Author: Preece, B W;Kwiecinski, M;Zienkiewicz, O C
Standard: £9 + VAT
Members/Subscribers, log in to access
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.
Preece, B W;Kwiecinski, M;Zienkiewicz, O C
The lateral buckling of beams is a complicated phenomenon, the maximum elastic bending stress necessary to cause buckling being dependent upon the geometrical and material properties of the beam, the type and position of the loading and also the support conditions. This paper presents a design procedure which enables all of these factors to be allowed for in an accurate, yet simple and direct manner, for 41 different cases of loading and support. The proposed method is both more accurate and more versatile than existing methods used in design codes. D.A. Nethercot and K.C. Rockey
At the invitation of the Council, Mr. Edmund Happold (F) prepared a paper 'The Household Cavalry Barracks, Knightsbridge' for presentation at the Public Works Congress in November 1970 in the session sponsored by the Institution. The text of the paper and of the discussion among the small audience that followed its presentation appears in the Conference Proceedings which is shortly to be published. Edmund Happold
Mr. H. Hitch: It is our belief in the aircraft industry that we have been involved in perhaps a rather higher measure of innovation over the last few years than other industries. Are we adequately conscious of the implications of this innovation? On the moral issues the main feature of our concern is that we reckon that we have no right to introduce to the general public any new device-I am thinking of an aeroplane-which is less safe than the standard of safety existing at the time. That does not mean, of course, that there is no possibility of innovation, but it does mean that when there is innovation the responsibility for safety and the complete onus of satisfactory operation is on the designer and the manufacturer and to an extent the operator. I understand that your industry splits these functions amongst different organizations. With ours the only split is with the operators. Some battles go on there-the operator blames us and we blame the operator-and, of course, it is always the operator’s fault. (I am a manufacturer!)