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


[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
>The cynical view that I have heard some people mention is that academia is
>the root (evil) cause of LRFD.
I really didn't mean that as pejorative; I hope you didn't take offense. 
I've heard the same sort of thing about the ASME Code 
language--complicated so that ASME Code people won't run out of work.

>I do believe that LRFD is pushed somewhat by the academic world.  It is
>just an easier transition from research results to a strength base method.
This eludes me. It sounds like you're saying that researchers can't 
handle the initial elastic response so they just note where the thing 
falls down, which doesn't make a lot of sense. Surely the transition form 
elastic to plastic behavior is part of the work. Any examples you can put 
your finger on? 

>BTW, what this bit about fluid're making my head hurt!!
I was trying to pick a neutral example that wouldn't fan any more flames 
than necessary. And fluid mechanics research is world-reknowned for being 
obscure and inventing peculiar terminology.

Christopher Wright P.E.    |"They couldn't hit an elephant from
chrisw(--nospam--at)        | this distance"   (last words of Gen.
___________________________| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)