As Justus says, a certain cross-sectional area is needed in the beam's material at the support point to handle shear forces. Theoretically, one could compensate for the cross-sectional area that is cut away by adding material to the sides and making the beam wider at the support, which would also reduce the pressure on the support surface.
OK, so regarding shear force, it's only the cross-sectional area that matters? I could increase the columns to be 90 x 140 and let the beam be 140 wide. Then theoretically, one should be able to cut more on the height of the beam?
OK, so regarding the lateral force, is it only the cross-sectional area that matters? I could increase the columns to 90 x 140 and let the beam be 140 wide. Then, theoretically, I should be able to reduce the height of the beam more?
I wrote THEORETICALLY: In reality, you must reliably prove that such a modified beam's cross-sectional area works just as well to handle the radial forces as an uncut one.
OK. Can you compare the shear force with the support reaction in the calculation example from byggbeskrivningar.se above in the thread? It states the support reaction is about 15 kN, so if you can compare that figure with the shear force, you might be able to cut away perhaps half the beam's height?
I'm mostly curious about how to calculate the dimensions of the actual suspension?
How strong fittings are required and how many/strong screws into the laminated beam?
Because the rafters will be hanging in the attachment.
The usual approach with such measures is that the rafter is placed on the beam, making the attachment purely stabilizing.
As mentioned earlier, cutting according to the sketch in post #1 does not affect durability.
Check out the ESSVE ET-T assembly screw for glulam beams, extremely good, completely invisible mounting.
Here is supporting glulam that carries trusses attached to the glulam beam.
I also don't think that the cut-off corner has any significant impact on the strength. What could be critical, however, is the shearing of the fasteners, and in that case, I'm thinking about anchor screws. It's probably worth considering how to make the attachment hold.
I also don't think the cut-off corner has any significant impact on durability. What can become critical, however, is the shear-off of the fasteners, and then I'm thinking anchor screws. It's worth considering how to make the attachment hold.
Absolutely, the designer should calculate the load on the trusses and which joist hanger, anchor screws, and screw pattern to use. And then some reinforcement with a substantial through-bolt through the glue-laminated beam. And then some more reinforcement with perforated strap that goes under the truss and is slung over the glue-laminated beam. And maybe a little Karlssons Klister too
Absolutely, the designer has to calculate the load on the roof trusses and decide on the appropriate joist hanger, anchor screw, and screwing pattern. And some reinforcement with a sturdy through-bolt through the glulam beam. And a bit more reinforcement with perforated tape that goes beneath the roof truss and is strapped over the glulam beam. And maybe a little Karlssons Klister too
Just to be on the safe side, put the load-bearing wall back and you'll be completely sure! ;-)
Click here to reply
Vi vill skicka notiser för ämnen du bevakar och händelser som berör dig.
Huvudbrytaren said:
