Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: higher loads or better details.

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
roger, i´m afraid there´s no such thing as a "proper" seismic load
but anyway, i agree detailing is as important as considering adequate
seismic loads

rodrigo lema
from mendoza, argentina
-----Mensaje original-----
De: Roger Turk <73527.1356(--nospam--at)compuserve.com>
Para: SEAOC Listservice <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Fecha: viernes 4 de septiembre de 1998 21:11
Asunto: higher loads or better details.


>Of course, my post should have read:
>
>Bill,
>
>Neither, otherwise I agree with you.  (To put it in the proper perspective
>for comparisons, I would -->not<-- want to have 20 percent of the members
>missing just as I would not want to have 20 percent of the connections
>missing.)
>
>I don't recall saying anything implying that connections are not important.
>They are vitally important as is the design of *any* structural member.  I
>stand by what I said:  "A 'good' detail for an inadequate load will have
the
>same result as a bad detail for a proper load."  If the connection is
>underdesigned, it will fail no matter how well it is detailed ... as will a
>badly detailed connection which was supposedly designed for the loads it
will
>receive.
>
>A. Roger Turk, P.E.(Structural)
>Tucson, Arizona
>
>Bill Allen wrote:
>
>. > Roger, which would you rather have:
>. > A. a structure where the members are 20% overstressed, or
>. > B. a structure missing 20% of its connections?
>. >
>. > IMO, those who are inexperienced at providing a lateral load path from
>. > roof to foundation (shear collection and transfer) are more dangerous
than
>. > those who underestimate the design loads as well as codes that provide
>. > too low of a design load.
>. >
>. > Regards,
>. > Bill Allen
>. >
>
>
>