Given the fact that different regions of the world have different climatic conditions (often times these conditions affect construction materials and environment), one wonders if it is really too appropriate to adopt foreign standards in designing engineering projects in areas different from where they were developed. Please, what's your take on this?
Admittedly geographical location and associated climatic conditions play a role in the standards. But so do many other things: the type of industry (civil, petroleum, LNG, aeronautical, etc.), the type of material (concrete, steel, composites, etc.), the type of load (seismic, wind, etc.), the type of structure (bridges, tunnels, buildings, etc.), the type of process (welding, cutting, additive manufacturing, etc.). And so on. Even insurers will have their say on the standards used.
Geographical location is neither the most important nor the more specific aspect. And given that not every country can be expected to have standards covering all the combinations of aspects, there will always be a major role for international and foreign standards. Indeed, the tendency is to go for standards applicable in progressively wider geographical areas.
I agree with Joaquin Marti . In addition, a country/nation can indeed adopt foreign standards in designing and constructing their engineering projects; however, with suitable modifications or revisions that take into consideration the specific needs and necessities of that country or region. These necessities can extend to many aspects including, but not limited to, the climatic conditions, type of project, availability of material, social aspects, and the authority to apply the standards.
Thanks, @Joaquin Marti & @Osama Mohsen, for your insightful explanations!
- Badges
- Science topic