Structural Engineering: 2007-12-30

Saturday, January 5, 2008

RE: Glass guardrail support [IBC 2006/CBC 2007; Chapter 24]]

Joe:

Look no further.
We really need to familirize ourselves with our new Code and know what is in there. You already have the resource.
Look under Section 2407 "Glass in Handrails & Guards" of Chapter 24 "Glass and Glazing" of IBC 2006 or CBC2007.

In terms of the wide range of the "material" and "construction type" coverage, CBC 2007 goes way beyond IBC 2006.

Regards
Casey (Khashayar) Hemmatyar, SE
Private email < khemmatyar@hotmail.com>

From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto: jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 3:01 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Glass guardrail support

I'm sorry, I may not have been clear. There are no posts. There is only a panel of glass 3' high x length of protection required. The panel is cantilevered from it's base. The distribution would not be through a top rail / post system, only through the cantilevered glass panel itself.

Any Clearer?

Joe grill

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

From: Thor Tandy

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:43 PM

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net ]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill

RE: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

Harold, Dr. Hamida, engineers,

It seems like the most significant place a one-third
allowable stress increase is still permitted is when designing footings with
the appropriate load combinations. I'm
looking at footnote d on table 1804.2 of the 2006 IBC which specifies "allowable
foundation pressure" and "lateral bearing pressure."

On the other hand, there is the requirement for a soil
investigation in section 1802 for anything in seismic design class C or
higher. An investigation could trump
table 1804.2 and the one-third increase.
Is that right?

thanks,
Mark Johnson

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

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

Friday, January 4, 2008

Re: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

Harold -

Regarding the handrail/guardrail ASD increase, this is valid only when you use the railing design loads prescribed by the IBC.

Is this correct? Or can you use any concentrated/uniform load and still apply the one-third allowable stress increase? <I don't have the latest/greatest IBC with me. Hence, my question>.

Thanks,
Charlie Canitz

-----Original Message-----
From: Harold Sprague <spraguehope@hotmail.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Sent: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 3:13 pm
Subject: RE: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

Dr. Hamida,

The allowable stress increase has been in the process of getting dumped for several years.

Please look at the 2006 IBC

1605.3.1.1 Stress increases. Increases in allowable stresses specified in the appropriate material chapter or the referenced standards shall not be used with the load combinations of Section 1605.3.1, except that a duration of load increase shall be permitted in accordance with Chapter 23.

1605.3.2 Alternative basic load combinations. In lieu of the basic load combinations specified in Section 1605.3.1, structures and portions thereof shall be permitted to be designed for the most critical effects resulting from the following combinations. When using these alternative basic load combinations that include wind or seismic loads, allowable stresses are permitted to be increased or load combinations reduced where permitted by the material chapter of this code or the referenced standards.....

There are only a few applications that allow an allowable stress increase in the current IBC. They are allowed:
1. In handrails (1607.7.1.3) as previously mentioned.
2. Wood - 2306.2 Wind provisions for walls. 2306.2.1 Wall stud bending stress increase.

There are even fewer provisions for allowable stress increase in the ASCE 7-05.

Regards,
Harold Sprague

From: y.hamida@scs-net.org
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Handrail Loads vs Short Term
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 11:17:31 -0800

If the design for seismic or wind you can use 1.33

Dr.hamida

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

From: Rick

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 10:37 AM

Subject: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

I've never used a 1.33 increase on handrail components, but have one that doesnt calc out without it. Can handrail loads be considered short term?
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Watch "Cause Effect," a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more =

More new features than ever. Check out the new AOL Mail!

RE: Glass guardrail support

We have a rule-of-thumb span/175 for glazing systems eg storefront etc. For railings we have a monstrous 42mm (1.5").

I wouldn't go near any railing that deflected that much ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Smith [mailto:jeffsmith7@comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 4:47 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

Do hand rails, glass or otherwise, have deflection requirements? I have never found it, but I prefer something very solid.

Jeff

From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:40 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

Back in years gone by we simply required the guard rails to be tested after they were installed. I was amazed how much glass could bend, but they performed well, and I slept well.

Regards,
Harold Sprague

RE: Glass guardrail support

Do hand rails, glass or otherwise, have deflection requirements? I have never found it, but I prefer something very solid.

Jeff

From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:40 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 17:16:47 -0500
From: gloomis@MasterEngineersinc.com
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes, if the conditions are right. See Metal Stairs Manual AMP 510 by the National Association of Architectural Metal Manufacturers. They provide tables for load distribution for uniform and concentrated loads. But there are conditions that must be met.

Gary W. Loomis, P.E., Senior Structural Engineering

Master Engineers and Designers, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Thor Tandy [mailto:vicpeng@telus.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 4:46 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill


Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live. Get it now!

Re: Glass guardrail support

Then, it sounds like the glass itself is designed to span from its base connection to its top. The post you are designing for, in theory, should not see load as it would be loaded independently of the glass... Regardless, i would ask for all the technical info from the railing mfr because some that i've seen are minimal, to say the least. Good luck.

On Jan 4, 2008 3:01 PM, Joseph R. Grill <jrgrill@cableone.net> wrote:

I'm sorry, I may not have been clear. There are no posts. There is only a panel of glass 3' high x length of protection required. The panel is cantilevered from it's base. The distribution would not be through a top rail / post system, only through the cantilevered glass panel itself.

Any Clearer?

Joe grill

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

From: Thor Tandy

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:43 PM

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill

--
David Topete, SE

RE: Glass guardrail support

To what regime did you test them?

Thor

-----Original Message-----
From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:40 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 17:16:47 -0500
From: gloomis@MasterEngineersinc.com
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes, if the conditions are right. See Metal Stairs Manual AMP 510 by the National Association of Architectural Metal Manufacturers. They provide tables for load distribution for uniform and concentrated loads. But there are conditions that must be met.

Gary W. Loomis, P.E., Senior Structural Engineering

Master Engineers and Designers, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Thor Tandy [mailto:vicpeng@telus.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 4:46 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill


Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live. Get it now!

RE: Glass guardrail support

The comment is the same. If there separate panels then we are obliged to use a top rail. The only other way that some of us are investigating, is to use laminated glazing and design/test etc.

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 3:01 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Glass guardrail support

Any Clearer?

Joe grill

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

From: Thor Tandy

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:43 PM

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill

Re: Glass guardrail support

Any Clearer?

Joe grill

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

From: Thor Tandy

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 2:43 PM

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill

RE: Glass guardrail support

Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 17:16:47 -0500
From: gloomis@MasterEngineersinc.com
To: seaint@seaint.org

Yes, if the conditions are right. See Metal Stairs Manual AMP 510 by the National Association of Architectural Metal Manufacturers. They provide tables for load distribution for uniform and concentrated loads. But there are conditions that must be met.

Gary W. Loomis, P.E., Senior Structural Engineering

Master Engineers and Designers, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Thor Tandy [mailto:vicpeng@telus.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 4:46 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

We are having a (local) debate on guardrails (any rail system above a drop of 2' or more). The main concern at this time is that a lot of off-the-shelf railing systems don't appear to conform to the code loadings we have. Aluminum systems are especially a problem since some manufacturers use the 6063 alloy which doesn't have adequate strength for our loads. We need at least 6061alloy for posts and connecting plates. Welding kicks the s... out of any connections too.

FWIW our loadings are 1.0kN (225#) point and distributed 0.75kN/m (51.4#/ft). This means that to minimize the post load the spacing has to be about 4'-4" ... and the (true) design hgt will depend where the fixing is. If you use a side connect your lever arm could increase to over 3'-9" ...

With glass railings we have a requirement that a top rail be in place so that if any one lite is removed/damaged there is still (possible) restraint. The use of laminated glazing seems to be a way around that requirement but I haven't yet seen where that is allowed per se in our code.

My point? If you are being asked to design just the base connect, make sure that the supplier's system has a written assurance by an/their engineer. If you just do the base you may not be free of liability that the (overall) system conforms (CYA) to any code ... engineers are meant to know better ...

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill


Get the power of Windows + Web with the new Windows Live. Get it now!

RE: Glass guardrail support

Yes, if the conditions are right. See Metal Stairs Manual AMP 510 by the National Association of Architectural Metal Manufacturers. They provide tables for load distribution for uniform and concentrated loads. But there are conditions that must be met.

Gary W. Loomis, P.E., Senior Structural Engineering

Master Engineers and Designers, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Thor Tandy [mailto:vicpeng@telus.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 4:46 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Glass guardrail support

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

Thanks,

Joe Grill

RE: Glass guardrail support

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, MIStructE, Struct.Eng
Victoria, BC
Canada
vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph R. Grill [mailto:jrgrill@cableone.net]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 1:02 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support

Thanks,

Joe Grill

Steel deck manufacturer in Turkey

Is anyone aware of a steel deck manufacturer that supplies deck for Turkey? I am trying to find standard profiles and section properties for a project located in Turkey.

Regards,
Harold Sprague

Share life as it happens with the new Windows Live. Start sharing!

Re: Glass guardrail support

go to the julius blum website they have calculations and details, if you call them they can give you more assistance. LA city used to have research reports for the glass panels and extruded bases, but I have not been able to find them recently

----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph R. Grill"
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Glass guardrail support
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 14:01:58 -0700

I am looking at the support system for a guard rail system. The system is pre-manufactured and only the attachment to the structure needs to be designed. It is a guard in a residence and I am told will be 36" high. I also understand that per IBC 1607.1 that I only need to consider the 200# load requirement. The glass panels are wide (from what I am told, they are the full width of the opening they serve with no intermediate vertical non-glass members.

I am wondering if there is some distribution of the 200# concentrated load that can be taken from the top of the guard to the support attachment? with a 36" high guard can the 200# load be distributed over, say 3 ft? or maybe something other 2ft?, 6ft? A distribution would make my attachment to the substructure much easier since it is a wood substructure.

Thanks,

Joe Grill

Bart Needham, SE Principal, nbse associates, inc. civil & structural engineers Office 206-780-6822 Office 805-452-8152 Fax    206-780-6683 Fax    208-693-3667 Mobile 206-300-2346  Office locations: 629 State Street #230 Santa Barbara, CA  93101  205 Fairview Lane Suite 100 Paso Robles, CA  93446  365 Ericksen Ave. NE Suite 328 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110  Mail and Deliveries: 321 High School Rd. NE Suite D-3 PMB 216 Bainbridge Island, WA  98110

Glass guardrail support

Thanks,

Joe Grill

RE: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

Dr. Hamida,

The allowable stress increase has been in the process of getting dumped for several years.

Please look at the 2006 IBC

From: y.hamida@scs-net.org
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Handrail Loads vs Short Term
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 11:17:31 -0800

If the design for seismic or wind you can use 1.33

Dr.hamida

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

From: Rick

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 10:37 AM

Subject: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

I've never used a 1.33 increase on handrail components, but have one that doesnt calc out without it. Can handrail loads be considered short term?
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Watch "Cause Effect," a show about real people making a real difference. Learn more

Re: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

If the design for seismic or wind you can use 1.33

Dr.hamida

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

From: Rick

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 10:37 AM

Subject: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

I've never used a 1.33 increase on handrail components, but have one that doesnt calc out without it. Can handrail loads be considered short term?

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Re: wood floor system for a Pool table

Total deflection of Live plus Dead load with self weight taken as zero
deflection= L/240

instantaneous deflection life load only = L/360

Dr-hamida

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

From: Pinyon Engineering

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2008 11:21 AM

Subject: wood floor system for a Pool table

Hi,

I am working on engineering for a custom home where the billard table (pool table in bar speak) is on the second floor.

What floor deflection should be allowed to make sure the game can't be influenced by a bouncing floor???

any experience or reference to look at ?

Thanks,

Tim Rudolph

Pinyon Engineering

Bishop,CA

RE: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

Check out 2006 IBC Section 1607.7.1.3, where design based on ASD using the loading specified in that section may use the 1/3-increase. It's a nice allowance that has not been recognized before, but seems to make sense.

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick [mailto:mohr2circle@yahoo.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 10:37 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Handrail Loads vs Short Term

I've never used a 1.33 increase on handrail components, but have one that doesnt calc out without it. Can handrail loads be considered short term?

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

Handrail Loads vs Short Term

I've never used a 1.33 increase on handrail components, but have one that doesnt calc out without it. Can handrail loads be considered short term?

Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

RE: Concrete Strength Requirements for Residential Projects in SDC D or Higher

A very quick review of the IRC 2003, Table R402.2 provides a minimum compressive strength. If the wall is not exposed to the weather, the strength is 2,500 psi. If it is exposed to the weather then depending on weathering potential the strength varies as follows:

Negligible 2,500 psi

Moderate 3,000 psi and air-entrained

Severe 3,000 psi and air-entrained

To determine weathering potential you need to go to Figure R301.2(3). In the state of Washington, along the coast is moderate and as you go inland it is severe.

There is also ACI 332, Guide to Residential Cast-in-Place Concrete Construction. It has something similar but shows the whole state of Washington as severe.

Could not find anything on requirements for special inspections. Ran out of time.

Gary W. Loomis, P.E., Senior Structural Engineering

Master Engineers and Designers, Inc.

-----Original Message-----
From: Andre Sidler [mailto:asidler@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 12:01 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Concrete Strength Requirements for Residential Projects in SDC D or Higher

Fellow Engineers -

Say one was designing a residential project in SDC D or higher with a daylight basement using concrete walls. The residence above would be wood framed. ASCE 7-05 says that the concrete walls have to be Special Reinforced Concrete Shear Walls because of the SDC D or higher. ACI 318-05 Section 21.2.4.1 says that you must use a minimum of f'c = 3,000 psi. Typically one would call out f'c = 2,500 psi for residential concrete so that you don't trigger special inspection, that is until I came across this. Do either of you know of an exception to this for residential design? Perhaps in the IRC? I don't know the IRC too well.

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

RE: Concrete Strength Requirements for Residential Projects in SDC D or Higher

If special inspection is your concern, you need to refer to the building code for that purpose. The 2006 IBC waives all special inspection requirements in one and two family dwellings (1704.1 exceptions 3). There is also several other exemptions for concrete in section 1704.4 exception 2, which specifically says that you can skip special inspection of footings even if you specified strength is greater than 2,500 psi.

Ben Yousefi, SE, CBO

Assistant Building Official

Santa Monica, CA

ben.yousefi@smgov.net

310-458-2201 x 5025

P Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.

From: Andre Sidler [mailto:asidler@hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 8:49 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Concrete Strength Requirements for Residential Projects in SDC D or Higher

Re: Concrete Strength Requirements for Residential Projects in SDC D or Higher

Check ACI 332, Req'ts for Residential Conc. Const. You'll have to read it, and maybe discuss w/ the building official to see what governs. 04 is current, but the 07 is now open for public review.

>>> On 1/4/2008 at 10:48 AM, Andre Sidler <asidler@hotmail.com> wrote: