pillar verification

[albertos]

excuse the question, in workshop we would like to mount a small arm to banish a pillar of the shed, I have to perform a brief analysis of verification (see pdf attached) but I have purely mechanical and non-building knowledge.
found the mf that gives me the strength with which I have to go to do the analysis at the bending of this hyperstatic structure. What are the limits for reinforced concrete?
give me two fingers, even simplifying for security,View attachment stdiopilastro Model (1).pdf or tell me yours about it.

Thank you.
tree

 

[gil]

Hi.
the resistance of the column depends on the type of concrete and armor used. I guess it's a prefab. without entering into the merit of calculations, I think strongly notable the solution indicated because deleterious for the structure of the shed.
Obviously we will not fall the roof in the head, but at the long time the work of the arm will produce fragility in the column.

for this reason the arms are mounted on specially created mounts.

 

[Betoniera]

excuse the question, in workshop we would like to mount a small arm to banish a pillar of the shed, I have to perform a brief analysis of verification (see pdf attached) but I have purely mechanical and non-building knowledge.
found the mf that gives me the strength with which I have to go to do the analysis at the bending of this hyperstatic structure. What are the limits for reinforced concrete?
give me two fingers, even simplifying for security,View attachment 35203 or tell me yours about it.

Thank you.
tree

I'll be right back.
Unlike gil, I am more possible.
this because the load you indicated is modest (250 kg).
additional stresses that induce in the pillar are:
arm weight 400 kg
weighing 250 kg
- 250*6,50+400*3,5 = 3025 kgm
- axial action 250+400 = 650 kg

for a pillar of c.a. 50x50 cm 650 kg more are ridiculous.
the moment is more significant, but always almost influential than the resistance of the pillar.
to verify that pillar you need to know the existing armor and loads (cover, wind, snow and sisma).
to these loads you should add your hoist and check the stress.
However, since the greatest stresses introduced extremely low compared to the resistance of the pillar, in my opinion, we can still proceed to the installation of the machine.
rather, if you really want to be quiet, proceed also to a load test with load perhaps double regarding the exercise.
If you do not marry this reasoning, then you must by force:
- to know the armours present in the pillar (with execution drawings or removing the cover),
- know the quality of cls (in a prefabricated we are order rck = 500 kg/cm2).
- know the stresses induced by weight structures, wind, snow and sisma (and here I want you: what do you do recalculate the entire building? ).
- check the pillar again with the new added load.
at the end of all this you will find that the change in terms of tension in materials is minimal.

Obviously you can put the column, but then you would have the foundation problem.

Hi.

 

[Cristallo]

albeit betoniera has made 2 conticini coming to the conclusion (correct) that an additional load of 650kg for such a pil are a mug, there is to take into account some peculiar aspects of the structure.
a 3025kg flender moment applies to the head of the pillar.
What happens at the base of the pillar? you will have the moment resulting from the application of a pair to the terminal of an arm.
the section of the pillar (and its armor) are verified?. if yes, also the pillar/foundation joint occurred? (if the pil. is prefabricated, the foot joint will be a glass, which is not thought for such efforts).
the column foundation plinth is able to counter the lifting induced by the couple on the opposite side to the hoist?

how is the column/trave joint in cover?
many collapses in emilia for earthquakes because the sheds had these joints configured as trolleys.
If it is a cart, do we attack the situation by applying (fixed) a side load in the head of this column?

I don't know from you, but from me when you intervene partially on the structure of a building, the norm imposes the verification of the whole structure.
I would go more cautiously, then do vobis.

it becomes easier to make an ad-hoc strutturina for the paranco, even thickened (but junta).

 

[albertos]

albeit betoniera has made 2 conticini coming to the conclusion (correct) that an additional load of 650kg for such a pil are a mug, there is to take into account some peculiar aspects of the structure.
a 3025kg flender moment applies to the head of the pillar.
What happens at the base of the pillar? you will have the moment resulting from the application of a pair to the terminal of an arm.
the section of the pillar (and its armor) are verified?. if yes, also the pillar/foundation joint occurred? (if the pil. is prefabricated, the foot joint will be a glass, which is not thought for such efforts).
the column foundation plinth is able to counter the lifting induced by the couple on the opposite side to the hoist?

how is the column/trave joint in cover?
many collapses in emilia for earthquakes because the sheds had these joints configured as trolleys.
If it is a cart, do we attack the situation by applying (fixed) a side load in the head of this column?

I don't know from you, but from me when you intervene partially on the structure of a building, the norm imposes the verification of the whole structure.
I would go more cautiously, then do vobis.

it becomes easier to make an ad-hoc strutturina for the paranco, even thickened (but junta).

the pialstro is definitely prefabricated and has a section 40x40, as it is composed in its inside I did not know, (building 80s) in heralth the load that will be applied to you is certainly lower than exposed because oversized in departure. the idea is to fix the flag to a column fixed in turn to the pillar and bound on the ground with 4 backgrounds.
are there tables where are given the "indicative" values of axial load and time for those types of pillars?
Thank you.
tree

 

[Cristallo]

are there tables where are given the "indicative" values of axial load and time for those types of pillars?

if you can trace back to the manufacturer and this keeps the documentation is possible. but slender.

the idea is to fix the flag to a column fixed in turn to the pillar and bound on the ground with 4 backgrounds.

the idea works, but do not bind the new column to the pillar. I'll be right there.
4 chemical plugs on the foundation of the column will ensure the transfer of actions. for those loads a modest column he believes can meet your needs, even totally free. and you can calculate it (also depends on how orient the beam and whether the arm is swivel or not)
does not affect the existing structure (which already has its shortcomings)

 

[Enigma]

the idea works, but do not bind the new column to the pillar. I'll be right there.
4 chemical plugs on the foundation of the column will ensure the transfer of actions. for those loads a modest column he believes can meet your needs, even totally free. and you can calculate it (also depends on how orient the beam and whether the arm is swivel or not)
does not affect the existing structure (which already has its shortcomings)

quoto... I also recommend an external column so as not to go to scratch the existing structure.
type "group of flag" (http://www.retestatic.it/user_allegati/500x500/jpeg/7e8/645082.jpeg), the only thing I would use a pipe as a column.

enigma

 

[gil]

I agree with the previous interventions that emphasize that the load is not particularly relevant. Therefore I am sure that even when the arm is fully loaded, the column does not move. so you could do it.

However go to apply a punctual load on a column of which I do not know the exact consistency, as already mentioned it leaves me puzzled. That is why it is not possible to make estimates if not at all. It should also be taken into account that:

1) Due to continuous work over time micro cracks can be created in the column
2) add a flenching moment to a structure made to work at vertical pushes and that badly bears other types of load, means to add criticality to criticality.