Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Food for thought

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
At 14:38 4/20/98 -0700, Bill Allen wrote in response to Bill Cain:
>[Bill Cain]  The key points are:
>1) "planned checked using the DSA model"; and
>2) "...includes T&I, SO and, of course, a structural engineer".
>These two elements alone would provide a substantial increase in
>construction quality and seismic performance.  One only needs to look at
>the performance of post-1933 schools for proof (although the early Field
>Act structures (1933-37 where the lateral force requirement was only
>0.04(DL + LL/2), will probably not perform too well.)
[Bill Allen]So, trying to stay on track for a moment with my original
point, if these two "key points" are so "good", then why aren't they being
applied to all structures (particularly in zone 4)?

[Bill Cain Response] 
That's a damn good question and they should be.  Problem is, at least at
this end of the State, that the building owners' lobby is stronger than the
public's or structural engineers' so lots of things are "overlooked"..