Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Repair Standards before the next one....

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

Adoption of Appendix Chapter 34 would help tremendously in ensuring that
buildings are adequately repaired and the causes of the damage are
addressed.  These standards have a somewhat simplistic trigger which is
objective.  The triggers are cost for repair of structural damage compared
to the replacement cost of the structure.  There are three levels of repair
for most structures and only two levels of repair for essential service

I still believe that the best type of repair triggers deal with the
structural condition of the building not simply the costs associated with
the repair.  My current belief is that a loss of lateral capacity is a
reasonable approach.  The problem with this approach is that the
determination of the loss is left to the judgement of the engineer of
record (not at all a bad idea).  Unfortunately, when dealing with Federal
assistance programs, the judgement of the engineer of record is not always
shared by the Federal reviewer.  Under their evaluation a different loss of
capacity is determined.  Funding will always be in line with what the
Federal reviewer determines.

The repair code I wrote attempts to address this major problem by
establishing a basic evaluation criteria.  In many respects this evaluation
becomes a relative loss of capacity, not necessarily the actual loss of
capacity.  However, if all use the same evaluation criteria, the results
should be comparable.

Hope this answers your question Fred.  Thanks for the response.