ConstruCtion issues discussion of construction issues and techniques
H
ave you ever been in a discussion, adversarial or entertaining, with a non-engineer or even an engineer, about what code requirements exist for construction activities? For example, a discussion about the generation of structural calculations for an existing building where the construction does not comply with the permitted construction drawings and, in some cases, with specific code requirements. The justification usually includes the excuse that structural engineers are commonly overly conservative and that the buildings described in the construction documents exceed the minimum requirements of the building code. What follows is a review of what should be considered non-negotiable points. The 2012 International Building Code (IBC), in Section 101.3, states “The purpose of this code is to establish the minimum requirements to provide a reasonable level of safety, public health, and general welfare through structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, sanitation, adequate light and ventilation, energy conservation, and safety to life and property from fire and other hazards attributed to the built environment and to provide a reasonable level of safety to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations.” IBC Section 101.2 states “Scope. The provisions of this code shall apply to the construction, alteration, relocation, enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such buildings or structures.” The administration chapter of the code also describes what constitutes violations of the code, that the power of the building official is that of a law enforcement officer, and that the building official is not liable for any injury resulting from an omission in the construction when acting in good faith and without malice. This liability section states, “The building official, member of the board of appeals or employee charged with the enforcement of this code, while acting for the jurisdiction in good faith and without malice in the discharge of the duties required by this code or other pertinent law or ordinance, shall not thereby be civilly or criminally rendered liable personally and is hereby relieved from personal liability for any damage accruing to persons or property as a result of any act or by reason of an act or omission in the discharge of official duties.” IBC Section 104.1, Powers and Duties of Building Official, also states that “The building official is hereby authorized and directed to enforce the provisions of this code. The building official
What is a 10d Common Nail? AGAIN Part 2 By Williston L. Warren, IV, S.E., SECB
Williston L. Warren, IV is Principal Structural Engineer, SESOL, Inc., Newport Beach, California. Treasurer of the National Council of Structural Engineering Associations (NCSEA), Member of the NCSEA Code Advisory Committee (CAC), Chair of the CAC Evaluation Service Committee, Past President of the Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), Member of the Applied Technology Council (ATC) Board of Directors, Board Representative on the Project Review Panel for ATC 58-2, ATC-110 and ATC-124.
16 February 2017
shall have the authority to render interpretations of this code and to adopt policies and procedures in order to clarify the application of its provisions. Such interpretations, policies and procedures shall be in compliance with the intent and purpose of this code. Such policies and procedures shall not have the effect of waiving requirements specifically provided for in this code.” IBC Section 107.3, Examination of Documents: “The building official shall examine or cause to be examined the accompanying submittal documents and shall ascertain by such examination whether the construction indicated and described is in accordance with the requirements of this code and other pertinent laws or ordinances.” Once the code is adopted by city, county, or state ordinances or laws, the following apply to design and construction of every building: 1) The code is the minimum standard for building design and construction. 2) The most restrictive section of the code governs. 3) Any construction omissions or defects are not the building official’s responsibility. 4) Inspections do not lessen the builder’s responsibility for defects in construction. 5) The building official is responsible for determining if the construction is in accordance with the code. 6) Interpretations of the code must be consistent with the intent and purpose of the code. 7) The construction is required to comply with the permitted drawings unless noted by the building official. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of wiggle room in these seven requirements. In the author’s opinion, this looks to be intentional in order to take contractors’ creativeness out of the design documents and construction process. The engineering professionals that defend poor and deficient construction regularly claim that “there is testing that shows…” This claim is used to justify the construction based on these test results, even knowing that these reports are incomplete or inconclusive. For example, after the 1994 Northridge Earthquake, testing of timberframed buildings was performed by universities across the country to examine not only component performance but system behavior during cyclic loadings. These investigations included the determination of the performance of stucco and drywall covered framed walls subjected to cyclic loads and cyclic testing, and force transfer behavior of anchor bolted sill plates of shear panels. One finding for the sill plate testing is that the behavior and capacity for the sill plate configurations without nuts on the anchor bolts are similar to tested configurations with tightly installed anchor bolt nuts. These findings are brought up regularly in discussions of code requirements for anchor
