|
This information sets out some of the basic considerations taken into account by the lifting design engineer. ==Compliance== Statements like those in AS3850, “Because of the mode in which failure can occur, it may be necessary to test complete systems and not calculate values obtained from a group of components that make up the system. The mode of failure of an individual component does not necessarily reflect the mode of failure of the system.” But the standard does not continue to further the understanding required regarding test methods, the components that should be deemed as part of the system, the various modes of failure, and the interpretation of test results for each failure mode. And further in AS3850, “The strength limit state capacity shall be determined by a statistical analysis from the test results in accordance with Paragraph A4.5.” and assuming the test data is taken from a statistically valid test method, the data is to be determined via statistical means to derive the Load resistance model, for the anchor. There are adequate load case coefficients available to estimate sling angle load amplification, suction from the casting bed, and various dynamic transportation load estimates. Load resistance factors of safety, FOS, set out in the Australian Code would typically denote a FOS of 5.0 for re-usable lifting equipment and an FOS of 2.5 for a lifting anchors. File:1_figure_1.jpg|Fig 1: Load resistance elements of an anchor system in a wall panel File:1_figure_2.jpg|Fig 2: Lifting system model for a thin section wall panel The rigging arrangements can influence the applied anchor load, where statically indeterminate systems are not necessarily a design consideration, but can be used in practice. The determination of the loads through the rigging system must be a consideration whilst calculating the load resistant model, refer to the examples shown in Figure 3. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Precast concrete lifting anchor system」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|