Curtain min. Heading Thickness

M

MaFiAMaX

New Member
Hello, In the walls with Hw/lw>2 in the article 3.6.2.1 of the Earthquake Code, if the structural system does not consist entirely of shears, the thickness of the wall cap should be min [floor height/15; 200mm] is envisaged. If the floor height is more than 6m and the curtain is held by beams in the conditions stated, min [floor height/20; 300mm] is required. (Before this article was revised, 1/20 ratio could be operated if the necessary condition was met without a floor height limit) I think that this article punishes curtains unnecessarily. Accordingly, on the curtains held by beams; The thickness of the curtain with a height of 5.5 meters can be 40 cm, and a curtain with a height of 6 meters can be made 30 cm. I would like to ask my dear colleagues their thoughts on this issue. Also, other competitor software S**4CAD on the market does not do this check (it does screen thickness control but does not take the header into account, I learned from technical support myself). When I tried a simple model with a height of 5.5m with ideCAD, I was very happy to see that ideCAD indicated this in the geometry control. Also, shouldn't he give this error in the earthquake regulation report? On the other hand, when the floor height was 610 cm and the curtain was held by beams from all sides, it gave the ratio of 1/15 as a warning. Did I misunderstand this item?
 
I know it's rude to post repeatedly, but I'm really curious about my colleagues' thoughts and practices on this subject. Currently, in one of my projects, the floor height is 5.5m and I have made the curtain thickness 30cm because I think according to the floor load./20 rule. Making the curtains of 30x210 in the project to 40x280 leaves it on the negative side both in terms of architecture and cost. Not to mention that this floor is the 3rd floor (architecturally ground), so I have to raise the curtains on the lower floors as well. Since the number of curtains was close to 20, this issue was so thought-provoking.
 
Do not my dear colleagues and ideCAD officials have any information/comments on this issue? I'm not asking this question out of curiosity, I'm asking because I'm really confused. Best regards.
 
Hello, I couldn't understand what you expect from us in your message.... The article in tdy is very clear... As an alternative to what you wrote, you can only consider the curtain thickness conditions in the header areas. (By entering column-panel-column) If you think there is a problem with the application, you can try to find the answer to your question by contacting disaster management. Good work...
 
"HakanŞahin":29jpka2a" said:
Hi, I couldn't understand what you expect from us in your message.... The article written in tdy is very clear... As an alternative to what you wrote, you can only consider the curtain thickness conditions in the heading areas (column-panel- by entering a column) If you think there is a problem with the application, you can contact the disaster works and try to find the answer to your question there. Good work...
Click to expand...
Hello Hakan, Let me explain. If the curtain ends are held by the beams that meet the necessary conditions before the article is revised He was able to use 1/20 ratio, then the curtains where this is valid were changed to 6m and above curtains.So if the curtain is smaller than 6m, 1/15 ratio is valid. ideCAD gives the ratio of 1/15 in geometry control, but when I take the floor height to 610cm and the curtain is Although it is held by beams from all sides, I still get 1/15 ratio error in geometry control. shouldn't it flow? I think I explained my question clearly. Thank you for your answer.
 
"HakanŞahin":96hbi2ui" said:
So if the curtain is smaller than 6m, the ratio of 1/15 is valid. ideCAD gives the ratio of 1/15 in the geometry control, but when I take the floor height to 610cm and the curtain is held by beams from all sides, it is still 1 in the geometry control I'm getting the /15 ratio error. According to the regulations, shouldn't it look at the 1/20 ratio here?
Click to expand...
Then add the project to the message or [email protected] Send it, let's examine. In the project, let's see if the interpretation of the program is different from what TDY reports, then let's evaluate. Note: The messages that the program reports in geometry control are just warnings, they can be ignored.
 
The attached model is modeled for the aforementioned subject. ideCAD gives the ratio of 1/15 that the curtain head thickness is not appropriate as it should be, but it also looks at the ratio of 1/15 on the 610cm floor. I would also like to state that I did not open this issue to question ideCAD. On the contrary, I wanted to control myself with ideCAD. But I wanted to ask you and my colleagues because it didn't give the result I expected. So the main issue is not ideCAD. If I understand the regulation correctly, I can make a 5.5m high curtain approximately 40cm with 550/15 ratio, and a 6m high curtain 30cm with 600/20 ratio. This was really weird to me. I wanted to discuss this matter with you.
 
Hello again, in TDY, the phrase "attached in the lateral direction" refers to columns or panels, not beams, in my opinion; the condition in question is valid for L, U, etc. type elements that combine as panel-panel or panel-column... In this case, TDY seems to be consistent within itself. In the program, the condition is always 1/15. Good work...
 
Hello, Thank you for your replies. I wish our regulation was written in a way that is not written in the style of a novel, but they would not leave open doors for interpretation. The fact that no one's name is mentioned in our regulation or that there is no reference is another matter, there is no one to hold accountable, but we had to comply. I've tired you out too, get yours right. Good work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top