Re: Flexure vs. Cable Action in a solid rod.

No you are not, no more than the author of the textbook on steel beam design is responsible for the application you make of it.

I will simply say that I would never seal such a letter, for fear of incurring liability that the board rules - the law - do not require of me. 

William L. Polhemus, Jr. P.E.

Via iPhone 3G

On Jun 23, 2009, at 11:06 AM, Richard Calvert <RichardC@lbbe.com> wrote:

Well, you are, at that point, taking shared liability on for that portion of the structure – this added buffer for the EOR is the whole point of this approach. 

---

From: Bill Polhemus [mailto:bill@polhemus.cc]
Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 11:55 AM
To: seaint@seaint.org
Subject: Re: Flexure vs. Cable Action in a solid rod.

 

Richard Calvert wrote:

... formally obtain a second opinion (signed and sealed)...

I'm curious about the advisability of "signing and sealing" a second opinion. What exactly are you vouching for there with your seal? What is your scope of responsibility?

I submit that sealing a letter giving your opinion on a design topic where you are not directly responsible for the design, etc., is not wise.

In that case, should engineering professors "sign and seal" their textbooks?

******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * 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 seaint-ad@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 ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********