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


 
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-08, 07:03 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 diverse member cross section cost comparison

diverse member cross section cost comparison
anyone know of an effective way of comparing diverse steel and aluminum members for simple beam support to give the best dollar for strength. have flexibility in design for choosing cross sections, mainly looking at i-beam, channel, round, square and rectangular tubing. thank you. vava1
check out our whitepaper library.
the loading needs to be taken into account.
i have attempted similar, by creating a spreadsheet listing many structural steel shapes and properties (i.e. cross-sectional area, moment of intertia, etc). then, by inputting the loading, the spreadsheet would calculate the shear/moment for the span, determine the maximum stress in the member. this list can then be used to determine options of what will work. it would be easy enough to add a "cost" column to determine the cheapest acceptable member.
however, i think a spreadsheet that allows entering a wide array of loading, and contains the hundreds of structural steel
dollars per volume/allowable stress.
i hope you mean to compare steel to steel, and aluminum to aluminum...
when designing to a given siatuation, the cheapest is typically the lightest. further, more in depth, comparisons are not easy; that's why there are so many shapes available.
the shapes that are offered by the steel mills are based on being as material efficient as possible while minimising any "additional" works required, such as stiffeners.
there are several good threads on efficient/economical design; i suggest you do a search. i will, however, be very interested to read other people's remarks.
regards,
ys
b.eng (carleton)
working in new zealand, thinking of my snow covered home...
would there be any need to account for the section modulus and/or modulus of elasticity - say comparing cost effectiveness of steel 46ksi rect tubing vs an 35ksi aluminum alloy i-beam?
i would say yes giving that many designs are serviceability and deflection controlled.
__________________
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)
 


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
confused with aisc code about section modulus huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 01:07 PM
built up section - sction modulus huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 05:46 PM
section of a section huangyhg tec-ease(America) 0 2009-09-05 12:48 PM
【转帖】section of a section yang686526 American standards 0 2009-04-29 09:53 PM
【转帖】asme美国机械工程师标准目录2 huangyhg American standards 5 2009-04-26 02:38 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 04:14 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