- Jul 26, 2001
- 2,297
- 0
- 0
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'm no structural engineer...but I have put up lots of structural steel buildings...that just doesn't LOOK right.
I can't imagine that the column gets the proper structural strength at that kind of angle.
I'd think that simply off-setting the columns would be a safer and stronger way to change floor size.
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'm no structural engineer...but I have put up lots of structural steel buildings...that just doesn't LOOK right.
I can't imagine that the column gets the proper structural strength at that kind of angle.
I'd think that simply off-setting the columns would be a safer and stronger way to change floor size.
Originally posted by: Modular
It looks to be a design thing. I'm also no engineer, but those columns don't necessarily have to be the ones supporting the load. There might be load bearing support built throughout the middle and inner edges of the structure...
Originally posted by: Gibson486
I am an EE, so I all I care about is the room for my conduits and panels. If teh building falls....not my problem...if the building catches fire, though.....
It's wachovia. It's representative of their business practices.Originally posted by: eLiu
Originally posted by: BoomerD
I'm no structural engineer...but I have put up lots of structural steel buildings...that just doesn't LOOK right.
I can't imagine that the column gets the proper structural strength at that kind of angle.
I'd think that simply off-setting the columns would be a safer and stronger way to change floor size.
Agree^^
Last time I checked, concrete isn't the best at sustaining shearing loads. So why you would voluntarily create extra shear forces is beyond me.
