Should the Building Codes recognize alternative reinforcing methods?

Question

Currently, the International and all Model Construction Building Codes recognize one rigid-assembled-frame reinforcing method, "beefing" up the rigid frame's connections with metal postcaps, postbases, wind strap-ties and seismic holddowns and strap-ties.

These all add some resistance strengths at the different connection points, but doesn't address any tension-resistance of the frame itself, whenever the wind-speeds or seismic-forces are stronger than the resistance strengths of the added reinforcing connectors, which happen all the time.

As tension-resistance, flexible and elastic rigid-frame continuous connected reinforcing systems are not adequately addressed in the Building Codes, should they be added as a separate subsection, amendment, or chapter?

Answer 1

WOW! You are like a very smart person. Although, it made little sense to me (I'm a ChE student) but it appears that you know exactly what you are talking about and I appreciate that.

Answer 2

Because of the weight of the responsiblity they bear,

Code authorities tend to be extremely conservaive.

(Remember F. L. Wright had to do a static test to

prove those 'mushroom` reinforced concrete columns?)

You're not likely to see approval without some proving.