Verulam
Date published

N/A

First published: N/A

Price

Standard: £9 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Buy Now

Added to basket

The Structural Engineer
Verulam
Date published

N/A

First published

N/A

Price

Standard: £9 + VAT
Members/Subscribers: Free

Buy Now

CO2 emissions Mr E C. Beale, from South Croydon, provides more background to the thinking behind his contribution to our 16 February 1999 column: Given that CO, emissions from humans are several times as great as the total from fossil fuels, it would seem that the minimum would be 3 times as great and that livestock emissions might be as great again. This does not take account of all the sources of CO, in the natural world, which might be as great as the previous total.

Additional information

Format:
PDF
Publisher:
The Institution of Structural Engineers

Tags

Issue 18

Related Resources & Events

The Structural Engineer
Correspondence on The Precast Concrete Bridge Beam: the First 50 Years

Correspondence on The Precast Concrete Bridge Beam: the First 50 Years

Mr K. G. Brunskill (M) I am surprised that the discussion contains no mention of Dr Paul Abeles who pioneered all the work on the inverted T-beam and whose beam and slab tests of the late 1940s and early 1950s were well recorded in The Structurul Engineer at the time.

Price - £9
The Structural Engineer
A Theory of Structural Vulnerability

A Theory of Structural Vulnerability

A structure is vulnerable if any damage produces consequences that are disproportionate to that damage; conversely, a structure is robust if it can withstand arbitrary damage. The purpose of this paper is to present a new theory of structural vulnerability. It is a theory of structural form and connectivity, the purpose of which is to identify the ‘weak links’ within a structure. It is not a theory of the response of a structure to loads. Z. Lu, Y. Yu. N.J. Woodman and Professor D.I. Blockley

Price - £9
The Structural Engineer
Discussion on Safety of Structures, and a New Approach to Robustness by Professor A.W. Beeby

Discussion on Safety of Structures, and a New Approach to Robustness by Professor A.W. Beeby

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”’

Price - £9