Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: IBC "Oops" (Was Residential Design Discussion)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
And the "<=1.0" shouldn't apply to mass walls (i.e., tilt-up concrete walls
and masonry walls)?

If that's where ASCE 7-02 (and others) stopped, then they're not done.


Bill Allen, S.E. (CA #2607)

||-----Original Message-----
||From: Allen Adams [mailto:aadams(--nospam--at)]
||Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 11:38 AM
||To: seaint(--nospam--at)
||Subject: Re: IBC "Oops" (Was Residential Design Discussion)
||One of Dennis Wish's core complaints in regard to this issue
||is the penalty
||that the rho factor inflicts on short walls. This problem HAS been
||addressed and is in the process of resolution. The Draft copy
||of ASCE 7-02
||defines rho for walls essentially the same as in UBC 97, but
||then adds:
||"... where the ratio 10/lw need not be taken greater than 1.0
||for buildings
||of light frame construction." Once ASCE 7-02 is formally
||approved, it will
||be incorporated into the IBC.


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