Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re:Re: 1/3 increase[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: Re:Re: 1/3 increase
- From: "Jim Harris" <jrharris(--nospam--at)ix.netcom.com>
- Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2001 10:20:59 -0700
I did not mean to imply that I would consider increasing a load in the Simpson catalog by 1/3. I just meant that I don't use the 133% column in the catalog.
It may be very common in California to see the correct diameter nails but here in Colorado I don't see it done often. I find nails with all sorts of names that have the correct penny number but never the correct diameter or lengths(remember that length is one of the factors in those evil yield mode equations). The contractor will fight you every step of the way on the common nail issue and the Building Department really couldn't be bothered with the issue. One building department official from a Denver Suburb told me, "Common, hell I haven't seen anyone use a common nail in 10 years whether it was specified on the plans or not". Just one of those standards of construction practice that vary around the country. For these reasons I often over design hangers and other Simpson connectors to account for the box nails or under diameter nails usually found.
I still tend to think that the 1/3 increase does not relate to the "rate of loading vs. strength" issue with the exception of wood.
by the way I loved the use of the word "Pinko" in one of the posts. Makes me think of Morton Downey Jr. (a tear)
- Prev by Subject: RE: 1/3 increase
- Next by Subject: RE: Re: 1/3 increase
- Previous by thread: RE: 1/3 increase
- Next by thread: RE: Re: 1/3 increase