【24h】

Wind Loading - Practicing Engineers and the Code

机译:风荷载-执业工程师和规范

获取原文

摘要

There is widespread concern among practicing engineers that the clarity and usability of the building codes have radically diminished as the size and complexity of the codes have increased. One tool for assessing the ability of practicing engineers to consistently and reliably implement the code is the use of Trial Design Problems. The Trial Design Problem process consists of (a) developing a common engineering problem, (b) enlisting practicing engineers to complete the engineering problem using the code, (c) evaluating the engineering solutions submitted by practicing engineers, and (d) conveying the results of the problems to the engineering community and code development committees.The Design Practices Committee of the Structural Engineering Institute recently completed several Trial Design Problems related to wind loading per the ASCE 7-05 code and the new Alternate All Heights Method of the 2009 IBC. The quantitative analysis of the Trial Design Problem solutions indicated serious concerns with the ability of practicing engineers to reliably and efficiently implement several provisions of the ASCE 7-05 wind procedures including:? Using ASCE 7-05, only Vi of the practicing engineers properly accounted for the internal pressures.? Using ASCE 7-05, only 1/3 of the practicing engineers properly accounted for torsion or end zone pressures.? The new Alternate All Heights Method in the 2009 IBC yielded more reliable and accurate results in less than V2 the time as compared to ASCE 7-05 Method 2.Considering the Trial Design Problem results, a follow up study was performed to evaluate the committee structure of the ASCE 7 wind committee as compared with other ASCE 7 committees. The study indicates a clear connection between the usability of the code provisions and the number of practicing engineers on code committees.
机译:在实践中的工程师中,人们普遍担心,随着法规的规模和复杂性的增加,建筑法规的清晰度和可用性已从根本上降低了。评估实践工程师一致,可靠地执行代码的能力的一种工具是使用试验设计问题。 “试验设计问题”过程包括(a)开发一个常见的工程问题;(b)征召执业工程师使用代码完成工程问题;(c)评估执业工程师提交的工程解决方案;以及(d)传达结果向工程界和代码开发委员会提出问题。 结构工程学院的设计实践委员会最近根据ASCE 7-05规范和2009 IBC的新“替代全高方法”完成了一些与风荷载有关的试验设计问题。对“试验设计问题”解决方案的定量分析表明,对于实践中的工程师能否可靠,有效地实施ASCE 7-05风程序若干规定的能力,存在严重的担忧: ?使用ASCE 7-05,只有执业工程师的Vi才能正确地解释内部压力。 ?使用ASCE 7-05,只有1/3的实际工程师适当地考虑了扭转或末端区域的压力。 ?与ASCE 7-05方法2相比,2009年IBC中新的“替代所有高度”方法在不到V2的时间内产生了更可靠,更准确的结果。 考虑到“试验设计问题”的结果,进行了后续研究,以评估ASCE 7风力委员会与其他ASCE 7委员会的委员会结构。该研究表明,规范规定的可用性与规范委员会中的实践工程师数量之间存在明显的联系。

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