Defect in VL bracing Design checks

RE: Defect in VL bracing Design checks

Seth Guthrie — Fri, 19 Oct 2018 20:18:54 GMT

Thanks for pointing that out. Our developers will make the correction quickly for the next release in November.

RE: Defect in VL bracing Design checks

Shady Abdelmessih — Fri, 19 Oct 2018 08:48:17 GMT

In calculating the Ksc (Bolt reduction factor) if you are applying the total tension force (355.83 kip) you should use the total number of bolts resisting that force Nb. The correct design for the bolts in a Double Clip angle connection should be as per the below snapshot.

This totally changes the unit check from 1.8 to 0.67

RE: Defect in VL bracing Design checks

Seth Guthrie — Thu, 18 Oct 2018 21:31:33 GMT

The design is made for one clip angle with 8 bolt rows but if you take a look at the report results you can see that the final capacity is multiplied by 2 (double connector).

RE: Defect in VL bracing Design checks

Seth Guthrie — Wed, 17 Oct 2018 21:51:51 GMT

It does look like a problem. I'll confirm with our developers. I never really used the CBB joints without a beam, but that does not seem to be part of the problem.

RE: Defect in VL bracing Design checks

Shady Abdelmessih — Wed, 17 Oct 2018 08:27:17 GMT

File attached.

communities.bentley.com/.../Grid-HA_2D00_H10-Level-100_2700_.zip

RE: Defect in VL bracing Design checks

Seth Guthrie — Tue, 16 Oct 2018 18:23:43 GMT

Please reply and insert the file into your reply for review. You can save it as a .zip file first. Or use Secure File Upload

I think I see the same kind of thing using the gusset base plate with bolted double angle connections from the gusset to the column, but I want to make sure we are looking at the same codes, joint types, etc.