FLORIDA
BUILDING COMMISSION
BUILDING (STRUCTURAL) TECHNICAL ADVISORY
COMMITTEE
MINUTES
TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 2014
1:00 P.M. – 4:59 P.M
TELECONFERENCE/WEBINAR MEETING
FROM TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA
Public point of access:
Suite 90A, 1940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida.
|
TAC/POC MEMBERS AND
OBJECTIVES |
|
|
STRUCTURAL TAC MEMBERS Present: James Schock,
CW Macomber, Dick Wilhelm for Steve Strawn, Daniel L. Lavrich, Do
Y. Kim, Jamie Gascon, Warner Chang, David Compton |
|
|
Ř Objectives |
|
|
MEETING
AGENDA |
|
|
OBJECTIVE |
REVIEW OF OBJECTIVES
WILL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: Description of issue, discussion by TAC, public
comment, TAC action |
|
1:00 P.M. 1) |
Welcome
and Opening Roll Call Reviewed
and Approved of the June 24, 2014 Meeting Agenda |
|
2) |
The TAC
felt the reports satisfied the contractual agreement on research projects. The TAC also felt that an amendment to the
motion was needed to add a provision for an on-site meeting prior to the
Commission taking up the final report so that further discussion can be
achieved. The following projects were unanimously accepted with the added provision: 1) Investigation of wood
structural panels for opening protection. ( Project #3 ) The TAC heard a presentation of
a final report from DR. Forrest Masters of the University of Florida Engineering
School for Sustainable Infrastructure & Environment
regarding their findings of wood structural panel research. Comments made were: a). A comment was stated
that hurricane protection industry is using an alternative test method to
ASTM E-330, tend to use a ramp load method to failure and divide by 1.5, not
really using the .6 multiplier. It was
stated that future tests may want to be run and divide by 1.67 instead of 1.5 b).It was stated that there
was no insurance reduction granted for using wood structural panel. c). It was asked are impact
resistant coverings testing for all coverings the minimum be 140asd design
pressure? It was stated that it may be
a little hard to show this on the teleconference on 1 screen. It was stated 130 within 1 mile of the
coast. There was a comment that the
problem is that the Building volume says 140 and the Residential says 130
there is a difference in this section in the two volumes of the code. It was stated that he just wanted to add
this for future discussion and this includes all impact resistant coverings. It was said from a user standpoint they are
following the standard not a chart in the FBC and when choosing the pressure
for a structure they rely on an engineer to test for ultimate. d) It was asked what
type of OSB (grade) was used. APA
classifies 2 different types with one with superior glues and one may be more
durable in wet conditions. Dr. Masters
said he will include that in final report with grade stamp and that phase 2
should address the grades and saturation and deterioration levels. e). It was asked how
much degradation to fastener holes and how many seasons will you get out of
the panel before you have to replace them and possibly should be considered. 2)
Full scale wind load testing of aluminum screen
enclosures ( Project # 4 ) The TAC heard a presentation from Dr. Sungmoon Jung from Florida State University on a Phase I
study of aluminum screen enclosures. a). A comment was made on the
thickness of the coupon. Also clarification
of and the correlation of the test windspeed and
the design windspeed was asked for. b). Failures of past screen
enclosures/cages were because lack of lateral bracing and racked c). Does the AAF design guide address the
attachment. It was stated that it is
possible but no one was sure. d). There was also a comment that there
was a lot of testing to do in such a short timeframe. There is a good baseline data set and
should be careful making any assumptions. e). It was also stated that all the code
changes mentioned would go before the TAC through the code change
process. f). It was asked why this testing was
done and Sungmoon commented that this was the first
time ever that full-scale testing was done.
There were some smaller tests done in the past but no full scale tests
were done. g). It was asked why exposure B and not
exposure D. It was stated that the St.
Johns county focus group was used which is exposure B. It was also the maximum the facility could
perform for the testing. h). Was any analysis done on catenary
forces was asked and Sungmoon Jung said no catenary
forces testing was done. i). It was stated again that this is
difficult to discuss over teleconference and a face-to-face meeting would be
preferred. 3). Feasibility study for
in-home storm shelters in Florida residential homes. ( Project # 5) The TAC heard a
presentation from Dr. David Prevatt from the
University of Florida Engineering School for Sustainable Infrastructure &
Environment on their Phase I study on in-home storm shelters. a) It was stated that everything in the
presentation was based upon what was found in Joplin and their construction
in those portions of the country is different. Tornadoes there are somewhat different in
that portion of the country. The
reason those roofs come off that is that they are not anchored. Dr. Prevatt
agreed with what was said that roofs are blown off in Florida and just
because we have a good building code it means that 70% of the homes are not
up to standards and he saw them that they were not up to now. b) It
was also stated that there was no comparison to those homes built under the
Florida Building code today to those of homes built in the 60’s. c) It
was also stated that corner buttressing to prevent wall collapse should be
considered. d) It
was stated that too much attention is being made towards tornadoes and not
hurricanes. e) It
was also stated that this a Phase 1 feasibility study and that if more
attention to roof types f) Storm
shelters are a good idea for the interior areas of the State. Title for study should be called “Storm
Shelters for Florida residential Homes not located in the Evacuation Zone” Don’t want the
homeowner to have false sense of security and want the citizens to
evacuate. Help could not be available
for several days. g) Strapping down the roof is very
important not sure how cost effective the corner bracing will be |
|
3) |
The
committee voted to defer the Discussion and recommendation of potential future
research topics for consideration by the Commission to the next Structural
TAC meeting. |
|
4) |
With no other business and
comments from TAC and public |
|
5) |
Adjourned at 4:59 PM |
STAFF CONTACTS: Joe Bigelow,
Planning Analyst joe.bigelow@myfloridalicense.com
(850) 717-1829 or Mo Madani,
Manager mo.madani@myfloridalicense.com
Note: This document is available to any
person requiring materials in alternate format upon request. Contact the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation, Suite 90, 1940 N. Monroe, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 or call
850-487-1824.