Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Main Wind Force vs C&C Wind Force

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
A wall acting out of plane is not acting in a MWFRS function, therefore I would check C&C plus axial unless the trib area is greater than 700 sf then you can use MWFRS (ASCE 7-05 Sect. A separate check would be when the wall is acting in a MWFRS function. In my point of view columns and walls pull double duty and should be checked for C&C always and also Main Wind if they are also part of the MWFRS. Also, always include axial.

- Jeremy

Quoting "Gerard Madden, SE" <gmse4603(--nospam--at)>:


If the global lateral stability of the structure depends on the member in
question, it is Main Wind Force Resisting System.

If not, it is a component.

Regardless, members must be designed for the all the loads it needs to


On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 8:32 AM, Jason Christensen <jason(--nospam--at)> wrote:

 A senior associate and myself are having a debate.

So please correct me if I am wrong:

Desinging a wall element for out of plane force (be it masonry, wood, etc.)

When checking the element for forces that are combine, (i.e. axial + wind)
one should use the MWFRS forces.  However that same element must then be
checked for the C&C load, but that C&C load is not required to be in
combination with any other loads.

If this is incorrect please let me know, also if anyone has a reference
that would show an example of this I would be greatful.



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