The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 32 (1954) > Issues > Issue 4 > Soil Mechanics in Relation to Structural Engineering Written Discussion on Mr. P.L. Capper's Paper
Name of File 2226-32-04.pdf cached at 15/12/2017 02:27:11 - with 1 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\86\86aba986-5fd1-4ccb-b7e2-1c51200b7ad9.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\86aba986-5fd1-4ccb-b7e2-1c51200b7ad9_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 86aba986-5fd1-4ccb-b7e2-1c51200b7ad9_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Soil Mechanics in Relation to Structural Engineering Written Discussion on Mr. P.L. Capper's Paper

Commenting on Mr. S. P. Banerjee’s contribution to the discussion, Professor A. L. L. BAKER writes: On page 24, reference 21, it is stated that moments M b and M b + M c are approximately proportional to their corresponding deflections. The closeness of the approximation depends on the degree of similarity of shape of the bending moment diagrams. When the ratio of Y b / M b is greater than Y c / M c which is usual on account of the relative shapes of the M b and M c diagrams, the approximation is on the safe side. Even in special cases, when this is not true, the vagueness of K values for the soil and their distribution, and EI values for beams and their distribution necessitates the use of extreme safe limiting values, which justifies using the above convenient approximation.