Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: LRFD vs ASD

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
This could lead us to conclude...

Office buildings, commercial establishments, and other enterprises which
pay taxes are "non-essential".

 Fountain ;-)

----------
> From: Patrick Rodgers <prodgers(--nospam--at)earthlink.net>
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Re: LRFD vs ASD
> Date: Tuesday, July 28, 1998 11:49 AM

> Dear All,
> 
> One thing that has been overlooked the discussion of steel design LRFD vs
> ASD is that
> the 1995 California Building Code (1994 UBC with 1995 State Amendments
also
> known as Title 24 Part 2) is that Section 2203A.1 specifically forbids
the
> the use of LRFD design for public schools, hospitals and state-owned or
> state-leased essential services facilities
> 
> 	2301A.1	The design, fabrication and erection of structural steel shall
be
> in accordance with the requirements of Division IX (ASD).  Division VIII
> (LRFD) is not adopted for public shools, hospitals and state-owned or
> state-leased essential services building design.
> 
> Another point is that the State has not adopted the 1997 UBC as the basis
> of the California Building Code.  I believe they are holding off until
the
> 2000 UBC/IBC
> 
> Patrick
> 
>