Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Use of WOOD: Single Family Housing D

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
To the three reasons given below, I would offer a fourth reason for
non-failure, which I think is more compelling:   The structure has never
been subjected to the loads that are sufficient to cause it to *fail*.....
        ...regardless of the ability of its materials to redistribute loads
and forces; 
        ...regardless of the loads for which it was supposed to have been
designed (in the event there was any design); 
        ...and regardless of of whether either design *or* construction was
carried out "properly", whatever that means. 

This fourth reason is consistent with what Brian asserted way below and in
previous posts. Nothing was claimed to have been done expertly, properly, or
otherwise, other than good enough for what it has been subjected to.   

My former mother-in-law built apple pies rivaling Mrs. Roselund's, and she
had no proper mix designs or any other proper basis of construction. The
outcome invariably met high expectations, and to no one's surprise. In the
inexact science of motherhood, she had no proper designs to go on either,
but observed custom as she knew it. Results were at least reasonable for the
times, perhaps due to some redistribution of stress, etc., and who can say
that later methods of motherhood, whether prescriptive or performance-based,
would have done better?        

Charles O. Greenlaw,  SE    Sacramento CA
__________________________________________
>Brian,
>
>IMO, there are three reasons why structures do not fail, the first of which 
>is the least likely.
>
>1. The structure was properly designed *and* constructed.
>
>2. The structure has never been subjected to the loads for which it was 
>supposed to have been designed.
>
>3. The inherent ability for material to redistribute loads and forces.
>
>A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
>Tucson, Arizona
>
>Brian wrote:
>
>. > However, I can say that the engineering is unecessary because of my 
>. > experience looking at homes that have performed for years. These homes 
>. > have were not engineered.
>