Special Inspection for Masonry 1

[STR04]

How are most EOR specifying special inspection for masonry in low seismic areas? What kind of qualifications are most building officials requiring for special inspectors? I had a reviewer state that if f'm does not exceed 1500 psi than special inspection is not required for masonry. Do most building officials follow IBC chapter 17? How many inspectors do you see or require to be certified by the ICC for special inspection of masonry?

TIA

 

[archeng59]

I'm having the same problems in my area. local and state building officials are leaving it up to the EOR to make requirements for inspector qualifications. what makes it worse, some building officials are not aware of the chapter 17 requirements. In my Statement of Special Inspections, which is submitted with the permit application, I'm specify what I expect the inspector to do. no one is ICC certified in my area, so I can't ask for that type of certification at this time. maybe someday. So for now, I'm specifying that all grouting procedures are observed and the inspector must inpect rebar placement before grouting occurs. This is for load bearing walls and shear walls.

 

[JedClampett]

I think Special Inspection is going to be a huge issue in the future and not for just CMU. I think archeng59 is right on when he/she says that the Building Officials don't understand nor appreciate the requirements included in Chapter 17.
As far as qualifications, in our area it is totally up to the Engineer of Record or the Owner to assign Special Inspectors. Basically if we say someone is qualified, it is up to the building Official to challenge or audit their qualifications. I would happily vouch for the inspectors in our company based on their experience and training. Of course, a Building Official could always ask for more training, but that hasn't happened yet.
Note that with every new code, more and more attributes fall under Special Inspection. I don't see this going away.

 

[SperlingPE]

Two local jurisdictions in my area require all inspections as required by IBC. A document must be included when going for a permit that indicates the type of construction on the project and what inspections must be done. Local engineering and testing firms have geared up with qualifed personnel to do the work.
This is an added expense for owners (albeit necessary in some cases), but who is watching the inspectors? Make sure that you know what level of inspection is required. I have had a job where the first level of inspection was required for the masonry. The inspector did full time inspection.

 

[Lutfi]

If you reference ACI 530, it automatically invokes special inspection requirements. It places the burden of inspection on the contractor.

If you are using UBC, I am not sure about the special inspection requirements.




Regards,
Lutfi

 

[henri2]

Out here on the west coast the story is different with regards to ICC certification. Special inspection has been around for quite a while.

In most jurisdictions located on the west coast (CA, OR, WA, NV, and AZ) ICC certification is now mandatory for special inspection. Many jurisdictions won’t even accept the RDP doing the special inspection if he/she is not certified by ICC.

It is not uncommon to come across special inspectors who are multi-certified, sometimes covering all SI disciplines, in addition to being certified by AWS as a CWI/SCWI.

The centralized certification drive for special inspectors started on the west coast in 1988 with southern CA leading the way, followed by Clark County - NV, Bay Area- CA, and so on. Back then ICBO wrote and administered the examinations. Prior to ICBO certification, a handful of jurisdictions (led by LA City) gave their own written-oral exams while other jurisdictions approved a special inspector if he/she worked for a lab that had a PE.

The switch from ICBO to ICC certification in the mid 90s was relatively smooth.

Most special inspectors out here now seem to comprehend the major differences between UBC Chapter 17 and IBC Chapter 17 special inspection provisions.

In the case of masonry, there were a few problems in the transition, similar to what STRO4 pointed out. Under the UBC, if f'm was limited to 1500 psi and 1/2 allowable stresses WSD was used, no was no special inspection required. A lot of structural masonry was designed that way. The special inspectors did not like this for obvious reasons.

With the IBC, 1/2 allowable stresses is not permitted for structural masonry design and the only exceptions where SI is not required for structural masonry designed per IBC provisions is when empirical design is used for non-essential facilities or for some reason the BO/AHJ decides the work is of a minor nature. On the west coast, empirical design is not used, which means that apart from CA, almost all other structural masonry on the west coast is now subject to special inspection. This has created a big demand for certified masonry special inspectors. When CA finally starts using the IBC, the demand will even be greater.

A common catalyst in spreading the special inspection gospel was the role played by code-enforcement organizations and state structural engineering associations. Another common theme was that large jurisdictions seemed to lead the way. From what I hear large jurisdictions in IL and NC have started requiring ICC certification

FYI, ICC has a publication that deals with setting up and monitoring a special inspection program. It's written primarily for the benefit of code enforcement personnel. Nonetheless, those who are interested in SI might find it interesting.

In the ideal set-up, the building department is supposed to have a division that approves special inspection agencies/special inspectors, reviews their reports and monitors their performance out in the field. There are some jurisdictions (LA City, Clark County) that have such a division and the requisite number of personnel to administer the program meaningfully and effectively.

The key to establishing a credible SI program is when structural engineering associations and code enforcement organizations work together to make it happen. And so it goes.

 

[archeng59]

the local engineering firms in my area are working on the issue about SI. Traditionally, any special inspectors were hired by the contractor. However, IBC chapter 17 requires the owner or the design professional acting as the owner's representative to retain the special inspector, not the contractor. we (engineering firms) are having a difficult time getting architects to require the owners to pay for this directly and to not allow the contractor to hire the special inspector. it's creating some tension between architects and engineers, obviously because the architects don't want to tell the owner to spend money on special inspectors. meetings with local building officials are on-going to try and get everyone on the same page about what's needed and when.

by the way, I am a "he".

 

[henri2]

archeng59,

Even in LA City, where special inspection (deputy building inspection) has been practiced for decades, there are numerous instances where the contractor and not the owner/owner's agent pays for special inspection services. And when the special inspector (registered deputy building inspector)is too vigilant for the contractor's liking, they risk getting booted off the job..but when the structural engineer and BO back the RDBI, the contractor typically backs down. In Los Angeles, there is a good relationship between the RDBI, BO and structural engineer.

I am pleased to learn structural engineers in your area are meeting with local BOs to find common ground. That's the way to go. It may a take several years but the BOs will eventually come around. Once the major jurisdictions go along with the program, smaller jurisdictions will start jumping on board.