Webinar - Structural loads in steel connection design

[@33cmane]

Thank you so much for this information

[@ideastatica_en]

Glad it was helpful!

[@offshare2033]

Thanks

[@MariaMercadoCelin-qc4lt]

Hi Thanks for the video. I have a question regarding the sign convention when importing from RISA. I see that the only change done was to the axes. What about the sign convention?? RISA takes compression as positive oposed to Idea, shouldn't that be changed also before importing ? I am working right now in a RISA model and idea, and have been very confused about the sign convention differences.

[@ideastatica_en]

Hello, the axis (LCS) is translated from the source software (Risa) to Connection app and at the same time the signs of internal forces, so that they match. In case something is wrong, you can identify it in the unbalanced forces tab www.ideastatica.com/support-center/unbalanced-forces-from-bim-link-import

[@ABDULSALAM-ALHETARI]

thank you for the webinar but it's still not defined how to know the position of hinge in the model. How to know that the hinge is in the bolts or in the node or in anther position X from the beginning of the member?

[@ideastatica_en]

Hello, this is descibed here: www.ideastatica.com/support-center/how-to-define-correct-load-position The position of the hinge is determined by engineering judgement. Usualy, it is formed in the center of the bolts and depends on the overall connection stiffness. If the bolted connection (e.g. fin plate) is rather stiffer by using more bolts, the hinge moves slightly towards the node of the connection. To be perfectly safe, and that is a habit of engineers in some countries because some codes require it - you would do 2 calculations - one for shear force position in bolts and other one with position of shear force in weld of the connected plate to cover both extremes of moment distribution and hinge position.

[@harmony318]

Sometimes in the loads, load values are visible but when you click load percentage, i'm not able to input any percentage because the whole input row somehow is not there. Again when i click percentage load and go back to actula values, i can see the input row. I don't know why this happens.

[@ideastatica_en]

Hello, can you please refer this to our technical support? No such behavior has been detected. www.ideastatica.com/contact

[@leonardogonzalezcontreras9851]

👏👍

[@salmamadgy899]

Regarding load in equilibirium , If i dont have the forces for the bearing members, so should i close it?

[@ideastatica_en]

Hello! Please reffer to this article: www.ideastatica.com/support-center/equilibrium-and-supporting-member In case you miss the forces for the bearing member (and you can not obtain them), you turn off the equilibrium and depending on the model behaviour and your engineering judgement you may leave a reserve in capacity of identified connection parts.

[@zhiwang6885]

where can I download models in this video😀

[@ideastatica_en]

Hello, you can reach to the US office www.ideastatica.com/contact

[@sec.5_bn.2tahamostafa88]

A study was done to detect the behaviour of steel plates in idea statica. As idea statica stated that the behaviour of steel plate will be according to the bilinear stress strain curve existed in EN1993-1-5 app.C note c.6. And idea limited the strain on palates to be below 5 % according to EN1993-1-5 app.C note c.8. So it is expected from this bilinear curve that in ASD design philosophy fyd which is equal to 0.6fy will make the the strain on the plate to reach 0.1% while in LRFD philosophy the strain corresponding to 0.9fy will be 0.16% as we follow the first part of the curve which has a slope equal to E(2100 t/cm^2) so we wanted to make sure of this through some connection illustrated below but an obstacle was encountered as the accuracy in idea statica is 0.1% for strain so it is expected that we will get the second part of the curve only which has a slope equal to E/1000. and the results was consistent with this as shown below whether in ASD design philosophy or LRFD but there is a question has arisen which is why the strain at fyd is the same in the two methodologies of the design which is equal to 0.1%. While it is accepted to be to be 0.1% for ASD but for LRFD if the strain at 0.9fy is 0.1% this will mean that Young's modulus will be 0.9fy/0.001 for steel 52 E will be equal to 3240 t/cm^2 which is not correct ???

[@ideastatica_en]

Thank you for your comment. As it deserves some further exploration, we would like to ask you kindly to input your inputs to the support case, so our product specialists can answer it. Here is how to input the support case via our User Portal: www.ideastatica.com/support-center/how-to-create-a-new-support-case Thanks.

[@Raksa97]

For some reason when some parts of her explanation is not clear and confusing

[@ideastatica_en]

Hello, sorry for that, you cna always read the articles etc. www.ideastatica.com/support-center/continuous-beam-over-column-connection-design-en but the best is to go trough the Campus to learn everything www.ideastatica.com/campus