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
Engineers’ salaries The comments by Mike Heath, Director General of the Engineering Council referred to in ‘Structural news ’ for 4 November 1997, has raised more correspondence. Mr E. N. Carmichael has written from Bridgnorth in Shropshire in response to the anonymous letter published in Verulam, 20 January 1998: I am moved to respond to the question raised by Verulam as a result of an anonymous correspondent on the validity of average salaries claimed to be £40 131 p.a.
Few would dispute that construction projects generate more documents, and in particular secondary copies of documents, than are strictly necessary to get the work done. Whatever the reasons for this (and ritual abuse of the photocopier is clearly one), on completion of a project consultants need to decide how to deal with the voluminous documentation which has been generated. So what should you do? A. Rawstron
In my first feature comparing CP32 and BS 6399: Part 23 I focused on misapplication of the CP3 rules for changes of roughness as the principal reason that BS 6399: Part 2 is erroneously perceived to give larger loads than CP3. However, there is one change between the two Codes that does tend to increase structural loads and that is the modification of the ‘division by parts’ rule - clause 5.5.2 of CP3 and clause 220.127.116.11 of BS 6399: Part 2. N.J. Cook