Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Medeek

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41
With dual pitch hip roofs technically one could have a different pitch for all four sides (the most general case).  I should probably try to code this most general case then all the rest simply fall out of it.

View model here:

I'm not sure why one would want to construct a roof in this manner but I guess I should probably allow for the possibility.

Spending some time the last couple of days thinking about the floor module (floor trusses, I-joists, solid sawn joists).

The obvious 800 lbs gorilla is the ability to easily add openings into these floors. The other missing element is the ability to create a polygon shaped floor (something beyond a rectangle outline). 

With regards to polygon shaped geometry I've already done the heavy lifting when I programmed the foundation plugin to generate polygon shaped layouts (slab and stemwall).  The details in trimming the joists is also mostly figured out since my rebar and mesh routine for slabs utilizes a function that will form the basis for this function.  It is really just a matter of finding the time and then digging into the code deep for a solid 12 hour period (uninterrupted).

These two issues are my main focus the next week or two. If I can address both as well have the edit function work seamlessly with both then I will have created an actual functional floor module.

Version 2.1.8 - 03.18.2018
- Enabled the "Edit Floor Assembly" function for all I-Joist floors (imperial and metric units): TJI, BCI, LPI, Red-I, PKI.

Now I just need to get the floor framed opening feature working and then this module might actually be useful.

Realize that any manual edits made to the floor assembly are blown away when you use the edit function.  It is essentially re-drawing the entire floor assembly, the same goes for the roof truss assembly edit feature.

I've been thinking about the First and Second Menu and here is my latest revision:

First Menu:

1.)  Wall Mode:  Line, Polyline
2.)  Wall Type:  Exterior, Interior
3.)  Wall Justification:  Front, Center, Back
4.)  Wall Height (in.):  97
5.)  Wall Header Height (in.):  80
6.)  Stud Size:  2x2, 2x3, 2x4, 2x6, 2x8, 2x10, 2x12, CUSTOM
7.)  Stud Spacing (in.):  12,16,19.2,24,32,48, CUSTOM
8.)  Stud Direction: Left, Right
9.)  Start Corner:  End, Outside Corner, Inset Outside Corner, Inside Corner, Inset Inside Corner
10.) End Corner:  End, Outside Corner, Inset Outside Corner, Inside Corner, Inset Inside Corner
11.)  Top Plate:  1,2,3
12.)  Top Plate Thickness (in.): 1.5
13.)  Bottom Plate:  1,2,3
14.)  Bottom Plate Thickness (in.): 1.5
15.)  Adv. Wall Options: YES,NO

Second Menu (Adv. Wall Options):

1.)  Wall Sheathing: YES,NO
2.)  Sheathing Thickness:  3/8,7/16,15/32,1/2,19/32,5/8,23/32,3/4
3.)  Wall Cladding:  YES,NO
4.)  Cladding Thickness:  3/8,7/16,15/32,1/2,19/32,5/8,23/32,3/4
5.)  Wall Gypsum:  YES,NO
6.)  Gypsum Thickness:  1/4,3/8,1/2,5/8
7.)  Wall Insulation: YES,NO
9.)  Corner Framing:  California, 3 Stud, 2 Stud etc...
10.) Holdowns: YES.NO

Note that I have eliminated the Corner offset.  The amount of offset will be driven by the stud depth, however in the actual wall library (store parameters) I will include the offset for both start and end so that they can be edited independently.  Right from the get go I will set this up so that one can right click on the wall panel and instantly edit any of these settings as well as add or remove window and door openings.

I'm also going to add in a holdowns advanced option which will then trigger a sub-menu which will allow one to place holdowns at each end of the wall segment.

The holdowns sub-menu (subject to change) will include the following paramters:


1.)  Holdown Type: DTT2Z, HDU2, HDU4, HDU5, STHD14, STHD14RJ, etc... (also straps ie. MSTC)
2.)  Holdown Vertical Offset (in.): 0 (this allows the ability to fine tune the placement)
3.)  Holdown Anchor Bolt: None, SB58-24, SB78-24, SB1-30, SSTB16, SSTB20, SSTB24, SSTB28, SSTB34, SSTB36, THD Rod, SB + THD Rod, SSTB + THD Rod  (this parameter will be applied only if holdown type requires an anchor bolt)
4.)  THD Rod Length (in.):  24  (this parameter applied only if an option with THD Rod is selected
5.)  Holdown Placement:  Start, End, Both
6.)  Holdown Strap Placement:  Framing, Sheathing

The anchor bolt options that include a threaded rod with the anchor bolt will also include the appropriate coupler nut based on the size of the anchor bolt chosen:  CNW58, CNW78, CNW1

Additionally the threaded rod diameter will be based on the holdown chosen.

As you can see there is going to be a considerable amount of logic that determines the sizing of these components.

Two different ways to truss out a dutch gable roof:

The first method involves a wailing plate attached to the side of the girder truss.  This appears to be the preferred method of construction in Australia.

The second method employs vertical studs on the gable end portion (upper half) of the girder truss.  What is not entirely clear to me is how the joint comes together at the top chord where the horizontal member (at the top of the jacks) meets the vertical and diagonal web of the girder truss.

I could really use a shop drawing (2D) of this particular configuration.

Its not much to look at but this is the beginning of the Medeek Structural Plugin:

Version 3.1.7d - 03.14.2017
 - Addresses a minor bug with the UI menu for common trusses.  The overhang of the truss could be rounded to an integer value upon recreation of another truss set.

I wonder why no one else has noticed the overhang rounding issue.  I just realized it is an artifact from when I had it setup to use a integer value for the overhang, which I eventually changed but I must have forgot to update the rounding function (or remove it) so that non integer values could be input.

It appears this bug only affected common trusses but I will need to go through and check each truss type to make sure the same issue was not replicated elsewhere.

Alternatively that same opening could be framed as below:

For the size of the opening one would probably use some PSL or LVL Beams rather than a couple of I-Joists but the concept is the same, compare with the previous example where the opening would probably be supported from below by bearing walls.

I've been giving some thought to framed openings in floors, see image below:

Generally, at least from what I've seen most holes in floors are either rectangular, L-shaped or U-shaped, but I guess any outline is possible.

What I've shown in the image above is LSL or LVL framing out the opening however the actual framing might be significantly different depending on what is supporting the floor below.

In some cases the rectangular opening might not be supported by bearing walls from below, in that case the two LSL boards running parallel to the joists would probably be larger beams and the headers would be hangered from these beams and would also probably be more substantial.

The point is how to make this feature flexible enough to accommodate most framed openings but at the same time keeping it as simple as possible so the user is not overwhelmed with parameters.

View model here:

Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

P.S. I am also going to make this feature editable so that the actual hole can be altered after the fact.  This should be an interesting programming challenge.

Version 2.1.7c - 03.11.2018
- Added ceiling gypsum and ceiling battens to cathedral trusses.

View model here:

Tutorial 7, Edit Function and some changes to the global settings:

Version 2.1.7b - 03.10.2018
- Enabled the "Edit Truss Assembly" function for all common roof trusses (metric units).

Also addressed some minor bugs with the roof returns option.  There may be other minor issues that still may pop up with the edit feature as they always do when I introduce something new.

Please feel free to email me with any issues.

Structural Engineering / Re: Wind Speed Maps - ASCE 7-16
« on: March 09, 2018, 11:14:26 am »
I suppose one could argue that the discrepancy caused by poor interpolation will probably result in a wind speed difference of only 2-3 mph which will not drastically alter the wind speed analysis and loads calculated for a structure.  However, I would argue that we are doing engineering here not just throwing around warm fuzzy numbers that are somewhere in the ballpark of where they need to be.  If this is the case then we can probably dispense with most of our current, overly complicated wind load chapter and all its factors and other accoutrements.  Why go to all the trouble to devise such a complicated wind load analysis when don't really even know the wind speed for a particular site? 

This brings to mind the numerous discussions regarding significant figures that I had from my university professors back in the day.  We are misrepresenting our data and falsifying its accuracy when we use such ambiguous maps but then turn around and try to provide such in depth analysis with our complicated algorithms.

Structural Engineering / Wind Speed Maps - ASCE 7-16
« on: March 09, 2018, 11:12:56 am »
I don't know about the rest of you but when I look at the new wind speed maps in the ASCE 7-16, in particular the eastern United States I find the contour lines a bit confusing.  With that in mind I spent a couple minutes this morning trying to fill in some of blanks so to speak, see below:

Its obvious that there a number of saddle points in the isolines and that is what complicates things at first glance.  I am curious how well these hand sketched isolines would correlate with the ASCE hazard tool.

The way the map is shown in the printed manual doesn't define the isolines in enough detail in my opinion, too much is left to interpretation and user error.  The one spot value at the end of Lake Michigan is a case in point. 


Below is a screenshot of the edit panel:

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 41