Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: Re: Housing Performance Objectives[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: "'seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org'" <seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org>
- Subject: RE: Re: Housing Performance Objectives
- From: "Dennis S. Wish" <wish(--nospam--at)key.cyberg8t.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Dec 1997 12:06:37 -0800
Rick, we try to take the battle outside the list and hope that our SEA committee chairs (as well as participating members) are participating in this list or reviewing our posts on the seaoc web site so that they can get a general perception of our opinions. Many of us are geographically impaired and are unable to physically attend commttee meeting or ICBO conventions. This was one impetus for starting a listservice that could open the floor of the local committees to the views of those unable to attend. Personally speaking, I have been a committee participant on many occassions over the years. Like most, I spent almost six years as a member of SEAOSC without participation. I started becoming active in 1986 or 87 and the rest is pretty much verbose history. I would like to consider the list as a voice of majority of technically linked engineers that would like to be active but for some reason or another are unable to participate and still have a right to be heard. I do know how tedius and boring the determination of code writing can be. I have done it a few times and, admittedly, lost patience and interest. I never could sit still debating the use of the words "shall" or "will" and the implications of each. In respect of those that have done this, I am not trying to denegate their efforts, but will continue to attack the basic premise which the code defines - far before the technical language is written. The Conventional framing section is outdated and does not reflect the financial needs of today's society - IMHO (and those of others). Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Rick.Drake(--nospam--at)fluordaniel.com [SMTP:Rick.Drake(--nospam--at)fluordaniel.com] Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 1997 4:12 AM To: seaoc(--nospam--at)seaoc.org Cc: Robert.Bachman(--nospam--at)fluordaniel.com Subject: Re: Housing Performance Objectives The point is that those who participate in the code writing process have the last say on what's in the code. Participation includes serving on committees, preparing proposals, presenting proposals, and lobbying with the building code officials who have a vote. In the case of the UBC, it may even involve attending the annual ICBO meeting in Minnesota or Iowa. What makes it into the building codes represents the majority opinion of those that participate in the process. If you disagree with what is in the code, work with your fellow members within the system to attempt to change it. If you can build a case that the majority will agree to, your ideas can become code. The 1996 Supplement seismic performance objective was added in response to the public which mistakenly believed that seismic design per the code would preclude damage from the big one. If anyone disagrees with this code objective, a good start would be to write an article for a SEAOC Newsletter, or write a technical paper for presentation at the next SEAOC Convention. By the way, I personally agree with Tim McCormac and Dennis Wish that the code should reflect economic considerations for housing. My comments are just trying to point out that to effect change, we must be willing to go beyond this list server. Rick Drake, SE Fluor Daniel, Inc. _________________________________________ << The point, Rick, is that this objective no longer reflects the needs of society when the cost to repair is as devastating to a family as injury. Rather than simply accept a supplemental explanation for the code, we need to work on a new philosophy behind conventional framing methods. These need to be based upon damage reduction (economics) as well as life safety. Dennis Wish >> ________________________________ > I believe that the code writers tried to better define the seismic > performance objectives in the 1996 UBC Supplement, Section 1624.1, > which states "The purpose of the earthquake provisions herein is > primarily to safeguard against major structural failures and loss of > life, not to limit damage or maintain function." > > Rick Drake, SE > Fluor Daniel, Inc.
- Prev by Subject: RE: Housing Performance Objectives
- Next by Subject: RE: Housing Performance Objectives
- Previous by thread: RE: Housing Performance Objectives
- Next by thread: RE: Housing Performance Objectives