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

Seismology Committee Web page - Rigid/Flexible Part III

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Part III of III
What is lacking is a direction by the Seismology Committee to provide facts and methods rather than supposition and opinions. We don't need arguments that everything can be done that conforms to the principles of mechanics. Research does more than look at simple models. We are in a heated debate where one side claims that holddown failure is a function of simple mechanics based on the post and connection while the other side argues that the whole system is dependent on independent elements or  variables that comprise the performance of the system. Still, there is no solution which adds to the argument that we should never have gone the distance unless we could substantiate the outcome - and we can not.
In the mean time, I am sure to receive a great deal of direct, clear and infinitely concise critism from members of that committee for speaking so harshly about them. Possibly what I should do is set up a Listservice for Seismology members to submit their criticism for my review. I will give then very thoughtful consideration post my opinions on a website for their edification.
Finally, I only hope that the time and effort in the new Wood E-Committee which many engineers are expecting to volunteer their efforts will not end on deaf ears.
Dennis S. Wish, PE
Structural Engineering Consultant
(208) 361-5447 E-Fax