atee001
Structural
- Feb 13, 2009
- 19
Hi,
A bit of survey on the revised BS 5950 1990 to BS 5950:2000(though not recent but need to have some validations prepared!):
1. Going through BS 5950-1990, there was a clause that if the effective length of the member is less than the limiting length then then the lateral buckling check is redundant and the buckling moment of resistance may be said to be equal to plastic moment of resiatnace of the section-for members without axial load.
2. Whereas in BS 2000 it is "if equivalent slenderness is less than the limiting slenderness" than the lateral torsional buckling check is redundant and the buckling moment of resistance may be said to be equal to plastic moment of resiatnace of the section-for members without axial load.
Why is that BS 2000 refers to comparison between equivalent slenderness and limiting slenderness and BS 1990 refers to comparison between effective length and limiting length?
A bit of survey on the revised BS 5950 1990 to BS 5950:2000(though not recent but need to have some validations prepared!):
1. Going through BS 5950-1990, there was a clause that if the effective length of the member is less than the limiting length then then the lateral buckling check is redundant and the buckling moment of resistance may be said to be equal to plastic moment of resiatnace of the section-for members without axial load.
2. Whereas in BS 2000 it is "if equivalent slenderness is less than the limiting slenderness" than the lateral torsional buckling check is redundant and the buckling moment of resistance may be said to be equal to plastic moment of resiatnace of the section-for members without axial load.
Why is that BS 2000 refers to comparison between equivalent slenderness and limiting slenderness and BS 1990 refers to comparison between effective length and limiting length?
