Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

2nd try - Subject of Code Clarification - Non-Building Structures

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
The first time this message was sent on 02/12/98. Having had no response, this
is my second request. No offence as every-one is busy. Anyone with any
comments - as to what is reasonably correct the following condition?

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
When calculating OTM and RM for a non-building structure:

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 acting vertically upwards for overturning analysis together
with Fp for OTM, 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 or non-building structures,
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?

Shirish V. Mistry. S.E.