Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
Re: higher loads or better details.[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org, 73527.1356(--nospam--at)CompuServe.COM
- Subject: Re: higher loads or better details.
- From: Rhkratzse(--nospam--at)aol.com
- Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 15:30:49 EDT
In a message dated 9/4/98 9:47:04 AM, Roger Turk wrote: <<Proper loads and details go hand-in-hand with each other. A "good" detail for an inadequate load will have the same result as a bad detail for a proper load. >> I don't agree. I feel that proper connection details are much more important than design for precise loads, at least when it comes to seismic design. I believe that a properly tied-together building designed for half seismic loads will perform better than an inadequately-connected structure designed for double loads (if there were such a thing as adequate design with inadequate connections). I'd certainly prefer a building that deflects a lot under seismic loads, but doesn't collapse, to one that has plenty of bracing, but isn't tied together than thus may "fall apart." This may apply to gravity design too: Would you rather have an undersized beam with adequate bearing (thinking of wood), which will sag and provide warning before failure, or an adequately-sized beam with inadequate bearing (which could fail catastrophically)? There's an old architectural saying: "God is in the details." He (She?) may also have been thinking of engineering. Ralph Hueston Kratz, S.E. Richmond CA
- Prev by Subject: Re: higher loads or better details.
- Next by Subject: Re: higher loads or better details.
- Previous by thread: Re: higher loads or better details.
- Next by thread: Re: higher loads or better details.