Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Seismic Design Hypothetical

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Mark,

You will on occasion see EBF in the low seismic areas in order to
accomidate windows or other openings that may not fit in a CBF.
Admittedly, most braced frames that I have seen (and designed) have been
CBFs and in low seismic areas.

And I believe that the issue of the need for ductility in seismic design
was mentioned...by me at least, if not others.  But, I know that I did not
make that big of an issue of it in this thread as a lot of things that
will allow such ductility will likely not be noticed by a "layperson" and
talking about ductility to a "layperson" will not really mean much without
some detailed explanation that might confuse them.  And since this whole
thread was about trying to explain to a "layperson" differences, such
thoughts were not "dumbed down" enough that a non-engineer (and even some
engineers that don't really understand seismic design) would understand.

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI


On Mon, 29 Aug 2005, Mark Johnson wrote:

>
> I would have to scratch my head if I saw an EBF in a
> low seismic area though.  I'm not thinking about brace
> connection where the lines of force don't quite
> intersect to in order to accommodate detailing.  Why
> do an EBF if you aren?t trying to accommodate
> movement?
>
> My point, that I didn't see anyone else make before,
> is that a major characteristic of seismic design is
> that it needs to accommodate ductile movement.  And,
> you can often tell if a structure was designed to
> accommodate that or not.  Even if the code allows you
> to treat them both as equivalent static lateral
> forces, that is a large simplification (but not
> over-simplification) and the actual forces are
> sufficiently greater so as to cause movement which
> requires ductile detailing.
>
> > The real difference is in the detailing requirements
> that must be done for seismic that usually is not done
> (at least not to nearly the same level) for wind, due
> to the need to achieve ductility.<
> Bingo!
>
> All that said, I'm glad to get a rise out of someone.
> At least I know my stuff makes it onto the list.
>
> Regards,
> MJ
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********