Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Diagonal rod bracing

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

        You could consider Diwidag as your rods. I seldom see these referenced on the list.  They are high strength material with upset deformations like concrete reinforcing bars (which is exactly what they are).  The upset deformations form threads which can screw into couplings and anchors that will develop the full strength of the rod.
        Dywidag is a German company.  Their product is readily available and commonly used in Canada; but, as I said above, I have not seen them referenced on the list, therefore you may have an availability problem in your area.
        Just some thoughts that you may or may not find useful.
H. Daryl Richardson
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, March 13, 2010 1:00 PM
Subject: Re: Diagonal rod bracing

  Thank you for the reply and the warning. Section 1613.9.9.6 does indeed prohibit the use of tension only braces, but Sec 9406.7.4 states that you can use rod braces in hillside construction if you use 5-times the load, and the connections must develop the full yield value of the rods. Pretty draconian requirements and I may not be able to comply, so I'm thinking to use compression braces.
Charles Laines, S.E.
In a message dated 3/11/2010 6:12:37 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, oshin(--nospam--at) writes:



I’m not sure if you are aware of L.A. Hillside Ordinance, but you need to look at Sec. 1613.9 of the 2008 City of L.A. Amendments.

Tension only bracing is no longer permitted.


Here’s the link




Oshin Tosounian, S.E.


From: David Topete [mailto:d.topete73(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2010 5:06 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)
Subject: Re: Diagonal rod bracing


I don't know why you wouldn't be able to argue.... 

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 5:05 PM, David Topete <d.topete73(--nospam--at)> wrote:

Well, you could you super-duper conservative and design for R = 1.0 along the line of bracing.  The superstructure would be wood shearwalls or steel frames deigned for their respective modification factor.  the old CBC of '01 had rod bracing systems.  I don't know why you would be able to argue for an equivalent R factor based on '07 CBC.  Good luck.


On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:51 PM, <ENGRLAINES(--nospam--at)> wrote:

I’ve been asked to provide guidance on remodeling a single story wood framed “stilt house” in the Los Angeles hills built in the ‘60’s. The house is supported by heavy wood girders and posts with crossed steel rods between all the posts to carry lateral loads to the grade beam and caisson foundation. No existing original construction plans. I expect to have a geotechnical report for the foundation, but the rod bracing is mine. I cannot find an exact fit for the seismic “R” values: a wood frame with steel bracing. The remodeling will be extensive so the whole building will have to be updated per the current code. I can change out the rod bracing with steel rolled sections but that still leaves a wood frame with steel bracing. Any thoughts?


Charles Laines, S.E.



David Topete, SE

David Topete, SE