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

RE: Definition of A sub B in Rho evaluation

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
sharonb(--nospam--at)slarchitects.com wrote:

"Thank you. 
I'm just trying to get a grip on this...Can you explain why a larger Ab is
not more conservative?"

I agree with you, sharon, in questioning this.  Keeping all other things
equal, increasing Ab  <IS>  a conservative move, as it  <MAY>  increase the
base shear.

The larger the Ab, the more shear-resisting "elements" (braces, frames, 10'
lengths of shear wall) are required to arrive at the same number for r, and
therefore for rho.  Larger Ab leads to smaller second term and therefore
larger r and therefore larger rho.

Mark Swingle


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** 
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to 
*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type 
*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email 
*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message 
*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send 
*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********