Recent content by canwesteng

Since they are full of holes, it's not likely to have much torsional strength, and it would be a huge science project to figure out the capacity anyway. You're better off getting rid of the torsion.

Can you tie the base together with rod or something?

If you aren't actually relying on the bending capacity at the corner, then go with the second detail and call it a day, no need to check development length.

I couldn't digest this entirely - but I ran my own check and also got the same answer except with 37.5 degrees being from the vertical line and not the horizontal one. I think that makes more sense - the wider the plate the closer it comes to just folding in the middle.

Some level of checking is baked into the allowable stresses for wood. Would that post be ok if it was sized for select structural? Maybe not. I would probably recommend the owner continue to monitor, but it's likely nothing.

I did try some with isotropic material, and in the end, it isn't 45 degrees, it's something like 44 degrees. So the 45 degrees only holds for squares.

I don't actually ever use it for slab design - just too tedious. Only ever for slab evaluation - once you know exactly the layout and the reinforcement, and only vary the loads, it's not as bad

It's really not a program, I just type in the equations (different depending on the yield line mechanism you are looking at), and just play with the inputs until I minimize the energy dissipated. This one is for a yield line mechanism described above on simple supports.

Just found the paper I was thinking of https://www.concrete.org/publications/internationalconcreteabstractsportal?m=details&i=6757&m=details&i=6757

I recommend Practical Yield Line Design by Kennedy and Goodchild, you can probably find it online for free. I've never heard of BA's method of differentiating the equations for work or energy - I just plug the formulas into mathcad and iterate the inputs til I'm happy.

Well in an isotropic material, the yield lines will be symmetric, and if the supports are symmteric, you'll just end up with 45 degree angles.

Correct

In my case specifically, more to the green and also up (negative moment resistance stronger at the bottom).

I'm curious to see the detail as well. Seems like even for a through bolt with side plates plowing through the wood would always govern.

I ended up working it out - you do end up with more yield line in total as the diagonals extend, but the work ends up being UDL x area x delta/3, and in the area that is a rectangular instead of a triangular, the work is UDL x area x delta/2. So more yield lines with the triangle but less work...