Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: Garage Floor Design[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: Re: Garage Floor Design
- From: "Randy Vogelgesang" <rvogel(--nospam--at)jps.net>
- Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1998 11:45:31 -0800
Oshin, I am not sure that using the UBC excludes using the Caltrans spec or that the two sources contradict each other. Apply the 2000+ACM- load on top of the slab over 20 in sq. (4+ACI-x5+ACI-?). Now, is the slab and plywood combination sufficiently rigid enough to distribute the load over three joists?, four joists? Obviously this is a complicated relative rigidity problem. The Caltrans manual IS a good source for determing the +ACU- of wheel load supported by members. Caltrans accepts that 4x timber is sufficient to spread the point load to the framing using S/4. The question is S/? for plywood w/ concrete. The slab is usually 3.5+ACI- thick with 6x6x10ww mesh. An analysis of this as a structural slab is not appropriate (I would not want to assume that the mesh is properly installed). This is where I found the APA report +ACM-139 useful. I suggest anyone interested in this to get a copy, the report details the test procedures and their recommendations based upon the results. The report demonstrated that plywood when toped with 3+ACI- of concrete has very good structural capacities when subjected to point loads. Naturally, the APA was only concerned with the capabilities of their plywood and not how the load was distributed to the framing below. All things considered I would feel completely comfortable using a S/3 factor when using 3/4+ACI- ply w/ 3.5+ACI- of concrete. The problem is how to convince plancheck. It is my opinion that common sense is not all that common. Randy Vogelgesang S.E. -----Original Message----- From: SDGSE+AEA-aol.com +ADw-SDGSE+AEA-aol.com+AD4- To: seaint+AEA-seaint.org +ADw-seaint+AEA-seaint.org+AD4- Date: Saturday, November 21, 1998 4:05 PM Subject: Re: Garage Floor Design +AD4-Randy: +AD4-Unfortunately we can not use Caltrans S/4. We have to stick to UBC using the +AD4-20+ACI-x20+ACI- area as you said you have used. Although the distribution methodology +AD4-is the same. I also have seen old houses with 1 1/2+ACI- concrete overs 2x decking +AD4-over 2x10 joists. As Greg said in his reply he has never been questioned by a +AD4-plan checker and has never had problem with the garages that he had designed +AD4-using 667+ACM- on a single 2x joist. Maybe the answer is that the 2000+ACM- wheel has +AD4-never been to those garages and if it has, there is still some safety factor +AD4-to take care of it. +AD4- +AD4-Oshin Tosounian, S.E.
- Prev by Subject: RE: Garage Floor Design
- Next by Subject: Re: Garage Floor Design
- Previous by thread: Re: Garage Floor Design
- Next by thread: Re: Garage Floor Design