Differences between Canadian and American codes

[GalileoG]

I am a Canadian structural engineer and have been thinking of possibly immigrating to the United States sometime in the future. I am worried that I will be overwhelmed with how different the American code deals with a variety of topics. How hard would it be for someone with a background in Canadian structural design standards to adjust to how things are done in the American code. Has anyone experienced something like this? How do you adjust?

Clansman

If a builder has built a house for a man and has not made his work sound, and the house which he has built has fallen down and so caused the death of the householder, that builder shall be put to death." Code of Hammurabi, c.2040 B.C.

 

[IJR]

Clansman

I have a copy of Canadian Steel specifications and I often refer to NBC95. The canadian spec looks very similar to AISC. Also Steel and RC texts published in US and Canada are very similar. I am not surprised because people like Murray, Packer, Allen are constantly moving between US and Canadian borders, and these are the people who keep codes in shape.

As for practice in US and jurisdictions, I will leave this to others.

What I am sure of is that, if you are flexible enough, your time to learn will be very short and fun. I spend most of my time learning what other countries practice and their codes, from US to Kazakshtan.

Applied physics seems to be culture free, but yes, jurisdictions are cultural props.

respects

ijr


respects
ijr

 

[dgkhan]

I am licensed in USA and Canada(alberta, Ontario) I have practiced ten years in USA and now it is my fourth year in Canada.
Snow Loads.
Both are different to begin with. here in canada you always add Rain portion too. Formula for balance, unbalance and drift are different. They are simple to follow though. You need to read yourself.
Windloads.
ASCE is more detailed. Using NBCC we do more guessing. Using ASCE we have less guessing and more guidance available.
Seismic.
Again ASCE is very deatiled as compared to NBCC.But you do not need classes for that. Just study and you will follow.
ASIC ~ CISC.
There are differences and you need to study AISC if you have not before. Class 1..4 are mentioned as compact non compact and slender. Again design specs are different. You have to study to understand.
ACI--CAN/CSA A23.04
You will not find general method of shear in ACI. CSA will not give moment co-efficients for two way slabs. Foundation is all based on tables in CAN. Thought there chapter goes almost same topic wise but there are differences.
AASHTO - CHBDC
Aashto is based on DF(distribution factor). CHDBC is based on F number for allocation of portio of load per stringer.

In summary, you can do deisgn based o US code after you read yourself and initially get your worked supervised to save your time and abck.

 

[JoshPlumSE]

I'm primarily a US guy, but I do a good amount of work with Canadian codes. To me, they are basically the same. It just takes a while (and a good degree of frustration) to come to that conclusion.

Eventually, you realize that this variable in the Canadian code is 98% equivalent to this other variable in the US codes.

Honestly, I think it will be a real pain for the first 3~6 months. But, then you'll feel relatively fluent in the US codes....

 

[weab]

Though I have never studied the Canadian code, I would suspect that strictly the numbers of the structural analysis of steel and concrete would not be a huge leap.

What would be a leap is to the IBC, the code that tells you how to load structures and what conditions to check for. The IBC is impossible for anyone to fully and properly understand (particularly seismic design) except for those that write it. So in that respect, you should fit in fine. Don't let it be a hindrance.

Explain to your future boss that there will be a learning curve and a reasonable guy will understand. It happens to all of us every 3 years when the IBC is updated.

Good Luck.