Structural Engineering: 2009-05-17

Saturday, May 23, 2009

RE: Concrete veneer

I agree. This is the way for the OP's clients to achieve their goal. Google "smooth stucco" or "EIFS". Be careful with EIFS, though. There are problems if it is done wrong (and possibly even if it's done right). Craftsmanship is the key to both applications. Maybe we will see a resurrection of craftsmanship with the latest economic "adjustment". One can only hope.

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

ALLEN DESIGNS

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

-----Original Message-----
From: Rhkratzse@aol.com [mailto:Rhkratzse@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 9:31 PM
To: erik_g@cox.net; seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Concrete veneer

Isn't this what we normally call "stucco"?

Ralph

In a message dated 5/22/09 6:44:04 PM, erik_g@cox.net writes:

I'm working on an (E) 2-story residential remodel in Laguna Beach, CA. On
the exterior walls, the homeowner would like to see a concrete veneer. In
other words, the homeowner wants to have the look of a concrete wall without
demo'ing the (E) stud walls and CMu walls and building (N) concrete walls.
Is it possible to achieve the concrete look by applying concrete to the
outisde? if so, is there a typical procedure to add the concrete veneer to
an (E) stud wall or an (E) cmu wall? do we apply a wire mesh to the (E)
walls and spray the concrete on? What should be the minimum thickness of
the concrete veneer? Is it a good idea to use a light weight concrete?

**************
A strong credit score is 700 or above. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! (http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222585033x1201462753/aol?redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?sc=668072&hmpgID=115&bcd=Maystrongfooter52309NO115)

Friday, May 22, 2009

Re: Concrete veneer

Isn't this what we normally call "stucco"?

Ralph

In a message dated 5/22/09 6:44:04 PM, erik_g@cox.net writes:

I'm working on an (E) 2-story residential remodel in Laguna Beach, CA. On
the exterior walls, the homeowner would like to see a concrete veneer. In
other words, the homeowner wants to have the look of a concrete wall without
demo'ing the (E) stud walls and CMu walls and building (N) concrete walls.
Is it possible to achieve the concrete look by applying concrete to the
outisde? if so, is there a typical procedure to add the concrete veneer to
an (E) stud wall or an (E) cmu wall? do we apply a wire mesh to the (E)
walls and spray the concrete on? What should be the minimum thickness of
the concrete veneer? Is it a good idea to use a light weight concrete?

Re: Concrete veneer

That's a lot of added seismic weight. Do you have the SW to handle it?
Chuck Utzman,P.E.

erik_g@cox.net wrote:
> I'm working on an (E) 2-story residential remodel in Laguna Beach, CA. On
> the exterior walls, the homeowner would like to see a concrete veneer. In
> other words, the homeowner wants to have the look of a concrete wall without
> demo'ing the (E) stud walls and CMu walls and building (N) concrete walls.
> Is it possible to achieve the concrete look by applying concrete to the
> outisde? if so, is there a typical procedure to add the concrete veneer to
> an (E) stud wall or an (E) cmu wall? do we apply a wire mesh to the (E)
> walls and spray the concrete on? What should be the minimum thickness of
> the concrete veneer? Is it a good idea to use a light weight concrete?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * 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
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Concrete veneer

RE: Concrete Bond

ICRI Guideline 03739, "Guide to Using In-Situ Tensile Pull-Off Tests to Evaluate Bond of Concrete Surface Materials”

www.restruction.com/pdfs/FieldApplications.pdf

From: Paul Feather [mailto:PFeather@se-solutions.net]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 11:58 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Concrete Bond

I am looking for any papers or discussion on the bond strength of topping slabs placed over precast or previously placed concrete.

Any references?

Paul Feather PE, SE

pfeather@SE-Solutions.net

www.SE-Solutions.net

951-699-2666

RE: Nailer on Masory Wall

Even if it’s not explicitly prohibited by the code, I don’t think (going by memory) there are any published allowable stresses for cross grain tension or bending for lumber. Would that be an indication that the code does not allow cross grain bending?

Oshin Tosounian, S.E.

From: Doug Mayer [mailto:doug.mayer@taylorteter.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 1:15 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Nailer on Masory Wall

Thanks for the replies. To clarify, this is an interior bearing wall where the joists (TJIs) run over and bear on the nailer on the top of the cmu wall.

I know cross-grain bending is bad, but I’m just curious where in the code it says that it is outlawed in all cases. Again, all I can find is in reference to lateral anchorage for concrete/masonry walls to diaphragms.

Thanks,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

If you hang the joist from the wall with top flange hangers and put Pa straps at bottom of joist max 4' o.c. that usually works assuming 12" deep joist min. to get coverage around strap in cmu wall.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 12:51:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronbuchko@yahoo.com writes:

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

Concrete Bond

I am looking for any papers or discussion on the bond strength of topping slabs placed over precast or previously placed concrete.

Any references?

Paul Feather PE, SE

pfeather@SE-Solutions.net

www.SE-Solutions.net

951-699-2666

Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

Since it is DSA project what Steve indicated is your only option. And you will need to check the bolt for anchorage loading.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 1:33:24 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ECVAl3@aol.com writes:

How about a steel angle clip @ 4'oc nailed or screwed to the joist and bolted to the masonry through the wood plate with a TITEN HD bolt?

S.Macie

In a message dated 5/22/2009 1:16:01 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, doug.mayer@taylorteter.com writes:

Thanks for the replies. To clarify, this is an interior bearing wall where the joists (TJIs) run over and bear on the nailer on the top of the cmu wall.

I know cross-grain bending is bad, but I'm just curious where in the code it says that it is outlawed in all cases. Again, all I can find is in reference to lateral anchorage for concrete/masonry walls to diaphragms.

Thanks,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

If you hang the joist from the wall with top flange hangers and put Pa straps at bottom of joist max 4' o.c. that usually works assuming 12" deep joist min. to get coverage around strap in cmu wall.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 12:51:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronbuchko@yahoo.com writes:

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

Recession-proof vacation ideas. Find free things to do in the U.S.

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

RE: Nailer on Masory Wall

Technically speaking the only place that cross grain bending and cross grain tension are outlawed by the code in Section 12.11.2.2.3 of ASCE 7-05. This section is for the lateral anchorage of structural walls and only required if you are in a Seismic Design Category C through F.

If the H2.5 anchors are for uplift control of your TJI joist then that connection doesn’t fall under the lateral anchorage section mentioned, and per code you may not be required to use something else (local codes may add additional requirements).

But I may be confused, if the joist are bearing on a sill on the top of the wall, then there must be an out-of-plane connection anyway, one that either uses the sill or works around it?

Jason Christensen, S.E.

From: Doug Mayer [mailto:doug.mayer@taylorteter.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 2:15 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Nailer on Masory Wall

Thanks for the replies. To clarify, this is an interior bearing wall where the joists (TJIs) run over and bear on the nailer on the top of the cmu wall.

Thanks,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

If you hang the joist from the wall with top flange hangers and put Pa straps at bottom of joist max 4' o.c. that usually works assuming 12" deep joist min. to get coverage around strap in cmu wall.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 12:51:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronbuchko@yahoo.com writes:

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

How about a steel angle clip @ 4'oc nailed or screwed to the joist and bolted to the masonry through the wood plate with a TITEN HD bolt?

S.Macie

In a message dated 5/22/2009 1:16:01 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, doug.mayer@taylorteter.com writes:

Thanks for the replies. To clarify, this is an interior bearing wall where the joists (TJIs) run over and bear on the nailer on the top of the cmu wall.

I know cross-grain bending is bad, but I'm just curious where in the code it says that it is outlawed in all cases. Again, all I can find is in reference to lateral anchorage for concrete/masonry walls to diaphragms.

Thanks,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

If you hang the joist from the wall with top flange hangers and put Pa straps at bottom of joist max 4' o.c. that usually works assuming 12" deep joist min. to get coverage around strap in cmu wall.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 12:51:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronbuchko@yahoo.com writes:

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

Recession-proof vacation ideas. Find free things to do in the U.S.

Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

i was assuming you had given a fix...

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Stan Caldwell <stancaldwell@gmail.com> wrote:

David:

Curing doesn't improve deflection, or vibration, or durability, or ...

Regards,

Stan

*************************************************
Structural engineering is the art of molding materials
we don't wholly understand, into shapes we can't fully
analyze, so as to withstand forces we can't really assess,
in such a way that the community at large has no reason
to suspect the extent of our ignorance." ...Jim Amrhein
*************************************************

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM, David Topete <d.topete73@gmail.com> wrote:

I guess the concrete needs time for curing, and the concrete sub needs time for healing...

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

And right before a 3 day weekend.....

Stan Caldwell wrote:

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?

--
David Topete, SE

--
David Topete, SE

RE: Nailer on Masory Wall

Thanks for the replies. To clarify, this is an interior bearing wall where the joists (TJIs) run over and bear on the nailer on the top of the cmu wall.

Thanks,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

From: Jnapd@aol.com [mailto:Jnapd@aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 12:57 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

If you hang the joist from the wall with top flange hangers and put Pa straps at bottom of joist max 4' o.c. that usually works assuming 12" deep joist min. to get coverage around strap in cmu wall.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 12:51:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronbuchko@yahoo.com writes:

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Doug

If you hang the joist from the wall with top flange hangers and put Pa straps at bottom of joist max 4' o.c. that usually works assuming 12" deep joist min. to get coverage around strap in cmu wall.

Joe Venuti
Johnson & Nielsen Associates
Palm Springs, CA

In a message dated 5/22/2009 12:51:09 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, ronbuchko@yahoo.com writes:

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Stay connected and tighten your budget with a great mobile device for under $50. Take a Peek!

Re: Nailer on Masory Wall

Most effective method of connecting a wood nailer(ledger) AND to avoid X-grain bending is to place two (2) anchor bolts (staggered) within the masonry wall a distance equal to the depth of the ledger. This will usually require a deeper ledger than would normally be required. Eg. for a calculated 2X10 you would use a 2X12 and locate the ab's min 3" from the top and 3" from the bottom of nailer thereby "fixing" the nailer in place and reducing the danger of X-grain bending.

--- On Fri, 5/22/09, Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com> wrote:

From: Doug Mayer <doug.mayer@taylorteter.com>
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Friday, May 22, 2009, 12:11 PM

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE
Structural Engineer

RE: Nailer on Masory Wall

I believe that cross grain bending is not allowed in any situation that I know of.

We have previously connected the joist to the anchor bolt connecting the nailer to the CMU wall thus having a direct load path from the joist to the wall.

Dave Puskas, PE, SECB

(Senior Engineer, Structural)

Cyntergy aec

320 South Boston 12th Floor

Tulsa, Oklahoma 74103

918-877-6000 ext. 394

From: Doug Mayer [mailto:doug.mayer@taylorteter.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 2:12 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Nailer on Masory Wall

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

I have never seen the code address cross-grain bending in anything other than lateral anchorage of masonry/concrete walls to diaphragms. Does the code somewhere specify that cross-grain bending in this situation is not allowed? Any help would be appreciated.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

--
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by Cyntergy's
MailScanner and is believed to be clean.

Nailer on Masory Wall

Situation: typical nailer on top of a cmu wall. Joists bearing on nailer and ties (H2.5) connecting joist to nailer for uplift.

Problem: DSA (California) backcheck comment believes that cross-grain bending of the nailer needs to be avoided and to design direct connection to cmu wall.

TIA,

Doug Mayer, SE

Structural Engineer

Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

David:

Curing doesn't improve deflection, or vibration, or durability, or ...

Regards,

Stan

*************************************************
Structural engineering is the art of molding materials
we don't wholly understand, into shapes we can't fully
analyze, so as to withstand forces we can't really assess,
in such a way that the community at large has no reason
to suspect the extent of our ignorance." ...Jim Amrhein
*************************************************

On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 10:27 AM, David Topete <d.topete73@gmail.com> wrote:

I guess the concrete needs time for curing, and the concrete sub needs time for healing...

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

And right before a 3 day weekend.....

Stan Caldwell wrote:

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?

--
David Topete, SE

Ladders

You will look in vain in the CFR nowadays for specifics from OSHA on ladder design. OSHA (and also regulators here in Washington State) currently just reference ANSI A14.3-2002 American National Standard for Ladders–Fixed—Safety Requirement which is written by the American Ladder Institute. This has all the details and minimum loads and dimensions you used to be able to look up for free, only now it will cost you $87.50 to buy the 32 page 2002 standard.

ANSI has just issued a 2008 version of this standard for a whopping $375 and I hope hell freezes over before I have to buy a copy. I will forego my usual rant about citizens having to pay before they can learn what laws and regulations say (as in building codes.)

Jim Lutz, P.E., S.E.

Senior Structural Engineer

1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 500

Seattle, WA 98101

Ph: 206-505-3400

Fax: 206-505-3406

www.bhcconsultants.com

This email and all attachments are confidential. For further information about emails sent to or from BHC Consultants or if you have received this email in error, please refer to Email Disclaimer

RE: High Mast Light Pole Design

That's going to be one drunk contractor this weekend!

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Caldwell [mailto:stancaldwell@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:09 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?

RE: High Mast Light Pole Design

score, tap/epoxy dowels @ 24” o.c. staggered and use a bonding agent over the entire surface… then pour the rest of concrete and double up your control joint locations for insane amount of cracking that will still occur, and problem solved!

From: Michel Blangy [mailto:mblangy@satco-inc.com]
Sent: Friday, May 22, 2009 11:30 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: RE: High Mast Light Pole Design

Can't we just pour another layer on top...I don't see the problem.

Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Caldwell [mailto:stancaldwell@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:09 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?

RE: High Mast Light Pole Design

Can't we just pour another layer on top...I don't see the problem.

Joe

-----Original Message-----
From: Stan Caldwell [mailto:stancaldwell@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 3:09 PM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?

Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

I guess the concrete needs time for curing, and the concrete sub needs time for healing...

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

And right before a 3 day weekend.....

Stan Caldwell wrote:

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?

--
David Topete, SE

Thursday, May 21, 2009

Re: High Mast Light Pole Design

And right before a 3 day weekend.....

Stan Caldwell wrote:

Drew:

Elevated one-way P/T slab designed for 7" thickness. ACI 117 has a tolerance of -0.25 in. Measured thickness as constructed of 6.00" to 6.50", with parts of the slab as thin as 5.13". This is an area of about 3,000 sf in a parking structure on a tight schedule, where all surfaces will be visually exposed. A decision will be made manana.

Stan

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

The goal of every engineer is to retire

without getting blamed for a major

catastrophe! ...Dilbert

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

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Drew Morris <dmorris@bbfm.com> wrote:

So what happened at the jobsite?