Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

RE: More ASD vs LRFD

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
I'm not sure what all these emails are about?  My name is Nick Romano and I
live in Atlanta.  Are these emails coming to me by mistake?  My email
address is nromano(--nospam--at)mindspring.com.



-----Original Message-----
From: Conrad Guymon [mailto:conrad(--nospam--at)karren.com]
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 3:24 PM
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org
Subject: Re: More ASD vs LRFD


Isn't the most important thing putting out a good set of design drawings so
that the the structure may be built properly regardless of the method used
to arrive at the member sizes?

Conrad Guymon, P.E.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Keith Fix" <kefix(--nospam--at)yahoo.com>
To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2001 2:46 PM
Subject: Re: More ASD vs LRFD


> Sorry everbody, I can't let this one go.
>
> I SPEND ABOUT 15% OF MY "DESIGN" TIME ON MEMBER SIZING.
>
> The remainder is spent on details, constructability, specificaions,
> coordination, meetings, "changes", review, drafting (yes, sometimes I
draft),
> and finally, project management; construction phase hours not
withstanding.
>
> In my experience, the men (never worked with a female engineer) who skimp
on
> design details, especially connections, are all ASD'ers.  "LRFD takes too
much
> time (and so do details)."  For me, most of the impetus behind drawing
good
> details has been saving time during shop drawing review; but I would be
remiss
> if I did not praise the excellent AISC guidance for connection design.
>
> If you want to design in ASD, go for it.  As long as your structures
stand, I
> couldn't care less.  Just leave those of us using LRFD alone.  You like
your
> way, I like mine.
>
> Live and let die.
>
> -Keith Fix, PE
> -Little Rock
>
> --- ADFPE(--nospam--at)aol.com wrote:
> > I want to throw one more vote in favor of ASD.  I design temporary
structures
> >
> > for heavy civil/structural construction projects and have tried LRFD,
but
> > found no benefit to its use.  Determining actual deflections is almost
always
> >
> > necessary.  Material quantity is a minor portion of the total cost and
the
> > use of "one size fits all" thinking minimizes the opportunity to put
things
> > together wrong.
> >
> > My primary concern with this whole topic though is that the focus is on
> > structural design analysis  and not on structural design detailing.  The
> > impression from the field is that consulting engineers spend an
inordinate
> > amount of time picking sizes and almost no time assuring
constructability.
> > This marginalizes their contribution to a project in the eyes of an
owner,
> > when time and again the contractor can play the " I am just a dumb
> > contractor, but this thing can't be built as shown" card.  The saving of
a
> > few pounds of steel per foot seems pretty trivial then.  "Skinned down"
> > designs often increase costs by requiring more elaborate construction
> > engineering solutions.
> >
> > The increased delegation of connection design, often the hardest part of
a
> > structures design, encourages contractors to prefer a design-build
approach.
> >
> > Detailers often end up re-analyzing the structure to get the needed
reactions
> >
> > and do the entire analysis process for themselves.  It is not a big jump
then
> >
> > for the owner to decide to eliminate having a separate consultant and
just
> > let the contractor manage the whole process.  I have been traditionally
> > opposed to this, but as we continue to find ourselves redesigning
projects
> > due to constructibility problems, I may have to change my thinking.
That
> > would be unfortunate as the owner is usually best served by having an
> > indepenent consultant on his side, but if that consultant is perceived
to  be
> >
> > a liability, eventually owners will switch to a contractor controlled
design
> > process.
> >
> > Please, please, please spend more time on checking constuctability and
on
> > providing clear, accurate documents. Create this time by reducing time
spent
> > refining otherwise "close enough" designs.  In a free market economy,
owners
> > will go where they perceive the greatest value.  The tradition of
engineer
> > led construction will continue only as long as owners perceive that this
> > system brings them the most value.
> >
> > Alan Fisher, PE
> > Manager, Construction Structures Design Group
> > Cianbro Corporation
> > Portland, Maine
> >
> > 207-773-5852
> > afisher(--nospam--at)cianbro.com
> >
> > ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> > *   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) 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
> > ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Check out Yahoo! Shopping and Yahoo! Auctions for all of
> your unique holiday gifts! Buy at http://shopping.yahoo.com
> or bid at http://auctions.yahoo.com
>
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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) 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
> ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
>


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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) 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
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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) 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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********