Moment-transfer/Non-Moment-Transfer Joint

E

eissenhover

New Member
Hello everyone, I would like to ask for your information on a subject, there are two images below, Image 1: The beam end freedoms were opened and adjusted to not transfer moment, naturally no moment was transferred to the columns after the analysis, max moment occurred in the middle of the beam, and the beam did not recover (pmm insufficient 2nd Visual: the same beam was adjusted to transmit moment and the amount of moment in the middle of the beam decreased, the moment was transmitted to the columns and the beam was saved (pmm was sufficient) So in the non-moment transfer system, all the moment was accumulated in the beam and the system (beam) did not save, but the truss-lattice etc. truss elements in systems are always hinged, I don't understand the contrast? In other words, according to the pictures I added, beams were saved in the moment-transmitting joint, that is, there was no need to enlarge the section. aren't articulated joints in the system more economical? This contradiction really confused me.
 
Hi, Truss systems are a solution used for truss-like structures with large openings. Even if there are articulated connections, the required strength can be achieved by changing the height and element sections. Production for rolled profiles is limited and can be produced in certain sizes. Where these dimensions are not sufficient, a cage system is used. In addition, when the truss system and beam frame system in the picture below are examined, it is seen that the internal forces in the columns are smaller in the truss system. In this way, cages in high-span systems can also make columns more economical. In general, for the economic solution of the steel structure, it is necessary to examine the material/profiles used in the entire structure, whether these materials/profiles are easily accessible, labor costs, and casualties.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top