Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: General Building Code Question[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
- Subject: Re: General Building Code Question
- From: GSKWY(--nospam--at)aol.com
- Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2002 10:44:44 EST
From everything I have seen and heard, my understanding is that design should be in accordance with the version of ACI 318 (and other documents) referenced by the building code in force at the time the design is done. If newer documents are more conservative, one uses their engineering judgement to determine if the requirements of newer documents should be followed.
It is not a good idea to use less restrictive requirements in newer documents, however; as Scott pointed out, the newer documents may include a number of other changes you are not including in your calculations.
The above is true even in places where there is no regulation - in DC for example, structural engineers must sign a certificate indicating that they have complied with BOCA 96.
Personally, however, I have used the change from 6 to 7.5 sqrt (f'c) as justification for not requiring a broken tendon to be fixed - in fact I have used this justification for a while now, ever since I knew it was going to come out in ACI 318-02. And I would probably not worry about a design that ended up with stresses of 6.2 sqrt f'c; I would not however design to 7.5.
In answer to your question about how long something could stay in 318, despite the fact that it is not in any of the building codes, the answer is forever.
- Prev by Subject: RE: General Building Code Question
- Next by Subject: Re: General Building Code Question
- Previous by thread: RE: General Building Code Question
- Next by thread: Re: General Building Code Question