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, 06:53 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 rho factor for wind and gravity loads

rho factor for wind and gravity loads?
section 1630 of the '97 ubc and section 1617.2 of the 2003 ibc (section 9.5.2.4 of asce 7-02) define the reliability / redundancy factor rho.
section c105.1.1.1 of the 1999 recommended lateral force requirements and commentary (seventeenth edition; seaoc), in discussing this factor, states the following:
"redundancy is a characteristic of structures in which multiple paths of resistance to loads are provided. the advantages of incorporating redundancy in a structure have long been recognized, especially when the structure is subjected to loads that cause inelastic deformations. a structure with multiple load paths is less susceptible to problems caused by design and / or construction errors."
as far as i know, this factor only exists for seismic forces.
my question is this . . . why is there not a rho factor for wind forces or gravity loads?
wind forces are similar to seismic forces in that they can occur both horizontally and vertically (see figure 6-2 of asce 7-02 and section 1630.1.1, equation 30-1 of the '97 ubc) and are both short duration loads (see table 2.3.2 of the 2001 nds; also see load combinations 12-6, 12-9, 12-11 and 12-13 of the '97 ubc).
i realize / understand that wind is a monotonic force and seismic is non-monotonic (causing cyclical, racking motions). it is tempting to reason that the inelastic deformations caused by seismic forces necessitate the rho factor.
oftentimes even though wind force may govern the design of a structure, the seismic forces are not much less (i.e. the structure is still subjected to seismic forces, albeit less than those produced by wind). my point here is that a structure doesn't always see either wind or seismic forces, but many times both during its life.
with respect to gravity loading, does anyone desire to design a structure where the failure of a single column may mean the failure of the entire structure? in general this behavior is undesirable and comes to the forefront of many discussions regarding blast-resistant structures.
is redundancy not equally important in a structure in designing for wind forces and gravity loads? if so, why doesn't the code specifically recognize this by way of a rho factor for wind and a rho factor for gravity?
thanks in advance for your assistance.
__________________
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
paring down sesmic loads huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-15 11:24 AM
moment frame investigation huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 02:55 PM
gravity load distribution huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 03:06 PM
equivalent frame for rc column design loads huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 10:48 PM
center of gravity huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 11:15 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 05:40 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