Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Conv. Constr. one direction

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
> >We're reviewing a wood-framed project designed under the 1988 UBC.
> In one
> >direction, the lateral design was engineered, with shear walls,
> holdowns,
> >etc.
> >
> >However, in the other direction, where there are long party walls,
> the
> >engineer stated that Conventional Construction criteria were met, so
> he just
> >put in gyp. bd. shear walls.  When we work the loads backwards from
> his
> >calculations, these walls would be overstressed using the loading for
> his
> >designed direction.
> >
> >My questions:  Was there anything in the code that said you could use
>
> >conventional framing requirements in one direction even if these
> >requirements weren't met in the orthagonal direction?  Was/is this
> the
> >standard of care?
> >
> >Mike Livingston, SE
> ---------------------------

My recollection was that Northridge Meadows was part "conventional
construction" and part engineered.  If this is true there maybe a
problem.

Additionally "Mixed" systems.... gyp & plywood don't work very well
together.  My guess is that 1/2 engineered & 1/2 conventional systems
are even worse.  I'm sure there are systems that could work but ones
that use materials that have vastly different stiffness & drift capacity
are not likely to do very well.  The e/q will sequentially destroy the
lateral system.
regards
Bob
--
Robert Kazanjy, PE  **Disclaimer: I speak for myself not UC-Irvine**
Senior Development Engineer
Civil & Environmental Engineering
UC Irvine
rkazanjy(--nospam--at)uci.edu