Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Steel Building Bracing

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
How about, if one or two story per Section 2211.8.5, the tension only
members are designed for 3Rw/8?

Also, per Table 16-H, what about Item 1.3 "Light steel-framed bearing walls
with tension-only bracing" (Rw=4)?

Regards,
Bill Allen
-----Original Message-----
From: Horning, Dick/CVO <dhorning(--nospam--at)CH2M.com>
To: 'seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org' <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>
Date: Wednesday, October 29, 1997 9:13 AM
Subject: RE: Steel Building Bracing


>Tom, where are you seeing a TENSION-ONLY provision in the UBC?  For
>Zones 3/4, the 1994 and 1997 UBC have stringent limits on slenderness
>ratios of braces and require compression braces to carry 70% of story
>shear.  This has eliminated use of rod x-bracing and virtually forced
>use of tubes.  If you have found a way around these provisions, I'm all
>ears (figuratively).
>
>> ----------
>> From: Thomas Chiu[SMTP:Tomchiu(--nospam--at)worldnet.att.net]
>> Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 1997 9:46 PM
>> To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
>> Subject: Re: Steel Building Bracing
>>
>> Chris Towne wrote:
>> >
>> > What factor of safety is prudent on design of steel cable for
>> tension
>> > x-framing?
>> >
>> > Chris Towne, E.I.T.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Don't forget the 3 Rw/8 X the UBC seismic force in your design, I
>> don't
>> have the UBC Code section handy but it should be under TENSION-ONLY
>> braced frame section. I had reviewed some engineer's design that did
>> not
>> check for 3 Rw/8 x UBC forces and he ended up revising his details
>> that
>> had gone for bid and cost the owner an arm and leg for the revision.
>> The reason being that they were using some old computer program that
>> never got updated for that section of the Code --- another unproper
>> use
>> of computer program.
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>