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


回复
 
主题工具 搜索本主题 显示模式
旧 2009-09-16, 09:57 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 wind load on temporary structures

wind load on temporary structures
i am looking for a little guidance on reducing the design wind load for a temporary structure with an approximate design life of 1 year. there is table c6-7 of asce, but i am not for sure on how to use it. do you just multiply the map wind speed from fig 6-1 by the factor in the table corresponding to an mri equal to the expected life span.
for all temporary structures we use aashto guide design specifications for bridge temporary works.
thanks for the response dwha, but i guess i should have mentioned that my structure is a building.
i have also struggled with this. but why would a temporary structure "see" any less wind load than a "permanent" structure?? esp - if it is up for a year??
of course - once it blows away - it was truly temporary...
i have seen thunderstorms pop up around here that pretty much come very close to design limits - sometimes 2 or 3 times a year!!

thanks for the reply miketheengineer. i have considered your argument as well, but you could make the same case for a 100 year event for a permanent structure. here is my argument for reducing the design loads: a temporary structure designed for some lesser wind load can have the same probability of actually seeing the design wind event as a permanent structure designed for the 50 year mri wind load. i just am not sure how to arrive at the lesser wind load.
in the uk you cant reduce the wind load for any structure that is subject to at least 6 months of wind.
i see the logic that your trying to use but dont agree with it.
just because the structure only has a design life of 1 year doesnt mean that it will see less wind in that time. it is likely that it wont see the 1 in 50 year storm during the period that its up, but you never know when that 1 in 50 year storm will occur so i wouldnt try and reduce the wind load.
thanks for the reply patswfc. isn't it all about probabilities though? just to play devil's advocate, you could see a 100 year storm in that time as well, so don't you just pick a probability that has been deemed acceptable, which is what the codes have done by selecting the 50 year storm. so couldn't the same probability be used for a short-term building? i am not saying anyone of you are wrong as i have had those same arguments, but someone else used the reduce wind speed based on this probability idea and i am just trying to see if anyone else has done that.
a few things to consider:
firstly, the level of wind load to which we design for is not a set in stone, concrete number. it is based on statistical analysis and an approximation of the likelihood of failure that is acceptable to society. we cannot make building with zero possibility of failure, so we have been forced to pick a number.
secondly, society does not expect that after a hurricane all temporary structures are going to remain undamaged. it is cheaper to take the risk and accept the consequences in the unlikely event that it is subject to this level of wind.
thirdly, the shorter something is up, the less likely it is that it will be subject to that load. i would use the reduction factor for short term structures (less than 1 year) that do not have a significant life safety factor.

look for some temporary construction loads. in the us we would look in asce 37-02. there is a table that relates construction period to construction wind speed, basically a factor less than one which increases as the construction period increases. you might be able to extend that to temporary structures.
ucfse..
i don't know about that. a structure under construction is by definition unoccupied. you can get away with lower wind speeds because the danger of loss of life is much lower. if a storm comes during construction, i suspect the workers would not be taking refuge behind an erected, unattached panel.
the structure gocyclones mentions is temporary, but occupied (at least that's my interpretation). consequently, i'd be careful about reducing the design wind speed. the probability of seeing the design wind event in any given year is exactly the same for a structure designed for a life cycle of 50 years as it is for one designed for one year.
if a storm comes during construction, they will go home and party.
my point was for the op to look at that information where wind loads are related to a relatively short life and decide if it was appropriate for use in his or her case.
__________________
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)
回复


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
wind load calculation for belt conveyor truss design huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-16 09:41 PM
emporary wind loads huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-16 01:09 PM
load combination questionpoll huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-10 11:01 AM
effects of a load on sog and below grade huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-08 09:45 PM
british wind loading codes huangyhg 产品功能分析 0 2009-09-07 05:19 PM


所有的时间均为北京时间。 现在的时间是 08:27 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