stiffener vs. "connection plate"
stiffener vs. "connection plate"
(OP)
There are designers who believe that a connection plate (which looks just like a transverse web stiffener except that a diaphragm or crossframe attaches to it, and thus has positive connection to both flanges whereas a stiffener might not) doesn't count as a stiffener, and thus is not to be taken into account when calculating required stiffener spacing and panel width and adding intermediate stiffeners.
I can't find this written anywhere, but I've heard it stated multiple times.
Does anyone know where this comes from?
Hg
I can't find this written anywhere, but I've heard it stated multiple times.
Does anyone know where this comes from?
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies





RE: stiffener vs. "connection plate"
RE: stiffener vs. "connection plate"
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: stiffener vs. "connection plate"
I have seen recent designs where bearing stiffeners are used as connection plates for the end diaphragms but are not positively connected to the bottom flange. Instead they are just milled to bear. Not a good seismic detail.
RE: stiffener vs. "connection plate"
And I've seen some *really* tight stiffener spacing, connection plates alternating with "real" stiffeners, that strongly suggests that someone wasn't counting the connection plates.
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376: Eng-Tips.com Forum Policies
RE: stiffener vs. "connection plate"
Perhaps there were details long ago for a specific DOT that defined each plates role as a stiffener or connection plate that made them mutually exclusive.
Regards,
![[pipe] pipe](https://www.tipmaster.com/images/pipe.gif)
Qshake
Eng-Tips Forums:Real Solutions for Real Problems Really Quick.