Residential Calculations 16

[jerseyshore]

I do a lot of residential projects and find myself approaching the calculations differently for nearly every job. For small jobs, not usually a big deal, but for the bigger ones it turns into a challenge.

I start off a bigger project thinking okay, I'm going to be organized this time and label everything neatly so that I can track loads, design posts, etc. But it's 2 days later and I am saving calcs as "Back left header kitchen long window". 40 members later and it's a mish-mosh of beams and joists and rafters that become a nightmare when I have to go back and change something.

So I'm starting a big brand new house next week and wanted to get some ideas how people normally approach these types of large projects. Hoping I can make my own system to save as much time on these PITA jobs as possible. Appreciate it.

 

[XR250]

I do have a website and the hosting fees but all my software is paid for except Office.
Oh, I forgot, I do pay my Acct. every month to use Quickbooks online. Also a few dollars for Google storage.
My overhead with insurance ends up being less than 20k per year.

 

[jerseyshore]

I pay for insurance, Enercalc, Freshbooks for nice looking invoices, and Ram Elements. My dad paid for my domain as a present for starting out and I just use Outlook for emails.

I already paid for 2TB of Google Drive storage so I just use that for saving everything. Google sheets for my record keeping and financing. Foxit free version for PDFs. Had a previous version of AutoCad and Office on my computer already. Forte is also free of course. Want to switch over to quickbooks soon, but who has the time.

Insurance is obviously the big one for us structural engineers, so keeping the rest of the costs down is important. For me I'm busy just doing what I'm doing so I don't need to go crazy and get an office and a wide format printer or anything like that right now.

 

[jerseyshore]

Just following up on this thread to say a sincere THANK YOU to everyone who offered suggestions above. I just finished up the big house (first big brand new house for my own shop).

I ended up putting a lot of things in no-plot layers. Beam/joist/rafter/truss labels, header post locations, and loads.

I started at the roof and worked my way down labeling floor beams as FB's, roof rafters as RR's, etc.

My calcs in Forte were broken down by floor and I just kept the numbering system going. They ended up switching to floor trusses right before I started so even though I didn't have to design them, I ran a calc for each just to make linking loads in Forte super easy.

They also swapped to superior walls for the foundation so I put all the loads in a no-plot layer as well and just turned on the higher ones.

We all know that feeling of grinding out a project type for the first time and it will be a lot easier to tackle the next one with a decent procedure in place. Still plenty of things I can improve on, but just having a system for the calcs and drafting is a good feeling.

Thanks again all.

 

[StrucPatholgst]

Jerseyshore, you should try ClearCalcs. Pretty inexpensive, and the output file is top notch. I can do the entire calc package deliverable on a home in about 2 days (as long as the architect provides floor plans).

 

[jerseyshore]

I will check it out. How does it compare to Forte & Enercalc? Those are the two programs I use 90% of the time.

 

[StrucPatholgst]

Also, I had a guy lose his mind this morning when I told him $500 for a resi structural assessment. He did end up calling back and booking it, though. And I've run into the "this should cost no more than $75" and "I thought this was free" people before. My favorite call is the typical guy buying a $2 million building, and then he tries to negotiate the fee in half.

 

[StrucPatholgst]

Forte doesn't have wind, snow, seismic, trusses, steel, or footings, I don't think. I think Enercalc is comparable, but Clearcalcs doesn't have gabion or segmental retaining walls. ClearCalcs is probably 2/3rds the price, and it's a true monthly plan, no big upfront cost. I looked at Enercalc hard last year, but the extra $$ wasn't worth it for me just for the retaining walls. I instead ended up getting AB Walls.

 

[jerseyshore]

For me Enercalc is worth every penny so I wouldn't give that one up. Very reliable, excellent support, huge range of modules. I'll look into ClearCalcs though.

I did pick up RisaCalc for a couple of months to do some aluminum and LGMF designs. I like that month to month option.

 

[AaronMcD]

Looks like this was already solved, just wanna add what I do. I almost exclusively work on complicated residential stuff, new, remodel, and additions.

I do a TON of calcs in CAD. I have a layer "S-COMMENTS" in red, no plot. When I am ready to print calcs, I copy the entire plan, delete layers that aren't needed for calcs, and change all calc notes to the text layer. Adjust scale as needed to fit on a sheet.

For beams and joists, I label anything with a calc as "RB3", "RJ2", "F3B4", etc. for "roof beam 3", "roof joist 2", "floor 3 beam 4", etc. I label all wood members the same in Forte, or steel members in RISA.

For columns, I rarely need many individual calcs. For wood columns I just make a spreadsheet of height, size, grade, and maximum load. Steel I just take worst case and run a spreadsheet for compression and drift.

However, column loads can get confusing and that's where my S-COMMENTS layer comes in handy. For complicated framing, I'll note loads at the ends of beams: "D=1.3k, RL=0.7k, E=2.1k" etc. I keep them separate because often a post will land on a transfer beam and need omega, and as I go down floor live governs over roof live. Go down a floor, and note similarly at the post, size post accordingly, note beams coming into the post, go down a floor and note loads on the next post. I end up with little load notes strewn around the framing.

For seismic:
Shear walls I note load from above, load at this level, PLF, end post axial load from above and from this level, and holdown required.
Collectors I put a comment note right under the collector line mark. Total load, PLF, load at connections, include 25% increase as needed. I also mark LRFD, Omega, etc as needed for any steel elements. Chords similar.

http://www.hellodwell.design

 

[StrucPatholgst]

Speaking of nomenclature, I use the following: [TYPE] [AREA].[LEVEL].[UNIT]

So the ridge beam at the second addition would be RIDGE 2.R.1. Joists at second floor (3rd area of work, second style) JOIST 3.2.2. Footing at first area of work, 3rd style, FOOTING 1.B.3. This lets me sort the schedules in ClearCalcs by area, or by level, or by type.

I do like the comment layer described above for member loads.

Also, I don't actually calculate out every single member. I will check loads on every one, but I only produce calcs on defining members. So for example, I'll provide calcs on 18 foot long I-joists in one area of the work, but not for the 7 foot long I-joists. Same with ridge beams. I will calculate the 17 foot ridge beam, but not the 7 foot dormer ridge.

 

[SE2607]

Regardless of size, I start marking up plans, starting with roof framing down to foundation, labeling beams, columns and pad footings. I keep marking up, including blank detail bubbles where I want to show a detail. In fact, it's a little game I play to see how far I can get before I pick up the calculator/spreadsheet/program. By doing that, I find I'm very efficient. Also, I use two screens; calcs on one, plans on another. It makes it easier to get spans and tributary widths. Now, I'm drifting away from spreadsheets towards RISA 3D. I've never used Enercalc or other framing program. It is too tedious to put in the loads. I set up my spreadsheets with unit loads and just input trib widths. Point loads on beams are reactions from other beams. Loads on pad footings are reactions from columns. Doing area loads in RISA is the only thing I know of that is faster. I xref the framing plan in, correct the geometry and apply area loads, but I still name the members as I always have, RB-1, FB-1, C-1, etc., instead of M1, M2, etc. I just wish I could show size and name at the same time. Sigh...

 

[jerseyshore]

Also, I don't actually calculate out every single member. I will check loads on every one, but I only produce calcs on defining members. So for example, I'll provide calcs on 18 foot long I-joists in one area of the work, but not for the 7 foot long I-joists. Same with ridge beams. I will calculate the 17 foot ridge beam, but not the 7 foot dormer ridge.

Are you saying that you only do calcs for the worst case members or that you only physically print/ export out a calc package with those members in it?


For those who haven't used Forte, I highly recommend it (or a similar software that links loads). Massive time saver and it allows you to easily copy and paste and adjust things on the fly. For example, on this job, I ran 40 different calcs for the floor trusses. But you do one calc, copy, change length and/or loading, design, copy again, etc. Then when you go down to the next floor, you can link any offset bearing wall loads from the floor above. It takes less than a minute per calc. Once I finish the trusses/ joists, I go onto the beams and do a similar process. Slightly more time, but it's a lot of copy, link loads, design, copy again and keep going.

If you have to change a beam or joist or header afterwards, it'll tell you all the members affected by the change (with loads linked) and force you to re-design each one to make sure they still work.

 

[StrucPatholgst]

ClearCalcs has that feature also, linking loads all the way down the structure. Same with quick duplication.

 

[Ben29]

I use Tedds for most of my calcs. I really like it.