Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: UBC Section 1633.2.6 Collector Elements

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Thank you Mr. Emoto, your response was valuable

> [Original Message]
> From: Jason Emoto <jemoto(--nospam--at)>
> To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
> Date: 10/17/00 8:43:10 AM
> Subject: RE: UBC Section 1633.2.6  Collector Elements
> << David Hall wrote:
> Ya know i sent a question here i needed help on and got no reponse yet
> someone sends a question concerning whether this site should be typed in
> English or another language and it gets a week worth of responses what is
> the deal here >>
> The "deal here" is probably that you've phrased your question in a fairly
vague manner and many busy people probably did not want to spend a lot of
time trying to figure out what you were really asking. I will take a stab
at it though.
> In order for lateral-force-resisting system elements to perform
effectively, we need to ensure that the loads can get to them.  It doesn't
do much good to design strong, ductile frames and walls if the collector
elements are the weak link.  Therefore, the collectors should have enough
strength at ultimate levels to resist the estimated maximum earthquake
forces that can be developed in the structure (E-sub-M).  If you are using
allowable stress design, you can check the ultimate strength capacity of
the collectors by using an allowable stress increase factor of 1.7.
> I believe this provision is philosophically related to the effort in the
97 UBC to improve seismic performance by system redundancy.  This
requirement of the collectors encourages the designer to improve sytem
redundancy by adding more frames and walls so that the collectors are not
working so hard.
> Jason Emoto
> > [Original Message]
> > From: David Hall <structbear(--nospam--at)>
> > To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>
> > Date: 10/16/00 9:30:46 AM
> > Subject: UBC Section 1633.2.6  Collector Elements
> >
> >
> > Your following message has been delivered to the list
> >   seaint(--nospam--at) at 09:37:30 on 16 Oct 2000.
> >
> > 
> > 
> > Can someone here give a quick explanation on this section pertaining to
> the
> > use of the Omega Factor in Ultimate Design and the increase of 1.7 in
> loads
> > for Allowable.  Thanks
> > 
> > 
> > 

--- David Hall
--- structbear(--nospam--at)
--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.