Forte limits this because of the depth to width ratio goes below a set parameter. I know, this is frustrating and I would like to see that they do away with this limit as for certain applications like headers you can use the plank method which exceeds this ratio. Maybe provide a comment about it exceeding the Desired limit but not Fail it and not show the results is not a good practice in my way of thinking. let the engineer or designer decided. At least for excessive uplift they give us some options and provide the values so that we can evaluate the situation. Please give us that opportunity here. We have designed lots of retrofits over the years that use multiple members to keep head clearances whether it be done with SS or LSL or LVL and run into this issue. Our work around is to cut all the loads in half and then evaluate it and remember to double the members from what the calcs show, that is a pain when there are linked loads.
Guest
Forte limits this because of the depth to width ratio goes below a set parameter. I know, this is frustrating and I would like to see that they do away with this limit as for certain applications like headers you can use the plank method which exceeds this ratio. Maybe provide a comment about it exceeding the Desired limit but not Fail it and not show the results is not a good practice in my way of thinking. let the engineer or designer decided. At least for excessive uplift they give us some options and provide the values so that we can evaluate the situation. Please give us that opportunity here. We have designed lots of retrofits over the years that use multiple members to keep head clearances whether it be done with SS or LSL or LVL and run into this issue. Our work around is to cut all the loads in half and then evaluate it and remember to double the members from what the calcs show, that is a pain when there are linked loads.