Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: IBC Masonry Special Inspection Requirements

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Code Standards are not bible and meant to be only minimum standards for
design and construction.  If the engineer of record thinks that any
masonry wall requires continuous inspection, he(she) can always specify
that on the drawings.  As for periodic inspection, the EOR should not
just blindly rely on the Code definition and so as the inspector.  It
should be clearly define on the plan.  Code is not construction document
but the plan is.  I would specify the following stages for inspection
for an average job on my plan:

1.  Inspect footing to wall dowels.
2.  Inspect wall reinforcing bars before the courses are laid and
pour      of concrete.
3.  Inspect concrete pouring.
4.  Inspect wall to slab dowels and ledger bolts/ wall anchors.

If I miss anything, please let me know. Thanks in advance.

Tom Chiu, SE
Thomas Engineering

Construction is where you learn engineering, not in design office, not
in school.

Sandy Pringle wrote:
> At 06:54 PM 3/2/98 -0800, you wrote:
> >I believe it's up tp the engineer of record to define that "periodic
> >inspection" on the general notes or specs.
> >
> >Tom Chiu, SE
> >Thomas Engineering
> >
> >Sandy Pringle wrote:
> >>
> >> The new IBC 2000 removes Continuous Special Inspection for most masonry
> >> buildings.  In its' place there is something called "Periodic Inspection"
> >> which is defined in one sentence as "intermittent inspection".  What should
> >> this definition really be?
> >> How should Periodic Inspection in Structural Masonry be defined??
> Mr Chiu,
> With all due respect, I am a Special Inspector, and if this definition is
> left the way it reads now, you guys will be fighting the same competition
> battle you've always had to fight whenever you wanted a quality assurance
> item on your plans.
> When you envision the actual construction process of a masonry building,
> there are many critical elements that won't be able to be verified very
> easily or even with some effort if just a few more courses are laid.
> Shouldn't this be more clearly spelled out in the code as to just what this
> means?  At what points should there be inspection??
> R.Sandy Pringle
> sandyp(--nospam--at)
> "Always hold your head up, but be careful
> to keep your nose at a friendly level."
>         Max L. Forman