OK, I'll start with a couple that are annoying that I see fairly often:
1) Triangular windows in gable end wall that follow tight to the roof slope when the intent for the roof is clearly for a scissor truss. I just ask which side do they want to have look weird or how big of a ridge beam will...
The terracotta (hollow clay tile?) may be the form work. There are historic proprietary concrete systems that used the clay tile in a shallow vault to support the reinforced concrete fill. A web search might turn up a few examples that you could compare with what you've found.
Small areas...
The set up of the test assembly effectively eliminates one potential failure mode, tearing /splitting of the bottom fibers of the carrying beam. For comparison of relative capacity, assuming they use the same rig setup for a conventional installation, the rig results for the end condition would...
I believe the question about elements in the system to which the over-strength (OS) factor is applied is discussed in the ASCE7-16 Commentary and Figure C12.3-5. The design philosophy being to encourage ductility in those elements capable of it and avoiding it in those that are not and could...
Good morning cnorvell,
It's not that they are not considered its when. For a roof rafter or joist the gravity loads are applied to the same surface as the C&C loads and are then to be included in the loading combinations. The pivot is if the gravity load is applied to a surface other than the...
...good lord the world is conspiring against me this morning. And again.http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=f4ffede6-1127-4db6-b64c-27a50d274a98&file=Guide_C_C.pdf
To be clear my statement was that C&C loads are not to be combined with loads applied to other surfaces... "C&C loads are only applicable to those elements that receive loads directly from one cladding surface and are to be combined only with loads that are transmitted directly through that same...
I don't disagree that the Commentary often leads to more questions than it provides, but the separate Guide to the Provision that ASCE publishes is pretty clear as to the intended requirements for C&C loads. They are intended for use with loads resulting from application to a single surface...
Good afternoon all,
I don't mean to upset the consensus but according to the "Guide to Wind Load Provisions of ASCE7-10" C&C loads are only applicable to those elements that receive loads directly from one cladding surface and are to be combined only with loads that are transmitted directly...
When needing to use a steel bearing plate under a post what does that detail look like? Is the plate loose or fastened to the sill plate? What about the post, how is it fastened to or through the bearing plate?
Take a look at the AWC publication "Wood Design Focus". There was a series of articles by a University research group specifically dealing with deck design, anchorage, and rhythmic excitation. I believe its was in the last 12-18 months if I recall correctly.
If all you need is a better visual of the crack pattern consider just using water. As the surface dries the cracks will become visually more pronounced until they dry too.
See the attached for your use. One thing I've noticed about this Guide is that newer isn't always better. Some of the earlier editions contained more of the information that now you have to search out from the source...
