Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

2000 IBC v 1999 UBC code question

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Fellow Engineers:

I am reviewing the impact the IBC will have on how we design out West.

Using 1997 UBC Alternate Basic Load Combination 1612.3.2 we are allowed a
1/3 stress increase for wind or seismic only loading regardless of if the
material is wood, steel, or concrete.

Using 2000 Alternate Basic Load Combination 1605.3.2 we are NO LONGER
allowed a 1/3 stress increase for wind or seismic only unless specifically
given in the material section.  This means wood only.

First question:  Did I read this correctly?

Second question, {mostly for those of you in Texas where I know that every
home is Engineered :)} where the IBC has been adopted are you still using
Simpson numbers or since they have also included a 1/3 increase on steel are
you down grading them?

Thanks in advance.

George Richards, P. E.

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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) 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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********