Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: drilled and epoxied rods (Samir)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Dave
I am not aware of technical aspects or reasons for values being drastically
different.  May be some one who participate in this list can shed some
light.  

Samir Y. Ghosn, P.E.
Harris & Associates
(800) 827-4901 xt 360
www.harris-assoc.com

At 02:15 PM 1/29/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>Samir,
>
>I've seen some of the ICBO reports where the allowable values were
>adjusted by the LABC, but I'm not sure what the reason is for the
>sometimes drastic reductions.  Do you know of the history or technical
>aspect of these adjustments?
>
>Thanks,
>Dave K. Adams, S.E.
>Lane Engineers, Inc.
>979 N. Blackstone St.
>Tulare, CA 93274
>PH:  (559) 688-5263
>FAX: (559) 688-8893
>E-mail:  davea(--nospam--at)laneengineers.com
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Samir Ghosn [mailto:sghosn(--nospam--at)harris-assoc.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 12:47 PM
>To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
>Subject: RE: drilled and epoxied rods
>
>
>Be aware in the real world out there there are no ideal conditions that
>resemble test protocol.  Futher, if you look at ICBO approval reports
>and
>LABC approval reports you might find out that the established Catalog
>Values, Sales pitch program, are higher than approved reports allow.
>use
>some judgement.  Evaluate if the anchors are used to resist seismic
>conditions, evaluate if the test protocol allows for dynamic motion and
>relative degredation of the impacted bolt assembly.  Thats my 0.02
>cents.
>Good luck.
>  At 10:38 AM 1/29/2003 -0800, you wrote:
>>For those interested, I got a very good response from Hilti this
>morning.
>>Hilti uses a method called the 5% fractile to calculate their
>capacities.
>>With this method, 95% of the anchors tested exceed the listed capacity.
>In
>>addition a factor of safety is applied that varies from 3 to 5. Their
>manual
>>has some documentation on this. In my opinion, this seems adequate from
>a
>>practical standpoint. Their procedure has been accepted by ICBO in
>report
>>AC01 published January 2001. However, the testing of anchors to this
>>procedure has not been approved yet. I assume that this is in progress
>as
>>the method was only accepted recently. So for at least Hilti products
>it
>>sounds like this issue will be resolved in the future. I assume other
>>manufacturers will potentially use the same procedure to justify the
>values.
>>
>>
>>
>>-----Original Message-----
>>From: Sherman, William [mailto:ShermanWC(--nospam--at)cdm.com]
>>Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2003 7:05 AM
>>To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
>>Subject: RE: drilled and epoxied rods
>>
>>
>>I've struggled with the same question regarding which values to use. I
>often
>>use ICBO values for projects in California, since there seems to be
>more
>>emphasis on their use there; but I often use manufacturer's catalog
>values
>>for non-UBC areas. If I am comparing two manufacturer's values, such as
>for
>>product substitutions in submittals, I often use ICBO values for
>comparison
>>to ensure that consistent test parameters are used. 
>>
>>
>>William C. Sherman, PE
>>CDM, Denver, CO
>>Phone: 303-298-1311
>>Fax: 303-293-8236
>>email: shermanwc(--nospam--at)cdm.com
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Panos Trochalakis [mailto:panost(--nospam--at)ckcps.com]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 5:51 PM
>>> To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
>>> Subject: drilled and epoxied rods
>>> 
>>> 
>>> I am working on a project that involves allot of drilled and 
>>> epoxied rods.
>>> Up until this point I have been using the capacities listed in the
>>> manufacturer's catalog. However, the allowable values in the 
>>> catalog do not
>>> match the allowable values listed in the ICBO report for the 
>>> same product.
>>> This appears to be consistent regardless of the manufacturer. 
>>> For example,
>>> both Hilti and Rawl do not match. In some cases the 
>>> discrepancy is large in
>>> others negligible. In other cases, anchor diameters listed in 
>>> the catalog
>>> are not even mentioned in the ICBO report. I called one 
>>> manufacturer and was
>>> told that they have conducted additional in-house testing to 
>>> create the
>>> allowables listed in their catalog. I am waiting to hear from another
>>> manufacturer but was hoping to get input from other engineers in the
>>> meantime. Do other engineers typically use the catalog values 
>>> and if so how
>>> do you feel about using values that are not backed up by independent
>>> testing?
>>> 
>>> Thanks in advance for any help.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>>> *   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 
>>> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 
>>> 
>>
>>******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>>*   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 
>>******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 
>>
>>******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>>*   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 
>>******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 
>>
>
>
>******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>*   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 
>******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 
>
>******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
>*   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 
>******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ******** 
>


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********