This document analyzes a timber beam used as a floor bearer. It summarizes the demands on the beam from different load cases, including moment, shear, bearing and deflection. The governing load cases are identified as 1.2G, 1.5Q for moment, shear and bearing demands. Short-term deflection is governed by load case G, Q_st, while long-term deflection is governed by G, Q_lt. The beam properties, load cases, demands and capacities are analyzed according to AS1720.1:2010 timber design standard.
Timber Design to AS1720.1 (+Amdt 3, 2010) Webinar - ClearCalcsClearCalcs
Understanding the complete timber design process and the
key differences with wood design using AS 1720.1 or AS 1684.
ClearCalcs engineering development lead Brooks Smith gave this free engineering webinar covering Timber Design to AS1720.1, including a discussion of common design parameters and considerations, a comparison with the residentially geared AS1720.3 and AS1684, as well as worked examples using the AS 1720.1 calculator in ClearCalcs.
Long a mainstay in residential construction due to its versatility, cost, and environmental friendliness, timber is now seeing growing demand in mid rise structures thanks to growing understanding of how to utilise the material, as well as the continued rise in availability of engineered wood products (EWP) such as glue laminated and cross laminated timbers.
However, unlike steel whose properties tend to remain fairly constant over time, timber has a range of factors that need to be considered by engineers including moisture content, creep, and load duration factors.
Designing a Concrete Beam Using the New AS3600:2018 - Webinar Slides - ClearC...ClearCalcs
The 2018 revision of the AS3600 Concrete standard includes major revisions for areas including phi factors, shear, deflection, rectangular stress block, and shrinkage/creep.
In this webinar, ClearCalcs lead engineering developer Brooks Smith discusses some of these key changes, and runs through the design process for a concrete beam design before demonstrating a few worked examples using AS3600:2018 in the newly released rectangular concrete beam calculator on ClearCalcs.com.
Watch the recorded webinar: https://vimeo.com/295532300
Explore all of our concrete, timber, and steel calculations at clearcalcs.com.
AS4100 Steel Design Webinar Worked ExamplesClearCalcs
Worked examples from the ClearCalcs AS4100 Steel Design Webinar - slides: https://www.slideshare.net/clearcalcs/steel-design-to-as4100-1998-a12016-webinar-clearcalcs
This document presents an example of analysis design of slab using ETABS. This example examines a simple single story building, which is regular in plan and elevation. It is examining and compares the calculated ultimate moment from CSI ETABS & SAFE with hand calculation. Moment coefficients were used to calculate the ultimate moment. However it is good practice that such hand analysis methods are used to verify the output of more sophisticated methods.
Also, this document contains simple procedure (step-by-step) of how to design solid slab according to Eurocode 2.The process of designing elements will not be revolutionised as a result of using Eurocode 2. Due to time constraints and knowledge, I may not be able to address the whole issues.
Timber Design to AS1720.1 (+Amdt 3, 2010) Webinar - ClearCalcsClearCalcs
Understanding the complete timber design process and the
key differences with wood design using AS 1720.1 or AS 1684.
ClearCalcs engineering development lead Brooks Smith gave this free engineering webinar covering Timber Design to AS1720.1, including a discussion of common design parameters and considerations, a comparison with the residentially geared AS1720.3 and AS1684, as well as worked examples using the AS 1720.1 calculator in ClearCalcs.
Long a mainstay in residential construction due to its versatility, cost, and environmental friendliness, timber is now seeing growing demand in mid rise structures thanks to growing understanding of how to utilise the material, as well as the continued rise in availability of engineered wood products (EWP) such as glue laminated and cross laminated timbers.
However, unlike steel whose properties tend to remain fairly constant over time, timber has a range of factors that need to be considered by engineers including moisture content, creep, and load duration factors.
Designing a Concrete Beam Using the New AS3600:2018 - Webinar Slides - ClearC...ClearCalcs
The 2018 revision of the AS3600 Concrete standard includes major revisions for areas including phi factors, shear, deflection, rectangular stress block, and shrinkage/creep.
In this webinar, ClearCalcs lead engineering developer Brooks Smith discusses some of these key changes, and runs through the design process for a concrete beam design before demonstrating a few worked examples using AS3600:2018 in the newly released rectangular concrete beam calculator on ClearCalcs.com.
Watch the recorded webinar: https://vimeo.com/295532300
Explore all of our concrete, timber, and steel calculations at clearcalcs.com.
AS4100 Steel Design Webinar Worked ExamplesClearCalcs
Worked examples from the ClearCalcs AS4100 Steel Design Webinar - slides: https://www.slideshare.net/clearcalcs/steel-design-to-as4100-1998-a12016-webinar-clearcalcs
This document presents an example of analysis design of slab using ETABS. This example examines a simple single story building, which is regular in plan and elevation. It is examining and compares the calculated ultimate moment from CSI ETABS & SAFE with hand calculation. Moment coefficients were used to calculate the ultimate moment. However it is good practice that such hand analysis methods are used to verify the output of more sophisticated methods.
Also, this document contains simple procedure (step-by-step) of how to design solid slab according to Eurocode 2.The process of designing elements will not be revolutionised as a result of using Eurocode 2. Due to time constraints and knowledge, I may not be able to address the whole issues.
The Manual explains the concept of transferring the load from the super structure up to the soil throughout Piles, which has a capacity of (End bearing, and Skin friction). It illustrates the steps needed to produce a full and safe foundation for your Super Structure.
Designing a Cold-Formed Steel Beam Using AS4600:2018 and 2005 - WebinarClearCalcs
Recording: https://vimeo.com/318370452
Cold-formed and light gauge steel are rapidly growing in use across residential and commercial projects thanks to their cost-effective and customisable nature.
In this presentation, ClearCalcs engineer Brooks Smith discusses what makes CFS unique, how to design a cold-formed beam to the newly released AS4600:2018, and key differences between the older 2005 version of the standard - most notably the new preference for the use of the Direct Strength Method over the Effective Width Method.
Reinforced concrete special moment frames • are used as part of seismic force-resisting systems in buildings that are designed to resist earthquakes. • Beams, columns, and beam-column joints in moment frames are prop... more abstract
Peer review presentation for the strut and tie method as an analysis and design approach for the mat on piles foundations of the primary separation cell (vessel).
Part-I: Seismic Analysis/Design of Multi-storied RC Buildings using STAAD.Pro...Rahul Leslie
For novice, please continue from "Modelling Building Frame with STAAD.Pro & ETABS" (http://www.slideshare.net/rahulleslie/modelling-building-frame-with-staadpro-etabs-rahul-leslie).
This is a presentation covering almost all aspects of Seismic analysis & design of Multi-storied RC Structures using the Indian code IS:1893-2016 (New edition), with references to IS:13920-2015 (Code for ductile detailing) & IS:16700-2017 (code for design of tall buildings) where relevant; following for each aspect of the code, (1) The clause/formula (2) It's explanation/theory (3) How it is/can be implemented in the software packages of (i) STAAD.Pro and (ii) ETABS
This is the latest edition of the earlier slides based on IS:1893-2002 which this one supersedes. This is Part-I of a two part series.
Design of Various Types of Industrial Buildings and Their ComparisonIRJESJOURNAL
ABSTRACT :- In this paper Industrial Steel truss Building of 14m x 31.50m, 20m x 50m, 28m x 70m and bay spacing of 5.25m, 6.25m and 7m respectively having column height of 6m is compared with Pre-engineering Buildings of same dimension. Design is based on IS 800-2007 (LSM) Load considered in modeling are Dead load, Live Load, Wind load along with the combinations as specified in IS. Analysis results are observed for column base as hinge base. Results of Industrial steel truss buildings are compared with the same dimensions of Pre-Engineering Building
The Manual explains the concept of transferring the load from the super structure up to the soil throughout Piles, which has a capacity of (End bearing, and Skin friction). It illustrates the steps needed to produce a full and safe foundation for your Super Structure.
Designing a Cold-Formed Steel Beam Using AS4600:2018 and 2005 - WebinarClearCalcs
Recording: https://vimeo.com/318370452
Cold-formed and light gauge steel are rapidly growing in use across residential and commercial projects thanks to their cost-effective and customisable nature.
In this presentation, ClearCalcs engineer Brooks Smith discusses what makes CFS unique, how to design a cold-formed beam to the newly released AS4600:2018, and key differences between the older 2005 version of the standard - most notably the new preference for the use of the Direct Strength Method over the Effective Width Method.
Reinforced concrete special moment frames • are used as part of seismic force-resisting systems in buildings that are designed to resist earthquakes. • Beams, columns, and beam-column joints in moment frames are prop... more abstract
Peer review presentation for the strut and tie method as an analysis and design approach for the mat on piles foundations of the primary separation cell (vessel).
Part-I: Seismic Analysis/Design of Multi-storied RC Buildings using STAAD.Pro...Rahul Leslie
For novice, please continue from "Modelling Building Frame with STAAD.Pro & ETABS" (http://www.slideshare.net/rahulleslie/modelling-building-frame-with-staadpro-etabs-rahul-leslie).
This is a presentation covering almost all aspects of Seismic analysis & design of Multi-storied RC Structures using the Indian code IS:1893-2016 (New edition), with references to IS:13920-2015 (Code for ductile detailing) & IS:16700-2017 (code for design of tall buildings) where relevant; following for each aspect of the code, (1) The clause/formula (2) It's explanation/theory (3) How it is/can be implemented in the software packages of (i) STAAD.Pro and (ii) ETABS
This is the latest edition of the earlier slides based on IS:1893-2002 which this one supersedes. This is Part-I of a two part series.
Design of Various Types of Industrial Buildings and Their ComparisonIRJESJOURNAL
ABSTRACT :- In this paper Industrial Steel truss Building of 14m x 31.50m, 20m x 50m, 28m x 70m and bay spacing of 5.25m, 6.25m and 7m respectively having column height of 6m is compared with Pre-engineering Buildings of same dimension. Design is based on IS 800-2007 (LSM) Load considered in modeling are Dead load, Live Load, Wind load along with the combinations as specified in IS. Analysis results are observed for column base as hinge base. Results of Industrial steel truss buildings are compared with the same dimensions of Pre-Engineering Building
In India, industries usually have quality range of gantry girders for industrial sheds. Assisted by skilled workers in India, companies have been able to successfully grow towards the zenith, but there is still minor margin remaining which can be achieved by optimally designing the gantry girder in an economic as well as efficient manner. For this purpose, it is essential to implement the procedure for model, design, analyze and validate the girder efficiently.
MAchine Design and CAD Presentation. its topic is about Hydrodynamic Journal bearings, Heat Generated in a Journal Bearing
Design Procedure for Journal Bearing
And Examples
International Journal of Engineering Research and Applications (IJERA) is a team of researchers not publication services or private publications running the journals for monetary benefits, we are association of scientists and academia who focus only on supporting authors who want to publish their work. The articles published in our journal can be accessed online, all the articles will be archived for real time access.
Our journal system primarily aims to bring out the research talent and the works done by sciaentists, academia, engineers, practitioners, scholars, post graduate students of engineering and science. This journal aims to cover the scientific research in a broader sense and not publishing a niche area of research facilitating researchers from various verticals to publish their papers. It is also aimed to provide a platform for the researchers to publish in a shorter of time, enabling them to continue further All articles published are freely available to scientific researchers in the Government agencies,educators and the general public. We are taking serious efforts to promote our journal across the globe in various ways, we are sure that our journal will act as a scientific platform for all researchers to publish their works online.
Analysis of Catalyst Support Ring in a pressure vessel based on ASME Section ...ijsrd.com
In reactors, catalyst support rings and tray support rings that support heavy catalyst beds and catalyst support grids, are subjected to high pressure and temperature and other dead loads, so their safe design is essential as they are critical parts in a reactor and their finite element analysis is carried out using ASME Sec VIII Div.2 in the industry. Analysis of skirt support to bottom head junction is also very important as this welded joint is subjected to wind loads, seismic loads, dead loads, high thermal gradient etc. The skirt support supports the whole reactor so the welded joint must be strong enough to endure stresses due to various reasons. This safety can be determined using FEA software using ASME Sec VIII Div.2.
Fire Resistance of Materials & Structures - Analysing the Steel StructureArshia Mousavi
A library room, whose structural steel members are to be checked in fire conditions (in terms of bearing capacity, R criterion).
The aims of this project are as follows:
1. Design of the beam and the column at room temperature
a) design the beam capacity at the ULS and the check the deflection at the SLS (d ≤ L1/250 in the rare combination) b) design the column for its buckling resistance.
2. Design the beam fire protection (boards) for the required fire resistance under the quasi-permanent load
the combination and assuming a three-sided exposure (concrete deck on top)
suggested steps: design load under fire
ultimate load of the beam at time = 0
ductility class
global failure or just a critical section?
increased capacity of the critical sections by the adaptation factors degree of utilization of the structure (or the critical section)
critical temperature.
protection design & final check.
3. Design the column fire protection
for the required fire resistance under the quasi- permanent load combination (optional: accounting for the effect of the thermal elongation of the beam).
suggested steps: design load under fire
thermal elongation of the beam assessment of the equivalent. uniform moment critical temperature (spreadsheet file)
protection design & final check
If needed, the member cross-sections designed at room temperature may be adjusted in order to meet the required fire resistance (parts 2 and 3)
6th International Conference on Machine Learning & Applications (CMLA 2024)ClaraZara1
6th International Conference on Machine Learning & Applications (CMLA 2024) will provide an excellent international forum for sharing knowledge and results in theory, methodology and applications of on Machine Learning & Applications.
Overview of the fundamental roles in Hydropower generation and the components involved in wider Electrical Engineering.
This paper presents the design and construction of hydroelectric dams from the hydrologist’s survey of the valley before construction, all aspects and involved disciplines, fluid dynamics, structural engineering, generation and mains frequency regulation to the very transmission of power through the network in the United Kingdom.
Author: Robbie Edward Sayers
Collaborators and co editors: Charlie Sims and Connor Healey.
(C) 2024 Robbie E. Sayers
Hierarchical Digital Twin of a Naval Power SystemKerry Sado
A hierarchical digital twin of a Naval DC power system has been developed and experimentally verified. Similar to other state-of-the-art digital twins, this technology creates a digital replica of the physical system executed in real-time or faster, which can modify hardware controls. However, its advantage stems from distributing computational efforts by utilizing a hierarchical structure composed of lower-level digital twin blocks and a higher-level system digital twin. Each digital twin block is associated with a physical subsystem of the hardware and communicates with a singular system digital twin, which creates a system-level response. By extracting information from each level of the hierarchy, power system controls of the hardware were reconfigured autonomously. This hierarchical digital twin development offers several advantages over other digital twins, particularly in the field of naval power systems. The hierarchical structure allows for greater computational efficiency and scalability while the ability to autonomously reconfigure hardware controls offers increased flexibility and responsiveness. The hierarchical decomposition and models utilized were well aligned with the physical twin, as indicated by the maximum deviations between the developed digital twin hierarchy and the hardware.
Hybrid optimization of pumped hydro system and solar- Engr. Abdul-Azeez.pdffxintegritypublishin
Advancements in technology unveil a myriad of electrical and electronic breakthroughs geared towards efficiently harnessing limited resources to meet human energy demands. The optimization of hybrid solar PV panels and pumped hydro energy supply systems plays a pivotal role in utilizing natural resources effectively. This initiative not only benefits humanity but also fosters environmental sustainability. The study investigated the design optimization of these hybrid systems, focusing on understanding solar radiation patterns, identifying geographical influences on solar radiation, formulating a mathematical model for system optimization, and determining the optimal configuration of PV panels and pumped hydro storage. Through a comparative analysis approach and eight weeks of data collection, the study addressed key research questions related to solar radiation patterns and optimal system design. The findings highlighted regions with heightened solar radiation levels, showcasing substantial potential for power generation and emphasizing the system's efficiency. Optimizing system design significantly boosted power generation, promoted renewable energy utilization, and enhanced energy storage capacity. The study underscored the benefits of optimizing hybrid solar PV panels and pumped hydro energy supply systems for sustainable energy usage. Optimizing the design of solar PV panels and pumped hydro energy supply systems as examined across diverse climatic conditions in a developing country, not only enhances power generation but also improves the integration of renewable energy sources and boosts energy storage capacities, particularly beneficial for less economically prosperous regions. Additionally, the study provides valuable insights for advancing energy research in economically viable areas. Recommendations included conducting site-specific assessments, utilizing advanced modeling tools, implementing regular maintenance protocols, and enhancing communication among system components.
Cosmetic shop management system project report.pdfKamal Acharya
Buying new cosmetic products is difficult. It can even be scary for those who have sensitive skin and are prone to skin trouble. The information needed to alleviate this problem is on the back of each product, but it's thought to interpret those ingredient lists unless you have a background in chemistry.
Instead of buying and hoping for the best, we can use data science to help us predict which products may be good fits for us. It includes various function programs to do the above mentioned tasks.
Data file handling has been effectively used in the program.
The automated cosmetic shop management system should deal with the automation of general workflow and administration process of the shop. The main processes of the system focus on customer's request where the system is able to search the most appropriate products and deliver it to the customers. It should help the employees to quickly identify the list of cosmetic product that have reached the minimum quantity and also keep a track of expired date for each cosmetic product. It should help the employees to find the rack number in which the product is placed.It is also Faster and more efficient way.
HEAP SORT ILLUSTRATED WITH HEAPIFY, BUILD HEAP FOR DYNAMIC ARRAYS.
Heap sort is a comparison-based sorting technique based on Binary Heap data structure. It is similar to the selection sort where we first find the minimum element and place the minimum element at the beginning. Repeat the same process for the remaining elements.
Using recycled concrete aggregates (RCA) for pavements is crucial to achieving sustainability. Implementing RCA for new pavement can minimize carbon footprint, conserve natural resources, reduce harmful emissions, and lower life cycle costs. Compared to natural aggregate (NA), RCA pavement has fewer comprehensive studies and sustainability assessments.
Sachpazis:Terzaghi Bearing Capacity Estimation in simple terms with Calculati...Dr.Costas Sachpazis
Terzaghi's soil bearing capacity theory, developed by Karl Terzaghi, is a fundamental principle in geotechnical engineering used to determine the bearing capacity of shallow foundations. This theory provides a method to calculate the ultimate bearing capacity of soil, which is the maximum load per unit area that the soil can support without undergoing shear failure. The Calculation HTML Code included.
Industrial Training at Shahjalal Fertilizer Company Limited (SFCL)MdTanvirMahtab2
This presentation is about the working procedure of Shahjalal Fertilizer Company Limited (SFCL). A Govt. owned Company of Bangladesh Chemical Industries Corporation under Ministry of Industries.
NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER IN CONDENSING HEAT EXCHANGERS...ssuser7dcef0
Power plants release a large amount of water vapor into the
atmosphere through the stack. The flue gas can be a potential
source for obtaining much needed cooling water for a power
plant. If a power plant could recover and reuse a portion of this
moisture, it could reduce its total cooling water intake
requirement. One of the most practical way to recover water
from flue gas is to use a condensing heat exchanger. The power
plant could also recover latent heat due to condensation as well
as sensible heat due to lowering the flue gas exit temperature.
Additionally, harmful acids released from the stack can be
reduced in a condensing heat exchanger by acid condensation. reduced in a condensing heat exchanger by acid condensation.
Condensation of vapors in flue gas is a complicated
phenomenon since heat and mass transfer of water vapor and
various acids simultaneously occur in the presence of noncondensable
gases such as nitrogen and oxygen. Design of a
condenser depends on the knowledge and understanding of the
heat and mass transfer processes. A computer program for
numerical simulations of water (H2O) and sulfuric acid (H2SO4)
condensation in a flue gas condensing heat exchanger was
developed using MATLAB. Governing equations based on
mass and energy balances for the system were derived to
predict variables such as flue gas exit temperature, cooling
water outlet temperature, mole fraction and condensation rates
of water and sulfuric acid vapors. The equations were solved
using an iterative solution technique with calculations of heat
and mass transfer coefficients and physical properties.
NUMERICAL SIMULATIONS OF HEAT AND MASS TRANSFER IN CONDENSING HEAT EXCHANGERS...
Worked Examples for Timber Beam Design to AS1720.1 Webinar
1. Created with ClearCalcs.comTimber Beam (version 89) — Roof Bearer
Client: ClearCalcs Date: Mar 11, 2020
Author: Brooks Smith Job #: 12
Project: Webinar Subject: B1
References: AS 1720.1:2010 (Amdt 3)
Moment Demand
Moment Capacity
Governing Load Case for Moment 1.2G, 1.5Q
Shear Demand
Shear Capacity
Governing Load Case for Shear 1.35G
Bearing Demand
Bearing Capacity
Governing Load Case for Bearing 1.35G
Governing Short-Term Deflection
Governing Load Case for Short-Term
Deflection
G, Q_st
Governing Long-Term Deflection
Governing Load Case for Long-Term
Deflection
G
Governing Imposed Load Deflection
Show Plots Including Load Duration
Factor k1?
Graphed Load Case
M =∗
4.06 kN ⋅ m
41% M =d 9.97 kN ⋅ m
M =LC
∗
V =∗
2.45 kN
16% V =d 15.2 kN
V =LC
∗
N =gov
∗
2.45 kN
13% N =d,gov 19.4 kN
N =LC
∗
79% δ =s −7.88 mm
δ =s,LC
97% δ =l −9.74 mm
δ =l,LC
13% δ =Q −1.28 mm
Reactions:
Distance from Left of Beam (m)
0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0
UltMax: 3.23 kN
UltMin: 1.63 kN
G: 3.63 kN
Q: 0.475 kN
UltMax: 3.23 kN
UltMin: 1.63 kN
G: 3.63 kN
Q: 0.475 kN
Yes - Show Final Demands for Individual Load Cases
Service LT: (G)
Load Case: G
Envelope
1.0 2.0 3.0
Shear(kN)
-4
-2
0
2
4
Summary
1
2. Use Custom Member?
Member Type
Number of Members in Group/Laminate
Total Beam Length
Lateral Restraint Type
Minor Axis Effective Length for Buckling
Position of Supports from Left
Support Type Position ( ) Length of Bearing ( )
Pinned 0 90
Pinned 3 800 90
Maximum Interior Span
Maximum Cantilever
Deflection Limit Absolute Criterion
Load Case: G
Envelope
1.0 2.0 3.0
Moment(kNm)
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
Long-Term LC: G
Envelope 1.0 2.0 3.0
Deflection(mm)
-10
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
Distance from Left of Beam (mm)
0 1,000 2,000 3,000
Self-weight
0.109
0 3 800 mm
0.109 kN/m
Roof Load
1.8
0 3 800 mm
1.8 kN/m
3.63 kN 3.63 kN
d=240mm
b=35 mm
Primary Loading
No
240 x 35 - e-beam (Wesbeam®)
n =com 1
L = 3 800 mm
Discrete Restraints at Compression Edge
L =ay 600 mm
r =
l mm l
b mm
L =maxspan 3 800 mm
L =maxcant 0 mm
Δ =max 10 mm
Key Properties
Design Criteria
2
3. Deflection Limit Span Criterion
Span Type (Interior or Cantilever) Short-Term Service ( ) Long-Term Service ( ) Imposed Load Q ( )
250 250 250
Structure Category
Distributed Loads
Label Load Width ( ) Permanent Load ( ) Imposed Load ( ) Start Location ( ) End Location ( )
Roof Load 1 000 0.9 0.25 0 3 800
Member Orientation
Self Weight
Include Self Weight
Character of Imposed Load
Wind Class
Ultimate Free Stream Dynamic Pressure
Serviceability Free Stream Dynamic
Pressure
Net Downward Pressure Coefficient
Net Uplift Pressure Coefficient
Wind Tributary/Load Width
Other Point Loads
Label Load Type Magnitude ( ) Location ( )
Alternate Imposed Q2 1.4 1 900
Maximum Beam Depth
Overall Depth
Total Breadth
Gross Area
Shear Plane Area
Second Moment of Area about Relevant
Axis
Section Modulus about Relevant Axis
Elastic Modulus
Stiffness
Axial Stiffness
Timber Density
Timber Member Type LVL
Strength in Bending About Relevant Axis
Strength in Tension Parallel to Grain
Strength in Shear in Beam
Strength in Bearing Perpendicular to
Grain
D =lim
Δ
s,lim L/ Δ
l,lim L/ Δ
Q,lim L/
Interior Spans
2 - Primary Structural Member
w =
mm kPa kPa mm mm
Major Axis
SW = 0.0544 kN/m
Yes
Roofs: All Other
N1
q =u 0.69 kPa
q =s 0.41 kPa
C =pt,down↓ 0.63
C =pt,up↑ −0.99
LW =wind 450 mm
P =other
kN mm
d =max 500 mm
d =total 240 mm
b =total 35 mm
A =g 8 400 mm2
A =s 5 600 mm2
I = 40 300 000 mm4
Z = 336 000 mm3
E = 13 200 MPa
EI = 532 kN ⋅ m2
EA = 111 000 kN
ρ = 660 kg/m3
type =
f =b
′
43.9 MPa
f =t
′
29.9 MPa
f =s
′
5.3 MPa
f =p
′
12 MPa
Permanent and Imposed Loads (AS1170.1)
Wind and Other Loads (AS1170.x)
Member Properties
3
4. Capacity Factor
Initial Moisture Content Seasoned
Initial Moisture Content from Member
Selection
Equilibrium Moisture Content (Annual
Average)
Partial Seasoning Factor for Bending
Partial Seasoning Factor for Shear
Partial Seasoning Factor for Modulus of
Elasticity
Temperature Factor
Number of Discrete Parallel Members
Geometric Factor in a Combined Parallel
System
Geometric Factor in a Discrete System
Strength Sharing Factor
Slenderness Coefficient
Design Action Ratio
Material Constant in Beams
Stability Factor
Creep Factor Table
Long-Duration Creep ≤1 day 1 week 1 month 3 months ≥1 year
1 1.33 1.58 1.76 2
0.5 0.665 0.788 0.881 1
Creep Factor for Permanent and Long-
Term Imposed Loads
Load Duration Factors
Load Duration: 5 seconds 5 minutes 5 hours 5 days 5 months 50+ years Variable (5d - 5mo)
1 1 0.97 0.94 0.8 0.57 0.94
1 1 1.03 1.06 1.25 1.75 1.06
Character of Imposed Load Factors
Imposed Load Type Short-Term Factor Long-Term Factor Combination Factor Earthquake Factor
0.7 0 0 0
1 0 0 0
ϕ = 0.9
mc =
IMC = 15 %
EMC = 15 %
k =4,M 1
k =4,V 1
j =6 1
k =6 1
1 or 2
g =31 1
g =32 1
k =9 1
S =1 13.6
r =ub 0.25
ρ =b 1.03
k =12 0.799
j =2,table
Factor: j
2
Fraction of max: j /j
2 2,max
j =2,max 2
k =1,table
Factor: k
1
Inverse: 1/k
1
CharQ =
Ψ
s ψ
l Ψ
c Ψ
E
Distributed
Concentrated
Modification Factors (AS1720.1, Cl 2.4)
Load Case Analysis (AS1170.0)
4
5. Strength Load Cases
Load Case Load Duration Factor Total Load ( ) Shear ( ) Moment ( ) Max Reaction ( )
1.35G 0.57 4.9 -2.45 2.33 2.45
1.2G, 1.5Q 0.94 6.45 -3.23 4.06 3.23
1.2G, 1.5Q_lt 0.57 4.35 -2.18 2.07 2.18
1.2G, Wu_down, Q_comb 1 4.35 -2.18 2.07 2.18
0.9G, Wu_up 1 3.26 -1.63 1.55 1.63
G, Eu, Q_E 1 3.63 -1.81 1.72 1.81
1.2G, Su, Q_comb 0.8 4.35 -2.18 2.07 2.18
Short-term Service Load Cases
Load Case Total Load ( ) Deflection ( )
G, Ws_up 3.63 -4.87
G, Q_st 5.03 -7.88
G, Ws_down, Q_lt 3.63 -4.87
G, Es, Q_lt 3.63 -4.87
G, Ss, Q_lt 3.63 -4.87
Long-term Service Load Cases
Load Case Total Load ( ) Deflection ( )
G 7.25 -9.74
G, Q_lt 7.25 -9.74
G, Ss, Q_lt 7.25 -9.74
Moment Capacity Excluding Load
Duration Factor
Shear Capacity Excluding Load Duration
Factor
Governing Bearing Capacity Excluding
Load Duration Factor
Strength Load Cases: Demands Divided
by Load Duration Factor
Load Case Load Duration Factor Total Load ( ) Shear ( ) Moment ( ) Max Reaction ( )
1.35G 0.57 8.59 -4.29 4.08 4.29
1.2G, 1.5Q 0.94 6.86 -3.43 4.32 3.43
1.2G, 1.5Q_lt 0.57 7.63 -3.82 3.63 3.82
1.2G, Wu_down, Q_comb 1 4.35 -2.18 2.07 2.18
0.9G, Wu_up 1 3.26 -1.63 1.55 1.63
G, Eu, Q_E 1 3.63 -1.81 1.72 1.81
1.2G, Su, Q_comb 0.8 5.44 -2.72 2.58 2.72
Load Duration Factor for Governing
Load Case in Moment Demand
Load Duration Factor for Governing
Load Case in Shear Demand
Load Duration Factor for Governing
Load Case in Bearing Demand
LC =str
k
1 Σw + ΣP kN V ∗
kN M∗
kN ⋅ m N∗
kN
LC =sserv
Σw + ΣP kN Δ
s mm
LC =lserv
Σw + ΣP kN Δ
l mm
M /k =d 1 10.6 kN ⋅ m
V /k =d 1 26.7 kN
N /k =d,gov 1 34 kN
LC /k =str 1
k
1 (Σw + ΣP)/k
1 kN V /k
∗
1 kN M /k
∗
1 kN ⋅ m N /k
∗
1 kN
k =1,M∗ 0.94
k =1,V ∗ 0.57
k =1,N∗ 0.57
Strength Load Case Analysis with Constant Capacity
5
6. Unfactored Load
Load Type Total Load ( ) Shear ( ) Moment ( ) Max Reaction ( ) Short-Term Deflection ( )
G 3.63 -1.81 1.72 1.81 -4.87
Q 0.95 -0.475 0.451 0.475 -1.28
Bearing Utilisation
Support Location ( ) Bearing Demand ( ) Bearing Factor Bearing Capacity ( ) Bearing Utilisation
0 4.29 1 34 0.126
3 800 4.29 1 34 0.126
Short-Term Deflection Per Span
Span Length ( ) Span Type Short-Term Deflection ( ) Short-term Deflection Limit ( ) Deflection Utilisation
3 800 Int -7.88 10 0.788
Long-Term Deflection Per Span
Span Length ( ) Span Type Long-Term Deflection ( ) Long-term Deflection Limit ( ) Deflection Utilisation
3 800 Int -9.74 10 0.974
Imposed Load Deflection Per Span
Span Length ( ) Span Type Imposed Load Deflection ( ) Imposed Load Deflection Limit ( ) Deflection Utilisation
3 800 Int -1.28 10 0.128
Comments
Beam is not notched
Default equilibrium moisture content is 15% (most non-exposed use)
Default fully-loaded moisture content is less than 25% (most non-exposed use)
Σw + ΣP kN V ∗
kN M∗
kN ⋅ m R∗
kN Δ
s mm
N =d,table
l mm N /k
∗
1 kN k
7 N /k
d 1 kN N /N
∗
d
D =ST
L mm Δ
s mm Δ
s,lim mm Δ /Δ
s s,lim
D =LT
L mm Δ
l mm Δ
l,lim mm Δ /Δ
l l,lim
D =Q
L mm Δ
Q mm Δ
Q,lim mm Δ /Δ
Q Q,lim
1.
2.
3.
Unfactored Load Analysis (AS1170.0)
Bearing Capacity (AS 1720.1:2010, Cl 3.2.6)
Deflection Analysis
Comments
Assumptions
6
7. Created with ClearCalcs.comTimber Beam (version 89) — Floor Bearer
Client: ClearCalcs Date: Mar 11, 2020
Author: Brooks Smith Job #: 12
Project: Webinar Subject: B2
References: AS 1720.1:2010 (Amdt 3)
Moment Demand
Moment Capacity
Governing Load Case for Moment 1.2G, 1.5Q
Shear Demand
Shear Capacity
Governing Load Case for Shear 1.2G, 1.5Q
Bearing Demand
Bearing Capacity
Governing Load Case for Bearing 1.2G, 1.5Q
Governing Short-Term Deflection
Governing Load Case for Short-Term
Deflection
G, Q_st
Governing Long-Term Deflection
Governing Load Case for Long-Term
Deflection
G, Q_lt
Governing Imposed Load Deflection
Show Plots Including Load Duration
Factor k1?
Graphed Load Case
M =∗
−15.2 kN ⋅ m
32% M =d 48.2 kN ⋅ m
M =LC
∗
V =∗
17.8 kN
32% V =d 55.1 kN
V =LC
∗
N =gov
∗
33.2 kN
37% N =d,gov 90.9 kN
N =LC
∗
65% δ =s −6.49 mm
δ =s,LC
93% δ =l −9.32 mm
δ =l,LC
62% δ =Q −6.17 mm
Reactions:
Distance from Left of Beam (m)
0 2 4 6 8 10
UltMax: 5.24 kN
UltMin: 1.42 kN
G: 3.17 kN
Q: 2.23 kN
UltMax: 33.2 kN
UltMin: 6.65 kN
G: 14.8 kN
Q: 16.3 kN
UltMax: 23.6 kN
UltMin: 4.2 kN
G: 9.33 kN
Q: 12 kN
No - Show Envelope Plots Divided by k1
Strength: (1.2G, 1.5Q)
Load Case: 1.2G, 1.5Q
Envelope
2 4 6 8 10
Shear(kN)
-20
-10
0
10
20
Summary
7
8. Use Custom Member?
Timber Grade
Timber Species
Depth of Custom Section
Breadth of Single Member/Laminate in
Custom Member
Number of Members in Group/Laminate
Total Beam Length
Lateral Restraint Type
Minor Axis Effective Length for Buckling
Position of Supports from Left
Support Type Position ( ) Length of Bearing ( )
Pinned 0 90
Pinned 3 000 90
Pinned 8 500 90
Maximum Interior Span
Maximum Cantilever
Deflection Limit Absolute Criterion
Load Case: 1.2G, 1.5Q
Envelope
2 4 6 8 10
Moment(kNm)
-20
-10
0
10
Distance from Left of Beam (mm)
0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000
Self-weight
0.273
0 10 000 mm
0.273 kN/m
Floor Load
7.13
0 10 000 mm
7.13 kN/m
B1-2
3.61 kN
Alternate Imposed
3.38 kN
6.55 kN 41.6 kN 29.5 kN
width=135 mm
height=250mm
Primary Loading
Yes
F17
Pine, Radiata (Australia & New Zealand, heart-in
material included) - Seasoned
d = 250 mm
b = 45 mm
n =com 3
L = 10 000 mm
Discrete Restraints at Compression Edge
L =ay 450 mm
r =
l mm l
b mm
L =maxspan 5 500 mm
L =maxcant 1 500 mm
Δ =max 10 mm
Key Properties
Design Criteria
8
9. Deflection Limit Span Criterion
Span Type (Interior or Cantilever) Short-Term Service ( ) Long-Term Service ( ) Imposed Load Q ( )
300 300 300
150 150 150
Structure Category
Distributed Loads
Label Load Width ( ) Permanent Load ( ) Imposed Load ( ) Start Location ( ) End Location ( )
Floor Load 2 000 0.5 1.5 0 10 000
Point Loads
Label Permanent Load ( ) Imposed Load ( ) Location ( )
B1-2 1.81 0.475 1 500
Member Orientation
Self Weight
Include Self Weight
Character of Imposed Load
Wind Class
Ultimate Free Stream Dynamic Pressure
Serviceability Free Stream Dynamic
Pressure
Net Downward Pressure Coefficient
Net Uplift Pressure Coefficient
Wind Tributary/Load Width
Other Point Loads
Label Load Type Magnitude ( ) Location ( )
Alternate Imposed Q2 1.8 10 000
Maximum Beam Depth
Overall Depth
Total Breadth
Gross Area
Shear Plane Area
Second Moment of Area about Relevant
Axis
Section Modulus about Relevant Axis
Elastic Modulus
Stiffness
Axial Stiffness
Timber Density
Timber Member Type Sawn High Grade
Strength in Bending About Relevant Axis
Strength in Tension Parallel to Grain
D =lim
Δ
s,lim L/ Δ
l,lim L/ Δ
Q,lim L/
Interior Spans
Cantilevers
2 - Primary Structural Member
w =
mm kPa kPa mm mm
P =
kN kN mm
Major Axis
SW = 0.182 kN/m
Yes
Floors: Residential and Domestic
N1
q =u 0.69 kPa
q =s 0.41 kPa
C =pt,down↓ 0
C =pt,up↑ 0
LW =wind 450 mm
P =other
kN mm
d =max 500 mm
d =total 250 mm
b =total 135 mm
A =g 33 800 mm2
A =s 22 500 mm2
I = 176 000 000 mm4
Z = 1 410 000 mm3
E = 14 000 MPa
EI = 2 460 kN ⋅ m2
EA = 473 000 kN
ρ = 550 kg/m3
type =
f =b
′
42 MPa
f =t
′
22 MPa
Permanent and Imposed Loads (AS1170.1)
Wind and Other Loads (AS1170.x)
Member Properties
9
10. Strength in Shear in Beam
Strength in Bearing Perpendicular to
Grain
Capacity Factor
Initial Moisture Content Seasoned
Initial Moisture Content from Member
Selection
Equilibrium Moisture Content (Annual
Average)
Partial Seasoning Factor for Bending
Partial Seasoning Factor for Shear
Partial Seasoning Factor for Modulus of
Elasticity
Temperature Factor
Number of Discrete Parallel Members
Geometric Factor in a Combined Parallel
System
Geometric Factor in a Discrete System
Strength Sharing Factor
Slenderness Coefficient
Design Action Ratio
Material Constant in Beams
Stability Factor
Creep Factor Table
Long-Duration Creep ≤1 day 1 week 1 month 3 months ≥1 year
1 1.33 1.58 1.76 2
0.5 0.665 0.788 0.881 1
Creep Factor for Permanent and Long-
Term Imposed Loads
Load Duration Factors
Load Duration: 5 seconds 5 minutes 5 hours 5 days 5 months 50+ years Variable (5d - 5mo)
1 1 0.97 0.94 0.8 0.57 0.8
1 1 1.03 1.06 1.25 1.75 1.25
Character of Imposed Load Factors
Imposed Load Type Short-Term Factor Long-Term Factor Combination Factor Earthquake Factor
0.7 0.4 0.4 0.3
1 0.4 0.4 0.3
f =s
′
3.6 MPa
f =p
′
10 MPa
ϕ = 0.85
mc =
IMC = 15 %
EMC = 15 %
k =4,M 1
k =4,V 1
j =6 1
k =6 1
1 or 2
g =31 1.2
g =32 1.2
k =9 1.2
S =1 3.11
r =ub 0.25
ρ =b 0.985
k =12 1
j =2,table
Factor: j
2
Fraction of max: j /j
2 2,max
j =2,max 2
k =1,table
Factor: k
1
Inverse: 1/k
1
CharQ =
Ψ
s ψ
l Ψ
c Ψ
E
Distributed
Concentrated
Modification Factors (AS1720.1, Cl 2.4)
Load Case Analysis (AS1170.0)
10
11. Strength Load Cases
Load Case Load Duration Factor Total Load ( ) Shear ( ) Moment ( ) Max Reaction ( )
1.35G 0.57 18.4 -5.1 -4.44 9.97
1.2G, 1.5Q 0.8 62.1 17.8 -15.2 33.2
1.2G, 1.5Q_lt 0.57 34.6 9.73 -8.47 18.6
1.2G, Wu_down, Q_comb 1 28.6 7.93 -6.96 15.4
0.9G, Wu_up 1 12.3 -3.4 -2.96 6.65
G, Eu, Q_E 1 22.8 6.31 -5.55 12.3
1.2G, Su, Q_comb 0.8 28.6 7.93 -6.96 15.4
Short-term Service Load Cases
Load Case Total Load ( ) Deflection ( )
G, Ws_up 13.6 -2.19
G, Q_st 35.1 -6.49
G, Ws_down, Q_lt 25.8 -4.66
G, Es, Q_lt 25.8 -4.66
G, Ss, Q_lt 25.8 -4.66
Long-term Service Load Cases
Load Case Total Load ( ) Deflection ( )
G 27.3 -4.38
G, Q_lt 51.6 -9.32
G, Ss, Q_lt 51.6 -9.32
Moment Capacity Excluding Load
Duration Factor
Shear Capacity Excluding Load Duration
Factor
Governing Bearing Capacity Excluding
Load Duration Factor
Strength Load Cases: Demands Divided
by Load Duration Factor
Load Case Load Duration Factor Total Load ( ) Shear ( ) Moment ( ) Max Reaction ( )
1.35G 0.57 32.3 -8.94 -7.79 17.5
1.2G, 1.5Q 0.8 77.6 22.3 -19.1 41.6
1.2G, 1.5Q_lt 0.57 60.8 17.1 -14.9 32.7
1.2G, Wu_down, Q_comb 1 28.6 7.93 -6.96 15.4
0.9G, Wu_up 1 12.3 -3.4 -2.96 6.65
G, Eu, Q_E 1 22.8 6.31 -5.55 12.3
1.2G, Su, Q_comb 0.8 35.7 9.91 -8.7 19.2
Load Duration Factor for Governing
Load Case in Moment Demand
Load Duration Factor for Governing
Load Case in Shear Demand
Load Duration Factor for Governing
Load Case in Bearing Demand
LC =str
k
1 Σw + ΣP kN V ∗
kN M∗
kN ⋅ m N∗
kN
LC =sserv
Σw + ΣP kN Δ
s mm
LC =lserv
Σw + ΣP kN Δ
l mm
M /k =d 1 60.2 kN ⋅ m
V /k =d 1 68.9 kN
N /k =d,gov 1 114 kN
LC /k =str 1
k
1 (Σw + ΣP)/k
1 kN V /k
∗
1 kN M /k
∗
1 kN ⋅ m N /k
∗
1 kN
k =1,M∗ 0.8
k =1,V ∗ 0.8
k =1,N∗ 0.8
Strength Load Case Analysis with Constant Capacity
11
12. Unfactored Load
Load Type Total Load ( ) Shear ( ) Moment ( ) Max Reaction ( ) Short-Term Deflection ( )
G 13.6 -3.78 -3.29 7.38 -2.19
Q 30.5 9.01 -7.53 16.3 -6.17
Bearing Utilisation
Support Location ( ) Bearing Demand ( ) Bearing Factor Bearing Capacity ( ) Bearing Utilisation
0 6.55 1 103 0.0634
3 000 41.6 1.1 114 0.366
8 500 29.5 1.1 114 0.26
Short-Term Deflection Per Span
Span Length ( ) Span Type Short-Term Deflection ( ) Short-term Deflection Limit ( ) Deflection Utilisation
3 000 Int -0.381 10 0.0381
5 500 Int -6.49 10 0.649
1 500 Cant 4.1 10 0.41
Long-Term Deflection Per Span
Span Length ( ) Span Type Long-Term Deflection ( ) Long-term Deflection Limit ( ) Deflection Utilisation
3 000 Int -0.542 10 0.0542
5 500 Int -9.32 10 0.932
1 500 Cant 5.87 10 0.587
Imposed Load Deflection Per Span
Span Length ( ) Span Type Imposed Load Deflection ( ) Imposed Load Deflection Limit ( ) Deflection Utilisation
3 000 Int 0.516 10 0.0516
5 500 Int -6.17 10 0.617
1 500 Cant 3.92 10 0.392
Comments
Beam is not notched
Default equilibrium moisture content is 15% (most non-exposed use)
Default fully-loaded moisture content is less than 25% (most non-exposed use)
Σw + ΣP kN V ∗
kN M∗
kN ⋅ m R∗
kN Δ
s mm
N =d,table
l mm N /k
∗
1 kN k
7 N /k
d 1 kN N /N
∗
d
D =ST
L mm Δ
s mm Δ
s,lim mm Δ /Δ
s s,lim
D =LT
L mm Δ
l mm Δ
l,lim mm Δ /Δ
l l,lim
D =Q
L mm Δ
Q mm Δ
Q,lim mm Δ /Δ
Q Q,lim
1.
2.
3.
Unfactored Load Analysis (AS1170.0)
Bearing Capacity (AS 1720.1:2010, Cl 3.2.6)
Deflection Analysis
Comments
Assumptions
12