China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Introduction
Published in You-Lin Xu, Jia He, Smart Civil Structures, 2017
Dead loads are those acting on the structure as a result of the weight of the structure itself and the components that are permanent fixtures on the structure. Dead loads are characterised as having magnitudes and positions. Examples of dead loads are the weight of the structural members themselves in a building, such as beams and columns, the weight of the roof structures, floor slabs, ceilings and permanent partitions, and the weight of the fixed service equipment. The dead loads associated with the structure can be determined if the materials and sizes of the various components are known (West 1993). Standard material unit weights, such as those given in Table 1.1, are used for calculating the dead loads.
Optimised design of wind turbine gravity foundations
Published in Alphose Zingoni, Insights and Innovations in Structural Engineering, Mechanics and Computation, 2016
Ultimately the design process involves balancing the design loads by the resistance of the structure with an adequate degree of safety in accordance with established design codes. The loads for the design are defined with a high degree of accuracy however the resistance of the structure is relatively poorly defined due to a number of factors: High sensitivity to geotechnical conditions Bearing pressuresRotational and lateral stiffnessSettlementsStructural response of reinforced concrete base
Introduction
Published in N. S. Trahair, M. A. Bradford, The Behaviour and Design of Steel Structures to AS 4100, 2017
Engineering structures are required to support loads and to resist forces, and to transfer these loads and forces to the foundations of the structures. The loads and forces may arise from the masses of the structures, or from man’s use of the structures, or from the forces of nature. The uses of structures include the enclosure of space (buildings), the provision of access (bridges), the storage of materials (tanks and silos), transportation (vehicles), or the processing of materials (machines). Structures may be made from a number of different materials, including steel, concrete, wood, aluminium, stone and plastic, etc., or from combinations of these.
Kriging Metamodeling-Based Monte Carlo Simulation for Improved Seismic Fragility Analysis of Structures
Published in Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2021
Shyamal Ghosh, Atin Roy, Subrata Chakraborty
A four storied RC building frame considered to be located in the Guwahati city of northeast India is further undertaken to study the effectiveness of the proposed K-RSM-based metamodeling approach for SFA of structures. The building plan is shown in Fig. 5. A transverse 2D frame as shown in (Fig. 6a) is considered for SFA. The dead load consists of self-weight of the structural and non-structural members. The live load is assumed to be 2 KN/m2. The concrete grade is considered to be M25, i.e., the characteristic strength of 25 N/mm2 and reinforcing steel grade is mild steel having yield strength of 250 N/mm2. The reinforcement and geometric dimension details of the columns and the beams sections are as follows: (i) beams: 300 mm x 400 mm, 12 numbers of 16 mm diameter bars at top and bottom with 8mm diameter stirrups @200c/c and (ii) Columns: 400 mm x 400 mm with 12 numbers of 16 mm diameter bars placed equally with 8 mm diameter stirrups @200c/c.
Modeling and Seismic Response Analysis of Italian Code-Conforming Single-Storey Steel Buildings
Published in Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 2018
Fabrizio Scozzese, Giusy Terracciano, Alessandro Zona, Gaetano Della Corte, Andrea Dall’Asta, Raffaele Landolfo
The case study structures were designed to withstand loads and load combinations specified in the Italian Building Code [MIT, 2008], by considering two limit states: ultimate limit state (ULS) and serviceability limit state (SLS). The following load types were considered: dead loads, wind actions, snow loads, crane forces, structural imperfections, thermal loads, and seismic actions. Loads were defined based on three different locations, i.e., L’Aquila (AQ), Napoli (NA), and Milano (MI), as representative of high, medium, and low seismic hazard conditions in Italy. For each site, two soil typologies were included, i.e., soil A and soil C according to the Italian Building code.
Topology Optimization of Thermal Insulators considering Thermal–Structural Multi-Objective Function
Published in Engineering Optimization, 2022
Younghwan Joo, Jaeho Jung, Minho Yoon
For the quantitative analysis of the optimized results, the average temperature of the heat flux boundary and the maximum von Mises stress of each design can be examined. Furthermore, from these values, the safety factor (SF) and the relative thermal conductance (TCrel) are defined as non-dimensional performance indices, as follows: where is the maximum stress; is the total amount of input heat per unit depth; T0 is the constant temperature, given as zero in this study; and ks is the thermal conductivity of solid material. The safety factor provides practical information for structural design by checking whether the structure is able to withstand the given mechanical load. The relative thermal conductance provides information on how much the suggested design is thermally insulative compared to the design filled entirely with solid material. Since heat transfer is maximized when the domain is fully filled with solid material, the relative thermal conductance physically means how much heat transfer is suppressed from the maximum heat transfer capability. These values, obtained for different domain sizes and boundary condition types, are presented in Tables 2 and 3. As indicated by the topology-optimized designs, both the maximum values of the von Mises stress and the temperature increase as the weighting factor increases. However, the design in Figure 6 (, boundary condition type A, W = 0.1 m) is still a possible solution, because its maximum stress is lower than the yield stress of 215 MPa for STS 304. It can be seen that the average heat source temperature varied with different domain sizes. This means that the optimal topologies were affected by the domain size, since thermoelastic load is determined by the temperature field.