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

RE: What code to use

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Ken-
Which code you use depends on why you are analyzing.  If it is because the
owner got caught for building without a permit, the building official is
probably going to want a current code analysis.  If it is for litigation
reasons, you will probably want to check compliance to the code that existed
at the time.

I've heard the line that "permits are a bother" many times before.  Usually,
in such cases, I have found serious deficiencies that the owner and/or
original contractor then tries to rationalize away.  I would approach a
project such as this very cautiously and take EVERYTHING I was told with a
mountain of salt.  I wonder, for example, how you will verify the foundation
construction as it is now concealed and very difficult to determine if
things such as proper corner detailing, tie configurations (if used), depths
and widths were correct.  You can use a rebar meter to determine approximate
bar size and depth and core or use a Schmidt hammer to get a ballpark idea
of concrete strength.  Much foundation information can't be determined
without destructive testing or exposure.

Also, the shear resisting elements are a bit tough to determine without
destructively exposing sheathing, chords, etc.  The exposures can be
minimized by appropriate analyses beforehand but need to be done.  Again,
what you are told may be remote from what actually happened during
construction.  Be careful.

Regards,
Bill Cain, S.E.
Oakland CA

	-----Original Message-----
	From:	Deb [SMTP:kendeb(--nospam--at)maxinet.com]
	Sent:	Thursday, September 28, 2000 2:46 PM
	To:	seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
	Subject:	What code to use

	I have been asked to analyze a house that was built without a permit
in
	1984. I have the original plans and have been told that the house
was
	built per the plans, the owner just didn't bother to get a building
	permit. This house is in a very rural area and building permits
there
	are often viewed as a burden that just isn't necessary. I will be
	inspecting it to verify that it was built according to the plans
before
	I begin the analysis. My questions is, do I use the current version
of
	the UBC or go back to the version that was in effect at the time
that it
	was built?

	Thansks

	Ken Reed, PE


	******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** 
	*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
	*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
	*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
	*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to 
	*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type 
	*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email 
	*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message 
	*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send 
	*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
	*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
	*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
	*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
	******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** 
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to 
*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type 
*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email 
*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message 
*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send 
*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********