FLOOD02274 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

is of illlerest because this prdctice has not been widely observed by previons BrATs. Although laminaled structural members rated for extetior use are available, the Hunicane Opal BI'AT could not determine the rating of those it saw. No failur,es of these beams and joists were observed however. 2.3.6 CONNECTIONS Many of the connections observed were dcficient. The BrAT observed widesprcad corrosion of galvanized straps, hangers, and joist-ta-beam ties benealh elevated buildings. Some of the corroded connectors had failed either before or duting the storm. The BPAT observed some galvanized strap connectors between piles, beams and joists (in otherwise good condition) that failed as a result of insufficient nailing or because storm forces exceeded the design f,)rces (see Figure 2-9). This was not a common mode of failure, however. The BrAT also found evidence that structural components had pulled away from one another when acted on simultaneously by flood and wind forces, despite the presence of the galvanized connectors. In some instances, foundation piles and beams were well-connected and withstood storm f(n-ces, while walls or upper structure componenLs werc poorly connected and were damaged or destroyed by wind f(lrCeS, flood forces, or both. 2.3.7 BRACING The use of2 x 8 or similar timber cross-bracing between timber piles was common beneath elevated wood-frame structures. Some bracing failures were observed that were apparently due to horizontal loading from water, debris, or both. The use of threaded galvanized rods and turnbuckles as cross-bracing was lcss common (see Figure 2-10). No failures of this type of bracing Figure 2-8 These piles were not umg enmlgh and were sl,liced to add defJlh. The splicing was exlJOsed by storm-induted erosion. HURRICANE OPAL IN FLORIDA 2-7