Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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


[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

1) Another "must read" is the 2000 NEHRP Provisions Commentary (FEMA 359).
This explains the 2000 NEHRP Provisions that have been largely incorporated
into the 2000 IBC and ASCE 7-02.  You can download it as a PDF file from

2) The next edition of the SEAOC Blue Book is in the planning stages by the
SEAOC Seismology Committee.  You can find a tentative outline for by
drilling down at

Rick Drake, SE
Fluor Daniel, Aliso Viejo, CA


                      "Paul Feather"                                                                                                   
                      <pfeather@SE-Soluti      To: <seaint(--nospam--at)>                                                                 
                      12/10/02 08:50 AM        cc:                                                                                     
                      Please respond to                                                                                                
                      seaint                   Subject:  SEAOC Blue Book (was Re: CONNECTION DESIGN RESPONSIBILITY)                    

I will second Thomas' statements regarding the blue book being a "must
read" for anyone who is involved in seismic design.  The blue book
provisions and commentary have traditionally been a state of the art
discourse on seismic design.  Many of the leading concepts and
methodologies (base isolation, passive energy dissipation, performance
based design....) are discussed in detail and developed in subsequent
editions long before adoption or publication in the model codes.

I have always found the blue book to be a testament to the high standards
and professionalism of the volunteers and committee members of the
Structural Engineers Association of California, this publication alone is
worth the continued support and membership.

I must admit that though I have always maintained my membership in SEAOC, I
have not always given the time and commitment I should.  With all the
controversy and recent discourse regarding the seismology committee and
SEAOC (rho factors etc..), I for one would like to take a moment and simply
say "Thank You" to the members who do contribute so much to our profession.

I do not know the intended future of the blue book with the passing of the
UBC and the changes in the code process.  I would be interested to hear
from anyone more involved in the current organization if they would share
their views on whether the blue book will continue to be published and the
direction the publication may take.

Paul Feather PE, SE
 ----- Original Message -----
 From: THunt(--nospam--at)
 To: seaint(--nospam--at)
 Sent: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 7:28 AM


 Part of the answer here is about timing and the procedures for writing the
 Uniform Building Code (UBC).  It starts (use to but no longer with the
 IBC) with the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC)
 producing their seismic "Recommended Requirements" for inclusion in
 Chapter 16.  ICBO, which compiles and produces the UBC, reviews these
 recommendations and historically would accept most but not all of the
 them.  As example, the seismic ductility factor "R" was originally split
 into two components.  This part did not make it in the final UBC however
 probably about 99 percent of everything else did.  The proposed code
 language "Recommended Requirements" are then followed by a very extensive
 commentary.  For anyone doing seismic design per the UBC this commentary
 is a real must read.  The commentary is then followed by what I would call
 special topics such as a detail review and history of the near source
 factor, "R" factors, dynamic analysis, lessons learned from the Northridge
 earthquake, performance-based design, etc., etc.

 Hope this helps,

 Thomas Hunt, S.E.
 ABS Consulting

                                To:        seaint(--nospam--at)               
    12/09/2002 06:31 PM         Subject:        Re: CONNECTION DESIGN      
    Please respond to                                                      

 In a message dated 12/9/2002 2:50:08 PM Pacific Standard Time,
 THunt(--nospam--at) writes:

 The commentary to this section from the SEAOC "Recommended Lateral Force
 Requirements and Commentary C108.2.2 reads "In some geographical regions,

 I don't design steel and I don't live in California, so maybe I am missing
 something, but how can you have "Recommended Requirements"?  Aren't things
 usually either recommendations OR requirements?

 Gail S. Kelley, P.E.

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:
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*   Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at) 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: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********