Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Old Seismic Values

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Daryl,

If this were a civilian project, there is a building authority. It sounds like this is either a DoD or DOE project. The Federal Government people get what they perceive as an absolute order from above, and they have to pass it on down the line. Jason is the one that has to try to bring reason to the process with his client. It is not an easy job to explain something like seismologic probabalistics and deterministic floors to a Federal Government program manager. And the manager then has to be ble to bring this back up the chain to the guy pulling th strings. It can be done. I have gone through this exercise with Federal managers. Some times it goes easy, some times it takes months to resolve. Some times you can be forced into the wrong solution, and then when it doesn't work (as you predicted), you still take the heat.

Regards,
Harold Sprague


From: Daryl Richardson <h.d.richardson(--nospam--at)shaw.ca>
Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: Old Seismic Values
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 13:17:18 -0600

Jason, Harold,

This sounds more like a political problem then a technical problem to me. I don't know very much about the different technologies involved here; but I do know that political problems often respond better to political solutions
than to technical solutions.

Might you not save a lot of time and effort by getting a letter from the Building Authority Having Jurisdiction stating what will and what will not be accepted for the project? Most businessmen won't get their backs up and fight
this kind of directive.

Another possible solution is to provide two sets of calculations which
show that both codes are met.

Respectfully submitted,

H. Daryl Richardson

Harold Sprague wrote:

> Jason,
>
> You have got a bit of homework to do.  This is normally in the domain of
> seismologists. But if you have the marching orders, the following is your
> homework:
> * 1994 NEHRP and Commentary
> * 1997 NEHRP and Commentary
> * 2000 NEHRP and Commentary
> * 2003 NEHRP and Commentary
> * Neotectonics in Earthquake Evaluation, Krinitzsky and Slemmons, Geological
> Society of America
> * DOE STD 1020-94, Natural Phenomena Hazards Design and Evaluation Criteria
> for DOE Facilities
>
> Papers:
> * The Hazard in Using Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Analysis for Engineering,
> Krinitzsky, Environmental & Engineering Geoscience Winter 1998
> * USACE Paper S-73-1, State of the Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in
> the US, Report 29, Krinitzsky
>
> The NEHRP documents were developed by the BSSC http://www.bssconline.org/. > Some of their documents are available on line. Some of the older ones will
> probably not be available on line.
>
> If it were up to me, I would call Geomatrix, URS, USACE, or USGS in Boulder.
>   You will find guys like Maury Power, C B Crouse, Ellis Krinitzsky, E V
> Leyendecker, Art Frankle, Ted Algermissen, and Dave Perkins who are the real > movers in the field. I have been envoloved in seismic engineering for about > 17 years and envolved in code development for about 10 years, I would hire
> one of the guys.
>
> What you are needing was the result of a radical evolution that took place > over a 10 year period. In the early days the Algermissen and Perkins charts > were what was used for zone development and were 20 years old before we went
> to true seismic spectral ordinates.  Ted Algermissen first proposed a
> seismic spectral ordinate chart in about 1995.  It just took us a while.
>
> Regards,
> Harold Sprague
>
> >From: "Jason W. Kilgore" <jkilgore(--nospam--at)leok.com>
> >Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
> >To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
> >Subject: RE: Old Seismic Values
> >Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2004 18:21:17 -0500
> >
> > > I don't know why you are even trying to use the old data.
> >
> >Because the client said, in effect, "Thou shalt use this document in your > >design". The document specifically states the acceleration and velocity > >values I gave earlier. I *know* that the values are wrong; my problem is > >that I have to explain to the client why they're wrong, how much they're
> >wrong, what are the right values, and why they are the right values.
> >
> >In order to do this efficiently, I need to completely understand exactly
> >what the old values are, and how they relate to the new values.
> >
> >Again, I realize that these are very low numbers, but the difference in the
> >report value (5%, 475 yr. return) and new values (2.1%, 475 yr. return)
> >could mean the difference between adding bracing to all mechanical units or
> >strengthening existing 20' tall URM shear walls (in plane and
> >out-of-plane).
> >
> >---
> >Jason Kilgore
> >Leigh & O'Kane, LLC
> >Kansas City, Missouri
> >
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE!
> http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********



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

_________________________________________________________________
Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/


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