To: "SEAOC Newsletter" <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Subject: RE: ASD vs. LRFD
From: Christopher Wright <chrisw(--nospam--at)skypoint.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 00 14:52:52 -0500
>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 mechanics...you'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)skypoint.com | this distance" (last words of Gen.
___________________________| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)