Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: addseaoc(--nospam--at)euken.com
- Subject: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- From: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org (Richard Lewis)
- Date: 30 Jul 1997 14:35:05 GMT
General comments to the many opinions raised about the issue of "code minimums"... Although I'm not an attorney, I don't believe that a client can successfully sue an engineer for designing above code minimums particularly if the design engineer can prove that his design was warranted by calculations, etc. For example, the code requirement for live load deflection is L/360. Based on my experience, this criteria will produce a "soft" floor in a residence with long (>18') spans. My preference is to use L/400. I cannot even conceive a qualified expert witness being able to successfully debate this issue. My recommendation is that the design engineer, when exceeding these code minimums, do so with rational thought and not be arbitrary. It's not always true that, if 10 nails are enough, 20 are better. While I agree that it should be up to the design engineer's best judgement when exceeding the code minimums, I believe that, if there are some areas of the code that are regularly inadequate, we should address them and change the code. Unfortunately/fortunately our practice is as much as a business as it is a science and we all must compete for work. Much too often the reality is that an engineer or an engineering firm will get that "over design" rap and will lose clients. Designing to code minimums should have a defensible position and if there are problems with particular sections of the code, they should be addressed. I share the experience expressed in this thread about clients who want the job done the cheapest (engr fee) are usually the ones who are the slowest to pay ,demand the most service and then bad mouth the work to boot. One final thought. Dennis, are you STILL working on that patio cover? Regards, Bill Allen --- Internet Message Header Follows --- Received: from server1.seaoc.org (bqe.com [188.8.131.52]) by host1.texramp.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id UAA00406 for <rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 20:18:22 -0600 (CST) Received: from darius.concentric.net by server1.seaoc.org (NTList 3.02.10) id la004431; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 18:06:05 -0800 Received: from newman.concentric.net (newman.concentric.net [184.108.40.206]) by darius.concentric.net (8.8.5/(97/02/12 3.22)) id VAA20683; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 21:03:30 -0500 (EST) [1-800-745-2747 The Concentric Network] Errors-To: <ballense(--nospam--at)concentric.net> Received: from BAllen (61004d0019la.concentric.net [220.127.116.11]) by newman.concentric.net (8.8.5) id VAA07811; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 21:03:29 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: <33124849.4F24(--nospam--at)concentric.net> Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 18:02:49 -0800 From: Bill Allen <ballense(--nospam--at)concentric.net> Reply-To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Subject: Re: building code minimums for wood frame References: <970224193623_-1105830366(--nospam--at)emout03.mail.aol.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Error-To: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Loop: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Info: [SEAOC] Owner: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-POP3-Rcpt: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org X-Sender: seaoc-ad(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Precedence: list X-ListMember: rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org [seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org] __________________________________________________ Richard Lewis, P.E. Missionary TECH Team rlewis(--nospam--at)techteam.org The service mission like-minded Christian organizations may turn to for technical assistance and know-how.
- Prev by Subject: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- Next by Subject: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- Previous by thread: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame
- Next by thread: Fwd: Re: building code minimums for wood frame