Name of File 4595-61-02.pdf cached at 18/03/2018 13:30:37 - with 3 pages. pdfPath: E:\\CMS\webtest\files\11\119f0f1e-f30f-4271-91a2-0f440fe6e87f.pdf. thumbPath: E:\\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\119f0f1e-f30f-4271-91a2-0f440fe6e87f_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 119f0f1e-f30f-4271-91a2-0f440fe6e87f_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article


CP 110 and/or CP 114, CP 115, and CP 116 As our readers will recall, the draft of the revision of CP 110 was issued for comment in February 1982. During the comment period, the Institution, in conjunction with the Institution of Civil Engineers, organised a number of symposia in different centres to discuss the proposals. In one of the papers introducing the discussion, Mr W. E. A. Skinner expressed his concern with the whole concept of limit state Codes. In the discussions that followed, various views were expressed, and there appeared to be some considerable support for the retention of the longer-standing Codes, CP 114, CP 115, and CP 116, referred to previously in this column. Since then, Mr Skinner, with two fellow members of the revision drafting committee (Mr J. E. C. Farebrother and Mr M. E. R. Little), has issued an invitation, through an insert in the October 1982 issue of the Journal, for support for a new approach to the drafting of Codes of Practice. They define the problem and state their aims as: Verulam