Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!
Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!
-
Congratulations JStephen on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
tapered Column design
- Thread starter Hasan_123
- Start date
JoshPlumSE
Structural
There is a design guide that AISC has for Tapered members. This is a pretty good place to start. I've actually only read the 1st edition. It appears there's a newer edition now.
In the 1st edition, there are some benchmark problems in Appendix C. There is an example and citation for the "Method of Successive Approximations" for the elastic buckling value of a stepped or tapered column. If that appendix still exists in the 2nd edition (and it should) then this would give a good method for calculating the axial capacity of such a member.
In the 1st edition, there are some benchmark problems in Appendix C. There is an example and citation for the "Method of Successive Approximations" for the elastic buckling value of a stepped or tapered column. If that appendix still exists in the 2nd edition (and it should) then this would give a good method for calculating the axial capacity of such a member.
- Thread starter
- #4
The whole thing is concrete with a metal cover at the top portion
Lomarandil
Structural
Looks like a pretty standard column, just happens to have a bunch of eccentric dead load on one side. Design as though 9" wide.
Now detailing -- there's a little bit of detailing attention required here, particularly if the column receives any external load. But that's tomorrow's thread.
Now detailing -- there's a little bit of detailing attention required here, particularly if the column receives any external load. But that's tomorrow's thread.
JoshPlumSE
Structural
I didn't realize the stepped member was a concrete column. Technically, the method of successive approximations is still valid for the calculation of elastic buckling. Though it would likely be a less straightforward incorporation for concrete code checks.
I think for concrete, the most important thing will be how the reinforcement transition works at this stepped area / transition. Honestly, it seems weird that (for concrete) a member would be stepped like this.... I feel like it would be more common to see a tapered depth in that are rather than an abrupt change in depth
I think for concrete, the most important thing will be how the reinforcement transition works at this stepped area / transition. Honestly, it seems weird that (for concrete) a member would be stepped like this.... I feel like it would be more common to see a tapered depth in that are rather than an abrupt change in depth
- Thread starter
- #8
it is weird. but architecture!!
A 9" concrete column at the base? Seems too narrow for a concrete column. You are going to have a hard time installing the vertical bars and ties, and maintaining 1.5" of clear cover to the ties. What is the detail at the base? You won't be able to lap splice vertical dowels. Your detail implies that there is a steel plate at the base. Is that correct? How wide is the column? What is the factored load? My suggestion is for you to discuss this further with whoever is supervising you.
It would help a lot if we knew the magnitude of the axial force, and the moment diagram shape and magnitude.
Lots of "ifs." For example:
If this will support a small area of roof, then the computed column buckling strength will probably be many times larger than the applied load. Coming up with a buckling strength refined estimate would be a waste of time. If the axial load is not small, then you would need that strength estimate.
If there is a significant moment at the bottom, the 9 in. section will control the design by a mile. If you can get that to work, then the rest of the column would likely just be a rebar detailing exercise.
If the moment is zero at the bottom and larger at the top, then...
If the load the loads are from gravity only, vs seismic, then...
If, if, if...
Lots of "ifs." For example:
If this will support a small area of roof, then the computed column buckling strength will probably be many times larger than the applied load. Coming up with a buckling strength refined estimate would be a waste of time. If the axial load is not small, then you would need that strength estimate.
If there is a significant moment at the bottom, the 9 in. section will control the design by a mile. If you can get that to work, then the rest of the column would likely just be a rebar detailing exercise.
If the moment is zero at the bottom and larger at the top, then...
If the load the loads are from gravity only, vs seismic, then...
If, if, if...
As usual, I get tripped up by terminology. Tapered to me has a constant slope on one or more faces. This appears stepped and not tapered. I see several responses are for something that appears to be based on tapers.
Is your column stepped or truly tapered? Bar placement is totally different for each. Tapered can have a bar that is continuous from top to bottom on both faces where stepped can only have it on a face that is straight (vertical or sloped)
Is your column stepped or truly tapered? Bar placement is totally different for each. Tapered can have a bar that is continuous from top to bottom on both faces where stepped can only have it on a face that is straight (vertical or sloped)
Can you tell us more about that metal cover? Is the extra width ad the top of the column just a metal, architectural wrap or something?
Similar threads
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question
