So I am going to introduce the first Peter of this session. His name is Peter Danskow. He's professor of interaction design at Ohus University. He is also the director of Center for Digital Creativity in three major research projects that explore digital creativity and collaboration. And he's here today to talk about creativity and computers. Please give Peter a hand. Thank you so much, Christiana, and thank you for putting me in this inspiring session. I very much look forward to hearing the next speakers as well. I've also actually really enjoyed this conference and at the conference we've seen many examples of how digital systems are spreading into more and more spheres of human activity. In my work I'm particularly fascinated with what happens when computers become part of and gradually change one particular type of activity, namely creativity. We've also seen at this conference many new and fascinating technologies out there, and it's very easy to get seduced by them. I can feel that myself with with several of the things I've seen here over the past two days. But as a researcher my goal here today is not to promote a specific technology or service. It is rather to present you with some principles and insights that might be of use to you when you shape workflows to support creative work in your organizations or in your own working life. And when you develop new tools to support creative work, regardless of the specific types of technologies that you might use. So you can think of what I'm about to present you as an overview of research into the workflows of creative professionals and insights into how we might get better at supporting and augmenting creative work. So in the talk there are two main points I'd like to make about the interplay between creativity and computers. And the first point is that digital tools and creative work practices are intertwined and they co-evolve over the course of time. And by this I mean that new technologies influence how we shape and how we think and create. And in return we create digital tools to help us think, explore and create in new ways. So in a sense we shape our tools and our tools shape us in creative work. And following this is my second point. If we want to create tools that are good at supporting and augmenting creative work, it's not enough for us to understand all the amazing things we can do from a technical perspective, although that may very well be the prerequisite for building new tools. Now we must also understand the ways in which creatives work and the dynamics and principles that drive creative processes. As Christiane said, I'm the founder and co-director of the Center for Digital Creativity here at Olds University and our core interest is exactly to explore these issues. We're approximately 20 researchers and developers working on this. Before I jump into my main presentation, just a brief introductory comment. One of the things we know from creativity research is that a crucial component in creativity is diversity. And you just heard the names of the presenters. I realized a couple of days ago that except for our moderator, Christiane Weiler, I am in fact in a session full of male speakers. So I've tried to stick to only using examples of female pioneers in the field of digital creativity in my presentation. So on with it. The big trend that we explore in our research center is, broadly speaking, what happens when we go from a situation in which we primarily have used computers to automate routine work and develop principles for creating systems that support this to moving into a situation in which we to a wider and wider extent use digital tools and creativity and knowledge work. In our center, we work with a range of different industries and domains. In order to explore this, our collaborators include, among others, LEGO education, Microsoft research, design it, as well as a range of public institutions and partners such as municipalities and libraries across Europe. We've also worked a lot with architects to explore the potentials of integrating digital systems into the built environment. Here on top is an example of a collaboration with Big Martin Professional, the Center for Advanced Visualization and Interaction, and Kulishon Architects, who you'll hear more about from one of its founders just in a short while. The collaboration was about developing an interactive facade for the Danish pavilion at the World Expo in Shanghai. And one of the insights from doing these types of research collaborations is that new technological opportunities don't just result in new digitally enhanced end products. They also lead us to develop new tools to support creative processes. Architecture, in this case, is rather an interesting domain for us to study because it's quite clear to see how the development of new tools can directly influence the outcome of the process. But it's also interesting because it demonstrates how tools can influence and change how we think. So architects' ideas about what architecture is will change and co-evolve with technology. And in return, some architects will then develop new tools to see and think in new ways. And this goes for a wider range of domains as well. When we explore how tools, especially digital tools, are used and developed in creative work, we realize that when we look at the front runners, at the pioneers across a range of domains, all the way from the performing arts to the science labs, we see that many of these pioneers don't just use the tools that are given to them. They find new and clever ways to hack them, to recombine them. They use them for unintended purposes and they create new tools. And they do so in order to be able to discover new things in the world, to experiment in ways that were not possible before and to think things that were previously unthinkable. And that's a couple of examples. You have here, on your left-hand side, Ilse-Marie Pell, one of the mothers of electronic music, Adaine, who is very much a tinkerer and an inventor herself. Today, we have pioneers such as Rebecca Fiebringer on your right, who explores how to develop AI systems that creatives can understand, train and customize to fit their particular purposes. Here are another couple of photos from some of our work and what you see might look like a mess to you. It might actually be a mess, in a sense. But these are, in fact, workspaces of one of our collaborators, the Bartlett in London. The Bartlett is the highest ranked school of architecture in the world. So what you see here are actually highly-skilled practitioners working in a world-class environment, the natural habitat, so to speak. And the reason that I show this to you is that when we talk about digital tools, we have a tendency to often focus on individual tools. And this is really nice if we want to achieve the best possible standalone tools. And there are a lot of tools out there that are really well-suited for very specific tasks in creative work. But what we find in many different forms of creative work is that many creatives don't just use one tool and not even one tool at a time. They use a complex mix of resources. Materials and tools. And they combine and employ them in different ways, depending on the situation. And they very often work collaboratively, using tools and materials in partnership with other professionals and to a wider and wider extent, perhaps even in partnership with intelligent machines. So creative mastery in this way is not just a question of learning how to use a tool, but learning how to figure out how to string all of these resources together in dynamic ways in response to specific tasks and challenges. This complex mess of resources and tools is not just something we see with analog tools and materials in our physical environment. It also goes through our digital infrastructures, although we often tend to think of the digital realm as being much more structured. But let's take an example from another domain that we're studying at the moment, namely writing. Normally, when you ask people which tool they use for writing, they will say something like Microsoft Word or Google Docs. And that is partly correct. But here's a concrete example from a current research project in which we examine the different types of tools that people use to support the creative process of writing. And what we see here are actually 12 different tools stringed together by one person for a particular writing process. And these tools range all the way from searching, collecting, organizing, tracking, reading, annotating, making notes, making sense of things, starting to put together strings of arguments and narratives and so on, until we get to the very final tool for composing the thing which might then be something like Word. And the reason I mentioned this to you is that when we look at these tools and we talk to these people, we find that these tools, only to a very limited extent, are able to communicate, but not very interoperable. It's hard even to do something that you would imagine as being simple, as moving text from one into the other, let alone let's say that in tool number three you want to annotate something and hope that this propagates or spreads to tool number 11. That's never going to happen with the current systems we have now. So this leads to another point which may to some of you sound controversial, which is that the way that we have designed many of our current IT system actually hinders and complicates creative work. On the one hand, because it's hard to combine and integrate tools in meaningful ways, and it's even harder to modify them so that they fit into creative practices. If we think about a few of the things I've said before and think about how creative professionals need to combine tools dynamically to hack them, to develop them and string them together, we can see why this might be a problem. But more so, this is also the case because there are many critical aspects of the creative process that current tools simply haven't been developed to support. And as I started out by saying many tools have been built to automate routine work, and this means that we have developed principles for developing certain types of tools that emphasize things like efficiency, minimizing errors, adhering to standards. And these are fine principles we teach them to our students when we want to teach them how to create usable systems. I wouldn't recommend that we disregard them. But we must also realize that these are very different principles from the principles and processes that are central to creative work such as experimentation, improvisation, combining and remixing seemingly opposing ideas or even learning from mistakes. In a sense, we can see the state of affairs as a problem and it certainly can be for creative professionals today. But I'd also say that we can see this as a range of opportunities that open up for us to explore both in research and industry. Opportunities for rethinking and redesigning the tools we have now and opportunities for creating software and tools which could exist to better support creative work but which we have not yet invented. And this to me is fascinating stuff. Now, a question I was asked when I was invited to do this talk was to talk about the creative tool of tomorrow and what it might look like. The way I'd like to try to answer that question is not to point to one specific tool, although we try to build a range of prototypes that embody some of these principles in our research center. But rather to suggest principles for you to consider, maybe in collaboration with us or other researchers or with each other, when you go out and create new workflows and new tools. The first of these is that we should create systems that don't log users into disconnected one-size-fits-all standard standalone software. Rather, we should develop systems in a way that will help creatives tinker with, adapt, combine and create tools themselves. As an example from how we explore this in our research center, we develop collaborative notebooks that people can recode and continue to develop as their workflows change and as their skillset evolves over the course of time. We should build tools that gracefully integrate digital and physical components because most creatives actually use both in their work, sorry. On our side, we're exploring this by creating, for instance, systems that integrate digital and analog sticky notes and whiteboards. We should build tools that support collaboration and this might sound self-evident. I suspect many of you actually build tools that have collaborative features. But when we go out and observe these tools that people are using in creative practices today, we see that most of these tools have first and foremost been developed for single users. Whereas most of the work processes we see are highly collaborative. So we should take this seriously when we build our tools and not just plaster on collaborative features as an afterthought. And by this, I mean, if you think, for instance, of Google Docs, which I like and use very much myself and which is probably one of the most widely used collaborative work tools, for better or worse, it looks very much like and functions to a wide extent like a word processor from the 1980s with features for collaboration plaster on top. On our side, we're exploring this principle by creating systems to capture and share knowledge that people create together, for instance, in events in public libraries. And last but not least, we should integrate the insights and all of the knowledge that we actually possess already from research into creativity and consider how we can make systems that not only enable us to automate and to speed up work, but to help us see, think and create new ways. On our side, we're, for instance, doing this by developing systems that support designers in creating shared collections of ideas and help them remix and combine ideas through a design process. This brings me to the conclusion of my talk. I want to thank you for listening. And as a publicly funded researcher, I also want to thank all of the many funding bodies that have made our work possible. And to thank the many researchers and collaborators in our center and beyond. And I like to end by saying that many of the challenges we face today, both in terms of industry innovation, but also on a larger societal scale, our challenges I think require us to see, think, explore, share and create a new ways. And I believe there's great untapped potentials in exploring how digital tools can help us better do so. And I'd be more than happy to discuss how we might do this together. Thank you. Are there any people that make your research possible? We actually don't hear that a lot. No. I mean, most of our research, I should probably thank all of you to the extent that you're taxpayers. We very much appreciate that as well. But also there are a lot of foundations in Denmark that generously support our work and we wouldn't exist without them. So for instance, some of the people who help finance our center, whenever you buy a window from Velux, some of that goes into public research. Whenever you drink a beer from Karlsberg, that funds research as well. So please buy more windows and drink more beer. Thank you.


Thank you. I won't stand over there. Yeah. Hello My name is Ross Welcome to WordCamp Edinburgh as well. We're an Edinburgh based WordPress agency So it's fantastic that you guys are all here at our home WordCamp Can Everybody hear me okay first of all. Yeah, and if you want to follow along on your own device My slides are here D33.io For slash WC-ed in just in case you need that. That's cool. So Tails from the edge right when I thought about a title for this talk I thought I should give it something dramatic because it's been a dramatic journey that Jason and I have been on and well Things can't have been that bad can they? well, I thought I'd start off with a Statistics and immediately lose visual on the projector and if I give this cord a wiggle It's gonna come back on. I believe this happened earlier on as well. Fantastic Okay, somebody tell me if we get a signal. Yeah, no dice Fantastic, I'll let you fiddle around with that.  Oh, okay Okay, right Joe's gonna get the captions back up and running, but I think I'll push on and Things can't have been that bad. Can they? Well, I looked at a statistic Just as was putting these slides together and I'm just gonna read out 38% There's been a 38% rise in the number of business insolvency appointments during the first quarter of 2018 over 2017 figures So that's almost a 40% rise and the number of businesses having trouble the number of businesses not having enough money to pay the bills and I Actually think that's quite an alarming increase if you read the whole article Maybe that is a bit of a scary statistic to start with but Yeah, it it's been tough I think and I think if you're doing well at the moment then you should be really proud of yourself because Trading conditions we found would be tough. We're having to work a lot harder for the business now We've been in business for almost as long as this projector. I think it's been around Okay Try again Only the best Come on Put it flicker. I'm gonna keep wiggling things around just until Yeah, it's plugged into the wall. I know we had issues with that earlier on No Come on. I will not be beaten by technology. Yeah, I'm past Yeah, yeah, okay Yeah, yeah, how many WordPress people does it take to fix a projector? Right? Yeah Okay, I think we're gonna get a different laptop. Yeah. Thanks, man. Nice one. There we go. Okay, right Let's push on Joe. You're gonna have to stand there It has been a bit of a journey, right and I've been working with WordPress for 10 years I've been running an agency for seven and yeah, I could tell you about the time we were fined by 500pixels.com for using an unlicensed image on a production website Yeah, happened by accident, but we put our hands up to it and paid the fine at that point in time if it had been Three images, ten images that had made it onto a production website It would have sunk my agency because we wouldn't have had the money to be able to pay the fine I could tell you about the time a client that we thought was really nice and really good to work with ripped us off 4,000 pounds I don't know if anyone else can identify with that in the room today But yeah, when it happened It was a crushing blow and we had to learn from it and move forward Or I could tell you about the time that we were down to our last 100 quid and the bank account and wondering What are we going to do next week? How are we going to get over this hump? But I'm delighted to say that yeah, we are still here, but It has been a bit of a roller coaster. I'm just gonna let this next slide load because it doesn't look like it loaded there Yeah, there we go and I have definitely been That person in the front and that person at the back as well, okay Celebrating the highs but also absolutely terrified So the intention of my talk today is really to avoid you having to shed tears that I have shed and This is just kind of stuff that worked for us. Okay, it might not work for you But this is how we did it. This is how we built a WordPress agency and this is what we concentrate on today so Five sections people process pricing practice and party. Okay, I'm just gonna dive straight into people That's the guy that I work with. Where are you?  Love you, man Jason and I have known each other for a long time and we've worked together for a long time So I'm not just in WordPress previously and not just in an agency Set up, but I read this quote and I thought I'm gonna have to include that So surround yourself with people who make you happy. It's incredibly important It's incredibly important that you enjoy what you do and that you enjoy the people that you interact with every single day And I'm not saying that life is like that every day in our office Do you know what 85% of the time I would say it is we have great fun and we love what we do It's not always been like that. Here's a chart representing Who did everything when my business first started? It was me. I did everything Then it looked like that Jason and I Sitting across the desk. Have you finished with that CSS file mate? Yeah, cool. Right. Let's move on. We'll do some terms for brilliant Today it looks like that. So there are five of us in design 33 myself Jason, Danny, Loic and Lorraine on this graph I don't think it accurately portrays the amount of work that I do because it only says However, when we break that down into a WordPress capacity, we've got maybe the Headings here are potentially in a slightly wrong order, but we've got accounting client handling. We've got creative We've got front end. We've got backend dev and we've got compliance and accessibility all inside our own agency and We also work with the range of freelancers so We work with freelance designers freelance seo people copywriters devs and people that do marketing and ppc but for us Fit is just as important as ability. Okay, so if you're a designer I would expect you to be able to open up sketch and design me something that looks nice All right, if you're a dev I would expect you to be able to solve a hard problem with some code And you know write it elegantly and adhere to standards that we would expect so That's all almost a given for us. It's more about the fit is this person going to Contribute to our team and help us grow as a business but It also applies to clients as well. All right, and this is really important for us. Okay We have to meet our clients and check that they fit with us Okay, and I think this is a singularly important thing that gets overlooked a lot of the time Client dangles a few grand in front of your nose and you jump at it Okay, without doing any checks to see if this is actually going to be a good fit So, how do we do that? Well, it's very simple. We meet them first of all, but then we think about working with them and we Check to see if they're going to take any of these boxes. Are they going to be fun? Life's too short. Okay I like to enjoy what I do. So is this client going to be fun to work with? Are they going to bring us fame? Can we ride on their coattails as they go and achieve these stellar things that they've set out to do? Can we get a bit of that? Are they going to make us more famous as an agency? Or let's be blunt about it Have they got a lot of money to spend because actually if I'm going to have to field phone calls over the weekends Then I want to know that it's worth it. And actually there's income coming into the agency. So We check the fit.  So Second thing on my list was process Come on There we go, right. Oh, oh, it's going to skip ahead five slides now Okay, this is a company that we started working with this year. It's been quite a big project for us And I'm going to use these guys as an example To talk about our process that we work through internally at the 1933. This is Ediston everybody meet Ediston This is what they used to look like. Um, I grabbed this image of the web archive the way back machine I'm pretty sure you could see the rest of this photo at some point But this is what it looks like now on the web archive They make houses so currently they're developing 250 new houses in Sockee in central scotland They build houses essentially for families to to move into and what did we do with them? Well We took them through a full rebrand. You were able to see it for a second there and it was like awesome. Um, come on Yes, thank you So, yeah, I'm going to keep talking. Um, we built them a responsive website a responsive website and Crucially, it had to be easy to use. Okay, that was one of the the kind of key functional requirements that a non-technical Back-end team had to be able to add new houses new properties to the to the front end of the website They had to be able to add special offers, you know, so free carpets with this one or Helped to buy information all of that sort of information had to be readily available And we took them through a bit of a process that we use that we've honed over the years to really I suppose get the best out of the project and How do we do that? How do we get from client sign-on to finished project? I think so, okay, we'll give it a second. So we've got four steps to our our Our process and they all begin with D which is nice. So we've got discovery design development and deployment and discovery Is coming up next Are we there yet? Okay discovery Starts when the client Has signed the paperwork and if you're not using paperwork then stop what you're doing and go and get a contract document made up Pay a lawyer to legalify it and make it binding. Okay, and if you're not doing that do that now do that today It's incredibly important that we have a clear Vision for the project right at the start that the client understands What's going to happen when it's going to happen how much things are going to cost and crucially at this point We also take a payment. Okay, and that is Hugely important. We normally ask for 50 percent of the project fee up front. Okay, so in Edison's case We did exactly that and we found that that carries the mind that sharpens everybody's focus because money's changed hands. All right um We find that that Tact works very well. How are we doing jace? Not good Um, and then we get into some workshops with our clients So with these guys we were branding them. So what that means for us is we're looking at color schemes We're looking at typography. We're looking at users. We're looking at all these things And we have a bit of a process that I would love to show you. Um, if we can Yes, uh d33.io Forward slash wp edin. I'm so glad I put the slides up there. Yeah Okay, and we're on slide number 35 Uh, wc edin. Yeah, sorry. Good man. Thank you. Oh, that sounded final Yeah, d33.io forward slash Wc edin. It's a pdf. We should be able to download it from there. Um, and Come on, man. Come on Yeah, we're struggling struggling. Okay, right. Let's keep going. So um, I'm on slide number 35, which is manifesto and Some personas. So we take our clients through and in Ediston's case We took them through a bit of a journey And understanding who they are and understanding who their users are as well. Okay, so Why do we do that? Well, we need to we need to understand what the website has to do in this case Yeah, it's pretty simple. It's going to sell houses, right? But there's going to be a journey through the website for each user So we need to understand who those users are and the only way that we can do that Or the easiest way that we find to do it is to workshop with our clients draw all of that information out and We output a website at the end of this. It's a discovery site and it has all of the clients discovery work on there. So That means that if we're working with a designer, the designer can reference back to the discovery site The client can go. Oh, yeah. Who is the persona type that was the uh, you know, the uh, proud Divorcing or you know that kind of thing they can go back and they can they can look at the persona type Um, so we find that that works very well. Then we move into design now Our design process is not Set in stone Jason you're looking hopeful here Yeah, yeah, yeah And it's worthwhile reminding our clients and I always say this that you might not fall in love with our designs right away Okay, you might look at them and think I'm not sure about this And really it would be good to have some slides because the next few slides are pretty visual because we're talking about design, right? So, uh Come on. We can do it. We can do it. Oh Oh, it's thinking Yes, oh Nobody breathe Come on That's progress I think if this isn't going to work. We should just Sack it And uh, maybe we can you hook me into the tv instead? That's it the betterment of the captions Say again All right. Okay. Yeah, nice one. Okay, cool, right. So Uh, where do we go to? Okay. You might not fall in love right away. Um Yeah, and at this point we start to iterate designs pretty quickly. Okay So you can see here. We've got some various different visual Roots for uh, Edison's logo Edison's typeface. They're their wordmark Um, and we start to work through bits of the website Okay, and I'll come back to why in a second, but here's a homepage design that didn't quite make the cut Here's another completely different route. Um that we took that was felt not to be just quite right for Edison We'll start to mock up bits of the website as I said, so this is a call to action panel Encouraging customers if they've got questions to get in touch with Edison By either phone or by email and here's the footer of the finished website Why are we designing little bits of things? Well, what we found that it means is that when we get to The final iteration of the website. So here is the sketch file that actually made it to production The client already knows what they're getting. All right, they've already seen the colors. They've already seen the typeface There's no grand Unveiling and you wait with baited breath to see if they like it or not, you know there's none of that and It helps our clients feel more more involved in the process It helps our clients feel that they are taking decisions throughout the design process and there's constant feedback for our designers to Learn from and to iterate new Versions of the design. So at this point, we take a payment as well. So clients clients happy Let's take a payment. Let's get some more cash into the agency. Okay Why do we take stage payments? Well, I suppose it just helps us Have a bit of cash flow in the business first of all, but there might be costs involved with this You you might be working with an external designer or freelancers. So you've got to pay them, right? So staged payments taken payments at different stages throughout the project really really helps you Manage that and you're not having to think where you know, where on earth am I going to get the money to pay the designer from? That's fine. The client's going to give you it at the right point. Okay, so What do we do next? Well into development and We've got signed off visuals We then make them in a browser. I think that is pretty A simple way of putting it but we work with staging sites like this one. So behind a password Where our clients can log in and see our progress as we're as we're working through the the build process and once we get to the stage that we have In a browser visually the same representation as the signed off mock-ups We take another payment at that point. Okay now You guys might do something different. This is just how we do it. Okay, so we might mock up Three key pages say I held up four fingers there, but I said three four right we might do four Once we get to that point We kind of know how to build out the rest of the site because we know what the header in the footer looks like We know what an h1 and h2 and h3 looks like we know what hero sections look like and forms look like So we can kind of build out the rest of the site without too much more input from a designer now We found that that approach works very well and once we get to here We take a payment and the client Feedback that we get from this process seems to indicate that they like this bit too Because they can actually see the designs come to life They can see the rollover effects that we're using on buttons or how form interactions work and our development process has Uh I think it's safe to say evolved over the years and uh, yeah, I think like most of you we we started out with ftp Um, and then we kind of rolled forward into version control with git and yeah nowadays were continuous integration with jenkins Um, jason understands this bit much better than I do that's his job. Um So we are deploying to the web. Uh, we're getting ready to deploy and what do we have to think about? Well, this is a bit that a lot of people get wrong Um, we need to think about 301 redirects. We need to think about are we uh, is this a new domain or are we redirecting from an old Domain what's going to happen to all the old urls Uh, do we need to tell google about any of this? Are we using analytics? Are we using anything a bit more kind of, you know out there hot jar lead forensics or anything like that? You know, what are we doing? Um, are there any complicated dns changes that we need to think about just now for example? Are we going to break ediston's email if we uh, if we mess things up at this stage? So quite a quite a tricky part of a project But we have a trail list that we go through a kind of pre-flight list if you like That's always grown. It's always getting bigger and being refined as we go The whole process with us takes about nine to 12 weeks and yeah I mean it does depend on the project. Sometimes we go quicker. Sometimes we are Slower depends on the client anybody had slow clients before. Hey, right? Yeah, you know, I'll give you that copy by friday. Yeah And I think really the Important thing to remember here is if you're going to use stage payments, then It's good to think about that Do you know that there are going to be a slow client? If you do then you should maybe look at where you put your payment stages So that you're not running into a dry spell of money from their from their project So think about that in advance and that leads me on to number three, which is pricing. Normally every other talk that I've been to whether it's a word camp or another Tech talk when you when you start talking about pricing this happens I'm not telling you nobody's going to talk about it, right? Particularly. I have to say shock horror with word camps Okay, um, but I run a business. I need to make money and it's an important part of what we do And getting our pricing strategy, right took a long time. Okay How do you do that? Okay, so here's the the kind of party Charge that normally falls to me to write the proposals to go to meetings to Write documentation to do the search all of that has value Okay, and if you're not charging for that then you're missing a trick because you're giving your time away for nothing All right, and I don't know about you, but my time is valuable. I could be doing one of the other two things here Unfortunately as part of project work, there's quite a lot of paperwork that goes into the the projects that we work on there's quite a lot of reading and Understanding brief documents, you know, we have to really understand these things when we're giving them So we charge for all of that project management. We charge for it build it into your costs Um, I promise you it's a good thing to do. It's not just about design and development. There are Other other things to think about Who's heard of this value-based pricing? Yeah, you're nodding. Yeah, I know you have. Yeah Okay, value-based pricing is something that we have Tried in the past. We've never really got it right and I'd be interested to hear from anybody that has Let me give you an example. So Really really near the start of of design 33's kind of I suppose incarnation We started working with an Edinburgh legal firm quite a prestigious one. They're about 350 years old I remember sitting in their boardroom thinking how did I end up here? This is incredible And they had a system whereby they need to produce legal certificates If you've ever bought and sold a house in Scotland, your solicitor will have had one of these certificates called a property inquiry certificate They charge 85 quids each for them. Um, and the process that we walked into was this manual process, right? So person in the office generates the document then puts the client details into it then puts the logo on it Then make sure it's got the right date and the right stuff in the footer Right it's taken far too long. So and they do a lot of these they do a lot of these So we were asked to build a system that would help improve that workflow. So it's going to be ip restricted It's not publicly accessible. It's just for the client. So that kind of cuts down on, you know, it doesn't have to look snazzy It can be very simple and essentially User enters the data Some magic happens and then a branded pdf is spat out at the other end in reality It was a WordPress site with gravity forms on the side that the staff could see Gravity pdf. I'm pretty sure it's the name of the plugin that handles the data input from the form and then it spits out the pdf at the other end They were like, this is amazing guys.  So When I was putting these slides together For wordCamp, I looked and to date as of the 8th of November, they've generated 19,146 certificates. Okay, who remembers how much they were charging their 85 quid each Okay, so currently as of the 8th of November, they have put through 1,627,410 pounds Through our system, right in anybody's books. That's a lot of money. Okay Should we have charged more? Yes. Should we have used value based pricing? Yes We got it wrong. We didn't see the inherent value We didn't understand it because we didn't take them through a process to help us understand What they were going to do with this and just how lucrative it was if you Buy me a beer later. I'll tell you how much we charged for them For the build, but we should have charged a lot more money. Okay We've talked about people we've talked about process we've talked about pricing and we've had some Technical issues in between practice, right? I want you to meet somebody. This is Emily Emily's eight. She's my youngest daughter and she's learning to play the cornet Anybody else here have kids that play brass instruments? I feel your pain Yeah, um, I said to her the other day and she's fantastic. She's really picking up and it's great I said to her the other day Do you know what honey practice makes perfect and quick as a flash? She came back and said no dad Practice doesn't make perfect practice makes progress and I thought That's good. Yeah, I'm having that right. So practice makes progress and I don't want to sound all preachy But there's no substitute for practice and all of the the agency Stuff that Jason and I do whether we are talking to people We're talking to potential employees or potential clients Whether we are thinking about our process whether we're thinking about how we how we actually complete our project Work or whether we're looking at our pricing. Why didn't we win that piece of work? We were too expensive, right? We need to practice that but again, we need to practice. There is no substitute for practicing how we handle our people how we interact with our clients our process should be Constantly being refined and we should also go back and re-examine our pricing A lot of a lot as well. Okay party, right Why is this in here? Well, I thought I had to kind of have five and then I there's a bit of a tenuous link in here as well So forgive me. Um, we do like to party at design 33 is anybody knows us. I'm sure we'll testify to Uh, this was our agency seventh birthday last week An escape room. That's Jason and I mountain biking and Glen tress last year We do like to have fun together and this is going to tie it back to what I said right at the start We do like to have fun and party a lot, but enjoy what we do This is us at word camp Europe last year and here comes the tenuous link. I think what I get most out of working in a word press agency is I get the opportunity to participate Um, I I mean that sincerely. I think uh, I've done a I've done a number of different jobs in my time And I definitely enjoy running my agency. Um, it's been hard. It's been hard work And the 10 years that I've been using wordpress. It's changed a lot and it's been hard. It's not always been easy, but We're really lucky. We work in an open source community. We get to learn from each other and we get to continually improve the products we work with Um, that's kind of it. Thanks for being with me through the the technical stuff. Yeah Brilliant. Yeah, thanks very much. Thanks. Do we have any questions for Ross? Yes That's a good question. No, we'll build it into our project fee So we tend to charge on a project by project basis. So um Sometimes we get request for proposals in or tender documents in and there is a fee attached to that You know that that happens sometimes doesn't happen always sometimes it can be quite a good way of Uh, I suppose getting a bit more information out of your client as well. So, um, if you can phone up the client and say How much is the the tender fee until I would do there isn't one I know I haven't indicated a budget either, you know My financial director is going to give me in the neck if I don't go back to some information You know, can you tell me how much the budget is? You know, then I suppose it's maybe a route to opening up a conversation You know, um, we build it in when we know, uh, if we're successful then, you know This project is going to take this amount of hours to work Through then yeah, it's going to have these costs associated with it. So yeah So typically recharge 50 up front 20 at design sign off 20 at Your designs are now in the browser and then 10 on when your site's ready to launch not when your site has launched But when your site's ready to launch, um, we can be really flexible. Yeah. Um, and I think, you know, it just depends on the client's Uh aspirations around that, you know, they might have financial milestones that they need to hit to pay you, you know So yeah, we can be pretty flexible around that. Um Much pushback on that would start to ring a bell for me though. Yeah, definitely. Yeah Yeah And Yeah, yeah um, at the moment we have nine active projects and In the last 12 months we worked on 60 digital projects. So quite a lot. I um, I You know, I get really twitchy when we don't have much in the pipeline.  Yeah. Yeah Yeah, so um Actually this year we've been really surprised by the amount of repeat clients and I think it's because we are In a bit of a space where we've been around for a few years So we might have built your website Previously and now you're you're back for a new one. So we are starting to see an uptick in that definitely Um, yeah, I think of three projects that we're working on just now that are for existing clients that are now getting new websites Do you have maintenance contracts as well? We do. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah Um, it's actually timely that you ask that because we're looking at changing how we deal with that. Um, we have various Levels or tiers of maintenance So from somebody that might have quite basic needs to somebody that needs an immediate response because their licensing system is down For example and their users can't log in to their site. So that can be quite challenging. We use A kind of WordPress management system, I suppose to uh to update multiple sites at once and and so on. So Yeah, cool All right Yeah Yes Yeah, yeah, no, seriously. Uh, actually we talked you say yes as well. Yeah, uh Actually, do you know, do you know what it might sound a bit? um, philosophical, right, but Life is very short. I have two beautiful children, you know, and actually one of the things that I like most about Uh, running my own agency is that when they say dad can you come to school and do this thing with us? I'm like, yeah, do you know what? Yes, I can I can do that and Running my own agency running our agency together gives me the flexibility to do that Do we work too hard in the uk? I think we call we do You know, you're on the train going home emails answering responding, you know Actually, I think there is room for a bit of a change A change there. Yeah, definitely. I could work four days a week. Yeah. Yeah start next week Yeah, go um, I'll we got any more time for Yeah, one more So Okay, yeah, so I thought we're going to get through the top Anybody mentioning doing right Um What are we doing? Okay. So I've been pretty open with you. Let me be open with you again on this We have been late to the party with Gutenberg. Definitely and I think We will be not not not using it, but we will be Configuring our client sites to work with a classic editor. I think for now So in the past we've used visual builders. We've you know, we've built sites that Are commercially focused sites as well that can't afford just to stop working, you know That the content editors can't log in and you know update the sites. So I think it is going to be challenging.  We've got a bit of a an internal project that we're working on just now To really help us understand the message that we want to communicate. We are starting to get Nervous emails from customers though, you know saying I keep seeing this every time I log in, you know, a new editor is coming, you know But as far as I understand it is it's been pushed back again, right the release date. So yeah, yeah, I think for now We're going to roll with a classic editor But I think it's going to be interesting and we've got a couple of projects That are starting to bubble away that I think we might end up building with Gutenberg So, you know a bit of both I think is the answer Yes I think that's something that I really enjoy about what we do because of the size that we are We can talk about something among anything and be doing it Tuesday Wednesday, right?  So if we want to start playing around with whether it's Gutenberg or whether it's I don't know A mapping library Then we can do that. Yeah, so definitely one eye on the future One eye on our clients as well making sure they're behaving. But yeah, definitely one eye on the future at all times Cool. All right. All right. Nice. Thank you very much


Kuntz, Triska, Reeves, a car, yes, what's his name, Estes, Estes, Estes is not here, Okay, we were talking about the ends of the beams holding up the required shear loads due to the applied loads on the beam. It's complex, it's not complicated. You have to be careful. You only need one number, that's your H over the thickness of the web. And depending on how slender that thing is, how much tendency it has to buckle or not to buckle, you are given different variables, different things you have to do. It's a little unusual in that the fee changes, the fee doesn't usually change depending on the slenderness ratio on most of the stuff we've been doing. Quick review is, for all provisions except G21, which is getting ready to talk about, fees are .9. So since it's not a .9, I guess it's a 1. The basic strength is 6 tenths of the tensile yield, which is the yield in shear times the area of the web times, and then we'll have a reduction factor on here that will indicate how susceptible the web is to buckling. And then he tells this for webs with less than this squared E over F sub Y breakpoint, fee is a 1, and C sub V is a 1. Now you already told your fee is a .9 for everything. What in the world? Is that Estes back here?  Oh my goodness. We thought you were bailing. And so it's temporarily a 1 for a short period of time where your slenderness of the web is less than this breakpoint depending on your steel. Then it's .9 for everything else. The C sub V changes depending on the slenderness. It actually stays the same from 2.24 times square root of E over F sub Y up to 1.1 times square root of 5 for most cases times E over F sub Y. You just put your H over T sub W and you put the numbers in there and you see where you fall. Then when it gets a little more slender you have another C sub V, same fee. When it gets a little more slender you have a different C sub V and the same .9. The only difference in case of V, we said that for webs without stiffeners and this, that's almost always the case, that's already getting pretty bad. Case of V is a 5 except for T shapes. If you had a beam made out of a T then case of V is a 1.2. Here's what stiffeners kind of look like. They weld plates in there, they weld plates in there, they weld plates in there. And they make little shear panels what they call out of these little boxes and that strengthens things up quite a bit. In that case, case of V changes depending on the distance between the stiffeners and the H. Remember how H is not equal to D? We've used that earlier. So pretty straightforward. We had already started on a W14x90 back on our page 212 until we got off in the pictures and the codes and everything that go with this so we have some idea of what's going on. We had already calculated, we didn't calculate it, we probably never will. Pulled it out of a table on page 1-25 for a W14x90. Page 221A, there it is right there. W14x90, it's not on that page. W14x90, there's your H over T sub W, 25.9. So we know what we've got. All we don't know now is where we fall in the scheme of things. So our first break point was the 2.24 square root of, I think we worked that out before. 54, and since our 25.9 is less than 54, then our web is going to yield. It's not going to have any buckling problems to it at all. So the fee will be 1 and the C sub V will be 1. It also says, as pointed out in the spec note, this is the case for most wide flanges, that specification note to the user, the comment, 16.1-325. So all you do then is you LRFD 25.9 less than 54, fee is 1, C sub V is a 1, and so you get 185 kips out of it. That 2.24, that's right out of these. Well, the 25 point, yeah, that's correct. Let me make sure which one. You talking about the 22.24? Okay, that's on table B1 and B2. Maybe you're right, maybe it is B4. Right, and up there it ought to say something about bending as opposed to compression. Well, actually this, they just bring for the same shape. Okay, well here's a 14 by 90. Let's see, we just check that number if that's the question. All right, here is a W14 by 90. And according to this table, the H over TW is 25.9. And do you say you got another number from someplace else? Okay, the break points on there. All right, let me dig. I got to go back a little because once we pass it up, but they're in here. Oh, that's moment strength.  That's for sheer break points, right? Okay, who's got a book with this number right there in it? The number we're looking for? These are compression elements, so these will be your flanges. Okay, so we're looking for the web. Webs of 3.76. And these are, this is for the web being buckling in the long direction. In other words, here's your shape and your web can do this. Oh, that's terrible. Okay, and the flange can do this and the web can do this. Oh, that really hurts. But what we're talking about is the web doing this because you're compressing it from the bottom and then you have the load on the top. So these numbers are for the web, as you said, and they are for the flanges, but they're in the long direction. This is in the direction. I don't know where that's going to be. Well, I do know where it's going to be because it tells us 16.1-68 maybe. 68 sounds, you know, about the right way down the road from where we're at. See, now we're going to talk about things that are in sheer. And we have these magic break points at these different places. 1.1, 1.37. Is that what we're talking about? 2.24. Very top of the page. There's a 2.24. See, now I've got to go in the right section, of course, for webs with less than this number, you get a full blast and you get a full blast. And then other things, now then you've got to reduce your fee and you've got to reduce your C sub V. That's sure. Well, I guess that's really... This is what we just looked at, isn't it? Doesn't look like it's on the same. No, it's not. It is. This is right out of the AISC manual. So you're talking about buckling in a different direction. This one we're talking about buckling that looks like that.  Then, for example, so-and-so, so-and-so, uniform load maximum support equal to the reaction of case. So he wants to know, here was our case. Our case was a 2.08 kip per foot beam, 45 feet long. You'll find that back on page 212. That's no problem that we were working. And he's used it for a couple more examples now. Maximum reaction on the end would be 2.08 times 45, half for you, half for you. And that comes out 2.08 times 45 cut in half, 46 kips, so less than our 185, so that's the final proof that this beam will not fail in shear in the web. If it fails in buckling in the web due to bending, that's somebody else's job, although none of them do, because they're too short, too fat. They may fail by flange buckling along the axis of the flange. Now, the Dickens, what is this? W-14 by 90. Ah, look at this. Look at that. He's got a table with it in there. Wonderful. Now he tells me. There's that 185 we just worked on. Okay. Now, along with the web having a tendency to buckle, sometimes you will have a girder and you will want to bolt a T-shape or an angle onto the girder and then you'll bring the beam in and you'll want to bolt the beam to the girder. And because you like the floor height constant all the way across, rather than have the flange stuck down underneath this thing, they will cut this piece out that's called coping. If you do not cope the beam, then this little block of steel right here won't tear out because it'll mash up into the flange and it's got all kinds of strength. You would have to tear the whole flange out. But if the flange is missing, then this little piece is subject to what? Never mind. You see it. Block shear. That's right. It works just like when you tore a piece out of a channel or when you tore a piece out of a wide flange. The strength of this thing is a function of the gross area in shear and the gross area in tension and the net area in shear and the net area in tension and a couple of practical things to make sure that you don't have a whole lot of strength here and while they're developing this strength, this piece is already broken. There'll be a limit on that. But it's nothing new. It works exactly as this one did here. The only difference is instead of having two planes in shear, you only have one plane in shear and you have one in tension as you did here. And in this case, unlike most of the other cases, you could actually have another row of, another column of bolts. They really call those rows. In that case, instead of having a nice uniform stress distribution under here, the stress distribution gets kind of un-uniform. Then you're... What was that? Some kind of a factor change from 1 to 0.5? Where would you... Where was it? No, the shear lag factor would be where you've got something in pure tension and the load is having to come down and get through a smaller section. I don't remember. But I'll tell you where you're going to find it and where you're going to find it. Well, I didn't mean a page number. But that's fine. But I was thinking, well, you're going to find it in block shear. Because that's where we found it in the first place. And you do say it's on 16.1-? All those. Okay, thank you. And what was that thing called? It was... U, that's right. I remember the B.S. Well... But I didn't remember what it was. T or U or what it was. That was the use of B.S. And it's either 0.5 for this case, for this case, or 3 or 4 or 5, and it's equal to 1.0 If you just have a single column of bolts, then this dress is pretty uniform. This is pictures from last year. Here's pictures from this year. There's the beam. There's the use of B.S. for 0.5. There's the use of B.S. for 1. And it's on 16.1-412. Thank you. Here's another one where they're running the thing across a girder. This one they're using and they're bolting it to a column. Here's where they're not doing anything. Just sitting it on a pad. That's the shear that you and I are working with right there. That's the area of the beam. We're trying to make sure that it doesn't buckle up to where we are so far. And there is the... Look at that. I figured it'd be somewhere. That must be... Here we've got the equation. That's right. I know what you're talking about. This is in the commentary where they talk about this. And these are the specs right here. And there's the use of B.S. He does tell you... No, this is Segui, so I don't know. But I'm pretty sure that he explains that use of B.S. is either a 1 or a 0.5 and what in the specifications. Then he refers to the commentary because he says, some people aren't going to believe this and they won't know why. And so you'll go to the commentary to find out why. Yeah, that's true. Everything else is a 1. But this is such a common case you need to know. For instance, if you look further back in the... in the manual, you'll find a whole section on bolting things like this and how strong they are. Because there is... some moment applied to this group of bolts and there is some shear applied. So there are some bending moments on there and you'll see some with one row, two rows, three rows, four rows.  He wants to know how strong this little piece right here is. These are three-quarter inch diameter bolts. So you're going to have to add the extra 16th for fit and 16th for damage to the whole size that you think you see there. You're going to have to have a tension area down here one and a quarter times the thickness of a W18 by 35 beams web. It's 50 KSI steel. You're going to have a gross shear area of 9, 10 of 11 inches tall times the thickness of the flange. Kind of like that. Then you're going to have to take off one, two and a half... one, two, three and a half holes to get the net area in shear. And I have to take off a half of a hole to get the net area in tension. Then you're going to plug it in this equation right here.  Here is your ultimate in tension. Here is your... What is this? There you go. It's the ultimate in shear. That's good. And then there is another equation where he would like you to... Sometimes if the yield gets up here and this piece yields and pulls so far it's so strong that this thing here gets in tension on the back end. He doesn't want that to happen. So he's going to limit this term to the 6 tenths of tension yield times the gross area as opposed to the net area. And then the last term is the same as before. So I'll leave it for you to run out the numbers on that case. Here's a good beam. It's got this supported back there pretty far. We'll be going to develop most of the shear strength in the web. This one, I'm not sure that looks a little short, just looks ridiculous. The shear stresses are going to have a hard time getting up in there. As far as how much it'll take the things we've got so far, this is not a function of that. But we'll get into designing these plates and at that time we'll start making sure that they are long enough back in here so that somebody doesn't give this a try. Here's a side view of something bolted on. I don't know if that's an angle or a T. Yes, I do, because here's the top view. There's the T. T is bolted to the column. And then the beam is bolted to the T. And block shear. You've done it. Deflection is also a limit. Two reasons, really. It's a serviceability requirement. But number one, it can't be so much deflection that something really goes wrong. By that something gets bent someplace else because this particular beam has got a lot of deflection to it. And also if it feels unsafe, then it doesn't matter if it is safe or not because nobody's going to rent it. There's two reasons that you limit those deflections. The deflections are actually a serviceability requirement. There's a deflection due to dead load and there's a deflection due to live load. The deflection due to dead load, you can either live with it if you don't care or you can have them camber it out.  How many quarters of an inch? Well, then if you'll tell them when you order the beam, say I want you to camber that beam with a three-quarter inch upward camber. And then when you get it, you make sure you don't put it in upside down and then when you put the concrete on it, it'll come out dead straight. So that's good. So the beam is straight before the people come on there. The next thing is the live load. And the live load is not something that you can get rid of on the front end. So that's usually what you're really limiting with these equations. There's that W18 by 35 we were talking about. There's the thickness of the web and I kept talking about the thickness of the web. There's depth of the beam. It is a serviceability state, not of strength. Deflections are always computed with service or unfactored loads. I worried about what the worst single event would do to the thing if it deflects way too much during the one worst thing that could ever happen in the world and almost never does, but we can live with that deflection as long as it doesn't fall down and you've already taken care of that by making sure none of the pieces fall off.  Dead load deflection is usually compensated by cambering. Therefore only the live load deflection is a concern to you and also only the service load. So you'll calculate, when the person tells you there's 220 pounds per foot on the beam, live load, that's the service load, and you're getting ready to factor it. You don't factor it for these things. You just use it as is. Another effect of deflection is ponding. It is possible that you have a flat roof, which a lot of buildings do, and it rains and some of the gutters get clogged up, then you get the water stacking in it. That causes more deflection of the beam. That means there's more place for the water to pond and they have controls on that inside of the specifications also. Cambering that out of there will also do the job.  If the thing is full of water, they've got it figured out. So that if all of the places where water could get out due to rain, it won't pull the roof down. And I've seen a building where that happened. It was a little 7-eleven over on 29th Street. Here's your moment diagrams for our most common cases. Simply supported beam, deflection in the middle, 5WL 4th over 384EI. That W is going to be a service unfactored load. You're going to make sure it's within somebody's idea of what reasonable is. I should have mentioned that back here. There's a reasonable table that different people feel is appropriate. Maximum live load deflection for a roof supporting a plaster ceiling. In other words, if you have plaster up there, it can crack. So they restrict the deflection pretty severely. If it's some other kind of ceiling like these are, I don't know if they ever... I guess it's a plaster thing. Church is probably. But usually they'll have something like this so that you won't crack it if you have more deflection. And if it's not supporting the ceiling at all, then you probably don't care. And they'll give you different things. They say maximum live, they want this much. Maximum dead end live. Somebody thinks that's appropriate. Max snow or wind load deflection is appropriate. These things come out of different places. He's just telling you typical deflection. And if they have a load on your beam that you say, I don't have one of those, then you go back to your 345 work and find the maximum deflection using one of the methods that you were taught.  Works like a champ. So for example, he's got a service load of 500 dead, live 550. He weighs 35 pounds a foot. If he's going to be picky about it, he may go ahead and add that 35 pounds on there somewhere. Probably this already includes it. This is more convenient to express it in inches and feet, so he's just going to go ahead and change everything the inches before he gets started. He's been told that the live load deflection of L over 360 has been called for. He wants to know if it's okay. There's deflection equations. 5W dead, live 4th over 384 EI. We'll tell him what he's going to have to camber out or live with, and he may not care. Not care. Live load deflection, the only thing he does is he changes the load from 5 to 550.678. But the live load deflection has been restricted in this design to L over 360. 30 feet long, 12 inches a foot. It's a 1-inch as permitted, so his live load deflection is not excessive. If you're not told what that number is, then obviously it's either somebody else's problem or they don't care. Now designing a beam, going the other way. Old Pop Quiz. Good one, I might use that Friday. Yeah, Friday. Here's a different one. One of them is 10 inches deep, one of them is 8 inches deep. This one shows the plastic neutral axis here, why? Area above is equal to area below the plastic neutral axis. Where's the plastic neutral axis on this one? At the top, above here? Below here, how much? Yes, what do you mean yes? 1 inch, look at that, you're absolutely right. That's because 10 minus 1 is 9 and 8 plus 1 is 9 and that's the plastic neutral axis.  So it would be Z and M sub yield would equal to F sub Y times Z and M sub N would equal to what? Don't everybody speak at once? Very rude. Just you. M sub E B F sub Y. M plastic, that's right, M yield, M plastic. Thank you, I'll use that. I'll go with M sub P. M sub N is here off the hook. Better symbol, M sub nominal, how much? 10? Same, that's a nominal strength. M sub plastic. It was just hard to get that out, wasn't it? And then M sub U has to be less than or equal to what? Resistance factor of how much? 0.9 times M sub nominal. A lot of terms, a lot of terms. Alright, so designing one now. Where did my word design go? There we go. Beam design, you're going to have to try and pick one that's got all of these things that are going to work in your favor. Going to have to have enough plastic moment. Going to have to not laterally, torsionally buckle. Going to have to not buckle in the flanges. Not going to buckle in the web. Commonly, he suggests that you compute the required moment strength so you know what you're being asked for. You do that by factoring your loads and getting the maximum moment in the beam. Select a shape that satisfies this strength requirement. It can be done in two ways. You can guess. Just go to the middle of page 100 through 600 and just pick one. I guess you could. And then if it's too strong, pick a lighter one, or vice versa. Or, I like this, or better, use the beam design charts in part three of the manual. They're on page 399 through 142. You've seen them. They look just like this. They've been doing it forever. And that's all they've done is they've written them down for you on these pages. You only see this little bitty snapshot on any given page. But they're all there. And after you pull that beam, check for the shear strength. It's very seldom going to control. Then you check for the deflection. So he's got a regular old wide flange, fit KSI steel, simply supported. Five and a half kip per foot live load. Probably has some dead load of its own here. Oh, I like this. Why do I like this? No lateral torsional buckling. So I know very good and well that the full plastic moment is going to be able to be used in this shape. And he hasn't said it's compact, but I'll probably either pick a compact or I'll pick one out of a table that includes them being non-compact, if that's the case. So I got what I mentioned before. You're going to write down four things. Imsa plastic, lateral torsional buckling, flange local buckling, web local buckling. You'll make sure everything there fits. Now we add the term delta. We know the web's not going to buckle for anything in the book. If there's flange local buckling, we'll have to be a little careful. It's not going to laterally torsionally buckle, so we're looking for MCP. First, he suggests we get our loads. 1.2 dead plus 1.6 live. He says I'm going to just assume the beam has no weight. It's very unlikely the beam I pick will be perfect. And when I throw its own weight on there, it will be too small. So let's assume it doesn't weigh any. That weighs very little. Probably maybe 30, 40, 50 pounds a foot out of 4,500 pounds per foot. It's not likely that it won't still work. We'll check it. Plus 1.2 dead plus 1.6 live, 7.2 kit per foot. This has a maximum moment WL squared over 8. What was that 5 over 384 thing a while ago? What was that for? Deflection. That's right. This is for a moment. It's equal to 1.8 to 7.2 kit per foot, 30 feet squared, 810 kit feet is required. You've got to come up with a fee subending M sub nominal. This will be M sub plastic. It'll give me that number. Assume it's going to be compact. Compact shape with full support. Nominal is equal to plastic. M sub Y, Z sub X. Same thing we just did on that T beam a minute ago. From fee sub B, M sub N is greater than your request. There's your fee sub B, there's your M nominal. That has to exceed your request. Solve for the required Z of your shape. Z is M sub U over fee sub B. F sub Y, 216 inches cubed. If you say too fast, too fast. I can take a look at it. But there's nothing new. I mean, we've been doing this now for weeks. So I need a beam that's got a 216 cubic inches on it for Z. And I got a really nice thing called a Z table. On page 3-24. I need 216. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Look at this. They're grouped in sets. If you need a 190, this one will work. But the ones above it, you'll find this one is the lightest. That'll give you the 190. It's the lightest one out of this whole set. 120, 86, 83, that's the lightest one. But it doesn't matter because that's still not going to work. 216, 216, here we go right here. A W21 by 93. A RW21 by 84 is lighter. That's what you and I would consider the answer for this problem. The real world, if you say I can't get one, unless I want to wait six months for it, then I'll take what I can get. But that'll save me a chunk of change. Now, let's just say I had chosen W14 by 99. I wouldn't, of course, because it's not the lightest. But let's just say it was the lightest. Then probably what I needed was 172 for Z. To go figure out what this person thinks the plastic moment is, we would multiply Z times 50 KSI times 0.9 divided by 12 inches and a foot. And he ought to give us 649 KIP feet. 6, 6, hmm. Maybe just a little round off error there. Let's check this one here. It's got a, I'm looking for. Oh, that's with the, that's with, that's a 14 by 90. Oh, that's a 14 by 90. Thank you, thank you. There's a 14 by 90. Let's check it. When I work it out, it comes out 589. Geez, man. What's wrong with this? Oh, that does sound bad. What does that subscript mean? Flange problem, flexure problem. That's right. So this thing here is not really going to work for us. We're never going to get to 173 times 50. So you're not going to be able to really use this table. You can use it, you know, but if you happen to run across an F on the one you choose, then the Z isn't giving you the right answer because you can't reach that Z. The flange will buckle first. However, remember we already mentioned, they'll tell you the truth somewhere. Here's the truth for a W14 by 99. Not 649, but 646. For the 90, not 589, but 573. There's your fees to be mpx that you can really have. That takes into account both the Z and the local buckling of the flange. So what we really should have done rather than following Segui down the road like a bunch of lemmings, rather than getting the Z number, we should have just put his moment. His moment was, the moment required was 810. We should have just gone on here for 810, 810, 810, 810, 810. We still got the same beam because it didn't have an F on it. But that one takes care of that. That takes care. It's adjusted for flange local buckling. This is not adjusted for flange local buckling. There's no way to adjust Z. Z is Z. That's it. I don't know if some of you noticed or you were using a 13th edition, just because you couldn't afford a new one. If you are, these two numbers are reversed. I don't think that'll ever matter to you. So we've picked a beam. I like it. People can do that. Any mentions here about non-compact shapes and why you shouldn't do what I just did, you ought to just go ahead and use the moment if you're going to use those Z-tables. Now the beam design charts are also available out there. Basically speaking, they'll already have the fee in there because you need that. There's your L plastic. Your L when the radius of gyration kicks into Timber Schinkel's equation. There's an open dot. That's a solid dot. You can tell where you're at. This is a typical view for a page.  All of these curves are generated with a C-CB of no Christmas present for you. Reason being, he has no idea what your moment diagram looks like and the shape of the moment diagram is what tells you if you get better than Timber Schinkel's equation. So that's a limitation to what you see written on the page. We can get around it, but we'll have to get around it. One thing is when you do use C-CB other than one and somebody tells you you can multiply this number times 1.3 and it goes right there, that's fine. But when it goes right here and he tells you you can multiply it by two, don't ever let it go past in plastic because that's where the beam's going to fail, plasticly. Here are some typical numbers. I don't remember what he was using this for. Maybe just to demonstrate. This is a W24 by 84. I found that number by going in the Z-tables and finding what his Z was. Well, I actually just looked up his piece of BM sub-X, it's 840. And then it drops down to and past that point I just tracked it page after page after page after page until I found an open dot and that M's, a piece of BM sub-R was 515 and then Tim Schinkel's equation took over. For that beam I looked in the Z-table. You can find L sub-P and L sub-R on this page, Z-table, so I listed L, P and L-R. And I'm saying that as an example here was your request, 748 kit feet coming in this way with a given unbraced length of 6 feet, bingo. Anything above that or to the right of that will do the job. So I looked at this one, but it was dashed. So it means it's not the lightest. That's a W18 by 96. Then I went on up from this point and I ran across a W24 by 76 and that was the one that I chose right there. There was another one above that W24 by 84 which, you know, was heavier. So there's not much reason to go to one that's heavier. Any curve to the right or above is stronger. Charges are entered with the unbraced length and the required strength. Anything above the right gives you an acceptable beam. If you run into a dashed curve, there's a lighter shape right around there. Go dig it out. His example 510, the required design strength was 810 and there was continuous lateral support. I'm sure it was saying anything different from what you and I were saying. Read all this stuff and I may have missed something. Now, this is where I showed you. This is limited by Z. This is limited by flanged local buckling and so he's just going to show you this. That's what you'll see in the book. Here's how you can track down somebody. Follow them home so that you can see how strong they are. You'll find out from your Z-tables how much moment he comes in plastic and you just track him down. He comes out here at about 11 feet. So you ought to find him coming in on the next page around 11 feet at around 750 feet a moment and you just keep on tracking it down. So in other words, if you're given on an exam how strong is a W24x103 if it's 40 feet long, finding a W12x103 can be a real challenge. There's a lot of 40 feet down in here and then you start looking and you start looking and then when you go through all the... There it is right there actually. But if you'll track it down and follow it this way, you're guaranteed to be able to use these tables. So he's got a beam shown. Got to support two concentrated live loads of 20 kips each. Here's his moment diagram. Here's his C-sub-B. C-sub-B is M-M-M. They're all equal so C-sub-B is going to be a one. Got to temporarily ignore the beam's weight. Got to give you 192 kip feet of required ultimate moment. And he says from the charts what you need, 192. What's the unbraced length? 24 feet. 24 feet. 192. Zip, zip. W10x54. Oh, it's not the lightest. Oh my goodness. Gee, I'm really sorry about that. Hope your company didn't go into bankruptcy for that. No, it didn't. You just didn't get the job. What is the lightest? W12x53, two pounds per foot, lighter. And I'd say how do you know that, but I know how you know it because you saw the green line and kept on going up there. You next time. Yes, sir? It's going to be on the syllabus, right? That's correct. It's all going to be on Friday? Yeah, you're going to know that's true. I didn't look and see. Have we not gotten into that yet? It won't be on the quiz. Oh, howdy. Can I ask a question? Yeah, as long as I can keep on getting out of here. What you got? If you can't answer it. I was just going over. Yeah?  So any questions? There's no block share. It needs to be required. Right. Well, they're just saying somebody else has been assigned that problem. He was told to do that. So you're not responsible for checking that. If it says block shares, you can omit block share for this problem. No, no. Then I think your real question is, why did they say that? Did they say that because they could look at it and say it's not necessary that we check this? Absolutely not. You always got to check it. Now then they were told, you were told in that problem that you did not have to check block share. On some of our early problems, you were told that because you hadn't yet been shown how. It is welded in just two sides and no block share. Well, that's true. If it's welded on both sides and welded on the end, there's nothing, there's no little block that could pull out. You don't care about block share. Block share is a phenomenon where you have bolt holes.


And then, by the way, afterwards, says I'm playing for Toon Squad, dude.  This is the first time I think we're seeing him in a full movie, especially when it's being remade after Michael Jordan. Him going, you know, and doing this acting thing is impressive to me.


Hey there friends, thanks for checking in at Ryder's range right now, and I've got a gun Well, it actually belongs to Ryder and that is an STI staccato C. Check that out An officer size 1911 chambered in 9 millimeter.  You can see it does have the front serrations 1911 style 8 plus 1 but what makes this super cool? I find it just be an amazing trigger. It's a three pound single-action trigger and I'd have to get that on the scale to show you because I know you can't see that From that viewpoint, but it really is a sharp gun now It does have a hybrid frame, which means it's aluminum Throughout but yet it has a polymer grip now these grips can not be changed They're not interchangeable it's built right into the frame But when you grip the gun and you get a feel for it You really don't want to change it because it's got a real nice feel and you feel a complete control in it And it's only 9 millimeter to top it off. So we're gonna take a few shots We're gonna talk to Ryder about this see why he loves this gun so much. I've shot it before I've never really did a review. So we're doing that today. We're gonna take a few shots And also this gun's expensive like this is, you know 12 13 14 hundred dollars somewhere in that price range. I'm sure Ryder will give us more detail So let's go ahead and load it up. We'll take a few shots talk a little bit more about the staccato C Here we have the staccato C eight rounds loaded up Let's see how we do nice One of the things I didn't mention is that it does have a bushing less bull barrel ambidextrous Thumb safety Take a look at that hammer pretty cool. It's a beautiful looking gun And I know you guys like good-looking guns. I certainly do check out that trigger guard a little different Ryder told me that Because it is different. It won't fit into a officer size 1911 Kydex holster Leather should not be an issue Two-slot pick rail right there for your accessories And a very nice shooter and that soft trigger pull is very noticeable with live firing All right, so Ryder told me I missed two there and that's embarrassing For a gun of this quality. So we're going to try that again Here we go. Whoa that one I missed two again Oh one more There we go What a nice shooting handgun Let's get Ryder on here. We're gonna talk a little bit more about the staccato C and why he Enjoys it so much. All right, here we have Ryder from Ryder's range. This is a Windy and rainy day. We're actually under a canopy So it may be we're a little bit away from the targets. What'd you say about 12 yards 12 and a half He has 12 yards to the six pack of plates. All right, so this is your staccato C I'll go ahead and give that to you and you had mentioned that the msrp is or was $1400 now the the gun's going for around $1300. Yeah, you can find these still on gunbroker for around 13 There's not a lot of them out there right now People are hanging on to these original staccato C's since the uh, they've rebranded the company named a staccato and they now have the staccato Uh, C duo, which is an optics ready type model. So right and so what was formerly known as sti is now Staccato, it's the company's name is staccato. So if you see that just keep in mind that that is What was known as sti? All right, so you love the gun This they build this as the world's best shooting carry gun and uh, you know, I I don't doubt that this is a wonderful Accurate reliable gun and as dan said the the trigger is to die for it is a wonderful wonderful shooting gun And you also mentioned that you had how many rounds threw it without any failures I've got more than 2000 rounds through this particular gun right now I've uh, I've cleaned it maybe twice and I've not had one single failure of any kind out of it with any kind of ammunition It's it's it's been great. That's pretty amazing. All right. And so You are interested in the optics ready model I definitely am considering now that I'm getting more into optics as I get older my eyes aren't working what they used to Um, I'm really interested in trying this out with the optics ready the uh, I think they call it the duo The duo optics plate removable plate on and put a bunch of the miniature Red dots and you're going to invite me out the riders range to check out the optics, right? Absolutely. So I don't miss two out of eight of course, um Yeah, putting a good red dot on it makes a huge difference at 12 yards on these plates For me, it's uh That's the only way to go. All right. I'm gonna fire it one more time and bring the camera toward me You good with that? I'm good with that. All right. Let's do it. Wow What a nice shooting handgun I mentioned a couple times and we talked about how expensive it is But would you find that gun that you just fire so well? Many people say that that's a price they're willing to pay All right. So there it is formally known as sti here. We have the staccato c officer side 1911 and 9 millimeter riders Thanks for allowing me to come out to your range and review your gun. I certainly did enjoy it You're welcome out here anytime. You know that. All right. Thank you If you like videos like this, please subscribe and share I always appreciate thumbs up button Thanks for watching and you guys be safe


What's up y'all it's your girl Kenzie here from Leighton Sports Cards and I am ripping a personal for my guy Ramar's 8 We've got a 22-23 Leaf Best of Basketball Alright good luck I'm on a Tatum rookie That would be pretty sick Not a Tatum rookie, but still a nice one. Nice. How about a 2018 prism? Shay Gilius Alexander Silver Prism PSA Mint 9 Nice SGA there Mint 9. Let's say it looks pretty darn sharp for a 9 Little whitening on this quarter, I guess Nice one there though. That's sick 2018 prism Silver SGA Alrighty Ramar's that we'll do for your box. Thanks again for hopping back in and we'll get this right out to you