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.

Closing remarks

 
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
swamikrishnan
E-Conference Moderator


Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 18

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:32 am    Post subject: Closing remarks Reply with quote

As the E-Conference on Tall Building Design and Construction draws to a close, I wanted to briefly reflect on the proceedings of the last three weeks and offer my thoughts on using the momentum generated by the conference to move tall building design in India forward.

The open-ended, no-holds barred format of the conference brought to the fore several aspects of tall building design, some philosophically deep (e.g., stiff versus flexible, do we need tall buildings, etc.), some rich in details  (e.g., methods to compute creep deformation in columns, pile-testing, etc.), and several very basic questions that are applicable not just to highrise buildings, but also to lowrise buildings (e.g., sizing and reinforcement of columns).  An appreciable collection of scientific works on the subject has been aggregated for future use of the SEFI community.   115 topics were discussed in a total of 770 posts.  It was refreshing to see contributions come in not just from experienced engineers, but also from budding structural engineers.  The discussions were not just civil (no pun intended), but also downright earnest and collegial.   Based on these observations, I would declare the conference an unqualified success.  Kudos to the engineers who participated, and an appeal to one and all (the active, the passive, the passively active, and the actively passive, which is the vast majority of the almost 15000 members of SEFI) to cultivate, nurture, and uphold this “guru-sishya parampara” in the Indian structural and geotechnical engineering communities.  As Margaret Fuller said, “If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it”.    

In order to build upon the momentum generated by this conference and elevate the standard of tall building design in India, I would like to put forward three initiatives for your consideration:

1.     IS Code for Tall Building Design, Detailing and Construction:  From the broad spectrum of issues that were discussed and debated in the conference, it is clear to me that the need for a comprehensive and prescriptive Indian code for the design, detailing, and execution of tall buildings is paramount.  The vast majority of the engineers who participated in the survey concur with this (at the time of this writing, 194 had voted for the creation of a tall building code, 6 voted against; 182 voted for it to be prescriptive, 14 voted against).  The code must promote/require best practices in seismic and wind engineering with special attention to ductile detailing of structural materials, components, and systems.  Given the rapid pace at which tall buildings are being erected, the development of this code must be rapid and its adoption must follow suit immediately thereafter.  Accompanying the code must be a detailed and lucid commentary describing the rationale, philosophy, and theory behind the provisions in the code (the SEAOC blue book is a very good example).  Such a document can also serve as a guide to engineers, educating them on all aspects of tall building design that they must consider and deliberate upon in the planning and design process.

2.     (i) Capacity building in the short term:  Once the code is ready, it is critical that engineers across India, especially in the major metros with ongoing tall building development, be trained in the use of the code to design these buildings.  This could be accomplished by experts from the BIS or by other qualified engineers (e.g., in the USA, Dr. S. K. Ghosh has been conducting 1- or 2-day workshops for groups of engineers in practicing engineering companies on the use of the latest building codes (including design exercises); his company charges a reasonable fee for the training and additional workshop material).   (ii) Capacity building in the long term:  In the long term it would be tremendously beneficial to morph the SEFI cyber-community into the Indian Structural Engineers Association with a physical presence in all the major metros through city chapters.  The association could serve as the primary advocacy group for structural engineers; could hold chapter meetings for information sharing and dissemination, and networking; could hold educational/social mixing events with Architects and Contractors; could include technical committees that routinely investigate structural engineering issues and recommend action to be taken, if needed, as well as help keep the codes up to date and relevant; and could help in mentoring budding structural engineers.

3.     Structural Engineering Licensing:  One sure-fire way of bringing in quality-assurance in structural engineering is to introduce a structural licensing mechanism and to require that buildings greater than a certain height (say, all tall buildings as defined by the new Tall Building Code) be designed by licensed structural engineers (and the drawings be stamped by this "engineer-of-record").  The criteria for acquiring the structural engineer’s license would NOT be like the “chartered engineer” certification.  It would be more rigorous; there would be a rigorous one- or two-day exam, testing the engineer on various design and detailing problems/case histories.  A certain minimum level of experience under the supervision of a registered structural engineer (in addition to a Civil Engineering degree) would be the eligibility requirement for appearing in the written examination.  An autonomous Board of Registration would have to be created to oversee the process of licensing.  In addition to quality-assurance, licensing has other benefits as well:  (i) it elevates the stature of structural engineers; could enable the engineers to engage and interact with architects as equals, thus helping realize building architectures that do not by default include such seismic vulnerabilities as soft stories; (ii) it can help make structural engineering more lucrative as a profession, thus helping compete against currently more lucrative professions such as software engineering in attracting the brightest and the best of students.

I sincerely hope that there would be movement in these directions in the very near future and all of you come together to make this happen.   I wish to close by acknowledging the efforts of Er. Alpa Sheth, Prof. C. V. R. Murty, and SEFI administrator, Er. Sanjeev Kumar in putting together a successful e-conference for the benefit of the 15000-strong SEFI community.  I have personally enjoyed taking part in this one-of-a-kind conference and I hope you have too.

Sincerely,

Swaminathan Krishnan
California Institute of Technology
http://krishnan.caltech.edu
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Thankful People
1 user(s) is/are thankful for this post.
alpa_sheth
...
...


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 253
Location: Mumbai

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 10:56 am    Post subject: Closing remarks Reply with quote

Dear Prof Swaminathan,


On behalf of SEFI I would like to extend our warm gratitude for the sterling moderation that you have conducted during the past three weeks. Thanks so much for sparing so much of your time in your hectic schedule. 


The SEFI community has gained much by your participation. We look forward to a long-term association with you. 


with warm regards personally, and from SEFI,


Alpa  Sheth 





On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 4:03 PM, swamikrishnan <forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:
Quote:
           As the E-Conference on Tall Building Design and Construction draws to a close, I wanted to briefly reflect on the proceedings of the last three weeks and offer my thoughts on using the momentum generated by the conference to move tall building design in India forward.

The open-ended, no-holds barred format of the conference brought to the fore several aspects of tall building design, some philosophically deep (e.g., stiff versus flexible, do we need tall buildings, etc.), some rich in details (e.g., methods to compute creep deformation in columns, pile-testing, etc.), and several very basic questions that are applicable not just to highrise buildings, but also to lowrise buildings (e.g., sizing and reinforcement of columns). An appreciable collection of scientific works on the subject has been aggregated for future use of the SEFI community. 115 topics were discussed in a total of 770 posts. It was refreshing to see contributions come in not just from experienced engineers, but also from budding structural engineers. The discussions were not just civil (no pun intended), but also downright earnest and collegial. Based on these observations, I would declare the conference an unqualified success. Kudos to the engineers who participated, and an appeal to one and all (the active, the passive, the passively active, and the actively passive, which is the vast majority of the almost 15000 members of SEFI) to cultivate, nurture, and uphold this “guru-sishya parampara” in the Indian structural and geotechnical engineering communities. As Margaret Fuller said, “If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it”.

In order to build upon the momentum generated by this conference and elevate the standard of tall building design in India, I would like to put forward three initiatives for your consideration:

1.     IS Code for Tall Building Design, Detailing and Construction: From the broad spectrum of issues that were discussed and debated in the conference, it is clear to me that the need for a comprehensive and prescriptive Indian code for the design, detailing, and execution of tall buildings is paramount. The vast majority of the engineers who participated in the survey concur with this (at the time of this writing, 194 had voted for the creation of a tall building code, 6 voted against; 182 voted for it to be prescriptive, 14 voted against). The code must promote/require best practices in seismic and wind engineering with special attention to ductile detailing of structural materials, components, and systems. Given the rapid pace at which tall buildings are being erected, the development of this code must be rapid and its adoption must follow suit immediately thereafter. Accompanying the code must be a detailed and lucid commentary describing the rationale, philosophy, and theory behind the provisions in the code (the SEAOC blue book is a very good example). Such a document can also serve as a guide to engineers, educating them on all aspects of tall building design that they must consider and deliberate upon in the planning and design process.

2.     (i) Capacity building in the short term: Once the code is ready, it is critical that engineers across India, especially in the major metros with ongoing tall building development, be trained in the use of the code to design these buildings. This could be accomplished by experts from the BIS or by other qualified engineers (e.g., in the USA, Dr. S. K. Ghosh has been conducting 1- or 2-day workshops for groups of engineers in practicing engineering companies on the use of the latest building codes (including design exercises); his company charges a reasonable fee for the training and additional workshop material). (ii) Capacity building in the long term: In the long term it would be tremendously beneficial to morph the SEFI cyber-community into the Indian Structural Engineers Association with a physical presence in all the major metros through city chapters. The association could serve as the primary advocacy group for structural engineers; could hold chapter meetings for information sharing and dissemination, and networking; could hold educational/social mixing events with Architects and Contractors; could include technical committees that routinely investigate structural engineering issues and recommend action to be taken, if needed, as well as help keep the codes up to date and relevant; and could help in mentoring budding structural engineers.

3.     Structural Engineering Licensing: One sure-fire way of bringing in quality-assurance in structural engineering is to introduce a structural licensing mechanism and to require that buildings greater than a certain height (say, all tall buildings as defined by the new Tall Building Code) be designed by licensed structural engineers (and the drawings be stamped by this "engineer-of-record"). The criteria for acquiring the structural engineer’s license would NOT be like the “chartered engineer” certification. It would be more rigorous; there would be a rigorous one- or two-day exam, testing the engineer on various design and detailing problems/case histories. A certain minimum level of experience under the supervision of a registered structural engineer (in addition to a Civil Engineering degree) would be the eligibility requirement for appearing in the written examination. An autonomous Board of Registration would have to be created to oversee the process of licensing. In addition to quality-assurance, licensing has other benefits as well: (i) it elevates the stature of structural engineers; could enable the engineers to engage and interact with architects as equals, thus helping realize building architectures that do not by default include such seismic vulnerabilities as soft stories; (ii) it can help make structural engineering more lucrative as a profession, thus helping compete against currently more lucrative professions such as software engineering in attracting the brightest and the best of students.

I sincerely hope that there would be movement in these directions in the very near future and all of you come together to make this happen. I wish to close by acknowledging the efforts of Er. Alpa Sheth, Prof. C. V. R. Murty, and SEFI administrator, Er. Sanjeev Kumar in putting together a successful e-conference for the benefit of the 15000-strong SEFI community. I have personally enjoyed taking part in this one-of-a-kind conference and I hope you have too.

Sincerely,

Swaminathan Krishnan
California Institute of Technology
http://krishnan.caltech.edu
     



     


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


Joined: 11 May 2012
Posts: 2

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 1:11 pm    Post subject: Closing remarks Reply with quote

Dear all,
 
I attach the document which deals with the sesimic design of tall buildings .This was issued by the Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (2008)  and touches many of the topics covered in the E conference. Additionally gives some conclusive design recommendations.
 
Regards
 
Dr Barnali Ghosh (Geo Seismic Specialist)
Senior Principal
Mott Macdonald UK
 
 
 


 
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 10:33 AM, swamikrishnan <forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:
Quote:
           As the E-Conference on Tall Building Design and Construction draws to a close, I wanted to briefly reflect on the proceedings of the last three weeks and offer my thoughts on using the momentum generated by the conference to move tall building design in India forward.

The open-ended, no-holds barred format of the conference brought to the fore several aspects of tall building design, some philosophically deep (e.g., stiff versus flexible, do we need tall buildings, etc.), some rich in details (e.g., methods to compute creep deformation in columns, pile-testing, etc.), and several very basic questions that are applicable not just to highrise buildings, but also to lowrise buildings (e.g., sizing and reinforcement of columns). An appreciable collection of scientific works on the subject has been aggregated for future use of the SEFI community. 115 topics were discussed in a total of 770 posts. It was refreshing to see contributions come in not just from experienced engineers, but also from budding structural engineers. The discussions were not just civil (no pun intended), but also downright earnest and collegial. Based on these observations, I would declare the conference an unqualified success. Kudos to the engineers who participated, and an appeal to one and all (the active, the passive, the passively active, and the actively passive, which is the vast majority of the almost 15000 members of SEFI) to cultivate, nurture, and uphold this “guru-sishya parampara” in the Indian structural and geotechnical engineering communities. As Margaret Fuller said, “If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it”.

In order to build upon the momentum generated by this conference and elevate the standard of tall building design in India, I would like to put forward three initiatives for your consideration:

1.     IS Code for Tall Building Design, Detailing and Construction: From the broad spectrum of issues that were discussed and debated in the conference, it is clear to me that the need for a comprehensive and prescriptive Indian code for the design, detailing, and execution of tall buildings is paramount. The vast majority of the engineers who participated in the survey concur with this (at the time of this writing, 194 had voted for the creation of a tall building code, 6 voted against; 182 voted for it to be prescriptive, 14 voted against). The code must promote/require best practices in seismic and wind engineering with special attention to ductile detailing of structural materials, components, and systems. Given the rapid pace at which tall buildings are being erected, the development of this code must be rapid and its adoption must follow suit immediately thereafter. Accompanying the code must be a detailed and lucid commentary describing the rationale, philosophy, and theory behind the provisions in the code (the SEAOC blue book is a very good example). Such a document can also serve as a guide to engineers, educating them on all aspects of tall building design that they must consider and deliberate upon in the planning and design process.

2.     (i) Capacity building in the short term: Once the code is ready, it is critical that engineers across India, especially in the major metros with ongoing tall building development, be trained in the use of the code to design these buildings. This could be accomplished by experts from the BIS or by other qualified engineers (e.g., in the USA, Dr. S. K. Ghosh has been conducting 1- or 2-day workshops for groups of engineers in practicing engineering companies on the use of the latest building codes (including design exercises); his company charges a reasonable fee for the training and additional workshop material). (ii) Capacity building in the long term: In the long term it would be tremendously beneficial to morph the SEFI cyber-community into the Indian Structural Engineers Association with a physical presence in all the major metros through city chapters. The association could serve as the primary advocacy group for structural engineers; could hold chapter meetings for information sharing and dissemination, and networking; could hold educational/social mixing events with Architects and Contractors; could include technical committees that routinely investigate structural engineering issues and recommend action to be taken, if needed, as well as help keep the codes up to date and relevant; and could help in mentoring budding structural engineers.

3.     Structural Engineering Licensing: One sure-fire way of bringing in quality-assurance in structural engineering is to introduce a structural licensing mechanism and to require that buildings greater than a certain height (say, all tall buildings as defined by the new Tall Building Code) be designed by licensed structural engineers (and the drawings be stamped by this "engineer-of-record"). The criteria for acquiring the structural engineer’s license would NOT be like the “chartered engineer” certification. It would be more rigorous; there would be a rigorous one- or two-day exam, testing the engineer on various design and detailing problems/case histories. A certain minimum level of experience under the supervision of a registered structural engineer (in addition to a Civil Engineering degree) would be the eligibility requirement for appearing in the written examination. An autonomous Board of Registration would have to be created to oversee the process of licensing. In addition to quality-assurance, licensing has other benefits as well: (i) it elevates the stature of structural engineers; could enable the engineers to engage and interact with architects as equals, thus helping realize building architectures that do not by default include such seismic vulnerabilities as soft stories; (ii) it can help make structural engineering more lucrative as a profession, thus helping compete against currently more lucrative professions such as software engineering in attracting the brightest and the best of students.

I sincerely hope that there would be movement in these directions in the very near future and all of you come together to make this happen. I wish to close by acknowledging the efforts of Er. Alpa Sheth, Prof. C. V. R. Murty, and SEFI administrator, Er. Sanjeev Kumar in putting together a successful e-conference for the benefit of the 15000-strong SEFI community. I have personally enjoyed taking part in this one-of-a-kind conference and I hope you have too.

Sincerely,

Swaminathan Krishnan
California Institute of Technology
http://krishnan.caltech.edu
     



     


Posted via Email



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.
Seismicdesignofhigh_rise_building_2008.pdf
 Description:

Download
 Filename:  Seismicdesignofhigh_rise_building_2008.pdf
 Filesize:  1.98 MB
 Downloaded:  560 Time(s)

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
diwakar bhagat
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 09 Oct 2008
Posts: 9

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 2:54 pm    Post subject: Closing remarks Reply with quote

Pls discuss the responsibility of developer visa vis structural engineers for such projects , in future conferences.

Regards diwakar bhagat
Sent from BlackBerry® on Airtel

--Original Message--
From: Barnali_g <forum@sefindia.org>
Date: Wed, 5 Dec 2012 14:43:19
To: <econf34289@sefindia.org>
Subject: [E-CONF] Re: Closing remarks

           
Dear all,
 
I attach the document which deals with the sesimic design of tall buildings .This was issued by the Council of Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat (2008)  and touches many of the topics covered in the E conference. Additionally gives some conclusive design recommendations.
 
Regards
 
Dr Barnali Ghosh (Geo Seismic Specialist)
Senior Principal
Mott Macdonald UK
 
 
 


 
On Wed, Dec 5, 2012 at 10:33 AM, swamikrishnan forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:

      --auto removed--

Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sakumar79
...
...


Joined: 18 Apr 2008
Posts: 667

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 3:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear Sirs,
    First of all, I thank the SEFI admin for this wonderful opportunity to gather so much knowledge about various aspects of tall buildings design, many of which may not have been significant for small or medium buildings. The admin, moderators and senior sefians have done a great job in my humble opinion.

    In continuation of Prof. Swaminathan sir's post, may I humbly suggest that regarding point number 3 (Structural Engineering Licensing), in addition to making it mandatory for licensed engineers only to certify tall buildings, it should also make it mandatory for such buildings to be proof checked by a second (independent) licensed engineer. This will help reduce the chances of errors.

Yours sincerely,
Arunkumar
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
thirumalaichettiar
Silver Sponsor
Silver Sponsor


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 3459

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 4:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Dear all Sefians,
On behalf of all I thank the moderator Madam Alpa Sheth for originating this e-conference and coordinated with other moderators Dr.S.K and Dr.C.V.R.Murthy along with Dr.N.S, Dr.Sureshkumar and others and appreciate their great effort.

By reading and going through the discussions we learnt many unknown and once again we owe debt of thanks to them for sparing their busy and precise hours for us.

I specially thank Madam Alpa the moderator for giving me opportunity to be the  Raconteur.

We look forward another one in continuation of this since there are many unanswered topics and questions.

Once again I thank to all members who contributed, participated sparing their time to share their knowledge with us.

With Warm regards,
T.RangaRajan.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Dr. N. Subramanian
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 21 Feb 2008
Posts: 5282
Location: Gaithersburg, MD, U.S.A.

PostPosted: Wed Dec 05, 2012 6:21 pm    Post subject: Re: Closing remarks Reply with quote

Dear Dr Swaminathan,

Very nice summary of the proceedings of the e-conf. on Tall Buildings indeed!

I wish to appreciate you for all your informative comments!

I also thank and appreciate the organizers for conducting this e-conf. and giving me an opportunity to be a resource person in Structural Engineering.

Regards
Subramanian
swamikrishnan wrote:
As the E-Conference on Tall Building Design and Construction draws to a close, I wanted to briefly reflect on the proceedings of the last three weeks and offer my thoughts on using the momentum generated by the conference to move tall building design in India forward.

The open-ended, no-holds barred format of the conference brought to the fore several aspects of tall building design, some philosophically deep (e.g., stiff versus flexible, do we need tall buildings, etc.), some rich in details  (e.g., methods to compute creep deformation in columns, pile-testing, etc.), and several very basic questions that are applicable not just to highrise buildings, but also to lowrise buildings (e.g., sizing and reinforcement of columns).  An appreciable collection of scientific works on the subject has been aggregated for future use of the SEFI community.   115 topics were discussed in a total of 770 posts.  It was refreshing to see contributions come in not just from experienced engineers, but also from budding structural engineers.  The discussions were not just civil (no pun intended), but also downright earnest and collegial.   Based on these observations, I would declare the conference an unqualified success.  Kudos to the engineers who participated, and an appeal to one and all (the active, the passive, the passively active, and the actively passive, which is the vast majority of the almost 15000 members of SEFI) to cultivate, nurture, and uphold this “guru-sishya parampara” in the Indian structural and geotechnical engineering communities.  As Margaret Fuller said, “If you have knowledge, let others light their candles in it”.    

In order to build upon the momentum generated by this conference and elevate the standard of tall building design in India, I would like to put forward three initiatives for your consideration:

1.     IS Code for Tall Building Design, Detailing and Construction:  From the broad spectrum of issues that were discussed and debated in the conference, it is clear to me that the need for a comprehensive and prescriptive Indian code for the design, detailing, and execution of tall buildings is paramount.  The vast majority of the engineers who participated in the survey concur with this (at the time of this writing, 194 had voted for the creation of a tall building code, 6 voted against; 182 voted for it to be prescriptive, 14 voted against).  The code must promote/require best practices in seismic and wind engineering with special attention to ductile detailing of structural materials, components, and systems.  Given the rapid pace at which tall buildings are being erected, the development of this code must be rapid and its adoption must follow suit immediately thereafter.  Accompanying the code must be a detailed and lucid commentary describing the rationale, philosophy, and theory behind the provisions in the code (the SEAOC blue book is a very good example).  Such a document can also serve as a guide to engineers, educating them on all aspects of tall building design that they must consider and deliberate upon in the planning and design process.

2.     (i) Capacity building in the short term:  Once the code is ready, it is critical that engineers across India, especially in the major metros with ongoing tall building development, be trained in the use of the code to design these buildings.  This could be accomplished by experts from the BIS or by other qualified engineers (e.g., in the USA, Dr. S. K. Ghosh has been conducting 1- or 2-day workshops for groups of engineers in practicing engineering companies on the use of the latest building codes (including design exercises); his company charges a reasonable fee for the training and additional workshop material).   (ii) Capacity building in the long term:  In the long term it would be tremendously beneficial to morph the SEFI cyber-community into the Indian Structural Engineers Association with a physical presence in all the major metros through city chapters.  The association could serve as the primary advocacy group for structural engineers; could hold chapter meetings for information sharing and dissemination, and networking; could hold educational/social mixing events with Architects and Contractors; could include technical committees that routinely investigate structural engineering issues and recommend action to be taken, if needed, as well as help keep the codes up to date and relevant; and could help in mentoring budding structural engineers.

3.     Structural Engineering Licensing:  One sure-fire way of bringing in quality-assurance in structural engineering is to introduce a structural licensing mechanism and to require that buildings greater than a certain height (say, all tall buildings as defined by the new Tall Building Code) be designed by licensed structural engineers (and the drawings be stamped by this "engineer-of-record").  The criteria for acquiring the structural engineer’s license would NOT be like the “chartered engineer” certification.  It would be more rigorous; there would be a rigorous one- or two-day exam, testing the engineer on various design and detailing problems/case histories.  A certain minimum level of experience under the supervision of a registered structural engineer (in addition to a Civil Engineering degree) would be the eligibility requirement for appearing in the written examination.  An autonomous Board of Registration would have to be created to oversee the process of licensing.  In addition to quality-assurance, licensing has other benefits as well:  (i) it elevates the stature of structural engineers; could enable the engineers to engage and interact with architects as equals, thus helping realize building architectures that do not by default include such seismic vulnerabilities as soft stories; (ii) it can help make structural engineering more lucrative as a profession, thus helping compete against currently more lucrative professions such as software engineering in attracting the brightest and the best of students.

I sincerely hope that there would be movement in these directions in the very near future and all of you come together to make this happen.   I wish to close by acknowledging the efforts of Er. Alpa Sheth, Prof. C. V. R. Murty, and SEFI administrator, Er. Sanjeev Kumar in putting together a successful e-conference for the benefit of the 15000-strong SEFI community.  I have personally enjoyed taking part in this one-of-a-kind conference and I hope you have too.

Sincerely,

Swaminathan Krishnan
California Institute of Technology
http://krishnan.caltech.edu
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