Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: Standard format of submission of structural design calculations.

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]

On Jun 3, 2007, at 8:10 PM, Muhammad Amin wrote:

The calculations include output from standard software like GTStrudl
and some programs develped by me or my friends. I will be thankful if
someone would point me to guidance on standard format/practice  of
submission of calculations and if possible a sample submission.

I don't think there is a standard--anyway nothing I've ever run into in the last 40 years.
I use something like the following outline with FEA work--

1. Introduction
2. Structure Description
3. Analysis Description
3.1. Model Description
3.2. Loading
3.3. Boundary Conditions
3.4 Analysis and Performance Criteria
4. Results
4.1. Stresses
4.2. Internal and External Reactions
4.3. Displacements
4.4. Weights
4.5. Natural Frequencies
5. Conclusions
6. References

The purpose of the report is to provide sufficient detail to justify your conclusions of structural adequacy. Anything that doesn't address that single purpose is redundant. I try to anticipate what the client will have questions about and include those. I also try to include those details and numeric results I'll need to remember what I did when the client comes back a year later with a question.

You need to explain the important details of what you're analyzing; a description of the model and important assumptions and methodology, to include boundary conditions, loading and a summary of the criteria for judging adequacy. The results section is a brief description of what was obtained; actual results are included in Appendices only in the detail needed in justification. I'll also include a summary table of governing results. The detail needed depends a lot on how painstaking I think the review is likely to be.

I minimize the amount of output listings and plots included, and I never include input files on the basis that they aren't any use to the client. If they ask for them or the output listings, they get them, but I don't go to any trouble to make that stuff less mysterious. The significant material is in the report. Computer plots never stand alone. If they're included the significant detail is noted carefully in the text of the report.
Christopher Wright P.E. |"They couldn't hit an elephant at
chrisw(--nospam--at)skypoint.com   | this distance" (last words of Gen.
.......................................| John Sedgwick, Spotsylvania 1864)
http://www.skypoint.com/~chrisw/



******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********