This information may not be directly applicable to structural analysis or design on a daily basis, but it can’t hurt to have some material science background on the materials with which we build.

A new draft report released for public comment by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) provides a comprehensive set of “best practice” guidelines for designing building structures to resist major fires. The document, NISTIR 7563, Best Practice Guidelines for Structural Fire Resistance of Concrete and Steel Buildings, is part of the NIST response to the World Trade Center (WTC) disaster of Sept. 11, 2001, and was developed in conjunction with the agency’s technical building and fire safety investigation of WTC buildings 1 and 2 (the WTC towers) and 7.

NIST welcomes public comments on the draft report, received by noon Eastern Daylight Time on April 15, 2009.  Comments may be submitted by one of the following three methods:

electronic mail to cauffman@nist.gov;
fax to (301) 869-6275; or
mail to NISTIR 7563 Comments, Attn: Stephen Cauffman, NIST, 100 Bureau Dr., Stop 8611, Gaithersburg, Md. 20899-8611.

The draft report is available here as a PDF file:  http://wtc.nist.gov/media/NISTIR_7563_DRAFT_Feb2009.pdf.

This draft guidelines report is the result of a collaborative effort initiated by NIST that involved experts in the design and construction industry and academia. It features information on current best practices in structural fire resistance engineering in the United States and overseas, and current best knowledge in fire risk assessment, and characterization of the design fire, material properties at high temperatures, and thermal and structural response calculation methods. The document integrates state-of-the-art information in one source, enabling users to apply a performance-based approach to fire resistance design as well as the evaluation of concrete and steel structures.

For more information, contact wtc@nist.gov.

The Structural Engineering Slide Library was collected over the period 1950 through 1980. It was developed as a visual resource for illustrating structural systems in undergraduate courses in structural analysis and design. Each structure is identified, and a brief description is given.

When I was a TA for a freshmen introduction to structural engineering course, these slides were helpful in providing “real world” illustration of some of the idealized conditions that we were studying.

For example, when explaining about pin and roller supports, it’s helpful to show what a pin (left), and a roller (right) really look like.

The Library consists of these slide sets:

• Set A: Beam Structures
• Set B: Arch Structures
• Set C: Cable and Suspension Structures
• Set D: Truss Structures
• Set E: Domes and Shells
• Set F: Columns, Rigid Frames, Grids and Slabs
• Set G: Structures Under Construction
• Set H: The Structures of Leonhardt, Andrä and Partners
• Set J: Earthquake Engineering

Note: you can use the free IrfanView image viewer to view the MRSID files.  (It looks like the JPG files are limited to those with library accounts).

Via Whole Building Design Guide:

The NBIMS Executive Committee has released National BIM Standard Version 1 – Part 1: Overview, Principles, and Methodologies for public use. This document, which includes contributions by more than thirty subject-matter experts in the capital facilities industry, incorporates industry comments and now contains new and expanded information about the NBIMS production and use process.

With the release of this document there remain many Building Information Modeling (BIM) issues to discuss, coordinate, and resolve, not only throughout the United States, but also with our international counterparts. It is hoped that this effort will facilitate discussion and lay the groundwork for ongoing organizational and operational activities.

The Executive Committee expresses sincere appreciation to all those who have contributed and continue to contribute to the creation of the National BIM Standard. As always, we invite participants to join the Committee to help shape and share in the transformation of our industry. There is no cost to download Version 1 – Part 1.

National Building Information Model Standard
Version 1.0—Part 1 Overview, Principles, and Methodologies (PDF 9.1 MB)

For more information please contact Alan Edgar, chair of the NBIMS Project Committee at aredgar@comcast.net.

Lucky for me that Hilti makes their technical guide available for free download in PDF form.  Follow this link for their most up-to-date version of their technical guide (version 2008).

WNYC’s Leonard Lopate recently covered green building, on the “Please Explain” segment of his radio show. While it doesn’t really get into the technical stuff, I think atleast the first 15 minutes provide a good introduction to the background of the issues. The segment includes a co-founder of LEED, so we know the information is reputable.

Here’s a stream of the audio:

and here’s a link the the mp3.

Notable points from the program:

• The new Bank of America Building in NYC is designed to capture water into storage tanks for mechanical systems.
• The White House has taken steps to improve its energy efficiancy. They recently installed solar hot water heaters, saving taxpayers $300,000 year.
• US Government uses 2.3% of the country’s energy (about $10 billion dollars). Consequently, there are programs in place to make Federal buildings more green.
• Small shallow floorplates of older buildings, using U-and H-shaped layouts, allow more daylight, better ventilation, and potentially greater energy efficiency than newer buildings with 30- to 40-ft floorplates from facade to elevator core. Artificial light and air conditioning enable these floorplates to be practical, but they require more energy.
• More than 5000 “green” buildings in the US today

NIST recently published, Best Practices for Reducing the Potential for Progressive Collapse in Buildings (NISTIR 7396).

via EurakaAlert:

The report, Best Practices for Reducing the Potential for Progressive Collapse in Buildings, argues that although no building system can be engineered and constructed to be absolutely risk-free, risk-informed assessment and decision-making can reduce the risk of progressive collapse. According to the researchers, engineers must not simply work to the minimum requirements of the building code; they need to consider ways to improve structural integrity and robustness to accommodate local failures.

According to NIST engineers, hazards that increase the risk of local structural failures that, in turn, can lead to a partial or complete progressive collapse include design and construction errors, fire, gas explosion, the transport and storage of hazardous materials, vehicular collision, and bomb explosions.

The NIST report cites a lack of continuity of support within a building system, a lack of ductility in structural materials, members and connections, and lack of structural redundancy in providing alternate load paths as critical factors that limit structural integrity. The use of large-paneled or bearing wall construction, for example, can limit continuity and ductility. Such systems may be poorly suited to absorb or dissipate energy resulting from unforeseen events such as gas explosion and sabotage.

The guide catalogs a number of cost-effective engineering solutions for retrofitting existing structures.

The document summarizes “existing knowledge” for use by engineers in making risk-informed planning and design decisions. It is not intended to provide step-by-step guidance. Appendix A describes applicable design standards from around the world. Appendix B identifies research needs relevant to progressive collapse. Appendix C provides case studies of progressive collapse.

I don’t claim to be a great writer, or even a good one (part of the reason I started this blog was to improve my writing), but I’d like to share tips I’ve picked up along the way.

The first tip is a cheat sheat for homonyms. With spell checkers built into your computer, there’s really no excuse to mis-spell anything. But it’s still easy to use the wrong word in the wrong place. From Online Technical Writing:

For some writers, their main spelling problem is similar-sounding words, for example, principle and principal or affect and effect. Here is a list of these commonly confused homonyms, with examples of their correct use:

accept, except

The construction firm accepted the offer to build the bridge.
Everything has been finished except for the paint job.

advice, advise

The construction firm ignored the engineer’s advice.
The engineer advised the firm to use single suspension walkways.

affect, effect

The effect of the increased oil prices has been devastating on our economy.
The increased oil prices have affected our economy drastically.

cite, site, sight

The consulting engineer cited a paragraph from the building code.
At the construction site, the workers carefully erected the scaffolding.
The collapse of the walkways was a terrible sight.

complement, compliment

The programmer has received many compliments on her new system.
The colors that have been selected for the room do not complement each other.

counsel, council, consul

She was appointed consul to the embassy in Beirut.
There was lenthy debate on the tax proposal at city council last night.
He counselled her to get a degree in technical communications.

its, it’s

It’s time to go home; it’s getting late.
The car has lost one of its headlights.

lose, loose

Your car loses power when it is out of tune.
I have some loose change in my pocket.
Don’t let Mamie get loose!

personal, personnel

They plan to take out a personal loan to build the deck.
Send your application to the personnel office.
The CEO wants to have a personal chat with all this company’s personnel.

principal, principle

The principal component of the solar panel is the collector.
Explain to me the principle of convection.

stationary, stationery

Use company stationery for company business purposes only.
The derrick may not remain stationary during the gale-force winds.

than, then

My utility bill higher this month than it was last month.
The hurricane reached the Texas coast; then it plunged right into the heart of Houston.

their, there, they’re

Their calculus course is much harder than ours.
Over there on the table is your calculus book.
They’re not taking calculus this semester.

to, too, two

Are they going to pave the street today?
It is still too rainy to pave the street.
Two hours ago, the sky was clear.

whose, who’s

Whose technical writing book is this?
There is the woman whose technical report won top honors.
Do you know who’s in charge around here?
He’s a man who’s not afraid of criticism.

your, you’re

Your technical writing book is on the table.
You’re going to have review Part 1 before writing that report.

Some programs have grammer checkers built-in, that can spot mistakes when you use the wrong homonym, but they don’t always work, so I don’t rely on them. I printed out this list and tacked it up next to my monitor, for easy reference.