Tuesday, November 30, 2010

RE: Beam clamps for piping braces

Could try Lindapter. Most clamps fasten to one outstand of a flange, but some of the associated plates and brackets require 4 clamps and fasten to both outstands of the flange. Which would provide more lateral restraint than single clamp at end of rod.
 

Regards

Conrad Harrison

B.Tech (mfg & mech), MIIE, gradTIEAust

mailto:sch.tectonic@bigpond.com

Adelaide

South Australia

 

Beam clamps for piping braces

Does anyone know if B-Line or Unistrut or others makes a clamp that attaches to the bottom flange of a W beam and is tested for lateral loads and can be used to brace piping / ducts / etc?

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Rajendran,

Depending on the steel frames lateral resisting system it could be a moment frame, a braced frame, or an inverted pendulum.

Thomas Hunt



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/30/2010 06:34 AM
Subject:        Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Yes, it is a sort of a stile except that this one is high. It needs to go over a 20' high concrete wall.

Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:


From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 11:16 PM

Rajendran,

You will need to describe your structure a little better.  So far it sounds like a stile if you are going up, over, and down an obstruction.


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 01:41 PM
Subject:        
Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a staircase to cross over an obstruction. What will be the applicable component if Table 13.5-1 were to be used?


Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 7:18 PM

Rajendran,


Are you asking about the overall staircase as a structure or are you asking about a staircase within a structure?  If you are talking about a steel braced frame or moment frame structure with a staircase inside then the overall structure would be likely a non-building structure similar to a building in which case you can use either Table 15.4-1 or Table 12.2-1.  If you just designing the staircase (i.e. stair stringers and attachments) then you would use Table 13.5-1.


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 11:00 AM
Subject:        
Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a stand alone structure. If I used Chapter 13 procedure, will it pass through the Permit Agency's scrutiny?

Thanks.


Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 4:20 PM


Rajendran,


Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        
Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.


Rajendran





------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------




------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Yes, it is a sort of a stile except that this one is high. It needs to go over a 20' high concrete wall.

Rajendran


--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 11:16 PM

Rajendran,

You will need to describe your structure a little better.  So far it sounds like a stile if you are going up, over, and down an obstruction.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/29/2010 01:41 PM
Subject:        Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a staircase to cross over an obstruction. What will be the applicable component if Table 13.5-1 were to be used?

Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:


From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 7:18 PM

Rajendran,

Are you asking about the overall staircase as a structure or are you asking about a staircase within a structure?  If you are talking about a steel braced frame or moment frame structure with a staircase inside then the overall structure would be likely a non-building structure similar to a building in which case you can use either Table 15.4-1 or Table 12.2-1.  If you just designing the staircase (i.e. stair stringers and attachments) then you would use Table 13.5-1.


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 11:00 AM
Subject:        
Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a stand alone structure. If I used Chapter 13 procedure, will it pass through the Permit Agency's scrutiny?

Thanks.


Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 4:20 PM

Rajendran,


Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        
Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.


Rajendran




------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: written report with equations.

I've Just discovered ! One Note and Word now have an equation solver add-in
!
http://callkathy.amplify.com/2010/08/16/let-onenote-or-word-solve-your-math-equations/


--------- Original Message --------
From: seaint@seaint.org
To: seaint@seaint.org <seaint@seaint.org>
Subject: Re: written report with equations.
Date: 03/09/10 16:05

>
>
> Joe,
>
> If you are using Microsoft Word for
> your written text then look into their &quot;Equation Editor&quot; which
> is sometimes included free but often not installed in the basic setup.
>
> Thomas Hunt, S.E.
> Fluor
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> &quot;Joseph R. Grill&quot; &lt;vveng@cableone.net&gt;
> 03/09/2010 12:56 PM
> Please respond to seaint
>
>
>
>
> To
> &lt;seaint@seaint.org&gt;
>
>
> cc
>
>
>
> Subject
> written report with equations.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This may seem a bit basic, but I am hoping
> I can put together a written report which will include type written
equations
> which will show correct notations, roman numerals, superscripts,
subscripts
> etc etc. &nbsp;Just as soon not have to purchase anything. &nbsp;Any
suggestions?
> Thanks,
> Joe Grill
> &nbsp;
> &nbsp;
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person
> or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
> proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.
> If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
> hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
> distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
> this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
> contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.
>
> Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
> sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Monday, November 29, 2010

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Rajendran,

You will need to describe your structure a little better.  So far it sounds like a stile if you are going up, over, and down an obstruction.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/29/2010 01:41 PM
Subject:        Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a staircase to cross over an obstruction. What will be the applicable component if Table 13.5-1 were to be used?

Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:


From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 7:18 PM

Rajendran,

Are you asking about the overall staircase as a structure or are you asking about a staircase within a structure?  If you are talking about a steel braced frame or moment frame structure with a staircase inside then the overall structure would be likely a non-building structure similar to a building in which case you can use either Table 15.4-1 or Table 12.2-1.  If you just designing the staircase (i.e. stair stringers and attachments) then you would use Table 13.5-1.


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 11:00 AM
Subject:        
Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a stand alone structure. If I used Chapter 13 procedure, will it pass through the Permit Agency's scrutiny?

Thanks.


Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 4:20 PM

Rajendran,


Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        
Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.


Rajendran




------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------



------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Tom,

It is a staircase to cross over an obstruction. What will be the applicable component if Table 13.5-1 were to be used?

Rajendran


--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 7:18 PM

Rajendran,

Are you asking about the overall staircase as a structure or are you asking about a staircase within a structure?  If you are talking about a steel braced frame or moment frame structure with a staircase inside then the overall structure would be likely a non-building structure similar to a building in which case you can use either Table 15.4-1 or Table 12.2-1.  If you just designing the staircase (i.e. stair stringers and attachments) then you would use Table 13.5-1.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/29/2010 11:00 AM
Subject:        Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a stand alone structure. If I used Chapter 13 procedure, will it pass through the Permit Agency's scrutiny?

Thanks.

Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:


From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 4:20 PM

Rajendran,

Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        
Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.


Rajendran



------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Rajendran,

Are you asking about the overall staircase as a structure or are you asking about a staircase within a structure?  If you are talking about a steel braced frame or moment frame structure with a staircase inside then the overall structure would be likely a non-building structure similar to a building in which case you can use either Table 15.4-1 or Table 12.2-1.  If you just designing the staircase (i.e. stair stringers and attachments) then you would use Table 13.5-1.

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/29/2010 11:00 AM
Subject:        Re: Seismic design of staircase in California




Tom,

It is a stand alone structure. If I used Chapter 13 procedure, will it pass through the Permit Agency's scrutiny?

Thanks.

Rajendran



--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:


From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 4:20 PM

Rajendran,

Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).


Thomas Hunt, S.E.

Fluor




From:        
Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        
seaint@seaint.org
Date:        
11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        
Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.


Rajendran



------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material.  
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer.  

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company.  
------------------------------------------------------------


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Tom,

It is a stand alone structure. If I used Chapter 13 procedure, will it pass through the Permit Agency's scrutiny?

Thanks.

Rajendran


--- On Mon, 11/29/10, Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com> wrote:

From: Tom.Hunt@fluor.com <Tom.Hunt@fluor.com>
Subject: Re: Seismic design of staircase in California
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Monday, November 29, 2010, 4:20 PM

Rajendran,

Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.

Rajendran


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Re: Seismic design of staircase in California

Rajendran,

Unless your staircase is part of the overall lateral force resisting system of the building it would probably be more appropriate to consider it a non-structural components and use ASCE 7 Chapter 13 for your seismic design forces (i.e. Fp forces).

Thomas Hunt, S.E.
Fluor



From:        Padmanabhan Rajendran <prajendran@ymail.com>
To:        seaint@seaint.org
Date:        11/29/2010 08:13 AM
Subject:        Seismic design of staircase in California




I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.

Rajendran


------------------------------------------------------------
The information transmitted is intended only for the person
or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
proprietary, business-confidential and/or privileged material. 
If you are not the intended recipient of this message you are
hereby notified that any use, review, retransmission, dissemination,
distribution, reproduction or any action taken in reliance upon
this message is prohibited. If you received this in error, please
contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 

Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender and may not necessarily reflect the views of the company. 
------------------------------------------------------------

Seismic design of staircase in California

I am designing a steel staircase located in South Long Beach, California. It is about 22' tall laid at about 40 deg to horizontal. To estimate seismic loads on the structure, I am considering it as a non-building structure subject to the sections of Chapter 15 of ASCE 7 (2005 edtition). There are 2 tables in this chapter to determine "R" and "Omega 0": Table 15.4-1 for nonbuilding structures similar to buildings and Table 15.4-2 for nonbuilding structures not similar to buildings.  I think the staircase would be classified under Table 15.4-2 as "All other self-suppoting structures, tanks or vessels not covered above or by reference standards that are similar to buildings". Under this classification R = 1.25 and Omega0=2. Is my assumption correct? If not, what will be the accepted method?

Thanks.

Rajendran

Sunday, November 28, 2010

Re: SEAOSC Webinar Info

ok
I already registered
Dave





On Nov 28, 2010, at 6:37 PM, SEAOSC@aol.com wrote:

Please attend this upcoming SEAOSC Webinar: Dec. 8 - Doug Thompson, S.E. will present a Webinar on Wood Design: Significant Changes from 2006 to 2009 IBC Chapter 23-Wood. Webinr starts at noon PST and ends at 1 p.m.  Register at: http://www.seaosc.org/events_detail_announcement.cfm?pk_announcement=27


SEAOSC Webinar Info

Please attend this upcoming SEAOSC Webinar: Dec. 8 - Doug Thompson, S.E. will present a Webinar on Wood Design: Significant Changes from 2006 to 2009 IBC Chapter 23-Wood. Webinr starts at noon PST and ends at 1 p.m.  Register at: http://www.seaosc.org/events_detail_announcement.cfm?pk_announcement=27

RE: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Bill-
First, let me say I'll miss your posts on the SEAINT listserver. Although I haven't always agreed 
with you nor your political viewpoints, you have offered your opinions in a straight forward and 
honest manner without trying to play games. And you weren't afraid to admit when you didn't 
know something.  That is hard for most people.

As to your newly chosen path, I wish you the very best with it. I have a sister-in-law and a 
brother-in-law in academia in fields very closely allied to history and they are both quite happy
with what they are doing. It is, however, every bit as competitive as engineering. My sister-in-law 
visited us for Thanksgiving and commented that the worst spats in academic issues are about 
the most trivial matters. Sound like Engineering?

I have always told my kids to not worry so much about what they choose to do but to choose something 
they really enjoy because they will be spending a lot of hours doing it. So far, they are doing just that
and seem quite happy with their lives (I have five sons ranging from 27 to 42). One recently tired of what he 
was doing, hit the reset button and has chosen a new path, one he is very happy with.

As for the history of engineering and/or technology, there are many interesting and important 
contributions to be made in this area. The old adage that those who don't pay attention to history 
are destined to repeat it is true.  With your perspective of having been in the field for a significant 
period of time, you can bring an important view point and an understanding that would escape a 
younger person.

Much of your depression likely comes from your dissatisfaction with your engineering career.  
Having recognized you needed a change should do wonders for your outlook. If you approach 
your newly chosen field with the same fervor you've shown at times in your postings on the
listserver, I have no doubt you will succeed. In fact, you seem to be the type of individual
who can overcome much adversity when you have a goal in mind.

Best wishes as you continue on your life's journey. Check in with all of us from time to time. 
From the comments I've seen since your post, I'm sure many of us would enjoy hearing from
you.

Regards,

Bill Cain, S.E.
Berkeley, CA




> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:46:09 -0600
> From: bill@polhemus.cc
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: A Farewell to Structural Engineering
>
> Hello, SEAINTers. Long time since I've checked in personally.
>
> I am now going on the sixth month of my current spate of unemployment.
> The phone does not ring. Such employment openings as I do see
> advertised, are for entry-level positions, or require expertise that I
> do not have (such as offshore platform design).
>
> I have also been struggling, not entirely coincidentally, with one of
> the worst bouts of depression with which I've ever had the misfortune to
> deal. No one's fault, really; it is what it is. But it has forced me
> into self-examination at an uncomfortable level.
>
> I haven't been happy or fulfilled as an engineer in years. I think the
> profession and I simply grew apart. If you are not a world-class expert
> - as I am not - in any particular subfield, you must perforce be content
> with "management" or some-such. And I am not that either.
>
> I have made up my mind to drop out altogether. In fact, I am changing
> course radically - something I probably should have done years ago but
> was too caught up in the practicalities of earning a living to realize it.
>
> I have decided to apply to graduate school with the aim of earning a
> Ph.D. in History, and remain in academia for the remainder of my life.
> It's not exactly entering the monastery, but it's almost as radical a
> departure. I have always been fascinated with all aspects of history -
> especially that of engineering and technological progress. I will
> probably focus on that, perhaps even civil and structural engineering
> history. Wouldn't that be something.
>
> At any rate, I just felt it incumbent upon me to write a brief swansong
> in this vein. Not that I expect any of you to really care, but it might
> be of interest to one or two, and so it would serve a purpose.
>
> Thank you all for services rendered in the fifteen-plus years that I've
> participated on this forum, and I wish all of you the very best of good
> luck in all you do.
>
> William L. Polhemus, P.E.
> Katy, Texas
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Friday, November 26, 2010

RE: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Bill,
 
As others have said, I appriciate your past active contributions to the list server and I will miss your participation.
 
Good luck,
 
Larry Hauer S.E.
 
> Date: Tue, 23 Nov 2010 15:46:09 -0600
> From: bill@polhemus.cc
> To: seaint@seaint.org
> Subject: A Farewell to Structural Engineering
>
> Hello, SEAINTers. Long time since I've checked in personally.
>
> I am now going on the sixth month of my current spate of unemployment.
> The phone does not ring. Such employment openings as I do see
> advertised, are for entry-level positions, or require expertise that I
> do not have (such as offshore platform design).
>
> I have also been struggling, not entirely coincidentally, with one of
> the worst bouts of depression with which I've ever had the misfortune to
> deal. No one's fault, really; it is what it is. But it has forced me
> into self-examination at an uncomfortable level.
>
> I haven't been happy or fulfilled as an engineer in years. I think the
> profession and I simply grew apart. If you are not a world-class expert
> - as I am not - in any particular subfield, you must perforce be content
> with "management" or some-such. And I am not that either.
>
> I have made up my mind to drop out altogether. In fact, I am changing
> course radically - something I probably should have done years ago but
> was too caught up in the practicalities of earning a living to realize it.
>
> I have decided to apply to graduate school with the aim of earning a
> Ph.D. in History, and remain in academia for the remainder of my life.
> It's not exactly entering the monastery, but it's almost as radical a
> departure. I have always been fascinated with all aspects of history -
> especially that of engineering and technological progress. I will
> probably focus on that, perhaps even civil and structural engineering
> history. Wouldn't that be something.
>
> At any rate, I just felt it incumbent upon me to write a brief swansong
> in this vein. Not that I expect any of you to really care, but it might
> be of interest to one or two, and so it would serve a purpose.
>
> Thank you all for services rendered in the fifteen-plus years that I've
> participated on this forum, and I wish all of you the very best of good
> luck in all you do.
>
> William L. Polhemus, P.E.
> Katy, Texas
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Thursday, November 25, 2010

Re: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

To Bill and Vish,

I'm sorry to hear you folks are having this financial downer in your business.  I wish you both well in whatever you do and I hope this economy turns around soon for all of us.

Regards,
Ray Shreenan  SE  

--- On Thu, 11/25/10, G Vishwanath <gvshwnth@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: G Vishwanath <gvshwnth@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: A Farewell to Structural Engineering
To: seaint@seaint.org
Date: Thursday, November 25, 2010, 3:35 AM

Bill,

If it is any consolation, a lot of us are going through a bad time.
Even overseas.
I too am in the same boat now.
At 62 I don't have the options you have. You are much younger than I.
For 26 years I was content with the stability and  security and prestige  that a Govt Job provided.
I gave it up when I had 6 more years of service left in order to give a boost to my bank balance which didn't look too good at the age of 52. We retired at 58, per rules in force at that time.

I entered the big bad world of Knowledge process outsourcing, and set up a detailing business to cater to the overseas market. Detailing for USA paid us more than structural design for Indian clients.
The boom lasted about 5 years during which time I did fairly well for myself.
Then the economic tragedy in USA struck and its effects are being felt here in India too.

The US market is not recovering and the local jobs for Indian clients  we are now doing just don't pay enough to keep us going.
We got back into the local market believing the US recession is temporary but how long is temporary? 2 years? 3 years? Someone has now scared me by saying things are going to be bad for a few more years and that the detailing prices will never climb back to pre 2007 levels.  In the past I never lost a job that we bid because of our price. But now even our prices are not competitive. I can hardly believe anyone in USA is quoting less than what we quoted. But I now learn that there are quite a few desperate people out there willing do grab a job at any price.

The last three years have been the worst. I am surviving on crumbs now
Clients have defaulted on payment even when there were no contentious issues.
Projects have been abandoned half way and no compensation was paid for the time spent already.
The position is critical now and the next few months will decide what I have to do with myself and my career.

Hanging up my boots for good is one option, but I won't be happy with that decision.
My health is reasonably good and there is still some "juice" left in me.
I would rather be gainfully occupied with something or the other for a few more years at least.

I wish you all the best .
Do continue your postings to the list. I  always enjoyed it when things got dull and you stirred the pot with some provocative posts.
I was in California recently and had the pleasure of talking to some list friends.
My daughter and son-in-law live there and I was visiting them.
I may be visiting again next year. Hopefully we could talk on the phone and cheer each other up.

Regards
Vish (from India)




Bay Area Testing Lab Recommendation


I would recommend you contact Tom Voss at Scientific Construction Laboratories in Lafayette, 925.284.3363.



<dfisher@fpse.com>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Bay Area Testing Lab Recommendation

List members:

I am starting a new project in San Francisco and need the services of a "progressive" testing lab in the Bay Area...

We all know that testing agencies (like engineers) run the spectrum from
ultra-conservative to "everything's OK" all the time.

I would prefer an "out of the box" approach.
The initial scope: testing of existing pile foundations.

Anyone you can suggest?

Regards,

David L. Fisher SE PE
Fisher and Partners




Matt Steiner, P.E., S.E.
Thornton Tomasetti

Sent from my Verizon Wireless Blackberry

Re: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Bill,

If it is any consolation, a lot of us are going through a bad time.
Even overseas.
I too am in the same boat now.
At 62 I don't have the options you have. You are much younger than I.
For 26 years I was content with the stability and  security and prestige  that a Govt Job provided.
I gave it up when I had 6 more years of service left in order to give a boost to my bank balance which didn't look too good at the age of 52. We retired at 58, per rules in force at that time.

I entered the big bad world of Knowledge process outsourcing, and set up a detailing business to cater to the overseas market. Detailing for USA paid us more than structural design for Indian clients.
The boom lasted about 5 years during which time I did fairly well for myself.
Then the economic tragedy in USA struck and its effects are being felt here in India too.

The US market is not recovering and the local jobs for Indian clients  we are now doing just don't pay enough to keep us going.
We got back into the local market believing the US recession is temporary but how long is temporary? 2 years? 3 years? Someone has now scared me by saying things are going to be bad for a few more years and that the detailing prices will never climb back to pre 2007 levels.  In the past I never lost a job that we bid because of our price. But now even our prices are not competitive. I can hardly believe anyone in USA is quoting less than what we quoted. But I now learn that there are quite a few desperate people out there willing do grab a job at any price.

The last three years have been the worst. I am surviving on crumbs now
Clients have defaulted on payment even when there were no contentious issues.
Projects have been abandoned half way and no compensation was paid for the time spent already.
The position is critical now and the next few months will decide what I have to do with myself and my career.

Hanging up my boots for good is one option, but I won't be happy with that decision.
My health is reasonably good and there is still some "juice" left in me.
I would rather be gainfully occupied with something or the other for a few more years at least.

I wish you all the best .
Do continue your postings to the list. I  always enjoyed it when things got dull and you stirred the pot with some provocative posts.
I was in California recently and had the pleasure of talking to some list friends.
My daughter and son-in-law live there and I was visiting them.
I may be visiting again next year. Hopefully we could talk on the phone and cheer each other up.

Regards
Vish (from India)




Wednesday, November 24, 2010

Re: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Hello Bill,

I wish you the best.

I can understand the idea of going to grad school. I've thought of
doing that as well.

I've enjoyed reading you posts for many, many years, and hope that
you don't stop reading and posting here. I would third or fourth the
advice to not give up the license just yet: if for no other reason than
to give you options. It would seem that it would be good to be able
to do some engineering while in school to offset the cost of graduate
school, which isn't getting cheaper.

Thank you for all of the knowledge, entertainment and provocation
to think that you've provided to this forum.

Take Care,
Lloyd Pack
Advantage Consulting Engineers
Caldwell, ID.

On 23 Nov 2010 at 15:46, Bill Polhemus wrote:

> Hello, SEAINTers. Long time since I've checked in personally.
>
> I am now going on the sixth month of my current spate of unemployment.
> The phone does not ring. Such employment openings as I do see
> advertised, are for entry-level positions, or require expertise that I
> do not have (such as offshore platform design).
>
> I have also been struggling, not entirely coincidentally, with one of
> the worst bouts of depression with which I've ever had the misfortune
> to deal. No one's fault, really; it is what it is. But it has forced
> me into self-examination at an uncomfortable level.
>
> I haven't been happy or fulfilled as an engineer in years. I think the
> profession and I simply grew apart. If you are not a world-class
> expert - as I am not - in any particular subfield, you must perforce
> be content with "management" or some-such. And I am not that either.
>
> I have made up my mind to drop out altogether. In fact, I am changing
> course radically - something I probably should have done years ago but
> was too caught up in the practicalities of earning a living to realize
> it.
>
> I have decided to apply to graduate school with the aim of earning a
> Ph.D. in History, and remain in academia for the remainder of my life.
> It's not exactly entering the monastery, but it's almost as radical a
> departure. I have always been fascinated with all aspects of history -
> especially that of engineering and technological progress. I will
> probably focus on that, perhaps even civil and structural engineering
> history. Wouldn't that be something.
>
> At any rate, I just felt it incumbent upon me to write a brief
> swansong in this vein. Not that I expect any of you to really care,
> but it might be of interest to one or two, and so it would serve a
> purpose.
>
> Thank you all for services rendered in the fifteen-plus years that
> I've participated on this forum, and I wish all of you the very best
> of good luck in all you do.
>
> William L. Polhemus, P.E.
> Katy, Texas
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> *
> * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
> * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
> * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
> * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
> * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
> * site at: http://www.seaint.org
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
>

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Best of luck on your endeavors, Bill.  But, please do post something on occasion.  The humor and wit has yet to be matched!

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 9:43 AM, Dmitri Wright <dmitri@cascade-structural.com> wrote:
Bill,

I have enjoyed your contributions to the list over the years, and I will certainly miss seeing them.  I know others that are also leaving the profession, and it saddens me to see so much talent and experience leaving prematurely.  I do not think our profession will be the better for it.  On a personal level, I wish you all the best on this exciting new adventure in your life.

Dmitri Wright, PE
Cascade Engineering, Inc.
245 SE 4th Ave, Suite B
Hillsboro, OR  97123-4033
dmitri@cascade-structural.com
503-846-1131





From: Bill Polhemus <bill@polhemus.cc>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Hello, SEAINTers. Long time since I've checked in personally.

I am now going on the sixth month of my current spate of unemployment.
The phone does not ring. Such employment openings as I do see
advertised, are for entry-level positions, or require expertise that I
do not have (such as offshore platform design).

I have also been struggling, not entirely coincidentally, with one of
the worst bouts of depression with which I've ever had the misfortune to
deal. No one's fault, really; it is what it is. But it has forced me
into self-examination at an uncomfortable level.

I haven't been happy or fulfilled as an engineer in years. I think the
profession and I simply grew apart. If you are not a world-class expert
- as I am not - in any particular subfield, you must perforce be content
with "management" or some-such. And I am not that either.

I have made up my mind to drop out altogether. In fact, I am changing
course radically - something I probably should have done years ago but
was too caught up in the practicalities of earning a living to realize it.

I have decided to apply to graduate school with the aim of earning a
Ph.D. in History, and remain in academia for the remainder of my life.
It's not exactly entering the monastery, but it's almost as radical a
departure. I have always been fascinated with all aspects of history -
especially that of engineering and technological progress. I will
probably focus on that, perhaps even civil and structural engineering
history. Wouldn't that be something.

At any rate, I just felt it incumbent upon me to write a brief swansong
in this vein. Not that I expect any of you to really care, but it might
be of interest to one or two, and so it would serve a purpose.

Thank you all for services rendered in the fifteen-plus years that I've
participated on this forum, and I wish all of you the very best of good
luck in all you do.

William L. Polhemus, P.E.
Katy, Texas



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
* *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you *   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted *   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web *   site at: http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



--
David Topete, SE

Re: Light Pole/ Business End

David, thanks for the input. I like your re-use idea. In my case it may be covered under one permit but I will bump up my fee for the added risk for 10 poles.

Rainier
Via iPhone 


On Nov 23, 2010, at 1:20 PM, David Topete <d.topete73@gmail.com> wrote:

Will there be 10 separate permits issued?  If so, charge your fee for the design and cad time needed to develop the one design, then charge a "re-use" fee of $500, $1,000(?) for each subsequent use of the design.  Charge enough to cover your expenses for the plan review process.  Consider a separate fee relating to C.A. since there may be unforeseen field conditions at some of light pole locations.

On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 12:34 PM, <rccatubig@gmail.com> wrote:
Fellow Engineers,
Say you have to provide calculations for 10 identical light poles that will be installed in the same general location. Do you charge for one light pole or do you charge based on the number of poles?

Rainier C. Catubig, SE
Via iPhone


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



--
David Topete, SE

RE: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Bill,

I have enjoyed your contributions to the list over the years, and I will
certainly miss seeing them. I know others that are also leaving the
profession, and it saddens me to see so much talent and experience leaving
prematurely. I do not think our profession will be the better for it. On a
personal level, I wish you all the best on this exciting new adventure in
your life.

Dmitri Wright, PE
Cascade Engineering, Inc.
245 SE 4th Ave, Suite B
Hillsboro, OR 97123-4033
dmitri@cascade-structural.com
503-846-1131


From: Bill Polhemus <bill@polhemus.cc>
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Hello, SEAINTers. Long time since I've checked in personally.

I am now going on the sixth month of my current spate of unemployment.
The phone does not ring. Such employment openings as I do see
advertised, are for entry-level positions, or require expertise that I
do not have (such as offshore platform design).

I have also been struggling, not entirely coincidentally, with one of
the worst bouts of depression with which I've ever had the misfortune to
deal. No one's fault, really; it is what it is. But it has forced me
into self-examination at an uncomfortable level.

I haven't been happy or fulfilled as an engineer in years. I think the
profession and I simply grew apart. If you are not a world-class expert
- as I am not - in any particular subfield, you must perforce be content
with "management" or some-such. And I am not that either.

I have made up my mind to drop out altogether. In fact, I am changing
course radically - something I probably should have done years ago but
was too caught up in the practicalities of earning a living to realize it.

I have decided to apply to graduate school with the aim of earning a
Ph.D. in History, and remain in academia for the remainder of my life.
It's not exactly entering the monastery, but it's almost as radical a
departure. I have always been fascinated with all aspects of history -
especially that of engineering and technological progress. I will
probably focus on that, perhaps even civil and structural engineering
history. Wouldn't that be something.

At any rate, I just felt it incumbent upon me to write a brief swansong
in this vein. Not that I expect any of you to really care, but it might
be of interest to one or two, and so it would serve a purpose.

Thank you all for services rendered in the fifteen-plus years that I've
participated on this forum, and I wish all of you the very best of good
luck in all you do.

William L. Polhemus, P.E.
Katy, Texas

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

re: farewell to engineering

First, nice tip of the hat to Hemingway. Maybe the literary bug will
bite you too.

Second, sounds to me like you are about 40-ish, though I always had
you pegged for about 55 for some reason. Maybe because your political
views reminded me of my dad. I mean no offense in any of this, just an
impression, like when you talk to someone on the phone several times
and then finally meet them and are surprised they don't meet your made
up picture. So how old are you since you are revealing so much?

I don't think you are alone whatsoever in considering other
professions (or second guessing your original choice). I sure have,
and so have my friends who are attorneys, accountants, etc. A dismal
economy and a bout of unemployment will undoubtedly push you to those
thoughts. But if you have a dream to follow and only one life to live,
I say go for it. Don't we all sometimes feel like just one lifetime is
not enough, there are so many other professions, places to live,
people to meet, and never enough time...

Right now I am in the middle of a biography about a young farmer boy
in Malawi, one of the poorest countries in the world (in Africa), and
his family just survived a famine- so it sure makes me feel lucky to
have been born in the US and have a job right now! Their corrupt
government sold their stockpiles of emergency food and couldn't their
people from starving, and we complain about dipping home prices
foreclosures! Gives you some humility for sure. But I am not making
light of your situation...

If I were in your shoes, like others said, I would maintain your
license. Maybe dabble in structural engineering when the phone rings
or the opportunity otherwise presents itself. Maybe a little side
money to help out a poor history graduate student would be nice... :)
Maybe there is a book about engineering history out there for you to
write, or a history channel special for you to consult with, sky is
the limit.

Have you ever considered something within the general field that is
not structural engineering design? What about the construction side of
things, project management? I think an experienced and knowledgeable
SE would make a great PM. I understand now the timing with the economy
is not good, but its something I have considered.

A couple of years ago my cousin, a mechanical engineer for a
subcontractor to Ford, left the auto business to become a financial
planner. He now works out of a small office near his home and really
enjoys it. The ups and downs of the car business, which are about as
shaky as construction these days, was too much for him. And I think he
wanted a change. Though I personally could not believe he went into
finance at the time he did, but...

Best of luck, stay on the list, you still have lots of engineering
advice I am sure you can offer. And share any interesting engineering
history stuff with us.

Regards,
Andrew Kester, PE
Structural Engineer

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Bay Area Testing Lab Recommendation

List members:
 
I am starting a new project in San Francisco and need the services
of a "progressive" testing lab in the Bay Area...
 
We all know that testing agencies (like engineers) run the spectrum from
ultra-conservative to "everything's OK" all the time.
 
I would prefer an "out of the box" approach.
 
The initial scope: testing of existing pile foundations.
 
Anyone you can suggest?
 
Regards,

David L. Fisher SE PE
Fisher and Partners

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

Re: A Farewell to Structural Engineering

Good luck, Bill.
Even though we have disagreed in the past, I wish you the best. When I
was thinking about university approximately a century ago, I considered
history as I loved the subject and still do. As for engineering, I still
like it. but dislike all the red tape that seems to go with it now.
Fortunately up here, there has been no slow down for engineers that I
know of. As for history & engineering, I happened on to a new TV program
last night called "Genius". It was about people who invented or
discovered things, such as Alan Turing, Alexander Fleming, Frank Wittal
and one I forgot. It was narrated by Stephen Hawking. I look forward to
next week. I think there will be lots of interesting things for you to
look into.
Best of luck
Gary

On 11/23/2010 4:46 PM, Bill Polhemus wrote:
> Hello, SEAINTers. Long time since I've checked in personally.
>
> I am now going on the sixth month of my current spate of unemployment.
> The phone does not ring. Such employment openings as I do see
> advertised, are for entry-level positions, or require expertise that I
> do not have (such as offshore platform design).
>
> I have also been struggling, not entirely coincidentally, with one of
> the worst bouts of depression with which I've ever had the misfortune
> to deal. No one's fault, really; it is what it is. But it has forced
> me into self-examination at an uncomfortable level.
>
> I haven't been happy or fulfilled as an engineer in years. I think the
> profession and I simply grew apart. If you are not a world-class
> expert - as I am not - in any particular subfield, you must perforce
> be content with "management" or some-such. And I am not that either.
>
> I have made up my mind to drop out altogether. In fact, I am changing
> course radically - something I probably should have done years ago but
> was too caught up in the practicalities of earning a living to realize
> it.
>
> I have decided to apply to graduate school with the aim of earning a
> Ph.D. in History, and remain in academia for the remainder of my life.
> It's not exactly entering the monastery, but it's almost as radical a
> departure. I have always been fascinated with all aspects of history -
> especially that of engineering and technological progress. I will
> probably focus on that, perhaps even civil and structural engineering
> history. Wouldn't that be something.
>
> At any rate, I just felt it incumbent upon me to write a brief
> swansong in this vein. Not that I expect any of you to really care,
> but it might be of interest to one or two, and so it would serve a
> purpose.
>
> Thank you all for services rendered in the fifteen-plus years that
> I've participated on this forum, and I wish all of you the very best
> of good luck in all you do.
>
> William L. Polhemus, P.E.
> Katy, Texas
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
> * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers *
> Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe
> (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> * Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you *
> send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted * without
> your permission. Make sure you visit our web * site at:
> http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ******
> ****** ********

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seaint-ad@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********