Are there any CA structural engineers on this forum?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 16d @ 4"
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forum Structural
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on interpreting the Uniform Building Code (UBC) regarding seismic load combinations, specifically the equation involving dead load (DL), live load (LL), and seismic load (Em). There is confusion about whether to apply a 1.33 increase in Allowable Stress Design (ASD) or to adjust Em to strength level before applying a 1.7 increase. One participant suggests that Em is already at strength level, implying that a 1.7 increase is appropriate. It is emphasized that mixing service and strength design factors should be avoided, and starting with service level equations may simplify the process. Local building departments may provide additional guidance on specific amendments and application rules.
16d @ 4"
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Need help with interpreting the UBC! :biggrin:
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
What part?
 
Bystander said:
What part?

The part of the special seismic load combo with 1.2DL+0.5LL+Em.
When I use this equation, do I apply a 1.33 increase if I choose to stay in
ASD, or do I have to multiply Em by 1.4 (to bring to strength level) and then apply a 1.7 increase.

My boss told me that Em is in strength level already and that a 1.7 increase is applicable.

Any suggestions?

Thanks, :biggrin:
 
Figured it was going to be seismic. At which point I can't help you. You might try the local building dept. --- if they're competent. Local building codes probably include very specific local amendments, and rules for application --- wouldn't surprise me, nor would it surprise me if CA has a blanket amendment incorporating "design factors to be determined from whatever counts as the latest study of damages from previous quakes."
 
Thanks for the attempt. :biggrin:

Bystander said:
Figured it was going to be seismic. At which point I can't help you. You might try the local building dept. --- if they're competent. Local building codes probably include very specific local amendments, and rules for application --- wouldn't surprise me, nor would it surprise me if CA has a blanket amendment incorporating "design factors to be determined from whatever counts as the latest study of damages from previous quakes."
 
I am sure you have it figured out by now, but that whole equation (including Em) is strength level equation. So for ASD, you would divide the Em part by 1.4 and then get to use a 1/3 stress increase if you choose (latest Codes have taken out the 1/3 increase). It is easiest to just start with the service level equations if you are using ASD: D+L+Em/1.4... etc.

Be sure not to mix and match factors between service and strength design.
 
I have Mass A being pulled vertically. I have Mass B on an incline that is pulling Mass A. There is a 2:1 pulley between them. The math I'm using is: FA = MA / 2 = ? t-force MB * SIN(of the incline degree) = ? If MB is greater then FA, it pulls FA up as MB moves down the incline. BUT... If I reverse the 2:1 pulley. Then the math changes to... FA = MA * 2 = ? t-force MB * SIN(of the incline degree) = ? If FA is greater then MB, it pulls MB up the incline as FA moves down. It's confusing...
Back
Top