BOLTS for architectural components?
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Respect the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
Yes, they are wrong. The developer I sponsored to work on digitising the tables is not trained as an engineer and incorrectly mixed up the nominal bore and the outer diameter. I'll ask him to fix it (he already has a script which parses it so it should be very quick to fix).
Thanks for the heads up! Please let me know if you spot any other issues and I'll be sure the relay the message.
Thanks for the heads up! Please let me know if you spot any other issues and I'll be sure the relay the message.
I also blog about 3D rendering, architecture, software and other on thinkMoult.com. RSS / Atom feed available for your convenience.
-
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:33 am
- Location: Australia
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
I have had a look at the 50SHS40 Bolts output. There is a difference in the profile face area and weight per metre. Some more screenshots are attached.
I hope I haven't got my wires crossed somewhere here (its happening a lot lately ) , but perhaps we should look into this further.
- Attachments
-
- Bolts 50SHS40, l=1000.0>Profile.png (23.4 KiB) Viewed 1169 times
-
- Bolts 50SHS40, l=1000.0 > IR4mm.png (32.56 KiB) Viewed 1169 times
-
- Bolts 50SHS40, l=1000.0 > OR6mm.png (30.73 KiB) Viewed 1169 times
-
- Bolts 50SHS40, l=1000.0>Weight.png (62.89 KiB) Viewed 1169 times
-
- AustubeMills SHS >Corner Radii.png..png (56.97 KiB) Viewed 1169 times
-
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:33 am
- Location: Australia
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
A couple more from Lysaghts suppliers Austube Mills and ORRCON. It seems the corner radii appear to be the cause of the differences.
- Attachments
-
- AustubeMills 50SHS40 l=1000.0>DATA.png (47.61 KiB) Viewed 1168 times
-
- Bolts 50SHS40, l=1000.0.png (32.5 KiB) Viewed 1168 times
-
- ORRCON 50SH40 Weightpng.png (11.84 KiB) Viewed 1168 times
-
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:33 am
- Location: Australia
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
No worries - these to brochures from Australian Tube Mills provide excellent information.Moult wrote: ↑Thu Nov 03, 2022 3:23 am Yes, they are wrong. The developer I sponsored to work on digitising the tables is not trained as an engineer and incorrectly mixed up the nominal bore and the outer diameter. I'll ask him to fix it (he already has a script which parses it so it should be very quick to fix).
Thanks for the heads up! Please let me know if you spot any other issues and I'll be sure the relay the message.
https://mega.nz/file/2tQzlSSb#z7aD3OGvK ... l3Fj5FavVc
https://mega.nz/file/etJ3iaDQ#mvvoJUGVz ... DiLXqj5V0Y
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
Indeed, currently the BOLTS data merely transcribes a size and a thickness, and this happens both for Bluescope as well as European profiles:
- https://github.com/boltsparts/boltspart ... quare.yaml
- https://github.com/boltsparts/boltspart ... quare.yaml
Therefore the radius you are seeing is ... invented by FreeCAD? It doesn't exist in the BOLTS raw data. I think we should:
1. Edit the raw BOLTS data to include InnerFilletRadius and OuterFilletRadius (the convention may vary between Australia and Europe so we should explicitly nominate both outer and inner) - I can do this for Australia, but someone needs to do it for Europe
2. Fix the FreeCAD BOLTS add-on to use this data (ping @bernd)
3. Fix the IFC BOLTS script to use this data
BTW I also notice that the naming scheme for Bluescope does not match Australian conventions, I will also get them modified to follow this type of naming scheme:
Thanks for the resources! I was looking at the OneSteel Design Capacity Tables for structural steel version from Dec 2010, I think that has been superseded by the one you linked to. Can I confirm that https://www.steel.org.au/resources/elib ... el-hollow/ is the best resource for closed sections?
For open sections can I confirm this is the best resource? https://www.steel.org.au/resources/elib ... -sections/ (I have a copy, it is a member only resource)
- https://github.com/boltsparts/boltspart ... quare.yaml
- https://github.com/boltsparts/boltspart ... quare.yaml
Therefore the radius you are seeing is ... invented by FreeCAD? It doesn't exist in the BOLTS raw data. I think we should:
1. Edit the raw BOLTS data to include InnerFilletRadius and OuterFilletRadius (the convention may vary between Australia and Europe so we should explicitly nominate both outer and inner) - I can do this for Australia, but someone needs to do it for Europe
2. Fix the FreeCAD BOLTS add-on to use this data (ping @bernd)
3. Fix the IFC BOLTS script to use this data
BTW I also notice that the naming scheme for Bluescope does not match Australian conventions, I will also get them modified to follow this type of naming scheme:
Code: Select all
219.1x6.4 CHS
200UB18.2
150x10 SHS
150x250x9.0 RHS
100x6 EA
125x75x10 UA
200PFC
For open sections can I confirm this is the best resource? https://www.steel.org.au/resources/elib ... -sections/ (I have a copy, it is a member only resource)
I also blog about 3D rendering, architecture, software and other on thinkMoult.com. RSS / Atom feed available for your convenience.
-
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:33 am
- Location: Australia
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
Not invented by FreeCAD defined by european standard, but since it was not defined in the blt files I just defined it in the FreeCAD geometric creator modul. i am aware it was a hack. https://github.com/boltsparts/boltspart ... py#L36-L38
We should add a column in blt file.
-
- Posts: 522
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2017 5:33 am
- Location: Australia
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
Bernd & Moult - I have done a bit more digging and this is what I have found:-
The Eurocode provides Europeans with extensive engineering data tables. Australia should take a leaf out of our European cousins book!
https://eurocodeapplied.com/design/en19 ... properties
I have done a cursory check of the Generic SHS profiles that Bolts produces and they seem to be in accordance with the Eurocode. So I don't think anything needs to be done with them. I have got a question mark about wall thickness greater than 10mm.See screen shots attached.
There is however, a difference between the Australian Tube Mills profile radii specifications at different wall thicknesses. They comply with AS/NZS standard which appears to require larger corner radii. I am not an engineer but this does seem to have an impact on the profile surface area and from what I have learned from bernd, and my other internet chums on the FEM forum this matters, so I think the profiles produced for Australia by Bolts should be in accordance with those standards.
About the data sources - If the Australian Steel Institute provides the Australian Tube Mills data table for hollow profile sections I believe we should use them.
I am not sure about the open profiles but I have provided a link to the Onesteel product guide which is also compliant with AS/NZS standards.
https://mega.nz/file/Do5jnBiI#OACLslnku ... FOfxsapxjA
I don't have any knowledge of python or yaml but if I can help with any of the menial tasks I will.
Cheers
The Eurocode provides Europeans with extensive engineering data tables. Australia should take a leaf out of our European cousins book!
https://eurocodeapplied.com/design/en19 ... properties
I have done a cursory check of the Generic SHS profiles that Bolts produces and they seem to be in accordance with the Eurocode. So I don't think anything needs to be done with them. I have got a question mark about wall thickness greater than 10mm.See screen shots attached.
There is however, a difference between the Australian Tube Mills profile radii specifications at different wall thicknesses. They comply with AS/NZS standard which appears to require larger corner radii. I am not an engineer but this does seem to have an impact on the profile surface area and from what I have learned from bernd, and my other internet chums on the FEM forum this matters, so I think the profiles produced for Australia by Bolts should be in accordance with those standards.
About the data sources - If the Australian Steel Institute provides the Australian Tube Mills data table for hollow profile sections I believe we should use them.
I am not sure about the open profiles but I have provided a link to the Onesteel product guide which is also compliant with AS/NZS standards.
https://mega.nz/file/Do5jnBiI#OACLslnku ... FOfxsapxjA
I don't have any knowledge of python or yaml but if I can help with any of the menial tasks I will.
Cheers
- Attachments
-
- Eurocode >10mm wall.png (36.67 KiB) Viewed 1016 times
-
- Eurocode Radii Note 2.png (76.69 KiB) Viewed 1020 times
-
- Eurocode Generic SHS radius.png (57.78 KiB) Viewed 1020 times
-
- Eurocode Radii Note 1.png (77.07 KiB) Viewed 1020 times
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
I will have a look if you could help.
Re: BOLTS for architectural components?
The time beeing some american ibeams have been added as well. https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic. ... 11#p638611
BOLTS for FreeCAD and the webpage have been updated as well.
BOLTS for FreeCAD and the webpage have been updated as well.