Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: PEMB document/review

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I have ordered the new 2002 code too.  Might as well start there and work with it.  The terminology may be in their manual, but it may need some terms added to it and your specifications may still need to define where the definitions of these terms are located (MBMA 2002 in this case). 

I am not sure that the inclusion in MBMA requires PEMB companies to adhere to this terminology.  If we define it to be so in our specs, then it will be defined.  I think using MBMA as the source is the best idea, although, some terms may need to be added.

Ron Martin
Tuscaloosa, AL

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