Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
[SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Simpson MAS Anchors[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaoc(--nospam--at)power.net>
- Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Simpson MAS Anchors
- From: "DW" <wish(--nospam--at)cyberg8t.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Sep 1996 14:51:01 -0700
I live in the Palm Springs area and have used these for lightweight steel stud framing. I'm not crazy about mechanical connectors such as these although Simpson has all of their ICBO reports in order. The problem is more political than practical. In our area there are very few engineers and a large lobby of developers who influence the building official by way of the local city council. Using conventional anchor bolts means that the builder needs to use a "good" framer and concrete sub in order to properly place the anchors. MAS and PAHD anchors allow the framer some room for error - and are almost always installed incorrectly. This type of construction is not required to have structural observation and in most cases of spec homes, may not even require the services of an engineer or architect. The choice to use conventional anchor bolts verses MAS or other mechanical connectors is not left to the engineer but is dictated by the contractor. If the engineer demands conventional anchor bolt use - it will probably be the last job he will do for that client. This is unfortunate and is mirrored with other prefered installations that are not generally a favorite of the engineer - such as the use of 3/8" plywood which tends to get over-nailed. There are a lot of problems in conventional construction that are simply ignored by ICBO since they have historically considered single family construction just outside of the scope of structural engineering (which is evident in their current conventional framing standards) due to the low risk aspect. Until the code making committees can help develop better standards we are at the mercy of what products are accepted on the market by the building official based solely on the issuance of an ICBO report. At least the building officials in Los Angeles have more clout to supersede the code. In a small town the building official is carried out of town on a rail if he does not have enough justification to restrict the use of these products. Sincerely Dennis S. Wish PE PS: Please note that I am not against Simpson, Harlan, Silver or any manufacture if their products are used as tested and installed in accordance with their recommendations. My experience is that they are not and there is not sufficient inspection to uncover the deficiencies. ...
- Prev by Subject: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] Seismic retrofit criteria
- Next by Subject: [SEAOC] RE: [SEAOC] Single jolts like an EQ, but not EQ!!!!!
- Previous by thread: [SEAOC] Re: [SEAOC] NEHRP
- Next by thread: [SEAOC] Traffic wear of light weight concrete