Laserfiche WebLink
t g <br /> . , � <br /> � ' Starling Madison Lofquist, Inc. <br /> Consulting Structura / and forensic Engineers <br /> ------� , ,•� � -- <br /> � 5224 South 39"' Street, Phoenix, Arizona 85040 <br /> tel: (602) 438-2500 fax: (602) 438-2505 www.smleng.com <br /> IronRidge June 16, 2014 <br /> 1495 Zephyr Ave Page 1 of 11 <br /> Hayward, CA 94544 <br /> Attn: Mr. David F. Taggart, Vice President Products <br /> Subject: IronRidge XR1000 Rail, Roof Flush Mounting System— Structural Analysis <br /> Dear Sir: <br /> We have analyzed the IronRidge XR1000 Rail for the subject solar module support system and <br /> determined that, for the configurations and criteria described below, it is in compliance with the <br /> applicable sections of the following Reference Documents: <br /> Codes: ASCE/SEI 7-10 Min. Design Loads for Buildings & Other Structures <br /> International Building Code 2012 Edition <br /> International Residential Building Code 2012 Edition <br /> Other: AC428, Acceptance Criteria for Modular Framing Systems Used to Support PV <br /> Modules, dated Effective November l, 2012 by ICC-ES <br /> Aluminum Design Manual, 2010 Edition <br /> The IronRidge XR1000 Rail is an extruded aluminum section with an overall depth of 3.00 in. and a <br /> net area of 0.807 sq.in. The rails are used to support solar modules, typically, on the roof of a <br /> building. See Exhibit A—attached. The rails are clamped to aluminum angle brackets that are either <br /> attached directly to the roof framing or attached to a stand that is screwed to the roof framing. The <br /> rails are mounted across the slope with a small clearance (flush mounting) to the underlying roof <br /> structure. The installed solar modules are at the same slope as the underlying roof structure. <br /> All loads are transferred to the roof framing through the angle brackets by simple bi-axial flexure of <br /> the rails. The maximum span of the rails is governed by either the mid-span flexural stresses or the <br /> deflection requirement that the rail not come into contact with the roof. <br /> The effect of seismic loads (for all design categories A-F) have been determined to be less than the <br /> effect due to wind loads in all load conditions and combinations. Therefore, the maximum allowable <br /> spans for common load cases are shown in Tables 1, 2 & 3 below for 0-6 degree slopes, Tables 4, 5, <br /> & 6 below for 7-27 degree slopes, and Tables 7, 8 & 9 below for 28-45 degree slopes. <br /> Starling Madison Lofquist, Inc. Consulting Structural and Forensic Engineers <br />