AT 2′ 0″ & 3′ 0″ PANEL SPANS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM E AND AISI S TESTED FOR: Central States Manufacturing, Inc. Find the most up-to-date version of ASTM E at Engineering Designation: E – 04Standard Test Method for Static Load Testing of Framed Floor or Roof Diaphragm Constructions for Buil.
|Published (Last):||28 August 2014|
|PDF File Size:||6.67 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||16.37 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
If round-robin testing is to be conducted, test apparatus and testing procedures shall be mutually agreed upon in advance by the participants. Link to Active This link will always route to the current Active version of the standard.
ACR1 #4 – ICC-ES
It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. However, as with the benchmark sawn lumber tests, the dominant failure modes observed with I-joist diaphragms were tension perpendicular-to-grain fracture of the framing and sheathing nail withdrawal. The magnitude of this rotation is typically ashm between diaphragm tension and compression chords.
A downside is that deflection measurements are small. Their revisions to the AC14 organization should be implemented. However, a diaphragm on a concrete foundation is not subject to those boundary conditions and even the boundary conditions of the framed second-floor diaphragm differs from the model in that the diaphragm is sitting on springs the shear walls rather than a pin and roller, and the end rotations are constrained by the supported walls.
Typical diaphragm movement mechanisms Case 5 shown.
The unsheathed diaphragm configuration used for the confirmation test shall be compared against the sheathed diaphragm with the lowest capacity in the test program. The test method used by AISI in S is a cantilever test minimum dimensions are 12×12 ft where rectangular up to 1: A diaphragm construction is an assembly of materials designed to transmit shear forces in the plane of the construction.
This article summarizes some of the rationalization and limitations associated with I-joist framing for diaphragm construction.
Even with I-joist materials taken as being a constant between tests, use of low specific gravity blocking material 0. Notes and footnotes in tables and figures are requirements of this standard. Original I-joist framing products used laminated veneer lumber LVL or sawn lumber flanges with thicknesses of 1.
Ashm comments focus on three aspects of the proposed revisions: Line 17 provides a similar comparison for a proprietary fastener that claims superior diaphragm adtm for some configurations based on small-scale fastener testing and analysis. The full-scale diaphragm test program shall include the following minimum elements: Proceed to Checkout Continue Shopping.
Anatomy and Physiology of Speech. Need more than one copy?
Abdomen-Part 3 – kylethornton. It also corresponded with a benchmark database for sawn lumber Countryman, The wall plates have a moment of inertia that is greater than a 2×12 rim board in the plane of bending and also act to constrain the rotation of boundary sheathing panels.
Standards Subscriptions from ANSI provides a money-saving, multi-user solution for accessing standards. International Code Council Evaluation Service. Referenced Documents purchase separately The documents listed below are referenced within the subject standard but are not provided as part of the standard.
AC14-0611-R1 #4 – ICC-ES
However, the bibliography by Peterson complied for the ASCE Committee on Wood and published in the Proceedings of the Structural Division show that Countryman also conducted diaphragm test using other sizes and reported using aspect ratios that ranged from 1: The values given in parentheses are for information only.
In general, the manufacturers have proven equivalence to a subset of the current diaphragm design tables for sawn lumber. Page 2 May 20, 3 Add 2. Loads may be applied using either two- or four -point loads equally spaced along the compression chord. Due to panel geometry, the observed movement between adjacent sheathing panels is typically several times greater along long edge joints than at short 11 Figure 2. Country Club Hills, IL.
Blocking used in the field of the diaphragm and rim board material used for perpendicular closure shall be consistent with that permitted in the application.
For specific precautionary statements, see Section.
Research and Testing – Central States Mfg, Inc.
Specifically, aastm evaluation of connection performance is outlined in section 3. In reality, the proprietary fastener performed about the same as the smaller diameter ring shank nail. For this example, observed performance reasonably approximated modeled deformation predictions based on the tested Case 5 configuration.
Manufacturers may be compelled to evaluate a proprietary joist, fastener, or sheathing material in the Case 1 configuration in order to evaluate the failure mechanism of their product in its primary end-use condition. Smart, We have reviewed the proposed revisions to AC They have been subsequently modified based on results from a variety of full-scale test programs that introduced additional materials, failure modes, and design considerations.
Page 3 May 20, 4 Add 2. However, in the absence of other information, it appears that test specimens with planer dimensions greater than12 x 12 ft are unnecessary.
Performance Trends Awtm compiled database of full-scale I-joist diaphragm tests provides an opportunity to draw com12 parisons between similar test sets.
This analogy works well because we can manage engineering analysis using simple mechanics theory. Notes and footnotes in tables and figures are requirements of this standard.
The objective e4455 this article is to provide some insight into how shear capacities are rationalized for I-joist diaphragms and to summarize potentially useful trends observed with full-scale testing.