1. Joist Explore and Report
nominal dimensions 8x2x0.5 t=0.054 straight corner model

2. cont.

3. Team Exercises Group 1:Team Lip
Examine the influence of changing the lip length or lip geometry on the elastic buckling (Mcr), and (if time) the DSM strength – share then report
Group 2: Team Flange
Examine the influence of changing the flange width or geometry on the elastic buckling (Mcr), and (if time) the DSM strength – share then report
Group 3: Team Supports
Examine the influence of adding springs or supports at different appropriate locations in the section on the elastic buckling (Mcr) and (if time) the DSM strength – share then report
Group 4: Team Stiffener
Examine the influence of adding folded stiffeners at different appropriate locations in the section on the elastic buckling (Mcr) and (if time) the DSM strength – share then report

4. Group 1: Team Lip Varied lip length 0.3-2 in., tried return, and 45
Lip length not local buckling, unless really long
Inc. lip length = inc. dist. Buckling
Lip not controlling allowables on this particular section (800S200-54), even HDS style lip not a big improvement
Did not try thickening the lip…
Cost analysis….

5. Group 2: Team Flange Tried bigger flange ( 3 in.)..
12% increase in capacity
Tried single V in the middle of the 2 in. flange
17.9% increase in capacity!
Tried other cases in the flange.. Single V was the winner in these trials

6. Group 3: Team Supports
Put springs on top and bottom flanges, distortional goes up 1.21
Two spring on top flange up to 1.31 (DB)
Springs on web.. Local went way up! (DB?)
Looked at other locations

7. Group 4: Team Stiffener
Ribs and V’s in the flange, also looked at stiffening lip, also looked at planking (ribs) in the web
Double planking in the web, with returns, 18% increase in the moment capacity
Flange and lip help DB, but needed something in the web to get a big boost…