Ignore a new clause in the recent code 3

[JohnWk]

I want to ask two questions, legalization related. I think it is important to know for any structural engineer
1- I'm using the recent code to design but I want to ignore specific clause which is new and 99% of the structures in the country did not design for it. Is it legal to do that ? if yes, how to answer comments from a peer reviewer if they ask to use that clause ?

2- related to item 1 above. is it legal to design based on an older code? say we have 2018 version but I want to use 2009 version. again how to answer a peer reviewer comment of I need to use the new code.

I don't want to mention the specific clause or code. I want to ask these questions in general. Assume from Engineering Judgement point that new clause is for rare condition, not clear, missing important details and result very heavy reinforcement.

 

[IDS]

driftlimter - I don't see your last paragraph as being contrary to what anybody else has said, but in this case the options are to provide the extra reinforcement, or to investigate the new requirements in more detail to meet the requirements more efficiently. Sticking to the old code is not an option.

BridgeSmith - In this case the "rare condition" is most likely an event that happens rarely, but when it does it affects all structures in the area, i.e. an earthquake, and the judgement on what level of earthquake is appropriate for design in any given area is not something that should be left to individual engineering judgement.

Doug Jenkins
Interactive Design Services

http://newtonexcelbach.wordpress.com/

 

[Ron]

@JedClampett....agree.
@IRstuff....no. The most recent code is not always adopted by the jurisdiction. Not as common now as it was in years past. In the past, I've seen two or three code revisions passed over because of local ordinances or statutory requirements. In my state, since we now have a state building code, the most recent is the adopted one. This is not true of all states or localities.

 

[IRstuff]

OK, given those caveats, the most recent APPLICABLE code, then ;-)

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list

http://www.eng-tips.com/forumlist.cfm

 

[dik]

...or maybe just THE APPLICABLE CODE.

So strange to see the singularity approaching while the entire planet is rapidly turning into a hellscape. -John Coates

-Dik

 

[rowingengineer]

In 2006 a wind event cause a particular type of building construction to fail by 40percent of all building of this construction type in a local area geographic area, this number was well above code expectations. Many failed building ignored code provisions because the 1996 didn't require the checks, well the 1996 code was unconservative plain and simple.I often wonder what will happen if a similar events hits Cairns or Townsville, 96 isn't that long ago in building terms.

I could also do Christchurch in NZ 2010, Tracy 1974. never assume the older code are/were conservative just because you haven't heard of failures, the truth is more likely the event that cause the damage or issue just hasn't happened yet or your too young.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...gQFnoECAcQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0HB8haWJMhWL-8VCqvzKl6

 

[BridgeSmith]

BridgeSmith - In this case the "rare condition" is most likely an event that happens rarely, but when it does it affects all structures in the area, i.e. an earthquake, and the judgement on what level of earthquake is appropriate for design in any given area is not something that should be left to individual engineering judgement.

Agreed. I was thinking more of rare structural configuration, but you're most likely correct. The pitfalls of answering non-specific questions, I guess. AlexRm, if you want something more than generic responses, you'll need to provide more than generic information. I would venture a guess that someone, maybe several people, would have insight on the specific provision you are struggling with, and could help you sort it out.

Rod Smith, P.E., The artist formerly known as HotRod10

 

[phamENG]

I suspect the OP didn't get the confirmation he was hoping for, and so went elsewhere to find it.

 

[GeorgeTheCivilEngineer]

The best example of using alternative codes is the UK adoption of Eurocodes. The British Standards relating to structures haven't been updated for decades but there's no suggestion that a building designed to them wouldn't be safe.

New codes should allow for a better economy or just for things not envisaged by the older codes. Changes to allow for the effects of climate change could impact but probably not significantly on pure structure.

Obviously in seismic areas where research and thinking have moved on then that's a different situation.