Chapter 4 loads are service so you need to factor them appropriately based on your design methodology. I'm not aware of any material allowances for stress increases.
I don't think the torsion will ever be resolved into the HSS tube unless it engages both the top and bottom flanges. You could weld continuous plates to close the wide flange shape; it may be your best bet.
Can you not use the IRC instead of IBC? It may help you out to stay in there instead of going to the IBC and ASCE 7. I have never used the exception and would be hesitant to since the gyp board really doesn't give much of an inelastic behavior before failure. Also, what is the demising wall...
You're not going to find that spreadsheet available and I doubt anyone is willing to share it since it requires DoD clearance to get access to the newer versions. Your best bet is asking Protection Engineering Consultants. They wrote the spreadsheet and pretty much the entire blast code for UFC.
That's true dik, but I agree with WARose. Most often the plate will cause a conflict with top of steel and composite deck or joist bearing or something else that's usually not worth coordinating out. If you can make the plate work, by all means do it, but in my area, the common detail is all...
Where in the span are they trying to do this? At first glance, that fix doesn't look like it would cut it. I wouldn't let them cut my flange like that, even at the end of the beam near supports. You could check the remaining section as a WT and strengthen based off the extra strength but I would...
I'd want all my weld thrus to be complete pen welded, even if something else would work. Use the plate if you can, but complete pen weld thrus are common in my area.
I agree with Koot. My old, larger firm had their own in house spreadsheets but my new, much smaller firm uses Code Search and I like it. It functions well, fucntions accurately, and is accepted for calculation submittals. I also get a lot of use out of the dead load calculators.
Expansion joint or hard attaching to existing? If expansion joint, I vote Risk Category II since they are essentially separate structures. If hard attached, then Risk Category III.
Think about it.. you're applying a pressure over a fixed area so where would the resultant need to be? At the centroid of the area. If you have a diaphragm and a floor above, then to calculate the force at the level, you would use the tributary width/height of half the floor above and half the...
I would model the columns and pin everything. A vertical roller at the top chord isn't quite accurate because the column prevents it from moving horizontally. The column will rotate some in bending from the couple from the chords, so you will want to capture that in your model.
Why not put a joist at each end of the alcove and let it function as a drag strut? I usually look at these types of cases as semi rigid so those walls don't suck up an unrealistic amount of lateral load.
I agree with hokie.. beware of this one. If you are going to analyze this from square 1, then it is likely not going to be economical for you or the building itself.
