Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Lat Torsional Buckling

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
A tube is certainly a good choice in this type of condition.  However, it
may or may not accomplish one of the stated goals...reduce the cost from a
W16x77 beam.  If my (sometimes faultly) memory serves me correctly, tubes
(or HSS, as they are now affectionate called) tend to be more expensive
than wide flange members on a pound to pound basis.

One other item that I would offer...if cost is the primary driving factor
to switch from a W16x77 to a W16x36 w/C12x20.7, then I would argue that
the WF with the channel will likely cost more.  In terms of "tonnage" of
steel it is about a 25% reduce in weight.  However, keep in mind that the
fabrication costs will increase due to having to weld the channel to the
beam.  Therefore, it could be that the W16x77 is the most cost effective
member.

Hope that helps,

Scott


On Thu, 19 Oct 2000, John MacLean wrote:

> Jason W. Kilgore wrote:
> 
> << Because of lateral torsional buckling, a W16x77 is required.  This isn't
> such a big deal except that the owner is screaming to cut costs everywhere
> possible (this building prototype will be built many times).  I am trying to
> use a W16x36 with a C12x20.7 channel combined section.>>
> 
> Jason:
> 
> This may be a little out of left field and my apologies if you've already
> considered it. Have you thought of using a tube section? Like a TS 20x8?
> Your lateral torsional problem should basically go away because of the
> torsional strength of the tube. Just a thought.
> 
> Cheers,
> John MacLean
> 
> 
> 
>