Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
[SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Basic Roof Rafter Analysis Question[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net>
- Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Basic Roof Rafter Analysis Question
- From: "DW" <wish(--nospam--at)cyberg8t.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 Aug 1996 00:02:38 -0700
I don't have a City of Los Angeles Type V sheet but do have the city's Guideline 12 - Unit Weights of Building Materials. The issue is not if the load conforms with the city's guidelines, but rather if the rafter can be calculated for to work with the required load. First, let me remind you that the intended tile is not a heavy (10 psf +) tile, but rather a 7.0 psf maximum lightweight composite tile. According to the Guideline 12, cedar shake is good for 5 to 6 psf of dead load. 1x skipped sheathing is approximately 1.0 psf -giving a total of 7.0 above the rafter. 1/2" plywood plus a 7.0 psf tile will place the new load at 8.5 psf. My decision on this project was to add struts or brace the existing struts to secure a positive reaction at the location of the purlin (backbrace or perpendicular support). The rafter was then checked as a two span rafter and the reaction of the struts was verified to be transferred to an interior bearing wall. Lateral was not a consideration here since the increased weight would not change to a seismic governing force. Dennis ...
- Prev by Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Basic Roof Rafter Analysis Question
- Next by Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Concret cracks
- Previous by thread: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Basic Roof Rafter Analysis Question
- Next by thread: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Repair of damaged wood columns (Rot & Termite damage)