And it's not about saving money on the pad itself, it's about minimizing changes to a tank that is already in fabrication and still having the process piping work as it should. Like I said, I can push for a more difficult solution if need me, I'm just not convinced yet that there's not a simpler...
I asked this too. It would require a 90 in the pipe near the suction which is not ideal. I can force whatever outcome I need to if there's no simpler solution that will always work, but I'm trying to be a team player.
Thanks for the input everyone, a lot of good stuff to consider.
To address a couple items: first, like I said in the original post, rotating the pump is not an option because it will require changes to the tank that is already being fabricated. Regarding expansion joints in the piping, I don't...
I have a new mat foundation that supports a tank and pump. For various reasons, the pump sits partially on our new foundation and partially on an existing foundation (grey). My concern is differential settlement that might induce some stresses on the pump piping. I've already explored other...
Here is the geotech's response for any interested:
"I’m just thinking out loud. I assume you are not interested in doing pile testing on the existing pile and incorporating it into the new design. I also assume that you don’t want to tie the existing pile into the new pile cap and just ignore...
I've got a new structure at a heavy industrial site sitting on a pile supported mat foundation. We discovered that there is an existing foundation within our footprint that was used for the removal of a large piece of equipment. We assume this is a pile cap with piles but can't find any...
In my admittedly limited connections to engineers at other companies, I'm actually noticing an opposite trend...that is, people either going back to RISA after trying another software for some period, or trying RISA for the first time.
Thanks Koot, I appreciate the detailed response and encouragement. I think I've satisfied any doubts I had about my design approach/assumptions. I've already designed my shear transfer reinforcement into the shear walls, so minimum required decking attachment to satisfy the items you listed...
What's the mechanism that explains this? Are we saying that once the concrete cures, the slab is so rigid that any connection of the decking to steel is negligible? In other words, decking connections are mostly for construction in this scenario? This was my design initial design assumption, but...
I'm designing a building with a rigid diaphragm (reinforced concrete slab with non-composite deck) and masonry shear walls. My design approach has been to have steel floor beams supporting the slab that carry gravity loads out to pilasters in the masonry walls. My slab is tied directly into the...
This is the approach I was going to default to next. I have the wall reactions from my model and use those in my shear diagram for the diaphragm. As long as loads from used in the model match what I use in the shear diagram, all should work out.