Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Correspondence 2007-7-30 07/30/2007 07:39 5414846859 PAGE 07/22 L~~''''\~;D :s ~e\ Residential Structural Design and Drafting Sen~ices . 685 Wimn Strr!<< 1845 Hwy. 1,26, Sui12 A7 EL!>~, ..Orqpn97402 FkIn! ...OR97439 Office: (541) 687-'817 Office: (.541) 997.;.&000 Cell: (541) Su..33S4 CcD:(S41) 2Q6..13sO ( ., I I, I i , July 25, 2007 re: COM2007-0791 The floor. beams specified .for this project were specified at 32" on center,. When installed, it was impradical to install the .Iast beam on the west side of the .new portion of structure because there was insufficient room to do so. There is a maximum of 38" between the centerline of the last beam installed and a point 2-3/4" onto the mudsill. If 1-1/8" decking rated for a 48" spain is inStalled, the beam support is more than sufficient for that. The piers are spaced at 8 feet on center. If the loading (live and dead) is calculated as being % of the 38" (19") on one side ofthe.beam, and 16" on the other side, to be conservative we can calculate the loading as .3 feet of trib. area x 8 feet of trib. area x (40# live. load + 1.2# dead load) which is 24 x 52 ~ 1248 pounds of loading on the pier. Assuming a .ground bearing value of 1000#/sq_ ft., that means a total of 21.2 sq. inches of bearing must be available for the loading at this pier. The total available for that pier is 256 sq. in., so the pier support is sufficient for the loading also. I find no problem with the way the floor .support sys.tem has been i1nstalled, e"en though it was not installed speCifically as designed, kJRI~ Karl R. Stoner, Stoner Design ~~~~Ay~;--