Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Shear Wall Tests - Static vs. Dynami

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

The paper is not too long to fax (10 pages), but it is (horrors!) 
*copyrighted*!  If there is a university nearby, their library might have/get 
the Journal (Journal of Structural Engineering, ASCE, June 1998, Vol. 124, 
No. 6, pgs. 686 - 695).

Since a conclusion in the paper recommends a 25 percent *decrease* in the UBC 
allowable shear loads, I am going to implement this immediately.  If further 
tests show that this reduction is excessive, then the design will be safe; if 
further testing shows that this reduction is not needed, the design will 
still be safe.  It is a win-win situation.  On the other hand, if further 
tests show that there should be a greater reduction in the allowable shear 
loads, then I can say that I made use of the most recent and best information 
that I had.

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

. > So, then the next question is why were the results different than those 
. > done by APA in their Research Report 154 which justified the UBC shearwall
. > values. This falls in line with Findleton's letter in the ICBO 
. > publications "Building Standards" which Bill Allen Faxed to me.
. > Neither test was done cyclically.
. > 
. > Is the ASCE report too long to fax? If it is, where can I obtain it?
. > 
. > At what point would you revert to more conservative values such as the
. > ASCE's?
. > 
. > Dennis
. >