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

RE: EQ resistant Design

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
> to reflect the fact that each response peaks at different instants. The
> fact remains that loading in both directions should be considered
> simultaneously.

True.  And this is the reason that for "higher" SPC/SDC classes in the
modern codes require a simultanious application of 100% of the seismic
load in one direction and 30% of the seismic load in the other direction.
This is especially something to think about if the torsional effects of
the seismic load (i.e. the "center of mass" is significantly different
that the "center of rigidity) are significant.

One thing to keep in mind...this whole topic has diverged a little...the
original question was about a code provision (thus, a minimum design
requirement) and my initial response was an explaination of "where" that
code provisions came from (at least as I understand it).  So the whole
discussion started off dealing strictly with things from a building code
prospective.  The "tangent" that we have gone down (seismic design in
general) is definitely good since it reminds people (or at least it
should) that the code does not cover every aspect of seismic design and it
is important for the engineer to apply some "expertise" and due diligance.
After all, that is why we get paid the big bucks, right?!? :-)


Ypsilanti, MI

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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:
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********