Replaced By BS EN 13001-1:2004 BS EN 13001-2:2004 DD CEN/TS 13001-3.1:2004 DD CEN/TS 13001-3-2:2004
Replaced by Notes:
BS EN 13001-1:2004, BS EN 13001-2:2004, DD CEN/TS 13001-3.1:2004 and DD CEN/TS 13001-3-2:2004 but remains current until part 3-3 of the series is published.
BS 2573-2:1980
Rules for the design of cranes. Specification for classification, stress calculations and design of mechanisms
Status CU
Publication Date 31/12/80
Committee MHE/3
ISBN 0 580 11763 4
Pages 24
International Equivalent
Cross references:
BS 436, BS 545, BS 721, BS 970, BS 1134, BS 2573:Part 1, BS 2903, BS 3017, BS 3037, BS 3579, BS 3692, BS 5512:Part 1, ISO 2408, ISO 4301, ISO 4308, ISO 4309
Replaced By:
BS EN 13001-1:2004 BS EN 13001-2:2004 DD CEN/TS 13001-3.1:2004 DD CEN/TS 13001-3-2:2004
Replaced by notes:
BS EN 13001-1:2004, BS EN 13001-2:2004, DD CEN/TS 13001-3.1:2004 and DD CEN/TS 13001-3-2:2004 but remains current until part 3-3 of the series is published.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Irrigation Systems: Design, Planning and Construction
A Laycock - Irrigation Systems: Design, Planning and Construction
Publisher: CABI | 2007-11-24 | ISBN: 1845932633 | PDF | 320 pages | 10.37 MB
Of all the confrontations man has engineered with nature, irrigation systems have had the most widespread and far-reaching impact on the natural environment. Over a quarter of a billion hectares of the planet are irrigated and entire countries depend on irrigation for their survival and existence. Considering the importance of irrigation schemes, it is unfortunate that until recently the technology and principles of design applied to their construction has hardly changed in 4,000 years. Modern thinking on irrigation engineering has benefited from a cross-fertilization of ideas from many other fields including social sciences, control theory, political economics and agriculture. However, these influences have been largely ignored by irrigation engineers.
Drawing on almost 40 years of experience of irrigation in the developing world, Laycock introduces new ideas on the design of irrigation systems and combines important issues from the disciplines of social conflict, management, and political thinking.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
ASCE JOURNAL OF GEOTECHNICAL AND GEOENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING
Correcting Liquefaction Resistance for Aged Sands Using Measured to Estimated Velocity Ratio
J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. Volume 135, Issue 6, pp. 735-744 (June 2009)
Ronald D. Andrus, Hossein Hayati and Nisha P. Mohanan
Updated Liquefaction Resistance Correction Factors for Aged Sands
J. Geotech. and Geoenvir. Engrg. Volume 135, Issue 11, pp. 1683-1692 (November 2009)
Hossein Hayati and Ronald D. Andrus
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Wind Loading - A Practical Guide to Wind Loads on Buildings
Wind Loading: A Practical Guide to BS 6399-2
By Nicholas Cook
Publisher: Thomas Telford Publishing
Number Of Pages: 150
Publication Date: 1999-01-01
ISBN-10 / ASIN: 0727727559
ISBN-13 / EAN: 9780727727558
Product Description:
All buildings in the UK must now adhere to the recently published wind code BS 6399-2. The introduction of a new code is often traumatic, especially so in this case,as the previous code has been in place for 25 years.
The author's considerable practical knowledge of wind engineering, together with his involvement in drafting this standard and his experience in conducting workshops on this subject make him the ideal person to convey the strengths and weaknesses of BS 6399-2 in this guide. Following recent amendments to BS 6399-2 (2002) this popular guide has been revised.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
NCHRP Report 628 Self-Consolidating Concrete for Precast, Prestressed Concrete Bridge Elements
Published by Transportation Research Board
ISSN 00775614
ISBN 9780309117661
Year 2009
Pages 99
This report presents recommended guidelines for the use of self-consolidating concrete (SCC) in precast, prestressed concrete bridge elements. These guidelines address the selection of constituent materials, proportioning of concrete mixtures, testing methods, fresh and hardened concrete properties, production and quality control issues, and other aspects of SCC. The report also presents recommended changes to the AASHTO Load and Resistance Factor Design (LRFD) Bridge Design and Construction Specifications, and test protocols for evaluating some of the properties of SCC. The information contained in the report will guide materials and bridge engineers in evaluating, selecting, and specifying SCC mixtures for use in precast, prestressed concrete bridge elements, thereby facilitating fabrication, improving working environment and safety, and reducing cost. The information contained in the report will be of immediate interest to state materials and bridge engineers and others involved in specifying and evaluating concrete mixtures for use in highway bridges.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Product Description:
Geologists and civil engineers related to infrastructure planning, design and building describe professional practices and engineering geological methods in different European infrastructure projects.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
NCHRP Synthesis 360 Rock-Socketed Shafts for Highway Structure Foundations (A Synthesis of Highway Practice)
NCHRP SYNTHESIS 360
Published by Transportation Research Board
ISSN 05475570
ISBN 0309097681
Year 2006
Pages 145
This synthesis collected, reviewed, and organized the most salient aspects of this knowledge and experience to present it in a form useful to foundation designers, researchers, contractors, and transportation officials. The objectives of this report were to collect and summarize information on current practices pertaining to each step of the design process, along with the limitations; identify emerging and promising technologies; determine the principal challenges in advancing the state of the practice; and provide suggestions for future developments and improvements in the use and design of rock-socketed shafts.
For this TRB synthesis report a literature review was conducted on all topics related to drilled shaft in rock or intermediate geomaterials. A questionnaire was developed and distributed to the principal geotechnical and structural engineers of U.S. state and Canadian provincial transportation agencies. Questions were grouped into the following categories: use of rock-socketed shafts by the agency, evaluation of rock and intermediate geomaterials, design methods for axial loading, design methods for lateral loading, structural design, construction, and field load and integrity testing.
Code:
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
Here are some suggestions from my side..but before following points should be kept in mid:-
* This is only my personal thinking not affected by anyone else
* These suggestions are prepared to improve our forum. I didnt say, our moderators and admin are not working to improve the forum.
* I prepared my these suggestion keeping in mind the effort of those users who are new but contributing a lot and contributing power stuff not just posting to become active.
* I am not an english man and is not pointing out any one with bad english.
* These are just the suggestions, NOT A TRY TO CHANGE THE FORUM BY ONE MAN, many among you will disagree with me, many will agree, some will just agree with some points.
* I do not want to create politics here.
* I love my forum. and beleive in freedom of speech and right to think and express and i will appreciate any criticism and appreciation.
* I know only ADMIN, moderators can change the rules, we are here for suggestions only
* I do not know where my position will be? if these suggestions are implemented fully/partially. and I am not interested in ranking/reputation but it is important for users to get reward for their good work
So here I go,
1) Instead of showing thanks given and thanks received on posts, it should be the ratio of both...
for an example:-
xx thanks given in yy posts sholuld be Thanks/Post ratio = xx/posts = zz
this ratio should be the base for user's popularity....a user with high ratio (zz) means his posts are productive and if this ratio is less than 1 means user is posting but due to lack of quality/information he is not contributing much....
2) thanks given/thanks received ratio is also important....
if this ratio is less than one, it means a user is popular among other users (receing high no. of thanks) but at the same time he is not agreeing with other users or not giving thanks to other users ( as no. thanks given by this users is less). so the ideal ratio should be near UNITY...so that people receive and give thanks....it does not mean that if i receive 20 thanks i must retrun 20 or more thanks back to other users...this ratio is also useful in determining a users activity in forum (with ratio less than one, also means that user is helping others but in return not finding right posts for himself to say give thanks to other users)....
3) the old REPUTATION points should only be awarded by forum ADMIN, MODERATORS or VIPs. It should be disabled for other common users to avoid misuse of reputation points. Only if forum team think that a user must receive reputation point they should award the points.
3.1) Some times REPUTATION should be enabled for other members to vote for moderators or other members. but on rare occasions...for a hint this can be done twice a year like elections... 3.2) Reputation should be equal to the ratio mentioned in point no. 2) plus (+) any reputation recevied from forum team or from point 3.1)
4) A leaderboar should be created. Rankings displayed on main forum page should not be according to total no. of posts or total. no. of thanks rather they should be according to reputation calculated from point 3.2)....this is will be very effective because in this case not only our moderators or only the members with the highest posts will be top scoreres but it will also give the chance to the new users posting very good materials and receving thanks.
Of course I am not denying that our precious active members and mods made very large no. of posts which are also useful.
5) All the details about actual no. of posts and threads and actual no. of thanks received and given should be moved to the profile of individual user. who ever is interested in seeing the total nos. should refer to the detailed profile of that user.
6) All the above point/reputation system recommended by me should be only applicable to posts and threads RELATED directly to the CIVIL ENIGNEERING stuff...
I know our moderators receive points and thanks and reputation based on correcting other members and telling them to abide by rules...yes thats the work of a moderator and he should receive credit for his hard work...and yes they also contribute to the real stuff along with moderating the forum...but there should be another system for the moderators for doing their moderation job. I mean they should be ranked within them selves and there should be another section like MODERATORS POINTS/POPULARITY SECTION....or any thing else...so this way we may exclude our FORUM DISCUSSION (first one) and VARIOUS section (last one) and any other posts in which moderators ask other members to correct their posts etc. from the main point system.
7) Medals should be awarded once a user's points from 3.2) reaches some specific limit. For an example If a user xyz reaches 15 points from 3.2) he should be awarded a medal. These settings can be discussed further. I just want to give you indications not the exact system.
8) The points with DONATE option should be reduced by a factor and added in the repuation points. [/code]total points as said earlier should be move to profile. for an example if i have 1000 points they should be redesigned to normalize them to the magnitude of REPU points in 3.2) or they should be multiplied by a factor say a factor of (250 or 1/250) so that 1000 becomes 1000/250 = 4 and added into the main ranking REPUTATION points.
9) I and we do not believe in language, race, religion etc rather we believe in skills and contribution. but as we are working in ENGLISH language in our forum. so i think we need our FORUM DISCUSSION or atleast the [color=#4682B4]RULES written in good english without grammer mistakes. I my self not an expert in ENGLISH and cant be because i am not an english man. but one should always try to improve. because our RULES section is among the most viewed section so it should be error free yes even from language point of view. Any moderator with good english should be awarded the duty to ammned the RULES section posts for language mistakes. for general engineering posts it is okay to accept lang mistakes as our main concern is about the main concept of engineering not on the language. For good english i mean with no spelling mistakes and clear meaning. it does not mean putting idioms and making understanding difficult bcz most users are not english here.
10) There should be a distinguished medal for experinced users of this forum. For an example DELL BRETT is so experienced in actual life. So after confirming and talking with moderators all these members should be award a special medal for having actual experience displayed with their posts. or atleast we can dispaly no. of years like SHOUT is displayed in each post for each user.
just a correction!
See in this post even, i made some spelling mistakes, although i reviewed it several times before posting and i also made some mistakes about formating color and size...but i didnt see the EDIT button to edit my post to correct it...on some posts i see the EDIT button and some times no..is there any bug...
and the last point after reading the post by chigozie about user BENNYK problem
11) If a member (we may put limit as only the PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER active status) has some issues and want to leave the CIVILEA, we must respect for what he has contributed and there should be an option of RESIGN to leave the forum with respect. after that his name should be displayed with RESIGNED symbol like our RETIRED MODERATORS.
Computers and Structures, Inc. is proud to release CSiBridge, a new comprehensive state-of-the-art software product for the structural & seismic analysis, design and rating of simple and complex bridges. All operations are integrated across a single user interface that provides an easy-to-use and intuitive workflow environment. Bridge models are created parametrically resulting in enhanced productivity, saving engineering time while redefining the standards of accuracy and versatility.
System Requirement
Processor:
• Minimum: Intel Pentium 4 or AMD Athlon 64.
• Recommended: Intel Core 2 Duo, AMD Athlon 64 X2, or better.
• A CPU that has SSE2 support is required.
• The SAPFire® Analytical Engine includes a multi-threaded solver that can take advantage of multi-core CPUs.
Operating System:
• Microsoft® Windows XP with Service Pack 2 or later, Microsoft® Windows Vista, or Microsoft® Windows 7, 32- and 64-bit versions.
• With a 64 bit operating system, the SAPFire® Analytical Engine can utilize more than 4 GB of RAM, making it possible to more efficiently solve larger problems.
Memory:
• Minimum: 2 GB for XP O/S, 4 GB for Vista/Windows 7 O/S.
• Recommended: 4 GB for 32-bit O/S, 8 GB or more for 64-bit O/S.
• The problem size that can be solved & the solution speed increases considerably with more RAM.
• Vista/Windows 7 requires more RAM than XP for the operating system itself.
Disk Space:
• 6 GB to install the program.
• Recommended: 500GB or larger Hard Disk Drive (7200 rpm SATA)
• Additional space required for running and storing model files and analysis results, dependent upon the size of the models.
Video Card:
• Minimum: Supporting 1024 by 768 resolution and 16 bits colors for standard (GDI+) graphics mode.
• Recommended: Discrete video card with NVIDIA GPU or equivalent and dedicated graphics RAM (512 Mb or larger) for DirectX graphics mode. The card must be DirectX 9.0c compatible (DirectX SDK Aug 2009 – Build 9.27.1734.0).
• DirectX graphics mode fully utilizes the hardware acceleration provided by a GPU and dedicated graphics RAM.
• For better graphics quality in terms of anti-aliasing and line thickness, the device raster drawing capabilities should support legacy depth bias.
***************************************
Content of this section is hidden, You must be registered and activate your account to see this content. See this link to read how you can remove this limitation:
![[Image: Download.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/Download.png)
![[Image: 82198609380649203400.jpeg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/82198609380649203400.jpeg)
![[Image: info.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/info.png)
![[Image: 17389790709155693706.png]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/17389790709155693706.png)
![[Image: password.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/password.png)
![[Image: 55625350586720113554.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/55625350586720113554.jpg)
![[Image: 32919429547375667779.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/32919429547375667779.jpg)
![[Image: 03627508086525248524.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/03627508086525248524.jpg)
![[Image: screen.png]](https://forum.civilea.com/postgen/screen.png)
![[Image: 37642828817101492782.jpg]](https://pic.civilea.com/images/37642828817101492782.jpg)