Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Need feedback from those using strict interpretation for Woodstructures

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
In a message dated 7/31/99 1:38:28 PM Pacific Daylight Time, chuckuc(--nospam--at)dnai.com 
writes:

<< I've done a few homes now using the ?97 code, and it appears to be adding 
about
 10 to 20 hours of additional calculations.  I expect as I get more familiar 
with
 the process that will drop substantially. >>

Was there a significant difference over past projects designed to 
conventional tributary methods in these homes?

I think you for your comments. I understand the differences and the issues 
around Northridge although I don' tend to agree with your evaluation of the 
performance of wood buildings. I do, however, agree that engineers have not 
historically calculated shearwall deflections and for the most part designed 
walls to be compliant witht he old code H/b ratio of 3.5:1. My studies have 
shown even before Northridge that these narrow panels were insufficient when 
highly loaded. I just don't believe that spending an additional 20 hours on 
design is justifiable when  an engineer is capable of determining appropriate 
balanced wall stiffnesses in a simpler manner.

Thanks again for your informaiton, I appreciate the input.

Regards
Dennis