Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: FTG UPLIFT[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: FTG UPLIFT
- From: "Stuart, Matthew" <MStuart(--nospam--at)Pennoni.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:25:25 +0000
- Accept-language: en-US
I have a method of calculating a way to engage a large area of the slab on grade above as a part of the uplift resistance.
D. Matthew Stuart, P.E., S.E., F.ASCE, SECB
Pennoni Associates Inc.
My office just served as the engineer for PEMB foundations on a large project. We did use the 0.6 factor on the self-weight of the footings, but there was a lot of discussion in our office about it. We could not find an authoritative source that would allow using 100% of the footing weight, although it seems to make sense for the reasons you describe. I'm interested to hear what others have done.
I wanted to see how many are using 0.6xFTG Self Weight of the footing when checking uplift due to wind or using the entire footing weight, 1.0xFTG Self Weight to help resist uplift. There
appears to be several engineers that use 0.6x(everything else dead load except the footing) + 1.0x(FTG Self Weight) to check versus 1.0xGross wind uplift. The concrete has no allowance to be lighter than what you assume, and the footings have to be consistently
dug to at least the dimensions you specify on your drawings. Is there anyone involved in forensics of metal buildings that have seen the footings uplift out of the ground when the code prescribed 0.6 wasn't factored on the footing self weight?
- Prev by Subject: RE: FTG UPLIFT
- Next by Subject: FTG UPLIFT
- Previous by thread: Re: FTG UPLIFT
- Next by thread: Re: FTG UPLIFT