First published: N/A
Standard: £9 + VAT
An IStructE account gives you access to a world of knowledge. Create a profile to receive details of our unique range of resources, events and training.
Added to basket
SIR,- Mr. Faber raises a question which requires ventilation and, even more than that,
action. The trend to-day is for the architect to become the employer of engineers, with the result that the latter are inclined to suffer. Each of them, whether engineer or architect, follows a profession which requires no adulation on my part, but why should either profession become the servant of the other? Rather, they should work together in harmony. I heartily agree with all that Dr. Faber says in his article.
The CHAIRMAN (Mr. Ewart Andrews) said that he was sure all those present had enjoyed the paper, and, when they had studied it sufficiently well to understand it, they would realise that Mr. Leys had spent a great deal of time and thought in tackling this paper on the very difficult subject that the Americans, he thought, called "soil mechanics.” Mr. Leys had said in connection with one of the diagrams, that Rankine had
assumed that a certain line was a straight line. The fact was that he had assumed it was a straight line because that made if easy for him to get his formula! That, indeed, was the reason for all these mathematical assumptions. If one did not make some assumption which enabled a certain simple result to be reached, then, of course, one could not get anywhere.
THE most readily understood method of dealing with eccentric load (or, which is
much the same thing, with bending moment) is that of the Equivalent Axial Load. By this
method one takes the total actual load on the column and adds to it an amount to correspond with the bending moment. The sum is called the “total equivalent axial load,” and the column is designed upon it, without further reference to the bending moment.