几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-07, 04:29 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 bottom flange bracings

bottom flange bracings?
on a gabled steel moment frame, my architect requested me to take out all bottom flange bracings making it fully unbraced. top flange is effectively braced by purlins. with wind uplift controlling, i'm always using the full width of the frame (sloping) as my compression flange unbraced length. i've seen some designers and not realizing that node pt. at ridge is not a braced point unless provided with other positive means. any one has a different approach to this condition?

can you rephrase the question and post a sketch of your situation?
don't you have a ridge beam (perpendicular to gable frame)?
there's not a ridge beam so the full rafter span is unbraced at bottom flange. it is 100' span symm. single gable at 3:12 slope, i'm using about 103' unbraced length of compression flange for wind uplift. node pt. at ridge should not be assumed as braced pt.
you are correct. it is unbraced for its full length.
daveatkins
so, was your question lb = 103' or 206'?
forget above the ridge beam, it is immaterial for this case. i agree 103' is correct, because the true unbraced length of concern is shorter than that.
thanks guys. it's just that other designers can sometimes overlook this without specifying the correct lb in their model,i.e., using lb=51.5' instead of 103'
i assume you told your architect you can't comply.
ba
the other guys are correct that the full span length must be used if the bottom flange is totally unbraced, which probably makes your design very unwieldy.
there are proposed design methods which use the strength of the purlins, bolted to cleats with at least two bolts, and combined with web stiffeners, to brace the bottom flange indirectly. there have been some discussions on this site about using stiffeners as braces, but i don't have a specific reference.
australian steel institute (asi - formerly known as australian institute of steel construction - aisc) publishes a book called "limit state design of portal frame buildings" by woolcock, kitipornchai & bradford. i have the first edition (1991), but i know it has been updated since then.
a couple of quotes from the first edition:
from 5.3.2.3.2 "without fly bracing":
"... theoretical and experimental studies have confirmed that translational restraint alone acting at the level of the tension flange, such as that provided by purlins, is virtually ineffective [to increase the lateral buckling capacity] ... it is possible to design the purlin-rafter connection for some rotational capacity by providing two or four friction bolts to the cleat ..."
from 5.8 "fly braces":
"in this case, the bottom flange should be braced by using a wider purlin cleat and four high strength bolts, and a web stiffener on one or both sides to prevent distortion ... there is some evidence that the stiffeners are unnecessary. however, until testing confirms this, it is recommended that at least one side of the web be stiffened."
hope this helps!
i would recommend looking into using torsional bracing so that your shape does not get needlessly large. see appendix 6 of the aisc 360-05 (american institute of steel construction) specification.
"2. torsional bracing - it is permitted to provide either nodal or continuous torsional bracing along the beam length. it is permitted to attach the bracing at any cross-sectional location and it need not be attached near the compression flange. the connection between a torsional brace and the beam shall be able to support the required moment given below..."
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
回复


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
bottom flange bearing on steel beam huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 04:29 PM
bending calculations for non-typical beam situation huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 03:25 PM
beam bottom flange loading huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 02:45 PM
area of compression flange huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 12:49 PM
ansi 9standards0 code issues - acceptable flange usage huangyhg American standards 0 2009-09-05 03:44 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 05:13 AM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多