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

Re: What is the 1076 of Later Edition of the UBC?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Dennis 
I suspect it is a misprint - should be 1976 UBC.

Stan Scholl


On Mon, 16 Apr 2001 17:03:17 -0700 "Structuralist" <dennis.wish(--nospam--at)gte.net>
writes:
> The manager of a wood framed commercial building nearby is about to 
> lease
> space to the University of California. The U of C has provided him 
> with a
> "Certificate of Applicable Code" which is to be completed by a local
> Architect, Civil or Structural Engineer.
> The document states as follows:
> 
> "I, _____________ an architect, civil engineer or structural 
> engineer,
> licensed by the State of California, have completed a recent 
> walk-through
> and reviewed the available documentation of the building, and hereby 
> certify
> that the design and construction of the entire building, known for 
> purposes
> of this agreement as <Building Address> was either:
> 
> A) Approved by the local jurisdiction pursuant to the 1997 or later 
> edition
> of the Uniform Building Code (UBC);
> 
> 				OR
> 
> B) Approved by the local jurisdiction pursuant to the 1076 or later 
> edition
> of the UBC, including all additions, modifications or repairs to the 
> seismic
> resisting system. The building was originally constructed in 1997.
> Additions/modifications/repairs took place in 1997.
> 	I further creativity the building is not and does not 
> contain any of the
> following:
> (i) Unreinforced Masonry walls;
> (ii) welded steel moment frames (WSMF) constituting the primary 
> structural
> system of the building which WSMF's (a) have been subject to 
> previous strong
> ground motion (approximately 0.20g or greater) since construction, 
> or (b)
> may have low or limited redundancy, or discontinuity or offsets of 
> the
> moment frames;
> (iii) flexible diaphragm-rigid walls;
> (iv) Apparent additions, or modifications, or repairs to the seismic
> resisting systems dome without a permit.
> (v) hillside construction on a slope steeper than 1-vertical to
> 3-horizontal; or,
> (vi) multi-story wood frame structure with construction over the 
> first-story
> parking (soft-story structures)."
> 
> My two questions:
> 
> 1. What is the reference to the 1076 or later edition of the UBC?
> 2. Although I have not yet checked the building, I do believe it is 
> wood
> framed walls and diaphragm. The aspect ratio of the diaphragm and 
> location
> of the walls would indicate that the diaphragm is probably rigid 
> (the full
> diaphragm is relatively rigid). I would assume they are speaking of 
> masonry
> or tilt=up buildings with wood diaphragms.
> 
> Can anyone explain this to me so that I can advice my client. The 
> building
> was completed 3 or 4-years ago. I believe it is wood construction 
> (client
> did not know but has the drawings). This would put the design into 
> the 94
> UBC. Does the report specifically exempt compliance to anything 
> earlier than
> the 97 UBC?
> 
> Has anyone filled out these affidavits. and can you explain the 
> limitations.
> 
> TIA,
> 
> Regards,
> Dennis S. Wish, PE
> 
> 
> * 
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions 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 

* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions 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