Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: NFPA 5000 - Why? And Where?

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Rick,

I will disagree in a minor way.  I would argue that the IBC would still be
referencing (or at least reprinting like the UBC does) the same
standards without the work from NCSEA and others.  It is just that those
referenced documents would likely be modified in significant ways during
the IBC process.  We DEFINITELY can thank NCSEA, it member organizations,
AND the material organizations such as ACI and AISC (I know that ACI
makes it a point to attend the IBC hearings to object to changes to 318
during the IBC process) for making sure that there are very minimal
changes to the referenced documents during the IBC process.

Regards,

Scott
Ypsilanti, MI

On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 Rick.Drake(--nospam--at)Fluor.com wrote:

>
> Scott's assessment is essentially correct.  However, it didn't "just
> happen" that the IBC code essentially references the exact same
> documents structurally.  NCSEA and its member structural engineering
> organizations, have worked very hard at all levels to make sure that all of
> the structural documents (AISC, ACI, ASCE, etc.) are ANSI accredited and
> referenced in both codes.
>
> If that makes your life easier, make sure you thank your local "code
> writers".
>
> Regards,
>
> Rock Drake, SE
> Fluor Daniel, Aliso Viejo, CA
>
> *********
>
>
>
>
>                     Scott Maxwell
>                     <smaxwell@engin.      To:     <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>                     umich.edu>
>                     09/11/02 06:28        cc:
>                     AM
>                     Please respond        Subject:     Re: NFPA 5000 - Why? And Where?
>                     to seaint
>                                                                                                               .....
>
>
>
>
>
> As others have pointed out in the past and has been highlighted in various
> articles in publications, the NFPA 5000 code will strictly rely upon
> referencing other ANSI standards or concensus based standards if there is
> not accredited ANSI standard for that "thing".  This means that the NFPA
> will reference ASCE 7 for loading, ACI 318 for concrete design, AISC's
> LRFD and ASD and Seismic specs for steel design, the MSJC (ACI 530/ASCE
> 5/TMS 402) for masonry design, the wood NDS for most wood design, etc.
> Supposedly, NFPA will make NO (or very, very minor) changes to those
> documents when they reference them (meaning essentially that the
> structural portion of the NFPA 5000 code should be very thin...basically a
> statement to see this document and that document, which also means that we
> will be buying more than just the NFPA document which users of the BOCA,
> SBC, and IBC codes are already used to buy will be a change to UBC users).
>
> It so happens that the IBC code essentially references the exact same
> documents structurally.  Thus, there will be very little difference
> structurally between the IBC and the NFPA 5000.  The main difference is
> that there is more potential for IBC code to tweak/change the provisions
> in that adopted references.  There are fewer changes being made in this
> way in the IBC, but it can still be done.  Thus, in theory, the two should
> be essentially the same, but there is still the chance for some
> significant differences if the IBC people get a little "wild".
>
> HTH,
>
> Scott
> Ypsilanti, MI
>
>
> On Wed, 11 Sep 2002 MBREngineering(--nospam--at)aol.com wrote:
>
> > After attending and ACI seminar lately, the rumor is that California is
> > leaning towards NFPA 5000 adoption instead of the IBC 2000.  Again I
> believe
> > that this is all political.  I also understand that most of the loading
> > criteria, including wind and seismic is being referred to the ASCE 7.
> >
> >
> > ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> > *   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
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
>
>
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The information transmitted is intended only for the person
> or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential
> and/or privileged material. If you are not the intended recipient
> of this message you are hereby notified that any use, review,
> retransmission, dissemination, distribution, reproduction or any
> action taken in reliance upon this message is prohibited. If you
> received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the
> material from any computer.  Any views expressed in this message
> are those of the individual sender and may not necessarily reflect
> the views of the company.
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********