BASE PLATE Design using RAM Connection

[BAGW]

Hi,

Have anyone tried base-plate design using RAM connection. Is it accurate? I like the way it is setup. The thing I am unsure of is "Strain Compatibility" option in RAM. I think assigning "Strain Compatibility" makes the base plate to behave rigid. The BP's I am designing has a thickness 2'' or more. Has anyone used "Strain Compatibility" option. Is this accurate? Strain Compatibility equations are not based on AISC Guide. What is this Strain compatibility based on?

Thanks

 

[mike20793]

Yes the design is accurate. You are correct, the strain compatability option makes the baseplate rigid. They have several white papers regarding design of baseplates on their website.

 

[BAGW]

Hi Mike,

When to you consider the Base Plate to be rigid. My rule of thumb can I assume anything equal to or grater than 2'' as rigid? If yes, i can turn on the strain compability option for the base plate check right.

 

[mike20793]

That sounds about right to me.

 

[KootK]

Rationally, I would think that rigidity would be based on a base plate cantilever to thickness ratio. I've heard a limit of five expressed on several occasions but have never really seen any definitive justification. Below a certain aspect ratio, one would think that the cantilever would behave as one panel of a strut and tie type system rather than as a flexural thing. If the aspect ratio for such a system in concrete would be about 2.5-ish, five in steel seems entirely plausible.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.

 

[KootK]

I suspect this goes without saying, but I would also expect a "rigid" base plate to remain 100% elastic throughout its load history. You know, Sx vs. Zx.

I like to debate structural engineering theory -- a lot. If I challenge you on something, know that I'm doing so because I respect your opinion enough to either change it or adopt it.