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

Re: bolt end distance in timber

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Joe -

To some extent, which I would choose depends on the difficulty of
executing the more conservative option.

My inclination would be option 1 (centerline), assuming
that the minimum end distance is intended to suppress splitting
of the member in tension.  The split should (more or less) appear
along the bolt centerline.

That said, it is clearly conservative to take option 2
(shortest distance to end), since this is where the smallest
rupture energy capacity (area x rupture energy/area) would be
available.

If the difference between the two is not significant (i.e. leads to
no major complications for fabrication), I would choose the shortest
distance to the beveled end from the bolt hole.

I think option 3 (shortest distance from bolt hole to
intersection of top edge and slope) is too conservative.
Of course, it depends again on how much trouble it is to
take the extra conservatism.  If it's a minimal change, then
the resulting cost should be small.

Just my $0.02.

Charley

--
Charles Hamilton, PhD EIT               PGR and Lecturer
Department of Civil and                 Phone: 949.824.3752
    Environmental Engineering           FAX:   949.824.2117
University of California, Irvine        Email: chamilto(--nospam--at)uci.edu




******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions 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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********