N/A
Standard: £10 + VATMembers/Subscribers: Free
Members/Subscribers, log in to access
The Structural Engineer, Volume 77, Issue 18, 1999
John Roberts, the incoming President, is perhaps best known for work on complex steel structures, refurbishment of historic buildings and the highly specialised field of theme park rides.
As he recorded in his President’s message, the start of Professor Clark’s year in October 1998 was significant in that it saw the repayment of the Institution’s loan with Barclays Bank, successfully concluding the financial strategy that had been adopted since 1994. It was a turning point, allowing the Institution to move forward with a very positive strategy for the future. Prof Clark said: ‘It has not been easy, but the Institution has emerged stronger and more cohesive due to the unstinting support of the members and their response to the supplementary subscriptions’. Kathy Stansfield
Dr S. B. Desai (F) (Department of the Environment, Transport & the Regions) I congratulate Professor Beeby for drawing the attention of structural engineers to some important problems in the provision of structural safety at a conceptual level. During his presentation, he emphasised that adequate safety factors, adequate robustness, and the avoidance of mistakes, are three independent requirements for the provision of structural safety. However, I am concerned that the following statements in his paper remain open to misinterpretation by engineers: Page 16 (‘Introduction’): ‘Adequate robustness is provided so that the structure can withstand accidents and unforeseen events without suffering damage disproportionate to the cause’. Page 18 (‘Mistakes’): ‘One thing that can be done to limit the consequences of mistakes is to provide “robustness”’