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

RE: ASD vs. LRFD

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Speaking of short memories...

ACAD R12 was built for D(ead) O(perating) S(ystem).

yes, R13 did suck and cost me a L O T of money in production time.

R14 works well in Windows. From my personal experience, the first time
AutoCAD and Windows worked well together was ACAD R13C2 and Win95B. But,
ACAD R14 and WIN98 works well enough for me that, for the first time that I
can remember, I don't have the Latest and Greatest (tm) versions on my
machine.

Of course, the above is all my opinion and should be considered as such.

Oh yeah, I design using ASD. In fact, I use ASD in masonry and wood, too.
I've also been known to use WSD in concrete design when I am more concerned
about cracking and deflections (i.e., service performance) than I am in
maximizing the strength of a section (which, for me, is most of the time). I
do admit to using LRFD in light gage steel design only because the 1996 AISI
Cold Formed Steel Manual (the first one I've used in 20 years) is LRFD
based. Sooo...I calculate section properties and fastener strengths in LRFD
terms then divide by Omega to get the ASD values. Sigh....

Regards,

Bill Allen, S.E. (CA #2607)
ALLEN DESIGNS
Laguna Niguel, CA
http://www.AllenDesigns.com


||-----Original Message-----
||From: Fountain Conner [mailto:fconner(--nospam--at)pcola.gulf.net]
||Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2000 7:47 AM
||To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
||Subject: Re: ASD vs. LRFD
||
||
||'Sells more books, dude.
||
||It's like ACAD R12.  Autodesk finally came up with a *great*
||product and
||couldn't stand it.  Consequently they produced and marketed a vastly
||inferior R13 which people were coerced into buying.  It was
||soooo bad that
||when R14 came out, people with short memories tho't R14 was
||the greatest
||thing since sliced bread.
||
||My 2 cents.
||
||Fountain E. Conner, P.E.
||Gulf Breeze, Fl. 32561