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

Re: Rigid Diaphragm Analysis

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I couldn't agree with you more. This has always been my position. Who is 
really jumping the gun.
Once Northridge hit, the cities and committees were on the run to create 
emergency measures that would put the city back together and create stricter 
measures JUST IN CASE the design was at fault. It was done as a mitigation 
measure but was only considered temporary until the damage could be evaluated.
I think that the committees started with the premise that we were dealing 
with new variables that were never considered in prior quakes. Therefore we 
needed to upgrade the code because it was believed that the damage was due to 
these unknown variables at the time.
However, when the dust settled, the preliminary reports showed that design 
was not the problem - execution of the design was the culprit. 
I would think that the committee's should have taken a step back and 
considered the information at hand for different types of buildings instead 
to progressing with changes in methodology based upon one type of model. This 
model does not fit all buildings and the ones most seriously affected by it 
is the one that probably needs it the least.

But what do we do now?