When to start using "G" for designing methods

Discussion in 'Design, Development and Standards Discussions' started by Mark Johnson, Jul 16, 2008.

  1. Mark Johnson

    Mark Johnson Friend of the Community


    I agree with most of what you said except "where the designer knows that a new standard..." Just because there is a new standard does not mean it is the law or the accepted standard of the industry. The local building codes must allow the use of a standard, either inclusion in the building code or adoption by the building official. If a building code references rev EIA/TIA-222-E and you design it to a later version, you may be called on by the building official to explain why. (I have had to explain why I used rev F instead of E) If the local building code is the IBC, then it needs to be revised to reference the latest edition of the EIA-222-G to make it "Legal".

    As a side note I hope that California adopts the IBC and gets away from the UBC based California Building Code. They would have to redo their seismic engineering exam. (And maybe retest their engineers?)
  2. Marcello Posada

    Marcello Posada Friend of the Community

    I would like to post the following questions to any manufacturer and designer of monopoles and other telecommunication structures link to this web site.

    What do we use to design telecommunications structures for the time being? Most of us are now right at the verge of starting to use G, because any structure that we design now will most likely get bought or delivered after January 1st 2006. I know this is a very critical decision or and time for some of us, especially after that article "To G or not to G" published on this web site a few weeks ago.

    If anyone has any comments regarding this, please reply, I would like to know what everyone else thinks about this.
  3. Simon Weisman

    Simon Weisman Industry Observer

    The designer of a structure must, by law, be a professional engineer. As a professional engineer he is duty bound to three entities: the client (purchaser), the employer (supplier), and the public (everyone who may ever be affected by the structure).

    To the first two he owes a duty to protect life, property, and purse.
    To the third (which really includes the first two as they are members of the public) he owes a duty to protect life and limb.

    The designer must, as a minimum, satisfy the requirements of the purchaser as spelled out in the purchase specifications. But, he cannot leave it at that. He must also make sure that the structure is safe, so that the public is protected. This may require more than what was asked for in the specification, but the designer must satisfy the public's need for safety before any other requirement.

    In the case where the designer knows that a new standard for structural safety has been published, it must be his duty to investigate the safety of the structure he has designed as it would be seen from the point of view of the new standard.

    This is what the public has a right to expect of him. Why? Because engineers have pledged to guard public safety in exchange for the restriction by the public on who may practice as an engineer. The same sort of deal as exists between the public and doctors, lawyers, and accountants.

Share This Page