Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Log Strucutres - IS-LOG document

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I've made comments on it.  There were lots of log homes located in the Fairbanks area that performed better than light frame timber buildings in the 7.9 magnitude Mentasta earthquake in November 2002. There is currently no R response modification factor for log homes in the building codes that I could find.   I ordered the 2006 IBC and ASCE 7 to see if they have an R for stacked log walls with drift pins / threaded rods.  My comment was that they should have an R=6.
 The prescriptive stuff in that draft standard is limited to low seismic zones, low wind.

From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint1(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2006 10:10 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Log Strucutres - IS-LOG document

I've been struggling with log structures for a while. I've just about given up on doing them as there does not seem to be any consolidated guidance on the lateral performance of such structures, and the research necessary to really understand them would be significant. I'm not afraid of the research, but the proposed ICC standard on log structures, and the potential loss of business should a prescriptive standard be enacted, makes me hesitant to spend any appreciable time on the project.

Still, I get questions on a fairly regular basis concerning log residences, and some jurisdictions (those who actually enforce the I-codes) require engineering documentation.  Based on the article in Structures magazine, I've been referring people to follow the progress of the IS-LOG standard, in hopes that they can get direct guidance with little intervention from me. Does anyone know when the IS-LOG standard might be completed? I was under the impression that it's debut was Really Soon (TM), but after downloading and reading the document sections at I found nothing of real value for prescriptive design. So far, it's a welcome, three definitions, 40+ pages of log material properties, a couple pages on settlement, and three pages which tell you when you should use the "engineering provisions" of the document. The engineering provisions don't exist, nor do any prescriptive guidelines exist if you don't need to use the (non-existent) engineering provisions. It's more of a framework than a document, and there's no placeholders for the missing sections.

Is there a "real" document that anyone is aware of, and I'm just missing it, or is this standard really as far away from useful as it seems?
******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * 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: ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********