Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: UBC 1997

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

I agree with Jerry – the code limits the allowable lateral soil capacity to the allowable at 12 feet not the depth of the pile.

Gautam

 


From: Jerry Coombs [mailto:JCoombs(--nospam--at)carollo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 11:00 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: UBC 1997

 

No, the 12' limitation is only for limiting the upper value when computing the lateral pressure.

>>> "Mark Deardorff" <mark(--nospam--at)rstavares.com> 8/15/2007 12:56 PM >>>

BTW, The formula for non-constrained conditions, for the purpose of calculating lateral soil bearing, are limited to a depth of embedment of 12'. I am not sure the formulas are valid for a 46' embedment.

 

Mark E. Deardorff, SE
R & S Tavares Associates, Inc
9815 Carroll Canyon Road
Suite 206
San Diego, CA 92131
Phone: 858-444-3344
Phone: 209-863-8928
Cell: 209-765-5592
mark(--nospam--at)rstavares.com
www.rstavares.com

 

CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY  NOTICE:
This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain confidential and proprietary information and may be legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. It may be read and used solely by the intended recipient(s), and any review, use or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender and delete this e-mail, including any attachments, from your system immediately without reading, copying or distributing them. Thank you for your cooperation. R&S Tavares Associates Inc. and its client retain all proprietary rights they may have in the information.

 

 


From: Jerry Coombs [mailto:JCoombs(--nospam--at)carollo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 15, 2007 10:45 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: UBC 1997

This is the same equation as in the 2006 IBC 1805.7.2.1 Eqn 18-9.

 

Don't forget that you can use the S1 values x2 for isolated poles allowing .5" movement, as well as the 1/3 increase.

>>> Padmanabhan Rajendran <rakamaka(--nospam--at)yahoo.com> 8/15/2007 12:04 PM >>>
There are frequent references to UBC 1997 in this list. As old as that code is, does it continue to be allowed by the permitting agencies? Considering that the methodologies to calculate wind and seismic loading have changed significantly, why has UBC 1997 not become defunct?

Do ISO 9002 certified institutions still use UBC 1997?

Rajendran


Need a vacation? Get great deals to amazing places on Yahoo! Travel.