Joined
·
114 Posts
(Following is another section from my upcoming book on Green Framing. TKG)
Building codes are a relatively new invention. The first widely-accepted building code in the U.S. was written in the early 1900s. Today’s building code, the International Building Code (IBC), has its roots in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) which was first published in 1927. Over the years many local jurisdictions adopted building codes but many did not. Even today there are jurisdictions in the U.S. that do not issue building permits nor require adherence to any building code.
Where I live in western Washington, building codes are strictly enforced for any structure from a shed to a fence to a sky scraper. Around here it’s unthinkable that a house might be designed by a non-professional and built without a building permit.
But where my brother lives in Kansas, there are no such requirements. Draw up your plans on a napkin, grab your hammer and go. There are lots of places like that in our country today.
So in America we’ve got quite a mix-mash of structures. A few that meet current codes but many, many that don’t.
I took some photographs the other day of old buildings in my county.
The first one, I call the Titanic. This house is probably at least 50-years-old and as you can see has settled terribly. The house is likely built partially over an old slough that was filled with logs and other debris. The part built over the slough embankments has not settled but the part built over the fill-debris has. This is called differential settlement. Incredibly, people still live in this house.
The next structure is a 75+ year-old commercial building. By today’s standards it contains not a single shear wall nor a horizontal diaphragm. It is listing about a foot out of plumb, yet there it stands.
Here is a very large barn, probably 50+ years old. Note how huge its wind sail area (roof) is. Also you can see that it is located in the middle of an open valley with no trees or other buildings to shield it from the wind. The gable end walls are mostly door openings, and the wood panels in between don’t come close to any sort of legal shear wall. The roof isn’t a legitimate diaphragm. There’s a two-foot sag in the roof at the eaves. Yet year after year, winter after winter, storm after storm, this barn continues to serve.
According to its historic placard, this building was constructed in 1890. It has undergone an extensive tenant improvement, but other than new windows and doors, the exterior walls, floor and roof framing are original. It is built partially over a salt water channel, supported on timber piers. The horizontal siding on the long walls shows settlement up to a foot in several areas. The above photo is the rear wall. Note all the windows and doors (read: no shear panels.)
The front wall is pretty much the same: all windows; which count for nothing in resisting lateral (wind and earthquake) loads. Here is what this wall looks like from the inside:
This is also the front wall, about mid-height.
This wall is constructed of horizontal siding attached to 2x4 studs. Not one shear panel, holdown, or hurricane clip.
Roof framing is 2x6 rafters, originally spanning 20+ feet. There is no ridge beam. I’d go so far as saying there isn’t one code-compliant piece of lumber or connection in this entire building. And in fact most structural elements are overstressed, according to current code, by several hundred percent.
In its 119-year life, why hasn’t this building imploded or blown over?
This last building was also built in 1890. One corner (the one by the streetlight) has settled at least six-inches. But that’s not what makes this one of the most dangerous buildings in the county. The front wall is all glass. No shear walls, no portal frames, no buttress walls, nothing. And the next parallel interior wall is some 30-feet back into the building. As the one corner sinks, the building tilts causing racking (shear) stress on the window wall. Should a window break or crack there is a real possibility that this building would fall over sideways – I’ve seen it happen to a building of similar construction in a nearby town. Yet, this building stands.
All of the aforementioned structures have lived through snow accumulation of several feet, howling wind storms, and earthquakes.
All across America and the world are buildings that don’t come close to meeting current code. It usually takes a hurricane, tornado, severe neglect, freakish snow storm, or 7+ magnitude earthquake to bring them down. And even then many survive.
So what’s the point?
The point is that things not built to code are usually plenty strong and those that are built to code are vastly stronger than they need to be in most cases.
If you live in a jurisdiction that has building codes and enforces them, you don’t have a choice but to comply with those codes. But you don’t need to overbuild.
Let me say that again. Our building codes contain so much factor of safety, no one should ever feel compelled to exceed them. The grossly non-code-compliant buildings on the previous pages, in my opinion, provides stout testimonial.
Our industry should be actively searching for ways to trim our designs so that they just comply with code and no more. If we build stronger than code we’re literally throwing away money and effort. And we’re not building green.
This book is about minimal, yet code-compliant, structural design. Green design. The trick is understanding the underlying structural concepts: where loads come from; where they go; and how they’re resisted. With that knowledge, we can maximize efficiency and save money.
Building codes are a relatively new invention. The first widely-accepted building code in the U.S. was written in the early 1900s. Today’s building code, the International Building Code (IBC), has its roots in the Uniform Building Code (UBC) which was first published in 1927. Over the years many local jurisdictions adopted building codes but many did not. Even today there are jurisdictions in the U.S. that do not issue building permits nor require adherence to any building code.
Where I live in western Washington, building codes are strictly enforced for any structure from a shed to a fence to a sky scraper. Around here it’s unthinkable that a house might be designed by a non-professional and built without a building permit.
But where my brother lives in Kansas, there are no such requirements. Draw up your plans on a napkin, grab your hammer and go. There are lots of places like that in our country today.
So in America we’ve got quite a mix-mash of structures. A few that meet current codes but many, many that don’t.
I took some photographs the other day of old buildings in my county.

The first one, I call the Titanic. This house is probably at least 50-years-old and as you can see has settled terribly. The house is likely built partially over an old slough that was filled with logs and other debris. The part built over the slough embankments has not settled but the part built over the fill-debris has. This is called differential settlement. Incredibly, people still live in this house.

The next structure is a 75+ year-old commercial building. By today’s standards it contains not a single shear wall nor a horizontal diaphragm. It is listing about a foot out of plumb, yet there it stands.

Here is a very large barn, probably 50+ years old. Note how huge its wind sail area (roof) is. Also you can see that it is located in the middle of an open valley with no trees or other buildings to shield it from the wind. The gable end walls are mostly door openings, and the wood panels in between don’t come close to any sort of legal shear wall. The roof isn’t a legitimate diaphragm. There’s a two-foot sag in the roof at the eaves. Yet year after year, winter after winter, storm after storm, this barn continues to serve.

According to its historic placard, this building was constructed in 1890. It has undergone an extensive tenant improvement, but other than new windows and doors, the exterior walls, floor and roof framing are original. It is built partially over a salt water channel, supported on timber piers. The horizontal siding on the long walls shows settlement up to a foot in several areas. The above photo is the rear wall. Note all the windows and doors (read: no shear panels.)

The front wall is pretty much the same: all windows; which count for nothing in resisting lateral (wind and earthquake) loads. Here is what this wall looks like from the inside:

This is also the front wall, about mid-height.

This wall is constructed of horizontal siding attached to 2x4 studs. Not one shear panel, holdown, or hurricane clip.
Roof framing is 2x6 rafters, originally spanning 20+ feet. There is no ridge beam. I’d go so far as saying there isn’t one code-compliant piece of lumber or connection in this entire building. And in fact most structural elements are overstressed, according to current code, by several hundred percent.
In its 119-year life, why hasn’t this building imploded or blown over?

This last building was also built in 1890. One corner (the one by the streetlight) has settled at least six-inches. But that’s not what makes this one of the most dangerous buildings in the county. The front wall is all glass. No shear walls, no portal frames, no buttress walls, nothing. And the next parallel interior wall is some 30-feet back into the building. As the one corner sinks, the building tilts causing racking (shear) stress on the window wall. Should a window break or crack there is a real possibility that this building would fall over sideways – I’ve seen it happen to a building of similar construction in a nearby town. Yet, this building stands.
All of the aforementioned structures have lived through snow accumulation of several feet, howling wind storms, and earthquakes.
All across America and the world are buildings that don’t come close to meeting current code. It usually takes a hurricane, tornado, severe neglect, freakish snow storm, or 7+ magnitude earthquake to bring them down. And even then many survive.
So what’s the point?
The point is that things not built to code are usually plenty strong and those that are built to code are vastly stronger than they need to be in most cases.
If you live in a jurisdiction that has building codes and enforces them, you don’t have a choice but to comply with those codes. But you don’t need to overbuild.
Let me say that again. Our building codes contain so much factor of safety, no one should ever feel compelled to exceed them. The grossly non-code-compliant buildings on the previous pages, in my opinion, provides stout testimonial.
Our industry should be actively searching for ways to trim our designs so that they just comply with code and no more. If we build stronger than code we’re literally throwing away money and effort. And we’re not building green.
This book is about minimal, yet code-compliant, structural design. Green design. The trick is understanding the underlying structural concepts: where loads come from; where they go; and how they’re resisted. With that knowledge, we can maximize efficiency and save money.