Theme

Which failure arrives first — page 6

Essays 121 to 144 of 495 on this thread, in the same order.
A straight line, and the comfortable case is already two thirds down it. The capacity of a 215 mm masonry wall as a fraction of its squash load, against the eccentricity of the resultant. Nothing in this figure is a buckling calculation. A material that cannot be pulled bears on a strip of width 3(t/2 − e) under a triangular stress block, so the capacity is exactly 1.5f(t − 2e) — a straight line, zero when the resultant reaches the face, and already at 67% at the edge of the kern. The middle third is treated everywhere as the comfortable case; a wall loaded there has given away a third of its capacity before slenderness has been mentioned. The lower line is the same wall with slenderness in it, which enters as an ADDITIONAL eccentricity of 17.4 mm rather than as a reduced stress — h_ef²/2400t, for h_ef = 3000 mm. Euler's load for this wall is 9.6 times what the eccentricity rule allows, which is why no masonry calculation contains it. Stability

It does not buckle, it runs out of width

Every stability failure in this collection is a member that could have carried tension deciding to go sideways instead. Masonry cannot carry tension, and its failure under an eccentric load is not a bifurcation at all — the bearing area simply shrinks until it runs out. The capacity is exactly linear in the eccentricity, Euler's load is ten times anything allowed, and no material property appears until the very end.

Cover enters twice, and the strength of the concrete enters once. How long a 20 mm bar has before the cover over it splits, against the cover, split into the two halves it is always split into. Initiation is the time for the chloride front to reach the bar, which goes as the square of the cover — Fick's law and nothing else — and it is 9.1 years at 35 mm and 36.2 at 70. Propagation is the time from there to a split cover, which is short: 0.9 years, because the cover cracks at a section loss of 0.21% and no strength check in this collection would notice a loss that small. The pressure the cover can take grows with the cover too, so cover appears in both terms and the concrete's own tensile strength appears in one of them, linearly. That asymmetry is why every durability clause in every code is about cover and crack width, and hardly at all about strength. Materials

The load that comes from inside

Every action in this collection has been applied from outside — a weight, a pressure, a movement, a temperature. Corrosion is not applied at all, and the reason it belongs to statics rather than to durability is that what does the damage is a load: rust occupies three times the volume of the steel it came from, and the only place to make room is by pushing the cover apart.

The width nobody drew. A gusset plate with a brace bolted to it over 240 mm, and the width the profession has agreed to pretend is carrying the force. Everything else on this site arrives with a cross-section; a gusset does not, because it is a piece of steel with something attached somewhere in the middle of it and there is no geometry that says how much of it is working. The answer is the Whitmore section: assume the force spreads at 30° from the first fastener and take the width it has reached at the last, b_eff = w + 2L·tan30° = 367 mm. That is 4.08 times the width anything is actually attached to, and the rule comes from a 1952 master's thesis. It has since been checked against finite element work and holds to about ten per cent, which is fortunate, because moving the assumed angle by ten degrees moves the answer by 34%. On this plate the check that governs is not the stress the rule was written for: it is the Whitmore section buckles, at 721 kN against 1564. Connections

The width nobody drew

Every other member in this collection arrives with a cross-section. A gusset plate does not — it is a piece of steel with a brace bolted to it somewhere in the middle, and no geometry says how much of it is working. The profession's answer is a thirty-degree spread from a 1952 master's thesis, it invents three quarters of the area being checked, and the check it was written for is not the one that governs.

The force falls, the drift rises, and the damping goes the wrong way. What a compliant foundation does to a 0.6 s building on a 8 × 8 m footing, against the stiffness of the ground under it. Three curves, all normalised to the fixed-base answer. The period lengthens — 1.31 times at 200 m/s — because the swaying and rocking of the foundation are flexibilities in series with the structure's own, and the rocking term carries an h², so it is the tall building that feels it. The base shear falls with the period, which is why a fixed base is usually called conservative. The displacement rises, by 51% here, and that is what breaks the cladding, the services and the gap to the building next door. And the effective damping falls rather than rises: the structure's own is divided by the cube of the lengthening — 2.2% of an original 5% — while a slender building's foundation radiates only 0.28% back, because rocking radiates almost nothing at these frequencies. Dynamics

The ground is a spring

Every dynamic result in this collection has assumed a structure rising from something that does not move. Nothing does. A foundation can slide and it can rock, both are flexibilities in series with the structure's own, and the rocking one carries a square of the height — so the period lengthens, the force falls, the drift rises, and the damping goes the wrong way.

The snow that left the roof is standing against the wall. A roof in section with a 1.0 m obstruction at its downwind end, drawn with the vertical scale exaggerated 4 times because a metre of snow on twenty metres of roof is thinner than the line it would be drawn with. The balanced layer is 0.48 kN/m² everywhere; the wedge against the wall holds the snow that 30% of the 20 m upwind gave up, so its area is fixed by conservation of mass rather than chosen. That makes it 0.85 m deep and 3.4 m long, with a peak load of 2.60 kN/m² — 5.4 times the balanced value, and still only 27% of the snow on the roof. An intensity several times the design load, made of a quantity nobody would notice had moved. Equilibrium

The load that arrives where the wind stops

Snow is the one load a structure is given rather than subjected to. What falls is spread evenly over a whole region; what a member carries is whatever the wind left above it, and the wind piles it against whatever gets in the way. The heaviest patch on a roof is usually a quarter of the snow on it.

The load that makes itself worse. The amplification of a deflection against the ratio of applied load to buckling load. A structure at half its buckling load deflects twice as far as first-order analysis predicts, and the curve runs away well before the load is reached. Equilibrium

The load that is really a lean

No frame is ever plumb. The columns are out of upright by something like a three-hundredth, and every tonne of gravity load standing on that lean has a horizontal component. The force that represents it is not a safety allowance — it is an exact statics substitution for a geometry nobody drew.

The length at which a beam stops being a beam. Elastic critical moment against the distance between lateral restraints, with the section's plastic capacity drawn across it. The two cross at 4086 — beyond that length the beam buckles sideways before it reaches the strength its cross-section has, and the capacity is set by the restraints rather than by the steel. Stability

The load that moves with the twist

A beam about to buckle sideways is beginning to rotate, and everything attached to it rotates with it. A load hung from the top flange swings out over the side and drives the rotation on; the same load hung underneath swings back and stops it. Two identical beams, two different capacities, and the only difference is a height.

A Pratt truss of 8 panels. A Pratt truss under equal panel-point loads. The joint equilibrium equations were assembled and solved; 14 members came out in tension, 13 in compression and 2 carrying nothing. Stability

The tie that spends an afternoon as a strut

A tension member is chosen by its area and nothing else. A compression member is chosen by how that area is arranged. So a member whose force reverses under some load case is not merely being asked for the same number with the other sign — it is being designed against a different variable, and the same steel can carry seventy times more or less depending on a shape nobody chose for that purpose.

The props decide where the stress ends up. Bottom-fibre stress in the steel of a 12 m composite beam carrying 6 kN/m of wet concrete and 9 kN/m afterwards. Unpropped, the bare steel takes the first stage alone and reaches 146 MPa; propped, the finished composite section takes everything and reaches 93 MPa — a ratio of 1.57. 62% of the unpropped beam's final stress was locked in before the slab was structural at all. The deflections differ by 1.73 times for the same reason, and no drawing of the finished beam distinguishes the two. Sections and stress

The section that changed while it was being loaded

A stress is computed from a moment and a section modulus. When part of the moment arrived while the section was a different shape, there is no single section modulus to divide by — the stresses add and the properties do not, and two identical finished beams can differ by half again in stress with nothing on the drawing to say which is which.

The corner columns take what the middle ones did not. Axial stress in the columns across one flange face of a 36 by 36 m framed tube, at the base. Plane sections says the flat line: every column on the face at the same distance from the neutral axis, therefore at the same stress. The solved distribution is the curve — 78.5 N/mm² at the corner against 13.4 in the middle, a ratio of 5.88. The middle columns lag because the only route the axial force has into them is the in-plane shear of the spandrel frame, bay by bay from the corner. The face is carrying its resultant on an effective width of 45 per cent, and the tube deflects as though its second moment were 64 per cent of the gross. Structural form

The columns that lean

A framed tube carries its wind load by bending the spandrel beams between its columns, and it does it badly — the corner columns take nearly six times what the middle ones do. Tilt the columns instead, so the perimeter is triangulated, and the same shear is carried axially. The concentration falls to 1.21 and the tube recovers most of the stiffness the plan said it had.

The least reliable number in the material decides the answer, briefly. What a twenty per cent error in the concrete's tensile strength does to a computed deflection, against how far past cracking the beam is. Well past the cracking moment it does almost nothing — at 1.9 times M_cr the spread is 56 per cent — because the section is nearly fully cracked and the interpolation has run out. Just above cracking it does everything: at 1.19 times M_cr the same twenty per cent moves the deflection by 3658 per cent. Tensile strength is the property with the widest scatter and the least direct test, and a beam designed to sit near its cracking moment has put the answer on it. Deflection

The curvature nobody applied

Concrete shrinks as it dries, by about half a millimetre in every metre. In a symmetrically reinforced member that is a shortening and nothing else. In a member with more steel in one face than the other — which is every beam and every slab — the steel holds one side back and the section bends, with no load on it at all.

The characteristic strength, which nothing was measured at. A lognormal population of strengths with a mean of 30 N/mm² and a coefficient of variation of 0.15. The characteristic value is the 5% fractile — 23.2 N/mm², which is 77% of the mean, and which need not be the strength of any specimen that was tested. Dividing it by 1.50 gives 15.5, and the shaded sliver below that is the fraction of the population that would fail to reach it: 6.4e-6, or one in 155,818. A factor applied to a fractile is not covering the scatter, because the scatter has already been spent getting to the fractile. Materials

The strength no specimen had

A material property is written into a calculation as a number, and a material does not have one. It has a population of strengths with a mean and a spread, and the number used is a low fractile of that population — a value that need not have been measured, that most of the material exceeds, and whose distance below the mean is decided entirely by the scatter.

The middle third, computed. The kern of a 300 × 600 mm rectangle, computed by asking, for every direction, how far the resultant can move before the far face would be pulled. It reaches ±100.0 mm vertically and ±50.0 mm horizontally, which are h/6 and b/6 exactly, and the region between is a rhombus rather than the ellipse the two numbers suggest — a resultant on a diagonal has less room than either axis allows. Materials

The strength thrown away on purpose

Masonry, concrete and soil are all analysed as though they had no tensile strength whatever. Each of them has some. The decision to set it to zero is the single most consequential modelling assumption in the subject, it is safe for one kind of check and unsafe for another, and almost nothing that uses it says which.

A base plate, and when the bolts start working. A 500 × 500 mm plate carrying 600 kN and 180 kN·m, so the resultant sits 300 mm from the centre against a kern of 83.33 mm. The plate is in bolts engaged: bearing over 150.88 mm at a peak of 20 N/mm², with the holding-down bolts carrying 154.42 kN. The plate lifts at 50 kN·m and crushes at 126 kN·m, and the bolts are not needed until 150 kN·m. Connections

The failure that is in the concrete

An anchor bolt is a steel component and its capacity is usually decided by something else entirely — a cone of concrete pulled out around it, failing in tension, in a material every other calculation on the project has assumed cannot take tension at all. The exponent in the capacity says so: it is not the square the geometry implies.

The end bolts do the work and the middle ones very nearly nothing. A lap of 10 bolts at 75 mm pitch transferring 800 kN between two plates, with the force each bolt actually carries drawn above it and the flat line a division by the bolt count would have given drawn behind. The end bolts carry 1.16 of their nominal share and the middle ones 0.89. The reason is not in the bolts: at the leading end the first plate is carrying everything and the second nothing, so the two strain at different rates and the slip between them is largest there. In the middle they strain alike, there is almost no slip, and a bolt with no slip across it transfers almost no force. The mean over the worst is 0.861, and the end bolt has to slip 1.16 mm before the rest catch up. Connections

The joint that has to be as good as the member

A splice exists because members come in lengths and structures do not. It has to deliver the same force, at the same stiffness, in the same distribution across the section, through a discontinuity — and each of those three requirements is met by a different feature of the detail, with the third one usually left to look after itself.

What the shape of a load in time is worth, for two load shapes. The peak displacement as a multiple of the static deflection, against the load's duration divided by the structure's natural period, for two load shapes: a load that rises linearly, then stays; a rectangular pulse, then nothing. The lines are closed forms and eight dots are the peak of a complete time integration of an oscillator of 0.300 s period under that load, agreeing with the line to within 0.19% everywhere. Dynamics

The load that is over before it has moved

A blast delivers an enormous pressure for a few milliseconds. Everything else in this field asks what force a structure can carry; a load that has come and gone before the structure has travelled any distance is not asking that question, and the answer turns out to depend on the mass and the ductility with the strength barely in it.

A strength with no mechanism in it, made of four. The shear a member carries with no links in it, split into the mechanisms that carry it, against the member's effective depth on a logarithmic axis. The three bands are calibrated to Taylor's measured shares at one 300 mm × 500 mm member and are then evaluated everywhere else, so the shape of the total is a prediction. Aggregate interlock is the band that dies: it depends on how tightly the crack faces are held together, crack width grows with member depth, and it falls from 62% of a shallow member's strength to 22% of a deep one's. That decay is the whole of the size effect, and the dashed line is the design code's fitted k = 1 + √(200/d), which knows nothing about interlock and falls by a factor of 1.52 where the model falls by 2.05 over the same twentyfold range. Dowel action is why the expression contains the flexural reinforcement ratio, which nothing in a truss analogy would predict. Internal forces

The strength with no mechanism in it

A concrete member with no links in it carries shear, and the expression that says how much is three variables raised to fitted powers with a size term in front. There is no free body anywhere in it. What it is fitting is a competition between four things that carry shear across a crack, and only one of them explains why a deeper member is worse at it.

An enhanced strength that is the strength of a tie. Bearing strength as a multiple of the design cylinder strength, against how far the load is allowed to spread, with the bursting tension the spread creates on the same axis. The enhancement is √(A₂/A₁) and it reaches 2.80 for the 250 mm pad on a 700 mm block drawn — 47.6 N/mm² against a design strength of 17.0. There is no material property in that statement beyond the one being enhanced, and the reason is on the second curve: a load that spreads does so along inclined struts, a pair of inclined struts has a horizontal component, and that component is 16.1% of the load. It has to be tied. 1099 mm² of steel is what the enhancement actually is, and the cap of three is not a property of concrete — it is the angle past which nobody believes the strut. Internal forces

Three times as strong under a smaller pad

Press a small plate onto a large block of concrete and it will carry three times the stress a cylinder of the same concrete fails at. The enhancement is a ratio of areas with no material property in it, which should be a warning: what has actually been measured is not the concrete's strength but the strength of a tie holding it together.

The dimension the capacity rides on is not a drawn dimension. Moment capacity of a 225 mm slab against the cover to the reinforcement. The line is very nearly straight, because capacity is A_s·f_yd·z and z is about 0.9d — so the capacity is proportional to a dimension that is not on the drawing. What is on the drawing is the overall depth, and the effective depth is what the cover, the link and half a bar diameter leave of it: 225 − 30 − 0 − 8 = 187 mm here. Every one of those three is a site tolerance rather than a design decision. Ten millimetres of bar position is 5.7% of this slab's capacity and 1.8% of a 600 mm beam's — the same workmanship costs 3.0 times as much in the shallow member, and the shallow member is the one whose steel is walked on before the pour. Sections and stress

The dimension nobody can measure

Every flexural capacity in reinforced concrete is proportional to the effective depth, and the effective depth is not on the drawing. It is what is left of the thickness after a cover, a link and half a bar diameter have been taken off it — and each of those is a site tolerance. In a slab, ten millimetres of workmanship is six per cent of the strength.

The answer is continuous and the catalogue is not. Capacity bought against capacity required, over a real rolled series. The straight line is what a continuous section would give — exactly the moment asked for, and nothing can be bought on it. The staircase is what a catalogue gives: each tread is one section, each riser is the step to the next, and the vertical gap between the two is steel that is paid for and does nothing. The steps in this series run from 23% to 59% in plastic modulus, so the average waste is 15.0% and the worst is 46% — just above a riser, where the section below has been missed by a kilonewton-metre. The 1200 kNm marked buys a 686×254×125 at 1418 kNm, which is 85% utilised. Two things follow that a continuous treatment cannot see: the sensitivity of a design to an assumption is zero over most of a tread and enormous at a riser, and an optimisation that returns three significant figures is answering a question with twelve answers in it. Sections and stress

The answer is continuous and the catalogue is not

Every optimisation in this subject returns a number with three significant figures in it, and nothing with three significant figures can be bought. What can be bought is a rolled series whose steps are a quarter to a half apart, so the member that goes on the drawing is on average a tenth stronger than the one that was calculated and can be a third stronger for no reason at all.

The two braces balance until one of them buckles. An inverted-V brace after the compression member has gone. While both braces are elastic they carry equal and opposite forces and their vertical components cancel on the beam above, which is why the beam in a chevron bay is usually sized for gravity alone. The compression brace buckles at 445 kN and then sheds most of what it was carrying — 30% is left here — while the tension brace goes on to yield at 1065. The difference between the two vertical components is 659 kN, applied at the middle of the span with no help from either brace, and it asks the beam for 1317 kNm against the 200 kNm the gravity load asks for — 6.6 times as much. The beam drawn does not: 1517 kNm against a capacity of 731. The force is not a load case anybody applies; it is what the frame leaves behind on its way to the state it will actually be in. Structural form

The force the brace leaves behind

Two braces meeting under a beam carry the storey shear as a tension and a compression whose vertical components cancel, so the beam above sees nothing. They cancel only while both braces are elastic. Once the compression brace buckles it sheds most of its force, the tension brace goes on to yield, and the difference is a point load at midspan that nobody applied.

Effective length is a property of the storey. The effective length factor of the one column that resists sway, against the total gravity load on the storey as a multiple of its own. At the left-hand end it carries the storey alone and its K is 1.99 — the 2.0 every chart gives a column fixed at the base and free to sway at the top, reproduced here by a route that never mentions a chart. Then columns are added that have pinned bases and therefore no lateral stiffness whatever. They contribute load and nothing else, so they cannot buckle on their own and they lower the load at which everything buckles together. K rises as the square root of the load ratio, exactly, and at the storey drawn — three leaning columns carrying 69% of the gravity load — it is 3.57. That is off the end of every published alignment chart, and the leaning columns themselves, which a designer would take at K = 1.0 for pinned ends, are at 2.54. Stability

The column that leans on its neighbours

A column with a pinned base and a pinned top has no lateral stiffness at all and cannot stand up alone, and yet thousands of them do. What holds them is the rest of the storey, and what it costs is paid by whichever columns do have stiffness — whose effective length rises as the square root of the load being leaned on them, straight off the end of every chart.

A transverse load with nothing applied. Web slenderness against web thickness, with the limit the flange's own curvature sets. A flange carrying 6213 kN and curved to a radius of 592 m needs 10.5 N per millimetre of radial force to stay on its curve, and the only thing available to supply it is the web. Nothing has been applied to the girder: the load comes from the deflected shape, which is why a straight beam has none of it and a beam at a plastic hinge has a great deal. Setting the radial force against the web's own plate-buckling resistance gives, in four lines, h_w/t_w ≤ k·(E/f_yf)·√(A_w/A_fc) — the form the codes use, arrived at without them. The constants differ: an elastic flange strain gives k = 1.34 and the rule uses 0.3, a factor of 4.5, and the gap is the curvature assumed. k goes as the inverse square root of the flange strain, so 0.3 is a flange strained to 3.4% — which is what a plastic hinge does to it. The rule is not conservative; it is written about a different beam. Stability

The web that is crushed from inside

A plate girder's compression flange is curved by the beam's own deflection, and a curved force needs a transverse load to stay on its curve. The only thing available to supply it is the web. So a deep girder can buckle its web vertically with nothing applied to it at all, and the rule that prevents it is the only clause in the codes about a load no load case contains.

A bearing capacity is a mechanism, and here it is. Prandtl's collapse mechanism under a 3.0 m footing in a soil of 32° friction. A rigid wedge is driven down with the footing at 61° to the horizontal; a fan of radial shear turns the stress through exactly ninety degrees on a logarithmic spiral whose growth rate is tanφ; and a passive wedge at 29° has to be pushed up and out of the way. Nothing here is empirical — every angle is a function of φ alone — and the mechanism reaches 15.9 m from the centre, which is 10.6 times the footing's half width. That is why two footings closer together than about four widths do not have separate bearing capacities. Equilibrium

The ground is a mechanism

Bearing capacity is met as a formula with three terms and a table of coefficients, and that presentation hides what it is. Underneath is a plastic collapse mechanism — a rigid wedge, a fan of radial shear on a logarithmic spiral, and a passive wedge that has to be pushed up and out of the way — and every coefficient in the table is a property of that one drawing.

All themes