Author: Thorburn, S
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
The subject of responsibility for and the checking of designs continues to draw comment. In earlier columns we asked to hear of their experience from engineers in commercial firms and also from consulting engineers who check submitted designs on behalf of authorities. As a chartered engineer working in the former situation Mr. M. T. Ely writes: I do not wish to enter into the arguments regarding responsibility and
liability in the preparation and checking of designs and calculations; suffice to say that as a chartered engineer, working for a commercial firm, I consider myself responsible for my own designs. Heaven forbid the day should come when a checking engineer insists on a change in my design or calculations which I consider to be unnecessary or downright wrong simply to satisfy his own ideas!
The President: Thank you very much, Professor Johnson and Mr. Smith. I must say that if over 25 years ago in my drawing office days I could have knocked off a calculation like that I should have been considered a budding genius but, alas, we did not have composite beams to play with in those days.
The paper comments on the importance of the elastic critical load as a factor in structural design and deprecates unnecessary mathematical complexity. It looks forward to the end of incorrect and misleading statements which had their origin when the subject was not properly understood. The paper re-derives, in a simple way, a recent approximation for multi-storey frames, draws attention to an easy solution for some problems concerned with initial eccentricity, and discusses an alternative long- established approximation which may perhaps still be best for multi-storey frames.
Correction vol 54, no 8, Aug 1976, p316