Which is more conservative? IBC or AASHTO?
Which is more conservative? IBC or AASHTO?
(OP)
I know this is a pretty broad question, but as I deal mostly in transportation related projects, we typically design per AASHTO LRFD. For a municipal project, I would like to still design that way, but was unsure if there is a quick definitive answer as to if an AASHTO LRFD design would be equal to or more conservative than the IBC?
Any thoughts?
Any thoughts?






RE: Which is more conservative? IBC or AASHTO?
PE, SE
Eastern United States
"If a builder builds a house for someone, and does not construct it properly, and the house which he built falls in and kills its owner, then that builder shall be put to death!"
~Code of Hammurabi
RE: Which is more conservative? IBC or AASHTO?
Codes are written to reduce risk to an acceptable limit. This is decided by the committees that write the code. How they get there is neither conservative or unconservative.
RE: Which is more conservative? IBC or AASHTO?
RE: Which is more conservative? IBC or AASHTO?
Look at the load factors in IBC as compared to AASHTO. Unless AASHTO has a lower factor on its loading, it can't yield a materially different result in the concrete design. I think IBC is still 1.5 for sliding and overturning, 1.6 for ultimate load from horizontal soil loads. Check me on that.