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]
In addition to my last post, I might suggest that the letter I submitted
to the Seismology Committee in 1999 also included the comments of other
noted and respected engineers including:
Joseph R. Grill, PE
Ray Shreenan, PE
Nels Roselund, SE
Charles O. Greenlaw, SE
Paul Reilly, PE
Jeffery Seegert, PE
Daniel McNaughton SE (and exerpts from an abstract by Timothy L.
Phillips labled "Lateral Load Sharing by Diaphragms in Wood-Framed
Buildings"; 
Bruce Resnick, SE
Jeff Smith, SE
Michael Cochran, SE.
Bill Cain, SE
James Bela
Andy Vidikin, SE
Mark Swingle, SE
Gerard Madden, PE
Bill Allen, SE
Alfonso S. Quilala Jr.
Ben Yousefi, PE
Bill Nelson, SE
Roy Kroll, CEG / Associate
Lynn (last name not listed)
 
These are well respected professionals in the field who, at the time
prior to August 1, 1999 had serious questions about the code and those
who wrote them. Many of these issues are as yet unresolved. They don't
refer to the code in respect to steel, concrete or masonry - they refer
directly to wood design and the difficulty that the code has created
both in competition and in future value of these homes when there is no
law to disclose the differences that may affect the performance of these
homes in moderate and strong motion earthquakes or wind.

Sincerely,
Dennis S. Wish, PE

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:bill(--nospam--at)polhemus.cc] 
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 5:44 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: IBC "Oops" (Was Residential Design Discussion)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sprague, Harold O. [mailto:SpragueHO(--nospam--at)bv.com]
> Sent: Monday, September 30, 2002 2:35 PM
> To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> Subject: RE: IBC "Oops" (Was Residential Design Discussion)
>
>
> Charlie's take on this is accurate.  There were impediments to seismic

> code development in the old process.  Ron Hamburger and Bob Bachman 
> were instrumental in moving seismic code development into the FEMA
> sponsored BSSC
> process.

I can't speak with any authority as to this, since I and my 12 year old
daughter both have about equal experience in the seismic engineering
code development process, but I have an observation.

It sounds as though those who are making these statements, including
Harold, Charlie and others, are actually talking around the point that
Dennis is trying to make.

I don't think Dennis has said that the entire code development process
is "corrupted," or that there is NO good work coming out of the various
committees who have input into that process.

If I read him correctly, I believe he is limiting his criticism strictly
to the provisions in the UBC 97 that seriously handicap light-frame wood
structural design, forcing design of uneconomical structures to a degree
that, if similarly handicapping provisions were insisted upon in
structural steel design, say, there would be a tremendous outcry from
those who design those structures as well. But because the light-frame
wood design market is not the "mainstream" of structural engineering
design, the loophole remains open and any attempts to close it are met
with a stone wall.

If my observation is not accurate, please forgive me, but I have taken
pains to try to follow Dennis' rants over the past week. He is incensed
that, in order to design wood frame structures--especially
shearwalls--reasonably and economically, the designer has in essence to
break the law, or face losing work to those who ARE willing to break the
law.

For someone like Dennis whose practice is firmly grounded in wood
residential and light-frame commercial work, that is an impossible
position to be in. But because those involved in seismic code
development have other areas of interest at heart, it's not being
addressed.

I hope I've got that right, and I hope that we can all see through
Dennis' fit of pique to the underlying cause.


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