Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Federal building code future

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Along the lines of a Federal Building Code, can anyone please clarify the
role of such national standards as ANSI?  The UBC does adopt some of the
ANSI standards, but how are the remainder of the ANSI standards imposed upon
the industry and ourselves (or are they)? Are they adopted by OSHA and
therefore imposed on us?  Any insight is appreciated.

Daniel J. Huntington
Structural Engineer
KJWW Engineering
623 26th Avenue
Rock Island, IL 61201
PH: (309) 788-0673
Fax: (309) 786-5967
e-mail: huntingtondj(--nospam--at)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeffery Seegert (x 485) [mailto:jbseegert(--nospam--at)]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 14, 1999 8:16 AM
> To: 'SEAINT'
> Subject: RE: Federal building code future
> In my opinion, owners are constantly stipulating design criteria.  Many
> of these criteria exceed code requirements.  In high wind areas, I am
> constantly being asked to design residential homes to withstand wind
> speeds that are significantly higher than code minimums.  Many large
> manufacturing companies are designing their warehouses and factories to
> withstand loads in excess of code minimums.  Many local jurisdictions
> are adopting their own additions or modifications of the code.
> The federal government builds hundreds of buildings every year.  If they
> adopt a standard to be applied to all federally funded projects, I'm not
> sure that there is anything we can do except call our congressmen (they
> will find an engineer who will design the project to their standards).
> I'm sure that the feds will lobby with the idea that their standards are
> stricter than the codes and will use examples such as Oklahoma City to
> rally their point around.  This may eventually effect the existing codes
> but there are many many engineers and code boards who I'm sure will not
> sit back and allow the federal government to step in and take over the
> existing code approval procedure.
> FEMA is the closest form to an accepted code governing body and yet
> there have been many modifications to their requirements as a direct
> result of input and critique from the private sector.  One thing to
> think about is the current research side of code development.  It took a
> very long time before the private sector realized the importance of
> steel stud/structural wood panel shear wall testing.  Then to get the
> funding from the different manufacturers and technical associations
> slowed the entire process down (this process has been in effect well
> over 5-7 years).  Federally funded research (this may well be as slow a
> process if not slower) is much more abundant.  This research can be
> directed and applied to many more areas than private funding may allow.