Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

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

Re: ASCE 07

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Richard, all I'm suggesting is that we estimate forces for our work. Certainly we may do so in any number of ways, but we've agreed (or at least conceded) that we're going to adhere to this particular standard. 

I had a professor who had strong opinions about analysis and design some of which were at odds with the conventional wisdom - including what was published in the design codes. In many instances his objections were strong enough that he felt compelled to do things differently in his own work. 

I'm not sure what the ramifications are. Certainly we cannot ignore the potential for involuntary interaction with the distinguished members of our fine legal community. 

I suppose that if you believe some other methodology to be more correct, or sufficiently rigorous while at the same time easier to use, one might feel justified in going that direction.  

My own opinion is that things are certainly much easier to implement in this age of cheap and powerful computing. Simple hand methods are always welcome as a sanity check. 

I'm not sure that we are really so constrained in our procedures by the continued advancement of knowledge that a wholesale rebellion is warranted, however. I think the knee-jerk response AGAINST code revisions is no more rational than comprehensive revision "just because we can."

William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Via iPhone 4

On Jul 11, 2011, at 12:49 PM, "Richard Hess" <RLHess(--nospam--at)HessEng.com> wrote:

> Hello Bill,
> 
> I believe that "the way things are done" should refer to the constructed
> structure, not to some clever new research into the "nature" of a force.
> 
> Richard Hess, S.E.
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:bill(--nospam--at)polhemus.cc] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 11:49 AM
> To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
> Subject: Re: ASCE 07
> 
> ASCE 7 is not a materials design code. It is agnostic regarding definitions
> of things like "failure."
> 
> It is a code that defines the criteria for estimating or approximating
> design-level loads. The changes incorporate the progression of understanding
> of the loading phenomenon. 
> 
> For example, there has been a lot of research into the nature of how wind
> interacts with the surfaces of bodies to generate loads on those surfaces.
> ASCE 7-10 incorporates the more recent understanding. 
> 
> EDITORIAL NOTE: I have always been somewhat at a loss to explain why so many
> of my colleagues resist and are quite frankly militant against changes to
> the way things are done. 
> 
> I suppose you could use the old ANSI A58.1 code for loading if it makes you
> feel more comfortable...as long as "nothing bad happens."
> 
> And I guess you could insist on having all your kids' tonsils removed as
> well. 
> 
> William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
> Via iPhone 4
> 
> On Jul 7, 2011, at 1:26 PM, "Richard Hess" <RLHess(--nospam--at)HessEng.com> wrote:
> 
>> Questions:    
>> 
>> 1.  How many of the changes are due to actual failures in the field of
>> structures properly designed by previous editions?
> 
> ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
> *   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********