Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Yet another Wind question

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
You might need to apply C&C pressures to a MWFRS element...as another load
case to consider (i.e. a shearwall will get designed in place due to MWFRS
pressures, but out of plane for C&C pressures).  But, I get your
point/intent.  You are 100% correct in that it is function not size that
matters (OK, my dirty mind is now having fun with that one).

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI  

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Banbury [mailto:cbanbury(--nospam--at)arkengineering.net] 
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2008 11:26 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Yet another Wind question


I wasn't really meaning to comment on the application of MWFRS pressures to
C&C elements. 

I sometimes hear the argument that C&C pressures must be applied to all
MWFRS elements with a TA less than 700sf. I was just pointing out that the
definition of MWFRS elements is based on function and not related to TA.

Christopher Banbury, PE
President

Ark Engineering, Inc.
PO Box 10129, Brooksville, FL 34603
22 North Broad ST, Brooksville, FL 34601
Phone: (352) 754-2424
Fax: (352) 754-2412
www.arkengineering.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell(--nospam--at)umich.edu] 
Sent: Thursday, February 07, 2008 2:31 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Yet another Wind question

"The tributary area of 700sf is not a part of the definition of MWFRS but is
a helpful exception that allows C&C elements with TA larger than 700sf to be
treated as MWFRS. As you say, if the intent is there then the rules should
be revised."

That is what we (or at least I) was talking about.  The point is the MWFRS
tables can end up getting used for MORE than just MWFRS pressures.  For C&C
items with large trib areas, you end up using the MWFRS pressures for C&C
purposes.

You are correct in that such an element would NOT be a MWFRS ELEMENT...it
would still be a C&C ELEMENT.  That distinction is determined by its
function as you pointed out.  But, the point was that some C&C ELEMENTS get
large enough that you use MWFRS PRESSURES to design it.

It is an important distiction even if it ultimately just semantics (you only
really care if it is a MWFRS or C&C element to determine which method is
used to determine pressures...thus, it matters little where you CALL an
element a MWFRS or C&C element if it ultimately using the MWFRS method to
get the wind design pressures).

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********