We have a one-story with loft log home on a downslope lot with a wood frame buildup 12' high on the downside, and 2' high on the upside. The Owners would like to convert the buildup area into livable space with new windows.
County plan checker is saying not only do I have to check the buildup...
My other problem is the 1:1 minimum aspect ratio required by the ICC-400, which limits the number of walls we can actually use for shear along a given line (just one wall in my case). And, because I do not have that much shear along that particular line, the required shear values are high...
For the shear values of bolts and other fasteners in wood there is this nifty online calculator by the American Wood Council:
http://www.awc.org/calculators/connections
John
ICC 400-2007 is also silent on these factors, (I looked at ICC 400-2012 earlier) and the log building website has research papers but I do not see anything where the Code states the values to be used.
It's been several years since I did a log home lateral analysis; and I'm trying to find which R and Cd to use. The building department referred me to the ICC 400, but it seems to be silent on these factors. Can anyone point me in the right direction, thanks!
I have continued to use the program, and find email works best; I usually get a detailed response within hours.
And I just learned StructuralSoft is not sitting back...they're now working on an amazing development to this program that is due sometime around the end of the year.
John
Okay, I just downloaded Building Worx from Structural Soft and did my first project with it. In short, I think this program is amazing.
The way it basically works is, you import your CAD drawings into this program. After inputting the loads and building information, you then quickly outline...
I got the update for the new '10 CBC from LateralWorx, and the updated/revised program is even easier to use, having used it (the revised program) on two projects now including a rather complex 3-story building.
Support continues to be very prompt and thorough. Both engineers there are not...
Here in Big Bear Lake (100 psf), it's a judgment call depending on how high the roof is above the deck itself. But for an average 8' height, 50% of the roof snow load is usually used for the covered deck to accomodate blowing snow.
I like LateralWorx and have been using it for the last few months, with great support. (Before that, I was using a cumbersome spreadsheet-type program, with quite poor customer support). With this program (LateralWorx), you basically import your CAD floor plans into it, indicate the locations...
Correction: LateralWorx can use snow for righting moments; you just add a percentage of the snow load to the dead load bearing on the wall you're analyzing.
John
Mike
Thanks, Mike. If we disregard the snow for righting moments, then the holddowns would be substantially larger which I don't think is necessary.
A bit OT but I'm trying out the new LateralWorx program; it's quite amazing IMO. No, I don't work for them or anything....you import the CAD...
Thanks for the responses.
Mike, I understand what you're saying, but if the snow slides off (or is absent) during a quake, that would then lighten the lateral load (and reduce overturning) at that moment. So we wouldn't then "need" the weight of the snow any longer for righting anyways...
Talked to two SE's and got two different answers; do we or do we not add a portion of the roof snow load to the roof DL when calculating righting moments for a shear wall when seismic forces govern?
(It would seem logical that if seismic forces govern due to the weight of the snow on the roof...
