Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: ASCE 3

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Title: Message
I would say that you are going "outside" of the IBC's "standard" provisions.  In otherwords, you are into "alternative materials" and as such, you would want/need an evaluation report (such as the ICC-ES report for Verco that is per ICC-ES AC 43) and then approval of the local code official.
 
This is the whole purpose of the "alternative material" provisions...if something does not meet the specific provisions in the code directly, then you still have a way to use that item.
 
Thus, use the Verco ICC-ES report, unless the local code official won't accept it.
 
The point is that if the Verco deck met the code provisions directly (i.e. ASCE 3), then they should generally not need an evaluation report.
 
Regards,
 
Scott
Adrian, MI
-----Original Message-----
From: Benjamin Maxwell [mailto:enginerd666(--nospam--at)yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 7:55 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: ASCE 3

List Engineers,
 
2006 IBC, 2007 CBC, etc. refer to ASCE 3 for cold-formed metal deck - see IBC 2209.2 (CBC is the same).
 
So, first, this ASCE 3 document was published in '93 or so and has not been updated since.  It's also hard to find, and I literally did a nice jig when I found it in one of our outdated and neglected library zones amidst spider webs and dust.
 
Once I had this document in hand, I went to Verco to look for the references to ASCE 3.  I couldn't find any in my Verco catalog and technical manual.  Then I went to the Verco ICC report.  Here I found only a reference to ICC AC 43 for steel floor and roof decks.
 
In the AC 43 document ICC allows design in accordance with EITHER ASCE 3 OR the Steel Deck Institute's Composite Deck Design Handbook (CCD2 - 1997). See Sections 3.4.1 and 3.4.2. 
 
From what I have gathered referring to the Steel Deck Institute web site and other information we have in our office, the CCD2 reflects more current physical testing that included the positive contributory effects of composite steel framing as opposed to the older study documented in ASCE 3 that considered non-composite steel framing.
 
Back to my point.  My question is that this seems open up a loop hole in the code that could allow steel deck construction that meets ICC standards, but does not technically meet IBC standards, correct?  In other words to gain ICC approval my deck can meet CCD2 but ignore ASCE 3 requirements.  This seems to be outside the intent of the current IBC requirements.
 
I have an e-mail in to the Steel Deck Institute that I sent Monday, but I can't wait any longer.  I need answers!!!!
 
Any help or insight would be appreciated.
 
Thanks,
 
Ben Maxwell


Benjamin H. Maxwell, S.E.


Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.