Search results for query: *

Not a bad idea Euler07 but the new walls are internal non load bearing fire walls plus we'd be changing how the existing suspended slab is loaded. Thanks for your input.

Thanks sdz. I think you are right. Probably best to leave the stud wall to Rondo and design a column in the location of the existing fly brace locations to restrain the truss bottom chord. The column will be able to be hidden within the fire wall and will not impact anything aesthetically.

Thanks human909 Rondo has designed the wall for everything else, including internal wind pressures etc. They may be willing to include this additional load in their design? The studs are 5500mm maximum at the ridge and they currently have double studs at 450mm crs. If not steel columns at larger...

I calculated a compression load in the truss bottom chord of 485kN x 2.5% = 12kN. If the restraints are at 0.45m can I just multiply 12kN x 0.45m = 5.4kN. Yes human909 I should consider internal wind pressures as well. If the light weight framing can't support this which seems likely may have to...

Thanks sdz So the closer the restraint spacing, the higher the continuous load? My restraint spacing will be 0.45m. Yes I am aware the fire engineer won’t be considering any structural concerns.

Hi Agent666 When you say truss are you referring to each pair of back to back wall studs? Sorry, I'm not quite following. Thanks for the reply. Regards

Hi Currently involved in a project where a commercial building is being converted into residential units. The roof structure consists of steel roof trusses at 6m centres as the primary roof members which support purlins. The bottom chord of the truss has fly bracing each side at regular centres...

Hi Was wondering if there are any issues building a raft foundation system on top of the building pad (similar to a waffle pod slab) rather than excavating the foundations into the building pad? The pad would effectively have to built up to underside slab level with 200-300mm of suitable fill...

Have attached a standard drawing for reference.https://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=e446530a-e7cf-44cd-919b-7a6b1e0b84cf&file=Image.pdf

Hi Have been asked to design some unreinforced rectangular stormwater drainage pits. Assuming the size will be limited to a point where the maximum tensile strength of the concrete is not exceeded, so 600-900mm maximum wall widths. Just wondering how the minimum reinforcement requirements of...

Further to Agent666's response just had a quick look and AS3735- Concrete structures for retaining liquids code commentary actually references NZS3106 in respect to earthquakes and the movement of liquids.

Not sure about question 1. In respect to question 2 could you start with the mass of water multiplied by an appropriate coefficient based on AS1170.4 acting at the centroid of the tank.

Hi All Is anyone familiar with this code and whether the rated loads nominated within are required to be factored up for design or adopted as specified? Regards

Yes, I think you could adopt a height to thickness ratio of 50 in your situation.

Thanks for that. Yes, panels most likely cast on site. That would make panels on sides of building 32 tonne. Mind you even two panels would probably be ok. Was worried about the weight and the building is just off a boundary and was concerned about construction issues about maneuvering a 15.4m...

Thanks again Retrograde Have been thinking about this and probably should provide more detail so if anyone can assist I can get a more informed and detailed response. I am designing a 50m long x 20m wide portal frame building (central ridge) which will have concrete panel walls. Portal frames...

Thanks Retrograde, that's the type of building I am designing.

What is the second paragraph of 5.7.2 referring to if it is not allowing the use of clause 5.7.1 where the top of the wall is supported by a member that does not have an FRL? Does it mean the supporting member will fail first and so allows a reduced wall thickness to be adopted for structural...

No worries, that’s what I was afraid of. Building is type B construction due to its volume which is dictating the FRP. I saw the reference to 170mm in a Australian Precast technical doc.

Thanks for your response. I am trying to work out the panel thickness required for a structural adequacy of 240 mins. I have seen elsewhere 170 thick is ok for this but 5.7.2 seems to a lot thicker than this.