Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: Equivalent frame[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Re: Equivalent frame
- From: "S. A. Masroor" <smasroor(--nospam--at)gem.net.pk>
- Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2000 10:51:00 +0500
Mr. Bryson is absolutely right. Even when we go the old Winter/Nilson method, we are providing for the load to be carried in both directions. X-moments in slab plus bending moment in cross beams equal W.Lx/8 and Y-moments in slab plus bending moment in longitudinal beams equals W.Ly/8. This is what Equivalent Frame is doing.
Michael Bryson wrote
My experience has been that the equivalent frame method gives very
results to that of a FEM method used by a program such as SAFE. In fact
from equilibrium, the full load must be carried separately in each
direction (cut a panel along the points of zero shear so that it is
centered over a column). As stated by someone earlier, the FEM just gives
you a distribution of the forces along the slab width.
I don't think that analyzing the slab twice in two different directions
corresponds to designing for twice the load. If that was the case, nobody
would design using the equivalent frame method. I think it just means
doing two checks to make sure it works, but not adding the results of the
S. A. Masroor
- Prev by Subject: Re: Epoxy Grout for Rock Anchors
- Next by Subject: Equivalent frame Re: A structural engineering journal
- Previous by thread: Re: Beam Analysis
- Next by thread: RE: seaint Digest for 21 Nov 2000