To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org, <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: Re: Exit facilities in wood
From: Neil Moore <nmoore(--nospam--at)innercite.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Apr 2001 11:22:35 -0700
Table 2.3.2 of the 97 UBC doesn't allow a 1.25 increase. The 1.25 increase
is specific to roof live loads.
Is the cantilevered walkway also an exit route? Check footnote 5 in Table
Good to hear from you.
Neil Moore, S.E
neil moore and associates
consulting structural engineers.
>Regarding the design of wood beams for the exit live load of 100 psf, any
>comments on the following approach?:
>- Strength : check beam for 100 psf live load and a load duration factor of
>1.25 (seven days duration). This should be conservative as an
>emergency exit load is of very short duration.
>- Serviceability : check beam for 60 psf live load (this is a cantilevered
>walkway). Who really cares what the deflection is in an emergency as long
>as everything holds up?
>Eric Lehmkuhl, S.E.
>KPFF Consulting Engineers, San Diego
>(619) 521 8500 phone
>(619) 521 8591 fax
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions 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