Agostage
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 9, 2013
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 1
Referencing SEAOC Vol 2 (2009) - Example 5 part 9c
Tilt-Up building with wood flexible diaphram:
pg. 305
In this example the main diaphragm is designed for the N-S direction and a nailing zone diagram is created to reflect the varying shear demand that exists (The E-W direction is not shown but would need to be computed in practice).
In part 9c. a subdiaphragm is designed in the E-W direction (using out-of-plane Fp forces), simple beam analysis to yield a shear demand.
However, they use the previous main diaphragm N-S capacities to compare to the subdiaphragm shears developed from an E-W load. Is this correct?
It seems to me that the main diaphragm in the N-S direction is a NDS Case 4 while the subdiaphragm is a Case 2 that should be checked against the main diaphragm E-W capacities.
Appreciate any guidance.
Tilt-Up building with wood flexible diaphram:
pg. 305
In this example the main diaphragm is designed for the N-S direction and a nailing zone diagram is created to reflect the varying shear demand that exists (The E-W direction is not shown but would need to be computed in practice).
In part 9c. a subdiaphragm is designed in the E-W direction (using out-of-plane Fp forces), simple beam analysis to yield a shear demand.
However, they use the previous main diaphragm N-S capacities to compare to the subdiaphragm shears developed from an E-W load. Is this correct?
It seems to me that the main diaphragm in the N-S direction is a NDS Case 4 while the subdiaphragm is a Case 2 that should be checked against the main diaphragm E-W capacities.
Appreciate any guidance.