Replies

1. 
   PE_FredM | Dec 25, 1998 11:39am | #2

   *
   You're not being rude. As a PE myself, I've never assumed that I couldn't learn something from someone in the trades. Its the PE's who assume that they know it all that are usually the most uninformed, ignorant or outright dangerous. And its the builders like you who question the PE's who make us better at our job. Always question authority.

2. 
   Guest_ | Dec 26, 1998 09:56am | #3

   *
   Fred,
   Thank you. You just helped to make our world a better place.

3. 
   Darrell_Hambley | Dec 28, 1998 05:07am | #4

   *
   Thanks for the help. Mike M. is right...footings have to be designed to react against the overturning forces, period... no matter what the code says. When I look at what has been signed off on other job sites vs what the plans call out I have to question whether the equations have more value than practical experience. I find this forum combined of builders, engineers and DYI's much informed as a whole. Darrell

4. 
   Guest_ | Dec 28, 1998 06:20am | #5

   *
   Questions about BWP:

   1. It's typical of framers in Western WA (siesmic zone 3, 80mph wind) to install plywood panels from the sole plate to the top plate leaving the rim joist naked, enen though code says all edges are to be blocked and edges nailed from the foundation sill to the top plate. The load path depends on the withdraw strength of sole plate-to-rim joist nails (3 16d @16oc). Is this considered adaquate?

   2. For plwd on both sides (2'8" BWP, 1st of 2 stories) are holes for plumbing allowed. Does the 40% rule apply?

   3. Should the footing for a cripple wall under a BWP be 8" thk x 18" wide like that for a 3-story? Are hold-downs required if L>4ft?

   Thanks

1. 
   Guest_ | Dec 25, 1998 05:52am | #1

   *I don't mean to be rude, but what does that PE after your name mean. I thought it was us guys, i.e. builders, that were supposed to ask you guys, i.e. PE's, these questions. 1. If the engineer or designer does not specify any hold downs at the second floor then none are required. If you are in doubt, calculate the up-lift on these panels and call out an appropriate hold down. 2. Minor penetrations for plumbing and electrical are ok and unavoidable. The integrity of the panel must not be compromised. 3. The footing under any wall need to be adequate for the loads imposed. The size is not arbitrary. If you need a hold down that requires a 30" deep footing, then you need a 30" deep footing. This depth is not uncommon. Hold-downs are required as necessary for the calculated up-lift and/or sliding of a panel. Although a wider panel needs less hold-down, you can't just say that they are not required if a panel is greater than a certain width. Standard details are often acceptable, but when conditions vary lateral analysis by a qualified engineer may be required.

5. 
   Guest_ | Dec 28, 1998 06:20am | #6

   *
   Darrell,

   Your original question makes more sense in terms of "How do they get away with this?" rather than "Is this how its is supposed to be done?"

   As a designer, I am neither a licensed architect nor engineer, but I always want an engineers approval of my plans. However during the design process I check everything using "Maxquake" for lateral loads and "Maxbeam" for gravity loads. I often see approved details that I would never use.

   In my most recent house in Wash. state, the county approved a 6x12 header for a 18' span that in reality required 3 - 1.75x14 microlams for a 14' span. Nevertheless they required an engineers stamp for the lateral. The engineer was willing to do lateral only, so I could have built using the undersized header. I didn't. In Calif. the engineer I work with regularly will not sign plans without having checked and approved everything.