{Previously posted in LinkedIn group I created: Pre-Engineered manufactured structural Building products, and have since shut down. It having a membership of 30 people. Most of these people also in my group Pre-Engineered Manufactured Building Systems Group which has over 2000 members.}
Accumulating evidence to justify the null hypothesis that design-proposal suitable for purpose, versus evidence to validate the alternate challenging hypothesis that not fit-for-function. To what extent is the alternate hypothesis considered at design time, versus consideration after failure occurs?
Given that design loads have a probability of exceedance, failure is possible: therefore how does the structure behave at failure, is that acceptable or should it fail in a different way?
