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
Dr P. A. Jackson (F) (Gifford & Partners)
Having been responsible for the assessment, testing and analysis of a number of similar
bridges, I was very interested in this paper. I have a few comments and would like to hear the authors’ views.
As members with sufficiently long memories will recall, the Government’s proposals for
‘Approved Persons’ were extensively debated 12 years ago; procedures for assessing candidates and maintaining a register were formulated jointly with the Institution of Civil Engineers and, at that time, it was hoped that there would be rapid progress towards final approval by Government. The underlying assumption (which still applies) was that ‘Approved Inspectors’ (AIS), when appointed, had to approve all Building Regulations, whereas ‘Approved Persons’ (APs) would specifically address structural
requirements. While they therefore had to understand the Building Regulations sufficiently to know the context within which structural adequacy was determined, there was no need fully to understand (or indeed be responsible for) other aspects of the Regulations.
Stefan B. Tietz
There have been many situations in which flexural members - especially bridge girders -have been found to have less than the desired strength. A widely used method of providing additional strength has been the introduction of prestressing by means of external tendons'. External tendons are prestressing strands situated outside the original concrete section and are connected to the structure by anchorages and deviators.