Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: 2000 IBC v 1999 UBC code question

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Actually, I thought that this was because wood material strength is a
function of so-called "duration of load," and that the strength of a wood
member rises inversely according to the length of time that load is applied.

Thus there is established evidence that wind loading, as an example of a
short-duration load, really does justify increasing the strength of the wood
member in design.

For other materials, you're quite right. The "Mysterious 1/3 Allowable
Stress Increase" is justified only by long-standing practice.

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Barrett [mailto:jbarrett(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Monday, October 29, 2001 1:27 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: 2000 IBC v 1999 UBC code question

Wood is still allowed because it is unlike the other materials because in
its design criteria the allowable stresses are low and then bumped "up" by
factors such as 1.15 and 1.6 depending on the criteria.  This is due to the
fact that
every wood member is different.

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at:
*   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) 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: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********