Our structure was strong and sturdy, holding 10 pounds before being tested to its breaking point. It was also highly structurally efficient, but even after improvements, it still had definite room to improve, particularly in the base.
Our structure held 10 pounds successfully.
Structural efficiency rating = 143
Preliminary testing told us that we needed to improve the support in the center of the base level of the structure. Without time to make major compensations or adjustments, we quickly added the small central pillar. Beyond that, we only tweaked the structure's base a little to prevent the possibility of collapse due to leaning supports. If we had had time, I would have liked to move some of the supports and rid ourselves of the center support on the base without damaging the structural integrity.
1. What factors could affect the choice of materials for the structural frame of a building?
Cost, strength, efficiency
2. Is it advisable to compare the Structural Efficiency Rating for two different proposed framing systems for a building if one system uses structural steel framing and the other uses cast-in-place concrete? Why or why not? If not, what would be a better comparison to determine efficiency?
It isn't advisable, because they are for totally different purposes.
3. Why would a structural engineer be more interested in the Structural Efficiency Rating using the maximum design load than the efficiency determined by using the maximum load capacity of the structure?
It will show that it is strong enough to hold what it needs to and not more.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.