horizontal shear in wood beams
horizontal shear in wood beams
(OP)
Client wants to open up an interior bearing wall in a home. Was checking on the new concentrated loads on the existing house girder using a software program. Conditions are pretty standard: 24' deep house, (3) 2 x 10 center girder supporting First Floor, Second Floor & storage Attic with support walls; lally columns @ 8'-6" oc.
Program failed the beam for shear, not only for the proposed concentrated loads which was expected, but also for the existing conditions. Horizontal shear in wood beams is usually considered critical for high concentrated loads on short spans, whereas for longer spans, bending is usually primary.
Why is length of beam not a consideration in the calculation for shear in the sizing of wood beams? At what point is a beam considered short with excessive loads?
Also, for the existing uniform loading conditions, the program called for a 16" deep beam rather than the existing 10" which on the face of it seems ridiculous.
Program failed the beam for shear, not only for the proposed concentrated loads which was expected, but also for the existing conditions. Horizontal shear in wood beams is usually considered critical for high concentrated loads on short spans, whereas for longer spans, bending is usually primary.
Why is length of beam not a consideration in the calculation for shear in the sizing of wood beams? At what point is a beam considered short with excessive loads?
Also, for the existing uniform loading conditions, the program called for a 16" deep beam rather than the existing 10" which on the face of it seems ridiculous.






RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
That said, horizontal shear does control in wood sometimes.
It also depends on if the program is using an older code. The value of CH is a factor used in older wood codes. In the 1997 NDS the design values were reduced to account for splits and shakes. The designer had to include the CH factor to increase allowable stresses if there weren't any splits or shakes. In the 2001 and after codes that factor was eliminated. Your software might be using a lower value and thus showing a shear problem.
What sort of loading are you using?
Live loads for residential floors are typically 40 psf in the states and in some recent codes the upper floors are 30 psf.
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
Loading is Live loads @ 40PSF for 1st floor, 30 PSF for 2nd and 10 PSF for limited storage attic; figured 10 PSF per floor for dead loads. Program is StrucCalc which has been useful for residential calculations.
Any thoughts on why length isn't factored in for shear calculations . . .and yet shear becomes a critical factor for short beams?
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
I'm an architect but when registering for the forum it did not have that category but I do spec so I chose that. Find the program saves time when viewing options between steel, wood and flitch plates.
But I did go to Tech. . . Go Hokies!
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
Mike McCann
MMC Engineering
Motto: KISS
Motivation: Don't ask
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
The moment unity is worse - 2.41 based on simple span beams and based on continuous beams it is 1.60.
So it appears that you have a problem with the original design.
(unity = 1.0 means just safe per code)
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
Understand intuitively why a short header with a heavy concentrated load would fail in horizontal shear as compared to a longer span, and that shear is more critical than bending on short beams.
However, the equation for max. horizontal shear stress: 1.5 V/bd doesn't take into account length of span. If a 5000# conc. load is located midspan over a 3' window header as compared to a 12' wall opening header, assuming both headers are the same, the max. horizontal shear remains the same. While the shear values along the beam will vary, the max. remains the same. In my example, max. hor. shear would be the same for both the 3' and 12' spans. For a doug fir header, the 95 PSI hor. shear strength along the grain remains the same. I'm missing the calculation link that makes this more critical for the 3' span.
Thanks for humoring me. . .
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
It is not more critical for the 3' span. Both beams in your example are equally critical in shear.
Short beams are more likely to be governed by shear stress while long beams are more likely to be governed by deflection or bending stress.
BA
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
BA
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
BA
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
Thanks for all your patience and responses. . . alan
a2mfk. . . your suggestion is duly noted
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
Generally speaking, for a given total load W=P, either uniformly distributed (W) or concentrated (P) at the beam center, a longer beam will force you to use a deeper header or a double 2x header to satisfy bending and deflection criteria; and the shear near the reaction is basically W/2. That's what hokie was saying, 19FEB11 0:01, in slightly different words. And, the shorter beam allows you to use a smaller header for bending and deflection, again same W or P and shear near the reaction, but now the horiz. shear stress 1.5V/bd is greater, because the smaller member gives a smaller "bd" in the denominator. With the centered point load the shear is essentially constant along the beam length, except for variation due to the uniform weight of the beam. If you move the point load toward one of the reactions, the max. bending moment will start to reduce, implying a smaller member; and in the extreme with P only "d" from one reaction the moment will be very small, but the shear will now be almost P, not P/2. Look at some of the beam formulas in one of your ref. books.
That being said, I fully agree with a2mfk. And, I suspect you get madder than hell when your local Structural Engineers practice any Architecture on a job which is predominantly a structural job. And, even happier when they come to you for architectural advice on that job. These damn computer programs make many people pretend to be proficient at things that they should be very careful doing, for lack of a fuller understanding of the problem.
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
I like to try to teach architects who will listen. In this vein, alan131, do you know why shear stress, particularly in wood beams, is used as 1.5V/bd rather than just V/bd as usually used for steel and concrete?
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
BTW. . . UVa beat the Hokies in mens BB today. . . nuts.
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
I know, twice this season. What a bummer!
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
At least the Hokies own them in football.
RE: horizontal shear in wood beams
Wondering why a beam program is telling you "bad in shear" sets off some alarm bells for me. If he is just wondering for educational purposes and this is only for preliminary planning, then please forgive me. If he has every intention of having a SE do the final design, then my bad. But helping a non-engineer practice engineering is prohibited in my state's rules...
Also, from your perspective, and this may be generational (with all due respect), there was a time when architects received a lot of training and first hand exposure to structural engineering. I have heard of some older architects who said when they first started their career they did quite a lot of engineering, and with those individuals, it showed. There were small offices who had everyone under one roof and architects may actually do structural engineering. And I would say that if you are an architect who worked for 4 years under a PE, got your PE sponsorship, and passed the NCEES Structural 1 exam, I would have no problems with your practicing structural engineering, even getting your PE if they changed the rules...
Nuff said, not ranting, just have had some bad experiences with this specific subject.