Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: 3-D modeling

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I don't see an exception in the code to allow a hand analysis for a light
timber building with flexible diaphragms.  If a buildings diaphragms are
flexible and cannot transmit torsion and the diaphragms distribute force on a
tributary basis then I don't see the benefit of a 3-D model because you'd get
the same results by hand.  I don't see the point, even if there is a soft
story or weak story because of the way the loads are assumed to be
distributed.  The building code needs an exception for light timber buildings
with flexible diaphragms.

Also in my opinion there would be no benefit to doing a 3-D finite element
model for 1600 square foot two story snoopy house with 2' simpson strong wall
garage front piers and if a plan reviewer makes you do one then they should
be smothered in honey and thrown on an ant hill.

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthew Shear [mailto:MShear(--nospam--at)] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 1:31 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: 3-D modeling

Based on ASCE Section 12.7.3, a 3-D model is required if a structure has an
irregularity type 1, 4, or 5.  Would this be required for a light framed
shear wall structure?  Or even on a structure with a flexible diaphragm?


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********