Can anyone give me confirmation on the following?
I gave my boss a proof in one of my texts that if you have an overhang on a building that matches the roof slope that you don't have to design the MWFRS with a C&C wind coefficient when design the MWFRS. He doesn't agree with me.
I've researched this topic, and while it's less conservative than his, I wish that he would at least take heed in what I'm telling him.
Can anyone else confirm for me that when you have a matching-roof-line outrigger/canopy/overhang, that you still design Main-Wind-Force-Resisting-System as that of the main portion of the roof?
Scottiesei, I know that you and I have discussed this before and we came to the conclusion that it can be partially-enclosed, but not necessarily a 2.20 coefficient from the C&C tables with theta between 7 and 27 degrees.
Thanks,
McEngr
I gave my boss a proof in one of my texts that if you have an overhang on a building that matches the roof slope that you don't have to design the MWFRS with a C&C wind coefficient when design the MWFRS. He doesn't agree with me.
I've researched this topic, and while it's less conservative than his, I wish that he would at least take heed in what I'm telling him.
Can anyone else confirm for me that when you have a matching-roof-line outrigger/canopy/overhang, that you still design Main-Wind-Force-Resisting-System as that of the main portion of the roof?
Scottiesei, I know that you and I have discussed this before and we came to the conclusion that it can be partially-enclosed, but not necessarily a 2.20 coefficient from the C&C tables with theta between 7 and 27 degrees.
Thanks,
McEngr
Last edited by a moderator: