Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: ASD Load Combinations

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
OPINION
 
I think they are all applicable.  
We have developed an in-house spreadsheet to check a particular element for
the worst case of all these.

The "12-7..." series doesn't exactly parallel the "12-13..." series.
The "12-7..." series comes from ASCE 7-95.
The "12-13..." series comes from 1994 UBC.

There is 12-17, 12-18, the factors for resisting effects of wind and the
factors within the "specific" sections of the code as well. 

This is why we developed the spreadsheet.  It looks like we may get another
three years use out of it!

Sharon Robertson Bonds, PE
Salerno/Livingston Architects
363 Fifth Avenue, Third Floor
San Diego, California  92101
(619) 234-7471

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Larry Hauer [SMTP:lrhauer(--nospam--at)earthlink.net]
	Sent:	Tuesday, November 14, 2000 3:52 PM
	To:	seaint
	Subject:	ASD Load Combinations

	Can someone enlighten me on when to use Basic Load Comb. formulas
12-7 thru 12-11, (sec. 1612.3.1 of '97 UBC), in lieu of formulas 12-12 thru
12-16-1, (sec. 1612.3.2), when designing in ASD?
	 
	It seems to me that, for economical design, formulas 12-12 thru
12-16-1 should always be used since they allow a 1/3 stress increase for
wind/seismic, while sec. 1612.3.1 formulas DO NOT. Granted, the 0.75 factor
in formula 12-11 is the same as the 1/3 increase, but formulas 12-9 and
12-10 which also include wind/seismic forces, do not allow the increase.
	 
	Thanks in advance,
	 
	Larry Hauer SE