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

RE: Alaskan Engineers read ->RE: IBC vs NFPA5000 (Was IBC 1617.6. 2. ..)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
New twists on the same stuff to keep it interesting.  Some of it is too
vague for my liking but some of it is a big improvement.

Deflection limits for snow and for walls.  Seismic design category D instead
of zone 4.  Have to always consider orthogonal effects for rigid diaphragms.
Vertical component of seismic load Ev required for ASD too. AISC Seismic 4.1
does not jive with IBC 1605.4.  Wind stuff different.  Different rules for
combining R's on same axis. Need to scale response spectrum analysis stuff
by whole static base shear.  Have to check drift on wood buildings unless
use simplified method.  Wood shearwall nailing tables different adjustments.
Chapter 17 very different. Concrete anchorage stuff more difficult. NDS wood
to concrete different. Wood perforated wall stuff not as clear as FEMA 368
chapter 12.  Aspect ratios for walls.  Have to buy book for ASD masonry.
Doesn't say 3x for masonry wall anchorage system anymore.  Have to buy more
books than before.



-----Original Message-----
From: Tom.Hunt(--nospam--at)d-fd.com [mailto:Tom.Hunt(--nospam--at)d-fd.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 20, 2002 7:55 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Alaskan Engineers read ->RE: IBC vs NFPA5000 (Was IBC
1617.6.2. ..)



Scott,

In case you haven't heard the low down on this the IAPMO is hammering the
I-Codes because they allow the use of plastic pipe which can be installed
by non-union workers.  You can bet that your Rep is supported by the local
Alaskan unions (read big $money$).  Also note that NFPA headquarters is
located in Massachusetts (read Ted Kennedy, unions, more $money$).

By the way, since you have actually had to USE the IBC how has it compared
to the UBC in so far as implementation and interpretation of the provision?

Thomas Hunt, AK PCE 8909
Duke/Fluor Daniel





                    "Haan, Scott M."

                    <HaanSM@ci.anchor       To:     "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'"
<seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
                    age.ak.us>              cc:

                                            Subject:     Alaskan Engineers
read ->RE: IBC vs NFPA5000 (Was IBC
                    02/13/02 04:45 PM        1617.6.2. ..)

                    Please respond to

                    seaint









Alaskan Engineers:

IAPMO is in the process of derailing the state IBC adoption process by
lobbying the Alaska state legislature. I can't remember the Rep that is
spearheading it but she is framing the IBC adoption as being pushed down
the
throats of Alaskans by big government leftist bureaucrats.  Any Alaskan
engineer that thinks IAPMO is in left-field and thinks the IBC needs to be
adopted should e-mail their state senators and representatives now.

IAPMO is trying to get a bill rewritten, I think it is HR399, so that it
reads the state can only use "uniform codes".  It is a delaying tactic
until
the NFPA5000 comes out in 2003. IAPMO and NFPA just want to make money
selling books.  What is the difference going to be for structural
engineering anyway? -- buy more adopted standards with the NFPA5000?  I
feel
no loyalty to ICC but come on IAPMO and NFPA - write your own sewer pipe
code and fire code and leave the structural code alone.  Avarice.



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********