Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Search results for query: *

  1. CBlaker114

    Disagree with the plan reviewer... does this mean I'm wrong... forever..

    JLNJ... FBC 2017 references TIA Rev-G which References ASCE7-05... so under that exemption it would be the currently adopted source of wind loading for telecom supporting structures... Also.. I'm not arguing to use previous wind loads... especially since ASCE7-16 typically reduces the wind...
  2. CBlaker114

    Disagree with the plan reviewer... does this mean I'm wrong... forever..

    Celt83 - That's a really good point. The "the authority having jurisdiction" verbiage is essentially that same as your mom's "because I said so!" irrefutable, unyielding, absolute...haha And no. I've not had a conversation with the reviewer. The specific project I'm referring to is in the due...
  3. CBlaker114

    Disagree with the plan reviewer... does this mean I'm wrong... forever..

    Hello all, I've got an interesting situation where I've had plan reviewers in Miami Dade as well as Broward County (Florida) reject analysis' our firm has performed on telecom structures(cell phone towers) and site that Miami Dade requires 175mph (Vult) wind speeds for all class II structures...
  4. CBlaker114

    Roof Deck Miami-Dade

    Hello, Not sure how many on this forum are located in S. Florida, but I was contacted by a contractor today and told that they could not find an Notice of Acceptance (NOA) for the 3" Type N roof deck that we call out in our drawings. The county is saying that the maximum roof span allowed per...
  5. CBlaker114

    Wind force on Rooftop Equipment

    I would think this is mainly an attachment check and local framing check, yes? I would reference the Existing Building code here. For any members where gravity loads aren't increased by more than 5% and where lateral loads aren't increased by 10%, you don't even need to check them. You may...
  6. CBlaker114

    C&C Loads on CMU Walls

    I'd say the 10 sq ft C&C number would be overly conservative. Floor height is 10.5' so the minimum I'd have to use is 10.5^2/3= 36 sq ft. Either way, seems like the both responses so far agree with my shoulder angel. Thanks fellas.
  7. CBlaker114

    C&C Loads on CMU Walls

    Hello All, I'm running my checks for C&C loads on exterior CMU walls. When I go to find my applicable wind pressure, I'm wondering what tributary area applies when designing CMU... The majority of my previous experience is in wood and steel design, so please forgive me if this is rather...
  8. CBlaker114

    Caisson Foundation in the Way

    Sorry didn't get the section attached.http://files.engineering.com/getfile.aspx?folder=68949b4f-e0e4-44fa-a064-66d73fca7472&file=Section.pdf
  9. CBlaker114

    Caisson Foundation in the Way

    I've got a building in Florida where the architect has designed the perimeter of the building to wrap around an existing billboard so that the billboard is within about 8.5 inches of the exterior CMU wall. The edge of the existing caisson would extend about 6 inches under exterior wall. I'm...
  10. CBlaker114

    Double and Bolted Welded Connection with combined shear and Axial force.

    Agree with KootK on this one. It's not the tension in the weld that is the issue.. it's the fact that there's an eccentricity equal to the length of the angle leg causing torsion through the longitudinal axis of the weld (from the axial load in the beam). Without the weld return.. it holds...
  11. CBlaker114

    Reinforced Tower Leg

    Thanks All. I've designed an extension and welded termination to develop the required loads. I do think in reality there's some bracing capacity from channel to original leg which would increase the compressive capacity.... but I agree my previous approach could be an over-simplified approach as...
  12. CBlaker114

    Reinforced Tower Leg

    oldestguy/msquared, That's correct. With a reduced kl/r... my original legs will pass... essentially the rigidity of the channel will brace the SR leg. I just didn't know if this approach was appropriate.
  13. CBlaker114

    Reinforced Tower Leg

    So I've got an interesting problem. I've got a telecommunications self support tower where the legs have been reinforced by u-bolting a channel onto the tower legs.(I've attached 2 photos for reference) So from what I've seen, there's nothing that will allow the reinforcing channel to develop...
  14. CBlaker114

    Allowable mortar in grouted solid cells.

    So... I got a question from the building department that I've never encountered in response to our plan submittals. One of the comments on our structural plans read as follows, "How much mortar droppings from laying cmu will be allowed at the bottom of the cmu cell to be grouted?" Anyone ever...
  15. CBlaker114

    Drilled Pier Foundations EQN 18-1

    Thanks for the thoughts all. I'd contacted this geotech specifically about the allowable passive pressure for designing these piers, so yes that recommendation was for this specific application msquared48- I'd previous designed my piers using the method you suggest which makes me feel better...
  16. CBlaker114

    Drilled Pier Foundations EQN 18-1

    Hello all, I'm a structural engineer in North Dakota and I'm designing drilled piers that will support softball scoreboards. I'm running into an issue when I'm trying to call out the depth of my drilled piers using EQN 18-1 from section 1807.3.2.1 in the 2012 IBC. The geotechnical engineer has...

Part and Inventory Search