Grasshopper

algorithmic modeling for Rhino

Using Joint-Agent component for expansion joint of mullion

Dear all,

I'm studying Karamba to calculate facade structures against wind load. 

For the vertical structures, the mullions, it should be divided into two elements and there'll be an expansion joint when the span of mullion is too long to be a single extrusion.

I'm trying to make that condition in Karamba, using Joint-Agent component. Because I had a reference calculated with other software, I tried to make same results with that. Thus, I blocked x,y,z rotation on Joint-Agent component and it worked. The green dot in screenshot image file is the expansion joint. And the bending moment at the point is zero. 

I'm happy with that result, but I want to hear your comments if there's something to be modified for the better calculation, or any other recommendations for that.

I'll wait for your reply. Thanks!

Views: 734

Attachments:

Replies to This Discussion

Dear Jamparc,

the lower element is supported vertically at both supports which might still lead to locked thermal strains. Did you test the structure with a temperature load?

Best,

Clemens

Dear Clemens

You're right. The lowest support should not be blocked on Tz. It takes only wind load, not dead load(Gravity load in Karamba).

I have questions. I tested the temperature load which can be the value of movement of expansion joint.

movement = alphaT of material * ΔT * length of some mullion

Please see my attached gh file and you can see the "length of some mullion". And I don't know how Karamba selects the element(beam, mullion..) to input the length. 

1. What is the clue of the selected elements?

2. Is the total vertical movement '+-displacement'? (=Δdisplacement*2)

Attachments:

Dear Jamparc,

I added to your definition the calculation of the length of the elements in question. Instead of element numbers one could also use element ids.

The displacement you get at the Analyze-component and from the BeamView is the length of the displacement vector - it's therefore always positive.

Best,

Clemens

Attachments:

Dear Clemens,

Thanks for your reply!

RSS

About

Translate

Search

Photos

  • Add Photos
  • View All

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

© 2024   Created by Scott Davidson.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service