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

Fwd: Comments and suggestions

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

 
  Subj:	Comments and suggestions
  Date:	99-04-16 17:06:21 EDT
  From:	Efaa(--nospam--at)aol.com
  To:	Seaoc
  
  Structural Engineers Association of California
  Attention:  Executive Director
  
  I have just received a copy of the Seismic Design Manual, Volume 1, and 
would like to make the following comments and suggestion.  My personal 
opinion should in no way detract from the efforts made in the production of 
this Manual.  I appreciate the hard work and dedication that had to go into 
its preparation and publication.
  
  My displeasure is directed toward the 1997 Uniform Building Code.  I have 
been in the structural engineering profession for the past forty six years 
and find this Code to be the worst piece of shit I have ever come across.  
This Code is nothing but a cookbook of formulas and confusing requirements 
that takes away from the engineer his understanding of the basic principles 
behind good structures.  Is all of this supposed to produce better designed 
buildings?  I think not, because engineers will depend more and more on the 
computer to solve their problems and will replace common sense and 
intutition.  Will this translate into better construction in the field?  I 
think not, particularly in the field where the same shabby construction will 
continue regardless of the so-called sophistication of the new Code.
  
  My only suggestion is to flush this Code, right where it belongs, down the 
toilet.
  
  Norman J. Epstein, Structural Engineer     
 
 

--- Begin Message ---
In a message dated 99-04-16 17:06:21 EDT, Efaa writes:

<< Subj:	Comments and suggestions
 Date:	99-04-16 17:06:21 EDT
 From:	Efaa
 To:	Seaoc
 
 Structural Engineers Association of California
 Attention:  Executive Director
 
 I have just received a copy of the Seismic Design Manual, Volume 1, and 
would like to make the following comments and suggestion.  My personal 
opinion should in no way detract from the efforts made in the production of 
this Manual.  I appreciate the hard work and dedication that had to go into 
its preparation and publication.
 
 My displeasure is directed toward the 1997 Uniform Building Code.  I have 
been in the structural engineering profession for the past forty six years 
and find this Code to be the worst piece of shit I have ever come across.  
This Code is nothing but a cookbook of formulas and confusing requirements 
that takes away from the engineer his understanding of the basic principles 
behind good structures.  Is all of this supposed to produce better designed 
buildings?  I think not, because engineers will depend more and more on the 
computer to solve their problems and will replace common sense and 
intutition.  Will this translate into better construction in the field?  I 
think not, particularly in the field where the same shabby construction will 
continue regardless of the so-called sophistication of the new Code.
 
 My only suggestion is to flush this Code, right where it belongs, down the 
toilet.
 
 Norman J. Epstein, Structural Engineer     >>


--- Begin Message ---
  • To: Seaoc(--nospam--at)aol.com
  • Subject: Comments and suggestions
  • From: Efaa(--nospam--at)aol.com
  • Date: Fri, 16 Apr 1999 17:06:21 EDT
  • Full-name: Efaa
Structural Engineers Association of California
Attention:  Executive Director

I have just received a copy of the Seismic Design Manual, Volume 1, and would 
like to make the following comments and suggestion.  My personal opinion 
should in no way detract from the efforts made in the production of this 
Manual.  I appreciate the hard work and dedication that had to go into its 
preparation and publication.

My displeasure is directed toward the 1997 Uniform Building Code.  I have 
been in the structural engineering profession for the past forty six years 
and find this Code to be the worst piece of shit I have ever come across.  
This Code is nothing but a cookbook of formulas and confusing requirements 
that takes away from the engineer his understanding of the basic principles 
behind good structures.  Is all of this supposed to produce better designed 
buildings?  I think not, because engineers will depend more and more on the 
computer to solve their problems and will replace common sense and 
intutition.  Will this translate into better construction in the field?  I 
think not, particularly in the field where the same shabby construction will 
continue regardless of the so-called sophistication of the new Code.

My only suggestion is to flush this Code, right where it belongs, down the 
toilet.

Norman J. Epstein, Structural Engineer    

--- End Message ---

--- End Message ---