×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!
  • Students Click Here

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Waffle Slab Building and New Stair Design

Waffle Slab Building and New Stair Design

Waffle Slab Building and New Stair Design

(OP)
Good morning. I have a new stair to connect two floors in a waffle slab concrete building and I have a few questions that we are hoping to clarify.
1) The stair is a 'convenience stair' as being told by the architect as it is not a 'means of egress' from the floor or building. This allows them to have some exceptions to the way they have to detail the requirements but it does not seem to change our design requirements structurally. For example, ASCE 7 has "Stairs and Exit ways" as 100 psf. Even though this building floor was designed at 60psf LL + 20 Partition LL, it does not seem we can design for less than the 100. Anyone know of any way to reduce the stair LL requirement? We are trying to limit the impact to the floor below where the stair lands and reduce the possible reinforcement required due to the tenant occupancy below.

2) Another engineer in this building had an opening cut into the slab and required the contractors to chip away the concrete to install plates with slots for the rebar to pass thru, so that they could weld the rebar fully to the plate before cutting the rebar away and demoing the waffle for the opening. I see no reason to do this as the building is mild reinforced and does not contain prestressing strands or post tensioning. The argument was that they didn't want the rebar to pull back into the slab and risk cracking the waffle rib. This has come up because that was the only other opening cut into this building and the way the owner was told it had to be, which we aren't showing on our documents at this time. We have evaluated the loss of continuity as this continuous action is no longer present and we are essentially creating an end bay in the slab direction, changing the moment distribution. Any idea why the prior designer would have required that?

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login


Resources

White Paper - Implementing a Multi-Domain System
IoT systems are multi-domain designs that often require AMS, Digital, RF, photonics and MEMS elements within the system. Tanner EDA provides an integrated, top-down design flow for IoT design that supports all these design domains. Learn more about key solutions that the Tanner design flow offers for successful IoT system design and verification. Download Now

Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close