Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: hr @ EQ.32-2 of UBC97, Section 1632

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I would use hr = 20', for two reasons: 1) that is the height of the roof
that it is actually on; 2) it yields the more conservative result. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: James Lin [mailto:se3949(--nospam--at)yahoo.com]
> Sent: Friday, October 06, 2000 11:49 AM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: hr @ EQ.32-2 of UBC97, Section 1632
> 
> 
> One-story structure composed of 2 areas:
> (1) area 1 (gymnasium): 100'x170' w/ 30' high roof.
> (2) area 2 (office): 30'x140' w/ 20' high roof.
> these 2 areas are attached (170' to 140') with common
> structural wall.
> 
> Question: a mechanical equipment located at area 2
> (above 20' high roof), to design the lateral force per
> EQ.32-2 of UBC97, Section 1632, no problem to set
> hx=20', but how about hr? (30'? or 20'?)
> 
> Please give your opinion, thanks,
> 
> James Lin
> IDS, Inc.
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Photos - 35mm Quality Prints, Now Get 15 Free!
> http://photos.yahoo.com/
> 
>