Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: [SEAOC] Flexibility of metal deck[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "'seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org'" <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>
- Subject: RE: [SEAOC] Flexibility of metal deck
- From: Suzi McMullen <serenity(--nospam--at)sound.net>
- Date: Sat, 24 Feb 1996 06:12:13 -0600
How do I get off this list? Some wise guy put me on it. ---------- From: MDear885(--nospam--at)aol.com[SMTP:MDear885(--nospam--at)aol.com] Sent: Saturday, February 24, 1996 3:54 AM To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Subject: Re: [SEAOC] Flexibility of metal deck In a message dated 96-02-23 17:57:55 EST, you write: >Do YOU consider ALL metal decks to be "flexible", regardless of weld pattern, >number of spans, diaphragm configuration, bracing location, etc.? No. It depends upon many factors including whether or not the building has any built in eccentricities. If we have a symmetrical rectangular tiltup with a metal deck, we usually don't make the distinction. If it is a small diaphragm or particularly subject to rotation problems we check it as *both* and use the worst features of each model. It is pretty impractical to analyze it with a reasonable approximation of the true rigidity. In situations where rotation isn't an issue (aside from the 5% accidental torsion) but where the diaphragm is continuous past supports we also figure it both ways unless it is highly flexible. This usually yields higher loads to the interior shear wall. ...
- Prev by Subject: RE: [SEAOC] Flexibility of metal deck
- Next by Subject: [SEAOC] Footings' Tie Beams
- Previous by thread: RE: [SEAOC] Flexibility of metal deck
- Next by thread: [SEAOC] Applicability of building codes