RE: Being Outspoken

[Abolhassan Astaneh-Asl]

Dear Harold: Until we take our own individual responsibility and participate in cleansing our profession of these small number of corrupt engineers such as most members of Caltrans Seismic Advisory Board, the corrosion of reputation of honorable structural engineers such as yourself and thousands of hard working and ethical members of our profession will continue. Your suggestion of ASCE ethical panel looking into this is good one , but, in my experience, at least in two cases, the case of WTC Building Performance Assessment Team, and the Katrina investigation team, ASCE did not follow its ethical rules.

When ASCE formed the WTC Building Performance Team, to investigate collapse of World Trade Center Towers, two people were on the ASCE/FEMA BPAT team. One was Mr. Jon Magnuson , who was the top officer of the firm Skilling, Ward, Magnusson Barkshire , the firm that did the structural design of the WTC. The name Skilling Ward Magnuson Barkshire after collapse of World Trade Center changed to Magnusson Klemencic Associates. ASCE did not find it ethical to put the top officer of the firm that did the structural design of the WTC on the investigative team that was investigating why buildings collapsed.

The other member of the ASCE/FEMA BPAT was Ms. was Ms Saw-Teen See,Managing Partner, Leslie E. Robertson Associates, RLLP. Ms. See is also wife of Mr. Leslie Robertson who was working at the time of design of WTC at Skilling Ward Magnusson Barkshire and is the structural engineer of the record with his signature on all structural sheets. If ASCE is serious about ethical issues, it can start at home. When you are forming a team to investigate why a building collapsed, you do not put the wife of structural engineer who did the structural engineering of the building on the team to investigate her husbands design.

Of course the result of having these conflicts of interest was that the ASCE/FEMA Report stated that in essence there was nothing wrong with structural design of the WTC. The truth is the opposite . There were many things wrong about it including the use of "steel Bearing Walls" with very high strength steel and extremely vulnerable to fire.

As I have always stated, the 2595 people who died at the WTC, were murdered by those 19 murderers and their supporters and organizers. But, we had to learn from this tragedy to see if we have to change anything in our practices to avoid people loosing their lives because of our design. But of course, since there was nothing wrong with WTC design according to the morally corrupt ASCE BPAT, then we did not need to change anything!

When I stated that this is nothing but "moral corruption", many of you, including yourself, were attacking me for bringing up these facts. In doing so, or even by keeping quite, , perhaps unknowingly and perhaps based on a very mis-guided sense of pride or belonging to your profession, were on the side of the ASCE and some even personally attacked my character.

It took only the courage of my honorable colleague and very dear friend Professor Ray Seed , who wrote a 40+ letter to bring ASCE before an investigative panel which admonished ASCE for its unethical conduct in New Orleans.

As for the WTC BPAT case, ASCE not only has not accepted any wrong doing, it has showered awards on those who organized the WTC BPAT including the WTC BPAT leader Dr. Gene Corley and The ASCE WTC BPAT Project Manger Mr. James Rossberg who were directly involved in knowingly inviting and accepting Mr. Jon Magnusson and Ms. Saw-teen See with such a clear conflict to be a member of the investigative team.

Harold, we know each other for more than 20 years and I have utmost respect for your integrity as well as for your vast knowledge of the filed, but, do you really believe ASCE will be able to review the case of unethical conduct of Caltrans Seismic Advisory Board?

Best regards

A.Astaneh, Ph.D., P.E.

====================================================================

From: Harold Sprague <sprag...@hotmail.com>
To: <sea...@seaint.org>
Subject: RE: Being Outspoken

--_25bbe240-7f1f-4dee-b38f-c71c130f89f3_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There is an independent group within ASCE involved in anti-corruption. ASC=
E Global Principles for Professional Conduct that might warrant consultatio=
n on this issue. =20

Regards=2C Harold Sprague

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
* Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp
*
* This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers
* Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To
* subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to:
*
* http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp
*
* Questions to seai...@seaint.org. Remember, any email you
* send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted
* without your permission. Make sure you visit our web
* site at: http://www.seaint.org
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********

[Harold Sprague]

Professor Astaneh,
 
I prefer to keep the SEAINT list as a technical forum.  I recommend that anyone interested in studying ethics should have a copy of Engineering Ethics, Concepts, Viewpoints, Cases and Codes by the National Institute for Engineering Ethics, edited by Jimmy Smith and Patricia Harper. 
 
If you view an endeavor such as the WTC Bldg Performance Study as corrupt, why is your name listed in the Acknowledgments in Appendix G?  If I was listed as a reviewer and if I perceived that the study and document was corrupt, I would have my name removed as a minimum.   
 
In your reply below you stated, "...When I stated that this is nothing but "moral corruption", many of you, including yourself, were attacking me for bringing up these facts....."  I can not recall anything that I have ever posted as being an attack on you or anyone.  If you perceive anything that I have posted as an attack, I apologize. 
 
I have known Gene Corely, Jim Rossburg, and you for about 2 decades.  Gene and Jim have been among the most ethical and talented engineers I have ever known.  It grieves me to see this kind of accusation in any forum.
 
If you feel our profession is not adequately policing itself through the ASCE, NSPE, or ACEC, then you need to take whatever recourse you feel is appropriate.  There are State and Federal agencies that should investigate and prosecute corruption.  The SEAINT is an exchange to discuss, learn and disseminate structural technical issues.  I would suggest that you bring your concerns to the appropriate agency.
 
I hope that my disagreeing with your position is not perceived as corruption or an attack.  I can and have disagreed with others on issues, but I would never presume or accuse corruption. 
 
Please let this be the last post on this topic.  This posting is just to avoid the perception of tacit approval since it was addressed to me.  I will not participate in a debate on this issue. 

With all due respect,
Regards, Harold Sprague


 
> Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 07:32:44 -0800
> From: ast...@ce.berkeley.edu

---

Bing brings you maps, menus, and reviews organized in one place. Try it now.

[Bill Polhemus]

Dang, maybe we should go back to politics... ;-)

William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.

Via iPhone 3G

(Still Employed...)

[Dmitri Wright]

I miss Bill P !!

[Bill Polhemus]

I'm here. I'm just restin'.

William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.
Via iPhone 3G

On Nov 16, 2009, at 5:08 PM, "Dmitri Wright" <dmi...@cascade-structural.com

[Mark Johnson]

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I looking for guidance/examples/commentary for analysis of the wind and seismic loads on roof-top-mounted solar panels. For both flat and angles arrays on commercial and industrial buildings.

Any references and sources would be appreciated.

TIA
MJ

[Conrad Harrison]

Mark,

There was a brief discussion on the list about the subject late last year.
Also the book wind loading of structures by John Holmes also has a brief
discussion on the subject. But for the most part it is a matter of
judgement, based on the coefficients for roofs in the loading code, and drag
coefficients for flat plates.

Regards
Conrad Harrison
B.Tech (mfg & mech), MIIE, gradTIEAust
mailto:sch.te...@bigpond.com
Adelaide
South Australia

[Mark Johnson]

Conrad,

I looked up that discussion. It was good, mostly about panels on timber roofs and about live load under the panels as I remember. I’m more interested in wind on the panels. I think I got the seismic.

I’m also aware of the Homes book, a little pricey at the moment. If you think it has enough discussion to be worth it, I thank you for the tip and will keep it in mind if I really get stuck.

Thanks,
MJ

--- On Mon, 11/16/09, Conrad Harrison <sch.te...@bigpond.com> wrote:

[Richard L. Hess]

Conrad,
Is that not what structural engineers are supposed to do? Or do they now
need a picture workbook?

Richard Hess, S.E.

-----Original Message-----
From: Conrad Harrison [mailto:sch.te...@bigpond.com]
Sent: Monday, November 16, 2009 8:01 PM
To: sea...@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Analysis of Loads on Solar Panels

Mark,

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.707 / Virus Database: 270.14.69/2508 - Release Date: 11/16/09
23:40:00

[Richard L. Hess]

Mark,
If it is for S.C.Edison, tell them that they cannot anchor it for wind and
seismic forces by putting concrete blocks on the legs like it is usually
done here.
Where do I send my invoice?

Richard Hess, S.E.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

TIA
MJ

No virus found in this incoming message.

Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 9.0.707 / Virus Database: 270.14.69/2508 - Release Date: 11/16/09
23:40:00

[Richard Calvert]

http://www.comsol.se/press/gallery/download/603/wind_load_solar_panels.jpg ?!?!
looks like someone does need a picture book
and like someone has already taken the time to refine the loading as requested here... now if only us structural guys could only afford something like comsol! (20k+ per seat anyone!)

[Conrad Harrison]

Mark,

The book is a bit pricy. It only has about one page of discussion, and
covers the situation of a panel (or solar water heater) mounted on a frame
above the roof, it can be parallel to the roof plane or at some angle.

I don't have the book with me at the moment, but I'll try and scan the page
for you later.

[Conrad Harrison]

Richard,

Currently have a near graduate civil engineer in the office, completes final
year project next week and expects to graduate. Painting by numbers would
seem to be the requirement for understanding. Oh! And photographs to know
what the building looks like: a building which doesn't exist yet.

Since they study the structural codes in civil engineering, I was expecting
more familiarity with such codes, and more familiarity with the components
of a building. He showed me his lecture handout for wind loading, and all it
covers is wind uplift on an isolated rafter, and no real explanation of what
is going on. Not exactly assessing a whole building for wind loading. So not
really covered wind loading.

As for pictures. Well drawing a freehand sketch, a free body diagram would
be useful. But not in lecture notes, so why would he start there? Plus there
is the excuse: "I can't draw". Can only get better at drawing if keep
practicing, by doing: and no one is expecting a work of art.

So doesn't appear to be any real benefit to studying civil engineering in
preference to mechanical.

Looks like I am going to be spending a lot of time providing assistance and
some form of training. Going to be interesting.

[Richard Calvert]

Well, as a semi recent grad myself I can vouch for a lack of practical experience in college. In our final year design course we did see some "whole" buildings - but in both steel and concrete they were merely the simplest form a box one could get. And neither dealt with either the capacity of the diaphragm itself or the different assumptions/methods one can take in distributing the lateral forces. Only a pure base shear approach. I was fortunate to have a professor who preached the number and value of assumptions made in any given situation - probably the most useful of lessons throughout my college career. Something that was very useful in my accepting the fact that every engineer does things differently than the next(and almost all think theirs is the ONLY way!) But I was still far from out-of-the-box ready when I took my first SE job.

BUT, from both personal experience and in helping others come from college to become a valuable member of the team, I also recognize that recent grads rapidly (within a 6 to 12 months) become more capable and knowledgeable than those without a degree but years of experience - and are mostly paid much less; for the time being at the least.

IMHO it is worth spending a bit of time getting them up the first portion of the learning curve.

My last 'project' only took me one week before she was just as valuable to me as any cad technician in the office. This was after the 'sink or swim' approach had failed on her. And all I did was simply have her sit next to and watch me work, while I explained everything I was doing, answered questions and occasionally asked her questions to see what she had picked up on and what I still needed to work on with her. After that she would still have a few questions a day, but overall she went from "a couple more mistakes and shes gone" to being one of the more valuable people in the company. She's now director of something for the state! It just takes patience.

-----Original Message-----
From: Conrad Harrison [mailto:sch.te...@bigpond.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 9:56 PM
To: sea...@seaint.org
Subject: RE: Analysis of Loads on Solar Panels

[IRV FRUCHTMAN]

Mark: Since I haven't seen any panel wind tunnel test data, I assume panel top side pressure is the roof pressure w/o solar panels at the given wind conditions and the underside pressure is the roof interior pressure. I also make sure that the roof framing members are adequate, considering the panel bracket locations.  Irv --- On Mon, 11/16/09, Mark Johnson <mark...@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Mark Johnson <mark...@yahoo.com> Subject: Analysis of Loads on Solar Panels To: sea...@seaint.org

[Conrad Harrison]

Thanks Richard (Calvert),

I'm sure our new recruit will get up to speed soon. Its just been the wrong
time at the moment. He is under pressure to get his final year project
finished: testing some SIP's to ASTM E72 etc..., and little spare time to
refresh his memory. Whilst I was under pressure to get some jobs out at the
time he started, and wasn't otherwise expecting to be the one providing
guidance.

Also given that my formal education is mechanical engineering, I was
expecting someone with civil engineering background to have a lot greater
understanding of the task at hand. Since he has studied the structural
codes, I expect he will get up to speed quickly, once we have filled in the
gaps and refreshed his memory.

Most people seem to think I have unlimited patience and good at teaching. If
that holds true, then I don't see much problem.

My earlier comment was mostly my frustration at my inability thus far to
find the right starting point, and over expectations of where he should be,
whilst falling behind with what I was meant to be doing. That out off the
way, I now have more time to spend on providing more appropriate guidance
and supervision. Plus I now know what he can and cannot do, so that makes
the next step easier. We are both on a learning curve.

Thanks for the insight regarding civil engineering graduates.