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

RE: Structural Stud/Joist Designations

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
	Bill,
	
	The designation looks like a combination of the universal designator
system proposed by the North American Steel Framing Alliance and the
Dietrich Industries product catalog.  The 362 is the web depth in 1/100th of
inches, a CSJ stud (according to Dietrich product catalog) has a flange
width of 1 5/8", and the 18 is probably 18 gauge.
	The North American Steel Framing Alliance has a designation system
that I use, you may find it at
http://www.steelframingalliance.com/codes/RightSTUF.pdf.  Dietrich's web
site is http://www.dietrichindustries.com/.

	HTH, 

	Roland Bokma, E.I.T.
	ProgressiveAE
	Grand Rapids, MI
	www.progressiveae.com

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Bill Polhemus [SMTP:bpolhem(--nospam--at)swbell.net]
> Sent:	Tuesday, January 16, 2001 1:41 PM
> To:	seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org; aec-residential(--nospam--at)polhemus.cc
> Subject:	Structural Stud/Joist Designations
> 
> Could someone set me straight on something?
> 
> I am not well-versed in steel stud terminology.
> 
> I have an architect's drawings showing the designation 362CSJ18, which I
> assume
> is some sort of "Channel-shaped Stud-Joist" shape. Of course the architect
> hasn't a clue what the designation means; he's just copying it drawings
> that got
> it from other drawings, etc., down three or four generations. I did find
> one
> reference to this shape, at http://www.edgemontdrywall.com/newsteel.htm,
> but
> there is no information beyond the fact that it is one of many types of
> "Structural" as opposed to "Drywall" framing.
> 
> I see that a relatively new organization, the Steel Stud Manufacturers
> Association (SSMA; just what we need, another acronym to remember!), has
> now
> published specification tables, which can be found in .PDF format at
> http://www.ssma.com/ssmatechcatalog.pdf and in which I can find no
> reference to
> anything like 362CSJ18. Either that designation is proprietary or the SSMA
> has
> REVISED the "official" designations (don't you love it when they do that?
> Like
> TS ->> HSS?)
> 
> Can anyone point me in the direction of where I want to be? And if this
> section
> turns out to be not sufficient (big surprise there, where my experience
> with
> this architect is concerned), should I use the SSMA specification?
> 
> Thanks.
>