Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: new SEAOC seismology web page

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Me first! Me first!

Ref: 1997 UBC Code, section 1633.2.9.3 (R not exceeding 4).

In the old code, 1994 UBC, section 1631.2.9.3, the limitation was Rw<=6.
When designing wood framed structures under the old code using a Rw=6 (Table
16-N, item 1.1.b), this requirement was invisible. Now, the designer is
required to produce MORE (IMO tedious and worthless) structural calculations
for the same structure since R=4.5 for item 1.1.b in Table 16-N.

My Question:

It appears to me that Table 16-N and section 1633.2.9.3 were given to two
engineers to translate to the 1997 UBC code language (i.e., divide by 1.4)
with one engineer rounding up to 4.5 in Table 16-N and one engineer rounding
down to 4 in section 1633.2.9.3 and the seismology committee failed to
coordinate the two. Is this the case or has the seismology committee
discovered some scientific data or anecdotal evidence which, in the interest
of life safety, warrants the additional structural calculations? Or, should
UBC section 1633.2.9.3 be amended to read "...R not exceeding 4.5."?


Bill Allen, S.E.
Laguna Niguel, CA

=>-----Original Message-----
=>From: Mark E. Deardorff [mailto:MarkD(--nospam--at)]
=>Sent: Wednesday, December 22, 1999 3:16 PM
=>To: seaint(--nospam--at)
=>Subject: RE: new SEAOC seismology web page
=>I set this up for the committee. Until there is a permanent
=>webmaster, however, no one really has teh time to set it up
=>professionally. Martin will be receiving e-mails and then
=>distributing them to the appropriate members of the
=>seismology committee for further action.
=>Please, and this is directed toward everybody, use the
=>question submission form ONLY for legitimate questions. Do
=>not post comments there. Post comments here. Martin reads the
=>list in digest form on a regular basis. In order for this
=>system to work we must work to keep it as efficient as possible.
=>In fact, it might not be a bad idea to discuss potential
=>questions here before posting them to the seismology
=>committee site to avoid repetitious submissions.
=>I will also suggest to Martin that we post a list of pending
=>questions to help avoid just such repetitious and bandwidth
=>wasting submission.
=>Mark E. Deardorff
=>Chairman, CAC