11/9/2013 - No calculations provided. No review complete.
12/9/2013 - Review complete. Comments issued.
2/3/2014 - Responses reviewed. Comments issued.
3/21/2014 - Responses reviewed. Comments issued.
5/20/2014 - Responses reviewed. Comments issued.

1. LOAD DEVELOPMENT
Reference the calculations. All that has been provided for calculations is a RISA model. There are no calculations or supporting data showing how loads were developed. It is not clear which load case is the lateral seismic load (lateral load?, 45 degree lateral load?, both?). Please provide. Reference AAC section 23.10.104.8.

Item remains. Response not accepted. After careful review of the drawings and RISA model it appears the following are incorrect or missing:

A) The weight of the hoist snatch blocks or the rigging does not appear to be included. Please clarify.

Item resolved. WAB - 3/21/2014

B) It must be shown that the components in this system have been designed to meet the requirements of ASCE 7-05 section 13.6.1. There is no load case that applies 1.4 times the weight as a vertical component and horizontal component. Please note that based on the installation it does not appear as if the component has 360 degrees of free movement. This movement must be based on the 1.4 times the weight acting downward, and 1.4 times the weight acting horizontally. WAB - 2/3/2014

Item remains. Please provide the following: 1) Please provide copy of the complete section of the referenced used so that the alternate can be justified. No context could be taken from what was provided other than it dealt with a system with one degree of freedom 2) It appears that it has been assumed that this component is directly suspended from the main structure. This is not the case. This component is suspended from another component that is hung from the main structure. It is not clear from the calculations how this was considered. What happens if this component goes out of phase from the component it is suspended from? 3) No verificiation on amount of movement/angle of rotation permitted has been provided. This needs to be verified prior to approval. WAB - 3/21/2014

Comment remains. Per dicussion with engineer, item 2 will be resolved by using the frequency of the platform instead of the frequency of the main building. Item 3 needs to be verified in the field. WAB - 5/20/2014

2. MEMBER DESIGN
Reference the "Design Parameters" pages of the RISA model. RISA defaults to continuously braced members where values are not inputted for Lbyy, LBzz, L comp (top), L comp (bottom), etc. Please verify that all members are in fact continuously braced. Where the member is not continuously braced the appropriate unbraced lengths must be inputted.

Item remains. Response is accepted for the axial loads in the members, but not for bending. For bending if L comp (top), and L comp(bottom) are not filled in RISA considers the compression flange to be continuously braced. This can be easily verified by designing a beam in RISA, first without inputting a value into L comp, and then inputting the length of the beam for this value. WAB - 2/3/2014

Item resolved. WAB - 3/21/2014

3. SCOPE OF STRUCTURE
From the drawings it appears that there are two parts that make up the scoreboard, an upper and a lower part. It appears the RISA model is of the lower part. Does the lower portion provide support of the upper portion? If so, how is this load taken into account in the model. There also appears to be a platform that is to be designed by others. Where is this design? Please clarify.

Item resolved. This was designed by BBFM. It is laterally restrained. WAB - 2/3/2014

4. HOIST
Per the drawings there appears to be a hoist system. Please clarify what supports this hoist, and provide the details for it. If this is in the original drawings please indicate where. Reference AAC section 23.10.104.8.

Comment resolved. This was designed by BBFM. WAB - 2/3/2014

5. SEISMIC RESTRAINT
The lateral restraint of the scoreboard could not be located in the drawings or design calculations. Please clarify where this information is or provide for review. Reference ASCE 7-05 section 13.4.

Comment remains. See comment 1. WAB - 2/3/2014

Comment can be resolved in comment 1. WAB - 3/21/2014

6. BOLTED CONNECTIONS
Reference connection details for the angle braces. Please clarify if these braces are required to transfer seismic forces. Bolted connections that must transfer seismic forces are required to be fully pretensioned with the faying surfaces prepared as class A slip critical or better. Reference AISC 341-05 section 7.2. Please note that SAE rated bolts do not have a pretensioning method per RCSC.

Comment resolved as long as the element remains as a suspended element. WAB - 2/3/2014

7. DRAWINGS
It appears that several of the drawings have been truncated to cut off portions of the drawings. Please revise.

Comment remains. Please provide drawings that are not truncated. WAB - 2/3/2013

Comment remains. No new drawings could be located. Please provided. WAB - 3/21/2014

8. SITE ADAPTATION
It doesn't appear as if Vector Engineering provided engineering for drawings produced by another company. This is only permitted if the drawings are site adapted by Vector. The procedure for site adaptation is in the Alaska State Statutes section 12AAC36.195. Please see this section, and follow the procedure therein, and provide the letter giving permission to adapt the design.

Comment remains. Please provide drawings that are site adapted as required by the Alaska State Stututes. WAB - 2/3/2014

Comment remains. It appears most of the sheets meet the site adaptation requirements, but some of the sheets have not been stamped with the Vector Engineering stamp. Please also provide a letter indicating Vector Engineering has permission to adapt the drawings. WAB - 3/21/2014