Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: ACI 530-02/ASCE 5-02/TMS 402-02 Experts

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Barry,

In biblical terms the Adam is the NEHRP Provisions. The Eve is the NEHRP Commentary. And the NEHRP begat the ASCE 7-02 and the IBC 2000. Because the Garden of Eden was limited on fruit, the IBC was cast out of the garden, but the NEHRP continued to begat the generations of ASCE 7 Seismic Task Committee. The intent is that IBC will include ASCE 7 by reference.

The commentaries in the NEHRP get back to the root of the thought behind the Provisions. It is REQUIRED for us to produce NEHRP Commentary as we develop the Provisions. But is no Draconian type of punishment. And we have been remiss in this area.

The ACI largely develops their seismic provisions in the ACI 318 H. The masonry people do something similar I believe. They then feed this into the NEHRP for consideration. There have been things that were not acceptable to the NEHRP in the past and did not get included.

Regards,
Harold Sprague





From: "Barry H. Welliver" <barrywelliver2(--nospam--at)earthlink.net>
Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: ACI 530-02/ASCE 5-02/TMS 402-02 Experts
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 13:40:58 -0600

I'm just up from my nap.

I appreciate your insight on this matter Harold. I was afraid there was
"thinking" along this line. By your comments, I presume there is little
explanation of this in the new commentary and applaud your intention to
follow through at your code development meeting.

My own experience with code change proposals has reinforced the need for
good commentaries to help the users grasp a changed or new provision. I also
realize how difficult writing those commentaries can be. Perhaps if the
proponents where required to provide verbiage for the associated commentary
(to be published at the same time) the essence of the arguments would also
have to be agreed to.

I try to keep copies of the code change proposals specifically because they
contain information about the logic of the proposition. I'm familiar with
this in the IBC process. Is there a similar source for ACI/ASCE/TMS
approvals?

Thanks again for being a well-spring of information for this listserv.

Barry H. Welliver
barrywelliver2(--nospam--at)earthlink.net


-----Original Message-----
From: Harold Sprague [mailto:spraguehope(--nospam--at)hotmail.com]
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2004 12:05 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: ACI 530-02/ASCE 5-02/TMS 402-02 Experts

Barry,
I happened to be awake during the time that this was discussed in some of my

seismic code development participation.

This was a reaction to a lobby by the residential building community. Prior

to this, it was prohibited to support ANY masonry from wood.  The resulting
code was a compromise.  But masonry should not be supported by wood if the
masonry is 12 ft from grade. The argument presented at the time had nothing

to do with the weight supported by wood.  The argument presented was for
prohibition of a falling hazard.   I am sure that I could design wood to
support much more than what the code infers.  We have been remiss in
Commentary development.  I will make it a point to discuss this at our next
code development meeting... right after my nap.

Regards,
Harold Sprague





>From: "Barry H. Welliver" <barrywelliver2(--nospam--at)earthlink.net>
>Reply-To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>To: "Seaint Listserv" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
>Subject: ACI 530-02/ASCE 5-02/TMS 402-02 Experts
>Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2004 09:54:06 -0600
>
>First of all I have to say keeping up with "code changes" is adding grey
>hair on a daily basis now.
>
>
>
>An exception in section 6.2.2.3.1.5 allows support of masonry veneer on
>wood
>framing provided that the masonry has an installed weight of 40 psf or less
>and height of no more than 12 ft.
>
>
>
> My understanding of the 12 feet is a veneer weighing less that 40 psf up
>to
>that height (i.e. 40 psf x 12 ft.) is the maximum load allowed for wood
>support. It has been suggested that this means masonry weighing 40 psf
>cannot be installed higher than 12 above the ground. If this (second
>suggestion) is correct, I'd like to know.
>
>
>
>Secondly, if this provision is intended to limit the weight of masonry
>being
>supported (and that's a big if), then would a single stone (such as a
>lintel, jamb or sill stone) which has a density exceeding 40 psf but weighs
>significantly less than 40 psf x 12 feet, be "acceptable" as a rational
>interpretation (and hence be supportable on wood framing).
>
>
>
>Thanks for any help on understanding this "new" provision. As you might
>tell
>from my "inexperience" with ACI 530-02, I've yet to get this resource and
>associated commentary.
>
>
>
>Barry H. Welliver
>
>barrywelliver2(--nospam--at)earthlink.net
>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Check out Election 2004 for up-to-date election news, plus voter tools and
more! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx


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

_________________________________________________________________
On the road to retirement? Check out MSN Life Events for advice on how to get there! http://lifeevents.msn.com/category.aspx?cid=Retirement


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