Posted by Paul Malo on January 10, 2002 at 06:23:32:In Reply to: In the case lower connections not rendundant posted by d on January 09, 2002 at 21:42:01:
The image didn't come through with this post. Here's another thought, however. It's possible that such a lower chord extension could carry a horizontal compressive load to the column (there still being no vertical component involved in this member). Were that the case, this would not be a conventional truss at all, but in effect a ridged frame, as the triangulation at the column would provide rotational resistance, reducing the bending in the floor system, allowing a more minimal "truss" (which is really the trussed bent of a ridged frame) to span between the wall and core. When you're talking this many stories, every inch of depth saved at each floor adds up to a lot of cubage and money to be save. Were this the case, you diagrams would work. Had the weakest link been the bottom chord at the column, failure would occur as you visualize it. BUT, if horizontal stress was carried to the column by this member, why would it have been a slip joint?
The dampering intention seems to be more probable.
|
ArchitectureWeek
Search
Buildings
Architects
Types
Places
Pix
Free 3D Models
Store
Library
|