www.sefindia.org

[yacub]

Sir,  I am a structural engineer awaiting the implementation of RERA. As my friend Er. Suresh  pointed out, Structural Engineer can not do the 100% supervision of the site work. But he  can depute his engineers to check the steel and concreat. He can collect samples. He can  ask for test certificates from accredited / NABL civil engineering laboratories. He can  insist for technical supervision.   Sign the structural Certificates only if you are fully satisfied with the work, quality  certification & supervision.  This is an opportunity for structural engineers. Construction Engineering will also  furnish if the structural engineers insist on their certificate & test certificates.   Specifically put these terms in the agreement between the builder and Structural  Engineer.  Can any one prepare a draft agreement?  Dr. Yacub Mohan George  On Mon, 29 May 2017 12:52:02 +0530 "N. Prabhakar"  wrote >                   Dear Sefians, >  > I find that non-structural engineers and site engineers who actually do full-time  supervision of work at site, want structural engineers who have carried out the  structural design to get involved in site supervision also, even it may be a casual one,  so that they can be made easily and conveniently a sole sacrificial lamb should a mishap  occurs at site. Very clever of them to think that way !! Please beware of it. >  > N. Prabhakar       > >  >  > --

Posted via Email

[SATYAPAUL]

no structural engineer shall fall in to their trap.only take responsibility of design and verification  of steel reinforcement in members.Project management consultants shall take full  responsibility,certificate shall clearly mention steel reinforcement conforms to design only. satya paul  On Mon, 29 May 2017 12:58:39 +0530 "N. Prabhakar"  wrote >                   Dear Sefians, >  > I find that non-structural engineers and site engineers who actually do full-time supervision of work  at site, want structural engineers who have carried out the structural design to get involved in site  supervision also, even it may be a casual one, so that they can be made easily and conveniently a sole  sacrificial lamb should a mishap occurs at site. Very clever of them to think that way !! Please  beware of it. >  > N. Prabhakar       > >  >  > --

Posted via Email

[Rohinton Bhathena]

Safety checks should be progressive with equally competent persons at all stages.When I am called to certify a structure, I follow the following procedure.
[1] Is it my design or someone else? In which case I check the assumptions, codes used and design.
[2] Are the drawings as per the design.
[3] Is the manufacture as per the drawing?
[4] Methods and Supervision at site. Our supervision or Contractor's.
[5] Background check of Contractor's reputation is very important.king


For these reasons, I Stick to Steel Structures. No chance of the guys removing a few bars after checking


R Bhathena




On Mon, May 29, 2017 at 12:25 AM, Manoharbs_eq <forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:
[quote]            Hi suresh, 

Its not always just meeting the codal requirements as code is just a guidelines so the stability is always the responsibility of the designer, so the designer should be involved in all the stages of construction to ensure that construction is as per the design 






On May 28, 2017 1:13 PM, "sureshkochi" forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org))> wrote:

[yacub]

Madam   There is no question of a structural engineer is willing or not to take up  responsibility. As per NBC, RERA, structural engineer is responsible for the design AND  FOR ENSURING THAT THE BUILDING IS CONSTRUCTED AS PER DESIGN AND USING bis STANDARDS.   The question is, are we able to ensure good quality construction? If the quality is not  as per BIS and if there is no certificate of testing and if there is no certificate of  the construction engineer, the structural engineer has the liberty not to sign the  completion certificate.  Initially there may be some problems, but a system will evolve.(lets hope)  Dr. Yacub Mohan George  On Mon, 29 May 2017 12:16:53 +0530 "sangeeta_wij"  wrote >                   I agree completely with Suresh as many Structural Engineers do not wish/are not  in a position to take responsibility of construction supervision; the idea is to make  Authorities understand that design and construction are two different but equally  important aspects of a safe construction and it’s perfectly acceptable to have two  different agencies responsible for the same. They should be willing to accept two  agencies signing the certificate—one for design and the other for construction  supervision. Those of us who are willing to perform both the roles, may sign for both and  I think it’s pointless to argue whether or not every structural engineer must take  responsibility of construction supervision as the choice should rest with him. >  >  >  >  > Best Regards > Sangeeta Wij > Managing Partner > SD Engineering Consultants LLP > Vice President(North), Indian Association of Structural Engineers, > Fellow and Chartered Engineer, Institution of Engineers > H333 New Rajinder Nagar(Lower Ground Floor), > New Delhi-110060 > Ph:9811776210;01145128530 >  >  > From: B.V.Harsoda [mailto:forum@sefindia.org]  > Sent: 28 May 2017 20:07 > To: econf@sefindia.org > Subject: [E-CONF] Re: Econf for RERA >  >  >  > Dear Er. Suraj Sir, >  > I am fully agree with you. Site involvement of Structural is must for perfect  implementation of structural design for safe structures. >  > Regards, > Er. B. V. Harsoda > suraj wrote: > If Engineer does only design, he is design engineer & not structural engineer > Engineering prosecuted at site is very much part of Structural Engineering. > Be Global & come out of lack of understanidng > sureshkochi wrote: > Hi all > Designer is responsible for the design for life.  > But the responsibility is only for design and not for the structure. As far as the design  satisfy codes and good engineering practice, it is okey. The design should pass a proof  check. > But the designer can not stand at site full time and as such can not certify the  construction. So for the safety and stability of a completed structure designer alone can  not be responsible, there should be a construction engineer in charge certify the  adherence of drawings  > Suresh > Associated Structural Consultants > Kochi 17 >  > ASC KOCHI 17 > --auto removed-- >       > >  >  > --

Posted via Email

[sangeeta_wij]

Dear Mr Reddy
The gradation of Construction quality maynot be an easy task, let alone for structural engineers who are extremely busy and literally kept on their toes following the changes and implementing them from time to time and keep issuing revised drawings/details to site.

As for Precast Construction, you are absolutely right about the quality being more predictable and controlled; but most of our big cities are fairly high in seismicity and Precast is yet not a proven-to-be-ductile solution. In revised BIS 13920, clause 1.1.2, it’s recommended not to use it unless adequate appropriate experimentation and Non Linear Analysis proves drift compatibilty to be adequate, as per specialist literature. Thus, as structural engineers, we would like to exercise adequate restraints and caution before using Precast/PT/Flat Slab systems.




Best Regards
Sangeeta Wij
Managing Partner
SD Engineering Consultants LLP
Vice President(North),Indian Association of Structural Engineers,
Fellow and Chartered Engineer, Institution of Engineers
H333 New Rajinder Nagar(Lower Ground Floor),
New Delhi-110060
Ph:9811776210;01145128530


From: bcs123 [mailto:forum@sefindia.org]
Sent: 29 May 2017 02:34
To: econf@sefindia.org
Subject: [E-CONF] Re: Econf for RERA



Madam
I am following this Econf for RERA for quite some time and the discussion on the role of structural Engineer which has taken predominance as was already in place from ages more so with the implementation of RERA, underlining the importance in Construction Engineering.

In this context I feel the structural designing and IS codes for structural design has to identify a new parameter called Quality of construction supervision which should be inversely proportion to the factor of safety of the design. To elaborate, it is the duty of structural designer/engineer and in his own interest to guage the degree of construction quality that is going to be achieved at site while designing the structure. For example it is a known fact that precast structural members attain a high degree of construction quality for the simple reason that the member is cast in controlled conditions where optimal vibration temperature during casting and curing is achieved. This is the same reason why we don’t do the casting of these members at site. Similarly we need to check the weather conditions, availability of skilled manpower, machinery, tools and plants at site to control the detrimental factors that may creep in, when the construction takes place at the site of work.

We need to grade the construction company by an autonomous body who will be entrusted with giving a grade which we can use it for the factor of safety in designing the structures.

This is my broad opinion on the designing vis-a-vis construction supervision to make our structural designing more scientific and durable.

The industry experts may pitch in for further discussions please.

Regards,
Chandrasekhar Bakkireddy,
Director (Technical)
Praneeth Group,
Hyderabad.
www.praneeth.com


Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: sangeeta_wij (forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org))
Sent: 29 May 2017 12:09
To: econf@sefindia.org (econf@sefindia.org) (econf@sefindia.org (econf@sefindia.org))
Subject: [E-CONF] Re: Econf for RERA


I agree completely with Suresh as many Structural Engineers do not wish/are not in a position to take responsibility of construction supervision; the idea is to make Authorities understand that design and construction are two different but equally important aspects of a safe construction and it’s perfectly acceptable to have two different agencies responsible for the same. They should be willing to accept two agencies signing the certificate�one for design and the other for construction supervision. Those of us who are willing to perform both the roles, may sign for both and I think it’s pointless to argue whether or not every structural engineer must take responsibility of construction supervision as the choice should rest with him.




Best Regards
Sangeeta Wij
Managing Partner
SD Engineering Consultants LLP
Vice President(North), Indian Association of Structural Engineers,
Fellow and Chartered Engineer, Institution of Engineers
H333 New Rajinder Nagar(Lower Ground Floor),
New Delhi-110060
Ph:9811776210;01145128530


From: B.V.Harsoda [mailto:forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)]
Sent: 28 May 2017 20:07
To: econf@sefindia.org (econf@sefindia.org) (econf@sefindia.org (econf@sefindia.org))
Subject: [E-CONF] Re: Econf for RERA



Dear Er. Suraj Sir,

I am fully agree with you. Site involvement of Structural is must for perfect implementation of structural design for safe structures.

Regards,
Er. B. V. Harsoda
suraj wrote:
If Engineer does only design, he is design engineer & not structural engineer
Engineering prosecuted at site is very much part of Structural Engineering.
Be Global & come out of lack of understanidng
sureshkochi wrote:
Hi all
Designer is responsible for the design for life.
But the responsibility is only for design and not for the structure. As far as the design satisfy codes and good engineering practice, it is okey. The design should pass a proof check.
But the designer can not stand at site full time and as such can not certify the construction. So for the safety and stability of a completed structure designer alone can not be responsible, there should be a construction engineer in charge certify the adherence of drawings
Suresh
Associated Structural Consultants
Kochi 17

ASC KOCHI 17
--auto removed--





Download Attachments:
57D8E9CCB0CF44F1B71C11204782EEF5.png

Posted via Email

[SATYAPAUL]

STRUCTURAL ENGINEER AFTER CHECKING THE REINFORCEMENT HAS TO LEAVE HIS REPRESENTATIVE AT SITE TILL THE  CONCRETE IS DONE.STRUCTURAL ENGINEER IS ONLY RESPONSIBLE WHEN HIS/HER DESIGN IS DEFICIENT.DELHI METRO  BRIDGE GIRDER COLLAPSED,IT WAS FOUND WRONG DESIGN,CONSULTANT WAS BLACK LISTED. KOLKATTA STEEL BRIDGE  COLLAPSED,STRUCTURAL ENGINEER WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE.SO NEVER AFRAID.CHECK YOUR DESIGN CAREFULLY AND HAVE  CONFIDENCE. REGARDS SATYA PAUL  On Mon, 29 May 2017 12:58:39 +0530 "N. Prabhakar"  wrote >                   Dear Sefians, >  > I find that non-structural engineers and site engineers who actually do full-time supervision of work  at site, want structural engineers who have carried out the structural design to get involved in site  supervision also, even it may be a casual one, so that they can be made easily and conveniently a sole  sacrificial lamb should a mishap occurs at site. Very clever of them to think that way !! Please  beware of it. >  > N. Prabhakar       > >  >  > --

Posted via Email

[suraj]

Structural Engineers In India - A Narrow Approach
Understand that in general in India, structural engineers are not happy to do surveillance work on project sites
Well, it is up to their own approach, how they manage their system for prosecution of structural work purpose
It is their own responsibility, when design is not fully construct able & complaints are received from site engineer
Site engineer is not responsible for designs indeed, but for construction as a whole, yet there are many items that cause issues on site, which cannot be taken care of by site experts
Moreover, no structural engineer can escape its responsibility, by simply stating that one remains so busy for working on many changes are required to be made daily to designs to meet architectural & other requirements
Why frequent changes are required also, raises a question mark?
Are structural engineers able to foresee possible problems that respective design would pose to site execution engineer
Site concrete pouring is responsibility of site manager of course, but not issues related to designs errors
It has been experienced on almost all projects around world that there is no project that does not pose designs issues onsite in one or other aspect
What is then Redline Mark up & why is it required?
Please do not ask me what is Redline Markup
Every engineer is required to know this design alteration process term
What is reason that there is no single drawing that is exclusively used once for all activities of designs & working of construction?
Structural engineers generally do not produce designs & working drawings that are worth consistent, so that these details can be  prosecuted, without causing any site problem
When work is carried out on site, problems are posed obstructing certain part of work or whole work of structural itself
Site persons do not have competency to take decisions & if they take, who shall endorse to ratify for purpose of contract changes?
Structural engineer is not alone on contract, multi parties are involved
Who shall care about clashes on structural elements, due to proposed or designed inserts?
Tell me how many designs engineers take into considerations, all issues in relevance to all inserts?
Working drawings from services disciplines are never able at time of working on designs
There could be issues on designs details itself, due to site matters, which decision cannot be taken by a site person
Site person cannot wait to write to designer for solutions & invite to site for inspection & solution, consequently holding on that part of component
No structural engineer issues any method statement for its components for purpose of site smooth work & these cannot be included as such, for it is not known at that time what problems a particular site & design may depose
Well, list could be very long, but structural engineer cannot avoid approach not to collaborate with site, either directly or through its competent representative structural engineer, but exclusive responsibility would be considered to be owned by structural engineer
Do not think that by giving & packet of design drawings to site & job is over

[diwakar bhagat]

Please look into attached collapsed tank photograph and the news attached .

There is a need and requirement of health monitoring of structures ,to be taken up by govt and to be made an essential clause under RERA , to make the ( owners ,developers responsible for what they are building and maintaining )



Where is the maintenance , structural health monitoring system in our country
Material ,natural resource lost forever


Impact on resource ( aggregate,..... Sand ,...Water , cement ...And CO2 ..environment issues) comes in play





On May 29, 2017 12:09, sangeeta_wij <forum@sefindia.org (forum@sefindia.org)> wrote:

[N. Prabhakar]

Dear Er. Satyapaul,

Your recent statement in the posting under this column that " KOLKATTA STEEL BRIDGE  COLLAPSED,STRUCTURAL ENGINEER WAS NOT RESPONSIBLE" is not correct.  On this matter, please read the technical paper titled "COLLAPSE OF KOLKATA FLYOVER - PRACTITIONER’S PERSPECTIVE" authored by Dr. N. Subramanian and self, published in 'The Bridge and Structural Engineer', Journal of ING-IABSE, Vol. 47, Number 1, March 2017.  In this paper. the mechanism of collapse has been described which was due to faulty details of connection between steel girders over a steel pier, for which the structural consultant is considered to be responsible.

This is for your kind information.

With best wishes,

N. Prabhakar
Chartered Structural Engineer
Vasai (E), Pin 401 208

[bijoyav]

National Building Code (NBC) has already addressed the issue already.

As per the NBC, for multi stories buildings and special buildings, the
application  for permit has to be submitted in two stages. (Part 2,
12.2.5.1)


The code says,

"After obtaining the sanction for planning (Stage 1) from the
Authority, a complete set of structural plans, sections, details and
design calculations duly signed by engineer/structural engineer (see
Annex A) along with the complete set of details duly approved in Stage
1 shall be submitted. The building plans/details shall be deemed
sanctioned for the commencement of construction only after obtaining
the permit for Stage 2 from the Authority."

Again,
12.2.8 Structural Sufficiency Certificate

"The plans shall be accompanied by structural sufficiency certificate
in the prescribed form (see Annex C) signed by the engineer/structural
engineer (see Annex A) and the owner jointly to the effect that the
building is safe against various loads, forces and effects including
due to natural disasters, such as, earthquake, landslides, cyclones,
floods, etc as per Part 6 ‘Structural Design’ and other relevant
Codes. The engineer/structural engineer shall also have the details to
substantiate his design."


Regarding "SUPERVISION"

12.2.9 Supervision
"The notice shall be further accompanied by a certificate in the
prescribed form (see Annex D) by the registered
architect/engineer/structural engineer/supervisor/town planner (see
Annex A) undertaking the supervision (see 9.3)."


The Annex D is attached. The quality control is the responsibility of
the person who sign this. The Code allows Structural Engineer himself
or any other personal to take this responsibility.

He undertakes that " shall be carried out under my supervision and I
certify that all the materials (type and grade) and the workmanship of
the work shall be generally in accordance with the general and
detailed specifications’ submitted along with, and that the work shall
be carried out according to the sanctioned plans."


Finally, it is the duty of the owner to submit

"the certificate for execution of work as per structural safety
requirements (see
Annex G); and give written notice to the Authority regarding completion of work
described in the permit (see Annex H)" .... to be submitted by the
owner to obtain certificate for occupancy.


In short, Government expect all the buildings constructed are to
comply with with regulations of NBC and it is the responsibility of
the registered personals to ensure that. So a structural engineer keep
away from that. He has to ensue that the work is being executed as per
NBC. quality of concrete being produces, placement of reinforcement,
tolerances of form work, manufacturing of concrete etc..... All the
construction has to be as per NBC.

True. A structural engineer cannot be present at site throughout.
Still, a means for controlling quality of work has to be made at site.
As mentioned by one of our friend, a mere cube test conducted once in
while, or testing done on steel or cement is not enough. It should be
as per Part 6, SECTION 5A (b) MATERIALS, WORKMANSHIP, INSPECTION AND
TESTING of NBC for RCC and as per Section 6, if steel.




On 29/05/2017, sangeeta_wij <forum@sefindia.org> wrote: