CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
(OP)
In the 2007 Florida Building Code, Section 2121 requires concrete tie beams and columns at openings, corners, etc. Section 2122 pretty much says if the CMU walls are designed to what I consider very routine requirements, concrete tie beams and columns aren't required.
I've always taken the position that better to be safe, than fight with a code reviewer after I've designed the structure, and provided the concrete tie beams and columns. Am I being too concervative by always putting them in?
I've always taken the position that better to be safe, than fight with a code reviewer after I've designed the structure, and provided the concrete tie beams and columns. Am I being too concervative by always putting them in?






RE: CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
RE: CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
RE: CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
Now there is a section on threshhold inspection, but that is a different animal altogether.
RE: CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
There has been a lot of confusion over the term in Florida, particular for those who practice a lot in IBC areas. I hope the Department of Community Affairs/Building Code group will get this straightened out in the 2010 code...but I'm not overly optimistic.
RE: CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
In response to JC's question, I'm beginning to realize myself (don't tell anybody) that horizontal reinforcing in CMU walls is largely ignored, except by experienced seismic designers. A beam (a shear wall segment is a vertical beam) may requires shear reinforcement at d/2 max. The rule is d/3 max for "special reinforced masonry shear walls" with seismic.
Not trying to hijack the post... just an observation from a related perspective. Conservative is in the eye of the beholder.
RE: CMU Design in Florida HVWZ
For better or worse the inspections that are required are normally provided by the cheapest testing lab.