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

RE: Navy Structural Document Source

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Ed,

The DM2 was superceded many years ago.  It had several shortcomings.  My
advise is to not use it.  Using old codes opens you up to litigation.  The
DM2 does not represent the current state of prudent design practice.  That
is the reason it was superceded by the Navy.  My copy of the DM-2 is dated
12 February 1962 and was never updated.

I can cite old codes that have you design for low seismicity in Oregon, no
snow drift provisions, 10 psf wind pressure on projected areas in Oklahoma
City, etc.  All of these provisions have had consequences resulting in
failures.  That is why they were superceded.

Just because using old codes is acceptable to the owner does not necessarily
let you off the hook legally or ethically.  Memphis had a city statute until
about 1997 that had engineers design for seismic zone 0.  Some did, and some
designed for seismicity.  But the engineer's code of ethics puts your first
duty to the public, not the owner.

The current Navy standard for wind loads is contained in the
MIL-HDBK-1002/2A, Loads, 15 October 1996 at:
http://www.efdlant.navfac.navy.mil/Lantops_15/.  Click on "Publications" and
scroll to the 1002/2A.  I would use the 1002/2A with caution.  The
recurrence interval is 25 years as opposed to the customary 50 year
recurrence interval as in the ASCE 7-98.

The US Army Corps of Engineers documents require the use of the ASCE 7.

The best design guide representing the current state of the practice for
wind is the ASCE 7-98, and is the code I would urge you to use for wind
forces.

Regards,
Harold Sprague


> -----Original Message-----
> From:	Ed Fasula [SMTP:tibbits2(--nospam--at)metro.lakes.com]
> Sent:	Monday, September 11, 2000 11:39 AM
> To:	seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
> Subject:	Navy Structural Document Source
> 
> I have gotten some good links to obscure military sites with structural
> design information developed by the Navy, Army, etc.  I've often wondered
> how they were found.
> 
> At the present moment, I'm looking for a Navy document on wind load
> analysis.  It has a table somewhat similar to the UBC.  [We're designing a
> building in Wisconsin, and apparently this document is acceptable to them,
> but don't dare mention UBC to them - they developed their own (often
> ambiguous and incomplete) code from scratch and I understand the officials
> are very touchy about anyone else's code].
> 
> The document I need is: NAVFAC DM2 (October 1970)
> 
> Any help finding this online is most appreciated.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ed Fasula EIT
> 


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** 
*   Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) to the list, send email to 
*   admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message type 
*   "join seaint" (no quotes). To Unsubscribe, send email 
*   to admin(--nospam--at)seaint.org and in the body of the message 
*   type "leave seaint" (no quotes). For questions, send 
*   email to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you 
*   send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted 
*   without your permission. Make sure you visit our web 
*   site at: http://www.seaint.org 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********