Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re[3]: MBMA Code and Wind Loads

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
     For metal buildings I specify that the UBC be used for design.  The 94 
     UBC is currently used for most building departments.  I don't have to 
     worry about MBMA and the building department accepts it.  The 94 UBC 
     is still the old "fastest mile" procedure, but it gives generally 
     lower, but reasonable loads compared with the ASCE 7-95.  
     Ed Haninger
     Fluor Daniel
     in "rainy" California 

______________________________ Reply Separator 
Subject: Re[2]: MBMA Code and Wind Loads
Author:  James_F_Fulton@rohmhaas.com_at_-FDInternet at FDINET
Date:    02/16/1998 4:07 PM

I would tend to agree that the source of wind load provisions in ASCE 7-95 
not MBMA.  About 3 years ago I compared the wind loads on a metal building 
design determined using MBMA and ASCE 7 (either 93 or 88, doesn't matter 
here). The MBMA loads were much less.  MBMB has some justification for this,
but I am not sure what it is. Since wind loads for low rise buildings from 
ASCE 7-95 end up being not largely different from those determined from ASCE
7-93, I suspect that MBMA wind loads are still much less than the 
corresponding ASCE 7-95 values. In the process of this work, I was 
a metal bldg. spec, and I specified that the building was to be designed to 
1993 BOCA Code, particularly in regards to wind loads.