<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://communities.bentley.com/cfs-file/__key/system/syndication/rss.xsl" media="screen"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"><channel><title>RAM Frame and NBCC 2015 4.1.8.11 4)</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/products/ram-staad/f/ram-staad-forum/238526/ram-frame-and-nbcc-2015-4-1-8-11-4</link><description>Hi, 
 Based on NBCC 2015 4.1.8.11 4) single storey buildings with steel or wood deck as diaphragms can have a higher fundamental period compared to 4.1.8.11 3) as seen in the snap below. However, in the current RAM frame the Ta is only based on clause</description><dc:language>en-US</dc:language><generator>Telligent Community 12</generator><item><title>RE: RAM Frame and NBCC 2015 4.1.8.11 4)</title><link>https://communities.bentley.com/thread/742591?ContentTypeID=1</link><pubDate>Mon, 21 Nov 2022 23:13:09 GMT</pubDate><guid isPermaLink="false">6dad98f5-dbc9-4c4d-a9ba-e9da8dc6aa8e:d07cc678-6489-4ce8-8b4a-59b472dbcb23</guid><dc:creator>Seth Guthrie</dc:creator><description>&lt;p&gt;I see options to have Ta based on 4.1.8.11.3 a,b or c or you can specify Ta outright. In the US code if you use provisions for drift then T used won&amp;#39;t be capped, but I still see a cap on T (&amp;lt;=2Ta) in NBCC. If you really need something else, then user defined story forces are your last resort.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;div style="clear:both;"&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>