(2)2x vs. 3x in wall anchorage[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: (2)2x vs. 3x in wall anchorage
- From: "Mike O'Brien" <mikeo(--nospam--at)jsdyer.com>
- Date: Fri, 7 Apr 2000 16:43:58 -0700
In the 1997 UBC, 16184.108.40.206 note #5, it states that the minimum net thickness is 2.5" for wall anchorage. There is a similar requirement in the COLA codes.
Does this mean 3x min. or is (2)2x for 3" acceptable? What is the purpose of this requirement? Were the code writers trying to prevent a specific failure mode (bolts in bearing, wood in tension, boundary nailing) where (2)2x with symmetric wall anchors and continuity ties are inferior.
The project that brought this to mind is a retrofit where there are existing 2x rafters that I am planning on doubling up and bringing the wall anchorage capacity up to '97 standards.
- Prev by Subject: Re: 'Way Off Topic -- Hellooo, Aussies
- Next by Subject: Re: (2)2x vs. 3x in wall anchorage
- Previous by thread: RE: IBC 2000 Adoption??
- Next by thread: Re: (2)2x vs. 3x in wall anchorage