For those interested (although irrelevant to Multi-Lat™, the mountain range shown on the top of the Blog is actually the Santa Rosa Mountains located within walking distance of my home in La Quinta where my office is located in a small room off the front of my home. I’ve been a Small Office / Home Office sole-proprietorship for the last 22 years and at this location since 1993. It gets very hot in the summer (I’ve been here when it reached 130-degrees in August). Similar to those in cold climates, we tend to restrict daytime activities in the summer. Winter temperatures are wonderful – typically in the upper 60′s to 80′s during the days and down into the 40′s at night.  But, enought trivia – not to the business at hand.

I have made some changes in the design appearance. I have added an area in the title block for users to add a logo in JPEG and other popular formats. I would suggest that you keep the resolution of the JPEG small enough to appear well in print but not so large as to increase the file size.

Most sheets are now laid out in horizontal or layout format in order to increase the information on the sheet as well as to add graphics such as the roof zones that appear in the code for users to clearly define wind forces. I have also added the tables used in the wind loads with the appropriate footnotes to the resource in ASCE 7-05 that it appears. This does not eliminate your need to purchase a code, but makes look up values for wind speed and zones to be easier to follow. Also, you need not interpolate λ values as I have created tables with intermediate wind loads that will allow you to look up on λ value rather than a range to interpolate. The values are fairly linear and interpolation is easy enough to have put into an automate lookup table based on the basic wind categories B, C, and D.

In the seismic section you need not declare ASD or LFRD – you will be give both and the declaration will occur in the lateral multi-story distribution.

We are still using Excel 2007 until the workbook is completed and time will allow to have the styles stripped out and converted for Excel 97-2007 and the Star Office freeware.

I must remind you that your participation and comments are needed. I will only provide licensing in payment for feedback in the Alpha and Beta versions. I need comments as to the accuracy of the spreadsheet and any recommendations that you may have to improve the input and output – including color schemes. Most important is the output for base shear and wind loads. So far only one or two of the nearly 20 Beta Members have provided me with feedback. If you find the workbook difficult or do not understand something, then feed me your questions and I will help you resolve them. This will assist me in creating a manual and online example or tutorial as it is most likely others will also have the same concerns as you.

To qualify for a licensed version and updates, I require participation in the Beta program. I keep your comments and if you feel uncomfortable writing them to this blog then feel free to send them to me privately and I will reword them and post them anonomosly. You will still be qualified to receive a full licensed version for your participation.

If you disagree with a method or and assumption I’ve used, please let me know. It is a learning process for me as well as for you and I welcome an intelligent debate as to the meaning of the code assumption or compliance. If I am incorrect, I will make the changes necessary and if I am correct, you may also benefit from the knowledge.

Please help me get this program finished by submitting your comments and checking the spreadsheet in each stage against the work you do manually. This is the greatest test to show code compliance and reduce the errors or inaccuracies that Beta testing is to uncover.

Thanks to those who have been supplying me with comments and help – at this point I believe we are looking at completion closer to the end of the year although I am attempting to use as much of Multi-Lat 2008 in the current design of a two story custom home here in the desert.

Best regards,

Dennis S. Wish, PE

Administrator / developer

Multi-Lat™ 2008 is intended for use on light-framed Bearing Wall or Building Frame Systems that assume the limitations of 3-story wood framed structures with shear transferred though the diaphragms to a lateral load system primarily based on conventional plywood shear walls or proprietary shear wall systems. In most cases buildings under 30-feet in height (40-feet as defined in ASCE 7-05 Section 12.14.1 for certain conditions) and defined as a closed system may fall into the category of ASCE 7-05 Main Wind Force Resisting Systems using Method 1 – the Simplfied design methods.

An excellent resource on this is Donald Breyer’s book published by McGraw Hill “Design of wood Structures ASD/LFRD” for the 2006 IBC and ASCE 7-05 references. However, there are a number of inaccuracies that the user of our software should be aware of:

1. Breyer defines compliance with Method 1 – the Simplified Design Method as limited to 2-story light framed structures not exceeding 30-feet in height. And;
2. A building with virtually no irregularities in the design.

The current code clarifies this definition to a maximum of 60-feet overall height but provides no restriction as to the number of stories. Although a structure that contains irregularities in the design is fairly common in residential structures, the main purpose of the code is to define the entire structure rather than its components. Breyer explains that the main portion of the design used for occupancy (other than covered open patios considers how the main structure can be sealed from debris occurring during a high wind event. In other words, the ability to close windows, doors and in some cases the use of tempered glass panels to defelct debree will qualify most buildings for compliance with the MWFRS Method 1.

Breyer makes some errors in this section ( 2.23-2.28 ) that I have not found an errata which corrects the design assumption, but the ultimate voice on this issue is the code itself. Garages with doors that can be closed to seal the structure against interior wind gust and flying debree may be considered under Method 1. Building normally left open (parking structures, airline hangers etc. ) are the exception to the rule and best left to the use of Method 2 which is included in Multi-Lat™ 2008.

The user is refered to local municpalities for revisions to ASCE 7-05 and the 2006 IBC which have been modified and made into law are an exception to the rule or Breyer’s text. It is, therefore, prudent to check with your local buildng department where the project is to be constructed for the final word.

While Multi-Lat™ 2008 references Breyer’s book on wood design, it does define compliance based on the definition of the entire structure as a preliminary. The software allows the user to break to structure into blocks, irregularities in plan is based not on exterior wall geometry but on the general shape of the entire shear transfer ability of the roof. In other words, if the exterior wall geometry would normally define a “U” shaped building, if the roof spans the courtyard to creating a continuous rectangular plan geometry, then the structure would be defined as a regular plan and the shear would be expected to be dragged across the courtyard.

The discussions that help to understand the discrepancy in the texts and in some cases, the code, are often discussed and archived on the Structural Engineers Association International (SEAINT) List Service in addition to this weblog. The user is recommended to search through the List archives located at http://www.seaint.org . Follow the links to the List archives and use this to search for all discussion threads. It is highly recommended that the user seek the discussions held within the community to become familiar with the code (especially those of us located in the Pacific Ring of Fire that have been using the 1997 Uniform Building Code for the last ten years.

Donald Breyer’s PE book “Design of wood structures – ASD/LFRD” has been the “bible” of the educational institutes and a practical guide – more so than the Seismic Design Manuals – that this author has found in light-framing residential structures.

NOTICE: WE HAVE SOME ROOM FOR ABOUT TEN TO FIFTEEN MORE BETA TEAM MEMBERS. IF YOU WANT TO RECOMMEND ANOTHER ENGINEER, PLEASE HAVE THEM WRITE ME AT ADMIN@STRUCTURALIST.NET AND PROVIDE ME WITH THEIR NAME, COMPANY NAME, LICENSE TYPE (CE, PE, SE) AND AREAS OF EXPERTISE. ALL BETA USERS WHO REMAIN ON THE BETA TEAM ARE ASSURED CONTINUED FREE LICENSING OF THE MULTI-LAT™ 2008 AND LATER WORKBOOK. THIS IS IN APPRECIATION FOR YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT AND ASSISTANCE IN THE CONTINUED EVOLUTION OF THIS SOFTWARE.

PLEASE KEEP YOUR COMMENTS COMING!

DENNIS S. WISH, PE

CALIFORNIA LICENSED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING CONSULTANT

AUTHOR AND DEVELOPER OF MULTI-LAT™ SOFTWARE AND WEBLOG SERVICES AND USERS GUIDE.

ADMIN@STRUCTURALIST.NET

PLEASE FEEL FREE TO VISIT OUR NEW STUCTURALIST.NET WEBSITE NOW UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

I recently picked up a copy of Donald Breyer’s sixth edition of Deisgn of Wood Structures ASD/LRFD co-authored by Kenneth J. Fridley, Kelly E. Cobeen and David G. Pollock (McGraw Hill publications) (see Amazon Book for the best price / delivery times).

While Breyer notes that current code ignores Type I irregularities that may cause torsion in a wood frame structure three stories or less, it points to a number of irregularities (Vertical and Horizontal) that would require additional lengthy analysis and possibly the addition of the Over Strength factor Ω _o to be found in ASCE 7 Table 12.3-1 and in sections 12.3.3.4 for combination with E_m . This appears to include “L” or “U” shaped structures with plan irregularities type 2 at re-entrant corners where the irregularity exceeds 15% of the projection (F1) divided by the corresponding side lengths. In other words if you have an “L” shaped structure 100-feet long with one leg projecting more than 15-feet back from the 100-foot length, then the building will be required to be treated as dynamic or rigid.

However, it appears (and this is where I am presently confused) that if the setback of the projection exceeding 15% of the corresponding length can be penalized by the appropriate Ω _o found in the code. Is this correct, or is there more to it? I’ll be exploring this issue after sending out the Alpha version to see if the Omega penalty will allow light-framed structures three stories or less used in residential construction to be exempt from the rigid analysis or comparison of the center of mass to the center of rigidity.

This article is currently still under construction and will be added to by the author in the near future as confirmation to the issues noted can be verified and documented. Please feel free to add your comments below, or to start a discussion on this topic.

Alpha Version Release Notification

The Alpha version of Multi-Lat™ 2008 was released today. This is not a finished version – far from it. It is a work in progress and not intended to be used as a work product until it has been adequately carried through the entire Beta Program.

The Excel 2007 Workbook was delayed when a discussion was posted on the SEAINT Listservice (http://www.seaint.org click on the listservice choice in the left side of the web page to reach the subscribers page). While working on the spreadsheet software it became apparent that many engineers have been misinterpreting the base method that the seismic shear presents in both the IBC and ASCE 7-05. The default calculations for load cases is in Working Strength Design methods. The user must use the provisions of the ASCE 7-05 to decide to use the Allowable Stress Design (ASD) or Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD). This will, in most cases increase the lateral base shear that you evaluate closer to the base shear we used in the 97 UBC.

I have not yet finished this last part of Multi-Lat™ 2008 Alpha pending the next discussion on the need to consider an increased Redundancy Factor – Ρ (rho) and possibly the Over-strength factor – Ω ₀ (Omega). This last factor becomes more important when you consider using the simplified design methods of ASCE 7-05 Section 12.14.1.1.

I recently reviewed the information published in Donald Breyer’s book “Design of Wood Structures” sixth edition. I will be posting a discussion once I have some sketches together that we need to throw back and forth that Breyer brings up in Chapter 16 of his book. There are implications that most residential buildings in Seismic Design Category D, E and F will have some form of Vertical or Horizontal Irregularity that must be addressed unless the building is a simple block design where all walls stack (inside and exterior shear resisting elements). Please refer to the on-going discussion in the Weblog regarding Irregular Geometry and the introduction or the Over strength Factor – Ω ₀

_______________________________________________________________________________

In the Code Simple feature published in Structural Engineer Magazine February 2008 edition by S.K. Ghosh and Susan Dowty, the last paragraph emphasizes the ambiguity in the code where it states:

“So what is the code user to do in this quagmire? The good news is that the problem has been solved for the user in the 2007 Supplement to the 2006 IBC. The Supplement has deleted the special seismic load combinations in 2006 IBC Section 1605.1. The section now simply directs the users to use Section 12.4.3 of ASCE 7-05, except that it clarifies: “With the simplified procedure of ASCE 7 Section 12.14, the overstrength factor load combinations of Section 12.14.3.2 of ASCE 7 shall be used.” Although supplements are typically not adopted by local jurisdictions, what the 2007 Supplement has done would be an advisable way to resolve the problem that exists with the 2006 IBC.” ( http://www.gostructural.com/article.asp?id=2605 )

Donald Breyer’s text takes the issue of Plan irregularity (vertical and horizontal) into much greater detail in Chapter 16 of the Sixth Edition. As Professor Ghosh points out, the “quagmire” does not actually disappear from most structures. Unless the home is a one story structures with no horizontal plan irregularity (including reentrant corners) where a prescriptive code such as International Residential Code most of us will find that some Vertical or Horizontal plan irregularity as noted in Table 12.3-1 and 12.3-2 will occur in most of our design. Whether or not the base shear is penalized by use of Ω ₀ depends upon the Seismic Design Category (SDC) and the Occupancy Category the structure conforms to permits (or not) in table 12.6-1. However, remember that the interpretation of Irregularity changed somewhat from what we were using in the 97 UBC on the West Cost until this year. For example, a Vertical Irregularity exists if the second floor shear wall does not align over the first floor shear wall. If there is transverse “jog”, the irregularity exists. If you recall in the 97 code the walls could be within 4′-0″ of the offset to still be in the same line of shear. Of course the engineer had to accommodate the design for potential tension and compression of the upper level walls and their connection to the framing in the diaphragm below. In this version of the code, if both walls are in the same line of shear but the upper level wall is in front of or behind the lower level wall a Vertical Irregularity exists and the base shear formula changes.

Another issue that I have not verified is the limitations on section 12.14.1 and table 12.6-1 to a maximum 2-story building where a setback or vertical irregularity (or horizontal irregularity occurs). To help you, an Irregularity worksheet was added to the workbook so that you can review the tables 12.3-1 and 12.3-2 as well as 12.6-1. Where Multi-Lat™ errs is on the side of conservative results.

Breyer states it very well on page 2.43 of Design of Wood Structures 6th edition where he states:

“ASCE 7 Sec. 12.14 is titled Simplified Alternative Structural Design Criteria for Simple Bearing Wall or Building Frame Systems. This section provides a simplified version of the equivalent lateral force procedure, for use on a limited scope of buildings. Use of the simplified procedure should result in roughly equivalent results. Because the scope of the buildings is limited, there are a number of checks in the general procedure, which do not need to be considered in the simplified procedure. ASCE 7 Sec. 12.14.1.1 provides a list of 12 scoping criteria that the building must meet in order to be designed using the simplified procedure. Among the 12 there is one that will be problematic for a number of wood-frame buildings. Item 11 says the simplified approach is not permitted in structures with system irregularities due to in-plane or out-of-plane offsets of lateral force resisting elements. An exception permits offsets in shearwalls in two story buildings of light-frame construction, provided detailing requirements are met. Because offsets in shearwalls from story to story are so common in wood-frame buildings, there are likely to be a good number that do not qualify for this procedure. For this reason this book addresses the equivalent lateral force procedure instead. “

Excel 2007 – Why?

This Alpha version is being released to all BT members but only those who are using Excel 2007 will be able to take advantage of the features. This version is Macro-enabled, but there are currently no macros prepared in the version (such as those expected to be used for automated printing.

Excel 2007 uses pre-defined style sheets that are embedded in the workbook to improve the appearance of the interface and the output of the printed version. It is possible to strip out the styles and make this XLS or compatible with Office 97-2003 and later with Sun Micro-systems® OpenOffice.Org Calc (free) software packages. The goal is to create an affordable tool that does not require the user to invest in additional spreadsheet investments. With this said, users of Excel 2007 will initially gain the most advantage in both user interface and readible output.

Protected Spreadsheets

I initially wanted to create a spreadsheet that was an open code to allow user’s to improve upon the software and to send the improvements back for inclusion in future releases. However, the truth is that in the last version of Multi-Lat™ ( written for the 97 UBC) I worked with many users who improved the software and then wanted to protect their work and competitive edge. With the exception of the initial release that included the Rigid Diaphragm Analysis improved by David Merrick, SE of Northern California, none of the other versions that were modified or changed and coordinated with me were re-submitted for the benefit of others.

The second reason is to protect the integrity of the conditional logic embedded in the workbook. We must, as a group, verify the structural accuracy and integrity of the spreadsheet results and protect it from change that can produce inaccurate output. This version is re-written from the ground up and the complexity of the conditional logic is discussed in this blog and where possible, is converted to a flow chart to simplify the path across the IBC and ASCE 7-05. Tables are protected from copyright infringement since the information is required to comply with the “law” but the tables as published in the IBC and ASCE 7-05 are protected by publication copyright laws. Therefore, only the information contained within the table necessary to publish this software becomes visible as input from pull-down menu choices. The tables are concealed to protect the ICC from those who might benefit from the use of the tables without purchasing the codes. I must warn the user that this spreadsheet software is not intended to replace the code but rather requires the user’s understanding of the information contained in both references (the 2006 IBC, ASCE 7-05 and the 2007 California Building Code).

Alpha Limitations

The alpha version will produce some useful information that can help reduce your time in calculations that you are currently doing manually. However, I want to warn you that you are checking this software for accuracy – especially to verify if the results of the logical conditions contained in the workbook produce similar results as you obtain manually. Be careful in how you use this workbook – it is not intended for project use at this time although I have taken particular care in checking my work and seeking to produce accurate results. I can not check all conditions and this is where your response is important. If the logic is even slightly wrong- for example if the conditional assumes a “greater than” rather than a “greater than OR equal to” – then the output will not be accurate for the condition it is being used and this will become a task that I will need to address before continuing with the next section of the Workbook.

This Alpha version may seem “lighter” than promised, but there is a great deal that is hidden, in partial work product or extensive tables that are not intended to be modified by the user. Macros are not yet functioning and the Hyperlink table of contents to easily move around the workbook is disabled.

In the Material Dead Load Section you may go to the worksheet that stores the material and unit weight. You are free to change this, but I would ask you to submit your changes to me so that I can compare the results to other Beta Users in order to change or add materials that I had not considered (and correct unit loads that you might consider significantly different).

Most of the input is self explanatory and I am working on a User’s Guide on the side (as time permits). It will be available in the final Beta either on this Weblog or as a separate download. You may only place your cursor where the cells are unlocked. The spreadsheet should seem more like a program than a spreadsheet but protection of the integrity of the conditional statements is extremely important.

Your mission, should you decide to accept…..:)

I am offer Multi-Lat™ in appreciation for your help in maintaining the accuracy and usefulness of the program. Therefore, I need your comments and suggestions – including constructive criticism. For example, if you don’t agree with the logical steps (each choice will display the code section that triggered the condition) let me know or provide a debate so others can convince me that I was mistaken or missed the mark. If you don’t like the colors, please give me some suggestions that you like to work with – especially if you do not use a color printer.

I need you to keep the comments coming

“Dennis,

It is still my interpretation that the “design base shear” is V = C_s • W (Eq. 12.8-1), not V = ρ • Cs • W. I do not see “V” defined as “ρ • Cs • W” anywhere in ASCE 7-05. The factor, “ρ” (“rho”), is used only in Eq. 12.4-3 and as a load factor in the load combinations in Section 12.4.2.3.

CBC 1603.1.5 (Item 7) requires that the “design base shear” be included as part of the earthquake design data on our drawings. If this data is going to be of any use at all, it must be clear as to what we are calling the “design base shear.” Currently, I am showing it as V = C_s • W, not V = ρ • Cs • W. I would be interested to know what others are showing, or plan to show, on their drawings. I feel it is not a matter of “right” vs. “wrong”, but one of consistency.

Dave”

Dave,

Let’s put Rho aside for the moment. One lead I found on page 10 of the ICC “ Seismic Design Manual “ for Problem 1A. It is note in parenthesis that states: “(Note that design base shear in the ASCE/SEI 7-05 is a strength design basis.)”

Below this line continues a brief explanation:

“All tables in the IBC for wood diaphragms and shear walls are based on allowable loads. All tables in the NDS-05 supplement Special Design Provisions for Wind and Seismic (SDPWS) are nominal values and must be adjusted for both strength and ASD loads. It is not known how much longer the IBC will publish ASD values since the trend is toward having all values in strength of nominal format. Since ASD is still predominantly practiced, it has been decided to have this design example in ASD format. In addition, all the manufacturers of metal hardware connectors only publish ASD values.”

On page 12 of the same problem, the equation 12.4.2.3 from ASCE 7-05 is adjusted for ASD design:

“D + L + 0.7 ρ Q_E Eq. 12.4.2.3

Vn-s = 0.183 W

Therefore: Vn-s = 0.183 (102,500 lb) = 18,750 lb”

I can’t account for why the ICC is not clearer on the fact that the code is written for strength design methods to allow the user to choose the method (i.e., LRFD, ASD, Ultimate Strength etc.). However it is clear in the design guides as noted above. Furthermore, the 0.7 factor is the same conversion factor (approximated here) dating back before the 97 UBC. Go to section 1612.3.1 in the 97 UBC and look at the load combinations for Allowable Stress Design methods. The seismic lateral load is divided by 1.4 and the reciprocal of 1.4 is 0.7. The only difference between the two codes 97 vs. 2006 is that the ASD design method was much more clearly defined in the code and used more often than other design methods. LRFD was barely making the scene in wood in 97 and had been used in Steel with much of the industry opting to stick with ASD or Ultimate Strength design of Steel than to use the LRFD version of the Steel Manual.

This is the same in the 2006 IBC but with more provisions. For ASD design, the basic load combinations will be found in equations 16-8 thru 16-15 in section 1605.3.1.

Now let me add one comment for Rho. In many cases Rho will be equal to 1.0 in residential design. I have to opt out of this and check Rho with each project, but in my case I choose to apply Rho uniformly to the entire structure rather than to only the floor levels that meet the 35% or greater percentage of the base shear in each direction (where it would be equal or 1.0). On a one story building Rho must equal 1.0 but depending on the height of diaphragms above fixity, the factor would be applicable on the first level (second floor diaphragm) of the two story building because the majority of shear is moved up to the roof as the example I gave you with 10’ story heights and showing that 70% of the shear occurred at the roof and 30% occurred at the second floor diaphragm (100% at fixity). I’ll be conservative here until I feel that the shears I’ve been evaluating are not significantly lower than the shears we used since I started practicing in the middle 80’s.

Convince me! I don’t want to just argue the point as I think it is important to agree or find a level of agreement or the writers of the code can be attributed with creating an ambiguous code.

Thanks for your replies

Dennis

Please feel free to respond to the discussion and to add your thoughts by adding your comments below. Comments will be reviewed prior to posting them to the blog. Thank you!

Dennis S. Wish, PE

Administrator

]]> http://structuralist.wordpress.com/2008/03/09/strength-design-methodology/feed/ 0 structuralist http://structuralist.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/beta-testing-to-start-by-31508/ http://structuralist.wordpress.com/2008/03/05/beta-testing-to-start-by-31508/#comments Thu, 06 Mar 2008 06:33:55 +0000 structuralist http://structuralist.wordpress.com/?p=14 ]]>

Most will notice a delay in the release of the Beta versions of Multi-Lat™ 2008. The process of creating and testing Beta version Builds will begin as soon as the Alpha version is complete and a basic Quality assurance testing is done by the author. It is not just important to have a workbook template that performs accurately, but to have one that reads well, is intuitive to the user and provides information to those who will be reviewing your work. Until the Beta Members are brought up to speed in testing and evaluating, the work of coding as well as the online User’s Guide (this site) and a forth coming http://www.structuralist.net website is in the works.

I only ask that you be patient and that you check the information on this weblog. There are some issues in the code that are ambiguous and/or difficult to interpret or which many do not agree. I’ve started to post some of these on this Weblog – such as the use of ρ – the redundancy factor and the interpretation of when it is to be applied. Your review of these comments in the Seismic Discussion portion of this Weblog with comments that can be used to help narrow down a profession standard of interpretation by practitioners is extremely important. I hope you will help us.

You can post to this blog, but the access is somewhat limited to reduce the unwanted spam and comments that I must waste time to weed out. The topics are listed, and to comment on a running-thread of discussion, you need only register on the Weblog so that we can control who is allowed to post and stop anything unprofessional before it should occur. I you wish to post a Discussion that is new, please contact me with the questions and issues by writing to me at admin@structuralist.net and I will post the question. Please include your e-mail or user name if you want me to post it under your name or alias.

Please check back soon for more information. I am under pressure to complete and ready the Beta as I am currently motivated by a project that I must use Multi-Lat™ 2008 for. Each day brings me closer, so please bear with me on this and as soon as the Beta Testing is ready, I will post a notice. There will be 25 Beta Tester slots. If interested in becoming part of the team, send a private e-mail to me at admin@structuralist.net with your; Name; State and License Number; Company, address, city and state; Phone contact; e-mail contact; any websites or forums and weblogs that you may wish to link to this site or another structuralist.Net website and weblog. Finally include the version of Excel of a Compatible Spreadsheet that can import Excel files. I recommend Excel 2007 as the software is being prepared in this version because of the difficulties in striping out the style formats embedded in the spreadsheets. However, it is our intent to provide compatibility for

There is a lot of work to complete but with the slow ecconomic picture, the long needed down-time for a learning curve came whether I wanted it or not. So while I have the time, more work can be devoted to the spreadsheet and the online user’s guide.

It is the intent to convert the spreadsheet into a universal format to be used in all versions of M.S. Excel 97-2007 and the Open Office (freeware download owned by Sun Micro systems). The Beta will be released in Excel 2007 initially as this is the most robust version. It will be tweaked out upon completion to remove non-compliant visual effects that are not compatible with Excel 97-2003 and OpenOffice.org Calc.

Please return to this site for follow-up on the Beta release status. The Beta team has not yet been chosen and if you are interested in comparing results from Multi-Lat™ to your hand solution or the results of another commercial software, I will have room for as many as 15-25 testers. The Beta team will be chosen by the amount of input I receive and those who stick through the program will receive the initial release free (including all updates).

If you are interested in joining the Beta team, please e-mail me at admin@structuralist.net and put the following in the Subject line of your e-mail – Multi-Lat Beta Testing Request

Sincerely,

Dennis S. Wish, PE

Administrator

The profit is earned on the sale of higher definition map views. For our purpose the basic download will provide more accuate results related to near fault conditions when used with the USGS Acceleration Tools than when inputing the local zip codes.

As an example, my address was input into the software which centered the zoom field over my home. Moving the mouse over the property locates the actual location of 33° 39′ 06.79″N -116° 18′ 25.74″ W. The property is 253-ft above the sea level and the top of the cove in which we live is 299-feet above sea level. The bottom of the cove is at 58-feet. The distance can be determined from a scale on the map and the sum of this information used in both the seismic and wind design sections to determine the building terrain exposure.

While this may delay the first beta release, we found it to be a reasonable alternative that can provide a platform that has been available in public domain since 1988. Multi-lat™ was originally written in Excel for Office 2007. Problems occured when saving files in earlier formats. Sun Microsystem’s OpenOffice.org Calc is fuly compatible with all version of Excel up to and including Excel 2003.

Multi-Lat™ will be available in either the native OpenOffice Calc ODS format or in Excel XLS or XLT format for those who wish to remain with Microsoft Excel 97 or later. This move insures compatibility and provides an affordable alternative that is under constant development to keep up with the industry demands.

The following project statement is found on the OpenOffice.org website located at http://about.openoffice.org/index.html. I highly recommend you familiarize yourself with their software as it is an alternative to the commercial Office Suites that are presently available.

“Project

Mission Statement

Historical background

Licenses

NOTE – UPDATED 7/17/08

1. Multi-Lat™ 2008 is NOT YET compatible with Sun Microsystem’s OpenOffice.org Calc and Microsoft Office 97 and later. Excel 2007 is required to evaluate the current Alpha version. Macros are kept to a minimum for printing. Active-X features that are known for potential distribution of viruses have been eliminated from all spreadsheets.
   • Multi-lat™ is a locked spreadsheet template. It is locked to prevent the possibility of changing or overwriting formulas and tables. Unlocking passwords are provided to those who are contributing or helping to maintain the integrity of the spreadsheet and must be obtained by writing to us at admin@structuralist.net.
2. The current Alpha version and future Beta versions will be locked to protect the spreadsheet formulas. You will be able to modify the Dead Load materials and their unit weights. I would be interested in any changes you make that differ or add to what is provided in the present release.
   
3. User header and footers can be changed. Each sheet is embedded with a user intended title block that will print the users company name, information and user’s license number. The purpose of this is to insure that the latest version is used and that the user is authorized to use the software either through licensing or by license offered to all Beta Testers who participate in the Beta program.
   
4. Download Google Earth and install it on your hard drive at the default locations. Click on the link in these instruction (blue underlined text where the cursor turns to a pointed finger) to launch your browser and automatically lauch the Google Earth download page.
   • There are option that you can download, but the basic program will locate your Longitude and Latitude based on the address entered in the address bar once Google earth starts. While it is not specifically noted, the East-West location is at the bottom of the Google Earth page but should be entered as a negative number for those living in Continential United States.
   • For example, if you enter 51000 Arroba, La Quinta CA. 92253 (enter addresses in this format), the map will find the address and present you with an arial view of 51000 Calle Arroba, La Quinta CA. 92253. At the bottom of the screen you will see the actual map coordinates in the form of Latitude (degrees, minutes, seconds) and Longitudes (minus degrees, minutes and seconds). When using the “Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra” software from the USGS, you will need to enter the Longitude as negative units.
5. Next download the USGS “Seismic Hazard Curves and Uniform Hazard Response Spectra” software from the USGS website.

   Note: The Ground Motion Parameter Calculator is a Java(TM) Application and requires the Java(TM) Runtime Environment version 1.5.0 or higher . This application also requires an active internet connection to retrieve data from our servers.

   Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator – Version 5.0.8 (4.6 MB)

• • NOTE: YOU MUST DOWNLOAD THE JAVA RUNTIME ENVIRONMENT VERSION 1.5.0 OR HIGHER AND INSTALL IT ON YOUR COMPUTER FIRST. THE GROUND MOTION PARAMETER CALCULATOR WILL ONLY LAUNCH AFTER THE JAVA RUNTIME VERSION IS INSTALLED. THERE IS NO SHORTCUT TO THE PHP FILE AND YOU CAN CREATE ON BY DRAGGING THE FILE TO YOUR START MENU. REVIEW THE INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOWING WEBSITE;
  • http://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/hazmaps/design/ OR BY CLICKING HERE!

Save the Multi-Lat 2008 file as a Template and start each project by choosing from your available templates. Start either spreadsheet program as a new workbook from the template so as not to destroy the original file. Starting a workbook from a template will automatically prompt you for a file name. Use as many workbooks as may be required (depending on how you break your structure into blocks) and save each with a unique name. DO NOT OVERWRITE THE TEMPLATE FILE. If you use OpenOffice.org Calc, you have the option of saving your file for others to view in formats compatible with Excel, StarCalc, Sylk, Microsoft Excel 2003 XML format or HTML document format for printing. The OpenOffice.org Calc version may also be exported to PDF format.

For additional support, subscribe (free) to the Multi-Lat™ e-mail distribution Listservice (refer to this Weblog for anticipated date that the Multi-Lat™ List becomes available) or write to us at admin@structuralist.net for additional help.

Under Construction – July 17, 2008