The word "nominal" has a number of definitions. For example, the Free Dictionary gives seven: nom·i·nal (nm-nl) adj. a. Of, resembling, relating to, or consisting of a name or names. b.
For example, Dictionary.com gives as many as ten definitions! adjective being such in name only; so-called; putative: a nominal treaty; the nominal head of the country. (of a price, consideration, etc.) named as a mere matter of form, being trifling in comparison with the actual value; minimal. of, relating to, or constituting a name or names.
Has "nominal" really become a synonym for "minimal"? I thought "nominal" meant "in name only," but it appears that the definition has evolved. What say the members of this esteemed group?
It reads "NORMINAL" (sic). My first thought was how embarrassing, they mixed up the spelling of "normal" and "nominal", but as English is clearly harder than rocket science, I'm turning to the appropriate authority on such matters. Is "norminal" a normal word? If so, what does it mean?
The nominal dia of a 10M bar is 10 mm. The actual diameter is 11.3 mm. The development length is a multiple of the diameter, so it is more conservative to use the actual dia. In other bar sizes, it is more conservative for 25M, 30M, 45M, but less conservative for 20M, 35M and 55M, although the differences are quite small, except for the 10M where it is significant.
"Nominal" is another question. Perhaps there is some tolerance for larger than normal aggregate that's not predominant in the size distribution. Question i) Do 25.2.1 and 25.2.2 apply independently? the second one is spacing between layers of rebar, I'd expect that the bar spacing needs to work for the max aggregate size on both layers.
Am I correct in thinking Vasd is the same as ASCE 7-05 design wind speed? If so, it looks like ASCE 7-10 ans IBC 2012 back calculate wind speeds differently. Does anyone know why? Which is the proper way to back calculate ultimate to nominal wind speeds? Any help is greatly appreciated!
I think the nominal moment formula I quoted is indeed for Load Factor (Ultimate Strength) Design. That would be consistent with the remainder of the main body of ACI 318 (Since ASD is an alternate design method in the appendix). In that case you would apply the load factors you mentioned.
Dear All, I'm an ealry graduated Mechanical Engineer and In my company I'm working on Design of static equipments as P.Vessel,Tank and Heat Exhangers. Concerning to Pressure Vessel, I would like to know, if I have a Working Capacity of 13m^3, which one could be a Nominal Capacity that could...
The correct procedure is obviously: -take the nominal pipe thickness less undertolerance to obtain the minimum wall thickness in the new condition -withdraw the corrosion allowance to get the actual minimum available pipe thickness -compare the latter to the required wall thickness. If you reverse this procedure, you'll see that it corresponds to your procedure number 1, so I confirm what ...
