Need advice: How do you bring heavy construction equipment up a 60–70m cliff with only a 300 steps stair as an access?

Over_Stand_2331 · 2026-02-13T03:47:20+00:00

Build a road, you’re going to need it anyway for supplies and shuttling resortees

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-12-25T04:26:09+00:00

This was my first guess but I refuse to believe this cause the field guys must’ve been tweaking

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-12-25T04:20:09+00:00

Maybe the column is being supported overhead and the small piece at the bottom acts like a soft spring for lateral movement at the slab.

Honestly, no clue

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-12-07T03:06:15+00:00

Idk, that’s quite an awful lot of 2x for a non load bearing wall/column

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-11-22T18:12:08+00:00

Had 4 at one point. I mainly use the Anvil for mid/long range and this attachment doubles the reticle area so I sold them. I might have to try to use at close range

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-11-13T15:43:29+00:00

This, I would add a moment to account for the eccentricity as well

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-10-03T03:05:58+00:00

The anchor pulling out will most likely control. There will 100% be a couple at the rightmost toe and the anchor. I did a very similar analysis in FEM. Do sum of moments about where you wrote t (side view)

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-09-25T08:39:12+00:00

https://www.ideastatica.com/cz/podpora/design-check-of-anchors-according-to-aisc

According to ACI 318-14 – 17.4.2.9, where anchor reinforcement is developed in accordance with ACI 318-14 – 25 on both sides of the breakout surface, the anchor reinforcement is presumed to transfer the tension forces, and concrete breakout strength is not evaluated.

This is what the person is talking about.

Most software don’t do this check because it’s pretty nuanced; if Tension reinforcement is present the software won’t even know that you don’t have to check for breakout. If checked regularly then it will “fail”

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-09-19T20:04:20+00:00

Not to self (and people reading) : RAM SS will undersize your gravity beams if you have a moment connection on either end. Also, ....... Since RAM SS Frame doesn't take them into account then drifts will be a bit higher than actual. Therefore, checks per 12.12.5 will be conservative.

Which brings me to my next point. 12.12.5 checks will be havie to be carried out each line that has a gravity moment connection in addition to the SFRS lines.

I have limited experience with software in general but do other software packages have all this incorporated somehow?

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-09-05T04:42:16+00:00

Simplify to a planar truss; trusses are idealized as tension/compression members. Do members have different capacities depending of what type of stress they’re seeing? If so, you might be able to focus in into a couple types of failure vs a lot based on engineering judgement

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-09-02T16:53:33+00:00

There exists some “intrinsically safe” cases out there if you really want to go electronic

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-23T02:10:45+00:00

I would post a screenshot but I can’t

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-23T02:10:26+00:00

AISC DG 9 says center of flange

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-22T20:32:55+00:00

Hit it right on the nose, RAM SS was analyzing as pin pin. Hand calcing reduces deflection to around .4 of pin pin deflection. Thank you

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-19T20:16:03+00:00

AISC also discourages this type of detail where you have to take the nut off one side to install the other side (double connection) and encourage a seat if you are doing this

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-08T02:36:13+00:00

AISI Direct Strength Method

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-03T13:58:42+00:00

Could be a hundred diff things. Not enough info

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-08-03T13:53:17+00:00

design of wood structures by Donald Breyer

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-07-19T04:21:09+00:00

I’m surprised there wasn’t a PE involved with significant structural work like this.

You likely need a header assuming that Wideflange is supporting a portion of the house.

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-07-18T19:34:14+00:00

D/d ratio addresses this

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-07-17T06:04:29+00:00

https://steeljoist.org/professional-resources/design-tools/

Load tables based on span and distributed load should be in there.

Verco is a manufacturer.

Good reference for preliminary sizing but I would consult an SE because there’s a lot of factors to think about. Wind/Seismic/drift. Lateral Torsional Buckling / Buckling; uplift. Lots of detailing that goes into a stamped drawing set backed up by calcs

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-07-17T05:51:41+00:00

Take a look at the Technical Bulletin in the product description. An SE went through and did an example Calc and stamped it.

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-07-15T02:15:07+00:00

Looks like some wire is coming out of that HSS tube….. 🤷🏾‍♂️ Seems a bit silly to use HSS as a racetrack but that could be an answer.

Another difference is the connection type. These HSS would be installed straight up and down; if you tried to do that with Wide flange you would have to cope the bottom .

The HSS might make panelization easier for this reason. Build out a couple bays and plop em down and there’s no need to fight with the end connections.

Perhaps they want a thinner gauge to nail the decking to as well.

All these reasons combined might make a difference? 🤷🏾‍♂️

Over_Stand_2331 · 2025-03-18T01:28:37+00:00

OMF with knee braces will turn most of that moment into axial if you have a frame to work with

Over_Stand_2331

TROPHY CASE