Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: 3x single studs @ abutting panels

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Title: RE: 3x single studs @ abutting panels

It does meet the intent of the code.  The reason for the 3x is because you have two pieces of panel nailed to one member.  If the individual panels are nailed to separate members and then the members are spliced together then it meets the intent.

You would still to meet the 3x foundation sill requirements and apply the same concept if wood panels are butted at top or bottom plates in platform framing.

-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Bingham [mailto:NickB(--nospam--at)QuadKnopf.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 31, 2002 3:00 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: 3x single studs @ abutting panels


In my neck of the woods, Seismic zone 3, the building department will accept
two 2x studs nailed together as an acceptable alternate to a "single 3 inch
nominal member" as called for in footnote 3 of table 23-II-I-1 for shear
walls with v> 350 plf. While this solution does appear to meet the intent of
the code, it fails strict interpretation. Any feedback is appreciated.

Nick Bingham

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. 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: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********