0 Up votes0 Down votes

30 views4 pagesC StrucAnalysis Wong Jan17 1

May 14, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

C StrucAnalysis Wong Jan17 1

© All Rights Reserved

30 views

C StrucAnalysis Wong Jan17 1

© All Rights Reserved

- Finite Element Method at a Glance
- Seismic Analysis
- IsolatedBuilding Worksheet Sifdase
- Chapter 3: Direct Stiffness Method
- 78
- Bondstrength n(Read)
- AnalysisRequirement_2006IBC.pdf
- 1DMeshing.pdf
- Rollcage Fdr
- ps-ch03
- Concept So
- 0317 Contech PDH Final
- Allotey and Elnaggar SDEE2003
- Some Contributions of Physical and Numerical Modelling to the Assessment of Existing Masonry Infilled Rc Frames Under Extreme Loading
- 1 French 8NCEE-001072 Subgrade Modulus.pdf
- TOBCTJ-8-104
- Experiment and Numeric Analysis of Brick Masonry Wall With Bracing Under Cyclic Loading
- Design Project
- 1c33e40a-b06b-41b5-b9fe-42002d5cdeb0
- Vibration

You are on page 1of 4

eismic building design has typically modifiers recommended by domestic and inter-

been based on results from conventional national publications for a variety of building

linear analysis techniques. This type of components. A literature review of codes, stan-

Analysis

analysis is a challenge for the design dards, and research articles is provided, along

of reinforced concrete because the material is with a brief summary of the key assumptions

composite and displays nonlinear behavior that made in each document. Effective stiffness

is dictated by the complex interaction between parameters for flexural and shear stiffness are

its components the reinforcing steel and the summarized in the Table for easy comparison.

discussing problems, solutions,

concrete matrix. Simplifying the behavior of

idiosyncrasies, and applications reinforced concrete components, so they can be

of various analysis methods modeled using a linear-elastic analysis approach,

Domestic Codes

is vital to our ability to effectively design rein- A summary of a variety of documents, which were

forced concrete structures. published domestically and are typically used

Modeling of concrete structural elements using by structural engineers in the United States, is

linear analysis to extract a reasonable structural included below. Note that the recommendations

response typically involves modifying the stiff- provided in each document

correlate to specific

E

ness of concrete structural elements. However, return periods or hazard events, or specific levels

this method presents its challenges, including of applied loading. Some recommendations are

R

the following: independent of loading.

Effective stiffness is a function of the

U

ACI 318, Building Code Requirements for

applied loading ht and detailing

yrig Structural Concrete

T

Cop

of the component. Reinforced

Effective Stiffness for concrete components behave ACI 318-11 is referenced by the 2012 International

C

differently under different Building Code (IBC). Sections 8.8.1 through 8.8.3

Modeling Reinforced

e

U

loading conditions (e.g. tension, provide guidelines for effective stiffness values to

i n be used to determine deflections under lateral

R

as different rates of loading loading. In general, 50% of the stiffness based

z

T

(impact, short term, long term). on gross section properties can be utilized for

g a

Applying stiffness modifiers can be any element, or stiffness can be calculated in

S

A Literature Review an iterative process since the assumed accordance with Section 10.10.4.1. ACI 318-14

a

stiffness of reinforced concrete elements in contains similar recommendations for stiffness

By John-Michael Wong, Ph.D., S.E.,

Angie Sommer, S.E., Katy Briggs, S.E., m

a structural analysis model influences the

dynamic characteristics of the structure,

modifiers reformatted in Section 6.6.3.

Section 10.10.4, Elastic Second Order Analysis,

and Cenk Ergin, P.E. which, in turn, changes the results of the provides both a table of effective stiffness values

analysis and the effective stiffness. independent of load level and equations to derive

Seismology Concrete Subcommittee of

Schedule demands pressure engineers to stiffness based on loading and member proper-

the Structural Engineers Association

simplify the design process further, leading ties. Commentary Section R10.10.4.1 explains

of Northern California (SEAONC)

to only one stiffness modifier per element that these recommendations are based on a series

type applied to many analytical elements. of frame tests and analyses, and include an allow-

This may be significantly inaccurate for a ance for the variability of computed deflections

number of reasons, including: (MacGregor and Hage, 1977).

o Analysis models can be very sensitive

ASCE/SEI 41-13, Seismic Evaluation and

to the stiffness of a single element,

Retrofit of Existing Buildings

(e.g. backstay effects due to at-grade

concrete diaphragms or stiff podium Table 10-5 of ASCE 41-13 provides effective

structures in a tall building). stiffness values to be used with linear procedures.

o Certain types of elements may have Section 10.3.1.2.1 states that these may be used

varying stiffnesses due to loading and instead of computing the secant value to the yield

location. For example, a multi-story point of the component, which is independent of

column in a tall building will have a the force level applied to the component.

higher stiffness at the base compared to ASCE 41 differentiates between columns with

the roof. an axial load greater or less than 0.1*Ag*f'c and

o The design may warrant the refers to Elwood and Eberhard (2009) for further

consideration of multiple ground guidance regarding calculation of the effective

motion return periods, such as stiffness of reinforced concrete columns.

a service-level earthquake and a Future editions of ASCE 41 will use ACI 369

Maximum Considered Event (MCE) as the source document for concrete buildings.

earthquake, each with a unique set of The next revision, ACI 369-17, is anticipated

stiffness properties. to be published with ASCE 41-17 and will

This article aids the structural engineer by include improved stiffness provisions based on

providing a summary of the range of stiffness current research.

18 January 2016

Figure 1- Property Modifiers for Modeling of Concrete Buildings

Figureof1-stiffness

Table Property Modifiersfor

assumptions formodeling

Modelingconcrete

of Concrete Buildings

structures. Property Modifier for Modeling Elements

NZS 3101: Part

LATBSDC

Elements 10.10.4.1

ASCE 41-13

PEER TBI MCE-Level Servicability FEMA 356 NZS 3101: Part 2:2006 2:2006 Paulay & Priestly, Calvi &

ACI 318-11 Guidelines LATBSDC

Non Linear Ultimate Limit State Servicability

NZS 3101: Part Limit CSA A23.3-14 EuroCode TS 500-2000 Priestley

ACI 318-14 Table 10-5 PEER Models LATBSDC & Wind Table 6-5 Kowalsky (2007)

Elements 10.10.4.1 Service

TBI

6.6.3.1.1 ASCE 41-13 Guidelines

MCE-Level (2014) FEMA 356 NZS 3101: Part

(2014) Servicability

(fy=300Mpa)

2:2006 State (=3)

2:2006 (1992)

Paulay & Priestly,

Level Non Linear Ultimate Limit State Servicability (Note

Limit 3)

CSA A23.3-14 EuroCode TS 500-2000 Priestley KowalskyCalvi &

ACI 318-14 Table 10-5 Models & Wind Table 6-5 (fy=300Mpa) State (=3) (1992) (2007)

Service (2014)

6.6.3.1.1 Level (2014) (Note 3)

0.40Ig (rectangular) 0.70Ig

(rectangular)

Conventional Beams (L/H > 4) 0.35Ig 0.30Ig 0.50Ig 0.35Ig 0.70Ig 0.50Ig 0.35Ig (T and L 0.70Ig 0.40Ig 0.17Ig-0.44Ig

0.40Ig (rectangular) 0.60Ig (T and L

beams) (rectangular)

Conventional Beams (L/H > 4) 0.35Ig 0.30Ig 0.50Ig 0.35Ig 0.70Ig 0.50Ig 0.35Ig (T and L beams) 0.40Ig 0.17Ig-0.44Ig

beams) 0.60Ig (T and L

Beams beams) 0.35Ig 0.50Ig 0.40Ig

Prestressed Beams (L/H > 4) 1.00Ig 1.00Ig n/a n/a 1.00Ig n/a n/a n/a n/a

Beams 0.35Ig 0.50Ig 0.40Ig

Prestressed Beams (L/H > 4) n/a 1.00Ig 1.00Ig n/a n/a 1.00Ig n/a n/a n/a n/a

0.60Ig (diagonally

Coupling Beams (L/H 4) n/a n/a n/a 0.20Ig 0.30Ig n/a 0.75Ig (9) n/a

reinforced)

0.60Ig (diagonally

Coupling Beams (L/H 4) n/a n/a 0.20Ig 0.30Ig n/a 0.75Ig (9) n/a

Columns - Pu 0.5Agf'c 0.70Ig reinforced)

0.80Ig 1.00Ig 0.80Ig

0.70Ig 0.70Ig 0.90Ig 0.80Ig (Note 6)

Columns

Columns--Pu

Pu0.5Agf'c

0.3Agf'c 0.50Ig 0.70Ig 0.80Ig0.55Ig 1.00Ig 0.80Ig 0.80Ig 0.60Ig

Columns 0.70Ig 0.70Ig 0.70Ig 0.90Ig 0.70Ig 0.80Ig (Note 6)

0.50Ig 0.12Ig-0.86Ig

Columns - Pu 0.3Agf'c

Columns - Pu 0.1Agf'c 0.50Ig 0.50Ig 0.55Ig0.40Ig 0.80Ig 0.70Ig 0.60Ig

0.40Ig

Columns 0.70Ig 0.30Ig n/a n/a 0.70Ig 0.50Ig 0.12Ig-0.86Ig

(9)

Columns - Pu 0.1Agf'c 0.50Ig 0.40Ig 0.70Ig 0.40Ig

Columns - tension 0.30Ig n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a (9)

Columns - tension n/a n/a n/a n/a

Walls - uncracked 0.70Ig n/a n/a n/a 0.80Ig n/a n/a 0.7Ig 0.50Ig n/a n/a

Walls - uncracked 0.70Ig n/a n/a n/a 0.80Ig n/a n/a 0.7Ig 0.50Ig n/a n/a

0.75Ig (9)

Walls 0.75Ig (9)

0.40Ig - 0.80Ig

Walls

(4) Walls - cracked 0.35Ig 0.50Ig 1.00Ec (1) 0.75Ig 0.50Ig 0.32Ig-0.48Ig 0.50Ig-0.70Ig 0.35Ig 0.50Ig

0.40Ig - 0.80Ig 0.20Ig-0.30Ig

(4) Walls - cracked 0.35Ig 0.50Ig 1.00Ec (1) 0.75Ig 0.50Ig 0.32Ig-0.48Ig 0.50Ig-0.70Ig 0.35Ig 0.50Ig (Note 6) 0.20Ig-0.30Ig

(Note 6)

Walls - shear n/a 0.40EcAw (10 n/a 0.50Ag 1.00Ag n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a (9) n/a

Walls - shear n/a 0.40EcAw (10 n/a 0.50Ag 1.00Ag n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a (9) n/a

E

Conventional flat plates and flat

Conventional flat

slabsplates and flat 0.25Ig See 10.4.4.2

0.25Ig

See 10.4.4.2

n/a n/a (9) (9)

slabs 0.50Ig

0.50Ig 0.25Ig

0.25Ig 0.50Ig

0.50Ig n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a 0.25Ig 0.25Ig

0.50Ig 0.50Ig n/a n/a

Slabs Post tensioned

tensionedflatflatplates

platesand

and

Slabs Post

n/an/a See

See 10.4.4.2

10.4.4.2 n/a n/a n/a n/a

R

flatslabs

flat slabs

In-planeShear

In-plane Shear n/an/a n/an/a n/a n/a 0.25Ag 0.80Ag

0.25Ag 0.80Ag n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a

U

Notes

Notes (5)(5) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (2) (3) (3) (7) (7)

t

righ

T

Notes

Notes y

Cop

DefinitionsDefinitions

(1)Non-linear

(1) Non-linear fiber elements

elementsautomatically

automaticallyaccount

accountforfor

cracking

crackingof of

concrete because

concrete the the

because concrete fibers

concrete havehave

fibers zero zero

tension stiffness.

tension stiffness. Ig = GrossIgmoment

= Grossof moment

inertia of inertia

(2)Elastic

(2) Elastic modulus

modulus maymay be

be computed

computedusing

usingexpected

expected material strengths.

material strengths. L = Clear span of coupling beam

C

L = Clear span of coupling beam

(3) is ductility capacity.

(3) is ductility capacity. H = HeightHof=coupling

Height ofbeam

coupling beam

(4)Wall

(4) Wall stiffness

stiffness is

is intended

intendedfor forin-plane

in-planewall

wallbehavior.

behavior. Pu = Factored

Pu =axial load axial load

Factored

(5)ACI

ACI 318-11

318-11 Section

Section 8.8 Ag = Ac = AgGross (uncracked) area

8.8 (ACI

(ACI318-14,

318-14,Section

Section6.6) permits thethe

assumption of 0.50Ig for all

forelements under factored laterallateral

load analysis.

e

(5) 6.6) permits assumption of 0.50Ig all elements under factored load analysis. = Ac = Gross (uncracked) area

U

(6) TS 500-2000 specifies the use of 0.4Ig for Pu/Ac/f'c < 0.1 and the use of 0.8Ig for Pu/Ac/f'c > 0.4; interpolate for all values in between 0.1 and 0.4. f'c = Compressive strength of concrete

(6) TS 500-2000 specifies the use of 0.4Ig for Pu/Ac/f'c < 0.1 and the use of 0.8Ig for Pu/Ac/f'c > 0.4; interpolate for all values in between 0.1 and 0.4. f'c = Compressive strength of concrete

(7) T and L beams should use recommended values of 0.35 Ig. For columns, categories are P = 0.2 f'c Ag and P = -0.05 f'c Ag Ec = Modulus of elasticity of concrete

n

(7) T and L beams should use recommended values of 0.35 Ig. For columns, categories are P = 0.2 f'c Ag and P = -0.05 f'c Ag Ec = Modulus of elasticity of concrete

i

(8) Shear stifness properties are unmodified unless specifically noted otherwise. fy = Yield stress of reinforcing steel

(8) Shear stifness properties are unmodified unless specifically noted otherwise. fy = Yield stress of reinforcing steel

R

(9) Effective stiffness per equation. See reference for more information. MPa = Megapascals

(9) Effective stiffness per equation. See reference for more information. MPa = Megapascals

z

(10) Note that G = 0.4*I, so ASCE 41-13 is recommending that a modifier of 1.0 be used for the shear stiffness of concrete shear walls; that is, they recommmend no reduction in shear stiffness. Aw = Horizontal area

(10) Note that G = 0.4*I, so ASCE 41-13 is recommending that a modifier of 1.0 be used for the shear stiffness of concrete shear walls; that is, they recommmend no reduction in shear stiffness. Aw = Horizontal area

Guidelines for Performance-Based Seismic

Design of Tall Buildings, also referred to

as the Tall Buildings Initiative (TBI),

S T LEED

m

a g a

a recommended alternative to the pre- CERTIFIED

GOLD

scriptive procedures for the seismic

design of buildings taller than 160

feet. Whereas prescriptive requirements

suggest a dual system, the alternative

procedures in TBI allow for the use of

shear-wall-only structures.

While much of the PEER TBI document

focuses on nonlinear analysis for larger

earthquakes, the provisions of this docu- Seattle Long Beach

ment also give a set of recommendations Tacoma Pasadena

for effective component stiffness values to Lacey Irvine

Portland San Diego

use in a linear-elastic model subjected to a Eugene Boise

service-level earthquake (minimum return Sacramento St. Louis

period of 43 years or 50% probability of San Francisco Chicago

exceedance in 30 years). The provisions Los Angeles New York

to relatively slender structures with long

fundamental vibration periods, and with KPFF is an

Equal Opportunity

significant mass participation and lateral Employer.

response in higher modes of vibration.

www.kpff.com

Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural

Design Council (LATBSDC) Manual

The Ardea

Section 2.5 requires structural models to Portland, OR

incorporate realistic estimates of stiffness

and strength considering the anticipated are based on an earthquake with a 2% prob- to its strength, and that yield curvature is

level of excitation and damage. In lieu of ability of exceedance in 50 years. independent of strength. Because of the

a detailed analysis, the effective reinforced strength-stiffness relationship, they recom-

European Codes

concrete stiffness properties given in Table mend that engineers performing force-based

3 of that document may be used. This table According to Eurocode 8 (EN1998-3), the analyses should always treat the assignment

provides separate values for MCE-level seis- elastic stiffness of the bilinear force-deforma- of stiffness modifiers as an iterative process.

mic event nonlinear models as opposed to tion relation in reinforced concrete elements This reference provides ranges of stiffness

serviceability seismic events and wind loads. should correspond to that of cracked sections modifiers based on different member strengths

A serviceability seismic event is defined to and the initiation of yielding of the reinforce- for various reinforced concrete elements, all

have 50% probability of exceedance in 30 ment. Unless a more accurate analysis of the of which correspond to displacement-based

years; the MCE-level event is equivalent cracked elements is performed, this standard seismic design. However, the authors assume

to the MCER of ASCE 7-10, which has a recommends that the elastic flexural and shear that these recommendations can be used for

2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. stiffness properties of concrete elements are force-based seismic design as long as an itera-

Commentary Section C.3.2.4 also states that taken as 50% of the corresponding stiffness tive process is used.

stiffness properties may be derived from test of the uncracked element.

data or from Moehle et al. (2008). Part 3 of Eurocode 8 provides an equation

Conclusion

E

based on moment-to-shear ratio and yield rota-

International Codes tion, which can be used for determination of a As shown in the Table (page 19) and dis-

R

more accurate effective stiffness. Both ultimate cussed above, different standards and codes

and Other References level and serviceability level loads are addressed provide varying guidelines for modifying

U

A summary of a variety of documents pub- in Eurocode 8 for rlinear

igh and nonlinear analysis.

t the stiffness of reinforced concrete elements.

T

y

lished outside of the United States, is included Cop When performing a structural analysis, it

Turkish Standard

below. Note that the recommendations pro- is useful to review multiple codes and stan-

C

vided in each document correlate to specific Turkish TS 500-2000 refers to the Turkish dards to determine the effective stiffnesses

e

U

return periods or hazard events, or specific Earthquake Code (2007), which states that of elements. The information derived from

levels of applied loading, and some recom- uncracked properties shall be used for com-

i n multiple sources may reveal a more accurate

R

mendations are independent of loading. ponents when performing certain types of method of analysis for the particular structure

z

T

analyses. However, stiffness modifiers for the designer is currently assessing. Because

New Zealand Standard

a

cracked section properties may be utilized

g

the effective stiffnesses of reinforced concrete

S

NZS 3101: Part 2 (2006 Edition) states for beams framing into walls in their own elements can have significant effects on the

that effective stiffness in concrete members a

plane and for coupling beams of coupled results of structural analysis, it is prudent for

is influenced by the amount and distribu-

tion of reinforcement, the extent of cracking, m

structural walls when performing these types

of analyses. Cracked section properties must

the designer to understand the appropriate

modification factors and, in some cases, run

tensile strength of the concrete, and initial be used for the analysis of existing structures. multiple analyses using upper- and lower-

conditions in the member before structural Cracked section properties may also be used bound stiffness modification factors.

actions are applied. when performing advanced analyses.

To simplify the complex analysis that would

Paulay and Priestley (1992), Seismic John-Michael Wong, Ph.D., S.E., is an

be required to address these factors, the stan-

Design of Reinforced Concrete and Associate at KPFF in San Francisco,

dard lists recommended effective stiffnesses

Masonry Buildings California. He has served on the

for different members, similar to U.S. codes.

SEAONC Concrete Subcommittee

However, the level of loading used in NZS Paulay and Priestley provide recommenda-

since 2014 and can be reached at

3101 differs from U.S. codes. The ultimate tions for stiffness modifiers for cracked concrete

john-michael.wong@kpff.com.

limit state earthquake for a typical struc- frame members and shear walls. In their discus-

ture (importance level 2) is based on a 10% sion of stiffness modifiers for frame members, Angie Sommer, S.E., is an Associate at

probability of exceedance in 50 years for they emphasize the inherent approximation in ZFA Structural Engineers in San Francisco,

a structure with a 50-year design life. The the use of stiffness modifiers. California. She has served on the SEAONC

ultimate limit state earthquake for a structure Recommendations for frame stiffness are Concrete Subcommittee since 2014 and can

with an importance level of 4 is based on a provided in Table 4.1 (Pauley and Priestley). be contacted at angiesommer@gmail.com.

2% probability of exceedance in 50 years. The authors note that the column stiffness

Katy Briggs, S.E., is a Principal at BASE

The serviceability limit state earthquake for should be a function of the axial load, with the

Design in San Francisco, California. She is

all structures is based on an annual prob- permanent gravity load taken as 1.1 times the

the current chair of the SEAONC Concrete

ability of exceedance equal to one in 25 for dead load plus the axial load resulting from

Subcommittee and the vice-chair of the

a structure with a 50-year design life. seismic overturning effects. For the analy-

SEAONC Seismology Committee. She can

sis of concrete wall structures, the authors

Canadian Standards Association Design be reached at katy@basedesigninc.com.

recommend the use of component-specific

of Concrete Structures

equations to determine their effective stiffness. Cenk Ergin, P.E., is a Senior Design

CSA A23.4-14 provides recommended stiff- Engineer at Gilbane in Concord,

Priestley, Calvi, and Kowalsky (2007),

ness modification factors in Section 10.14.1.2. California. He is past chair of the

Displacement-Based Seismic Design

These factors are provided to determine the SEAONC Concrete Subcommittee. He can

first-order lateral story deflections based on Priestley, Calvi, and Kowalsky conclude be contacted at cergin@gilbaneco.com.

an elastic analysis. The Canadian Standards that the stiffness of a member is related

References

1. Concrete Buildings in Seismic Regions, George G. Penelis, and Gregory G. Penelis, 2014

by Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

2. ACI 318-11 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, Michigan. USA

3. ASCE/SEI 41-13 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings

4. Elwood, K.J., and M.O. Eberhard (2009). Effective Stiffness of Reinforced Concrete

Columns ACI Structural Journal 106(4):476484.

5. Elwood, K.J., et al. (2007). Update to ASCE/SEI 41 Concrete Provisions

Earthquake Spectra 23(3):493523.

6. Effective Rigidity of Reinforced Concrete Elements in Seismic Analysis and Design,

J.R. Pique1 and M. Burgos, The 14th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering

October 12-17, 2008, Beijing, China

7. New Zealand Standard NZS 3101.Part 2. 2.2006 Code of practice for the design of

concrete structures, New Zealand Standards Association, Wellington, New Zealand

8. Federal Emergency Management Agency FEMA 356 (2000) Seismic Rehabilitation

Guidelines

E

9. Paulay, T. and M.J.N. Priestley (1992). Seismic Design of Reinforced Concrete and

R

Masonry Buildings. Wiley Interscience.

10. Elwood, K. J. & Eberhard, M. O. (2006). Effective Stiffness of Reinforced Concrete

U

Columns, Research Digest N 2006-1. Pacific Earthquake Engineering Research Center

ht

PEER. University of California at Berkeley. USA. yrig

T

Cop

11. MacGregor, J.G. and S.E. Hage (1977). Stability Analysis and Design of Concrete

C

Frames Proceedings of ASCE, Vol. 103, No. ST10.

12. ACI 318-14 Building Code Requirements for Structural Concrete, Michigan. USA

e

U

13. Los Angeles Tall Buildings Structural Design Council (2015). An Alternative

Procedure for Seismic Analysis and Design of Tall Buildings Located in the

i n

R z

Los Angeles Region. 2014 edition with 2015 supplements. Available online:

T a

www.tallbuildings.org

g

S

14. Priestley, Calvi and Kowalsky (2007), Displacement Based Design of Structures, IUSS

Press; 1st Edition

a

m

15. Moehle, J.P., J.D. Hooper, and C.D. Lubke (2008). Seismic Design of Reinforced

Concrete Special Moment Frames: A Guide for Practicing Engineers, NEHRP Seismic

Design Technical Brief No. 1, NIST GCR 8-917-1, National Institute of Standards

and Technology, Gaithersburg, MD.

- Finite Element Method at a GlanceUploaded byAumair Malik
- Seismic AnalysisUploaded bySaint00003
- IsolatedBuilding Worksheet SifdaseUploaded byludwing
- Chapter 3: Direct Stiffness MethodUploaded byJames Sonu
- 78Uploaded byMohinuddin Ahmed
- Bondstrength n(Read)Uploaded bySamantha Nacion
- AnalysisRequirement_2006IBC.pdfUploaded bymanoj444_777
- 1DMeshing.pdfUploaded byEduardo Javier Granados Sanchez
- Rollcage FdrUploaded byAryan soni
- ps-ch03Uploaded byWendy Perdomo
- Concept SoUploaded byvijaykumarz
- 0317 Contech PDH FinalUploaded byNicolás Rocca
- Allotey and Elnaggar SDEE2003Uploaded byCarlos Ramirez Caballero
- Some Contributions of Physical and Numerical Modelling to the Assessment of Existing Masonry Infilled Rc Frames Under Extreme LoadingUploaded byRick Hunter
- 1 French 8NCEE-001072 Subgrade Modulus.pdfUploaded byDemçe Florjan
- TOBCTJ-8-104Uploaded byM Refaat Fath
- Experiment and Numeric Analysis of Brick Masonry Wall With Bracing Under Cyclic LoadingUploaded byAdi Prasetyo
- Design ProjectUploaded bycake61
- 1c33e40a-b06b-41b5-b9fe-42002d5cdeb0Uploaded bycklcon
- VibrationUploaded bysumatrablackcoffee453
- 05 01 0036 SCGoel Performance Based Plastic DesignUploaded bym4004
- Performance Based Seismic AnalyUploaded byShamim Ahsan Zubery
- Design_Lateral Load Resisting Frames SJs JGs.pdfUploaded byclam2014
- Evaluation of Response Modification FactUploaded byDiegoCastillo
- Structural Design Brief Report of Mahendra Aadarsha Ma ViUploaded byPrakash Singh Rawal
- VOD (SOM1)Uploaded byrohit22e
- Experimental Investigation and Nonlinear Analysis of Hybrid Reinforced Concrete Deep BeamsUploaded byHuda Jawad
- 53 TOP Structural Analysis - Civil Engineering Multiple Choice Questions and Answers PDF _ MCQs Preparation for Engineering Competitive ExamsUploaded byAamirKhattak
- Wicaksono +Space+Frame+and+Space+Truss+Idealisations+for+Bamboo+Building s+Structural+Analysis (1)Uploaded byRio Handoko
- Davit Calculation1Uploaded byNaveen Jeeva

- Beam Deflection FormulaeUploaded by7575757575
- pdeltaUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Estimating and verifying soil unit weight determined on the basis of SCPTu testsUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Estimating Soil Unit Weight From CPTUploaded byHR
- best practice guidelines fire resistenceUploaded byWahyu Aldi Febrianto
- Modulus of Subgrade Reaction - Which One to UseUploaded bydubai_santanu
- CPT Guide 6th 2015.pdfUploaded byAnonymous IIwfvRaO78
- CPT Theory ManualUploaded byBhavin Shah
- SPLIQ Version 1.3Uploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Bored PileUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Pile CalculationUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- SC00FUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- SC029Uploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Contractors EngUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Jafza Regulations ManualUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Punching Shear StrenghtUploaded byUSEM
- Sf Seismic Dec06 p21 241Uploaded bydr
- Handout-7-12.pdfUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- ret strUploaded byFardous Rababah
- Exampl of Fire Engineer Design Steel MembersUploaded byFWICIP
- Hollow Sections 2nd EdtUploaded byksuscribdacct
- Beam With OpeningUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Super Tall DesignUploaded byshaficool_375204
- Lets Learn Japanese Basic 1 - Volume 1Uploaded byIsmail Adha Kesuma
- Wallace-Slender Walls FINAL V5 Present HandoutUploaded byChristian Alcedo Santi
- AISC360 Round Filled Composite MemberUploaded byHattori Hanzo
- Aisc360 Box Steel DesignUploaded byHattori Hanzo

- Emissivity Measurement of Radiating SurfacesUploaded byashish
- 14015Uploaded bySuad Kubat
- Equivalent Length of Pipe.pdfUploaded bySurapaneni Sudhakar
- Fluid FrictionUploaded byfrakowanou
- Chapter 85 Controls and InstrumentationUploaded byJasmine Armstrong
- 1 Seismology 4Uploaded byBobby Wsk
- CoursUploaded byAbdel Daa
- Force Weight Flow MeasurementUploaded byvenkat a
- Piping interview questionsUploaded bymithunjobs
- ENB371 - Week3 -LN -Elastic Deformation of Soil - 6 Slides Per Page -ColourUploaded byApril Ingram
- SPE-16242-PA.pdfUploaded byJair Parra
- Darcy's lawUploaded byDiego Gómez Páez
- Compilation of Literature ReviewUploaded bybudhnabam
- Kiln Doctor FAQUploaded bygvrr1954
- 56Tensile.docUploaded bySujanto Widjaja
- KutunUploaded byJhon Edgar Pinilla Velasquez
- v49-85_Application of a Fracture-Mechanics Approach to Gas PipelineUploaded byZecheru Ion Irimia
- Axial LoadingUploaded byYusron Bachtiar Ardhi
- 189.pdfUploaded byMohamed Ismail Shehab
- Speed of SoundUploaded byYasir Ali
- Fatigue Part 1Uploaded byzalazullah
- Thermodynamics 2012Uploaded byelshan_aliyev
- Entropy, Order and Disorder.pdfUploaded bylazaros
- Lecture 7_Flow in PipesUploaded bywanradhiah
- SOM 2014 BhopalUploaded byarungp187
- Industrial Noise Control - SilencersUploaded byAhmad Shah
- Directional DrillingUploaded byRajeev Lochanam
- Lecture 2: EnthalpyUploaded byNAYEEM
- f73098_67c5d39c083de7e0ac0c3cea19a44702.pdfUploaded byMichelle Harris
- Group Assignment Bda 3063Uploaded byMohamadLutfi

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.