In Section 1605.3.1, you cannot increase the allowable stresses. Does this mean that we would have to de-rate the shear wall values we've been using?
In Section 1605.3.2, you can increase the allowable stresses, but you will note that you have to increase the wind by a factor of 1.3, which might mean that we can you the shear wall values as written.
Hope I haven't missed anything?
For those of you who are struggling, our local SAGE structural group has started holding weekly noon-hour meetings (with the El Dorado County building officials) to sort all this transition problems out. One of ex-presidents brought the pizza last week.
Neil Moore, SE, SECB
At 09:48 AM 2/14/2008, you wrote:
You can also try using http://www.documents.dgs.ca.gov/dsa/pubs/IR-16-7_WindLoad_12-18-07.pdf
Matthew
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 9:34 AM, Paul Feather < PFeather@se-solutions.net> wrote:
- Stan,
- First off, the simplified method is anything but simple. We use the
- general method (method 2) for everything and get more consistent results
- easier. The simplified method is derived from metal building
- manufacturer methods, and for anything but a metal building results in a
- complete book keeping atrocity.
- You are looking at 25 degrees area B. The way the simplified method
- works this is just one small area that cannot be applied in the same
- thinking as the UBC horizontal projected area. You have to add the area
- B to the Area E uplift, basically all areas A through H get applied
- simultaneously as one load case. Then you rotate the building reference
- corner and apply the whole thing again for all four reference corners.
- Get away from the simplified methods and you will simplify your life,
- while getting something closer to what you are used to. I don't believe
- the ASCE wind provisions could be any more convoluted and difficult to
- apply to real world engineering if we tried. The UBC methods were
- derived as a conservative simplification of the ASCE provisions years
- ago, and we desperately need to achieve something similar again.
- Spending three days on a doctoral thesis to develop simple wind
- pressures as opposed to working on load path and quality engineering is
- counter-productive, and saving 1.4 psf in wind pressure only matters to
- mass produced square boxes trying to be paper thin.
- Paul Feather PE, SE
- pfeather@SE-Solutions.net
- www.SE-Solutions.net
- -----Original Message-----
- From: sscholl2@juno.com [ mailto:sscholl2@juno.com]
- Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:09 AM
- To: seaint@seaint.org
- Subject: IBC 2007 Wind calcs.
- After 40 yrs. of doing UBC calcs. I am attempting to do my first IBC
- calcs. and need help, even after attending a seminar, which seemed to
- cover lots of things but not this.
- For a simple house, using 6.4 Method 1 Simplified Procedure, I cannot
- get a reasonable wind pressure of something between 15 psf and 25 psf.
- From 6.4.2.1, I get p s= 1.0 (1.0) 1.0 (2.3) = 2.3 psf which is
- unrealistic. This is using Fig. 6-2, exposure B, h=30 ft., Kzt =1
- and I=1
- Can someone point out my omissions/errors?
- Stan Scholl, P.E.
- Laguna Beach, CA
- _____________________________________________________________
- Click for a credit repair consultation, raise your FICO score.
- http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iifRtUze4Z9jymsCe1UDroI
- mKifm7vcAZ7s56ZSkSvbiqVDov/
- ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
- * 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
- ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********