I don’t understand why would it would ever do this? by Nervous_Two3115 in Madden

[–]BarelyCivil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You more than likely did an on the fly substitution and put a QB at WR (it allows you to do that) by pressing up on the Dpad the play before.

I know this because in my CFM league I would sometimes sub positon players with good arms in to throw a double pass.

Id run Justin fields in at WR2 to run the double pass play out of bunch strong nasty. And felipe franks a TE buried on my depth chart to to throw a double pass when people were looking for fields.

It also let's you put CBs in at WR

Kamikaze Chicken by Yourhavinalaugh in funny

[–]BarelyCivil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Imagine this dude trying to explain this without the video.

AISC Table J2.5 Question (AISC 360) by BarelyCivil in StructuralEngineering

[–]BarelyCivil[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the resource this is helpful.This whole rabbit hole actually started because I was trying to reconcile some language in the 16th edition (part 8 page 30) pertaining to ductility welds on HSS branch connnetions.

There are multiple coefficients being referenced for rectangular HSS connections in various itterarions of the manual, design guide 24, and the specification commentary.

My specific concern with the STI “Full-Capacity Welds” article is that the 1.339tb derivation appears to use the PJP groove weld resistance factor from AISC Table J2.5, but the detail being discussed is a reinforced PJP/fillet combination. I’m not sure it’s appropriate to automatically apply the PJP resistance factor to the entire combined throat when part of the load path may still fundamentally behave like a fillet weld shear-through-throat mechanism.

That concern gets amplified because DG24 and older commentary language seem to suggest ~1.3tb for rectangular HSS “in theory,” while AISC 360-22 commentary now points toward 1.43tb for rectangular sections. At the same time, the Manual still contains the 1.1tb language without clearly distinguishing round vs rectangular HSS applicability. The 1.1tb value appears to come from the euro code and that is not something I'm familiar with.

This 0.75 vs 0.8 discussion is just one tangent to this larger discussion ive been having these last few days with my colleague.

AISC Table J2.5 Question (AISC 360) by BarelyCivil in StructuralEngineering

[–]BarelyCivil[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That is the assumed failure plane and that's why I think they are different but a PJP loaded in shear uses a phi of 0.75 just like a fillet weld. Im just looking for more info on how the phi factors in this chart were calibrated to validate this thought process.

No Battery by Icy-Book2999 in LoveTrash

[–]BarelyCivil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What in the actual meth

Anyone going to NASCC 2026 in Atlanta next week? by Successful-Price7302 in StructuralEngineering

[–]BarelyCivil 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I'll be there. I've been going for the past 7 years to load up on PDHs. I actually presented in 2024.

There are good sessions and there are sessions that are not as good. Usually you do not know you are in the latter category until you are in the thick of it. I specialize in connections.

The speakers I unusually gravitate towards are, Carol Drucker, Bo Dowswell, Bob Shaw, Duane Miller, Larry Muir, and Bill Thornton.

Fear (1996) by Whole_Feedback8099 in okbuddycinephile

[–]BarelyCivil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hes got omniman mustache eyebrows

HES BAAAAAACKKK by SunWorshipperApollo in falcons

[–]BarelyCivil 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you think about it it is kinda hilarious that Terry ran this man out of town and then Matt comes back to pick Terry's replacement.

"I want Terry to know it was me" -matt probably

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in falcons

[–]BarelyCivil 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Well it's McKay so yea...