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 2009-09-10, 01:05 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 massachusetts building code r=3

massachusetts building code r=3
this question is for anybody that is familiar with the massachusetts state building code. it does not appear that the current edition allows you to take r=3 for steel design of buildings. so you would need to design and detail all buildings to meet aisc seismic requirements even if they fall into design category c. is this correct, am i missing something? thanks.
ouch!!
i would have a hard time believing that is accurate.
i'm thinking you need to look at the very bottom of the tables.
from what i understand the current "6th" edition does not allow you to design with r=3. i believe they still refer you to the 92 seismic provisions (with their own modifications shown in chapter 21). i believe the 92 seismic provisions can be found in the back of the second edition lrfd book (silver one).
this is where a debate can occur if you would like to mix and match code (use a newer version of the 92 seismic provisions of which some stuff doesn't make sense). i know people advise against doing this.
from what i have heard the new 7th of the building code is still a few months away and does not update the steel code to the 13th edition (still using the asd 89 spec).

section 1612.4.4 of the mass code states that other r-values not listed in the table are permitted, as long as they are substantiated by test data establishing the dynamic characteristics and demonstrate the lateral force resistance and energy disapating capacity listed in the tables.
i would think that with all of the newer research being done in the new seismic manual, that would substantiate an r=3 (using the same limitations), but you may want to check to see if your jurisdiction will allow it.
strguy11,
i was told at a seminar that r=3 was just an arbitrary number and was not back by test data.

fwiw here is a like to the proposed 7th edition of the massachusetts building code. i believe it is still under review and is therefore not enforces.
__________________
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
massachusetts building code load combinations huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 01:04 PM
louisiana building code huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 11:48 AM
icc code article cause for concern huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 07:00 PM
glazing in non-windbourne debris areas huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 02:42 PM
ada, osha and code violations huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 10:09 AM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 05:00 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