The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 63 (1985) > Issues > Issue 9 > Correspondence on Viewpoint on Nominal Design by Gerald Bratchell
Name of File 4810-63-09.pdf cached at 13/12/2017 05:19:40 - with 1 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\51\51d36339-b8c0-4fd2-8cc4-cadeed70c7dc.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\51d36339-b8c0-4fd2-8cc4-cadeed70c7dc_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: 51d36339-b8c0-4fd2-8cc4-cadeed70c7dc_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

Correspondence on Viewpoint on Nominal Design by Gerald Bratchell

Most organisations that I have been involved with in the UK and abroad give a nominal life to all their major assets, e.g. buildings, earth retaining structures, bridges, and also heavy mechanical plant. In the case of immovable structures, annual maintenance budgets are allowed for, following regular routine inspections. The structures are then maintained to ensure the life expectancy is not jeopardised. For mechanical plant, the owner raises charges against works on which it is being utilised. When maintenance costs reach a prohibitive level, the plant is renewed with accumulated funds. Mr. M. Arshad