Tek-Tips is the largest IT community on the Internet today!

Members share and learn making Tek-Tips Forums the best source of peer-reviewed technical information on the Internet!

Register Log in
  • Congratulations cowski on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

Search results for query: *

  1. papaaj

    Mass Code 7th Edition Chapter 34

    I posted a question about the new Massachusetts Bldg Code at the Demolition and Renovation board, but didn't get much response so I figured I'd link to it here: http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?qid=241106&page=1 Any help you can provide is appreciated.
  2. papaaj

    Mass Code 7th Ed Chapter 34

    Mike - I know what you're saying, relative to what IBC says. The previous version of the Mass Code had a similar provision. But in the new version of the Mass Code, I don't read it that way. As I quoted above, it says "an increase...up to 10%" of the seismic weight pushes you into what they...
  3. papaaj

    Mass Code 7th Ed Chapter 34

    The new version (7th Ed) of the Massachusetts Building Code, Chapter 34 (Section 3408) classifies work related to alterations to existing buildings into different levels of work. Level 2 work includes several different types of alterations, as defined in Section 3408.4.3, one of which is this...
  4. papaaj

    Coeff. of friction

    unclesyd - thanks for your input. I did call the DI division of ACIPCO, and they didn't know the answer, and (not surprisingly) had never even heard this question asked. Like you had said, our pipe cradles are not usually intended to provide any significant restraint to the pipe, and for our...
  5. papaaj

    Coeff. of friction

    KENAT - thank you for the suggestion. I put in a link over on the Stuctural post to here, being that there are already some responses here. unclesyd - thank you for the links. After a quick look through those references I didn't see anything specifically related to what I'm trying to find out...
  6. papaaj

    Coeff. of friction

    Hello, I posted this in the structural engineering forum, but I thought I'd repeat it here. I apologize if it's against the rules to post the same questiong in two places. We have a ductile iron pipe supported by concrete pipe cradles. The pipe was set in position first, then the concrete for...
  7. papaaj

    Cadweld vs. Bar-lock

    I don't know if there is a problem with Bar-lock, that's partly what I'm trying to find out. Like I said, in our office we have little experience with either system. But, based on the literature for each product, it seems to me that Cadweld has less room for error in the installation - it comes...
  8. papaaj

    CIvil/Structural Engineering Dictionary

    Here's a general engineering dictionary I've referred to and found helpful: http://www.engnetglobal.com/tips/glossary.aspx Here's an architectural dictionary, although not very comprehensive: http://ah.bfn.org/a/DCTNRY/vocab.html And on the lighter side: http://www.winn.com/bs/engineers.html
  9. papaaj

    Cadweld vs. Bar-lock

    We have recently designed an expansion of an existing concrete water treatment tank. One of our details calls for the reinforcing steel at the edge of the existing base slab to be partially exposed and cleaned, and then mechanically spliced to new rebar that will be in the base slab of the new...
  10. papaaj

    Wind loads IBC 2000 vs IBC 2003

    This is sort of a follow-up to a question I had asked last week (http://www.eng-tips.com/viewthread.cfm?SQID=96612&SPID=507&newpid=507&page=1), but received no replies (apparently I baffled you all). My previous question pertained to table 1609.6.2.1(1) of both the IBC and the current Building...
  11. papaaj

    Wind loads in New York State Code vs. IBC

    While using table 1609.6.2.1(1) of the current Building Code of New York State, I noticed some discrepancies between that table and the same table in IBC 2000, yet there is no indication in the New York code that some load values were intentionally changed. It appears that this is only the case...
  12. papaaj

    Int'l Bldg Code Wind Loads

    Thank you all for the informative responses. To haynewp - in your last paragraph I think you meant to say case "B" is disregarded in the IBC, correct? Regarding what Dave said, it makes sense that the loads in the "Horizonal Loads" column of IBC table 1609.6.2.1(1) (with...
  13. papaaj

    Int'l Bldg Code Wind Loads

    Thanks for your response, JAE. Simplified indeed. I kept going back to confirm that I was actually using the simplified provisions. What you said about the values in the "maximum" columns on the far right being upper limits makes sense. However, the way I interpret section...
  14. papaaj

    Int'l Bldg Code Wind Loads

    In table 1609.6.2.1(1) of the 2000 IBC, there are columns for "Horizontal Loads" on walls in the "End Zone" and the "Interior Zone", and there are also columns for "Maximum Horizontal Wall Loads" in Zones 1E, 4E, 1 and 4. Zones 1E and 4E are the same as...
  15. papaaj

    Concrete Column Detailing

    Here is an issue which probably very basic and simple, yet has engineers in my office perplexed. ACI 318, Section 7.10.5.4 requires that ties in concrete columns be provided "not more than one-half a tie spacing below the lowest horizontal reinforcement in slab or drop panel above.&quot...

Part and Inventory Search

Back
Top