Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]
RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- From: "Polhemus, Bill" <BPolhemus(--nospam--at)wje.com>
- Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:46:44 -0500
-----Original Message----- From: Tom Skaggs [mailto:tom.skaggs(--nospam--at)apawood.org] Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2006 12:25 PM To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org Subject: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity) I'm not trying to nit-pick your main point, however it is important to note that ICC-ES is NOT an "approving agency". They have issued a very good explanation of their role (http://www.icc-es.org/News/code-approval.shtml). -----/Original Message/----- Man, I love it when a discussion comes up here that exactly matches a situation with which I'm currently dealing. I went to the page you referenced above and found this sentence: "Evaluation reports on products have been erroneously construed as making the decision for the code official rather than providing an independent technical resource from which a decision can be justified." Now, the great majority of situations where this misconstruing has gone on, are faits accompli. That is, the engineer's already specified the product's use, the contractor's already installed it, and no one is ever going to be one whit the wiser as to whether "proper approval" was given or not. However, in my work I deal with the OTHER side of things: There's already been a problem, and now we're digging into the "how" and "why." And invariably, I come up with things that were done by my fellow structural engineers not quite according to Hoyle (or at least the building official). What I want to know is: Do you ALWAYS have to get approval for "widgets" like epoxy adhesive anchors that AREN'T specifically covered in the text of the model code? That is the kinds of products that the Evaluation Reports deal with. If so, how maddening--and how unfortunate for the designer who meant well all along, but to whom it never occurred to think, "oh, I've got to make sure the building official approves of this Hilti anchor..." Comments please. ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to: * * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp * * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web * site at: http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
- Follow-Ups:
- RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- From: Scott Maxwell
- Re: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- From: Jordan Truesdell, PE
- RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- From: dave lowen
- RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- Prev by Subject: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- Next by Subject: RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- Previous by thread: RE: Footing Overturning in Rock
- Next by thread: RE: "Code Approval" (was big dig structural failure - epoxy anchors overhead supporting gravity)
- About this archive
- Messages sorted by: [Subject][Thread][Author][Date]