Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: CBC Vs. UBC Do I need another Code?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
As for structural provisions for a project no covered by DSA of OSHPD, the
requirements are basically the same for structural design.  It is symantics.
California adopts the state building code as Title 24, California Code of
Regulations.  The latest in effect being the 1995 California Building Code
(CBC) which, for structural design, is the 1994 UBC with California
Amendments.  The local jurisdictions adopt the CBC with local amendments.
Unless the local amendments specifically require seismic retrofit and specify
the design standard to be used, the engineer is free to design to any
nationally recognized standard. 

Your choice of the Uniform Building Code for Building Conservation (UBCB) is
founded for unreiforced masonry.  If this is a tilt-up anchorage retrofit, the
provisions of  L.A. Division 91 or 1996 UBC Supplement may be appropriate.
For other types of construction maybe the CBC (UBC) would be correct.

Keep in mind, as with all codes, they are a minimum design standard to prevent
potential collapse and may not protect the building from needing to be
demolished after a minor earthquake.  This is what perfomance based seismic
design is all about.  Forget Ricter Scale!!  Ask the owner what (s)he expects
for the expenditure of this money on retrofit.  See if (s)he is willing to
spend more (or less) for other results after the earthquake.

Ted Beckwith, RCE