ICC is looking at 4 year code cycle

[JAE]

From the latest ICC newsletter:

In response to member comments regarding the growth in the number of proposed code changes submitted every cycle and the time required to process them‚ the Task Force on Hearings committee met in Palm Springs to hear what members had to say on current voting practices‚ the possibility of going to a three- or four-year code publishing cycle‚ and three-track code hearing schedule alternatives.

Here's a link to the suggested proposals. It appears that the "problem" [red]as they see it[/red] is NOT that the engineers are getting overwhelmed...it's that THEY have to process so many more code changes these days that they need more time to squeeze all the hearings in.

http://www.iccsafe.org/cs/cc/hearings/0208_report.pdf

 

[hokie66]

How "international" is this code council, anyway?

 

[msquared48]

And would this timing coincide with the presidential elections, playing further into the politics of design?

Mike McCann
McCann Engineering

 

[271828]

FWIW, I'm pretty sure AISC is going to a longer cycle also. I *think* the next Spec. and Manual won't be in 2010, but a little later (2012?), so that'll be at least 5 years, if not 7, which seems like an eternity in today's code world.

Geez, I saw an ACI 318-08 Code in someone's office the other day. That thing is a beast!! It was sitting on top of an ASCE 7-05 and I think it was bigger! Perhaps they're racing to 2000 pages or whatever, LOL.

 

[WillisV]

Next AISC Spec is 2010. 5-year cycle.

 

[271828]

Willis, are you sure about that?

You could be right. Perhaps it was the Manual that wasn't going to be released again. Still, 5 years isn't so bad in today's world.

 

[WillisV]

I'm sure.

 

[csd72]

hokie66,

It is as international as the world series.

 

[MiketheEngineer]

Think we could get Microsoft into a 5 or even 10 year code cycle...

1. They might get it right

2. We might be able to learn and understand all the changes.

 

[msucog]

keeping up with the codes is tough...especially with changes in astm, asce-7, aci, aisc, etc etc on top of the changes to the codes themselves. then for instance, astm revises a method but the codes don't adopt that specific method until the next year's go-around which helps to confuse the whole process. on top of that, it isn't really "official" until your particular state adopts the thing. i handle special inspection "stuff" for our firm (testing firm) and it's rather over-whelming keeping up with everything and re-learning on a weekly basis not to mention the huge costs of buying references. then throw in handling 5-10 big projects at any one time on top of all that is stressful to say the least.

in the past 3 years, i'm certain that i personally i purchased $2,000-3,000 worth of references (excluding astm compilations) specifically for my own bookshelf related to IBC special inspections and for SI testing. and we have 20 something engineers at our particular office so we need multiple copies of some of those references. i think the codes are a great concept but the revisions should be a little more limited than they are currently. in the past 5 years, the basis for IBC has been fortified and a good standard created. now that it's created, i'd like to see the process stream lined between all the different entities (IBC, ACI, ASTM, AISC, etc etc). they should be focusing more on complete implementation and enforcement nationwide for the next couple of years and have one big revision in 2010 or so.

that's my opinion for what it's worth.

and as with microsoft, the whole concept is starting to become more about money flow rather than the public's interest/safety. i expect such things out of microsoft because they're a coorporation. the building codes should be focusing more on the public's safety and interests rather than making tons of money just to further interject themselves in to society without the proper controls in place. again, just my opinion for what it's worth.

 

[hokie66]

csd72,

I thought as much.

 

[DonPhillips]

It is a little more international than major league baseball. It is used a lot in the Pacific Rim countries.

Don Phillips

http://worthingtonengineering.com

 

[hokie66]

That's inteeresting to me, Don. Do you know which, or if there is a comprehensive listing of countries which use it? I couldn't find it on the ICC site. To us in Australia, the ICC means the International Cricket Council.

 

[DonPhillips]

I do not know of such a list and the ICC website does not seem to advertise much about it. I have seen many e-mail from ICC over the years as different countries adopt codes - the latest was Mexico, as I recall.

I did find this contact site with links for Chapter contacts for New Zealand and Kenya:

http://www.iccsafe.org/government/chapters/contact_map.html

The code I think Japan uses is a version of the '97 UBC, published by one of the three code bodies that formed the ICC a few years ago.

Don Phillips

http://worthingtonengineering.com

 

[hokie66]

I think the New Zealand liaison just indicates interest in sharing code developments. New Zealand has its own code, and some of its referenced standards are shared with Australia.

 

[southard2]

I'd like to see a 5 to 7 year cycle. Here in Florida we are on a 3 year cycle. To be honest just about the time you get used to the new code and have actually had to refer at one time or another to each of the sections everything changes. Not to mention the supplements, etc... The worst part has been all the material specification changes going on at the same time.

I'm all for progress but I think it would be more orderly if the pace slowed a bit. I mean how much is physics really changing. I'm pretty sure the strength of materials is pretty constant. I wouldn't mind when new really important and applicable research is completed if they published a few pages to add to the back of the codes. At least that way its not a complete redo.

I know I'm preaching to the choir here but it is kind of funny that they are complaining about the work load in processing the changes. They should try practicing engineering with all these changes.