Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: 97 UBC 1633.2.8.1 Out-of-plane wall anchorage to flex diap (c oncr or cmu walls)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
E) All of the above

I use C) for all failure modes in conjunction with 0.85Fp only when I have
to. Basically, when I can't make the design work for 1.0 Fp for wood and
bolts in wood, I take advantage of the 0.85Fp.

When that doesn't work, I go get a coke.

Gerard Madden, P.E.
Civil Engineer, Associate
CRJ Associates, Inc.
email: gerardm(--nospam--at)crjarch.com
tel: 650.324.0691
fax: 650.324.0927
web: www.crjarch.com


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Swingle, Mark [SMTP:Mark.Swingle(--nospam--at)dgs.ca.gov]
> Sent:	Monday, November 15, 1999 3:25 PM
> To:	'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> Cc:	'mswingle(--nospam--at)earthlink.net'
> Subject:	97 UBC 1633.2.8.1 Out-of-plane wall anchorage to flex diap
> (concr or cmu walls)
> 
> 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
> 
> 
>