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!
-
Congratulations JAE on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!
Privacy Fence Importance Factor 1
- Thread starter ron9876
- Start date
MiketheEngineer
Structural
Who really cares if blows down - just call insurance company and replace it.
Yes - .77 seems reasonable - no risk to live or limb!!
Yes - .77 seems reasonable - no risk to live or limb!!
privacy fences blow over at about 50 mph. you can design it all you want but it all comes down to quality of workmanship.
they dig the hole, cut open and pour in the dry sack mix, pour in some water, and mix the concrete with the fence post, then stake it off to set.
they dig the hole, cut open and pour in the dry sack mix, pour in some water, and mix the concrete with the fence post, then stake it off to set.
- Thread starter
- #5
-
1
- #6
slickdeals
Structural
Can this wall be considered a fence? If so, then it can be designed for 90 mph wind per FBC.
- Thread starter
- #7
@slickdeals, While I agree with the 90mph I believe it is limited to fences 6'-0" above grade and shorter. Otherwise you have to go with the full load. Back to the original question, I don't believe there's anything where the code mandates what I factor to use. It depends on office "standards". I tyically use I = 1.0 since in my experience it has not been that much difference in bars.
FWIW, fences and masonry walls failed en masse in the 2004 Florida hurricanes. Most that I observed appeared to have no engineering (I would hope), and most of the walls were URM.
From a flying debris standpoint, I would just like fences to have enough concrete to keep them on the ground. I think anything stricter than that is just silly like others have said.
For overturning or bending failure of CMU privacy walls, I think I usually use I=1.0, though I agree with MiamiSerg that it doesn't usually make much difference. Though you could justify I=.77 from a loss of life standpoint as it is not an inhabitable structure.
From a flying debris standpoint, I would just like fences to have enough concrete to keep them on the ground. I think anything stricter than that is just silly like others have said.
For overturning or bending failure of CMU privacy walls, I think I usually use I=1.0, though I agree with MiamiSerg that it doesn't usually make much difference. Though you could justify I=.77 from a loss of life standpoint as it is not an inhabitable structure.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Question