Peng, J L (2002) Stability analyses and design recommendations for practical shoring systems during construction. Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, 128(6), pp. 536-544. ISSN 0733-9364
Abstract
This paper presents stability analysis and design recommendations for the falsework of wood and metal post shores. Based on the setup of shoring systems used on actual construction sites, analysis models of the shoring system have been derived. The experimental test results indicate that the base stiffness to the ground of shores is 50 t-cm/rad for (490 kN-cm/rad) wood post shores and 70 t-cm/rad (686 kN-cm/rad) for metal post shores of which the joint stiffness between members is 750 t-cm/rad (7,355 kN-cm/rad). With these stiffnesses, factors of 0.75 for wood post shores and 0.85 for metal post shores are used to modify the critical loads of shoring systems calculated from individual shores. The critical loads of a shoring system increase with the number of fixed strong shores, but are not affected by the number of leaning columns. In simplifying shore design, the LeMessurier formula is used for the strength computation of shoring systems composed of wood post shores. The critical loads of shoring systems increase linearly with the number of strong shores, but they are invariant with the positions of strong shores. If the required number of strong shores is defined, the critical loads of shoring systems can be found by interpolation.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | critical load; falsework; shoring; stability |
| Index terms: | wood, falsework, stability, construction site, metal, column, computation |
| Subjects: | structural engineering, work location, computational methods, traditional and composite building materials, construction methods |
| Topics: | Digital Applications, Engineering Principles, Site Management, Construction Materials |
| Descriptive scope: | 2 PC |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here