Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: Upgrade Fatigue?[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint-seaosc(--nospam--at)mail-list.com
- Subject: RE: Upgrade Fatigue?
- From: "Carl W. Jenne, P.E." <cjenne(--nospam--at)acstructural.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 17:02:40 -0400
- List-subscribe: <mailto:SEAINT-SEAOSCemail@example.com>
In Florida we've already adopted ASCE 7-10. The revised wind provisions with its different wind speeds have been a real hassle to explain to architects. Architect: "What's the wind speed in that location?" Us: "It depends. The wind blows harder on a hospital than it does on an office building." In order to save us the trouble of multiplying by 1.15 they increased the physical size of the code and opened a can of worms. Ever try to explain mean recurrence intervals to an architect? Having said that, it's not within our power to refuse to go along. All we can do is kvetch. Though Florida doesn't have seismic problems (by legislative fiat) we also design in other locations. Here's a dramatically oversimplified illustration of a AISC 341 catch-22: In an ordinary concentric braced frame, you’re (theoretically) allowed to use K-braces. In order to make sure you don’t have buckling in the braces, AISC 341 8.2b makes you select a seismically compact section. Under that provision, an HSS 3x3 brace chosen for capacity gets bumped to a much heavier HSS 5x5. So, good, right? No worries about buckling because your section is seismically compact, right? Not so fast. Go to section 14.3. That makes you introduce an unbalanced force into the column at the connection. There are a bunch of calcs to go through, but you essentially check the tensile CAPACITY of the brace. Not the actual load, the capacity. And since they just made you dramatically upsize the member, there’s a lot of capacity. Then you compare it to 30% of the capacity of the compression brace. The remainder goes into the column. So now, in this example, you have almost 15 times the horizontal load going into the column than you’d have if there wasn’t any compression brace at all. You say “the heck with it” and change to x-bracing. Same rules, by the way, for V-type and inverted V bracing. AISC 341 provisions apply for all building with R > 3, which is pretty much everything made out of steel. (With some impractical exceptions.) AISC's passive-aggressive way of saying not to use those systems? Fun with constant code improvements. Regards, Carl W. Jenne, P.E. Allan and Conrad, Inc. Consulting Structural Engineers Ring 407.628.5282 x 102 www.acstructural.com . -----Original Message----- From: seaint-seaosc(--nospam--at)mail-list.com [mailto:seaint-seaosc(--nospam--at)mail-list.com] On Behalf Of Bill Polhemus Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2013 11:10 AM To: seaint-seaosc(--nospam--at)mail-list.com Subject: [SEAINT-SEAOSC] Upgrade Fatigue? Just an observation, eliciting response. I've noticed in particular with respect to ACI 318-11 and ASCE 7-10, there seems to be real pushback on their adoption in practice. I've noticed this in such things as design software, erection drawings for steel buildings, and even examples of university engineering coursework found online. For whatever reason, with the introduction of the "International" codes in the U.S. and the ICC decision to pursue a thee-year code update cycle, coupled with their incorporating material design standards by reference, the old five- or six-year update development cycle was of course abandoned by the material design standard bodies in order to keep pace with the ICC. Not sure why but there it is. ASCE 7 has followed suit as well. Now, I think perhaps the practicing community has simply grown tired of it, and at least in practice they're refusing to go along. Truncated 451 characters in the previous message to save energy. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Post your message to the list by sending it to: SEAINT-SEAOSC(--nospam--at)mail-list.com. The email messages sent to the list will be saved in an archive on the World Wide Web. These archives are located at: http://archive.mail-list.com/SEAINT-SEAOSC To contact the list owner, send your message to: SEAINT-SEAOSC-list-owner(--nospam--at)mail-list.com. 5700 Ralston Street, Suite 300, Ventura, CA 93003 To unsubscribe, switch to/from digest, get on/off vacation, or change your email address, click here. <http://cgi.mail-list.com/u?ln=seaint-seaosc&nm=seaintma%40euken.net>
- Upgrade Fatigue?
- From: Bill Polhemus
- Upgrade Fatigue?
- Prev by Subject: Upgrade Fatigue?
- Next by Subject: RE: Upgrade Fatigue?
- Previous by thread: Upgrade Fatigue?
- Next by thread: RE: Upgrade Fatigue?