This was sent to me in an email.
I thought this thread would enjoy it.
...
Subject: "A Few Good Men"
CAST:
Structural Engineer: Jack Nicholson
Architect: Tom Cruise
Structural Engineer: You want answers?
Architect: I think I'm entitled to them.
Structural Engineer: You want answers...
You can try and call a local geo-tech and get his recommendation for typical soil bearing pressure in the area. Around me, typical soil is always 4000 psf or better.
Also, if the house has been standing for 40+ years, settlement would have already occured. I doubt if 500 plf or so would...
Thanks guys.
I thought a little about how I worded the question and the stone pushing up now does not make sense to me. The grade beams are rigidly connected so if one grade beams moves, they all do. Either way, clean stone with a gap under the plank, to me, seems to not provide support. I...
I am looking for opinions others may have for "clean" stone acting to withstand building lateral loads. The site condition I am analyzing is the passive pressure of a 12" layer of clean stone as a result of lateral forces from grade beams. To describe the constraint conditions, there are...
I was looking for some suggestions on timber pile protection at the cut off. Our spec's call for (3) coats hot creosote followed by one coat of coal tar pitch. The contractor pouring the pile caps and grade beams would like to use the creosote and substitute the tar with a 15# felt. Is this...
If a Hilti adhesive, or equivalent, was specified as the epoxy bonding agent then they have tested values. 2" may not have a published value but the shear and any tension stresses that will occur are likely very small.
10" seems very deep to start with, which makes me think that an epoxy may...
CENAEN,
Do you think a long hand test of calculations and written theories with less questions would be more appropriate?
Just curious, what is your area of expertise?
I was curious as to why the pass rates for the Structural I test was so low?
It is even lower then the Structure II pass rates.
http://www.ncees.org/exams/pass_rates/#pe_pass_rate
First Time Repeat Takers
Structure I 45% 8%
Structure II 49%...
Also, don't forget the seismic force calced is an ultimate force and the wind is an allowable.
To compare apples to apples, the seismic force is multiplied by .7 and then the shear wall tables may be used. No increase for the seismic while wind may be increased by 1.4.
Makes a lateral design...
haynewp,
you should look at boo1's link. Very helpful with those types of explanations.
However, I am asking about wood shearwalls which does have a 1.4 wind increase for shearwall capacities... I would like to know if others use this interpretation to justify this increase in capacity with...
Thats a good site for info. Thanks.
When I follow the IBC, I have been using the basic load combinations "ASD". From those equations, I mult. the seismic force by .7 and compare to wind.
Specifically, using plywood shearwalls with 2x studs, a bit of confusion, to me, lies in section 2306.4.1...
Can someone comment on the 1.4 increase allowed for wood diaphrams and plywood sheathed shearwalls (IBC 2000 code)?
Does the increase only apply to wind, or can that also apply to seismic?
