Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: CMU Column Ties (horizontal)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Dennis -

Is there any load path (intentional or unintentional) from the
fencing to the columns?  This may place some demand on the
columns if someone loads the fence, making the columns
more than just decorative features.  However, I can't imagine
this demanding more lateral capacity than provided by the
fully-grouted CMUs, especially with rebar.  Unless someone
crashes a car into it.  ;-)  Depending on what fronts on
the pool, this might actually be a problem.

The other concern about omitting the ties would come not
from the issue of fencing loads on the columns, but seismic
demand.  You might check the columns as either non-building
structures or non-structural components of buildings per
UBC'97 (or whatever is current in the jurisdiction).  Just
check the shear demand, and show whether or not the ties are
necessary.  Even at 1g lateral, back of the envelope suggests
there's no real problem.  However, my copy of the UBC is at
the office, and I can't recall if there is a provision for
minimum lateral reinforcing that might open you to
substantial liability if you recommend against the ties.


Charles Hamilton, PhD EIT               Faculty Fellow
Department of Civil and                 Phone: 949.824.3752
    Environmental Engineering           FAX:   949.824.2117
University of California, Irvine        Email: chamilto(--nospam--at)

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