【24h】

PRACTICAL DEMONSTRATION OF THE USE OF JOINT FLEXIBILITY IN STEEL FRAME DESIGN

机译:节点设计在钢框架设计中的实际应用演示

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

In the case of the braced frame, the material saving for the alternative with rigid joints was 9.7% in comparison with the one with pin connections. It is, however, necessary to make complicated and costly joint stiffening, that will decrease the total cost saving of the rigid jointed frame. In the case of a semi-rigid jointed frame we obtain a material saving of up to 17.7% compared to the frame with pinned joints. This difference is already considerable, even though the total cost will also decrease by something, because the fabrication of a semi-rigid joint is usually more expensive than the fabrication of a pinned one. In the case of the unbraced frame, the material saving for the alternative with welded semi-rigid joints was 7.1 % in comparison to a rigid jointed frame. In the case of a bolted semi-rigid jointed frame we obtain a material saving of up to 14% compared to the frame with rigid joints. The total cost saving of the frame with semi-rigid joints will even increase, because there is no need to make complicated and costly joint stiffening. So, when minimum cost of steel structures is of interest, we can use two different strategies: 1. in the case of braced frames - we can reduce the profile dimensions, i.e. reduce the material costs, but increase the fabrication cost of joints in comparison with a frame with simple joints, 2. in the case of unbraced frames - we can simplify the joint detailing, i.e. reduce the fabrication costs. The connections can be designed without expensive stiffeners. By an appropriate choice of joint types and their properties we can influence the magnitude of critical loads and buckling lengths, what, in this case, did not influence the design of column sections. We can affect the distribution and possible redistribution of internal forces and moments from the beams to the columns and vice versa, as well as the frame deformation. We can not only reduce the beam profiles but also decrease the cost of fabrication and thus find an optimal design with the lowest overall cost. This paper was published under the Grant Research Project VEGA No 1/7139/20, which is financially supported by the Research Grant Agency of the Ministry of Education of the Slovak Republic and by the Slovak Academy of Sciences.
机译:在采用支撑框架的情况下,与采用刚性连接的替代方案相比,采用销钉连接的替代方案节省了9.7%的材料。然而,有必要进行复杂且昂贵的接头加固,这将降低刚性接头框架的总成本节省。在半刚性连接框架的情况下,与带有销钉连接的框架相比,我们节省了多达17.7%的材料。尽管总成本也将有所降低,但这种差异已经相当可观,因为半刚性接头的制造通常比固定接头的制造更为昂贵。在无支撑框架的情况下,与刚性连接框架相比,采用半刚性焊接连接的替代材料节省的材料为7.1%。如果使用螺栓连接的半刚性连接框架,与采用刚性连接的框架相比,我们可以节省多达14%的材料。具有半刚性接缝的框架节省的总成本甚至会增加,因为不需要进行复杂且昂贵的接缝加劲。因此,当关注钢结构的最低成本时,我们可以使用两种不同的策略:1.对于支撑框架-我们可以减小轮廓尺寸,即降低材料成本,但相比之下增加接头的制造成本2.对于无支撑的框架,我们可以简化连接细节,即降低制造成本。无需昂贵的加强筋即可设计连接。通过适当选择接头类型及其性能,我们可以影响临界载荷和屈曲长度的大小,在这种情况下,这不会影响柱截面的设计。我们会影响从梁到立柱的内力和力矩的分布以及可能的重新分布,反之亦然,以及框架变形。我们不仅可以减少光束轮廓,还可以降低制造成本,从而找到总成本最低的最佳设计。这篇论文是在VEGA No 1/7139/20的格兰特研究项目下发表的,该项目得到了斯洛伐克共和国教育部研究拨款局和斯洛伐克科学院的资助。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号