Wow! Boy, must I be dense. I must thank you for providing such a clear and completely parallel example of submitting calculations to a City that gives me a better understanding of the ACI 318 creation and printing process.
Ignoring for the moment that ACI 318 is comprised of a bunch dumbass engineers, not Perfect Engineers like you (BTW, that reminds me that I should write to my State legislature to see that we change the Michigan PE Act to acknowledge that there is another type of PEs out there, aka Perfect Engineers...after all, we would not want people to get confused), I honestly cannot see how I missed it before. Obviously, the process of writing, printing, and shipping ACI 318 to you is just like you preparing calculations for a project and submitting them to a city.
Being the dumbass that I am, I mistakenly thought that ACI 318 was prepared by a large group of individuals working part-time on it over a period of years who finished their work about a year ago. I then made the error of believing that they would then print probably thousands of copies back in late 2007 or early 2008 so that it would be ready to submit to the IBC for review and final adoption in to the 2009 IBC code (I thought I had heard somewhere that ICC requires full, final print copies for consideration for adoption into their codes and those print copies must be ready by their hearings, which are usually in Feb/Mar of the adoption year). This of course could not be right as it would then mean that those printed codes would sit around almost a 9 months with potentailly thousands of people reading through them finding just about every little error (such as typos, mistakes, misprints, and other more serious mistakes) prior to them shipping a copy to you.
But, you are right. I was mistaken. ACI 318 obviously JUST finished their work a couple weeks, maybe at most a couple months, ago and ACI just got it in print shape and printed of a copy just for you, just like you would finish up calculations a few weeks or so (or less) prior to sending them to the City. And since ACI 318 and ACI staff as so inept at writting and type-setting the document, they still managed to find 4 pages worth errors in that the day or so it took them to get it ready to ship, which is impressive considering that like your calculations, they likely only had maybe a half dozen to a dozen or so pair of eyes pouring through the copy they just printed for you so that they could make the errata for you.
Thanks for pointing out what is clearing a completely parallel example. I am so stupid that I would not have otherwise spotted it.
Oh, I have to thank you for pointing out the way to becoming a Perfect Engineer. I never realized that in order to be a Perfect Engineer one had to be licensed as a Structural Engineer in four Western states. Now, I do have some questions about that, however. Do you have to be licensed as a Structural Engineer in four particular Western states or will any four Western states do? If it must be four particular states, which ones are they? And how do you define Western states? West of the Mississippi? West of the Rockies? And when you say licensed as a Structural Engineer, do you really mean that you have to have an SE license or will particing structural engineering with a PE license (that is Professional Engineer license, of course, not a Perfect Engineer license...after all, from what I am understanding from you, the Perfect Engineer license is more than just the plain ol' PE license) do (after all, not all states have SE licenses)? And while it is obviously the engineers from Eastern states are clearly inferioir, does being licensed in Eastern states get you some credit at all towards being a Perfect Engineer? Maybe being licensed in 20 Eastern states being equivalent to being licensed in one Western state? I look forward for the answers...after all, we all should strive to be a Perfect Engineer like you.
Regards,
Scott
Adrian, MI
I just purchased the ACI 318-08 Concrete Code. My wife called me at work and said I had a package waiting for me. I love getting packages. I knew it was the new Concrete Code because I had just ordered it. So I looked forward to coming home to break into that book and see the progress our "cement buddies" had in making the Code a much improved document, especially our own dear Appendix D, which has succeeded in creating a whole new structural discipline of engineers that specialize exclusively in the design of CONCRETE ANCHORS (caps mine to honor a subject that ACI has seen fit to make as sophisticated as the wind provisions of ASCE.) What was the first thing I found in the package? Placed on top of the Code book so that it stood out proudly as if claiming, "Look at me! I am very Important!" Yep, Code Errata! A brand new code that isn't even accepted by code bodies and hasn't even been purchased by most practicing engineers, and there are four pages of ERRORS, whoops, excuse me, Errata. Can't anybody get a code book published without errors? Errata? B.S., these are errors. I don't care if they are the publishers' proof reader's errors or just stupidity in writing these books. When I do structural calculations, I don't do this kind of careless work. I submit my calcs to the City then I routinely follow up with errata? I don't think so. Everyone makes mistakes but the codes make them routinely and treat them as if they are just another facet of the code.
As a Structural Engineer licensed in the four western states, I find the constant necessity of correcting codes with constant errata totally unacceptable.
Robert Garner, S.E.
R. Garner
Moffatt & Nichol
Tel.: (619) 220-6050
Fax.: (619) 220-6055
e-mail: rgarner@moffattnichol.com