Author: Brooks, D F;Brotton, D M
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
Brooks, D F;Brotton, D M
Dr. Rowe said that the second presentation of the paper might be considered analogous to the second reading of a Parliamentary Bill, with the Code of Practice Committee possibly representing the Upper House! However, should the analogy be taken too far, Dr. Rowe added that he and his colleagues regarded it as an indication of the very considerable argument and controversy, which was going on throughout structural engineering, concerning the new philosophies of design which were being considered and the new concepts which were being propounded.
The Chairman remarked that the paper had referred to a 2-ton crane, the existing 2-ton cranes in the low-level hangar having been taken down, reconditioned and re-erected one bay further out on the cantilever roof. But Fig 6 showed a 5-ton crane on the outer part of the cantilever roof. Was that the crane referred to, or was there another 2-ton crane somewhere? If it was a 5-ton crane that had been moved out, had it been necessary to strengthen the roof structure?
The author considers the requirements for workmanship in the construction of structural concrete. The concrete mix, batching and placing, the design, construction and striking of formwork are all covered, together with the requirements of curing and
cold-weather concreting. The author proposes a svstem of tolerances for construction and gives special consideration to surface finishes for architectural effects.