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

Why mime?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I replied to this message the same as I have to other listserver messages,
but this one was delivered in "MIME" format; other messages have been
delivered as standard text. What would cause this message to be formatted
differently? 

-----Original Message-----
From: Sherman, William 
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:50 PM
To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
Subject: RE: Snow load in combination with seismic.


Your following message has been delivered to the list
  seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org at 14:48:34 on 6 Jun 2001.
 


This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--- Begin Message ---
Is this building in an area which is likely to have snow on the roof for
much of the year or rather infrequently? How often are the "high snow loads"
likely to occur and to remain on the roof? There are no easy answers, but
the percentage of snow used with seismic should be conceptually related to
the probability that snow will be on the roof at the same time as an
earthquake may occur. For example, in the mountains in Colorado snow can
remain on roofs for a larger percentage of the year, than in Denver where
snow rarely remains for long. I would use a lower percentage in Denver than
in the mountains. If the building were in Alaska, I would also use a higher
percentage. But it all comes down to judgment and relative risk. 

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Marczewski [mailto:bmarczewski(--nospam--at)martind.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:30 PM
To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
Subject: Snow load in combination with seismic.


I have a multi-story building with high snow loads located in a very low
seismic region (zone 1).  The building official is unable to provide
information regarding the percentage of snow load in excess of 30psf that
should be used in combination with the seismic load.  My preliminary
calculations consisted of using 100% of the snow in the seismic dead load,
and I feel this is a significant penalty.  I have previously been able to
use only 25% of the snow load in seismic zone 3 in Jackson, Wyoming.  On the
other hand, Steamboat Springs, Colorado (zone 1) has required 100% of the
snow load to be used in combination with the seismic load.  The 1997 UBC
states that snow loads beyond 30psf must be considered in seismic design,
but may be reduced up to 75% when approved by the local building official.
What should I do, or does anyone have any recommendation on what percentage
of snow to use when the building official cannot provide guidance on this
issue?  I think the use of 100% snow load in combination with seismic is
really to harsh.  Comments would be great.  Thank you. 
 

Bill S. Marczewski 
Martin Design, Inc. 
1360 S. Clarkson St. 
Denver, CO 80210 
bmarczewski(--nospam--at)martind.com <mailto:bmarczewski(--nospam--at)martind.com> 

 

 

Is this building in an area which is likely to have snow on the roof for much of the year or rather infrequently? How often are the "high snow loads" likely to occur and to remain on the roof? There are no easy answers, but the percentage of snow used with seismic should be conceptually related to the probability that snow will be on the roof at the same time as an earthquake may occur. For example, in the mountains in Colorado snow can remain on roofs for a larger percentage of the year, than in Denver where snow rarely remains for long. I would use a lower percentage in Denver than in the mountains. If the building were in Alaska, I would also use a higher percentage. But it all comes down to judgment and relative risk.
-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Marczewski [mailto:bmarczewski(--nospam--at)martind.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 06, 2001 3:30 PM
To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
Subject: Snow load in combination with seismic.

I have a multi-story building with high snow loads located in a very low seismic region (zone 1).  The building official is unable to provide information regarding the percentage of snow load in excess of 30psf that should be used in combination with the seismic load.  My preliminary calculations consisted of using 100% of the snow in the seismic dead load, and I feel this is a significant penalty.  I have previously been able to use only 25% of the snow load in seismic zone 3 in Jackson, Wyoming.  On the other hand, Steamboat Springs, Colorado (zone 1) has required 100% of the snow load to be used in combination with the seismic load.  The 1997 UBC states that snow loads beyond 30psf must be considered in seismic design, but may be reduced up to 75% when approved by the local building official.  What should I do, or does anyone have any recommendation on what percentage of snow to use when the building official cannot provide guidance on this issue?  I think the use of 100% snow load in combination with seismic is really to harsh.  Comments would be great.  Thank you.
 

Bill S. Marczewski
Martin Design, Inc.
1360 S. Clarkson St.
Denver, CO 80210
bmarczewski(--nospam--at)martind.com

 

 

--- End Message ---