Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: IBC "Oops" (Was Residential Design Discussion)

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Gerard:
I take strong exception with your comment "I'm sure every engineer on
the seismology committee is a better engineer than myself." In my
opinion if the engineer on the Seismology committee is not considering
how the code revisions that they are approving for submittal to an ICBO
Council with the intent to vote into code, then he is not a better
engineer - he has proven he (or she) is deficient in his knowledge of
residential wood framing or is egotistical enough to assume that it
simply is not important enough to care about. In my opinion, we who
design wood structures, understand the complexity of residential design,
the impracticality of the code and it's negative effect on the consumer
(home buyer) as well as the incentive for developers and designers to
seek less restrictive and more profitable methods of design.
Furthermore, we are better engineers when we consider the trade off in
performance and the effect it will have on the out-of-pocket expense
paid by the owners when homes are designed using less restrictive
(conventional construction) provisions.
In my opinion, this makes you and I much better engineers that those who
put us in this position.

Dennis


-----Original Message-----
From: Gerard Madden, PE [mailto:gmadden(--nospam--at)attbi.com] 
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 8:58 AM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: IBC "Oops" (Was Residential Design Discussion)


Rick,

My criticism toward SEAOC is in no way personal. I used to work
alongside a member of the Seismology Committee and I respect him greatly
and he and I had a chat as to what the time commitments are. I
understand what these members give and volunteer, but I don't have to
like their conclusions or be afraid to voice my opinion. I'm sure every
engineer on the seismology committee is a better engineer than myself.
However, every time someone disagrees (er: complains), it is labeled
personal attacks on committee members.

Just because I name names (Ron Hamburger), and I only do so because he
posted to the list on this very topic (and I dare say I'd have a
difficult time finding a more prominent name in Structural Engineering),
does that make me someone attacking him personally? He was president of
SEAOC when he posted to the list, knew there was a problem, and soon
there after, vanished off the list and we have progressed no further or
had any updates. He took credit on this list as one of the "inventors"
of RHO. Probably all the more reason many (but not all) of the people in
committees don't post to this list, because disagreements are taken
personally or they have been instructed not get involved with US.

Now you tell me, how long should we wait-7 years after the code was
published to get it fixed? I'd love to start using the IBC with it's
improved RHO provisions (I still believe it should be removed entirely),
but unfortunately I can't.

It sounds like you are telling me I'm shit out of luck and I should just
shut my mouth (or maybe think before I speak to put it less crudely). I
guess I just have a hard time understanding why if 90% of the engineers
in SEAOC think something is wrong with this provision (either minor or
major), The two or three "complainers" on this list have to join
committees, write every member of ICBO, and run for governor to get it
fixed.

I understand SEAOC's role has changed and the UBC is basically not a
priority anymore for all the committees. I'm glad there is a chance the
2002 CBC will at least correct some of the flaws with this provision. I
think 95% of the 1997 UBC is good, but why not try to make it better if
possible? I had no problems with the code other than with residential
buildings and tilt-ups with less than 10 foot wall segments. When I was
working on tall buildings of steel and concrete frame construction, I
had absolutely no problems using the code (well there was that little
drift equation exemption thing a maroo).

Respectfully,
-gerard
Santa Clara, CA


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