Correspondence on Soil Buckling and the Leaning Instability of Tall Structures by E.C. Hambly
Date published

N/A

Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Back to Previous

Correspondence on Soil Buckling and the Leaning Instability of Tall Structures by E.C. Hambly

Tag
Author
Date published
N/A
Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

The Structural Engineer
Citation

The Structural Engineer, Volume 63, Issue 12, 1985

Date published

N/A

Citation

The Structural Engineer, Volume 63, Issue 12, 1985

Price

Standard: £10 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Dr. W. S. Baraiiski (Technical University, Lodi, Poland): I would like to comment on the problem of internal instability illustrated in Fig 11. It seems that any purely elastic model of soil is not appropriate for the phenomenon because-as it can be easily derived-elastic internal instability requires great values of stresses to be applied.

Additional information

Format:
PDF
Publisher:
The Institution of Structural Engineers

Tags

Opinion Issue 12

Related Resources & Events

The Structural Engineer
<h4>Correspondence on A New Approach to the Calculation of Wind Forces on Vertical and Horizontal Lattic</h4>

Correspondence on A New Approach to the Calculation of Wind Forces on Vertical and Horizontal Lattic

Dr. J. D. Ball (Simon Engineering Laboratories, University of Manchester): I congratulate the authors on unravelling data and providing design guidelines for wind forces on certain complex structures, and I would like to draw their attention to a similar problem in water flow.

Price – £10
The Structural Engineer
<h4>Verulam</h4>

Verulam

Suddenly applied loads In September, we published a letter from Mr N. W. Sutton of New Zealand, posing a question about dynamic loading. He sought the help of readers in resolving his uncertainty in proving that the stress due to the sudden application of a load is twice the stress due to its gradual application. The response was rapid and comprehensive from many parts of the world, and we were faced with the most unusual situation of having more letters than we could publish and also of having to select one letter as being broadly representative of the whole response. The letter that we now reproduce was one of thecfirst to be received and came from Mr N. M. Hallett of The City University. Mr Hallett offers the following explanation: Verulam

Price – £10
The Structural Engineer
<h4>Joint Actions and the Design of Steel Frames</h4>

Joint Actions and the Design of Steel Frames

The importance of connection stiffness in influencing the behaviour of steel frames is discussed. Experimental data on connection performance are cited which show that all practical forms of beam-to-column connection operate as semi-rigid joints. Against this background the assumptions of the ‘simple design’ method for non-sway frames are reviewed and a more rigorous behavioural study is presented. Potential benefits and disbenefits of allowing for semi-rigid action in design are discussed. For sway frames the philosophy of the ‘wind connection method’ is explained and conditions under which its use should result in reasonable frames are identified. Some attention is also given to the assessment of effective length factors that properly reflect the restraint available to columns in non-sway frames. D.A. Nethercot

Price – £10