Masonry Magazine April 1965 Page. 25
Walls can often be used to advantage in earthquake design areas.
Building Code Restrictions and Acceptance
At the October 29, 1964, annual research conference of the Southern Building Code Congress, a new provision was approved by the Code Research and Revision Committee which states that, where wall thickness and lateral support requirements are determined by a structural analysis based upon accepted engineering practice, the empirical requirements relating to wall thickness and lateral support may be waived.
A 1964 edition of the Uniform Building Code contains the following waiver in the masonry chapter: "The height or length to thickness ratio may be increased and the minimum thickness may be decreased when data is submitted which justify a reduction in the requirements specified in this Section."
Local codes are also recognizing that masonry bearing-wall buildings can be designed by competent designers without resorting to the arbitrary wall thickness and height requirements which are traditionally set forth in the masonry section of building codes. The new Denver code recognizes engineering know-how and high strength materials to build bearing-wall buildings with its provisions for rational design of bearing-wall buildings.
The American Standard Building Code Requirements for Masonry are now under revision by a drafting committee. This new draft includes conditions and provisions for a rational design of masonry bearing-wall structures.
Urban Renewal Project in Pittsburgh
Architect Tasso Katselas and Engineer Richard M. Gensert recently designed Pennley Park, an urban renewal project in Pittsburgh. The first section involves 8 apartment structures ranging from 4 to 10 stories. The program called for repetitive spaces with 20 ft. to 24 ft. spans. They selected transverse bearing walls of exposed brick. The walls interact with precast concrete floor planks to provide the structural system. Most of the walls are 12 in. in thickness.
FHA requested a cost comparison of this system with a steel frame and bar joist system. The steel system, including necessary fireproofing, additional partitions and painting, came in approximately 20 per cent higher in cost than the brick bearing-wall system.
Architect Katselas said: "Concrete might have provided many of the same advantages, but it would have required finishing. The exposed brick bearing wall gave us six elements; structure, separation, economy, acoustics, fire protection and finish."
Today, there is a renewed interest in the validity of traditional architectural forms. The warmth of color and texture, human scale and freedom of form and dimension of brick masonry offer the designer a traditional material, yet a new structural system in contemporary bearing wall construction. In many cases, these buildings are very economical, not only in first cost but also in ultimate cost, when the operation and maintenance of these buildings are considered.
Although this structural system is new, it is not without experience, both in this country and in Europe. Such buildings offer pleasing, economical construction and provide the occupants with comfort by the control of sound and heat and safety as provided by the structural strength and fire resistance of the building materials. In short, there are many good reasons why contemporary bearing walls should provide both finish and structure in many of today's buildings.
3 ft. charge and 3 ft. discharge height
ANCHOR "HY-DUMP"
Patent No 3100064
Designed to dump into wheelbarrow, concrete buggy, mortar buggy or plaster pump with no blocking or raising of the mixer.
For additional information, or to place an order, call Anchor "collect".
PHONE CHICAGO
Area Code 312
discharging Bishop
36"
height
7-2530
Special models available for terrazzo and allied work
MODEL 10HT
10 Cu. Ft. Mixer with
14 H.P. Gasoline or
3 H.P. Electric Motor
6502
Buy DIRECT-FROM-FACTORY and SAVE
Cythor
Write today for FREE catalog
ANCHOR MFG. CO.
2922 WEST 26TH STREET CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60623
MASONRY April, 1965
25