CROSS Safety Report
Check for errata when using manuals
This report is over 2 years old
A reporter from an international firm of consulting engineers noticed an alert on a global internal knowledge networks about an errata in an AISC manual.
Key Learning Outcomes
For civil and structural design engineers:
There can be reliance on the accuracy of published design information, but it would be impossible to guarantee no risk of error. A safeguard against this can be to always ensure approximate checks parallel to the ‘proper’ design to reduce the risk of gross error.
Find out more about the Full Report
The Full Report below has been submitted to CROSS and describes the reporter’s experience. The text has been edited for clarity and to ensure anonymity and confidentiality by removing any identifiable details. If you would like to know more about our secure reporting process or submit a report yourself, please visit the reporting to CROSS-UK page.
A reporter from an international firm of consulting engineers noticed an alert on a global internal knowledge networks about an errata in an AISC manual. Users of the 13th edition AISC Steel Construction Manual should check errata posted online (see link below) when using formulas and properties from this manual. AISC Technical Publications Revision and Errata Lists link at: www.aisc.org/content.aspx?id=2896
One of their staff discovered this while checking the design of a built up railing on a pedestrian bridge. The section modulus for an L4x4 angle changed by more than 75% from the value shown in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd printing of the manual. It highlights reliance placed on published material and the need for vigilance in ensuring that we retain a ‘feel’ for correct design.
The reporter thinks that in the UK the BSI are prompt to issue errata if critical design data is found to be incorrect, however there might be less attention paid to information from bespoke specialist companies eg fixings. The alert also highlights the increasing use of this media (internal networks) to share and transmit knowledge of issues/problems internationally.
Submit a report
Your report will make a difference. It will help to create positive change and improve safety.
Our secure and confidential safety reporting system gives professionals the opportunity to share their experiences to help others.
No feedback has yet been published for this page.
Expert Panel Comments
Expert Panels comment on the reports we receive. They use their experience to help you understand what can be learned from the reports. If you would like to know more, please visit the CROSS-UK Expert Panels page.
Errata can occur across the whole spectrum of technical publications and in most cases, it is very difficult, if not impossible, for users to check whether errata have been reported or published. Now that many national standards are produced at European level in CEN, the time between an error being reported and corrections being published takes much longer, more than a year in some cases.
When standards were produced locally, corrigenda or amendments could be quickly agreed, published and notified by BSI. Now as the first generation Eurocodes are being adopted, designers should certainly pay attention to the possibility that corrigenda have been published or that errors have been notified. A web search (e.g. for ‘errors in Eurocode 2’) can be productive. Eurocodes Expert and other materials sector web sites also aim to notify errors in published standards and users of such standards should be aware of these information sources.
This is a difficult problem which raises issues similar to those in reports about dubious material certification (Report 230). We are all reliant on the accuracy of published design information, but it would be impossible to guarantee no risk of error. A safeguard is to always ensure approximate checks parallel to the ‘proper’ design to reduce the risk of gross error.