Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: More questions about rigid plywood Diaphragms

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
     I'm sure that there are sections in the code requiring an analysis of
this but wouldn't the code be equally satisfied if you used strongbacks on
the rafters and braced down and across creating an inverted delta?
the lower point of the delta would transfer the shear to a horizontal
diaphram on the ceiling joists which would transfer the force to shear walls
     As Nels mentioned, the vertical shearing force would still be at the
ridge but would be decreased in proportion to the height of the delta.


-----Original Message-----
From: Seaintonln(--nospam--at) <Seaintonln(--nospam--at)>
To: seaint(--nospam--at) <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Date: Thursday, July 01, 1999 5:34 PM
Subject: Re: More questions about rigid plywood Diaphragms

>Our discussion some years ago had to do with the problems of calculating
>actual forces on Rafter Tied Gabled roofs. The calculated forces for a
>tied connection often does not work as the resulting forces require a much
>more sufficient connection that what is called for in the Nailing Schedule.
>The discussion concluded that the Rafter tied connection was probably
>determined emperically rather than by rational calculations.
>Chuck Greenlaw convinced me that my perverbial butt is in jepordy if I
>abide by the code fabricated standard of practice (since it is not in
>with the actual practices of the professional community during the reign of
>the '94 UBC) I'm in trouble.
>Nels has suggested that the analysis is pretty straight forward and other
>suggested that we really don't know what will happen until we create a few
>I know this may be a dumb questions, but hasn't the seismology committee
>modeled these system (gabled, scissor truss, vaulted roof systems) in the
>process of creating a deflection criteria?  If they had, why are the
>not provided for us to learn their "Intent".  It's great to be expected to
>comply with the intention of the code, but we have proved on this list that

>the intent never included light framed residential type structures.
>Has anyone on this list done the math for these types of structures and if
>so, how about sharing your results with us?
>I'm no longer looking to debate, but am more concerned with understanding
>to solve different models that are not rectangular or have various pitches.
>Specifically, I would like to know how to solve a Donut Shaped Structre
>square sides and an Attrium in the Center, A "U" shaped structure and a "U"
>shaped structure where the diaphragms of the legs are 45 degrees to the
>horizontal rather than perpendicular, A two story where the lower story is
>cut into the hillside for sub-terranean parking (with masonry walls), and
>other types of unusual shaped structures.
>Dennis Wish PE