Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Parking Garage Loading - IBC/UBC

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

When doing live load reductions, the alternate method of the IBC
(1607.9.2) will give you approximately the same result as the general
method of the UBC. Unlike the general method of the IBC (1607.9.1.2),
the alternate method of the IBC is not clear as to wether or not these
reductions are applicable to parking garages.  I would definitely get
clarification on wether or not the alternate method was intended to be
used in parking garage design before proceeding with the lower loads it



>>> jwatson(--nospam--at) 04/04/03 07:25AM >>>
We are working on a precast parking garage in northern California.  The
UBC requires a 50 PSF live load.  This can be reduced to 30 PSF for
columns and even the double-tees we are using.  The IBC (read ASCE
doesn't allow the reduction for the double-tees and the columns will
designed for 40 PSF.  We are debating which direction to advise to
owner to
go.  I am not aware of any parking garage failures but don't want the
building to be "under-designed" in 5 years when California does change
to something other than the UBC.  This is a eight story garage and the
impacts will be huge based on the decision.  Like usual it is a fast
job, and we need foundations in two weeks.  Opinions greatly


Jake Watson, P.E.

Salt Lake City, UT

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