Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Wind drift

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Absolutely; I agree.  I don't know if you're agreeing or disagreeing with my point, which is that some bad cracking (but not collapse) every 50 years may be acceptable, whereas much smaller swaying, creaking, and shuttering daily may not be.


In a message dated 11/7/07 2:51:08 PM, smaxwell(--nospam--at) writes:
But keep in mind that when you run your nice little structural analysis model using equivalent lateral seismic loads from the code, the resulting deflection is NOT the actual deflection of the structure under some theoretical seismic event.  It is the "equivalent" elastic deflection.  To get an idea of what the REAL inelastic deflection in theory would be, you must multiply that elastic deflection by the Csubd factor to get the inelastic deflection.  And that deflection will be QUITE more significant than any elastic deflection from wind.
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rhkratzse(--nospam--at) [mailto:Rhkratzse(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Wednesday, November 07, 2007 1:20 PM
To: charles(--nospam--at); seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Wind drift

In a message dated 11/7/07 9:10:08 AM, charles(--nospam--at) writes:

How can deflection from wind forces be different from deflection from seismic forces?  Deflection is deflection.

Although a given mount of deflection might be acceptable if it occurs only every few decades, as in a strong earthquake, but might not be acceptable if it occurs daily during a windy winter.


See what's new at