Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Clarification - Interpretation of Code - Non-Building Structures[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org
- Subject: Clarification - Interpretation of Code - Non-Building Structures
- From: ShirishM(--nospam--at)aol.com
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 16:57:22 EST
Per 1995 California Building Code (1994 UBC), Chapter 16A, section 1630A-1632A for Non-Building Structures, Table 16A-O as a reference. I need clarity and or interpretation to the following scenario: Wp = DL + contents(LL) Horizontal seismic force = Fp = 0.3*Wp Vertical seismic force = 1/3*Fp per footnote 12 1) The vertical component of seismic force: isn't this supposed to be applied to anchorage analysis only? and not for the entire non-building structure. If one uses 1/3*Fp for for overturning analysis together with Fp, than what is correct for question #2? 2) When calculating resisting moments, is one supposed to use Wp , or 0.85*DL plus LL or should it be 0.85*Wp to resist overturning moment? (Section 1631A.1) Last but not least, 3) For rod-bracing in metal building strutures, rods are used as tension braces only. The tension force has two components when connected to a primary frame - one in direction of frame and the other perpendicular. If one uses AISC, Part 5, Table J3.3 for allowable tension stress Ft, at the connection of rod to primary frame. Is one allowed to increase the tension stress due to wind or seismic (*1.33) or does footnote #1 of Table 16A-O over-rule this increase? I would like your opinions as to the interpretations and what are the general acceptable practices for the three questions? Thank you in advance. Shirish V. Mistry. S.E.
- Prev by Subject: City standard plan
- Next by Subject: clay tile flat arch floor
- Previous by thread: RE: Maintenance of Records
- Next by thread: FW: Service Message