几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量  


返回   几何尺寸与公差论坛------致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T (GDT:ASME)|New GPS(ISO)研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量 » 三维空间:产品设计或CAX软件使用 » CAD设计 » 产品功能分析
用户名
密码
注册 帮助 会员 日历 银行 搜索 今日新帖 标记论坛为已读


 
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-09, 06:43 PM   #1
huangyhg
超级版主
 
huangyhg的头像
 
注册日期: 04-03
帖子: 18592
精华: 36
现金: 249466 标准币
资产: 1080358888 标准币
huangyhg 向着好的方向发展
默认 ibc 2003 question again

ibc 2003 question again
i wanted to get some feedback about what others are doing in seismic design. i typically design structures for industrial applications, mostly for material handling of bulk materials. typically we are in low seismic regions (c or less) and utilize the elfp and systems not specifically designed for seismic resistance. my question comes as follows. my boss feels that when you are allowed to not specifically detail the structure for seismic resistance then you just calculate the seismic load in a brace, etc. based on equation 16-50 and 16-51 and design the connection basically like you would any old connection. he feels that only you are using the more stringent requirements and are detailing the structure for seismic resistance that you must then consider eq 16-19 & 16-20. i guess i always just kind of accepted this as true and moved on designing as he instructed me to do. it just so happens that i have began studying for my p.e. exam and was looking into some of these things more closely. (basicaly i am reading the code page by page.) i guess after reading through it and looking at alan williams book on wind and seismic engineering i am concerned that you must not always design the brace for the special load combinations. i hope my question has not confused everybody, but i would just like to see a little feedback as to what others feel is correct.
thanks for your time as always!
aggman,
this is another part of the code that i'm not to sure about. section 1605.4 for "special seismic load combinations" and section 1617.1.1.2 "maximum seismic load effect em" are not general requirements but needed only when specifically called for in a certain part of the code. and i'm not remebering what those are right now.
a relavant thread is, and maybe you have already seen this, is ...
thanks for the thread. it seems to me like you need a ph.d in code reading just to interprete when you have to design something a certain way or not.
from aggieyanks post of yesterday i see the final hearings for the ibc 2006 are next month. this will be another $100 and i'm still trying to understand the 2003 version.
__________________
借用达朗贝尔的名言:前进吧,你会得到信心!
[url="http://www.dimcax.com"]几何尺寸与公差标准[/url]
huangyhg离线中   回复时引用此帖
GDT自动化论坛(仅游客可见)
 


主题工具 搜索本主题
搜索本主题:

高级搜索
显示模式

发帖规则
不可以发表新主题
不可以回复主题
不可以上传附件
不可以编辑您的帖子

vB 代码开启
[IMG]代码开启
HTML代码关闭

相似的主题
主题 主题发起者 论坛 回复 最后发表
ibc 2003 1605.4 special seismic combinations huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 06:42 PM
ibc 2000 code question huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-09 06:39 PM
base shear calculation fron ibc and asce-7 huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 02:29 PM
2003 ibc seismic - troubleshooting huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 08:27 AM
2003 ibc 1620.1.6 huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 08:26 AM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 10:57 PM.


于2004年创办,几何尺寸与公差论坛"致力于产品几何量公差标准GD&T | GPS研究/CAD设计/CAM加工/CMM测量"。免责声明:论坛严禁发布色情反动言论及有关违反国家法律法规内容!情节严重者提供其IP,并配合相关部门进行严厉查处,若內容有涉及侵权,请立即联系我们QQ:44671734。注:此论坛须管理员验证方可发帖。
沪ICP备06057009号-2
更多