To: "SEAOC Newsletter" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: ASD vs. LRFD
From: Christopher Wright <chrisw(--nospam--at)skypoint.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jun 99 22:04:16 -0500
>The argument of Mr. Turk is founded on the notion that ASD code design
>concepts are "right," and that LRFD code design concepts are aspiring to
>upset the established order of things.
The arguments of Mr Turk _and_ the undersigned, among others.
I think it's fair to remind everyone that Fountain's original question
was 'show me it's better,' not 'explain why LRFD isn't wrong.' The thread
is moving noticeably toward and 'LRFD good, ASD bad,' format when we
should be discussing the original point--is LRFD demonstrably better
athan ASD? 'I like (ASD)(LRFD) better, so up yours,' isn't an answer.
(LRFD)(ASD) (provides better service performance)(results in
economies)(provides client savings) and is also a more cost-effective
engineering tool _is_ an answer.
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant from
chrisw(--nospam--at)skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
___________________________| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)