www.sefindia.org

STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING FORUM OF INDIA [SEFI]

 Forum SubscriptionsSubscriptions DigestDigest Preferences   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups  RegisterRegister FAQSecurity Tips FAQDonate
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to websiteLog in to forum 
Warning: Make sure you scan the downloaded attachment with updated antivirus tools  before opening them. They may contain viruses.
Use online scanners
here and here to upload downloaded attachment to check for safety.

Design code for Building , India , China,

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> E-Conference on Tall Buildings
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
pradeep joshiaaa
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 13 Jul 2010
Posts: 14

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:08 am    Post subject: Design code for Building , India , China, Reply with quote

 In India we are designing a two storey r.c.c structure and 51 storey high end residential building from the same code without any clarity what as a structural demand's that are needed to withstand dynamic

 forces for tall structure  . My personal opinion in this matter is that we should have earthquake zone wise different codes for different level of buildings considering geotechnical aspects also 

1. upto 5 storey


2. 6 to 15 storey


3. 16 to 30 storey
 
4. 30 storey plus


when we compare china with us there is no difference but a large displacement you can say of mind set. In china it is there state policy to excel in all phases of engineering , government is pushing hard to


 prove to world that they can match the world and at the same time can be best were as in India for decades ENGINEERS BILL could not pass, pile foundation code's are quarter century old, earthquake


 code is a decade old, we are still living with old codes making tall building and special structures . An era of 5 kg/sq feet steel upto 20 storey , non tower area 8 -9 kg/sq feet steel, 40 storey 8 kg/sq feet should be


 banned and punished as these are the codes set by real estate with structural drawing shops , not with structural engineers.Compromising tall structures is just like tickling time bomb . 


From every earthquake we learn something new and revise us and reward us simultaneously that structure we had made withstand the test of time or not. from san francisco E.Q  we learned about fire, 


hospital performance , from kobe we learnt about liquefaction can also be a giant killer.


When structural engineers from California or new York can make there own EQ guidelines why not S.E.F.I  can do the same , and make a practice to follow these norms and update the S.E.F.I


 ( E.Q.CODE) in every three years , collect the money from all educational institutions , individual and corporate's, state govt and various other agencies , make a committee under chairmanship of


Dr. S.K.JAIN and committee should compromise academicians , researchers , working professional from all four sides of India to come on a stage and prepare guidelines with strict parameters and clear


 definition of do's and don't. rather than  follow the present code which is not even clear of time period calculation to be adopted , although draft code by Dr. S.K.JAIN has clear definition.


It's my personal opinion that first code's should be revised then we can have another tall e-conf, with some fruitful discussion and conclusion.


Regard's


PRADEEP JOSHI


pradeepjoshiaaa@gmail.com (pradeepjoshiaaa@gmail.com)


PH-09868369045






  

Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SUNEIL
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 20 May 2009
Posts: 6
Location: India

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:19 pm    Post subject: Design code for Building , India , China, Reply with quote

I fully agree with what Mr Joshi has said /proposed.It is high time when we need  to go to the NGOs and other such bodies before we meet with one more natural calamity . We must do something now so that we need not do that post EQ.And when we have faculty experts like Shri SK Jain ,it is certainly possible to update our codes and design methods  and thus prevent any more disaster.I am hopeful that SEFI will consider this positively and will come out with something fruitful in the interest of the nation when most parts of the nation are becoming EQ sensitive gradually. Er suneil mehtaALWAYS  BE POSITIVE !!!!


On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:14 PM, pradeep joshiaaa <forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:
Quote:
            In India we are designing a two storey r.c.c structure and 51 storey high end residential building from the same code without any clarity what as a structural demand's that are needed to withstand dynamic

 forces for tall structure  . My personal opinion in this matter is that we should have earthquake zone wise different codes for different level of buildings considering geotechnical aspects also 

1. upto 5 storey


2. 6 to 15 storey


3. 16 to 30 storey
 
4. 30 storey plus


when we compare china with us there is no difference but a large displacement you can say of mind set. In china it is there state policy to excel in all phases of engineering , government is pushing hard to


 prove to world that they can match the world and at the same time can be best were as in India for decades ENGINEERS BILL could not pass, pile foundation code's are quarter century old, earthquake


 code is a decade old, we are still living with old codes making tall building and special structures . An era of 5 kg/sq feet steel upto 20 storey , non tower area 8 -9 kg/sq feet steel, 40 storey 8 kg/sq feet should be


 banned and punished as these are the codes set by real estate with structural drawing shops , not with structural engineers.Compromising tall structures is just like tickling time bomb . 


From every earthquake we learn something new and revise us and reward us simultaneously that structure we had made withstand the test of time or not. from san francisco E.Q  we learned about fire, 


hospital performance , from kobe we learnt about liquefaction can also be a giant killer.


When structural engineers from California or new York can make there own EQ guidelines why not S.E.F.I  can do the same , and make a practice to follow these norms and update the S.E.F.I


 ( E.Q.CODE) in every three years , collect the money from all educational institutions , individual and corporate's, state govt and various other agencies , make a committee under chairmanship of


Dr. S.K.JAIN and committee should compromise academicians , researchers , working professional from all four sides of India to come on a stage and prepare guidelines with strict parameters and clear


 definition of do's and don't. rather than  follow the present code which is not even clear of time period calculation to be adopted , although draft code by Dr. S.K.JAIN has clear definition.


It's my personal opinion that first code's should be revised then we can have another tall e-conf, with some fruitful discussion and conclusion.


Regard's


PRADEEP JOSHI


pradeepjoshiaaa@gmail.com (pradeepjoshiaaa@gmail.com) (pradeepjoshiaaa@gmail.com (pradeepjoshiaaa@gmail.com))


PH-09868369045






  
     



     



Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Thank Post    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> E-Conference on Tall Buildings All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

 

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


© 2003, 2008 SEFINDIA, Indian Domain Registration
Publishing or acceptance of an advertisement is neither a guarantee nor endorsement of the advertiser's product or service. advertisement policy