Lpile can determine the point of no moment. 1ft below grade sounds pretty low for typical piles. If you are using Lpile why not just determine the pile moment from that program?
I stopped asking contractors what they prefer because they always will just say PDF/Screws because its cheaper. I tend to trust puddle welds the most, but after reading some of this will think twice about it on small joists.
Generally with a system of angles that frame to adjacent joists...
If you have satisfied yourself that concrete strength and bearing pressure distribution are okay, then there isn't a reason not to go with option 2 from that standpoint.
There are some downsides to number 2 though from a construction standpoint.
You have a jagged perimeter which requires more...
318 is the code, 360 is a guide. 360 contains much more information specific to slab on grade and warehouse pallet racking as well as other considerations such as flatness tolerances that you need to consider.
If AHJ says you need to use ELF for foundations I don't see how you can get around that. However you could consider use of ASCE 7-22 12.13.4 if permitted. The intent of this section is to address the issue that you present. But If you are saying that RSA gives you 1/5th the overturning of the...
Yep footnote 2 doesn't leave a lot of room for interpretation. If you have over 50% permanent blockage below the canopy in the direction of consideration then you go obstructed, if not then free.
Normally I would say that the element is the entire stud and its effective area is calculated based on its actual length & span/trib but the parapet presents a different scenario.
How about ASCE 7-22 Section 30.6? And Figure 30.6-1.
The parapet wind pressure is much greater than the wall surface...
The load path from the diaphragm edge nailing to the rim, from the rim to the sill, from the sill through the bolts must all have at least the same or more strength as the diaphragm edge nailing.
I don't usually worry about how additional flexibility due to this indirect load path to the chord...
The shear lug is for this intent an 'anchor'. You can attempt to reinforce the anchor against breakout in shear. Hilti doesn't provide any guidance on this you need to refer to ACI or the Widianto et al for a rational method to do this.
Did you verify the program understands the unbraced lengths properly? Beam flexure is significantly impacted by the unbraced length and many programs don't get this correct without user override.
1. Widianto is the best way to design anchor reinforcement that I have seen yet. Its tedious but effective. I don't think the compression is going to do much at a basic level. Perhaps some Mohrs circle effect on the stresses but I have not seen that addressed.
2. Yep stirrups everytime for...
The seismic version is actually unique I believe in that the yielding mechanism is included in the connection elements. Sideplate and kaiser brackets still have a yielding beam element. For wind I can't really see why this is economical other than its easy to design.
