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

RE: ASD vs. LRFD

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
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...
> yet.  
> 
> 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
> now
> > it seems that, in terms of LRFD implementation, the structural
> engineering
> > community is quite a few steps behind. Is this assertion correct? I
> think
> it
> > would be of interest to all of us to find out how widespread the use of
> LRFD
> > really is. 
> > 
> > Gabe Bohm
> > San Dimas, Ca.
> 
>