Structural Engineering: 2007-11-11

Saturday, November 17, 2007

Re: Revit Structural

Garner, Robert wrote:
> Happily, most computer stores will continue to install XP on new
> machines if you wish
Yes, sure, they'll do it - for a fee. I suspect that the time will come
when MS will no longer allow OEM licenses for XP, particularly if Vista
looks like it's going to crater otherwise.

It's really too bad they didn't just present updates or refreshes to XP
instead of trying to convince us that Vista was this great new thing.
Meanwhile, they could have continued working on the original Longhorn
concept, which was supposed to be as revolutionary with respect to XP as
Windows NT was vis-a-vis Windows 3.x.

Alas, marketing imperatives overcame technical arguments, and Longhorn
may never come to be.

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* 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: 2006 IBC WIND ANALYSIS Question

Jason,

Case A involves the roof loading applied to the
parapet, which in a corner condition will result to
very high wind pressure. Any comments?
--- Jason Christensen <jason@wcaeng.com> wrote:

> If memory serves,
> For parapets: Case A = Pressure towards building
> Case B = Pressure away from building
> (suction)
> Not positive but the ASCE 7 Method 2 for sun shades
> or canopies, using
> the "partially enclosed" building requirements.
>
> Jason
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ed Najjarine, SE
> [mailto:en@najjarinestructures.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 1:26 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: 2006 IBC WIND ANALYSIS Question
>
> Ladies & Gents,
>
> Can someone please clarify (simplify) the wind
> loading
> on parapets in section 6.5.12.4.4 related to load
> case
> A & B. My results seem very high. Also which section
> best addresses the wind loading on canopies (or sun
> shades).
>
> Thanks in advance.
>
> Ed Najjarine, SE
> Irvine, CA
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* *******
> ******* ***
> * 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

> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ******
> ********
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* *******
> ******* ***
> * 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:
> *
> *

Ed Najjarine, SE

18818 Teller Ave. Ste. 120, Irvine, CA 92612
(949) 387-9440 T
(714) 412-4887 C
(949) 387-9207 F

www.najjarinestructures.com

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

RE: ADAPT or POSTEN ??

Stan,

We use the Adapt suite and are very happy with the results. There are a couple of areas where some refinement would be good, but overall the package is easy to use and very flexible.

The full suite from Adapt includes the traditional equivalent frame method, and also their Floor pro module is full FEA. The other benefit for our office is that Adapt is committed to integration with the CSI suite of software products, which we utilize, so the fit is good.

Bijan and Florian are very helpful with product support and training issues.

Paul Feather PE, SE

pfeather@SE-Solutions.net

www.SE-Solutions.net

From: Stan Caldwell [mailto:stancaldwell@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 3:20 PM
To: SEAINT Listserv
Subject: ADAPT or POSTEN ??

For the last few years, my practice has mostly been bridge design. However, every now and then, a significant building project comes along. This is one of those times. By the end of the year, my staff will start designing two building projects with a total of more than 40 floors. Most of the floors will likely be post-tensioned concrete construction. Both projects are located in Texas, well away from the Gulf Coast, so seismic and wind are not anticipated to be major issues.

The last time we maintained licenses on P/T software was back in the days of DOS. I assume that the two leading options today are the same that they were back then, ADAPT and POSTEN.

From recent hands-on experience, do any of you have recommendations on either of these programs?

Are there any other reasonable options that I am not yet aware of?

Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom on this subject.

Best regards,

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.

Richardson, Texas

Strawbale engineering (was: sust. engr)

Tim,

Thanks for your comment. I'm going to be working my first strawbale in the next week or two. The owners have agreed to go fairly conventional on their vertical and lateral supports (using the strawbale primarily as infill), but I will review the links you've posted. While I have some concerns about these buildings, they appear to be no less sound than the poorly constructed frame buildings I run across on a regular basis (i.e. - most people ignore similar concerns in stick buildings).

Jordan

Pinyon Engineering wrote:

Subject: Re: sustainable companies

well some are trying to do the weird green thing. check out http://www.strawbuilding.org/ that is the California Straw Building Association CASBA -- yes walls made of strawbales in high seismic zones (tax credit for using straw too!) a few years ago they got money from the state to do a structural testing program on strawbale walls and shear walls (testing research papers at http://www.ecobuildnetwork.org/). the result is a new book by Bruce King titled Design of Strawbale Buildings (the nerdest strawbale book ever) they did a full scale test of a plastered strawbale wall (got about 610 plf as a design value) (they also passed a 2-hour ASTM fire test). CASBA also has a draft appendix for strawbale construction before the California Building Standards Commission.

I have designed quite a few strawbale buildings. anyway check out the resource list from the CASBA website for engineers and firms that are building with straw and thinking of the world in a different way.

wow ! ! it looks like I over spent my $0.02

Tim Rudolph PE

writing this from my strawbale home/office -with 24" thick walls @ R30 walls & R50 attic insulation

Pinyon Engineering

115 Eagle Vista

Bishop CA 93514

3 little pig jokes welcomed

Friday, November 16, 2007

Re: Post-tensioned or reinforced ?

Kevin,

Others in my office have far more experience than I do, but I have picked up a few things. My thoughts concerning your questions:

Post-tensioned slabs are very common throughout the US -- I would venture that PT slabs are built far more than RC slabs. In most areas you can find contractors that are very familiar with PT, which does require more expertise than RC, both in design and construction.

PT advantages:
    - Longer spans or less thickness - PT makes more efficient use of both the concrete and the reinforcement, and as a result typically uses less of both. Less material usage is generally seen as "green".
    - Less deflection - the post-tensioning force can counteract the self-weight of the slab, resulting in much less dead load deflection. The designer can control the deflections to a much greater extent than with RC. However, the longer spans possible with PT can lead to live load deflection issues.
    - Durability - the post-tensioning force places the concrete permanently in compression, leading to fewer small cracks and less opportunity for water and chlorides to infiltrate the slab over time. Many engineers will specify higher PT forces at the roof levels of parking garages and other structures for this reason.
    - More control over the design - the structural engineer has more tools to influence the slab behavior.

PT disadvantages:
    - More complexity - PT construction requires much more skill on the contractor's part than does RC. Small errors can have large impacts. Tendons are stressed to a high force level when the concrete is only several days old.
    - Shrinkage and movement - The early stressing of the green concrete leads to more shrinkage than would be seen in an RC slab. If restraint is present that resists the shrinkage (e.g. a shear wall), cracks can develop in unexpected places.
    - Durability - PT slabs rely on the anchorages at the slab edges in order to maintain the force. In the past, there have been corrosion issues with anchorages which have led to costly repairs. The current state of the art promises much better long-term durability.
    - More control over the design - the structural engineer is responsible for more aspects of the slab behavior.

As a structural engineer and not a contractor, I cannot fully address the issue of cost. However, here in Hawaii, nearly every high-rise project utilizes PT to minimize the slab thickness. Since the building height is limited, a reduction in the slab height will allow an additional story or stories to be added to the project, which increases the value of the building. Many projects here have an 8'-6" floor-to-floor height: 8'-0" clear with a 6" slab. This is typically only possible with PT, unless the spans are short. Spans of 25 to 30 feet are routinely done with 6" slabs.

Many engineers are very familiar with PT, and many excellent resources are available online. It sounds as though you have an opportunity to become a leader and innovator in your region, with lots of experience to draw upon.

Best regards,
Daniel

----- Original Message ----
From: Kevin Below <kbofoz@gmail.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 4:52:37 PM
Subject: Post-tensioned or reinforced ?

Daniel, since you have a lot of experience with PT, I would like to ask you something I have been wondering about for a long time : What are the bottom-line advantages and disadvantages of PT vs RC slabs ?
In Quebec, I have never seen PT slabs being used, so there is little current field experience, although that could be brought in if it was worthwhile.
Is there an appreciable cost difference ? Advantage PT or RC ?
Deflection control ?
Slab thickness ?

What are the green aspects ?

Kevin

On Nov 16, 2007 8:26 PM, Daniel Popp < drp181@yahoo.com> wrote:

Stan,

Our office has done a great deal of high-rise PT design recently. We use both ADAPT and RAM Concept, which was known as Floor before being bought by RAM International (which is now owned by Bentley). Both programs have their strengths and weaknesses.

ADAPT is considered by many to be the industry standard, and is very good for two-dimensional design (design strips). I would recommend using the program to become more familiar with the design process, as it gives the user a simple two-dimensional design interface which makes adjusting the design easy. ADAPT has more recently introduced a three-dimensional finite element analysis option, which we have not used much yet. ADAPT Support is also beyond compare -- they even offer to model your slabs for you for a fee.

For complete design of two-way PT slab systems, RAM Concept is hard to beat. It performs a full three-dimensional analysis of the slab, including beams, drops, thickened areas, and support. The meshing of the slab is the best I've seen in any structural program. All design checks can be performed by the program, as well as punching shear checks and stud rail design. Concept is now integrated with RAM Structural System, meaning that geometry and loads can be sent both directions. This has not benefited our office, as we do not use RAM Concrete; I have been told by RAM that their Structural System cannot handle two-way slabs, meaning that extraneous beams must be added to the RSS model. Another downside: preliminary design is not as simple as in ADAPT, especially if the engineer does not have a good feel for the design.

Feel free to email me directly for more specific observations on the programs and PT design in general.

Best regards,
Daniel

----- Original Message ----
From: Stan Caldwell <stancaldwell@gmail.com >
To: SEAINT Listserv <seaint@seaint.org>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 1:20:13 PM
Subject: ADAPT or POSTEN ??

For the last few years, my practice has mostly been bridge design. However, every now and then, a significant building project comes along. This is one of those times. By the end of the year, my staff will start designing two building projects with a total of more than 40 floors. Most of the floors will likely be post-tensioned concrete construction. Both projects are located in Texas, well away from the Gulf Coast, so seismic and wind are not anticipated to be major issues.

The last time we maintained licenses on P/T software was back in the days of DOS. I assume that the two leading options today are the same that they were back then, ADAPT and POSTEN.

From recent hands-on experience, do any of you have recommendations on either of these programs?

Are there any other reasonable options that I am not yet aware of?

Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom on this subject.

Best regards,

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.

Richardson, Texas

Wind tower design

Has anybody done any wind tower design work ? I am doing some preliminary work on a concrete tower design, and I am thinking about the dynamic behaviour
and the effect of the passage of the blade when it passes in front of the tower. Does anyone have any information or ideas on this ?

The Germans and the Japanese have actually built some concrete towers already. Apparently steel towers are at about their height limit now, and the way to greater efficiency and bigger turbines leads to higher towers, which will probably be in concrete.

Post-tensioned or reinforced ?

Daniel, since you have a lot of experience with PT, I would like to ask you something I have been wondering about for a long time : What are the bottom-line advantages and disadvantages of PT vs RC slabs ?
In Quebec, I have never seen PT slabs being used, so there is little current field experience, although that could be brought in if it was worthwhile.
Is there an appreciable cost difference ? Advantage PT or RC ?
Deflection control ?
Slab thickness ?

What are the green aspects ?

Kevin

On Nov 16, 2007 8:26 PM, Daniel Popp < drp181@yahoo.com> wrote:

Stan,

Our office has done a great deal of high-rise PT design recently. We use both ADAPT and RAM Concept, which was known as Floor before being bought by RAM International (which is now owned by Bentley). Both programs have their strengths and weaknesses.

ADAPT is considered by many to be the industry standard, and is very good for two-dimensional design (design strips). I would recommend using the program to become more familiar with the design process, as it gives the user a simple two-dimensional design interface which makes adjusting the design easy. ADAPT has more recently introduced a three-dimensional finite element analysis option, which we have not used much yet. ADAPT Support is also beyond compare -- they even offer to model your slabs for you for a fee.

For complete design of two-way PT slab systems, RAM Concept is hard to beat. It performs a full three-dimensional analysis of the slab, including beams, drops, thickened areas, and support. The meshing of the slab is the best I've seen in any structural program. All design checks can be performed by the program, as well as punching shear checks and stud rail design. Concept is now integrated with RAM Structural System, meaning that geometry and loads can be sent both directions. This has not benefited our office, as we do not use RAM Concrete; I have been told by RAM that their Structural System cannot handle two-way slabs, meaning that extraneous beams must be added to the RSS model. Another downside: preliminary design is not as simple as in ADAPT, especially if the engineer does not have a good feel for the design.

Feel free to email me directly for more specific observations on the programs and PT design in general.

Best regards,
Daniel

----- Original Message ----
From: Stan Caldwell <stancaldwell@gmail.com >
To: SEAINT Listserv <seaint@seaint.org>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 1:20:13 PM
Subject: ADAPT or POSTEN ??

For the last few years, my practice has mostly been bridge design. However, every now and then, a significant building project comes along. This is one of those times. By the end of the year, my staff will start designing two building projects with a total of more than 40 floors. Most of the floors will likely be post-tensioned concrete construction. Both projects are located in Texas, well away from the Gulf Coast, so seismic and wind are not anticipated to be major issues.

The last time we maintained licenses on P/T software was back in the days of DOS. I assume that the two leading options today are the same that they were back then, ADAPT and POSTEN.

From recent hands-on experience, do any of you have recommendations on either of these programs?

Are there any other reasonable options that I am not yet aware of?

Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom on this subject.

Best regards,

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.

Richardson, Texas

Subject: re: straw bale homes

The strawbale wall assembly has mesh reinforcment in the plaster skins and thewall acts as a composite structure (think airplane wing ??) the proposed appendix to the code refers to being able to use a part of ACI 318 where the wall assembly can be modeled as a restrained , thin shell, reinforced concrete element - an this is proposed for all types of plasters including hemp mesh reinforced earth plaster. This is all heavy engineering thinking to a childhood story

and yes, most have designed have wood framed post and beam gravity load systems and wood framed roof diaphragms and all that I have designed have a steel braced frames on each wall line (Hardy Frames). So to make construction easy any not count on a stucco guy to do structural work. this also makes the neighbors think you building a giant cabana This is some of what it takes to build in high seismic areas in California - that's why engineering is required for thoes wacky owner builders who think straw is the new gold. bottoms up!!

Tim Rudolph

Not to rain on the nursery school rhyme parade, but I have a few minutes to kill before I haul out of here for happy hour... But isn't the logical choice of straw, wood, or bricks, going to be wood? Of course, I am assuming the properly designed wood structure would have the correct load path and uplift connections, clearly detailed for the same language speaking field framer. I am also assuming a single wythe brick construction with no grouted reinforcement. We know how that does in seismic and not much better in wind. Had the piggies had time to do double wythe brick with reinforcement, different scenario. But with the wolf on the way, permits were circumvented, uplift straps ommitted, no load path, improper or no nailing, and the Category 4 wolf winds brought it down.

Have a great weekend and Turkey Day next week, I have a Tucher with a slice of orange with my name on it!

Andrew Kester, PE
Principal/Project Manager
ADK Structural Engineering, PLLC
1510 E. Colonial Drive, Suite 301

Re: ADAPT or POSTEN ??

Stan,

Our office has done a great deal of high-rise PT design recently. We use both ADAPT and RAM Concept, which was known as Floor before being bought by RAM International (which is now owned by Bentley). Both programs have their strengths and weaknesses.

ADAPT is considered by many to be the industry standard, and is very good for two-dimensional design (design strips). I would recommend using the program to become more familiar with the design process, as it gives the user a simple two-dimensional design interface which makes adjusting the design easy. ADAPT has more recently introduced a three-dimensional finite element analysis option, which we have not used much yet. ADAPT Support is also beyond compare -- they even offer to model your slabs for you for a fee.

For complete design of two-way PT slab systems, RAM Concept is hard to beat. It performs a full three-dimensional analysis of the slab, including beams, drops, thickened areas, and support. The meshing of the slab is the best I've seen in any structural program. All design checks can be performed by the program, as well as punching shear checks and stud rail design. Concept is now integrated with RAM Structural System, meaning that geometry and loads can be sent both directions. This has not benefited our office, as we do not use RAM Concrete; I have been told by RAM that their Structural System cannot handle two-way slabs, meaning that extraneous beams must be added to the RSS model. Another downside: preliminary design is not as simple as in ADAPT, especially if the engineer does not have a good feel for the design.

Feel free to email me directly for more specific observations on the programs and PT design in general.

Best regards,
Daniel

----- Original Message ----
From: Stan Caldwell <stancaldwell@gmail.com>
To: SEAINT Listserv <seaint@seaint.org>
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 1:20:13 PM
Subject: ADAPT or POSTEN ??

The last time we maintained licenses on P/T software was back in the days of DOS. I assume that the two leading options today are the same that they were back then, ADAPT and POSTEN.

From recent hands-on experience, do any of you have recommendations on either of these programs?

Are there any other reasonable options that I am not yet aware of?

Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom on this subject.

Best regards,

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.

Richardson, Texas

Re: California Building Code and the 2006 IBC

Hello Andre:

What I heard through the grapevines is that L.A. City's Plancheckers will not be ready to use the CBC 2007 by January 2008..............

Antonio S. Luisoni

Consulting SE

In a message dated 11/6/2007 2:33:11 PM Pacific Standard Time, bruckmandesign@verizon.net writes:

Fellow Listers -

I hear California is adopting the IBC in January, 2008. Does any one have an idea on what the code status is for the city of Los Angeles? Will they also be adopting in January, 2008? Will there be any grace period where you can submit under either IBC or UBC(CBC 2001)? Will they have amendments? Um, sorry, the questions should have been, "how many amendments?"

I tried calling the LA Call Center and I didn't get any help.

Thanks,

Andre J. Sidler, P.E., S.E.
Quantum Consulting Engineers
Seattle, WA

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

Re: Structural Engineering Spreadsheets

Instead of looking for spread sheet after spread sheet, spend a little more money and by ENERCALC. It will be well worth it!

Antonio S. Luisoni SE

Granada Hills, CA

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

Re: DESIGN PROGRAMS FOR NEW CODE

Michael, I hope you will stand behind your promisses and finally issue the version 6.0 this year.

Antonio S. Luisoni SE

Granada Hills, CA

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

ADAPT or POSTEN ??

The last time we maintained licenses on P/T software was back in the days of DOS. I assume that the two leading options today are the same that they were back then, ADAPT and POSTEN.

From recent hands-on experience, do any of you have recommendations on either of these programs?

Are there any other reasonable options that I am not yet aware of?

Thank you in advance for sharing your wisdom on this subject.

Best regards,

Stan R. Caldwell, P.E.

Richardson, Texas

re: straw bale homes

Have a great weekend and Turkey Day next week, I have a Tucher with a slice of orange with my name on it!

Andrew Kester, PE
Principal/Project Manager
ADK Structural Engineering, PLLC
1510 E. Colonial Drive, Suite 301

New IBC Structural Notes

Does anyone know of any format or resources that deal with the new IBC code and general structural notes?

We are trying to minimize our conversion time to the new code and I was just curious as to what others have done.

Again thanks for all the "CONSTRUCTIVE" replies, as well as all past help.

I recieved some very helpfull info about sustainable bldg materials from my past post.

RE: 2006 IBC WIND ANALYSIS Question

If memory serves,
For parapets: Case A = Pressure towards building
Case B = Pressure away from building (suction)
Not positive but the ASCE 7 Method 2 for sun shades or canopies, using
the "partially enclosed" building requirements.

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Ed Najjarine, SE [mailto:en@najjarinestructures.com]
Sent: Friday, November 16, 2007 1:26 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: 2006 IBC WIND ANALYSIS Question

Ladies & Gents,

Can someone please clarify (simplify) the wind loading
on parapets in section 6.5.12.4.4 related to load case
A & B. My results seem very high. Also which section
best addresses the wind loading on canopies (or sun
shades).

Thanks in advance.

Ed Najjarine, SE
Irvine, CA

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

2006 IBC WIND ANALYSIS Question

Ladies & Gents,

Thanks in advance.

Ed Najjarine, SE
Irvine, CA

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

RE: Subject: Re: sustainable companies

Tim,

Does the government require a warning notice on it to tell people who get hay fever that it may affect their health; especially if they are pregnant.

RLH

-----Original Message-----
From: Pinyon Engineering [mailto:Pinyonengineering@hughes.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 5:14 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Subject: Re: sustainable companies

Subject: Re: sustainable companies

well some are trying to do the weird green thing. check out http://www.strawbuilding.org/ that is the California Straw Building Association CASBA -- yes walls made of strawbales in high seismic zones (tax credit for using straw too!) a few years ago they got money from the state to do a structural testing program on strawbale walls and shear walls (testing research papers at http://www.ecobuildnetwork.org/). the result is a new book by Bruce King titled Design of Strawbale Buildings (the nerdest strawbale book ever) they did a full scale test of a plastered strawbale wall (got about 610 plf as a design value) (they also passed a 2-hour ASTM fire test). CASBA also has a draft appendix for strawbale construction before the California Building Standards Commission.

I have designed quite a few strawbale buildings. anyway check out the resource list from the CASBA website for engineers and firms that are building with straw and thinking of the world in a different way.

wow ! ! it looks like I over spent my $0.02

Tim Rudolph PE

writing this from my strawbale home/office -with 24" thick walls @ R30 walls & R50 attic insulation

Pinyon Engineering

115 Eagle Vista

Bishop CA 93514

3 little pig jokes welcomed

RE: QUESTION REGARDING GLB REINFORCING?

There are methods out there to field replace dry-rotted portions of glbs and strong backs them with a system of tie rods that are bolted to each side of the beam. . I had it done on a building in SoCal about 4 years ago. Seemed pretty simple..

From: Mike Hokama [mailto:m_hokama@sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 9:01 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: QUESTION REGARDING GLB REINFORCING?

I am working on a restaurant job that has an arched glulam roof beam with signficant dryrot damage at the last 6 feet or so. Tyring to look at all options I was thinking about reinforcing it with 20'-0" long steel channels on each side and then welding the channels to a TS column. The bolted connection between the channels and the glb would obviously have to develop a moment to carry the roof loads. However, I remember in a wood course way back that although it is possible, a moment splice in a beam is not recommended and very difficult to correctly analyze. Any thoughts or recommendations or warnings. (see attached pdf) If the pdf is not postable I can email directly.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

Re: USGS Web address for determining IBC SDC and Base Shear

I would say that if the accelerations are close and knowing the uncertainty that goes into the seismic accelerations, I vote that they are both correct. Are we expecting more "accuracy" than reasonable on a model of a natural event?

Paul.

Phoenix, AZ

On 11/16/07, Larry Hauer <lrhauer@hotmail.com> wrote:

To continue with Dennis's question regarding how to determine the mapped spectral acceleration values for a specific location, I have found there are two sources, one is the USGS website using the Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, and the other is the FEMA 450-CD which is available free from FEMA, (800-480-2520). They are both based on 2003 information, BUT, interestingly they each give different results for a specific latitude and longitude, (not much difference- but definitely different). Again, they both say they are based on 2003 FEMA?USGS information, and the output "format" appears to be similar, ( i.e. USGS output).

Any ideas on which is "more" correct, and why?

Thanks in advance,

Larry Hauer S.E.

Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. Play Now!

RE: USGS Web address for determining IBC SDC and Base Shear

To continue with Dennis's question regarding how to determine the mapped spectral acceleration values for a specific location, I have found there are two sources, one is the USGS website using the Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, and the other is the FEMA 450-CD which is available free from FEMA, (800-480-2520). They are both based on 2003 information, BUT, interestingly they each give different results for a specific latitude and longitude, (not much difference- but definitely different). Again, they both say they are based on 2003 FEMA?USGS information, and the output "format" appears to be similar, (i.e. USGS output).

Any ideas on which is "more" correct, and why?

Thanks in advance,

Larry Hauer S.E.

Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. Play Now!

Thursday, November 15, 2007

Re: USGS Web address for determining IBC SDC and Base Shear

Thanks Dave,

I was seeking the USGS page to obtain the values needed to determine the SDC base shear values referenced in the October 2007 SEAOC document rather than the link to a site to determine the Latitude and Longitude of the building site as submitted by others. However, I thank all who sent me a response. The key was your USGS Web address listed below which I have bookmarked in my IE favorites.

Thanks again to all who responded.

Dennis

Dennis S. Wish, PE
California Professional Engineer
Structural Engineering Consultant

----- Original Message ----
From: DA <dnae@cox.net>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 8:55:50 PM
Subject: Re: USGS Web address for determining IBC SDC and Base Shear

Dennis ,

here the link

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/

download the java ground motion parameter calcilator - version 5.0.7

Dave, P.E.

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

From: WISH DENNIS

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2007 8:29 PM

Subject: USGS Web address for determining IBC SDC and Base Shear

I'm sure most of us in California are having nightmares trying to work out the 2006 IBC Seismic and Wind loads that we are gearing up for in January. I received a copy of the SEAOC Seismology and Structural Standards Committee Seismology Publication from October 2007. I know some of those on the committee are subscribers to the list (hint M.C.). I will be posting a few questions that I hope you can help with, but I would like to start with the reference in setion 2 "Determining Forces and Allowable Stress" for IBC 1613 Earthquake Load referenced the S(sub s and sub 1) map parameters from the USGS website. I wish they would have listed the link.

Can anyone provide the list with this link and do you know if you can reference by zip code rather than Longitude and Latitude?

Thanks

Dennis

Dennis S. Wish, PE
California Professional Engineer
Structural Engineering Consultant

Re: Subject: Re: sustainable companies

Tim:

What height to width ratios do you limit your straw shear walls too ?

Do you use over 200 plf for shear of stucco ?

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

Subject: Re: sustainable companies

well some are trying to do the weird green thing. check out http://www.strawbuilding.org/ that is the California Straw Building Association CASBA -- yes walls made of strawbales in high seismic zones (tax credit for using straw too!) a few years ago they got money from the state to do a structural testing program on strawbale walls and shear walls (testing research papers at http://www.ecobuildnetwork.org/). the result is a new book by Bruce King titled Design of Strawbale Buildings (the nerdest strawbale book ever) they did a full scale test of a plastered strawbale wall (got about 610 plf as a design value) (they also passed a 2-hour ASTM fire test). CASBA also has a draft appendix for strawbale construction before the California Building Standards Commission.

I have designed quite a few strawbale buildings. anyway check out the resource list from the CASBA website for engineers and firms that are building with straw and thinking of the world in a different way.

wow ! ! it looks like I over spent my $0.02

Tim Rudolph PE

writing this from my strawbale home/office -with 24" thick walls @ R30 walls & R50 attic insulation

Pinyon Engineering

115 Eagle Vista

Bishop CA 93514

3 little pig jokes welcomed

Snow load in Stowe VT?

Does anyone know the snow load in Stowe, Vermont?

TIA,

Ralph

**************************************
See what's new at http://www.aol.com

RE: QUESTION REGARDING GLB REINFORCING?

T. William (Bill) Allen, S.E.

ALLEN DESIGNS

Consulting Structural Engineers
V (949) 248-8588 • F(949) 209-2509

-----Original Message-----
From: Tarek Mokhtar [mailto:tarooky@earthlink.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:37 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: QUESTION REGARDING GLB REINFORCING?

Mike,

I agree with the course instructor, achieving a moment connection in this beam is impossible

you might want to add a steel tube each side of the beam to carry ALL the load, otherwise

just replace it

HTH

Tarek Mokhtar, SE

Laguna Beach,CA

I am working on a restaurant job that has an arched glulam roof beam with signficant dryrot damage at the last 6 feet or so. Tyring to look at all options I was thinking about reinforcing it with 20'-0" long steel channels on each side and then welding the channels to a TS column. The bolted connection between the channels and the glb would obviously have to develop a moment to carry the roof loads. However, I remember in a wood course way back that although it is possible, a moment splice in a beam is not recommended and very difficult to correctly analyze. Any thoughts or recommendations or warnings. (see attached pdf) If the pdf is not postable I can email directly.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:sketch.pdf (PDF /«IC») (001A1DEA)

--

Re: QUESTION REGARDING GLB REINFORCING?

Mike,

I agree with the course instructor, achieving a moment connection in this beam is impossible

you might want to add a steel tube each side of the beam to carry ALL the load, otherwise

just replace it

HTH

Tarek Mokhtar, SE

Laguna Beach,CA

I am working on a restaurant job that has an arched glulam roof beam with signficant dryrot damage at the last 6 feet or so. Tyring to look at all options I was thinking about reinforcing it with 20'-0" long steel channels on each side and then welding the channels to a TS column. The bolted connection between the channels and the glb would obviously have to develop a moment to carry the roof loads. However, I remember in a wood course way back that although it is possible, a moment splice in a beam is not recommended and very difficult to correctly analyze. Any thoughts or recommendations or warnings. (see attached pdf) If the pdf is not postable I can email directly.

Thanks in advance,

Mike

Attachment converted: Macintosh HD:sketch.pdf (PDF /«IC») (001A1DEA)

--

RE: Revit Structural

Happily, most computer stores will continue to install XP on new
machines if you wish.

Bob Garner, S.E.

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:bill@polhemus.cc]
Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 1:16 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Revit Structural

Christopher Wright wrote:
> It's not that they're smarter than everyone else, they just have more
> time to do actual work instead of dealing with security problems,
> assorted malware, plugging and praying, registry corruption...
Chris, let me start by saying that I'm hardly antipathetic toward the
Mac. I bought one of the very first PowerMacs back in '94, and used it
avidly for a couple of years. Anyone who enjoys using the Mac has, in my

opinion, plenty of reasons for it.

However, I frequently run into this comment from Mac enthusisiasts about

"malware" and "security problems" and "registry corruption," etc., and I

have to tell you that the vast majority - I'd go as far as to estimate
above 99% - of Windows users never experience these problems at all.

As far as security is concerned, that is and should be a worry of anyone

who uses a computer and exposes it to the online world. I have been a
"Linux hobbyist" for many years, and I can say for sure that it
continues to be a concern in that world. But the concerns are nearly
always "theoretical" in nature. In other words, they don't stem from
something that has happened, but from a discovery of the POTENTIAL for
bad stuff to happen.

To me, the advantage of a Mac over a PC is ease of use and elegant
design, not because "it works and the PC doesn't." The latter is
obviously untrue.

I will say that I have spent a couple of hours now looking at Vista, and

so far I think very little of it. If it weren't for the fact that MS
forces licensees to install Vista instead of XP in the default
configuration, I have a feeling no one would use it. But a lot of that
has to do with absence of any "gotta have it" functionality. They just
didn't really add any compelling new features to force me, and many
others, to WANT to upgrade.

In fact, I have to tell you that it has been years since most
Office-type applications have added anything that I find to be
compelling enough to force me to upgrade. I just got a copy of MS Office

2007, because the school system where my wife teaches makes MS software
available for next to nothing, but I haven't even bothered to try to
install it, even on an XP machine. From what I'm reading, there simply
isn't much there that is new, and a lot of things that have seemingly
been changed arbitrarily.

Bottom line: If you wan to evangelize the Mac, I'd stick to the things
that are more nearly true, and forget about the things that have very
little impact on the vast majority of users.

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

The information contained in the e-Mail, including any accompanying documents or attachments, is from Moffatt & Nichol and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above, and is privileged and confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, dissemination, distribution, copying or use of the contents of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please notify us.

Re: Revit Structural

However, I frequently run into this comment from Mac enthusisiasts about
"malware" and "security problems" and "registry corruption," etc., and I
have to tell you that the vast majority - I'd go as far as to estimate
above 99% - of Windows users never experience these problems at all.

As far as security is concerned, that is and should be a worry of anyone
who uses a computer and exposes it to the online world. I have been a
"Linux hobbyist" for many years, and I can say for sure that it
continues to be a concern in that world. But the concerns are nearly
always "theoretical" in nature. In other words, they don't stem from
something that has happened, but from a discovery of the POTENTIAL for
bad stuff to happen.

To me, the advantage of a Mac over a PC is ease of use and elegant
design, not because "it works and the PC doesn't." The latter is
obviously untrue.

I will say that I have spent a couple of hours now looking at Vista, and
so far I think very little of it. If it weren't for the fact that MS
forces licensees to install Vista instead of XP in the default
configuration, I have a feeling no one would use it. But a lot of that
has to do with absence of any "gotta have it" functionality. They just
didn't really add any compelling new features to force me, and many
others, to WANT to upgrade.

In fact, I have to tell you that it has been years since most
Office-type applications have added anything that I find to be
compelling enough to force me to upgrade. I just got a copy of MS Office
2007, because the school system where my wife teaches makes MS software
available for next to nothing, but I haven't even bothered to try to
install it, even on an XP machine. From what I'm reading, there simply
isn't much there that is new, and a lot of things that have seemingly
been changed arbitrarily.

Bottom line: If you wan to evangelize the Mac, I'd stick to the things
that are more nearly true, and forget about the things that have very
little impact on the vast majority of users.

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

RE: Revit Structural

Oh! ... Never mind.

Mark E. Deardorff, SE

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Allen [mailto:t.w.allen@cox.net]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:47 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: RE: Revit Structural
>
> I was just kidding.
>
> Sheesh!
>
> T. William (Bill) Allen, S.E.
> ALLEN DESIGNS
> Consulting Structural Engineers
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Mark Deardorff [mailto:mark@rstavares.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:33 PM
> > To: seaint@seaint.org
> > Subject: RE: Revit Structural
> >
> > Actually what irks me about Mac users is their
> condescending attitude
> > and snobbery. The PC is not as bad as portrayed by Mac users. There
> > are more problems with security issues but primarily because the
> > audience is so much larger. Exploiters of security and authors of
> > viruses go for the market.
> > Even so, the Mac has had viruses and some security issues.
> I have used
> > PC's forever, it seems, and have had no major problems. Lost a few
> > hard drives but that is not a PC issue. I have had one
> virus that did
> > no damage but caused usability problems. I ultimately had
> to format my
> > drive to get rid of it. But virus scanners and adware/spyware and
> > firewall software have kept me safe even from key loggers.
> >
> > Anyway, I get lots of work done on my computer and have
> automated many
> > of my designs. It has meant a higher effective hourly rate, more
> > options for design optimization and elimination of calculation
> > blunders, not to mention the free time it gives me.
> >
> > Mark E. Deardorff, SE
> >
> >
> >
> > ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> > * 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
> > ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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: Revit Structural

I was just kidding.

Sheesh!

T. William (Bill) Allen, S.E.
ALLEN DESIGNS
Consulting Structural Engineers

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Deardorff [mailto:mark@rstavares.com]
> Sent: Thursday, November 15, 2007 12:33 PM
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: RE: Revit Structural
>
> Actually what irks me about Mac users is their condescending attitude and
> snobbery. The PC is not as bad as portrayed by Mac users. There are more
> problems with security issues but primarily because the audience is so
> much
> larger. Exploiters of security and authors of viruses go for the market.
> Even so, the Mac has had viruses and some security issues. I have used
> PC's
> forever, it seems, and have had no major problems. Lost a few hard drives
> but that is not a PC issue. I have had one virus that did no damage but
> caused usability problems. I ultimately had to format my drive to get rid
> of
> it. But virus scanners and adware/spyware and firewall software have kept
> me
> safe even from key loggers.
>
> Anyway, I get lots of work done on my computer and have automated many of
> my
> designs. It has meant a higher effective hourly rate, more options for
> design optimization and elimination of calculation blunders, not to
> mention
> the free time it gives me.
>
> Mark E. Deardorff, SE
>
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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:
> *
> *

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

Re: Revit Structural

Ditto

-----Original Message-----
From: Mark Deardorff <mark@rstavares.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 3:32 pm
Subject: RE: Revit Structural

Actually what irks me about Mac users is their condescending attitude and snobbery. The PC is not as bad as portrayed by Mac users. There are more problems with security issues but primarily because the audience is so much larger. Exploiters of security and authors of viruses go for the market. Even so, the Mac has had viruses and some security issues. I have used PC's forever, it seems, and have had no major problems. Lost a few hard drives but that is not a PC issue. I have had one virus that did no damage but caused usability problems. I ultimately had to format my drive to get rid of it. But virus scanners and adware/spyware and firewall software have kept me safe even from key loggers. Anyway, I get lots of work done on my computer and have automated many of my designs. It has meant a higher effective hourly rate, more options for design optimization and elimination of calculation blunders, not to mention the free time it gives me. Mark E. Deardorff, SE ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * 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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Email and AIM finally together. You've gotta check out free AOL Mail!

RE: Revit Structural

Anyway, I get lots of work done on my computer and have automated many of my
designs. It has meant a higher effective hourly rate, more options for
design optimization and elimination of calculation blunders, not to mention
the free time it gives me.

Mark E. Deardorff, SE

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

RE: Fire Rated Assembly Consultants >> One Hour Floor / Ceiling Assembly UL - G525 & G531

Return Receipt

Your RE: Fire Rated Assembly Consultants >> One Hour Floor /
document: Ceiling Assembly UL - G525 & G531

was Tom Hunt/AV/FD/FluorCorp
received
by:

at: 11/15/2007 12:21:48 PST

------------------------------------------------------------
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: Reclaim Concrete Tunnel

The building codes do not apply to subgrade structures. You need to get some seismologists with experience in tunnels. It is a specialty that is claimed by many and practiced properly by few especially when it come to the NMSZ (New Madrid Seismic Zone).

You will get differential shaking depending on the strata of soil, orientation relative to the source fault, and the proximity to the source fault.

A couple of good sources for a starting point are:

Dr. Bob Herrmann
Saint Louis University

Dr. C.B. Crouse
URS Corp. Seattle, WA

Regards,
Harold Sprague

Subject: Reclaim Concrete Tunnel
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2007 10:48:33 -0600
From: jmicayas@riverconsulting.com
To: seaint@seaint.org

Fellow Structural engineers:

I got this heavy industrial project I'm working on. If possible can I get a second or third opinion?

Project location: 70 miles away from the new Madrid fault (Missouri)

Project description: An underground reclaimed concrete tunnel with 6 openings on top use for loading and unloading coal materials

Discharge to a transfer tower using a diverter chute. A 50 ft high of coal stack pile sits on top of my concrete reclaim tunnel (width =20', Length = 450 ft., depth = 18 ft).

For seismic base shear using non building structure; In addition to the self weight and conveyor inside the tunnel, do you consider 100% of the material weight sits on top of the tunnel? If not, is there a percent reduction?

Thanks,

Engr. Julius Micayas

P.E. license no.32969

Senior Lead Structural Engineer

River Consulting- New Orleans

111 Veterans Memorial Boulevard

Metairie, LA 70005

Phone - 504-841-3014 (direct)

504 837-5275 (office)

Fax - 504-837-2986

E-mail: jmicayas@riverconsulting.com

Climb to the top of the charts! Play Star Shuffle: the word scramble challenge with star power. Play Now!