Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Cantilever Columns

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
This is the first time I am sending any e-mail to SEAOSC. I hope it goes 
through.

I have looked at several e-mails regarding the plywood or wood diaphragm for 
mostly type V construction. I in fact have received Plan Check Correction for 
City of Agoura Hills requesting Rigid Diaphragm Analysis on a two-hundred 
square feet, second floor addition!!

I understand, based on our conversations with the City of Los Angeles, that 
the City considered all residential diaphragms as flexible.

I don't think anyone is against the rigid diph. analysis, except that the 
cost of engineering will go up and many of us can not compete with some that 
have low, low, low fees.

I do have a question:

The e-mail that I had received, indicated that for the cantilever steel 
columns, only the elements in that line may be designed for the lower "R". 
UBC, requires a "R" of 2.2 for cantilever columns. The whole business of 
cantilever columns started with 1996 Accumulative Supplement to the UBC 1994. 
In that Supplement, it clearly states that the lower "R" is for Isolated 
columns with Isolated pad footings.

Most of our columns are not isolated. There are at least two columns and the 
columns are embedded in continuous concrete grade beam. DOES THE LOWER "R", 
STILL APPLIES TO THIS CONDITION OR NOT?

Does anyone know the answer? I have asked the question from the Technical 
Representatives of ICBO. I have spoken with two gentlemen. None, knew the 
answer.

If someone knows the answer, please e-mail me.

Farzin S. Rahbar
fsrahbar(--nospam--at)aol.com