|
|
|
|
|
The note giving the design code clause for sloped bearing has been moved to the CALCULATIONS section of the Additional Data. It was incongruous with the other data in the Critical Load Combinations section.
The program now allows beams to be supported by walls in beam mode, in order to take into account the compressive resistance of a wall top plate. Wall supports are still not allowed for beams in concept mode; a column usually representing built up wall studs must be embedded in the wall.
Database Editor did not allow input of the axial compressive resistance, Fc, value for parallel-to-grain compressive resistance for beams, so that for custom databases, the compression angle-to-grain bearing resistance for sloped members from CSA O86 5.5.8 used a random value for fc and resulted in nonsensical output for bearing resistance. You can now enter Fc for beams in database editor. Existing custom database files should be modified to include an Fc value.
Starting with version 9 of the program, the reduction of shear due to point loads within d of support (NDS 3.4.3.1a) was including half the minimum bearing length in the x and d values. For interior supports half the full bearing length was being included. This resulted in the shear value being reduced less than it should have been, as the distances x and d did not extend as far into the span as it would have if it was measured from the edge of the support.
The program determines the reduction of shear due removing point loads within d of a support not only at the support close to the loads, but it approximates the effect at the support at the far end of the span. It was mistakenly doing so at the end of a cantilever span with no support. This has been corrected. Note that this did not cause any problems in design for shear, because shear is zero at a cantilever end.
For the size factor CF for bending strength Fb for timbers 5 x 5 larger from Table 4D of the NDS 2005 Supplement, when the load is applied to the wide face of the member, the factors .86 for Select Structural and .74 for No. 1 were not being applied to the Dense Select Structural or Dense No 1. grades, when they should have been. Instead the program was non-conservatively applying 1.0. Similarly, for the CF for E and Emin for Dense No. 1, it was applying 1.0 instead of 0.9.
AWC confirmed that the intention of the NDS is that the Dense varieties of these grades are to be treated the same as the regular grades in this regard. This has been corrected.
Note that for NDS 2010, the size factor for the wide face has been renamed flat use factor Cfu, but the factors applied are the same. NDS 2010 will be implemented in version 10 of Sizer.