Why are we seeing all the code change proposals regarding wood trusses in the current ICC code change/update process?
It is true that there were several proposals submitted pertaining to wood truss restraint and bracing and another requiring special inspection of the installed truss assembly. What I found interesting was that these proposals came from the National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA). It seems to me what they are saying is that, in their professional opinions, there is a breakdown in design assumptions matching the built environment. From the NCSEA website, here is their position statement regarding Special Inspections:
The National Council of Structural Engineers Associations (NCSEA) supports consistent enforcement in all jurisdictions of Special Inspections as mandated by the International Building Code (IBC). Special Inspections are intended to protect the safety, health, and welfare of the public by providing better assurance of construction quality, as an integral part of the overall process, and are thus essential for the satisfactory performance of any project. Special Inspections should always be performed independently from the contractor, as stipulated by the IBC, and are distinct from the inspections performed by the building official, which they supplement.
There seemed to be a common thread throughout their proposed code changes that they would like to see individual truss member restraint/bracing be specified (preferably by the Truss Design Engineer) as part of the Construction Documents and then require Special Inspection to assure that the design assumptions were met. The reasons stated by NCSEA for the need for these revisions included their opinion (and undoubtedly experiences) that trusses were being installed and buildings completed without the installation of the web/chord restraints/bracing specified on the Truss Design Drawings. We all have seen this and I have talked about it previously in this column. NCSEA membership has seen it often enough to feel the need to require the Special Inspections.
There is obviously added cost when there is the need for additional inspections and compliance. I don’t think that NCSEA was targeting truss manufacturers in their proposals; they simply want the built environment to meet the stated design assumptions. Though not specifically targeted, this may prove to be an opportunity (should the Special Inspection provision ultimately pass) for Component Manufacturers to provide additional value-added services to their customers. The elimination of required lateral restraints saves material, time, and money (MTM), and those three words are very meaningful to the builders and framers. If you can simplify and/or eliminate the need for the Special Inspection, then there is additional cost savings. It is time to start talking restraint and bracing with your customers and their customers. Reach out to the framers, builders, installation contractors, and, most of all, the Building Designers and specifiers to inform them of your willingness to assist them and reduce their cost. I believe that is a conversation that they will be willing to sit down and listen to.
Not all restraint and bracing can be eliminated from every job, but it needs to be part of the bigger equation when determining the invoice price. Having the conversation suggested above should show your customer that there are many things you can do to help them save MTM, even if your invoice price is slightly higher than your competitor.
Though the proposals regarding individual member restraint and bracing were voted down this time by the IBC Structural Committee, the one requiring the Special Inspection passed. Public comments on the committee suggestions are being received and will be dealt with at the Public Comment Hearings (PCH) in Kansas City on October 19–25. Final action on recommendations from the PCH will be taken with the Online Governmental Consensus Vote sometime in November.
SBCA reported on the initial outcomes of the ICC Committee Action Hearings and NAHB provided guidance to their membership (on trusses and other proposed changes) in their lobbying efforts.
In the interim, continue to hand out Jobsite Packages to anyone and everyone in the construction process. Give BCSI Books to your customers, specifiers, and code officials. Provide references to the B-Series Summary Sheets on your bids, submittals, and contracts. No amount of effort on the education front is wasted.
Thanks for reading, S.