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 2009-09-10, 09:49 AM   #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 lateral soil bearing pr, unconstrained soils and foudations

lateral soil bearing pr, unconstrained soils and foudations
has anyone tried to use equation 18-1 out the ibc 2006 for unconstrained soils and foundations to determine lateral bearing strength?
i tried using it and found it to be very conversative. i have an 8' cantilever post with a concentrated load of 375 lbs at the end. and according to the equations, it concludes that a 1' diameter footing 3' deep will not restrain the lateral load (i believe it suggest a ~12' deep footing). did i miss something here?
please let me know if you have used this in a design along with any comments or concerns you have about it.
thanks.
this equation is nothing in the codes (ibc, aitc, ibc) in this form and has been used for many years.
the 3 to 4 foot embedment with a 1 foot diameter footing seems reasonable to me. if you are getting a 12 foot embedment, i would look to your units to start. otherwise, look to the lateral soil bearing you are using and the computation of the "s" value.
mike mccann
mmc engineering
msquared48, did you mean "nothing new in the codes" ?
enginerrred,
three references you may find useful are:
pole building design by donald patterson, 1957. and
archon engineering's winpost ( about $40 )available at sales at archonengineering.com
and chart for embedment of posts, outdoor advertising association of america ( circa 1960 ) which has been reprinted in many structural engineering handbooks.
good luck
rwf7437:
yep...thanks.
mike mccann
mmc engineering
i get a 5 foot embedment considering allowable passive pressure of 250 psf. a 12 ft embedment results if allowable passive pressure is reduced to only 25-30 psf, about a factor of 10 difference.
thanks guys for the advice.
lobstaeata,
can you confirm that we are using the same variables? in my orginal calcs i used s1 = 100 psf (conservative due to non-testing), but in my calcs below i tried to match your results using s1 = 250 psf.
i have:
b = 1 ft
d = 3 ft (assumed)
h = 4 ft
p = 375 lbs
s1 = 250 psf
resulting in:
a = 3.51 ft
d = 6.04 ft (required)
how did you get a 5 foot embedment? can you let me know what we did differently?
__________________
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



所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 05:49 PM.


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