N/A
Standard: £10 + VATMembers/Subscribers: Free
Members/Subscribers, log in to access
The Structural Engineer, Volume 74, Issue 21, 1996
Mr D. W. Wood (Sir Alexander Gibb & Partners) I wish to concentrate on two major areas. First, would the CDM Regulations have made a major impact on how you proceeded? Secondly, you said that the design evolved and then you implemented the changes. Can you explain the magnitude of the changes? Did you rip things out completely and start again or were they minor changes?
Ladies and gentlemen, fellow members of the Institution of Structural Engineers, I want this evening to consider some simple questions -why do we choose to be engineers? Why structural engineers? Why members of this institution? These are very intriguing questions and I suspect that there are no simple answers, but I also suspect that most members would agree on some basic criteria. I want particularly to address my remarks to the ordinary member, whether she or he be in Huddersfield or Hong Kong, Southampton or Sydney, Delhi or Durban, Limerick or Lagos. B.P. Clancy
The safe and economic design of a retaining wall depends on the appropriate mobilisation of strength in the adjacent soil. Dense soil tends to be brittle, so that it loses its strength even under strains compatible with the expected displacement of walls. Loose soil tends to be so compliant that it fails to fully develop its available strength. These two concerns are central to the new design methodology adopted by BS8002 Code of practice for earth-retaining structures. M.D. Bolton