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

RE: Steel lintel beam

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Mr. Turk: Good points!

Ed:

Also, I'd suggest providing thru wall control joints at the
Lintel bearings to eliminate negative moment issues and account for the end
rotation of the lintel.


Getting a wall to have a net deflection of 0.3" is going to be next to
impossible without cambering the lintel.

The amount of camber you're going to need will be relatively large and
difficult to control/produce in the shop for a 50'-0" beam.

I'd also suggest additional control joints spaced along the span to allow
for the sequential loading of the wall
And supported roof and give some tolerance for offsetting the camber of the
lintel.


Good Luck,


David L. Fisher, SE, PE
Senior Principal
Fisher+Horos Structural Engineers
372 West Ontario
Chicago, IL 60610
USA

312.573.1701
312.720.0505 mobile

www.fplushse.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Turk [mailto:73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com]
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2001 4:48 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Steel lintel beam

Ed,

50 ft *clear span*????

Deflection limits:  L/600 per UBC 2106.2.9; L/600 but not more than 0.3" per
ACI 530.  I go along with the ACI limits.

With only 8 feet of wall above the lintel, you will not be able to take
advantage of arching if the span *is* 50 ft, therefore all the wall directly
above the lintel should be considered as loading.  My criteria to take
advantage of arching is that the wall has to be 1/2 the span "plus a little
bit" above the lintel. (The "little bit" is to provide a compression area
for
the arch.)  Windows and any wall penetrations will also limit when you can
take advantage of arching.  (Remember that windows and doors are frequently
filled in when remodeling, so don't be too precise on reducing your dead
load
based on openings.  I neglect all openings when considering wall loads.)

Cracking will be the result of deflection, not negative moments.  You can
frequently see triangular cracks in masonry walls above lintels.

Dead load from the roof joists will be dead load to the lintel.  Why would
you want to consider it live load?  It's there all the time, isn't it?  It
isn't moving or movable.

HTH

A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
Tucson, Arizona

Ed Jonson wrote:

. > I have a question about using a wide flanged steel beam for supporting
an
. > opening in a masonry wall.  The opening is 50 feet, with 8 feet of
masonry
. > wall above.  I'm planning on using a steel beam, designed as simply
. > supported.

. > I have two questions.

. > 1. What deflection limits should I use for the steel beam?  Also, should
. > the dead load from the roof joists be considered as live load?

. > 2.  If I design the steel beam as simply supported, is there a potential
. > problem with cracking in the masonry wall due to negative bending
. > stresses? I have a low roof that frames in to the side of the masonry
. > wall at the same level as the steel beam that will lateral support the
. > steel beam.

. > Thank you for any guidance.

. > Ed Jonson

*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   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


* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   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