×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
• Talk With Other Members
• Be Notified Of Responses
• Keyword Search
Favorite Forums
• Automated Signatures
• Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?2

Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

(OP)
Pals

The Direct method(DM) is found to be practical because INTERACTION equation with this method and  with the old effective length method(ELM) seem to give similar results. Makes sense if things turn out that equal with K=1.00

Does this mean DM is to be used only in P+M situation(interaction)? not for P only situation(no interaction)? Is that why Chapter E is retained?

respects
ijr

RE: Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

The Direct Method of analsyis is not sufficient for predicting all aspects and methods of buckling. Or, analysis programs are not yet sufficient to capture that buckling behavior.

The DM does a good (but approximate) job capturing elastic and inelastic flexural buckling of FRAMES.  It's ability to do this with individual members is imperfect. I suppose with engineering judgement, you could do so by introducing some member out-of-straightness directly in your analysis.  Also, it still may not adequately capture the flexural-torsional or torsional buckling failure modes very well.

Perhaps eventually we will get to the point where buckling is captured entirely from the analysis and chapter E will be elimintated or greatly simplified.  If that happens, I think the DM will be viewed as the first major step down that road.  But, by itself it doesn't get us there.

RE: Why Chapter E if Instability is Now by Direct Method?

Also, DM is mainly for the lateral force resisting system of the building not so much the gravity system (C1-3c).  But the gravity columns will still buckle, and other things that are in compression that are not really part of the LRFS will need to be designed per the chapter E provisions, as well

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Resources

White Paper - PLM and ERP: Their Respective Roles in Modern Manufacturing
Leading manufacturers are aligning their people, processes, and tools from initial product ideation through to field service. They do so by providing access to product and enterprise data in the context of each personâ€™s domain expertise. However, it can be complicated and costly to unite engineering with the factory and supply chain. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

• Talk To Other Members
• Notification Of Responses To Questions
• Favorite Forums One Click Access
• Keyword Search Of All Posts, And More...

Register now while it's still free!