Hung Lintel - Double Wythe Brick

[bookowski]

Has anyone dealt with this detail before? See attached section (architectural). I have a +/- 14ft. opening with a double wythe brick masonry wall. This is a steel frame building - but the arch. wants a double wythe facade (and they won't give up on that idea). They are currently showing a loose lintel in the attached section but that won't work so I need to hang it.

The first thought is to change the beam to a tube and do a hung lintel from the steel - but I'm going to need a relatively thick plate (bent plate?) to carry that brick. The o.f. of brick is about 12in. from c.l. of steel and it's carrrying about 15 feet vertically with a few punched openings.

Has anyone done a detail for this and have anything clever?

 

[manstrom]

A t-section won't work? I bet a double angle or T would make it.

If not, hang some 1/4" steel plates from the steel beam and extend a horizontal plate from the inside of the stud wall to the outside of the brick.

 

[msquared48]

I agree that this detail makes absolutely no sense, architecturally or structurally. At first glance, the architect appears to be smoking something.

Is there a reason for the double wythe that is not showing above or below the detail? Is the interior portion of the double wythe bearing at the ends of the opening?

Without further information, just recommend that the interior bricks of the double wythe be made of styrofoam, and specify a normal connection.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[hokie66]

That's a long way out from the steel frame to carry so much brick. Even with a tubular beam, there will be some twist, resulting in cracking of the brickwork.

I would look at making the brick carry itself for gravity loading. By building in galavanized reinforcing, you should be able to create a reinforced masonry beam which will do the job.

 

[manstrom]

And I can see an easy way to cut your brick budget in half.

 

[msquared48]

In looking at this detail harder, I have a couple more comments:

1 It looks like the double wythe is driven by the Bluestone sill, which appears to be supporting the window above. Is this the case?

2. Is there a vertical shrinkage allowance for the wood/brick combination at the topside of the Bluestone Sill? If not, where is it?

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[BAretired]

I suggest a beam selected to fit brick coursing, say a W8x13 with 7"x1/4" continuous plate bottom to carry the brick. You might want to tie it in to the roof beam periodically to stiffen it against wind forces.

BA

 

[bookowski]

Mike - The bluestone is not driving the double wythe. The architect's argument is that he likes to build things 'the way they used to do it' and he does not like single wythe cavity walls (thinks they aren't robust). He typically does smaller bearing wall buildings using masonry so the steel frame + cavity wall is outside of their box. I have no better explanation for it and I've never come across it before.

BA - I think I will do what you recommend and forget trying to support it from the frame. I was originally considering this option but it seemed like a waste since I'll have to deal with tying it back somehow for wind. Doesn't seem very elegant but better than hanging it from the beam I guess.

 

[msquared48]

bookowski:

And how to compensate for the vertical shrinkage issue from floor to floor? - probably in the order of 1/8" to 1'4", depending on the wood species and type used.

Mike McCann
MMC Engineering

 

[RFreund]

You could reinforce the brick as brick bond beam.

some discussion:

http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=242195

page 18

http://www.gobricksoutheast.com/downloads/ConstructionGuide.pdf

But I like BA's suggestion.


EIT

http://www.HowToEngineer.com