Search results for query: *

Lex - The sum would apply when you are looking at the attachment of the roof framing to the superstructure, say a roof clip on a wood truss (shown in pink below). The sum I am referring to is the roof pressure and soffit pressure on the overhang portion, which both apply when looking at the...

Thanks to everyone for the responses. Dave/Dan - this is what I needed to hear. The simplest explanation is usually correct. I just questioned myself because the equation with the GCpi term has been in the code for 3 cycles. Learning - to the first part of your comment, some overhangs will see...

I understand the C&C wind pressure on roof overhangs is the sum of the pressures on the top and bottom surfaces. The equation in ASCE 7 is p = qh*(Gcp-GCpi) where Gcp is defined as "the sum of the GCp of the overhang's top and bottom surfaces". By defining GCp as the sum of the external GCp...

Thanks for the great references! I will review.

I looked for a thread on this but didn't see anything. If this has already been discussed, please kindly post a link. Just noticing this in TJ-9000: I use excel spreadsheets to calculate my beams. Does anyone have a reference for calculating bending + shear deflection for other loading...

Thanks for your replies! Applying reduction before distribution makes sense. (just venting now) None of these references show how the distribution method would apply for a given force. They only look at capacity. Which I understand can be used to infer, but the point of a worked example is to...

When using the exception to deformation compatibility for in plane shear distribution, do you apply the capacity reduction for high aspect ratio shear walls (h/b>2) after or before force distribution? Assume all shear walls in a line are of the same construction. If you apply the capacity...

Drift: Thanks again for your responses and the links. To your point - I have never seen anyone add load to the diaphragm nails either. As well, I have always seen the shear transfer fasteners from the wall and the diaphragm treated separately. This is precisely my point. In order to do the...

Drift: Either the floor sheathing is involved in resisting the bottom plate nailing, or it is not. Case 1 - floor sheathing does resist bottom plate nailing There must be a load path. Bottom plate nail > floor sheathing > floor sheathing nailing > rimboard. Demand on floor sheathing nailing...

This thread touches on my concern A couple notes on that: 1. OP says "The sill nailing in our schedule is 16d, which would appear to not be long enough for adequate penetration into the rim joist." This implies the rimboard alone is being treated as the main member. Now, if minimum penetration...

Drift: thanks for your response. Haven't heard of sheathing negatively affecting nail strength, can you link me to some references on that. My assumption is that if the rimboard and sheathing both have G = 0.50, and they are adequately fastened together, then one could assume they are...

I’d like to get opinions on the shear transfer of an upper wall into the floor system at the exterior of a multi-story building (2-5 floors), using bottom plate nailing only. The nail is in single shear with the bottom plate as the side member. In order to design the nail per NDS Table 12N...

Aaron: I believe you are making a comparison between the total nails in the sheet versus the total nails along the transfer length? The force transfer occurs along the boundary edge, where the nails are 6" oc. So along 8 feet you will have 17. Please correct me if I mis-understood your comment.

So let's take stock of where we are at. Diaphragm values (tested) WIND (from original post) v strong = 400 plf v weak = 300 plf SEISMIC (didn't include these in the original post) v strong = 285 plf v weak = 214 plf Boundary nailing values (calculated) WIND OR SEISMIC - including diaphragm...

Pham: Thanks for typing that out. It is a good description of why values for an assembly would be higher than values for an individual fastener in the assembly. I x-posted to this to reddit and got a good comment that helped me see this differently. This made me realize that my original...

Volcomrr Thanks for your comments. Starting with the 2021 SDPWS, the diaphragm tables do not differentiate between wind and seismic. They list nominal values independent of force type. [For ASD] These values are then adjusted by a factor of 2.0 for wind and 2.8 for seismic, which accounts for...

Good catch fellas. Z' @ 6" = 95*1.6*1.1*12/6 = 334plf The comment on testing makes sense and I'm thinking you are definitely right.

Consider: Diaphragm capacity 2021 SDPWS Table 4.2c Wood sheathing 10d common nails (0.148" x 3") 1 1/2" framing penetration 19/32" sheathing thickness 2" nominal framing (G = 0.50) 6" boundary nailing Case 1 = 800/2 = 400plf Case 3 = 600/2 = 300plf Boundary nailing capacity 10d common (0.148"...

I looked at this and it does seem confusing. The nominal uplift capacities in Table 4.4.1.6 vary by a factor of 1.08 for G=0.50 vs G=0.42, which corresponds with footnote 2 in Table 4.4.1. Case 1 Values in Table 4.4.1 are correct for G=0.42. They could then be further increased by 1.08 for...

Thanks for all the replies. Sounds like I definitely will go with a building joint at the new/existing. Tiger: Waiting on geotech to get definite answer on how active the clay is. But you make a good point, I will tell the geotech to include a remove and replace option (if applicable) in their...