N/A
Standard: £10 + VATMembers/Subscribers: Free
Members/Subscribers, log in to access
The Structural Engineer, Volume 61, Issue 3, 1983
Structural calculations and the unqualified Mr D. S. Poppitt says that he has been tempted to write to us many times, and we are glad that he has now yielded to temptation to let us have his views on two matters of interest to many: As a member of a consulting practice, I have had the onerous task of checking calculations on behalf of a local authority. It is generally a pleasant matter to discuss any problems with fellow engineers, who will discuss ‘theories and ideas’ to explain their solutions. However, cases do arise when people who are not qualified prepare calculations under the assumption that ‘come what may’ they are correct, when in many instances they are not. Although such people are, thankfully, few in number, it brings to mind two points. One, that there are many unqualified people who are well capable of preparing calculations and being responsible; unfortunately, the former type ‘tar them all with the same brush’. Secondly, it would seem to confirm that the proposals for the new Building Regs-that a qualified engineer should certify designs-are well founded. Verulam
The importance of stability and the resistance to horizontal forces imposed on a building often do not receive the same attention as does the analysis for vertical forces. For all structures, it is essential that there be a path passing through clearly defined structural members by which the stabilising forces and horizontal forces may be transmitted to the foundations. Assumptions are often made in column design which allow the effective heights to be reduced on the basis that one or both ends are ‘properly restrained in position and direction’. These are often of doubtful validity. B.H. Fisher
Mr C. Boswell (Health & Safety Executive): I am delighted to have the opportunity to open the discussion because the fact that Chris Wilshere’s paper is to be discussed by this Institution must surely signify that the Code of Practice has finally arrived after so many years of gestation. Mr Wilshere’s wide-ranging introduction to his paper this evening will probably stimulate a discussion across the whole field of falsework but I will limit my comments to one or two matters.