Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.

Your browser appears to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser

We'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Sort it out

The article 'Designing for terror: what’s the point?' contained a number of inaccuracies and misconceptions regarding the design of structures to resist the extreme events that could be caused by terrorists. The subject is a serious one and deserves calmer comment.
It is plainly impossible to define, with precision, the hazard that could be presented to large structures by aircraft impacts, for example, over the lifetime of a building.

There is, currently, some risk that iconic buildings could be attacked in this way. Threat analysis of this type is carried out by specialists, but is unlikely to provide useful information for design engineers.

It is therefore more practical to plan such buildings with a view to building in resilience against the loss of supporting elements, whether by fire, blast or impact. This approach is given, in a simple form, in the codes of practice and building regulations.

A new accreditation body for people working in this area is being set up, at present, by the ICE, in the form of the Register of Security Engineers.

DAVID GOODE (M), D J GOODE & ASSOCIATES, THE OLD CONTROL TOWER, LAVENHAM AIRFIELD, OLD BURY ROAD, SUDBURY, SUFFOLK, CO10 9LR

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

Please remember that the submission of any material is governed by our Terms and Conditions and by submitting material you confirm your agreement to these Terms and Conditions. Please note comments made online may also be published in the print edition of New Civil Engineer. Links may be included in your comments but HTML is not permitted.

Related Jobs