Structural Engineering: 2007-07-29

Friday, August 3, 2007

RE:Aluminum, Stainless Steel, and Fiber Glass-Cost Comparison

Don't forget the grade and types of material. A 316 stainless is cheap
compared to Carpenter 20.

Regards,
Harold Sprague

>From: "Pinyon Engineering" <Pinyonengineering@hughes.net>
>Reply-To: <seaint@seaint.org>
>To: <seaint@seaint.org>
>Subject: RE:Aluminum, Stainless Steel, and Fiber Glass-Cost Comparison
>Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:10:43 -0700
>
>Sid
>I think to figure this out you need to souce the components like a
>contractor would. do some preliminary calcs to get member sizes the call
>the suppliers to figure out material costs. Talk with the local
>fabrication shop or contractor to see what they are able or willing to
>build for you. I think your structure is too unique and cost
>generalization won't work.
>
>
>Tim Rudolph
>Pinyon Engineering
>
>
>
>Subject: Aluminum, Stainless Steel, and Fiber Glass-Cost Comparison
>From: "Lakhani, Sid" <slakhani@ebmud.com>
>To: <seaint@seaint.org>
>
>This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
>
>------_=_NextPart_001_01C7D530.E36F12FC
>Content-Type: text/plain;
>charset="us-ascii"
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
>
>I am posting this question again.
>
>=20
>
>I have designed a service platform with fiber glass grating with:
>
>=20
>
>Live load 100 psf
>
>Grating span 4 ft
>
>Support beams C12 aluminum (11 ft span)
>
>Support Columns 4 inch aluminum pipe
>
>Approximate Area 500 sq ft
>
>=20
>
>I am revising the support beam and columns materials to Stainless Steel
>or Fiber Glass.
>
>I would like to know the cost comparison. Can any body inform me
>approximate costs per lb for aluminum, stainless steel and fiber glass
>alternatives?
>
>=20
>
>Thanks!
>
>=20
>
>Sid Lakhani

_________________________________________________________________
See what you're getting into…before you go there

http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_preview_0507

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* 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@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

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

Re: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Tim,

These are generally quite good ideas.

The only one I would take issue with is adding a plate to the bottom of the gluelam. If there is any "working" of the system you may develop some "slop" in the connections in which case the performance (at serviceability loading) may not live up to expectations. At factored load cases the system would probably work O.K.

Regards,

H. Daryl Richardson

----- Original Message -----

From: Pinyon Engineering

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, August 03, 2007 1:23 PM

Subject: RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

If you want to remove bottom laminations ---- can't you add a rectangular bar to the bottom of the beam attach it with SDS screws very frequently. then calc it using a transformed section thingey like in the PE exam reference book. Or bolt steel rectangular bar to the sides of the beam thru bolt the beam and ignor the wood - only use it to stabilize the side plates( say 1/4" thick x 12" plate x 21 feet long. or the eaisrer may be to add GLB next to the original or replace the original. this may get very expensive for not much gain. why not furr the entire ceiling down to the bottom of the beam.

something different

Tim Rudolph

Pinyon Engineering

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

If you want to remove bottom laminations ---- can't you add a rectangular bar to the bottom of the beam attach it with SDS screws very frequently. then calc it using a transformed section thingey like in the PE exam reference book. Or bolt steel rectangular bar to the sides of the beam thru bolt the beam and ignor the wood - only use it to stabilize the side plates( say 1/4" thick x 12" plate x 21 feet long. or the eaisrer may be to add GLB next to the original or replace the original. this may get very expensive for not much gain. why not furr the entire ceiling down to the bottom of the beam.

something different

Tim Rudolph

Pinyon Engineering

RE:Aluminum, Stainless Steel, and Fiber Glass-Cost Comparison

Sid

I think to figure this out you need to souce the components like a contractor would. do some preliminary calcs to get member sizes the call the suppliers to figure out material costs. Talk with the local fabrication shop or contractor to see what they are able or willing to build for you. I think your structure is too unique and cost generalization won't work.

Tim Rudolph

Pinyon Engineering

Subject: Aluminum, Stainless Steel, and Fiber Glass-Cost Comparison
From: "Lakhani, Sid" <slakhani@ebmud.com>
To: <seaint@seaint.org>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C7D530.E36F12FC
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I am posting this question again.

=20

I have designed a service platform with fiber glass grating with:

=20

Live load 100 psf

Grating span 4 ft

Support beams C12 aluminum (11 ft span)

Support Columns 4 inch aluminum pipe

Approximate Area 500 sq ft

=20

I am revising the support beam and columns materials to Stainless Steel
or Fiber Glass.

I would like to know the cost comparison. Can any body inform me
approximate costs per lb for aluminum, stainless steel and fiber glass
alternatives?

=20

Thanks!

=20

Sid Lakhani

Thursday, August 2, 2007

Re: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Thanks for the replies. I think I will just design the channel to take all the load since I am not sure what the grade of the "filler" laminations are and I do not want to take the time to find out.

On 8/2/07, Bill Cain <bcainse@aol.com> wrote:

If you are removing the tension lams, Like Tarek, I'd make sure the steel could take the entire load. You would need to consult with APA or AITC to determine new allowable stresses for the GLB with the lams removed if you want it to take anything. It is difficult to get a good connection between the two materials.Regards,

Bill Cain, SE

Berkeley CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Tarek Mokhtar < tarooky@earthlink.net>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 11:42 am
Subject: RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc
Erik,

There are a few issues with transferring the load, bolting, stiffness, etc from the glb to the steel section, and it also appears that you are removing some of the high strength laminations from the bottom of the beam,

I would design the new steel section to handle ALL the load, but that's just me

Tarek Mokhtar, SE

Laguna Beach

When you say "taking off a few laminations" it sounds to me as if you are proposing cutting off the lower portion of the existing glulam beam, is that correct? If so, you'll want to be sure to take into account the new grade of lumber that you have at the tension face of your beam when figuring F'b.

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com ]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

--

Tarek Mokhtar, SE
TMM Structural Engineers, Inc
31645 S. Coast Hwy
Laguna Beach, CA., 92651
949-499-6254
949-499-2777 Fax
AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com .

RE: HSS Framing

Hollow Steel Sections seem to be a regular research topic covered by many
publications.

The following publications are examples for sources of information:

1) The Structural Engineer (IStructE (UK))
2) The Australian Journal of Structural Engineering
3) Steel Construction (Journal of Australian Steel Institute (ASI). Formerly
AISC(Aust.))

Most of the research papers concern distortion of tube walls at connections.
I haven't read them in detail, therefore cannot advice what their
recommendations are.

The main design guides appear to be by CIDECT: http://www.cidect.org/
(CIDECT: The International Committee for Research and Technical Support for
Hollow Section Structures.)

The CIDECT publications are also available from ASI and possibly AISC(US).

Regards
Conrad Harrison
B.Tech (mfg & mech), MIIE, gradTIEAust
mailto:sch.tectonic@bigpond.com
Adelaide
South Australia

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Eribarne [mailto:jeribarne@bak.rr.com]
Sent: Friday, 3 August 2007 07:24
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: HSS Framing

We are designing steel structures made from HSS sections. I am interested
in any rules or advice that govern the shape of the beam members. For
example, we may be comfortable with TS10X2 or TS 10X4 beams carrying steel
TS purlins framing in from one side only.

But what if the carrying beam begins to get wider such as a TS10X10,
receiving framing from one side only? This would seem to add torsion to the
beam, but would it also tend to distort the beam? As the beam grows wider,
with loading from only one side, does there come a point where the vertical
side opposite the load becomes ineffective?

Also, what if the beam is not supported on columns, but by outlookers also
framing in from one side? Would the TS 10X10 tend to distort, because it is
only being supported on one vertical face.

Thanks in advance and much appreciation for any insight and input.

Joseph Eribarne
661-392-1124
jeribarne@bak.rr.com

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

Re: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

If you are removing the tension lams, Like Tarek, I'd make sure the steel could take the entire load. You would need to consult with APA or AITC to determine new allowable stresses for the GLB with the lams removed if you want it to take anything. It is difficult to get a good connection between the two materials.Regards,

Bill Cain, SE

Berkeley CA

-----Original Message-----
From: Tarek Mokhtar <tarooky@earthlink.net>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 11:42 am
Subject: RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Erik,

There are a few issues with transferring the load, bolting, stiffness, etc from the glb to the steel section, and it also appears that you are removing some of the high strength laminations from the bottom of the beam,

I would design the new steel section to handle ALL the load, but that's just me

Tarek Mokhtar, SE

Laguna Beach

When you say "taking off a few laminations" it sounds to me as if you are proposing cutting off the lower portion of the existing glulam beam, is that correct? If so, you'll want to be sure to take into account the new grade of lumber that you have at the tension face of your beam when figuring F'b.

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

--

Tarek Mokhtar, SE
TMM Structural Engineers, Inc
31645 S. Coast Hwy
Laguna Beach, CA., 92651
949-499-6254
949-499-2777 Fax

AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

HSS Framing

Also, what if the beam is not supported on columns, but by outlookers also
framing in from one side? Would the TS 10X10 tend to distort, because it is
only being supported on one vertical face.

Thanks in advance and much appreciation for any insight and input.

Joseph Eribarne
661-392-1124
jeribarne@bak.rr.com

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

RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Under ACI 318-05 Appendix D, D8.1, The minimum spacing of post-installed
anchors is 6*do, 4*do for c.i.p anchors. Under certain circumstances an
exception in D8.4 allows a smaller spacing for an anchor sized do if the
strength is based on a smaller assumed anchor diameter do'.

Under D.6.2.3, Equation D-25 only applies if s is not less than 2.5".

There may be other restrictions on minimum anchor spacing that I haven't
related here.

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: William.Sherman@CH2M.com [mailto:William.Sherman@CH2M.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 4:01 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

See ACI 318-05, Appendix D, Section D.8. Good practice would still
dictate consideration of concrete consolidation - rebar spacing
limitations would provide reasonable minimum spacings.

Bill Sherman
CH2M HILL / DEN
720-286-2792

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell@umich.edu]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:38 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Not that I am aware of. It would just be rebar spacing type
requirements (i.e. requirements to insure concrete around the anchor rod
and nut/head).

The possible exception is something in Appendix D. I have not really
"played" too much with Appendix D, I am don't know if there is any thing
in there. If I get a chance, maybe I will take a looksie.

Scott
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:18 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Is there a minimum spacing for anchor bolts besides what's required to
allow
concrete to flow around the head and body of the bolt per ACI?

TIA

Rand

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

RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

according to the drawing on msn the train is on the north side

"Scott Maxwell"
<smaxwell@umich.e
du> To
<seaint@seaint.org>
08/02/2007 02:24 cc
PM
Subject
RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota
Please respond to
<seaint@seaint.or
g>

I was thinking the same thing, but it is unclear from the video which side
of the river the camera was on (I believe it mentions North side) and I am
not familiar enough with area to know if the North side was the side with
the train or not. You cannot see the train in the video.

Scott
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 12:47 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

I cannot see the video from my location but from the still photos I would
guess the collapse stated where the train passes under it, is that the
right
side?

"Scott Maxwell"
<smaxwell@umich.e
du> To
<seaint@seaint.org>
08/02/2007 11:35 cc
AM
Subject
RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota
Please respond to
<seaint@seaint.or
g>

>From that video, it is kind of looking like something happened near or
>at
the support/pier that was just off camera to the right. Look like it
dropped pretty much straight down but starting on the right side (in the
video). It will be interesting to learn what the investigation teams come
up with.

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI
-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Blomberg [mailto:paul.blomberg@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:34 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

CNN has a video showing the bridge collaspe from a security camera on
the north side.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/08/02/vosli.mn.i35w.bridge.collapse

.side.view.cnn?iref=mpvideosview

Paul.

On 8/1/07, Scott Maxwell <smaxwell@umich.edu> wrote:
For those that are not aware, you might want to turn on CNN or Fox
News, etc...there was a major bridge collapse.

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI

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

RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Hilti's Profis program enforces a minimum bolt spacing based on bolt
diameter and embedment depth but it is not apparent what rational is
being used. It allows design based half a dozen methods but it will only
specify proprietary Hilti post-installed anchors. These may have their
own spacing requirements.

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: William.Sherman@CH2M.com [mailto:William.Sherman@CH2M.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 4:01 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

See ACI 318-05, Appendix D, Section D.8. Good practice would still
dictate consideration of concrete consolidation - rebar spacing
limitations would provide reasonable minimum spacings.

Bill Sherman
CH2M HILL / DEN
720-286-2792

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell@umich.edu]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:38 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Not that I am aware of. It would just be rebar spacing type
requirements (i.e. requirements to insure concrete around the anchor rod
and nut/head).

The possible exception is something in Appendix D. I have not really
"played" too much with Appendix D, I am don't know if there is any thing
in there. If I get a chance, maybe I will take a looksie.

Scott
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:18 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Is there a minimum spacing for anchor bolts besides what's required to
allow
concrete to flow around the head and body of the bolt per ACI?

TIA

Rand

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

RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

See ACI 318-05, Appendix D, Section D.8. Good practice would still
dictate consideration of concrete consolidation - rebar spacing
limitations would provide reasonable minimum spacings.

Bill Sherman
CH2M HILL / DEN
720-286-2792

-----Original Message-----
From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell@umich.edu]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 1:38 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Not that I am aware of. It would just be rebar spacing type
requirements (i.e. requirements to insure concrete around the anchor rod
and nut/head).

The possible exception is something in Appendix D. I have not really
"played" too much with Appendix D, I am don't know if there is any thing
in there. If I get a chance, maybe I will take a looksie.

Scott
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:18 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Is there a minimum spacing for anchor bolts besides what's required to
allow
concrete to flow around the head and body of the bolt per ACI?

TIA

Rand

RE: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Not that I am aware of. It would just be rebar spacing type requirements
(i.e. requirements to insure concrete around the anchor rod and nut/head).
The possible exception is something in Appendix D. I have not really
"played" too much with Appendix D, I am don't know if there is any thing in
there. If I get a chance, maybe I will take a looksie.

Scott
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:18 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Is there a minimum spacing for anchor bolts besides what's required to allow
concrete to flow around the head and body of the bolt per ACI?

TIA

Rand

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

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I believe that if you get the AITC technical note on glulam laminations, you can get a rather good idea of the grade of the material in the middle laminations. It has been a little while since I look at it, so I don't recall how specific it gets.

Regards,

Scott

Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Jerry Coombs [mailto:JCoombs@carollo.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 2:43 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Exactly. Those are "filler" layers, and are generally low-grade. Reality is, you don't know what they are.

RE: loading, with the proper number of connectors, you can ensure that they will be loaded "simultaneously", but you still won't know what the wood contribution is.

>>> On 8/2/2007 at 1:30 PM, "Josh Comfort" <jcomfort@ggbse.com> wrote:

When you say "taking off a few laminations" it sounds to me as if you are proposing cutting off the lower portion of the existing glulam beam, is that correct? If so, you'll want to be sure to take into account the new grade of lumber that you have at the tension face of your beam when figuring F'b.

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

Scott
Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Rand W Holtham [mailto:RHoltham@CBI.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 12:47 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

I cannot see the video from my location but from the still photos I would
guess the collapse stated where the train passes under it, is that the right
side?

"Scott Maxwell"
<smaxwell@umich.e
du> To
<seaint@seaint.org>
08/02/2007 11:35 cc
AM
Subject
RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota
Please respond to
<seaint@seaint.or
g>

Regards,

CNN has a video showing the bridge collaspe from a security camera on
the north side.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/08/02/vosli.mn.i35w.bridge.collapse
.side.view.cnn?iref=mpvideosview

Paul.

On 8/1/07, Scott Maxwell <smaxwell@umich.edu> wrote:
For those that are not aware, you might want to turn on CNN or Fox
News, etc...there was a major bridge collapse.

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI

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

Re: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

If you are removing lams, I'd basically ignore the GLB's contribution since the good wood on the lower fibers are gone.

Are you using an unbraced length = to the span for the channel? If you are bolting to the existing GLB or connecting to the diaphragm somehow, you can reduce that for LTB. What about a W8 or W10? Shore joists/rafters, remove (E) header, put in new PSL, Powerbeam, or Steel flush beam?

-g

On 8/2/07, Jerry Coombs <JCoombs@carollo.com> wrote:

Exactly. Those are "filler" layers, and are generally low-grade. Reality is, you don't know what they are.

RE: loading, with the proper number of connectors, you can ensure that they will be loaded "simultaneously", but you still won't know what the wood contribution is.

>>> On 8/2/2007 at 1:30 PM, "Josh Comfort" <jcomfort@ggbse.com> wrote:

When you say "taking off a few laminations" it sounds to me as if you are proposing cutting off the lower portion of the existing glulam beam, is that correct? If so, you'll want to be sure to take into account the new grade of lumber that you have at the tension face of your beam when figuring F'b.

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto: erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

--
-gm

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Actually, your glulam will carry all the dead load unless you shore it during installation of the channels, or unless you pre-deflect the channels prior to installation to pick up some of the dead load.

Bob

From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

Re: IBC Wood Frame Shear Wall Table -- panels over gypsum

That's my understanding as well, when you have a wall right on the property line, this happens due to fire rating.

-g

On 8/2/07, Mark Deardorff <mark@rstavares.com> wrote:

I suppose it would only matter if it affects fire rating. I think originally the gyp had to be applied directly to the studs meaning that the plywood could only be applied over it. If that hasn't changed it might indeed be a problem.

Mark E. Deardorff, SE
R & S Tavares Associates, Inc
9815 Carroll Canyon Road
Suite 206
San Diego, CA 92131
Phone: 858-444-3344
Phone: 209-863-8928
Cell: 209-765-5592
mark@rstavares.com
www.rstavares.com

CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY NOTICE:
This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain confidential and proprietary information and may be legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. It may be read and used solely by the intended recipient(s), and any review, use or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender and delete this e-mail, including any attachments, from your system immediately without reading, copying or distributing them. Thank you for your cooperation. R&S Tavares Associates Inc. and its client retain all proprietary rights they may have in the information.

From: Tom Skaggs [mailto:tom.skaggs@apawood.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:34 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: IBC Wood Frame Shear Wall Table -- panels over gypsum

I'm curious if anybody uses the Panels (wood structural panels) Applied OVER ½" or 5/8" Gypsum Sheathing portion of the IBC wood frame shear wall table (Table 2306.4.1). It appears that this portion of the table may be a relic of the Uniform Building Code. If this portion of the table were dropped, I'm curious how much heartburn this might cause.

Thanks in advance,

Tom

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas D. Skaggs, Ph.D., P.E.
Manager, Product Evaluation

Technical Services Division
APA - The Engineered Wood Association
7011 S. 19th Street
Tacoma, WA 98466
ph: 253/565-6600
fx: 253/620-7235
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

--
-gm

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Exactly. Those are "filler" layers, and are generally low-grade. Reality is, you don't know what they are.

RE: loading, with the proper number of connectors, you can ensure that they will be loaded "simultaneously", but you still won't know what the wood contribution is.

>>> On 8/2/2007 at 1:30 PM, "Josh Comfort" <jcomfort@ggbse.com> wrote:

When you say "taking off a few laminations" it sounds to me as if you are proposing cutting off the lower portion of the existing glulam beam, is that correct? If so, you'll want to be sure to take into account the new grade of lumber that you have at the tension face of your beam when figuring F'b.

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Erik,

I would design the new steel section to handle ALL the load, but that's just me

Tarek Mokhtar, SE

Laguna Beach

When you say "taking off a few laminations" it sounds to me as if you are proposing cutting off the lower portion of the existing glulam beam, is that correct? If so, you'll want to be sure to take into account the new grade of lumber that you have at the tension face of your beam when figuring F'b.

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

--

Tarek Mokhtar, SE
TMM Structural Engineers, Inc
31645 S. Coast Hwy
Laguna Beach, CA., 92651
949-499-6254
949-499-2777 Fax

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

-----Original Message-----
From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

Aluminum, Stainless Steel, and Fiber Glass-Cost Comparison

I am posting this question again.

I have designed a service platform with fiber glass grating with:

Live load 100 psf

Grating span 4 ft

Support beams C12 aluminum (11 ft span)

Support Columns 4 inch aluminum pipe

Approximate Area 500 sq ft

I am revising the support beam and columns materials to Stainless Steel or Fiber Glass.

I would like to know the cost comparison. Can any body inform me approximate costs per lb for aluminum, stainless steel and fiber glass alternatives?

Thanks!

Sid Lakhani

Re: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Erik,

If you can insure that both beams will be loaded simultaneously then each beam will take the applied load in proportion to their stiffness.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor

"erik gibbs" <erik.gibbs@gmail.com>
08/02/2007 10:58 AM
Please respond to seaint

To	seaint@seaint.org
cc
Subject	Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Now to my new question. I have an existing 5-1/8" x 15" Glu Lam beam that spans 21'-6" in a garage of an existing residence. The owner wants to turn this into a flush beam, which means taking a few laminations off and sistering a new beam next to the GLB. I want to use a steel channel, C10x15.3, but this section, when checked in bending fails under the full load. Also the GLB fails under the full load when checked by itself. My question is how would you check/calc both beams in a rational method, instead of just saying that the GLB takes 50% of the load and the steel beam takes the other 50%?

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

------------------------------------------------------------ The information transmitted is intended only for the person  or entity to which it is addressed and may contain  proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.   If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are  hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,  distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon  this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please  contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.    Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual  sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.   ------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

Percentage of load carried by GluLam = GluLam EI / (GluLam EI + Channel EI)

Percentage of load carried by Channel = Channel EI / (Glulam EI + Channel EI)

E = modulus of elasticity of member

I = moment of inertia of member

From: erik gibbs [mailto:erik.gibbs@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:59 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

Glu-Lam beam with Steel Channel calc

I previously posted a question about a plan check question for out of plane loading on a shearwall and to all that posted I thank you, it cleared up any questions that I had.

Thanks

Erik Gibbs

drywall on plywood fire rating

Mark:

3 places to look. 1. UBC Table 7-B fire ratings of partitions, IBC Table 720.1. 2. Gypsum Association (GA) www.gypsum.org. Fire ratings for wood stud partitions. A similar condition is GA file No WP3330 using wood fiberboard under drywall. 3. U.L. publishes fire rated design assemblies.

Respectfully,

Bob Freeman, Architect, Structural Designer

Integrated Design Services, Inc.

(949) 387-8500

RE: IBC Wood Frame Shear Wall Table -- panels over gypsum

I suppose it would only matter if it affects fire rating. I think originally the gyp had to be applied directly to the studs meaning that the plywood could only be applied over it. If that hasn't changed it might indeed be a problem.

Mark E. Deardorff, SE
R & S Tavares Associates, Inc
9815 Carroll Canyon Road
Suite 206
San Diego, CA 92131
Phone: 858-444-3344
Phone: 209-863-8928
Cell: 209-765-5592
mark@rstavares.com
www.rstavares.com

CONFIDENTIALITY AND SECURITY NOTICE:
This e-mail, including any attachments, may contain confidential and proprietary information and may be legally privileged or otherwise protected by law. It may be read and used solely by the intended recipient(s), and any review, use or distribution by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not an intended recipient, please notify us immediately by replying to the sender and delete this e-mail, including any attachments, from your system immediately without reading, copying or distributing them. Thank you for your cooperation. R&S Tavares Associates Inc. and its client retain all proprietary rights they may have in the information.

From: Tom Skaggs [mailto:tom.skaggs@apawood.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 9:34 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: IBC Wood Frame Shear Wall Table -- panels over gypsum

I'm curious if anybody uses the Panels (wood structural panels) Applied OVER ½" or 5/8" Gypsum Sheathing portion of the IBC wood frame shear wall table (Table 2306.4.1). It appears that this portion of the table may be a relic of the Uniform Building Code. If this portion of the table were dropped, I'm curious how much heartburn this might cause.

Thanks in advance,

Tom

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas D. Skaggs, Ph.D., P.E.
Manager, Product Evaluation

Technical Services Division
APA - The Engineered Wood Association
7011 S. 19th Street
Tacoma, WA 98466
ph: 253/565-6600
fx: 253/620-7235
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

I cannot see the video from my location but from the still photos I would
guess the collapse stated where the train passes under it, is that the
right side?

"Scott Maxwell"
<smaxwell@umich.e
du> To
<seaint@seaint.org>
08/02/2007 11:35 cc
AM
Subject
RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota
Please respond to
<seaint@seaint.or
g>

From that video, it is kind of looking like something happened near or at
the support/pier that was just off camera to the right. Look like it
dropped pretty much straight down but starting on the right side (in the
video). It will be interesting to learn what the investigation teams come
up with.

Regards,

CNN has a video showing the bridge collaspe from a security camera on
the north side.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/08/02/vosli.mn.i35w.bridge.collapse.side.view.cnn?iref=mpvideosview

Paul.

On 8/1/07, Scott Maxwell <smaxwell@umich.edu> wrote:
For those that are not aware, you might want to turn on CNN or Fox
News, etc...there was a major bridge collapse.

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI

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

IBC Wood Frame Shear Wall Table -- panels over gypsum

I’m curious if anybody uses the Panels (wood structural panels) Applied OVER ½” or 5/8” Gypsum Sheathing portion of the IBC wood frame shear wall table (Table 2306.4.1). It appears that this portion of the table may be a relic of the Uniform Building Code. If this portion of the table were dropped, I’m curious how much heartburn this might cause.

Thanks in advance,

Tom

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas D. Skaggs, Ph.D., P.E.
Manager, Product Evaluation

Technical Services Division
APA - The Engineered Wood Association
7011 S. 19th Street
Tacoma, WA 98466
ph: 253/565-6600
fx: 253/620-7235
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

RE: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

From that video, it is kind of looking like something happened near or at the support/pier that was just off camera to the right. Look like it dropped pretty much straight down but starting on the right side (in the video). It will be interesting to learn what the investigation teams come up with.

Regards,

Scott

Adrian, MI

-----Original Message-----
From: Paul Blomberg [mailto:paul.blomberg@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, August 02, 2007 10:34 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

CNN has a video showing the bridge collaspe from a security camera on the north side.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/08/02/vosli.mn.i35w.bridge.collapse.side.view.cnn?iref=mpvideosview

Paul.

On 8/1/07, Scott Maxwell <smaxwell@umich.edu> wrote:

For those that are not aware, you might want to turn on CNN or Fox News, etc...there was a major bridge collapse.

Regards,

Scott

Adrian, MI

Re: Bridge collapse in Minnesota

CNN has a video showing the bridge collaspe from a security camera on the north side.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/08/02/vosli.mn.i35w.bridge.collapse.side.view.cnn?iref=mpvideosview

Paul.

On 8/1/07, Scott Maxwell <smaxwell@umich.edu> wrote:

For those that are not aware, you might want to turn on CNN or Fox News, etc...there was a major bridge collapse.

Regards,

Scott

Adrian, MI

ACI Minimum AB Spacing

Is there a minimum spacing for anchor bolts besides what's required to
allow concrete to flow around the head and body of the bolt per ACI?

TIA

Rand

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

Wednesday, August 1, 2007

Bridge collapse in Minnesota

For those that are not aware, you might want to turn on CNN or Fox News, etc...there was a major bridge collapse.

Regards,

Scott

Adrian, MI

PLASTIC BENDING

question:

Subject: Z properties, calculations
From: "Jason Christensen" <jason.christensen@wcaeng.com>
To: <seaint@seaint.org>

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C7D38B.F48D2D5A
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Does anyone know where I can find a table that would include the
equations for calculating the plastic section, Z (in^3), for common
shapes. =20

ANSWER:

Kaliszky, S. Plasticity. Theory and Engineering Applications. Elsevier, 1989

A uni library will have it.

Try an interlibrary loan from your local one.

If you fail, I can send you my own, less complete.

Sincerely,

Gregory from Oz

Tuesday, July 31, 2007

Re: Wave Action - Connecticut shore line

Check NAVFAC DM-26, Design Manual: Harbor and Coastal Facilities.
Waves and Wave Pressures is in Section 4 of Chapter 2.
My edition is dated 1968, so there's probably something newer out there.

Neil Moore, SE, SECB
neil moore and associates
consulting structural engieners
shingle springs, california

distressed structures investigations

At 09:11 AM 7/31/2007, you wrote:

Does any one know where I can find a good reference for the above subject?

I am designing a massive Pile Cap foundation being supported by a 36� diameter Piles. What concerned
me is the deflection of the piles in case a storm or hurricane strikes and will create this monster waves.

Thanks,

Julius Micayas
Senior Lead Structural Engineer

Phone - 504-841-3014 (direct)
504 837-5275 (office)
Fax - 504-837-2986

e-mail: jmicayas@riverconsulting.com