed.  I did have occasion
> to
> shore and relieve stress on some elements, but for the most part it was a
> non-issue. 
> 
> The papers by Tide are much better than this meager synopsis.<<
> 


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** 
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to 
*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type 
*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email 
*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message 
*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send 
*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********