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 2009-09-08, 01:49 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 controlling lateral force seismic vs. wind

controlling lateral force: seismic vs. wind
what is the general consensus in regard to a what is deemed the "controlling" base shear in a lateral analysis?
namely, say you have e = 20 kip seismic base shear (ultimate) and a w = 10 kip wind base shear (service). ibc load combinations would say 0.7e to convert it to a service load: e = 14 kip (service). but, to calculate the seismic base shear, you also divided the force coefficient by the (inelastic) response modifier r.
is directly comparing a "service" e = 14 kip (with implied inelastic assumption) to a service w = 10 kip (with an elastic assumption) really correct?
i (perhaps too) simply compare 0.7e vs 1.0 w for determining which one "governs" the base shear force requirement. for deflections, i will check check the seismic p-delta stuff and then also a servicability drift using 0.7 w.
it doesn't matter which one governs the base shear. technically each and every element of the structure must be checked against both. in many cases, the wind may govern some elements and the seismic may govern others in the same building.
for instance, you might have a 90 mph wind area and a seismic design category b. say you have a long, narrow structure where the main wind force applied to the short wall faces doesn't produce much lateral effect while for seismic, due to the long building, there is plenty of mass and thus higher lateral forces developed than the wind.
but for the wind perpendicular to the long face, the wind would probably be higher.
but in designing an concentrically braced frame, the brace must be designed straight-up for wind and then also checked for the seismic requirements - say from the aisc seismic code which requires the special load combinations (with the omega factor) used on the connections.
a collector beam at the eave could be sized for flexure due to lateral wind forces on it, but its longitudinal design as a collector would possibly require the seismic loads to govern as these elements require the omega factor applied using the special load combinations.
to answer your main question - i use the comparison of 0.7e vs 1.0 w....but i've never heard of a "base shear force requirement".
it is a mistake to simply look at base shear wind vs. seismic, pick the higher one and ignore the other in the design of the structural elements.
i agree with jae and want to add: even down to a single holddown, you ought to still be comparing seismic and wind because the factors for dead load resistance are different and without direct comparison you can't know which controls. you can't decide ahead of time which controls for the building or even just look at which controls for each direction.
__________________
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
capacity design huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 10:49 PM
british wind loading codes huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 05:19 PM
balcony guardrail wind huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 02:11 PM
asce figure 6-10 wind loads huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 01:22 PM
arema rating steel bridge load combinations huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 12:50 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 06:20 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