Author: Iyengar, H;Novak, L;Sinn, R;Zils, J
N/A
Standard: £10 + VATMembers/Subscribers: Free
Members/Subscribers, log in to access
Iyengar, H;Novak, L;Sinn, R;Zils, J
The Structural Engineer, Volume 78, Issue 12, 2000
British Standards: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly BSI finally responds to considerable criticism through no less a personage than its Director, IStructE Past President, David Lazenby: I have been struck by several emotions as I have read some recent items in The Structural Engineer: in particular, the ‘Viewpoint’ by Joe Locke and the comments in Verulam on design Codes in general. My emotions have ranged from initial surprise (and even annoyance), through amused frustration, to partial sadness.
Although technology has advanced, there is increasing evidence that analysis programs are being used without an understanding of the actual behaviour of real structures and with an unrealistic confidence in the results. So said the Steel Construction Institute in 1995. Richard Dobson
The four-pin mechanism analysis of masonry arches may be extended to include lateral forces arising from at-rest soil pressure and the effects of live load. We demonstrate the effects of applying earth pressure at rest to the analysis with examples based on Bargower and Bridgemill Bridges. Boussinesq's soil pressure distribution is used to demonstrate the lateral loading effects of live loads, and both active and passive pressures are considered in relation to short-term live loading. Examples are based on the TRL's full-scale load tests, and we conclude that this development replicates the collapse loads at much lower passive pressures than originally proposed by the TRL. This note shows that the inclusion of lateral earth pressure is essential for a proper understanding of the forces involved and the estimation of factors of safety. David Van der Cruyssen