Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Existing Buildings

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I am out of the office this week but I am thinking about going in to just to look into the IBC about all this myself. It just really surprised me when he said you could basically invent whatever method you choose to use for analysis and design when dealing with an existing building and completely disregard, for instance,
ACI 318. I also need to look into the IEBC, we don't have a copy at the moment and it is not adopted in my immediate area.
 
I just didn't know if I have been being too conservative by applying the standards for new buildings when checking the capacity of an existing building instead of pushing for more investigative work on the existing structure and using the actual in place strengths and using a more liberal method of analysis, that being whatever I think is justified. I know there was the 5% modification rule in the IBC 2000, but supposedly there is a way around that. But, I have got to look at IBC chapter 34 again.  
 
 
Will 

 
On 1/11/07, Stuart, Matthew <mstuart(--nospam--at)schoordepalma.com> wrote:
You should also check to see if any State Codes supercede the adopted local Model Code. For instance in PA and NJ that are separate Uniform Construction Codes that are to be used in the case of repairs, renovations or adaptive reuses of existing buildings.  These two State Codes are as different as night and day and in the case of the NJ UCC there are substantial liberties provided to structures that are repaired with like kind materials to the point that even if you repair 100% of the building it does not have to be upgraded to meet the current IBC. In PA there are limits on the maximum amount of a structure that can be repaired percent wise, after which the latest adopted IBC kicks in.

Matthew Stuart

________________________________

From: Nels Roselund [mailto:njineer(--nospam--at)sbcglobal.net]
Sent: Thu 1/11/2007 6:55 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: RE: Existing Buildings



Will,



Get a copy of the IBC.  Chapter 34 is not as loose as your engineer friend has implied.  Structural additions and alterations are required to comply with the code with loads determined by ASCE 7.  There are exceptions, but you'd better read them to see if they apply to your building.  Also check to see if the IEBC [E is for existing] has been adopted in your area and whether new work triggers an applicable Appendix chapter; retrofit requirements are included in the IEBC for some types of buildings.



Nels Roselund, SE

njineer(--nospam--at)sbcglobal.net

________________________________

From: Will Haynes [mailto:gtg740p(--nospam--at)gmail.com ]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2007 2:58 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Existing Buildings



We have done some additions to existing buildings and checked adequacy of floors for increases in loadings many times before. But I always checked the existing building's original structural drawings against current codes when making decisions, along with conducting some site visits for some verification of construction.



Today I got into a discussion with an engineer that has done a lot of rehab work. He states that since there is no existing building code, you can use whatever analysis and design methods you choose (obviously you should still meet statics) and that no codes apply. The only provisions in the IBC are in chapter 34 which he said has a provision that allows you to completely diregard the building codes and standards that are intended for new buildings when looking into the capacity of an existing building.



For instance, if there is an existing flat plate reinforced concrete slab that is being analyzed to carry up to 50% more capacity than it was originally designed for under ACI 318. If enough cores are taken to justify the actual concrete strength, the existing reinforcing strength is  known, and the locations of all the rebar are verified you can completely disregard ACI 318 and use whatever redistribution of moments is required to get the slab to work, disregard all ACI's phi factors, and use tension rings or whatever other method you can come up with to show that the slab works.



Does anyone here have experience in checking the capacity of existing designs in this manner, with total disregard to the building codes? Is this typical practice when substantial verifications of the existing construction can be accomplished?







Will Haynes, P.E.