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

RE: Philosophy: Seismic Design Standards

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

In response to Dennis's question about Vision 2000.

Currently, the PBD subcommittee is mentally exhaused after just finishing the
new Blue Book appendix, so we're letting them take it easy for a few months to
get re-aquainted with their families.  In terms of future directions, I don't
think anyone is thinking about incorporating it into the code at any point in
the near future.  We'd like to stand back and look at it next to other
approaches, in particular the new methodology that will be presented in the
upcoming SAC guidelines.  Then perhaps take the best ideas of everything to
incorporate into a future revision.  Developing and perfecting a technical
methodology is one thing, there are a lot of very big issues that Frank McClure
and others have mentioned that need to be considered.  While we are all very
concerned about the responsibility and liability that it could impose on
engineers, there is another aspect.  The general public inherently thinks that
all buildings are equal, regardless of age, type of construction, etc. (I'll
grant you, we have succeded in creating a caution in their minds about URM
construction, elevated freeways, and perhaps tilt-ups).  If we start creating
buildings that can be graded in terms of performance, the public will eventually
start to think about buildings in a different manner.