Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Hardy Frame, between code changes

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Can you pass the information on about Hardy Walls - I've heard a little
about it but am interested in receiving more information.

Dennis Wish PE
La Quinta, California
ICQ# 6110557

"Silence is the virtue of fools."
Francis Bacon

|-----Original Message-----
|From: Jeff Smith [mailto:smthengr(--nospam--at)]
|Sent: Friday, March 27, 1998 7:46 AM
|To: seaoc(--nospam--at)
|Subject: Hardy Frame, between code changes
|Has anyone used "The Hardy Frame" as an alternate to plywood shearwalls or
|steel frames. I have the brochure and I will give them a call when
|they open
|this morning. They apparently have an ICBO Report. I have just started
|working on two new custom homes in San Francisco that have exterior walls
|that just meet the 3.5:1 aspect ratio, not sure yet if the holdowns would
|work anyway.
|About every three years I come across this dilemma. San Francisco does not
|adopt the 97 UBC (presumably with SF amendments) until February of 1999. I
|do not want to design a building  that becomes seismically obsolete (ie 94
|UBC w/ SF amendments) 6 months after construction begins. I know I
|will have
|a hard time selling the 97 UBC seismic requirements to the architect since
|it will have a big impact on aesthetics, cost and the seismic design unless
|the architect was to change the elevations to allow for 2:1 shearwalls.
|This, I am sure, is not expectable to the architect. A main
|feature of these
|houses are large amounts of floor to ceiling storefront type wide systems.
|Even if I went with frames, the frames would protrude offensively into
|finished space. Your thoughts would be appreciated.
|Jeff Smith