Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Wind damaged residences in Kansas

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Thor, why do you need to follow the direction your peers lead. If you feel
that there is merit in this discussion, simply participate or consider
adding your name to the REACH Listservice. The fact that most engineers do
not design residential structures should not prevent those who do from
helping. As was mentioned many time, until the Insurance industry determined
that the extensive damage incurred during natural disasters was not
acceptable, the topics where ignored. Now that we are thinking more in the
vein of performance based sturctures, we need to take responsiblitily for
this area that has been historically ignored - our homes.

Thanks for the comments, but I urge you to participate in those committee's
that you see popping up on the SEAint Server that wish to do something
constructive (pun intended) about residential wood frame damage.

Dennis Wish PE

-----Original Message-----
From: T [mailto:vicpeng(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Friday, November 13, 1998 1:44 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Wind damaged residences in Kansas

This thread keeps re-surfacing and I do wish the engineering community would
make a stand, especially my learned collegues here in British Columbia.

This problem is not limited to wind-blown structures.  The residential
market world-wide (eg, when I studied at Kobe University back in the late
seventies I was amazed that the current engineering thought was not being
applied to residential construction - a habit of using traditional
craftspersons totally precluded any scientific thought coming anywhere
within a fart of real construction.  The recent earthquake had me with
sudden 20/20 vision thinking "I told you so!") does not appear to like
keeping up with engineering knowledge and opinion.  I would gladly take up
the issue except my own peers are less than enthusiastic about pursuing this
elusive beast.  So I wallow in apathy and try to convince my own clients of
the sense in at least considering (emphasis) the engineering implications.

Thor A. Tandy   P.Eng.,  MCSCE
Victoria, BC, Canada
e-mail: <vicpeng(--nospam--at)>

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Kestner <jkestner(--nospam--at)>
To: seaint(--nospam--at) <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Date: Friday, November 13, 1998 12:01 PM
Subject: Re: Wind damaged residences in Kansas

>I agree with alot of what Harold said...............lack of
> companies willing to
>pay...............inadequate load paths to the ground............lack of
>required holddowns................etc. Engineering of the wood frame for
>is not required by the local codes so it is typically left up to the
>When we design wood frame commercial buildings, we inevitably get
complaints of
>overdesign from contractors, owners and architects who all believe "it is
just a
>big house"and therefore it should be built just like all the other houses.
>know of many structural engineers who refuse to work on wood frames because
>the hassle that we constantly face when we design it by the codes.
>Unfortunately, poor performance of these houses during a moderate wind
>confirms that something is wrong with what is being allowed, but it seems
>nothing changes. I hate to say it but, until the losses are big enough
>Homestead, Florida during Hurricane Andrew) nothing will change. There is
>much momentum trying to keep things the same (we are fighting an uphill
>Any suggestions? Anyone who wants to take up this cause?
>Jim Kestner, P.E.
>Green Bay, Wi