One of these two curves is a stiffness and the other is a statement of statics
One of these two curves is a stiffness and the other is a statement of statics. The torque a spandrel beam carries, against how much of its torsional stiffness is left. The rising curve is compatibility torsion — a floor beam framing into the side of the spandrel, which shares its fixed-end moment of 197 kNm between the spandrel's torsional stiffness and its own flexural one. Uncracked, the spandrel takes 51% of it, or 100 kNm; at a quarter of that stiffness it takes 21%, or 41 kNm, and the floor beam picks up what was shed. The flat line is equilibrium torsion — a canopy cantilevering 2.2 m off the same spandrel, whose 116 kNm is fixed by statics and contains no stiffness at all. The first can be designed away by accepting a rotation. The second cannot be designed away by anything.
3 essays call
torsion-redistribution. The drawing above is what it returns with no arguments at all; every
call below passes it something, because a placement that passes nothing draws whichever
member of the family the generator happens to default to rather than the one its essay
argues about.
Where it is called
Changing this generator changes every one of these figures.
The torsion that goes away if you let it
A spandrel beam attracts a torque in proportion to its own torsional stiffness. Crack it and the stiffness falls by a factor of four, the torque falls with it, and nothing has failed — because the floor beam it was competing with picks up exactly what was shed. A canopy hung off the same spandrel is a different animal entirely.
The movement with no limit against it
Every code in the world gives a deflection limit. None gives a twist limit — and a beam loaded off its shear centre twists. On an open section a modest eccentricity moves the flange tip sideways by three fifths of the sag that does get checked, and nothing anywhere says whether that is acceptable.
The torque that should not be shed
A compatibility torque can be let go, because the load has somewhere else to go. What the rule does not say is what it costs the somewhere else — a twenty per cent rise in a floor beam's midspan moment, a crack width nobody limits, and a rotation the spandrel has to actually deliver. There is a size of torque past which shedding is the wrong answer, and no code states it.
The library, page 6 of 7 — where torsion-redistribution sits