9,947 code checks: what buyers should actually ask about structure

You do not need to read AISI S100 — you need the questions that expose an offer built without it.

Where the number comes from

Every member and connection in the Missouri model is verified against AISI S100-16 LRFD load combinations: axial, bending, shear, web crippling, connections. That resolves to 9,947 recorded checks — each with a demand, a capacity and a utilisation you can open.

A check is a record, not a promise

The difference between engineered and drawn is a calculation book. Ask, for this stud: what is the governing check and its utilisation? A real answer names a code clause and a number.

What stays with the engineers of record

Coordination checks are not stamps. Destination sign-off — local loads, seismic, permits — belongs to the appointed engineers of record per project. An offer that claims otherwise is taking on responsibility it cannot hold.

The buyer's checklist

Ask which code edition, how many checks are recorded, the highest-utilisation member, and how issues are tracked. Our model carries its open issues on the record — graded by severity and visible to the project engineer of record.

Common questions

Is the structure code-compliant in my country?

The platform is checked to AISI S100-16 with GB 50009 cross-checks; destination compliance is confirmed by local engineers of record per project — stated plainly, never assumed.

What if a check does not pass?

Failed or open checks become graded issues with references. Blocking issues stop release; that is the point of having them.

Why publish the number of checks?

Because it is auditable. A count invites the follow-up question; a vague claim of 'engineered quality' does not.