INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Jobs

Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

(OP)
Pals

The Direct method(DM) is found to be practical because INTERACTION equation with this method and  with the old effective length method(ELM) seem to give similar results. Makes sense if things turn out that equal with K=1.00

Does this mean DM is to be used only in P+M situation(interaction)? not for P only situation(no interaction)? Is that why Chapter E is retained?

Your comment will be highly appreciated.Thanks in advance

respects
ijr

RE: Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

The Direct Method of analsyis is not sufficient for predicting all aspects and methods of buckling. Or, analysis programs are not yet sufficient to capture that buckling behavior.

The DM does a good (but approximate) job capturing elastic and inelastic flexural buckling of FRAMES.  It's ability to do this with individual members is imperfect. I suppose with engineering judgement, you could do so by introducing some member out-of-straightness directly in your analysis.  Also, it still may not adequately capture the flexural-torsional or torsional buckling failure modes very well.

Perhaps eventually we will get to the point where buckling is captured entirely from the analysis and chapter E will be elimintated or greatly simplified.  If that happens, I think the DM will be viewed as the first major step down that road.  But, by itself it doesn't get us there.

RE: Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

Also, DM is mainly for the lateral force resisting system of the building not so much the gravity system (C1-3c).  But the gravity columns will still buckle, and other things that are in compression that are not really part of the LRFS will need to be designed per the chapter E provisions, as well

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members!


Resources


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close