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 2009-09-15, 08:46 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 seismic design of steel water reservoir

seismic design of steel water reservoir
hi,
i'm designing a 32-foot high, 0.5 mg reservoir in seismic zone 4 in california, and the geotech engineer has supplied us with three different design spectral graphs by 1) campbell & bozorgnia, 2) boore, and 3) sadigh. i've been instructed to use the most conservative of the three. sadigh results in the most conservative zero period acceleration, but boore results in more conservative freeboard and shear anchorage requirements.
in past projects, i see that our company has been given a graph containing the average of the three spectral graphs by the geotech engineer, and therefore used that.
are there any clear requirements by awwa, or is it up to us as engineers to make a judgement call? can we just stick with the sadigh graph to make it simple?
thanks.
well, for one thing, using the zero period acceleration is similar to using a prescriptive code limit on the elastic response spectrum. so it's odd to me that you recieved the three spectra for something you could have found yourself in the applicable code.
also, using the zero period ignores the displacement controlled part of the response spectrum. or, in other words, there will be a displacement due to ground excitation and you'd like to know what that is. then you can also ascertain the stability of the tower under loading at that maximum displacement.
regards,
qshake
eng-tips forums:real solutions for real problems really quick.
if this is a steel reservoir (you didn't say), there's no reason to use seismic spectra at all. awwa d100-96 has a defined seismic design procedure that is applicable for all seismic zones.
unless there is something in the california code that over-rides awwa d100, i don't see a reason not to use it.
whoops, you did say steel in the title.
jed, awwa d100 does have standardized seismic design, but also allows for use of response spectra, and perhaps half the tanks in the state are designed that way. design using the response spectra can give seismic loads double the d100 standard, or higher- it's not a trivial difference.
__________________
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
seismic design of footing huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 08:44 PM
most valuable steel design textbook huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 03:17 PM
design build huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 05:13 PM
contract issues - structural steel connection design in the huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 01:40 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 01:51 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