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

RE: Charlie Carter re: latest AISC Code of Standard Practice?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Title: RE: Charlie Carter re: latest AISC Code of Standard Practice?

>It appears to me that the language that used to be in
>paragraph 4.2.1 regarding approval as it relates to
>responsibility for connections has changed somewhat
>making it less clear.  Is there a particular reason
>why the language:"...constitutes acceptance by the
>owner's authorized representative of design for the
>structural adequacy of such connections." was deleted?

The engineers that served on the AISC Code Committee indicated that they agreed with the intent of the way the AISC Code handled design responsibility, but objected to the language used to convey it. To eliminate the lightening-rod effect of the old language that read to many like a slap in the face, the language was modified as you now read it in Section 4.4.1. This same kind of change (to language that is more defensible and acceptable to all parties) has been made in many places in the new AISC Code of Standard Practice.

So in the end, the basic intent has not changed. Review and approval by the owner's desinated representative for design (usually the structural engineer of record) of the shop and erection drawings indicates that the design intent has been met and the fabricator "can get to work".

Charlie