This is more of a hypothetical discussion.
In theory, is there any reason why the principles of STM could not be applied to the design of structural steel (i.e. no concrete)?
I am envisaging the design of nonflexural steel members, brackets, corbels, deep beams, connections, corners of frames, and so forth.
I suppose one of the main differences would be the need to check for buckling of plate elements in compression, but other than that I imagine the remaining checks might be pretty similar to what is normally done for RC.
Another point would be that FEA is quite suited for this sort of thing since the steel can be well modelled by plate elements with pretty well defined material properties. Concrete obviously has the added complexities of cracking, discrete reinforcement bars, more brittle behaviour in compression etc., which is where STM comes in handy.
In theory, is there any reason why the principles of STM could not be applied to the design of structural steel (i.e. no concrete)?
I am envisaging the design of nonflexural steel members, brackets, corbels, deep beams, connections, corners of frames, and so forth.
I suppose one of the main differences would be the need to check for buckling of plate elements in compression, but other than that I imagine the remaining checks might be pretty similar to what is normally done for RC.
Another point would be that FEA is quite suited for this sort of thing since the steel can be well modelled by plate elements with pretty well defined material properties. Concrete obviously has the added complexities of cracking, discrete reinforcement bars, more brittle behaviour in compression etc., which is where STM comes in handy.
