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

RE: IBC Question

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Ah, but from a technical point of view, section R1.1 is _NOT_ part of ACI
318 (i.e. the "code").  The commentary is NOT a "legal" document...in
otherwords, it is not a mandatory language document and has no standing
from the point of view of being "code enforceable".  Now, it could be
construed as a "standard of care" document.

The point is that from a purely code/"legal" point of view that bit in the
commentary means nothing.

Now, if you have a local juridiction that has adopted ACI 350-01 as a
referenced code for environmental structures (i.e. tanks, etc), then I
believe WSD would still be permitted "per code" as I believe ACI 350 still
has WSD (aka the "Alternate Desgin Method").  It is also possible that
some of the ACI nuclear oriented codes might still have WSD in them.

Thus, that is the reason why I stated "technically, WSD no longer exists
for concrete".  You forgot my little qualifier (i.e. the "technically").
You are correct, however, that the commentary does imply that WSD "may"
be used, but as I am not a lawyer (though I have stayed in Holiday Inn
Express hotels in the past) I cannot say how much legal validity such a
commentary statement has.

Regards,

Scott
Adrian, MI

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005, Sherman, William wrote:

> It is not completely accurate to say that "WSD no longer exists for
> concrete" or that a 1/3 increase no longer applies to concrete.
> Although the Alternate Design Method is no longer published in the ACI
> 318 Appendices, Section R1.1 of ACI 318-05 includes the statement "The
> Alternate Design Method of the 1999 code may be used in place of
> applicable sections of this code."  And section A.2.2 of the 1999
> Appendix A for the Alternate Design Method permits a 0.75 reduction
> factor when considering wind or earthquake forces. Thus, WSD with a 1/3
> allowable stress increase is still permitted - it is just hidden well.
>
>
> William C. Sherman, PE
> (Bill Sherman)
> CDM, Denver, CO
> Phone: 303-298-1311
> Fax: 303-293-8236
> email: shermanwc(--nospam--at)cdm.com
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell(--nospam--at)engin.umich.edu]
> > Sent: Monday, June 20, 2005 2:57 PM
> > To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> > Subject: RE: IBC Question
> >
> > ... the only material standard/code that still permits
> > the 1/3 increase even when using the alternative load combos
> > is the MSJC (masonry code)...as Scott Haan pointed out
> > (technically, WSD no longer exists for concrete, so there is
> > no need to use either load combination with concrete as you
> > will use the factored load combos).
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********