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

RE: UBC Section 1612.2.1, Exception 2

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I have a course book that must be a later addition.  It seems there was an
error in the 1997 UBC chapter 19 Div VIII section 1928 stuff.  My course
book reads:       


Problem...Load factors of 1928.1.2 based on 1988 edition of ASCE 7 and do
not reflect earthquake load  (E) at ultimate load level as adopted in

Solution...Use of load combinations in 1612.2.1 [Eqs (12-1) thru (12-6)
without the (1.1) multiplier] and set of strength reduction factors listed
in 1928.1.1 are compatible, without further modification."

I see designers use the UBC 1612 load combinations with the 1.1 factor for
seismic design all the time.  The 1.1 factor is included in ACI 318-99
section 9.2.3 but then is not included in IBC 1605.2.1 which is referenced
in IBC concrete amendments.

Scott M Haan  P.E.
Plan Review Engineer
Building Safety Division, 
Development Services Department,
Municipality of Anchorage
phone: 907-343-8183   fax: 907-249-7399

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Bill Allen, S.E. [SMTP:Bill(--nospam--at)]
> Sent:	Wednesday, March 28, 2001 10:36 AM
> To:	seaint(--nospam--at)
> Subject:	UBC Section 1612.2.1, Exception 2
> I have some hand written notes in my seminar book when I attended the ICBO
> Seminar on the 1997 UBC Earthquake Regulations. I believe the presenter
> was
> S.K. Ghosh and I believe he said that this exception, which requires
> multiplying the load factors by 1.1, should be deleted and is not
> appropriate.
> My questions:
> 1. Does anyone else have similar notes?
> 2. Has anything been published publicly (such as a SEAOC position paper)
> which states this?
> 3. (a big one), what about masonry?
> TIA,
> Bill Allen, S.E.