The following presentation was made by

1
Challenges and Opportunities
The following presentation was made by Alastair
J. M. Aikman, P.Eng At a district luncheon
meeting in Edmonton on January 20, 2004
The content and opinions are those of the author
and do not represent those of APEGGA or any other
organization. Text, references and code numbers
are for illustrative purposes only and do not
necessarily reflect the content of future
editions of building codes.
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
2
Challenges and Opportunities
Presentation for APEGGA Members January 20,
2004 by Alastair J. M. Aikman, P.Eng
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
3
Two perspectives
The Code Writer The Code User
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
4
The Code Writer
National Research Council Provinces and
Territories
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
5
The Code Writer
Code Development Code Adoption
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
6
Code Development
1941 to 1974 National Building Code
Published as bylaw Municipal adoption
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
7
Code Development
1974 to 1995 National Building Code
Adopted by Provinces Provincial
Regulations Municipal Enforcement
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
8
Challenge 1990s

• Does the Code meet needs?
• Associate Committee review
• Recommendations
• New directions

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
9
Why change?
Problems
Past experience basis Delayed response
Inflexible Difficult to understand
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
10
Opportunities
Produce a better Code
Simplification Clarity Flexibility
Responsive
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
11
Better Code
Code Formats
Prescriptive Performance Combination
of both
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
12
Prescriptive
Set values for an item
2 by 4 studs _at_ 16 inches o.c. 38 x 89 mm
_at_ 400 mm o.c. easy to write and to inspect
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
13
Performance
Appropriate safety level
Specified loads Design formula
Acceptable result Acceptance criteria
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
14
Performance
Appropriate safety level ?
Loads imposed by a fire Corrosion
resistant Minimize growth of
micro-organisms
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
15
Better Code
Code Format NBC 2005
Objective based Retains current content
Adds objectives, etc.
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
16
Objectives
Primary objectives
Safety Health Accessibility
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
17
Objectives
Addressing who or what
People Property Facilities
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
18
Objectives
Latest designated objectives
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
19
NBC Objectives
SAFETY Fire Safety Structural Safety Safety in
Use Resistance to Unwanted Entry Safety at
Construction and Demolition Sites
ACCESSIBILITY Barrier-Free Path of
Travel Barrier-Free Facilities
FIRE STRUCTURAL PROTECTION OF BUILDINGS Fire
Protection of the Building Structural
Sufficiency of the Building Protection of
Adjacent Buildings from Fire Protection of
Adjacent Buildings from Structural Damage
HEALTH Indoor Conditions Sanitation Noise
Protection Vibration or Deflection
Limitation Hazardous Substances Containment
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
20
The Code User
Authorities Having Jurisdiction Designers Construc
tors Owners
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
21
The Code User
Challenges
Understand new format Examine past
solutions Develop new solutions
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
22
The Code User
Opportunities
Innovative designs New materials
Improved communication Optimized costs
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
23
Compliance
1.2.1.1. Compliance with the Code1) Compliance
with this Code shall be achieved by a)
complying with the applicable acceptable
solutions in Division B, or b) using
alternative solutions that will achieve at least
the minimum level of performance required by
Division B in the areas defined by the objectives
and functional statements attributed to the
applicable acceptable solutions.
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
24
Solutions
Two types of solution
Acceptable solution NBC 2005 provision
Alternative solution Equivalent
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
25
2005 Code Format
Three Divisions
Division A - Compliance, Objectives and
Functional Statements Division B - Acceptable
Solutions Division C - Administrative Provisions
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
26
Functional Statements
3.2.1.1. Functional Statements1) The objectives
of this Code are achieved by measures, such as
those described in the acceptable solutions in
Division B, that are intended to allow the
building or its elements to perform the following
functions (see Appendix A) F03 To retard the
effects of fire on areas beyond its point of
origin.
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
27
Functional Statements
Structural statements
F20 To support and withstand expected loads and
forces. F21 To limit or accommodate dimensional
change. F22 To limit movement under expected
loads and forces. F23 To maintain equipment in
place during structural movement.
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
28
Functional Statements
Miscellaneous statements
F12 To facilitate emergency response. F34 To
resist or discourage unwanted access or entry.
F35 To facilitate the identification of
potential intruders. F40 To limit the level of
contaminants. F50 To provide air suitable for
breathing. F72 To provide facilities for the
sanitary disposal of human and domestic wastes.
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
29
Code Provision
3.8.1.5. Controls 1) Except as required by
Article 3.8.3.5. for elevators, controls for the
operation of building services or safety devices,
including electrical switches, thermostats and
intercom switches, intended to be operated by the
occupant and located in a barrier-free path of
travel shall be accessible to a person in
wheelchair, operable with one hand and mounted
not more than 1 400 mm above the floor. F33-OA2
F6-OS3.5

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
30
Intent Statements
Clue to understanding Code
Will not be in the printed version of the
Code. Accessible on a CD-ROM Linked to
Code provisions
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
31
Code Provision
3.6.3.3. Linen and Refuse Chutes 4) Intake
openings for a linen chute or a refuse chute
shall a) have an area not more than 60 of
the cross-sectional area of the chute, and
b) be fitted with closures designed to close
automatically and latch after use.
F41-OH1.1

F03-OS1.1
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
32
Code Provision analysis
3.6.3.3. Linen and Refuse Chutes 4)(a) OH Health
OH2 Sanitation OH2.1 Exposure to human or
domestic waste F41 To minimize the risk of
generation of contaminants. F41
F41-OH2.1

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
33
Intent Statements
OH2.1 Exposure to human or domestic waste
a) have an area not more than 60 of the
cross-sectional area of the chute To limit the
probability that large linen or refuse objects
will be introduced into the chute, which could
lead to such objects becoming lodged in the
chute, which could lead to bacteria growth,
insect infestation or foul odours, which could
lead to unsanitary conditions, which could lead
to harm to persons.

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
34
Code Provision analysis
3.6.3.3. Linen and Refuse Chutes 4)(b) OS Safety
OS1 Fire Safety OS1.1 Fire or explosion
impacting area beyond point of origin. F03 To
retard the effects of fire on areas beyond its
point of origin. F41
F03-OS1.1

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
35
Intent Statements
OS1 - Fire Safety b) be fitted with closures
designed to close automatically and latch after
use. To limit the probability that a fire will
spread from a shaft containing a linen chute or
refuse chute through intake openings to other
parts of the building, which could lead to harm
to persons in other parts of the building.

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
36
Alternative Solutions
Match acceptable solution
Objective and functional statement
Intents and application Not just good
enough Research and specialization Risk
analysis/Cost benefits
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
37
Benefits

• More consistent application
• Existing requirements retained minimum
  disruption to users
• More information to evaluate equivalents and
  innovative solutions
• Easier to apply to existing buildings

Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
38
The Code User
Formal Education
New key concepts Alternative solutions
documentation Support tools quick guides
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
39
The Code User
Education programme
Who - building and other officials How -
classroom and internet When - late 2005 and
beyond
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
40
In Conclusion
Back to the Future
Use history and experience Research and
experimentation Dream new dreams Advance
boldly into tomorrow
1941
1950
2000
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
41
TORONTO - Ontario
Imagination and Ingenuity
SYDNEY - Australia
LONDON - England
BRAND - Germany
LONDON - England
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
42
TORONTO - Ontario
Imagination and Ingenuity
SYDNEY - Australia
THANK YOU
LONDON - England
BRAND - Germany
LONDON - England
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING
43
For further information you may contact Alastair
Aikman, P.Eng. Aikman Engineering Phone
780-444-3550 or by e-mail at info_at_amaze3.com
Alastair J. M. Aikman P.Eng. AIKMAN ENGINEERING