flexural-torsional buckling of single angles
the code says that ftb of singly symmetrical angles does not need to be checked- my question is why?
do you mean bent about their principal axis (z)?
if so, it's akin to bending about the weak axis of a wide flange, it simply cannot control.
because single angles are checked per e5.
frv, why do you say that? the commentary doesn't elude to this.
that's "alude"... just commenting.
mike mccann
mmc engineering
the z axis is the weak axis. it is physically impossible for the angle to undergo ltb when bent about this axis. the angle will fail either by some localized failure or flexural yielding before it could buckle.
actually mike,
that's "allude"...
al?lude
? ?/??lud/ [uh-lood]
–verb (used without object), -lud?ed, -lud?ing.
1. to refer casually or indirectly; make an allusion (usually fol. by to): he often alluded to his poverty.
2. to contain a casual or indirect reference (usually fol. by to): the letter alludes to something now forgotten.
origin:
1525–35; < l allūdere to play beside, make a playful allusion to, equiv. to al- al- + lūdere to play
synonyms:
hint, intimate, suggest.
tg
got me...
mike mccann
mmc engineering
mike: twisted, without check per code
definition or statement?
mike mccann
mmc engineering
... frv, are you sure? i ask because i am reinforcing a single angle in a joist and i want to understand the rational for the code and if ftb is a realistic buckling mode here.
others, if you wish to critique my grammar please do so in another thread. thanks.