www.sefindia.org

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FORUM OF INDIA [SEFI]

 Forum SubscriptionsSubscriptions DigestDigest Preferences   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister FAQSecurity Tips FAQDonate
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to forum 
Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools  before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners
here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.

IS800:2007 Query - Earth quake resistant design

 
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> SEFI General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
mtamil
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 07 Apr 2011
Posts: 187

PostPosted: Wed Sep 24, 2014 6:26 pm    Post subject: IS800:2007 Query - Earth quake resistant design Reply with quote

Dear Sefians,

"12.4.2 All welds used in frames designed to resist earthquake loads shall be complete penetration butt welds, except in column splices, which shall conformto12.5.2."

The above clause of IS800-2007 is bit of a surprise for me. I do understand that Beam-Column connections can meet this provision; as well the gussets welded to Beams/Columns.

But, I fail to understand how this provision can be met with, where an Angle bracing is welded with a gusset.

Are butt welds feasible between the gusset and bracing?

How  butt welds improve ductility/siesmic performance, especially when the action is  in the line of the weld (unlike a moment plate welded to the column)?

Learned sefians may please throw some light on the subject.

Regards
Tamilarasan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
vegad
...
...


Joined: 25 Dec 2013
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Fri Oct 03, 2014 2:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Member,

The code simply calls for less risk may be to cover up the kind of quality protocols generally afforded by our practices in welding. Even partial penetration welds considered stronger than fillet are not allowed, except in column splices for enhanced strength.

And worst, it applies to frames in all seismic zones; that indicates the level of confidence while defining seismic zones.

The clause in question calls for mechanism overhaul.

Only option left while complying to IS 800 is to keep least number of seismic paths sharing least gravity loads and providing "only bolt connections" where required in those paths.

Rest all can be designed for deformation compatibility and as usual connections.

So it simply means the connections types mentioned by you can only be done in bolts, if they lie in seismic load path.

Other option is to follow non-Indian code, if it suits the requirement.

Thank you.

(not so learned person)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mtamil
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 07 Apr 2011
Posts: 187

PostPosted: Sat Oct 04, 2014 4:45 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

vegad wrote:
Dear Member,

The code simply calls for less risk may be to cover up the kind of quality protocols generally afforded by our practices in welding. Even partial penetration welds considered stronger than fillet are not allowed, except in column splices for enhanced strength.

And worst, it applies to frames in all seismic zones; that indicates the level of confidence while defining seismic zones.

The clause in question calls for mechanism overhaul.

Only option left while complying to IS 800 is to keep least number of seismic paths sharing least gravity loads and providing "only bolt connections" where required in those paths.

Rest all can be designed for deformation compatibility and as usual connections.

So it simply means the connections types mentioned by you can only be done in bolts, if they lie in seismic load path.

Other option is to follow non-Indian code, if it suits the requirement.

Thank you.

(not so learned person)


Hi vegad,

Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I felt this part the code did fail to consider the practicalities of implementation.

Provisions under section 12 have put practicing engineers in the crossroads.

Regards
Tamilarasan
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topicReply to topic Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> SEFI General Discussion All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


© 2003, 2008 SEFINDIA, Indian Domain Registration
Publishing or acceptance of an advertisement is neither a guarantee nor endorsement of the advertiser's product or service. advertisement policy