LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for ARSCLIST Archives


ARSCLIST Archives

ARSCLIST Archives


[email protected]


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST Home

ARSCLIST  December 2006

ARSCLIST December 2006

Subject:

Re: Floor Load Capacity

From:

Jim Lindner <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Association for Recorded Sound Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Wed, 20 Dec 2006 21:09:47 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (153 lines)

Adding a bit to the comments already made - and giving the disclosure  
that I am neither an architect nor an engineer....

The distribution of the weight becomes critical and most of the dead  
load issues (this is what is referred to as a dead load as opposed to  
a live load) relate not only to the load on a square foot basis but  
on the overall load that the structure can handle. For example - even  
with 150 pounds per square foot does not assume that EVERY square  
foot of the structure will be loaded to capacity. Further there are  
other dead loads involved - such as the weight of the structure itself.

Another really important issue is that while the structure may have  
been designed for a certain load - that does not necessarily mean  
that the "as built" will meet that precise load  - unless it was  
specifically built and tested to meet that spec. after construction -  
there is a long list of shortcuts that can be made during  
construction that can severely reduce the designed load - that is why  
architects frequently design to a much higher spec. then a building  
will normally require for its intended use - because sometimes things  
happen - like the concrete not being exactly what was specified or  
there being issues with some of the rebar that was sitting in the  
rain a bit too long - and so forth.

Also - as a building ages the load handling capacity can change very  
dramatically - for example concrete spall is very common in older  
buildings and can have a very dramatic impact on the floor load.  
Buildings that may have been subjected to previous stress for any  
number of reasons may have  experienced settling or structural shift  
or changes that can cause a big change in load capacity as well. In  
the not too distant past a building that I was involved with did a  
series of core tests on the roof to determine load capacity and we  
were shocked at the results - it seemed that years of water  
penetration had caused the concrete to change. The proposed addition  
of a patio was out of the question and further work needed to be done  
to verify that it would be safe just doing what it was doing as a  
regular roof.

When walking around Manhattan these days many of the buildings have  
scaffolding up - that is to comply with "local law 10"  (http:// 
query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html? 
res=9D04E6D6163DF931A1575AC0A960958260) that relates to masonry  
pointing - seems that there are many buildings that need work just  
because of exposure over time to the elements and pollution.... there  
are many factors that can change the actual load capacity of a  
building. Total catastrophic collapse of buildings is very rare these  
days due to modern structural design - where the load is distributed  
throughout the structure. The idea is not to have just a few points  
of failure, but that does not mean that damage does not occur. Beams  
can shift and bend, and the damage is not necessarily visible.

There is a very interesting book on this subject - Why Buildings Fall  
Down: Why Structures Fail by Levy, Salvadori and Woest

So - I wanted to underscore the comments made and suggest that you  
really speak to an engineer and do some tests on the structure and  
get an idea of what the real issues are on this specific structure in  
the specific condition it is in at this time, and that you seriously  
examine this issue.

jim



Jim Lindner

Email: [log in to unmask]

   Media Matters LLC.
   SAMMA Systems LLC.
   450 West 31st Street 4th Floor
   New York, N.Y. 10001

eFax (646) 349-4475
Mobile: (917) 945-2662
Office: (212) 268-5528

www.media-matters.net
Media Matters LLC. is a technical consultancy specializing in  
archival audio and video material. We provide advice and analysis, to  
media archives that apply the beneficial advances in technology to  
collection management.

www.sammasystems.com
SAMMA Systems provides tools and products that implement and optimize  
the advances in modern technology with established media preservation  
and access practices.


On Dec 20, 2006, at 2:52 PM, Richard L. Hess wrote:

> Hello, Nicole,
>
> this is always a difficult question.
>
> Are you using stationary or moving-aisle shelving?
>
> This should never be done on this scale without consultation with a  
> structural engineer.
>
> The basic figuring is fairly easy to get close, but the calculation  
> details should be reviewed with the structural engineer.
>
> First order approximation for fixed-aisle shelving.
>
> Take the linear footage weight of the records (assuming that the  
> shelves will all be 12" deep and you won't make 10" deep shelves  
> for the 10" records), multiply the weight per linear foot by the  
> number of shelves high you plan to stack them.
>
> For moving aisle shelving, you're essentially done as the full load  
> per square foot is what is required.
>
> You should also have a count of how many records per linear foot.  
> For fixed-aisle shelving, you'll need to figure out the ratio of  
> square footage of shelving to aisles and then apply that so you  
> effectively spread the weight across the whole room, but beware  
> that the structural engineer will also want to know point loads as  
> for moving aisle shelving.
>
> 150 pounds per square foot is low for moving aisle shelving for  
> videotape storage, so I suspect it's even less adequate for moving  
> aisle storage for vinyl/shellac.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Richard
>
> At 01:43 PM 2006-12-20, Nicole Blain wrote:
>> Hello all,
>>
>> Does anyone know what the standards are for floor load capacity  
>> for stacks of 12" vinyl and 10" shellac discs.
>>
>> The standard for library book stacks is ~150 pounds psf.  I tried  
>> and failed to find anything on the internet that specifies vinyl  
>> and/or shellac.  I imagine it would be higher for the latter.  If  
>> there's an official document or study out there too, it would help  
>> convince the architects/engineers that this is an important issue.
>>
>> I found an article in the Fall 1993 ARSC Journal: Storage of Sound  
>> Recordings by Richard Warren Jr.  He has weight per linear foot,  
>> but not floor load capacity.
>>
>> Our collection houses ~175,000 12" vinyl and ~30,000 10" shellac  
>> discs.
>>
>
> Richard L. Hess                   email: [log in to unmask]
> Aurora, Ontario, Canada       (905) 713 6733     1-877-TAPE-FIX
> Detailed contact information: http://www.richardhess.com/tape/ 
> contact.htm
> Quality tape transfers -- even from hard-to-play tapes.

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.LOC.GOV

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager