Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

97 UBC 1633.2.8.1 Out-of-plane wall anchorage to flex diap (concr or cmu walls)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
This section of the 1997 UBC gives specific design criteria for anchorage of
concrete or masonry walls (out-of-plane) to flexible diaphragms.  These
specific criteria are to be used with the Fp equations in Section 1632.

Paragraph 4 of 1633.2.8.1 specifies that demands on STEEL components of the
anchorage system are to be increased by a factor of 1.4, in addition to all
other criteria.

Paragraph 5 of 1633.2.8.1 specifies that demands on WOOD components of the
anchorage system may be decreased by 15% (multiplied by 0.85), in addition
to all other criteria.

My question is this:  Is a bolt bearing on wood deemed to be a STEEL member
or a WOOD member?

So far, I see four possible answers:

a)  Hey dummy, it's obvious: It's a wood member because the bolt bears on
wood.

b)  Hey dummy, it's obvious: It's a steel member because the bolt is made of
steel.

c)  Hey dummy, it's obvious: It's a wood member for NDS failure modes I and
II which are governed by wood bearing, and it's a steel member for NDS
failure modes III and IV which are governed by steel yielding.  Therefore
pick the controlling demand/capacity ratio.

d)  Hey dummy, who cares?  Any of the above methods are defensible in plan
check and in a court of law since the code is so full of holes.

Which one do you vote for, a), b), c), or d)?

Mark Swingle, SE
Oakland, CA