gr1pp
Structural
- Aug 5, 2009
- 1
Actually, I have two questions.
The first is specifically the design fo the cladding itself. applying pur bending assumptions to the system results in extremely thick plates. I expect it to behave more like a net - in tension - but I'm uncertain of how to approach this via calculation.
The main question here, however, is whether the openness of a 15% open cladding could - placed on both side of a structure - would create a case for partially enclosed.
To be specific, it is a monoslope canopy spanning between two closed structures, with this 15% open metal cladding on each end. The Open metal is not attached to our structure (the canopy). One side has roughly 56% more opennings than the other.
On one side, I would think the wind would flow freely through the holes (1" to 1/2" in diameter) and build up in the interior of the structure with less area to escape.
on the other side I see the argument that wind will not flow freely thru the system (acting like a typical hurricane barrier), and therefore what ever does get inside will be low pressure and easily pass through the area at the other end. I beleive this to be the case, but I would rather have backup in the event that it is questioned.
Is anyone aware of any test data that may conclude such a case, one way or the other?
P.S. the difference in the resulting wind loadings for this case is a staggering 38PSF difference between ecnlosed vs partially enclosed... so the question is pretty important.
thank you
The first is specifically the design fo the cladding itself. applying pur bending assumptions to the system results in extremely thick plates. I expect it to behave more like a net - in tension - but I'm uncertain of how to approach this via calculation.
The main question here, however, is whether the openness of a 15% open cladding could - placed on both side of a structure - would create a case for partially enclosed.
To be specific, it is a monoslope canopy spanning between two closed structures, with this 15% open metal cladding on each end. The Open metal is not attached to our structure (the canopy). One side has roughly 56% more opennings than the other.
On one side, I would think the wind would flow freely through the holes (1" to 1/2" in diameter) and build up in the interior of the structure with less area to escape.
on the other side I see the argument that wind will not flow freely thru the system (acting like a typical hurricane barrier), and therefore what ever does get inside will be low pressure and easily pass through the area at the other end. I beleive this to be the case, but I would rather have backup in the event that it is questioned.
Is anyone aware of any test data that may conclude such a case, one way or the other?
P.S. the difference in the resulting wind loadings for this case is a staggering 38PSF difference between ecnlosed vs partially enclosed... so the question is pretty important.
thank you
