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.

Tall Building Design
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
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
suraj
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 17 Apr 2008
Posts: 2312
Location: NCR Faridabad, E mail suraj_engineer@yahoo.co.uk

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 2:57 am    Post subject: Re: Tall building Conference Questions Reply with quote

Dr Subramanian Sahib

  1. I agree with your comments regarding scarcity of electricity & water not only in Chennai, but elsewhere also, including NCR
  2. It is also, true that we have limited land for buildings, yet, other fact is  considerable as we that land has been abused by many promoters, who had planned haphazardly various complexes, without any good concept
  3. What I understand is that land can be very well planned in a systematic style
  4. Mistakes being conducted that all cultivable lands are being promoted for townships just to make monies & states have been involved on that just to share
  5. I am also, sure that we got scarcity about town planners who can think in reality about best utilisation of lands
  6. Farm houses have been promoted without any qualifications just to have social status & use such lands for night dirty parties & high profile marriage celebrations
  7. Government has no progressive policy towards proper land utilisation
  8. In NCR, one can see growth of many complexes withot any professional planning
  9. Master plan had been regularised in 1985, but its implementations has been out of proportioning, where monies play gigantic role
  10. I am not absolutely against tall buildings, but its use should be correctly defined.
  11. Number of stories should not be allowed to any numbers
  12. Tall building should not be considered as a status symbol for its residents
  13. One can know cost of small apartments in such buildings costing few crores
  14. Certain apartment in Gurgaon NCR costs 25 Crores rupees
  15. Should it be considered justified in 2012
  16. Some promoter is building 80 stories, while current cost is 2.5/3 crores
  17. I opine that for residential use, tall buildings should not be allowed more than 20 stories keeping in view safety of its occupants as well as operation & maintenance costs
  18. Twenty stories means 70 m high, which could be managed for construction as well as during use
  19. Tall buildings could be used for commercial use, where at least during night, there is no occupancy
  20. I had worked 20 years back on a town planning scheme, which due to certain reasons beyond my controls, could not be started, which brief, I shall include on other post sometimes in coming days
  21. Another problem is that all promoters/builders intend to have immediate multiple returns from schemes, otherwise, no scheme can be commenced with
  22. Fully, agree on your suggestion pertinent training of engineering personnel up to line management level
  23. Also, fire fighting equipment as well as specific training to personnel is a must



Dr. N. Subramanian wrote:
Dear Er Suraji,

You are right. Though many high rise buildings are coming up, only 1+4 buildings are the majority all over the world. But these 1+4 buildings may give way to taller buildings in future, as ground plus first floor buildings gave way for 1+4 buildings- it is because we have limited space, but have to house millions.

Tall buildings in India have to face some peculiar problems in India, especially in energy and water starved cities like Chennai and states like Tamilnadu. There is 15 hours power cut in Tamilnadu. There was a huge water shortage 10 years ago. If such things exist, how the lifts will operate and how will people get the water which will be distributed in lorries? Also the energy requirements of tall and super tall buildings themselves is a big problem. In this connection the following CTBUH Journal paper may be of interest to all of us: http://www.ctbuh.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=JZ85D9fkBYc%3D&tabid=1719&language=en-US


Another problem is Fire engineering design. Our fire fighters do not have proper equipment to put out fire in tall buildings. Even in USA, during the MGM Grand fire on November 21, 1980, 85 people died (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MGM_Grand_fire). That prompted major reformation of fire safety guidelines and codes.

We also need to train not only structural engineers but also workers to build quality constructions, as mistakes in such tall buildings will result in costly repair and rehabilitation.


Regards,
NS
suraj wrote:
Tall building Conference Questions
Dear Eng Sriprakash

  1. Yes, you are right on your statement about limited response to Tall Building E conference
  2. It is an acceptable fact that Tall buildings do not suit our conditions due to being technology demanding as well as, being very expensive in relevance to construction cost & life time O & M cost
  3. High rise up to say 20 floor may be suitable for us, while talking of 100 to 300 floors got no meaning at all to accommodate general public
  4. Bharat requires to meet provide 5 million residences in coming decades, which cannot be visualised in line to produce tall buildings
  5. General public is more interested in affordable apartments or plotted houses that can be purchased on EMI basis
  6. Designs pertinent tall buildings requires deep & detailed input from all engineering disciplines for interfaces resolutions & not only, an exclusive structural demands as intended for
  7. Highly experienced engineers are required to confer on such topic, who got exposures on buildings
  8. Yet 7 days more are available for around 15000 engineers on forum as well as, those from outside forum around globe
  9. Hope much more experienced minds shall come out to participate in a constructive manner to add to knowledge & share inter personal experiences
  10. It has also, been noticed that questions are also, not coming in as expected
  11. Questions as are commonly asked for on general discussion forum on elementary basis, continue being asked

_________________
Thanks & Warm Regards
IntPE(India)Suraj Singh FIE Civil
Engineering & Arbitration

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
suraj
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 17 Apr 2008
Posts: 2312
Location: NCR Faridabad, E mail suraj_engineer@yahoo.co.uk

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:08 am    Post subject: Re: Tall Building Design Reply with quote


  1. Yes, it is acceptable that on facilities plants project, both Green as well as Brown field categories, structural steel is used for equipment housing included within trains pertinent various processing units
  2. Many reason can be given to such practice, that hundreds of interfaces on mechanical piping are considered
  3. such housing is required for equipment accommodations not for human residences
  4. Yet, foundations of all such buildings are produced by RCC
  5. Blast resilient designs are required within on site or processing areas, which can be easily achieved by use of structural steel
  6. What about off site buildings & non plant administration & control buildings?
  7. I am sure that RCC is included for construction of such buildings

Vaishnava devi wrote:
Dear Sarfraj
We do quite a lot and lot of of steel buildings in india which include process plants for petrochemical industries, PHBs for power plants, hydrocarbon processing plants for HP, indian oil ongc etc, buildings for steel plants, furnaces and many more.  
A good portion of these process plant structures fall under tall buildings category which are designed by our inhouse team from gov. organisations. We refrain from using steel skeleton as a choice for residential towers only for want of skilled maintenance, apart from the cost part and its performance. We can be very sure, in near future we can see lot many steel structural buldings both high rise as well as low rise, which we are competent enough to analyse, design, build and maintain. Of late even owners of commercial complexes and corporate houses prefer steel as the material of construction with concrete deck toppings.

Regards
vaishnavadevi

From: sarfaraj.husain [mailto:forum@sefindia.org]
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2012 10:28 AM
To: econf34289@sefindia.org
Subject: [E-CONF] Re: How should one define min stiffness requirement of tall buil



though steel buildings are not much encouraged in india........after which height it is better to go for steel building ???


sarfraj...



From: "alpa_sheth"
To: econf34289@sefindia.org (econf34289@sefindia.org),
Date: 11/19/12 11:58 PM
Subject: [E-CONF] Re: How should one define min stiffness requirement of tall buildings?



Dear Prof. Swaminathan,

You raise a very imp point re. stiffness -
Typically, we seem to link stiffness with max allowable deformation under the design seismic loads of say h/500 and up to elastoplastic inter story limit of h/120 for shear walls (say h/100 or frame-shear walls and so on) under such loads.
What has been seen in the recent New Zealand, Tohoku, Chile earthquakes is that the spectral accelerations experienced were many times more than design accelerations and conventional theories did not work. Hence defining stiffness in relation to allowable deformations in a design earthquake is problematic to me because then it no longer remains an absolute requirement but a relative one- relative to selected design earthquake.
I have seen in India some projects having a fundamental period of as high as 9 seconds for a building of just 220 to 230 m and the argument put forward is that the building is within allowable deformation/drift values so why should there be any objection.
So my question is- should we have some other way of defining stiffness- either as you say ratio of area of the shear walls/vertical elements to total floor area or max fundamental period of a building with relation to its height or ....
I'd like to hear from others regarding this issue as I think we seem to be building way too flexible buildings in India.


regards,
Alpa












On Mon, Nov 19, 2012 at 1:00 PM, krishnan_caltech  forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org))> wrote: : Dear SEFIans,

I would like to welcome all members of the Structural Engineers Forum of India to this much-anticipated e-conference on Tall Building Design and Construction. The big headline from the 2010 M8.8 Maule earthquake was that of the 3000+ tall buildings (>10 stories) in Chile, 80 buildings were damaged and only one collapsed. Given the size of the event, there is a broad consensus in the global engineering community that this outcome is more than satisfactory as far as tall building performance is concerned. Much of the credit has been attributed to the building code revisions undertaken after the 1985 M7.8 Valparaiso earthquake that caused extensive damage. With few exceptions, the seismic provisions of the American Concrete Institute’s ACI-318 building code for structural concrete were adopted for the design of new reinforced concrete structures in Chile (as in India, the material of choice for tall buildings in Chile has been reinforced concrete). Damage was mostly limited to concrete crushing and spalling, and reinforcing bar buckling and fracture at the ends of thin shear walls. The shear wall boundary element detailing provisions in ACI-318 were omitted from the revised Chilean code and these thin walls lacked the required extent of confinement reinforcement. Engineers have concluded that thicker shear walls incorporating boundary elements would have prevented most of the observed damage. On the face of it, this seems to be a ratification of the ACI-318 seismic provisions and suggests that such a code could be adopted for tall building design the world over. While this may be the best course of action, this in itself may not be sufficient to produce the Chilean outcome. The ratio of wall area to floor area in Chilean tall buildings is far greater (2%-4%) than that in US tall buildings (1%-1.5%) despite the fact that they are designed nominally to the same provisions. The Chilean tall buildings are thus much stiffer than their US counterparts. The stiff Chilean tall buildings have been tested to a certain extent in this earthquake, whereas the flexible US tall buildings are yet to be tested. According to data collected by Prof. Moroni of the University of Chile, Chilean tall buildings have been getting progressively more flexible over the last 5 decades. During the same period, the damage rate in these buildings has been increasing with increasing flexibility (ref.: Prof. Jack Moehle’s EERI/PEER presentation). These observations raise important philosophical questions in the Indian context. Should Indian tall buildings go the stiff way of Chile or the flexible way of the US? How would one achieve this through the building code? I would like to see this question of “flexible vs stiff†vociferously debated in this conference. I would also like to understand and learn about the state of ductile detailing in Indian tall buildings. Do engineers and contractors recognize the importance of ductility detailing for earthquake resistance? How do we codify, implement, and regulate this? How do we educate all the stakeholders on the critical need for seismic detailing and get their “buy-in� I hope to find answers to all these questions in this conference.

The Chilean example has also raised other important questions for India. The peak ground velocity in Concepcion was quite strong at 67cm/s; however, the peak ground displacement was only 21 cm. The duration of significant ground motion was quite long at 88 s, but not as much as the 1960 Chile and the 1964 Alaska earthquakes. Had the displacements and durations been greater, the outcome may have been quite different. Do we know what ground shaking would result in Delhi from a great earthquake on the Himalayan Frontal Thrust? Do we have models that can predict ground motion from such an event? I hope to find out answers to these questions in this conference. I hope similar seismological questions can be addressed for other large metropolitan cities in the northern belt and the western front including, but not limited to, Mumbai, Ahmedabad, Kolkata, Surat, Pune, Jaipur, Vadodara, and Allahabad.

I am also deeply concerned about the buildings on stilts that seem to be ubiquitous (at least in the south where I have traveled extensively in the last decade). We engineers have to come up with creative solutions to address the architectural drivers of such glaring seismic vulnerabilities without compromising structural (seismic) integrity. I hope to see creative solutions for such problems outlined in this conference. Tall first and second stories, termination and/or offsetting of gravity/lateral force resisting elements such as columns and walls, also fall in this category. I hope to see case histories of buildings with such idiosyncrasies and the novel approaches that SEFI engineers have undertaken to tackle such architecturally driven situations.

Last, but certainly not the least, environmental scientists warn us that global warming is going to result in more intense and violent storms and hurricanes in the coming decades. Our coastal cities are going to be most affected. The latest storms in the eastern US (New Jersey) and in eastern India (Chennai) are harbingers of storms to come. Are our tall buildings prepared to face these “Frankenstorms� How do we deal with the moving target of wind hazard and our ever-increasing density of tall buildings in our mega-cities? During the lifetime of our building how will the wind loading patterns change with the rapidly changing landscape. How do we anticipate these changes at the design stage and build in contingencies into our designs, without being overly conservative and jacking up the costs? Seems like a pretty stiff challenge to me. I hope to hear your considered and deep thoughts on these “gray-area†questions.

In closing, I am looking forward to two weeks of exciting, rejuvenating, informative and enlightening debates and discussions on tall building design and construction in India. I sincerely hope that the SEFI community takes full advantage of this wonderful opportunity to share and elevate the state of this art, made possible by the remarkable vision and efforts of my co-moderators, Er. Alpha Sheth and Prof. C. V. R. Murty.

Swaminathan Krishnan, Co-Moderator
California Institute of Technology
http://krishnan.caltech.edu[/url]












-- ­­  





     This Message and its contents is intended solely for the addressee and is proprietary. Information in this mail is for L&T Business Usage only. Any Use to other than the addressee is misuse and infringement to Proprietorship of L&T Construction. If you are not the addressee please return the mail to the sender.
L&T Construction.

Posted via Email

_________________
Thanks & Warm Regards
IntPE(India)Suraj Singh FIE Civil
Engineering & Arbitration

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
sriprakash_shastry
...
...


Joined: 23 Mar 2010
Posts: 50

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 4:26 am    Post subject: Tall Building Design Reply with quote

Dear Mr. Prabhakar,

I would like to differ with your opinion on the WTC collapse. True, that concrete columns might have held up a little longer, but you have to realise the following points.

1. Most of the high rise buildings in the US have extremely advanced fire alarm and fire fighting systems. Most of the systems are FM rated systems. This would mean that a robot would be sent into the fire piping to see if there is any blockage in the pipes.
2. Who on earth would ever imagine that someone would pilot a plane into a building. Remember all the aircrafts were full on aviation fuel. As soon as the aircrafts crashed into the WTC several of the emergency staircases were cut off. So people could not get off.
3. Unlike in India, in the US the governments dont get into pricing of materials like steel and cement. Here this is not the case. Steel price is monitored and controlled by the government.
4. Unlike in India the engineering community in the US is so used to designing sky scrapers. They have been designing these ginats since the 1930's during our pre-independance days. John.D. Rockefeller started the Rockefeller building at the height of the great depression to enable employment to people.
5. Can anyone in the forum name any other tall skyscraper in the US that has come down completely due to fire. Hardly any examples come to mind.
6. I remember once when I got permission to see the columns of the WTC. If I remember they were something like 1.5m x 3m steel box columns with a plate thickness of 60mm. I doubt even today if we can get 60mm thick steel plates in India for fabrication. There are no steel contractors capable of working with such thicknesses and even if they are there they will be a handful.
7. Castellated sections are readily available off the shelf in the US. Here we will take a regular steel beams and make web openings in them and charge our clients for making the openings. Becasue openings dont come free. So it is more expensive than a regular steel beam.
8. If you go to a SAIL stockyard here (I have been fortunate enough to visit one) and ask them for lets say India's largest section rolled by the government ISMB 600. They will tell you. "It is not in the rolling schedule for the next 2 months. Even if we start rolling we dont know what quantum we will roll". By gods grace if the section requested is available then he will say. "Please go to the yard. It is somewhere there. I think you can get around 50% of your quantity." So what to do for the balance 50%. Luckily the scenario is changing with the new private players in the field.

I feel therefore that we should not use the example of WTC to shun the use of steel in buildings. We are using steel to build large 7 or 8 storied Industrial buildings with heavy floor loads. Steel framework with metal decking and concrete slabs are the way of life as far as Industrial jobs are concerned. Steel therefore is the way forward.

Regards
Sriprakash
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
S.KANTHIMATHINATHAN
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 09 Jun 2012
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Fri Nov 23, 2012 5:42 am    Post subject: Tall Building Design Reply with quote

Refer point 6.
Such columns of large size with thicker plates are used for power plant-Boiler supporting structures in India

With kind regards,
S.Kanthimathinathan
Structural Engineering Consultant,
Tiruchy Engineering Consultancy House,
1/1-A.Nariyan Street,
Srirangam, Tiruchy-620006
( Courses offered:- Design & Detailing of steel & R.C.C Structures)



Subject: [E-CONF] Re: Tall Building Design
From: forum@sefindia.org
Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 09:57:00 +0530
To: econf34289@sefindia.org

           Dear Mr. Prabhakar,

I would like to differ with your opinion on the WTC collapse. True, that concrete columns might have held up a little longer, but you have to realise the following points.

1. Most of the high rise buildings in the US have extremely advanced fire alarm and fire fighting systems. Most of the systems are FM rated systems. This would mean that a robot would be sent into the fire piping to see if there is any blockage in the pipes.
2. Who on earth would ever imagine that someone would pilot a plane into a building. Remember all the aircrafts were full on aviation fuel. As soon as the aircrafts crashed into the WTC several of the emergency staircases were cut off. So people could not get off.
3. Unlike in India, in the US the governments dont get into pricing of materials like steel and cement. Here this is not the case. Steel price is monitored and controlled by the government.
4. Unlike in India the engineering community in the US is so used to designing sky scrapers. They have been designing these ginats since the 1930's during our pre-independance days. John.D. Rockefeller started the Rockefeller building at the height of the great depression to enable employment to people.
5. Can anyone in the forum name any other tall skyscraper in the US that has come down completely due to fire. Hardly any examples come to mind.
6. I remember once when I got permission to see the columns of the WTC. If I remember they were something like 1.5m x 3m steel box columns with a plate thickness of 60mm. I doubt even today if we can get 60mm thick steel plates in India for fabrication. There are no steel contractors capable of working with such thicknesses and even if they are there they will be a handful.
7. Castellated sections are readily available off the shelf in the US. Here we will take a regular steel beams and make web openings in them and charge our clients for making the openings. Becasue openings dont come free. So it is more expensive than a regular steel beam.
8. If you go to a SAIL stockyard here (I have been fortunate enough to visit one) and ask them for lets say India's largest section rolled by the government ISMB 600. They will tell you. "It is not in the rolling schedule for the next 2 months. Even if we start rolling we dont know what quantum we will roll". By gods grace if the section requested is available then he will say. "Please go to the yard. It is somewhere there. I think you can get around 50% of your quantity." So what to do for the balance 50%. Luckily the scenario is changing with the new private players in the field.

I feel therefore that we should not use the example of WTC to shun the use of steel in buildings. We are using steel to build large 7 or 8 storied Industrial buildings with heavy floor loads. Steel framework with metal decking and concrete slabs are the way of life as far as Industrial jobs are concerned. Steel therefore is the way forward.

Regards
Sriprakash

Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
N. Prabhakar
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 474

PostPosted: Sun Nov 25, 2012 6:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Mr. Sriprakash Shastry,<xml><o></o>
<o> </o>
The point I was trying to make in my previous posting is to highlight that the steelwork on its own without protection cannot sustain prolonged fire which would lead to high temperatures and eventual failure of the individual structural members, and in some cases the complete collapse of the entire structure. This is certainly a drawback for steel usage unless it is protected properly.  Indiscriminate use of steelwork for any framed building without having necessary fire protection is risky and dangerous for the users. <o></o>
<o> </o>
Apart from WTC towers 1 and 2, there has been partial collapse of WTC 5 from fire due to a particular steel framing system, and the total collapse of WTC 7 may be attributed in large measure to the fire in the building.  The other failure that can be mentioned is the high rise building fire at One Meridian Plaza, Philadelphia, in 1991, burned 9 of the 38 floors, but the structure did not collapse. In all these buildings, the fire suppression system was not operational or was only partially operational at the time of the fire. In the book titled Construction Failure by Jacob Feld, published by John Wiley & Sons, Inc, (pp. 139-141),  several failures of steelwork due to fire, mostly in America, have been mentioned.<o></o>
The failures of steelwork due to fire is not limited to USA as there have been many such failures/collapses around the world due to fire.  A fire in the year 2000 in the 540-meter (1,772-foot) Ostankino TV tower in Moscow, Russia started at 440 meters (1,443 feet) and burned down to 100 meters (328 feet) above ground, tilted the spire 2 meters (6.5 feet), and lasted 24 hours.  In 2004, a fire collapsed a 12-story building in Nasr, Egypt after only three hours, and in 2005, the Windsor building in Madrid, Spain burned for 18 hours, suffered a very significant partial collapse and was later demolished. <o></o>
Regarding fire protection, it is traditionally by means of protective board or to coat the steel in spray-applied fire resistive materials which are of two main kinds: gypsum based or cement-based.  In the US, gypsum has been most prevalent whilst in the UK cement has been the standard.  Both are equally fire-resistant but cement-based protection have significantly greater durability.  Gypsum-based protection is comparatively soft and can be accidentally damaged, even by  a small kick.  The NIST findings on the collapse of WTC towers attribute one of the reasons for collapse as the dislodgement of thermal insulation in the floors by the aircraft impact.  <o></o>
These losses, their varying burn times, and the degree of structural failure, reflect the uncertainty of whether our current designs can withstand the threat of total burnout. The NIST report on WTC towers makes recommendations for increased structural integrity, enhanced fire resistance of structures, performance based design, improved active fire protection, improved building evacuation and emergency response, maintenance, education and training.<o></o>
In the new 1 WTC, 417 m high tower with 124 m high spire, that is nearing completion, a number of new safety features are included in the building's design, in order to better prepare it for a major accident or terrorist attack. These features include 3-foot thick reinforced concrete walls for all stairwells, elevator shafts, risers, and sprinkler systems; extra-wide,
pressurized
stairwells; a dedicated set of stairwells exclusively for the use of fire fighters; and biological and chemical filters throughout its ventilation system. The windows on the side of the building facing the west street are equipped with specially tempered blast-resistant plastic.   The structure is designed around a strong, redundant steel moment frame consisting of beams and columns connected by a combination of welding and bolting. Paired with a concrete-core shear wall, the moment frame lends substantial rigidity and redundancy to the overall building structure while providing column-free interior spans for maximum flexibility.<o></o>
Some of the drastic improvements in structural design and in design codes have come about due to these extra-ordinary failures.  To cite a few examples, the pack-of-card progressive failure of 22 storey residential building Ronan Point, with load-bearing large size precast concrete panels, in UK in 1968 due to gas explosion, collapse of 114 m high Ferrybridge hyperbolic cooling towers in UK due to close spacing of towers which resulted funnelling effect and increased wind pressures on the towers, failure of the famous Tacoma bridge due to aerodynamic instability.  <o></o>
We should certainly move on with steelwork for tall buildings subject to providing adequate protection and safety measures against accidental fires, based on the design and construction methods available at present. <o></o>
<o> </o>
With best wishes,<o></o>
<o> </o>
N. Prabhakar<o></o>
Chartered Structural Engineer<o></o>
Vasai (E)<o></o>
     <o></o>
  <o></o>
<o> </o>
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
baldevprajapati
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 27 Aug 2012
Posts: 13

PostPosted: Mon Dec 03, 2012 6:05 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ambalal sir

   my dissertation topics

is HRB with wind effect.  i create a model in the etabs of 30 story steel building. in the software how to pride plate on the section.
and also give me your mail id so can give my file. understand the my problem
thank u sir
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
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 

 
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