N/A
Standard: £10 + VATMembers/Subscribers: Free
Members/Subscribers, log in to access
The Structural Engineer, Volume 62, Issue 8, 1984
Structural masonry In April, we sought our readers’ views on what Mr T. J. Dishman described as an anomaly in BS 5628: Part 1: 1978, Code of Practice for the use of masonry (unreinforced). He noted that the design moment of resistance of a vertically spanning wall according to clause 36.4 was higher when using a low strength block manufactured with ‘special control’ than when using a higher strength block manufactured with ‘normal control’. Mr A. N. Beal of Leeds has followed up this point and has now drawn our attention to what he regards as a curious feature of clause 36.8. He writes: I can only point out that Mr Dishman has added another interesting example to the list of ‘anomalies’ in limit state Codes which is getting worryingly long and which seems to stem directly from errors and confusion at the heart of limit state theory. Verulam
Presidential tour On 22 August, the President and Mrs Rowe, accompanied by the Secretary and Mrs Clark, embark on a 3-week tour of South Africa, taking in the principal centres of Johannesburg, Pretoria, Durban, Cape Town, and Port Elizabeth. Obituary: Dr Oleg Kerensky
The following is the text of a report prepared by a Working Party of the Education & Examinations Committee, chaired by Mr Peter Campbell (Vice-president) and comprising Mr James Amstrong (F), Prof. Arthur Bolton (F), Prof. Kenneth Kemp (F), Mr David Lazenby (F), Dr. David Nethercot (M), Mr Edward Tufton (M), and Mr Keith White (Vice- President).