Structural Engineering: 2008-10-26

Saturday, November 1, 2008

RE: Cutting structural steel at site

It should have no effect. If you go into a modern structural shop, you will find any number of operations performed by cutting either with acetylene or plasma arc. Some shops burn holes for bolts with plasma. Most plate stock of any length is cut with acetylene track burners. Complicated parts are often cut with multi-head burners using acetylene.

The only difference is that the cut in the field will be more ragged because it will be done my hand. Have them dress the cut with a grinder, and it will look fine. If the welding bothers you for aesthetics, have them drill it with a mag drill or blow a pilot hole and have them ream the hole to size.

Regards, Harold Sprague

From: johnenader@hotmail.com
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Cutting structural steel at site
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 13:16:14 +0100

A girt that is attached to a column via steel plates is too long.

The contractor is requesting cutting the welded plate at one end by torching it. The girt will also be cut by a torch to the required length. The girt will be welded to the plate and then will be connected to the column by bolts.

What are your thoughts please about torching the end of the girts where the lateral loads will pass thru the torched cross section to the column.

Or what is the loss to the steel grade.

Thanks,

John

Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!

Want to do more with Windows Live? Learn "10 hidden secrets" from Jamie. Learn Now

Friday, October 31, 2008

RE: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

Chris,

I am not sure what the original intent of this requirement is. May be Scott can find out from one of his committee friends. Most building slabs are not considered structural foundations so it may or not apply to some of the conditions you site. If I was to guess, I would say this requirement just comes from experience that there should be some type of minimum thickness requirement for footings and pile caps just like a lot of other minimum concrete requirements such as minimum temperature steel. May be it was just a bunch of old farts from the 1940's smoking cigars around the table and thought it was a good idea?!?

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor

"Christopher Banbury" <christopher.banbury@gmail.com>
10/31/2008 08:10 AM
Please respond to seaint

To	seaint@seaint.org
cc
Subject	RE: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

So is this specification intended to be a cover requirement for the steel? What is its purpose? Does it matter if there is no earth above the footing as in monolithic construction? Could this be interpreted to prevent the use of structural slabs on grade used to support industrial racks; or monolithic footing & slab mat construction where the slab is reinforced? What of interior monolithic wall footings for light gauge steel partions as in slab construction for self storage facilities?

Thanks again. These are all hypothetical questions as this point. I'm just researching the history and application of this requirement.

Chris/David,

I would disagree and say it is a just a dimension/distance value of 6 inches or 12 inches and has nothing to due with "d" (i.e. distance from extreme fiber.....). So if you had a pile cap with #8 bar each way for bottom reinforcement and 4 inches of cover then your overall depth (h) of the pile cap would need to be a minimum of 18 inches (4" clr + 2 -#8 bar + 12").

Thomas Hunt, S.E.

--
Christopher Banbury
Ark Engineering, Inc.
PO Box 10129, Brooksville, FL,34603
(352) 754-2424

------------------------------------------------------------ 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: Cutting structural steel at site

John,

As long as the torch cutting and welding are done properly and in accordance with AWS D1.1 it should not be a problem. Flame cutting of steel is a standard method used in most if not all steel fabrication shops during normal steel fabrication. The real problem will be with the "As long as the torch cutting and welding are done properly...". Hopefully you have good site inspection, QC, QA, etc.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor

John Nader <johnenader@hotmail.com>
10/31/2008 05:16 AM
Please respond to seaint

To	seaint <seaint@seaint.org>
cc
Subject	Cutting structural steel at site

A girt that is attached to a column via steel plates is too long.

The contractor is requesting cutting the welded plate at one end by torching it. The girt will also be cut by a torch to the required length. The girt will be welded to the plate and then will be connected to the column by bolts.

What are your thoughts please about torching the end of the girts where the lateral loads will pass thru the torched cross section to the column.

Or what is the loss to the steel grade.

Thanks,

John

Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!

------------------------------------------------------------ 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.   ------------------------------------------------------------

Rammed earth construction

All,

I have a project in Rwanda on which my client wants to try some alternative means of construction. Rammed earth and straw bale construction have come up.

(For those who haven't heard of these, rammed earth is made by building wall forms, placing soil in them, and pounding it until it rings. It makes a durable, fireproof wall with local materials and labor. Straw-bale construction involves stacking straw bales, often dowelling them together with wood dowels, then applying thick parging to each side. This apparently results in a strong, fireproof, relatively durable wall too, although I know less about it than rammed earth.)

Does anyone have information on either of these? I am specifically looking for information on what soil properties are needed for a successful rammed-earth installation (e.g. clay content, sand content, moisture content). I don't yet know whether a geotechnical engineer is available to the project; so information of the "holds together as a ball when dropped" type is also appreciated.

I appreciate any help, or alternate suggestions.

Thanks,

Mike Hemstad, P.E., S.E.

MBJ

Minneapolis, Minnesota

RE: Rammed earth construction

I agree with Yi's reply too. We have found that, like Bruce King and Peter Walker, judicious choice of particle size distribution can help get strengths up to 800 psi.

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, C.Eng, Struct.Eng, MIStructE
Victoria, BC
Canada

-----Original Message-----
From: Yi Yang [mailto:YI@summit-sr.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 9:37 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Rammed earth construction

We are designing a rammed earth residence right now in California.

There is a book by Bruce King, "Building of Earth and Straw". It has good information in it.

I'm not sure what kind of building code is used in Rwanda, but there currently isn't any code for rammed earth wall in CA. The closest code I found was the New Mexico building code, which has some design requirement in it. We are going to get the contractor to build a mock-up, and take core samples from the mock-up for testing. A cylinder made just for testing may not be accurate because of the compaction process. Compacting a wall section then take a core sample is more realistic. According to the contractor, there is a particular soil, Nun's Canyon Fine, that's been used around here, and proved to be good in the past projects, when it's done right, a breaking compressive strength as high as 2000 psi can be achieved. A 300 psi allowable compressive strength would be a good start for preliminary design. I don't think a geotechnical engineer is going to help much for the wall design.

YI YANG, S.E.

Do you really need to print this e-mail?

From: Michael Hemstad [mailto:mhemstad@mbjeng.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 10:17 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Rammed earth construction

All,

I have a project in Rwanda on which my client wants to try some alternative means of construction. Rammed earth and straw bale construction have come up.

(For those who haven't heard of these, rammed earth is made by building wall forms, placing soil in them, and pounding it until it rings. It makes a durable, fireproof wall with local materials and labor. Straw-bale construction involves stacking straw bales, often dowelling them together with wood dowels, then applying thick parging to each side. This apparently results in a strong, fireproof, relatively durable wall too, although I know less about it than rammed earth.)

Does anyone have information on either of these? I am specifically looking for information on what soil properties are needed for a successful rammed-earth installation (e.g. clay content, sand content, moisture content). I don't yet know whether a geotechnical engineer is available to the project; so information of the "holds together as a ball when dropped" type is also appreciated.

I appreciate any help, or alternate suggestions.

Thanks,

Mike Hemstad, P.E., S.E.

MBJ

Minneapolis, Minnesota

RE: Rammed earth construction

I do RE in BC, Canada. If I can help ...

1) Get lab tests done on the available material - material is site-specific and needs care in selection.

2) Generate several particle-size gradings of the material and develop "mixes" that when tested give the "best" behaviour.

3) Decide what, if any, admixtures you might want to add. Eg: cement, flyash, other pozzolans etc that may be beneficial to the final working material.

4) If you decide to go reinforced RE and cement stabilized RE then make sure that you are comfortable using the masonry block design standards. Most engineers use masonry or concrete. While masonry approximates what is essentially a cement-stabilized aggregate, I'm not convinced yet.

5) For further information on material choice, SIREWall Inc here on Saltspring Island, BC has over 15 years of aggregate sampling experience, design of RE structures, and has a fund of knowledge on the behaviours of RE material in Canada, China and the US. I am one of their structural consultants so we familiar with their work.

6) I don't know Rwandan climates but while RE does perform well in wet and cold climes, it is prudent to design with reasonably large overhangs of the roof. Verandahs are an excellent way to protect.

7) If you go with cement-stabilized RE then curing is as important as in conc. construction.

8) There is a lot of info on the internet. Peter Walker of Bath University, UK has done much research on un-reinforced RE and Kepa Morgan of Auckland University, NZ and done a lot of work with fibre-reinforced RE. If you go with unreinforced and no-additive RE then I recommend those 2 Profs will be of great help.

Hope this helps you get started. If you need any further assistance then please contact me privately.

Thor A. Tandy P.Eng, C.Eng, Struct.Eng, MIStructE
UNISOL Engineering Ltd
Unit 7 - 625 Hillside Ave
Victoria, BC, V8T 1Z1
Tel/Fax: (250) 382-9115
Email: vicpeng@telus.net

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Hemstad [mailto:mhemstad@mbjeng.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 10:17 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Rammed earth construction

All,

I have a project in Rwanda on which my client wants to try some alternative means of construction. Rammed earth and straw bale construction have come up.

(For those who haven't heard of these, rammed earth is made by building wall forms, placing soil in them, and pounding it until it rings. It makes a durable, fireproof wall with local materials and labor. Straw-bale construction involves stacking straw bales, often dowelling them together with wood dowels, then applying thick parging to each side. This apparently results in a strong, fireproof, relatively durable wall too, although I know less about it than rammed earth.)

Does anyone have information on either of these? I am specifically looking for information on what soil properties are needed for a successful rammed-earth installation (e.g. clay content, sand content, moisture content). I don't yet know whether a geotechnical engineer is available to the project; so information of the "holds together as a ball when dropped" type is also appreciated.

I appreciate any help, or alternate suggestions.

Thanks,

Mike Hemstad, P.E., S.E.

MBJ

Minneapolis, Minnesota

RE: Rammed earth construction

We are designing a rammed earth residence right now in California.

There is a book by Bruce King, "Building of Earth and Straw". It has good information in it.

I'm not sure what kind of building code is used in Rwanda, but there currently isn't any code for rammed earth wall in CA. The closest code I found was the New Mexico building code, which has some design requirement in it. We are going to get the contractor to build a mock-up, and take core samples from the mock-up for testing. A cylinder made just for testing may not be accurate because of the compaction process. Compacting a wall section then take a core sample is more realistic. According to the contractor, there is a particular soil, Nun's Canyon Fine, that's been used around here, and proved to be good in the past projects, when it's done right, a breaking compressive strength as high as 2000 psi can be achieved. A 300 psi allowable compressive strength would be a good start for preliminary design. I don't think a geotechnical engineer is going to help much for the wall design.

YI YANG, S.E.

Do you really need to print this e-mail?

From: Michael Hemstad [mailto:mhemstad@mbjeng.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 10:17 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Rammed earth construction

All,

I have a project in Rwanda on which my client wants to try some alternative means of construction. Rammed earth and straw bale construction have come up.

I appreciate any help, or alternate suggestions.

Thanks,

Mike Hemstad, P.E., S.E.

MBJ

Minneapolis, Minnesota

RE: Elevator load factor.

IBC 2006 section 1607.8.1 tells you to increase the loads by 100%. This
would give you a 3.2 load factor.

Wesley C. Werner

-----Original Message-----
From: Jordan Truesdell, PE [mailto:seaint2@truesdellengineering.com]
Sent: Friday, October 31, 2008 11:23 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Elevator load factor.

I'm looking for the loading factor (LRFD) for elevator sheave beams. I
seem to recall a specific factor higher than 1.6, but can't remember
where I've read it. Does anyone have a load factor or a reference?
Thanks.

--
Jordan

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

Elevator load factor.

--
Jordan

RE: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

Thanks again. These are all hypothetical questions as this point. I'm just researching the history and application of this requirement.

Chris/David,

I would disagree and say it is a just a dimension/distance value of 6 inches or 12 inches and has nothing to due with "d" (i.e. distance from extreme fiber.....). So if you had a pile cap with #8 bar each way for bottom reinforcement and 4 inches of cover then your overall depth (h) of the pile cap would need to be a minimum of 18 inches (4" clr + 2 -#8 bar + 12").

Thomas Hunt, S.E.

--
Christopher Banbury

Ark Engineering, Inc.
PO Box 10129, Brooksville, FL,34603
(352) 754-2424

Cutting structural steel at site

Discover the new Windows Vista Learn more!

Thursday, October 30, 2008

Re: Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations

Engineering Observation for several portions of construction by the Engineer of Record, as progress occurs, is a requirement of the Bldg. Dept(s). prior to the City inspection by Bldg. Dept. inspectors. For typical projects such as a second story addition, two Structural Inspections are required: one prior to footing concrete placement and one when framing is completed by not covered by drywall.

Stan Scholl, P.E.

Laguna Beach, CA

Re: : Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations

Davis,

Your “Based on all the technical information and test reports received along with my personal site visits, it is my professional opinion...” sounds a lot like the weasel words we use when asked for this kind of certification. As a precast concrete subcontractor with PEs on staff but a lot of consultants designing Design-Build projects, we sometimes have to “certify” construction, and it is occurring with increasing frequency. We say we depend on our PCI certified QC department’s inspections, our PCI certified erector’s daily reports, our field coordinator’s inspection, our field QC inspection and at least one engineer’s field observation to say that everything is in accordance with the erection drawings and the remedial details. The only issue is that the requirement usually wants this from the design engineer, who often works for a consultant. Now some of our consultants make a practice of visiting their sites during erection, but their insurance carriers still do not like it. So we do. So far, no AHJ has rejected our letter.

I have never been aware at the start of a project that this would be required, but since the GC usually still has a lot of our money when the request is received, we comply.

Jim Getaz

Winchester, Virginia

Wednesday, October 29, 2008

Re: 2007 CBC Section 1805.7.2.1

Yes, that is the square root of the bracket.

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

In a message dated 10/29/2008 4:03:53 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, t.w.allen@cox.net writes:

Regarding equation 18-1, isn't the "1/2" at the end supposed to be a superscript (as in square root)?

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

ALLEN DESIGNS

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

Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals!

Re: 2007 CBC Section 1805.7.2.1

Bill,

In my 2006 IBC it shows the 1/2 as a square root superscript.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor

"Bill Allen" <t.w.allen@cox.net>
10/29/2008 04:03 PM
Please respond to seaint

To	<seaint@seaint.org>
cc
Subject	2007 CBC Section 1805.7.2.1

Regarding equation 18-1, isn't the "1/2" at the end supposed to be a superscript (as in square root)?

T. William (Bill) Allen, S.E.
ALLEN DESIGNS
Consulting Structural Engineers
V (949) 248-8588 • F(949) 209-2509

------------------------------------------------------------ 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.   ------------------------------------------------------------

2007 CBC Section 1805.7.2.1

Regarding equation 18-1, isn't the "1/2" at the end supposed to be a superscript (as in square root)?

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

ALLEN DESIGNS

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

RE: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

Chris/David,

I would disagree and say it is a just a dimension/distance value of 6 inches or 12 inches and has nothing to due with "d" (i.e. distance from extreme fiber.....). So if you had a pile cap with #8 bar each way for bottom reinforcement and 4 inches of cover then your overall depth (h) of the pile cap would need to be a minimum of 18 inches (4" clr + 2 -#8 bar + 12").

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor

"David Fisher" <dfisher@fpse.com>
10/29/2008 12:55 PM
Please respond to seaint

To	<seaint@seaint.org>
cc
Subject	RE: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

"d" as per ACI 318.

David L. Fisher SE PE

Fisher and Partners - Cayman
372 West Ontario Chicago 60610
75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI
319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701
312.573.1726 facsimile
312.622.0409 mobile

www.fpse.com

From: Christopher Banbury [mailto:christopher.banbury@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 1:39 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

ACI 318 15.7 - Minimum footing depth
Depth of footing above bottom reinforcement shall not be less than 6 in. for footings on soil, nor less than 12 in. for footings on piles.

Does "depth of footing" refer to 'd' as defined by 318 or Df as used in foundation design?

Thanks.

--
Christopher & Shannon Banbury
PO Box 12347, Brooksville, FL,34603
(352) 797-9200

------------------------------------------------------------ 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: Packing peanuts?

Piece of cake!

My current project is in Alaska. It was 15 below this morning. They are getting ready to shut down for the "winter" when it turns real cold.

You might want to consider expanded shale. It can also be used as a structural fill. It is very light weight.

Before I would do anything, I would find out if the soil is subject to frost heave. If it is a gravel, you may not have to do anything. Talk to the geotech.

Regards,
Harold Sprague

Subject: Packing peanuts?
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:52:40 -0600
From: GordonGoodell@harmonydesigninc.com
To: seaint@seaint.org

I've got a small commercial project that's getting put on hold, just before the Wyoming winter sets in. I'm sure I'm not the only one. This one has footings & concrete walls, but no slab, backfill, or floor package, and the owner doesn't want to (can't?)do anything else, except the bare minimum to protect his investment from frost. The outside backfill to frost depth is no problem, but those footings are exposed on the inside, too, as well as lots of interior footings, elevator pit, etc. The footprint is about 4,400sf. Filling it up with 500 cu. yds of dirt (to frost depth) and then scooping it out in the spring seems too painful. Does anyone have good ideas for reasonably priced blankets or even lightweight structural fill?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity

Stay organized with simple drag and drop from Windows Live Hotmail. Try it

Re: Packing peanuts?

Gordon,

Some ideas come to mind:

1.) Check with the geotech. Maybe you don't need to provide frost protection.

2.) Consider storing straw or hay bales. Maybe someone will pay you to store them for the winter; or maybe you can buy them and resell them next year for a profit. Loose hay or straw is better insulation than bales but more expensive to clean up later.

3.) If you need insulation for the building buy it now and use it for this purpose.

4.) Light-weight aggregate for concrete would be good insulation.

Good luck.

Regards,

H. Daryl Richardson

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

From: Gordon Goodell

To: seaint@seaint.org

Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 2:52 PM

Subject: Packing peanuts?

I've got a small commercial project that's getting put on hold, just before the Wyoming winter sets in. I'm sure I'm not the only one. This one has footings & concrete walls, but no slab, backfill, or floor package, and the owner doesn't want to (can't?)do anything else, except the bare minimum to protect his investment from frost. The outside backfill to frost depth is no problem, but those footings are exposed on the inside, too, as well as lots of interior footings, elevator pit, etc. The footprint is about 4,400sf. Filling it up with 500 cu. yds of dirt (to frost depth) and then scooping it out in the spring seems too painful. Does anyone have good ideas for reasonably priced blankets or even lightweight structural fill?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity

RE: Packing peanuts?

Yeah, we have lots of barley straw here (and Augie Busch has a vacation home). That’s currently the way I’m leaning. It’s in town, though, and I wonder how ripe it will get when the snow starts melting. And if I need 750 bales, how do I calculate the required number of dump cats to keep the rodent population at bay?

thanks,

Gordon

From: Michael Laplante [mailto:Michael.Laplante@cima.ca]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 3:20 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Packing peanuts?

Here in Montreal and outlying regions contractors will use hay to protect new concrete during cold weather construction.

De : Gordon Goodell [mailto:GordonGoodell@harmonydesigninc.com]
Envoyé : October 29, 2008 4:53 PM
À : seaint@seaint.org
Objet : Packing peanuts?

I’ve got a small commercial project that’s getting put on hold, just before the Wyoming winter sets in. I’m sure I’m not the only one. This one has footings & concrete walls, but no slab, backfill, or floor package, and the owner doesn’t want to (can’t?)do anything else, except the bare minimum to protect his investment from frost. The outside backfill to frost depth is no problem, but those footings are exposed on the inside, too, as well as lots of interior footings, elevator pit, etc. The footprint is about 4,400sf. Filling it up with 500 cu. yds of dirt (to frost depth) and then scooping it out in the spring seems too painful. Does anyone have good ideas for reasonably priced blankets or even lightweight structural fill?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity

Re: Packing peanuts?

They may cover the building and run commercial (Job site), propane heater(s) when the temperature goes down!

Farzin S. Rahbar, SE
David C. Weiss Structural Engineer & Associates, Inc.
(818) 227-8040 Ex. 13 Fax: (818) 227-8041

In a message dated 10/29/2008 2:06:16 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, GordonGoodell@harmonydesigninc.com writes:

I've got a small commercial project that's getting put on hold, just before the Wyoming winter sets in. I'm sure I'm not the only one. This one has footings & concrete walls, but no slab, backfill, or floor package, and the owner doesn't want to (can't?)do anything else, except the bare minimum to protect his investment from frost. The outside backfill to frost depth is no problem, but those footings are exposed on the inside, too, as well as lots of interior footings, elevator pit, etc. The footprint is about 4,400sf. Filling it up with 500 cu. yds of dirt (to frost depth) and then scooping it out in the spring seems too painful. Does anyone have good ideas for reasonably priced blankets or even lightweight structural fill?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity

Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot 5 Travel Deals!

RE: Packing peanuts?

We used large Styrofoam sheets placed under a layer of fill on the approaches to the new Dumbarton Bridge - although we did this to lighten the dead weight of the fill on poor sub-surface soils.

Bob Garner, S.E.

From: Gordon Goodell [mailto:GordonGoodell@harmonydesigninc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 1:53 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Packing peanuts?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

RE: Packing peanuts?

Here in Montreal and outlying regions contractors will use hay to protect new concrete during cold weather construction.

De : Gordon Goodell [mailto:GordonGoodell@harmonydesigninc.com]
Envoyé : October 29, 2008 4:53 PM
À : seaint@seaint.org
Objet : Packing peanuts?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

ExchangeDefender Message Security: Check Authenticity

Packing peanuts?

thanks,

Gordon Goodell

RE: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

“d” as per ACI 318.

David L. Fisher SE PE

Fisher and Partners - Cayman

372 West Ontario Chicago 60610

75 Fort Street Georgetown Grand Cayman BWI

319 A Street Boston 02210

312.573.1701

312.573.1726 facsimile

312.622.0409 mobile

www.fpse.com

From: Christopher Banbury [mailto:christopher.banbury@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 29, 2008 1:39 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

ACI 318 15.7 - Minimum footing depth

Depth of footing above bottom reinforcement shall not be less than 6 in. for footings on soil, nor less than 12 in. for footings on piles.

Does "depth of footing" refer to 'd' as defined by 318 or Df as used in foundation design?

Thanks.

--
Christopher & Shannon Banbury
PO Box 12347, Brooksville, FL,34603
(352) 797-9200

depth of footing above bottom reinforcement

ACI 318 15.7 - Minimum footing depth

Depth of footing above bottom reinforcement shall not be less than 6 in. for footings on soil, nor less than 12 in. for footings on piles.

Does "depth of footing" refer to 'd' as defined by 318 or Df as used in foundation design?

Thanks.

--
Christopher & Shannon Banbury
PO Box 12347, Brooksville, FL,34603
(352) 797-9200

RE: Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations

Bill,

Unless San Antone has revised their rules, you will find this requirement on the Certificate of Occupancy requirements that came with the Building Permit. In the past, I have gotten a copy of this from the GC, sent it to the owner through the architect to inform them of the requirements and asking how they want this to be handled. The owner, if they haven’t done a project in SA before, needs to understand that they will not get a C.O. nor will the power be permanently connected (SA has its own electric company) without the stated letter. If the owner is providing all construction material inspection and has other inspectors on board, then all of their reports need to be sent directly to you. You need to schedule field visits for yourself at milestones you feel are important based on the design. This must be coordinated with the GC.

And as always, the letter needs to be short, starting with a phrase like “Based on all the technical information and test reports received along with my personal site visits, it is my professional opinion...” San Antonio does this as their city inspectors do not review any structural work as it is being performed like other cities here in Texas.

I first learned about this requirement years ago in a seminar about a building that was built without EOR review. The GC thought it was great when he called the city to inform them about placing concrete, etc., they said OK and no one from the city showed up. When it came time to get the C.O., the sealed letter request was made. The EOR couldn’t write one since he had no involvement with the construction. The last I heard, the building was never occupied as no one could come up with a way to do forensic testing to adequately determine how the building was constructed.

What I described above is what I have done with all the buildings I engineered in SA and all the projects that Wallace did there also.

Replied by

Davis G. Parsons II, PE RA FAEI

Engineering Manager

Irwin Steel

817.636.2508

817.636.2506 (Fax)

From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:bill@polhemus.cc]
Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 12:52 PM
To: Davis Parsons; <seaint@seaint.org> <seaint@seaint.org> <seaint@seaint.org>
Subject: Re: Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations

Davis, how do EoRs typically handle this? By inspection? Prescheduled site visits?

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 28, 2008, at 10:58 AM, "Davis Parsons" <davis@irwinsteel.net> wrote:

Bill,

San Antonio requires the EOR sign and seal a letter attesting the project is built in accordance with the plans and specifications before a C.O. is issued. This is noted as a permit requirement when the building permit is issued.

Davis G. Parsons II, PE RA FAEI

Engineering Manager

Irwin Steel

817.636.2508

817.636.2506 (Fax)

RE: Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations

That is a tall order unless the special inspectors worked directly for the EOR. I would at least ask for "substantial compliance" and want to approve the special inspectors and recieve all reports. This would also get into nonstructural components in seismic areas and a lot of elements in nonseismic areas that are normally performance specified, like glazing and doors.

The statement required by San Antonio would cause me concern. CASE publishes "Guide to Special Inspections and Quality Assurance" which defines the roles for the various entities including the Engineer of Record.

The City of LA produces a document for the EOR that more accurately describes his duties and responsibilities.

Regards,
Harold Sprague

> Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 23:06:20 -0700
> From: m_k_gilligan@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations
> To: seaint@seaint.org
>
> "San Antoniorequires the EOR sign and seal a letter attesting the project is built in accordance with the plans and specifications before a C.O. is issued. This is noted as a permit requirement when the building permit is issued.
>
> DavisG. Parsons II, PE RA FAEI
> Engineering Manager"
>
>
>
> When presented with similar requests we always add qualifying language that addresses the fact that we do not have complete knowledge regarding the construction and that we have performed our work in accordance with the normal standard of care.
>
> If anybody signs such a letter without appropriate qualifying language you will find that you do not have E&O insurance coverage.
>
> Unless they have formally adopted this requirement when they adopted the IBC then all they can legally require is the Structural Observation report required in Section 1709.
>
> Mark Gilligan
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Want to read Hotmail messages in Outlook? The Wordsmiths show you how. Learn Now

RE: ACI 318-08 Section 14.8 Alternate Design of Slender Walls

Return Receipt

Your RE: ACI 318-08 Section 14.8 Alternate Design of Slender
document: Walls

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

at: 10/29/2008 06:47:52 PDT

------------------------------------------------------------
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: ACI 318-08 Section 14.8 Alternate Design of Slender Walls

1.) This presents another question. Does the same un-conservative approach run over into masonry P-delta/ slender wall design?

2.) Because they want to sell you the 318-08 code, rather than have you get by with a 318-05 and a supplement.

>>> Andre Sidler <asidler@hotmail.com> 10/28/2008 5:53 PM >>>
SEA Listers -

I sat in on a webinar on Tuesday morning and I was informed that the calculation of the P-delta and secondary moment in Section 14.8.4 of ACI 318-05 is unconcervative and that the brand-spankin' new ACI 318-08 has corrected this. Is there anyone out in the SEA Listserve universe that would be kind enough to send me a PDF file of section 14.8 of the ACI 318-08? I can't bring myself to purchase this edition just yet; I'd rather wait until IBC 2010 becomes the law of the land.

Second, why doesn't ACI issue a supplement to ACI 318-05 to correct this? ASCE issued a supplement for ASCE 7-05 that made some modifications. It seems that if this method is as unconservative as we were led to believe in the webinar then this should be taken care of immediately.

Cheers!

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

asidler@hotmail.com

Tuesday, October 28, 2008

Re: Jurisdictions That REQUIRE Engineer's Observations

"San Antoniorequires the EOR sign and seal a letter attesting the project is built in accordance with the plans and specifications before a C.O. is issued. This is noted as a permit requirement when the building permit is issued.

DavisG. Parsons II, PE RA FAEI
Engineering Manager"

When presented with similar requests we always add qualifying language that addresses the fact that we do not have complete knowledge regarding the construction and that we have performed our work in accordance with the normal standard of care.

If anybody signs such a letter without appropriate qualifying language you will find that you do not have E&O insurance coverage.

Unless they have formally adopted this requirement when they adopted the IBC then all they can legally require is the Structural Observation report required in Section 1709.

Mark Gilligan