Friday, November 6, 2009

Re: wind and drift

H/20 blows my mind. I was not aware of any manufacturer that would stoop to
using that, let alone acknowledging the fact. No, I take that back ... I am
not aware of any _reputable_ manufacturer that would allow that limit as the
controlling condition.

Can we name names here?

Allowing h/20 as a design limit switch in software and designing a structure
that theoretically achieves a deflection at h/20 are separate issues.
Regardless of which element of the PEMB has design controlled at this limit,
I will guarantee that there is a connected element that is not properly
stabilized. The designer's focus is too narrow and the software is only
capable of checking what it has been programmed to check. I am not aware of
any manufacturer's software that could adequately handle that design.

Say, any more news about the Dallas Cowboys former practice facility? I saw
the preliminary report ...

Paul Ransom, P.Eng.
ph 905 639-9628
fax 905 639-3866

> From:

> As Harold indicated all the PEMB projects I have been involved with the
> initial design was for h/20. I explain to the clients that because of the
> h/20 design criteria within 5 years your building will leak water for sure and
> probably air also. I suggest that the deflection lint be change to h/200
> the is happier but the PEMB supplier claims the price has now increased
> $10 -15,000 because of the more restrictive requirement.
> Joe Venuti
> Johnson & Nielsen Associates
> Palm Springs, CA

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at:
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
* Questions to 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:
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********