Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: LRFD, ASD, and USD[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org, CarlS95(--nospam--at)AOL.COM
- Subject: Re: LRFD, ASD, and USD
- From: jerome.tan(--nospam--at)PAREURO.COM
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1998 5:50:59 +0000
I would say so especially in terms of economics and volume of concrete poured. USD has allowed a more ductile design as a result of letting the steel yield first. This has allowed the designer to reduce sizes of concrete sections. In WSD the factor for f'c is half of the beta for USD. These translates to almost twice a section to that derived from USD. Here in my country, there are still plenty of buildings designed and erected between 1900 to 1965 with WSD. The same building when designed today in USD would probably cost less (that is if the value of money of yesteryears and now is the same). Yes, USD has made a difference. Jerome ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________ Subject: LRFD, ASD, and USD Author: MIME7:CarlS95(--nospam--at)aol.com at INTERNET Date: 7/28/98 4:25 AM Christopher Wright wrote (concerning the distinction between LRFD and ASD): << It seems like a distinction without a difference. >> Good quote. I'm going to save this one. Would you say the same about Ultimate Strength Design for concrete? We have three decades of experience to go on. So, here's Question No. 1: Has Ultimate Strength Design made a difference? Thanks. Carl S.
- Prev by Subject: RE: LRFD, ASD, and USD
- Next by Subject: Re: LRFD, ASD, and USD
- Previous by thread: Re: LRFD, ASD, and USD
- Next by thread: Re: LRFD, ASD, and USD