king nero

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Community Reputation

28 Excellent

1 Follower

About king nero

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 11/08/80

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
  • Interests
    welding - metallurgy
  • Occupation
    Mechanical Engineer
  • Expert in
    Steel Structures

Recent Profile Visitors

552 profile views
  1. The Arcelor Mittal website show a whole lot of design guides. You'll find almost every "standard" connection detail there.
  2. 1) no, but you must do something to show your auditor/client that you perform work in a "correct" way. One way for this is to use the latest software version. 2)If you don't know the loading, how do you do the design? Unless you're talking serial production of simple constructions, I don't see how this is going to work. If so, just use the most conservative loading cases you can come up with and design for those. However this is probably not going to be economical. 3)the responsible engineer writes a declaration that the design is performed in a "correct" way, taking into account the correct parameters, NA's, ... 4)if the fabricator cannot check the design, he has to rely on that written declaration (by the responsible engineer).
  3. The design (whether you do this in-house or hire an engineering company to do this for you) must be done in a "correct" way. The responsible engineer must take into account some things (like use of the correct national annex, calculation of the "U" factor (utilization, for NDT purposes), ..) and write a declaration that he uses the latest version of the eurocodes or a FEM package with the latest updates conform to eurocodes, ... and that the work is performed to the highest standards, using all correct parameters, wind/snow loads, ....) The signed declaration should cover all aspects from the first column of table B.1. The fabricator should perform an entry check on the calculations, however if they are not capable of doing this, they have to rely on the written declaration.
  4. I went a bit too fast with this and over-generalized. Of course, you are correct. But, the exact same problem could happen with a stiff baseplate, enough gusset plates, but a small, thin-walled CHS that cannot handle the moment generated at that location. As I said, any reply on this question needs to adress a whole lot of stuff, I doubt a forum could provide enough details on all possible cases to give a complete and correct answer here.
  5. Defining something as pinned or fixed has nothing to do with the foundation but with the connection itself. You have to have a very good understanding of what forces and moments do, where they go to and how they act/react. This thread could easily get turned into a thesis. There is no short answer here. For example, if you design a connection as pinned, but fabricate a baseplate that is "plenty sturdy" (so that it attracts a moment in reality), it is easier to destroy such a connection than if if were a truly pinned joint.
  6. you don't. You only declare performance of your own work. If erector welds, bolts, ... and such, either: - he does not have work in a workplace, and thus does not fall under the CPR - prepares his work in a workshop, needs his own EN1090 certification, and has to draw a DoP for his interventions.
  7. You can make a single DoP for all components of one skid, including anchor bolts, washers, nuts, ... Best to include an erection plan, and you refer to this on the DoP. If you have a certain type of skid that comes regularly into production (in identical form), you don't always have to make a new DoP but you can re-use the first one over and over again.
  8. OK, does the difference of a structure, kit, component, construction product, construction work, makes a practical difference to you? If so, please indicate the repercussions it has to you. We'll see from there.
  9. Yes, in that case it is a structure for me. Please define "structure". I think you rely on those definitions too much. See the definitions I quoted above. I see no reason to exclude these skids from application of the EN1090. Both during fabrication as after installation, it is a construction product.
  10. Yes. Is that, - yes, indeed it does matter, or - yes, I confirm the skid is a "construction work" ? For me, a skid is mobile and thus does not fall under the CPR. If however, it has its own tailormade foundations and will be permanent, I'd call the skid a structure.
  11. You can use vibration dampers that allow the machine to be fixed to the structure. Check with your suppliers.
  12. From the construction products regulation, terms and definitions: Doesn't matter if your construction is a product or kit, it needs CE marking. What does matter is, is your skid a construction work.
  13. rarely go => a building that has no function for the (semi-continuous) presence of human beings. A warehouse without a desk or office (used solely for storage), agricultural sheds, shelters for machinery, technical spaces, ... Rarely go = only when necessary (to pick up stuff, for maintenance, ...) Single occupancy, we interpret as one family as well. If part of the house is rented out, it's no longer single occupancy. It's only an interpretation, but we haven't had any remarks on this approach.