The Structural Engineer > Archive > Volume 64 (1986) > Issues > Issue 10 > The New Concrete Code - is it all it's Cracked up to be?
Name of File 4912-64-10.pdf cached at 15/12/2017 14:14:05 - with 1 pages. pdfPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\a3\a39dab4f-647c-4ccc-a739-27d4950f1318.pdf. thumbPath: E:\k9.istructe.org\CMS\webtest\files\pdfthumbs\a39dab4f-647c-4ccc-a739-27d4950f1318_1.png. objDoc: 1 - True. objPreview.Log: . strFileName: a39dab4f-647c-4ccc-a739-27d4950f1318_1.png

Members/subscribers must be logged in to view this article

The New Concrete Code - is it all it's Cracked up to be?

The purpose of the article was to stimulate a serious technical examination of BS8llO’s contents, and it is a pity that the normally unflappable Dr. Beeby has chosen to adopt a ‘debating’ style for his contribution. (His comments on the Campaign for Practical Codes of Practice require correction, although the article does not directly concern that Campaign-CPCP is not a campaign against the use of BS8110 [as he claims] but a campaign for the right of engineers to choose CP114 as an alternative if they prefer.) What follows is a response to the technical comments Dr. Beeby makes (numbered as in the original article). Mr. Beal