To: "'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: ASD vs. LRFD
From: Robert Rollo <rrollo(--nospam--at)TEAM-PSC.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 13:54:16 -0500
here ! here ! Texas panhandle as well !
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Fountain Conner [SMTP:fconner(--nospam--at)pcola.gulf.net]
> Sent: Friday, June 11, 1999 1:09 PM
> To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject: Re: ASD vs. LRFD
> Here in the remote reaches of the Florida panhandle, I don't do LRFD...
> AISC likes LRFD; I don't. No one has yet convinced me of an advantage.
> I will use LRFD when either: 1. The codes demand it; 2. The client
> demands it; or 3. I recognize some advantage in time saving (my time) or
> substantial savings of material (the owner's money).
> I understand, but have a problem with this statement, "The future is
> undoubtedly LRFD". Somebody please tell me why. Better yet, show me.
> Fountain E. Conner, P.E.
> Gulf Breeze, Fl. 32561
> > From: Bohm, Gabriel <GBohm(--nospam--at)TechnipUSA.com>
> > To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> > Subject: ASD vs. LRFD
> > Date: Friday, June 11, 1999 11:45 AM
> > The future is undoubtedly LRFD. AISC hardly even mentions ASD, but for
> > it seems that, in terms of LRFD implementation, the structural
> > community is quite a few steps behind. Is this assertion correct? I
> > would be of interest to all of us to find out how widespread the use of
> > really is.
> > Gabe Bohm
> > San Dimas, Ca.