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

RE: Seismic load combos and IBC

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Jason,

	When using ASCE 7-02 however, you do not have the special load
cases Eq 16-19 and Eq 16-20. The ASCE load combinations allow you to use
0.7E, I think. (1.2/.7 = 1.7) I interpret the statement: "This increase
shall not be combined with increases in allowable stresses or load
combinations reductions otherwise permitted by this standard..." to mean
that you cannot use a 1/3 stress increase or 0.75 times multiple
variable loads. This approach seems to me to harmonize the IBC 2003 and
ASCE 7-02 load combinations best. I would like to know what other SEAINT
listers think.

Wesley C. Werner


-----Original Message-----
From: Jason Christensen [mailto:jason.christensen(--nospam--at)es2eng.com] 
Sent: Friday, June 17, 2005 1:16 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Seismic load combos and IBC


Isn't the 1.7 increase (2003 IBC 1617.1.1.2) only used if you 
are designing with the simplified procedure?  If the equivalent 
lateral force is used 2003 IBC refers you to ASCE 7.  In ASCE 7 
9.5.2.7.1 you are allowed only a 1.2 ASD increase

Jason

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