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

RE: Engineering compensation --> steel moment connections

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
My omission.  Very true.  The "problems" were with welded steel moment
connections.  But then, who knows...may be next time there will be
problems with bolted steel connections or plywood shear walls or concrete
frames...

To me, the point is that the moment someone gets a little "cocky" and
thinks they know it all or that they have "it" just right,
fate/mother-nature/a-divine-power/what-ever-you-want-to-call-it steps in
and teaches a hard lesson.

Scott 


On Thu, 3 May 2001, Effland, Greg wrote:

> Quick note:  The "steel moment connections" that you mention that had
> performance issues in the Northridge earthquake are the welded moment
> connections.  I think an article can be found in ENR (?? issue) that talks
> about how bolted steel moment connections fared better due to their
> ductility.
> 
> Greg
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Maxwell [mailto:smaxwell(--nospam--at)engin.umich.edu]
> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2001 12:35 PM
> To: 'seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org'
> Subject: RE: Engineering compensation
> 
> 
> I think one statement should be modified slightly...
> 
> "To date, most of the country manages to survive very well without
> plan-checkers."
> 
> While I would not expect a plan-checker or plan review engineer to catch
> every problem, I would offer that there are potentially many problems that
> could have been caught but have not "reared their ugly head" yet because a
> severe enough load case has not occured yet to expose them.
> 
> In Michigan, we elimate the "bureaucracy" of having a building code for
> schools (in Michigan, schools are only required to meet NFPA fire
> codes...no building code requirements).  To date, the schools have managed
> to survive fine but then again, that could all change with one severe
> loading scenario.
> 
> Another "example" would be steel moment connections.  Steel moment
> connections in high seismic areas were "managing to survive" just fine
> "until" Northridge.
> 
> My point is that just because things run smoothly and there are no
> apparent problems does not mean that there is nothing wrong.  Who
> knows...maybe the whole plan-checker or plan review engineer system should
> be something used nation wide.
> 
> Scott
> 
> On Thu, 3 May 2001, Caldwell, Stan wrote:
> 
> > to be a perfect example of needless bureaucracy.  Most of the country
> > manages to survive very well without plan-checkers.  Texas is merely part
> of
> 
> 
> * 
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions 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 
> 
> * 
> *   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
> *   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
> *   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
> *
> *   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
> *
> *   Questions 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 
> 


* 
*   This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers 
*   Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To 
*   subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
*   http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
*   Questions 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