Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]
97 ubc
[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: 97 ubc
- From: KTarlow(--nospam--at)aol.com
- Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 14:06:48 EST
Dear Steve, I regard it as apenalty because you penalize the whole first floor in my case. Ther are two other shear walls on the lowest level but they are all being penalized. In reading the blue book the lowering of the R value was done because the factor of safety for cantilevered columns was reduced. Perhaps a more appriate response was to change the K value ofthe column from 2 to 4. Drift governs anyway, these colums never really got stressed up. But ifis true I canuse two R values in one direction. The lower value must be used in the lower levels, How do I get around the problem of sitting a rigid structure on top of a flexable structure. It seems to me the code doesn't allow that. Ken
- Prev by Subject: 97 ubc
- Next by Subject: Re: 97 ubc (soft story)
- Previous by thread: 97 ubc
- Next by thread: Wood Species in North CA
- About this archive
- Messages sorted by: [Subject][Thread][Author][Date]