Fig 1.
Calculation diagram of the substructure of the sway formwork support.
Table 1.
Specification and section property of horizontal bars and vertical poles.
Fig 2.
Disc-buckled type connection joint.
Fig 3.
Geometrical size of the connection joints (unit: mm).
(a) Disk-plate. (b) Wedge. (c) Wedge head.
Fig 4.
Dimensions schematic of the wedge insertion state.
(a) Positive-direction. (b) Negative-direction.
Table 2.
Detailed dimensions of the insertion depth, thickness of the wedge and the disk-plate.
Fig 5.
Experimental device diagram (unit: mm).
Table 3.
Experimental loading mechanism.
Fig 6.
Arrangement of the displacement measuring points (unit: mm).
(a) Positive-direction loading. (b) Negative-direction loading.
Fig 7.
(a) P-SJ5. (b) N-SJ5. (c) P-CX5. (d) N-CX5.
Fig 8.
Moment–rotation curves obtained by experiments.
(a) Positive-directive. (b) Negative-directive.
Fig 9.
Semi-rigid judgment criteria for socket-type joints.
Fig 10.
Dimensionless bending moment–rotation curves.
Fig 11.
Rigid regions of the experimental joints.
Fig 12.
Diagram of initial bending stiffness of socket-type joint.
Table 4.
Regional boundary of initial bending stiffness of the semi-rigid joint with different transverse and longitudinal distances in model of A-SG.
Table 5.
Regional boundary of initial bending stiffness of the semi-rigid joint with different transverse and longitudinal distances in model of B-SG.
Fig 13.
Diagram of initial bending stiffness of disc-buckle type joints.
(a) Positive-directive. (b) Negative-directive.
Table 6.
Regional boundary of initial bending stiffness of semi-rigid joint under the positive bending.
Table 7.
Regional boundary of initial bending stiffness of semi-rigid joint under the negative bending.
Fig 14.
Three-dimensional cloud diagrams of the effective length correction factor under different joint bending stiffness of condition 1.
Fig 15.
Effective length correction factor under different conditions.
(a) Condition 1. (b) Condition 2. (c) Condition 3. (d) Condition 4.
Fig 16.
Value areas of the effective length correction factor of condition 1.
(a) Trans. & long. distance = 0.3 m. (b) Trans. & long. distance = 0.6 m. (c) Trans. & long. distance = 0.9 m. (d) Trans. & long. distance = 1.2 m. (e) Trans. & long. distance = 1.5 m. (f) Trans. & long. distance = 1.8 m. (g) Trans. & long. distance = 2.0 m.
Fig 17.
Value areas of the effective length correction factor of condition 2.
(a) Trans. & long. distance = 0.3 m. (b) Trans. & long. distance = 0.6 m. (c) Trans. & long. distance = 0.9 m. (d) Trans. & long. distance = 1.2 m. (e) Trans. & long. distance = 1.5 m. (f) Trans. & long. distance = 1.8 m. (g) Trans. & long. distance = 2.0 m.
Fig 18.
Value areas of the effective length correction factor of condition 3.
(a) Trans. & long. distance = 0.3 m. (b) Trans. & long. distance = 0.6 m. (c) Trans. & long. distance = 0.9 m. (d) Trans. & long. distance = 1.2 m. (e) Trans. & long. distance = 1.5 m. (f) Trans. & long. distance = 1.8 m. (g) Trans. & long. distance = 2.0 m.
Fig 19.
Value areas of the effective length correction factor of condition 4.
(a) Trans. & long. distance = 0.3 m. (b) Trans. & long. Distance = 0.6 m. (c) Trans. & long. distance = 0.9 m. (d) Trans. & long. distance = 1.2 m. (e) Trans. & long. distance = 1.5 m. (f) Trans. & long. Distance = 1.8 m. (g) Trans. & long. distance = 2.0 m.
Fig 20.
Value of the effective length under different conditions.
(a) Condition 1. (b) Condition 2. (c) Condition 3. (d) Condition 4.
Fig 21.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of the joint bending stiffness on the effective length correction factor.
(a) h = 0.5m. (b) h = 1.0m. (c) h = 1.5m. (d) h = 2.0m. (e) h = 2.5m. (f) h = 3.0m.
Table 8.
Parameters related to section size of horizontal bar and the effective length correction factor.
Fig 22.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of the outer diameter size of the horizontal bar section on the effective length correction factor.
(a) LG-ϕ42 × 3.2. (b) LG-ϕ52 × 3.2. (c) LG-ϕ48 × 2.6. (d) LG-ϕ48 × 3.2. (e) LG-ϕ48 × 3.6.
Fig 23.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of the wall thickness size of the horizontal bar section on the effective length correction factor.
(a) LG-ϕ42 × 3.2. (b) LG-ϕ52 × 3.2. (c) LG-ϕ48 × 2.6. (d) LG-ϕ48 × 3.2. (e) LG-ϕ48 × 3.6.
Table 9.
Parameters related to section size of vertical pole and the effective length correction factor.
Fig 24.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of outer diameter size of vertical pole section on the effective length correction factor.
(a) SPG-ϕ43 × 2.5. (b) SPG-ϕ53 × 2.5. (c) SPG-ϕ48 × 2.0. (d) SPG-ϕ48 × 2.5. (e) SPG-ϕ48 × 3.0.
Fig 25.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of wall thickness size of vertical pole section on the effective length correction factor.
(a) SPG-ϕ43 × 2.5. (b) SPG-ϕ53 × 2.5. (c) SPG-ϕ48 × 2.0. (d) SPG-ϕ48 × 2.5. (e) SPG-ϕ48 × 3.0.
Fig 26.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of section size on the effective length.
(a) Outer diameter size of horizontal bar section. (b) Wall thickness size of horizontal bar section. (c) Outer diameter size of vertical pole section. (d) Wall thickness size of vertical pole section.
Table 10.
Influence parameters of elastic modulus of vertical pole with specification ϕ48×3.2.
Table 11.
Influence parameters of elastic modulus of horizontal bar with specification ϕ48×2.5.
Fig 27.
Three-dimensional diagrams of the influence of elastic modulus on the effective length correction factor.
(a) GK-1. (b) GK-2. (c) GK-3. (d) GK-4. (e) GK-5. (f) GK-6. (g) GK-7. (h) GK-8. (i) GK-9.