Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Fwd: [Fwd: Tilt-up roof ledgers]

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Message-ID: <332EC6DD.769A(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Mar 1997 08:46:21 -0800
From: Jim Dane <jimdane(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To: jimdane(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com
Organization: The Quikset Organization
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Structural Engineers Association <seaoc-request(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>
CC: Mike Rodin <merodin(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Tilt-up roof ledgers
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I am working on a tilt-up building project and have had several
discussions as to what is the current design thinking for roof and floor
ledgers.

The buildings are one story multi tenent light industrial with
diaphragms of approximately 70 ft. by 200 ft. and 22 ft. to top of
walls.  "Very typical".  With small buildings like this I still prefer
to use timber ledgers designed using hankinsons formula and seperate
HD's for wall ties.  I have also been using 300 plf. wall tie back force
for several years and am considering increasing this to 500 plf.

I have had several engineers tell me that I should be using steel angle
ledgers because it avoids the cross grain bending problem and the use of
hankinsons formula.  I have concerns about the use of ledgers unless
prying is considered at the ledger with regards to the angle or channel
legder thickness and also the tension loads on the bolts.  Seems that
the use of HD's would still be a good idea but this defeats the use of
the steel ledger.

Am I off in left field with an old way of thinking (An old xxxx that
need to move forward), or are timber ledgers with HD's still considered
acceptable.  I have used steel ledgers on large warehouse buildings
where the spans were large.

Would appreciate some other oppinions.

Thanks in advance.

Jim Dane, P.E.




--- Internet Message Header Follows ---
Received: from server1.seaoc.org (bqe.com [204.140.166.34])
	by host1.texramp.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA26239
	for <rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org>; Wed, 19 Mar 1997 10:42:39 -0600 (CST)
Received: from dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com by server1.seaoc.org (NTList 3.02.10) id
ea009936; Wed, 19 Mar 1997 08:29:44 -0800
Received: (from smap@localhost)
          by dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id KAA26619 for <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>; Wed, 19 Mar 1997 10:26:56 -0600 (CST)
Received: from irv-ca11-07.ix.netcom.com(204.32.161.167) by
dfw-ix9.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id sma026589; Wed Mar 19 10:26:33 1997
Message-ID: <333013D6.57BC(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Mar 1997 08:27:02 -0800
From: Jim Dane <jimdane(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com>
Reply-To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
Organization: The Quikset Organization
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Structural Engineers Association <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>
Subject: [Fwd: Tilt-up roof ledgers]
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Error-To: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
X-Info: [SEAOC]
Owner: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
X-POP3-Rcpt: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
X-Sender: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
Precedence: list
X-ListMember: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org [seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org]


__________________________________________________

Richard Lewis, P.E.
Missionary TECH Team
rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org

The service mission like-minded Christian organizations
may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.