Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: Missing Errata. CBC 2001 effective Nov. 2002

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Mr. Adams:

I got no response to this issue of uncorrected errata for new code

I suspect that the law is written to adopt the code and can not include the
later made errata. As far a as using an errata for design, it may cost money
and time to demonstrate the intent of the code by analysis, testing or by
delivering new codes yet to be adopted by law. (that too is a gamble if not
to be adopted). It may help to find a contradiction in the code to
demonstrate a need to use an errata.

A similar problem has come up with my more recent posting.  The concrete
shear wall strength equations. I have a case where the equation 11-32
demands 30% more strength than the equation 21-7. The code does not exclude
11-32 for higher seismic zones. David A. Fanella, Ph.D., S.E., P.E. has
stated it is intended that equation 21-7 should only control in a higher
zone. The new ACI 318-02 might clarify this but is not the adopted code for
California. I have heard that California may not adopt the IBC. I am ordered
the 318-02. I was surprised that 318-95 is no longer available but is
referenced in the IBC2000 see page 675 of the IBC. I have decided to use
equation 11-32 of the CBC. I professionally will not design for less than
the legal requirement and not less than that intended by the code and that
consistent with the code.

David Merrick, SE

----- Original Message -----
From: "Dave Adams" <davea(--nospam--at)>
To: "David Merrick" <mrkgp(--nospam--at)>
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 4:16 PM
Subject: FW: Missing Errata. CBC 2001 effective Nov. 2002


Did you ever receive a reply to this?  I saved it because I was
interested in the response as well.

Dave K. Adams, S.E.
Lane Engineers, Inc.
979 N. Blackstone St.
Tulare, CA 93274
PH:  (559) 688-5263
FAX: (559) 688-8893
E-mail:  davea(--nospam--at)

-----Original Message-----
From: David Merrick [mailto:mrkgp(--nospam--at)]
Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 4:58 PM
Subject: Missing Errata. CBC 2001 effective Nov. 2002

I have the California Building Code 2002, effective Nov 2002, Ordered in
This document is the 1997 UBC in whole with the California amendments.

I have found many 1997UBC errata from before Nov. 02 that are not part
this document.

Am I to manually add previous errata to correct this new code printing?
Is there a list of updated errata for the CBC?

Are some 1997UBC errata invalid? Are applying errata defendable in

I am tired of spooning out money for half baked documents. Is this

David Merrick, SE

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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: 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********