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.

Push over analysis and softwares...

 
This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> Past Discussions Year 2004
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
skjain.iitk
General Sponsor
General Sponsor


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2004 1:37 pm    Post subject: Push over analysis and softwares... Reply with quote

Dear Amit, Vipul, Sangeeta and others:

The push over analysis is not such a big deal in terms of software. For
instance, the SAP2000 is one of the well-respected software that also
has good capabilities for push over analysis. After the Gujarat
earthquake on my suggestion,  the firm CSI had agreed to provide this
software at a fraction of their regular price to Indian engineers and
many colleagues in the country indeed bought the software.

The main thing is:

a) Push over analysis require considerable amount of understanding of
the subject by the analyst. A large numer of assumptions are needed, and
member response curves are to be provided to the programme before it can
analyze. Hence, it is really a question about Indian structural firms
investing on the training of their engineers. My own impressions are
that many very good firms in India unfortunately do not consider
training to be useful. This could be because they do not realise the
need for training because they are doing roaring business anyway, or it
could be that the training quality in our country leaves much to be
desired. It is a universal fact that in the name of training workshops,
anything goes.

b) As of now, one does not expect push over analysis to be used for
design of new buildings; certainly not the ordinary buildings. However,
it is emerging as a very important tool for assessment of safety of
existing buildings and for retrofitting of the same. Unfortunately,
serious efforts by Indian structural firms towards retrofitting  jobs
have been lacking: this is evident in Gujarat where a major opportunity
has been lost after the 2001 earthquake for some good retrofitting work.
In fact, I am told that in some of the large contracts by the Govt of
Gujarat, some large structural firms otherwise well respected have given
rather simplistic and general recommendations for retrofitting of
buildings without backing these with any calculations or design philosophy.

My recommendation is that we all should collectively decide to improve
the state of the practice and for that we need to invest in training of
our people. As we do better quality of work, it will be possible to
charge more money for our services (I know Sangeeta will complain that
clients are not willing to pay!).

Best regards,

Sudhir

sdec@bol.net.in wrote:

Quote:
Dear Vipul,
I guess a time has come when maybe we need to pool resources and form a
couple of formidable consortiums to be able to fight the Big Fish>Any takers
of the idea?
Sangeeta Wij
----- Original Message -----
Message From  <acpl_sefi@rediffmail.com>
To: <sdec@bol.net.in>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 2:00 AM
Subject: Reply to Mr. Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi 's letter
dated 29th October 2004




Quote:
Dear Mr. Amit Dutt

I share your concerns over lack of resources available to the Indian
Consulting engineer in investing in expensive programs. However we must
not forget that we need to be competitive at the global level (both
commercially and technically) in the future &amp; we must start looking
towards that direction sooner than later--soon it may become a survival
issue.

Vipul Ahuja


On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 adutt@desein.com wrote :
Dear Sefians,


I wish to share Mr. Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi 's deep
concern over the neglect of  designing structures with regard to
Routine
Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures. But a Performance Based
Seismic Evaluation ,Push Over Analysis ( Non linear

Analysis) &amp; other sophisticated methods are easier said
than done
because of lack of resources etc.

Firstly the capability of the average  practicing structural
engineers &amp;
consultants in evaluating the ultimate seismic capacities &amp; going
for a
non linear analysis is very limited because a major  portion of
these
topics are  been dealt only at the research level &amp; not well
established


Secondly the above said analysis will require very powerful &amp;
costly
softwares beyond the reach of most of the organizations. The most
commonly &amp; popular software of structural engineering software in
India
seems to be STAAD PRO ,but how many people have really used it for non
linear analysis is a big question.

Thirdly &amp; probably the most important factor is that the client is
not
willing to give the time which will be required for the kind of
analysis
you are have suggested.



I feel as the awareness to seismic hazard &amp; seismic risk increases
over
the years within the engineering community &amp; also the nation as a
whole
the above methods of analysis  shall find their true place.



With regards



Amit Dutt

Structural Engineer










Structural Engineers Forum of
India  



























Posted via Email
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
sdec.in
Silver Sponsor
Silver Sponsor


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 473

PostPosted: Tue Nov 02, 2004 7:09 pm    Post subject: Push over analysis and softwares... Reply with quote

Dear Dr Jain,
boss u are right, pl bear with me when i complain-- where is the time, money
and client worth investing where our own Structural Association members are
quoting shockingly low prices(can u beat it--70p per sq ft including wetting
from IIT--dont worry, IIT Delhi!)
ab batao, kya maine galat kaha?
P.s.I met Alpa (for the first time!) in Bangalore where I presented my first
ever paper on EQ engg based on IS Codes with Case studies.I actally spoke
impromptu for sixty odd minutes before showing powerpoint for the rest half
an hour and the whole thing put together was something of a hit,quite
unexpectedly.Many people knew about SEFI  were aware of my frequent
comments, the rest will soon become members(thanks to my address and of
course Alpas v dynamic paper the next day).I also told them abt Nicee.org
and everyone quite liked the way SEFI has been managed so far and were also
quite enthusiastic abt the national test.
bye for now and regards
Sangeeta
----- Original Message -----
Message From  <skjain@iitk.ac.in>
To: <sdec@bol.net.in>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 7:20 PM
Subject: Push over analysis and softwares...


Quote:
Dear Amit, Vipul, Sangeeta and others:

The push over analysis is not such a big deal in terms of software. For
instance, the SAP2000 is one of the well-respected software that also
has good capabilities for push over analysis. After the Gujarat
earthquake on my suggestion,  the firm CSI had agreed to provide this
software at a fraction of their regular price to Indian engineers and
many colleagues in the country indeed bought the software.

The main thing is:

a) Push over analysis require considerable amount of understanding of
the subject by the analyst. A large numer of assumptions are needed, and
member response curves are to be provided to the programme before it can
analyze. Hence, it is really a question about Indian structural firms
investing on the training of their engineers. My own impressions are
that many very good firms in India unfortunately do not consider
training to be useful. This could be because they do not realise the
need for training because they are doing roaring business anyway, or it
could be that the training quality in our country leaves much to be
desired. It is a universal fact that in the name of training workshops,
anything goes.

b) As of now, one does not expect push over analysis to be used for
design of new buildings; certainly not the ordinary buildings. However,
it is emerging as a very important tool for assessment of safety of
existing buildings and for retrofitting of the same. Unfortunately,
serious efforts by Indian structural firms towards retrofitting  jobs
have been lacking: this is evident in Gujarat where a major opportunity
has been lost after the 2001 earthquake for some good retrofitting work.
In fact, I am told that in some of the large contracts by the Govt of
Gujarat, some large structural firms otherwise well respected have given
rather simplistic and general recommendations for retrofitting of
buildings without backing these with any calculations or design
philosophy.

My recommendation is that we all should collectively decide to improve
the state of the practice and for that we need to invest in training of
our people. As we do better quality of work, it will be possible to
charge more money for our services (I know Sangeeta will complain that
clients are not willing to pay!).

Best regards,

Sudhir

sdec@bol.net.in wrote:

Quote:
Dear Vipul,
I guess a time has come when maybe we need to pool resources and form a
couple of formidable consortiums to be able to fight the Big Fish>Any
takers
of the idea?
Sangeeta Wij
----- Original Message -----
Message From  <acpl_sefi@rediffmail.com>
To: <sdec@bol.net.in>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 2:00 AM
Subject: Reply to Mr. Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi 's letter
dated 29th October 2004




Quote:
Dear Mr. Amit Dutt

I share your concerns over lack of resources available to the Indian
Consulting engineer in investing in expensive programs. However we must
not forget that we need to be competitive at the global level (both
commercially and technically) in the future &amp; we must start looking
towards that direction sooner than later--soon it may become a survival
issue.

Vipul Ahuja


On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 adutt@desein.com wrote :
Dear Sefians,


I wish to share Mr. Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi 's deep
concern over the neglect of  designing structures with regard to
Routine
Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures. But a Performance Based
Seismic Evaluation ,Push Over Analysis ( Non linear

Analysis) &amp; other sophisticated methods are easier said
than done
because of lack of resources etc.

Firstly the capability of the average  practicing structural
engineers &amp;
consultants in evaluating the ultimate seismic capacities &amp; going
for a
non linear analysis is very limited because a major  portion of
these
topics are  been dealt only at the research level &amp; not well
established


Secondly the above said analysis will require very powerful &amp;
costly
softwares beyond the reach of most of the organizations. The most
commonly &amp; popular software of structural engineering software in
India
seems to be STAAD PRO ,but how many people have really used it for
non
linear analysis is a big question.

Thirdly &amp; probably the most important factor is that the client
is
not
willing to give the time which will be required for the kind of
analysis
you are have suggested.



I feel as the awareness to seismic hazard &amp; seismic risk
increases
over
the years within the engineering community &amp; also the nation as a
whole
the above methods of analysis  shall find their true place.



With regards



Amit Dutt

Structural Engineer










Structural Engineers Forum of
India  







































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


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 104

PostPosted: Wed Nov 03, 2004 11:53 am    Post subject: Push over analysis and softwares... Reply with quote

Dear Sangeeta:

We had a lot of discussions on the state of structural engineering in
the August 2002 workshop organized by NICEE and I will restrain from
writing too much on this issue. However, I cannot resist from stating
the following:

a) Consultants are in the "knowledge business". Improving the product,
that is "knowledge and skills", has to be unconditional: regardless of
what someone pays for services, you have to strive to give the best
possible services.

b) In view of the above, investment in capacity building of your own
firm is the best way to not only grow professionally but also to charge
higher rates for your services.

b) Indian engineers cannot survive in global economy by using the
arguments such as client is not paying, architects do not pay....They
must be as good, or better, as their peers elsewhere.

c) While there may be consultants charging Rs 0.70 per sq. feet, I am
sure there are other consultants who are charging Rs 7.00 per sq feet.
One has to decide one's own placement in the profession. Having superior
services is the best way to go up in the value chain.

I will close here and hope that SEFI members in general and SEFI as a
forum does not take the pessimistic view that we cannot improve since
our fees is low.

Best regards,

Sudhir Jain

sdec@bol.net.in wrote:

Quote:
Dear Dr Jain,
boss u are right, pl bear with me when i complain-- where is the time, money
and client worth investing where our own Structural Association members are
quoting shockingly low prices(can u beat it--70p per sq ft including wetting
from IIT--dont worry, IIT Delhi!)
ab batao, kya maine galat kaha?
P.s.I met Alpa (for the first time!) in Bangalore where I presented my first
ever paper on EQ engg based on IS Codes with Case studies.I actally spoke
impromptu for sixty odd minutes before showing powerpoint for the rest half
an hour and the whole thing put together was something of a hit,quite
unexpectedly.Many people knew about SEFI  were aware of my frequent
comments, the rest will soon become members(thanks to my address and of
course Alpas v dynamic paper the next day).I also told them abt Nicee.org
and everyone quite liked the way SEFI has been managed so far and were also
quite enthusiastic abt the national test.
bye for now and regards
Sangeeta
----- Original Message -----
Message From  <skjain@iitk.ac.in>
To: <sdec@bol.net.in>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 7:20 PM
Subject: Push over analysis and softwares...




Quote:
Dear Amit, Vipul, Sangeeta and others:

The push over analysis is not such a big deal in terms of software. For
instance, the SAP2000 is one of the well-respected software that also
has good capabilities for push over analysis. After the Gujarat
earthquake on my suggestion,  the firm CSI had agreed to provide this
software at a fraction of their regular price to Indian engineers and
many colleagues in the country indeed bought the software.

The main thing is:

a) Push over analysis require considerable amount of understanding of
the subject by the analyst. A large numer of assumptions are needed, and
member response curves are to be provided to the programme before it can
analyze. Hence, it is really a question about Indian structural firms
investing on the training of their engineers. My own impressions are
that many very good firms in India unfortunately do not consider
training to be useful. This could be because they do not realise the
need for training because they are doing roaring business anyway, or it
could be that the training quality in our country leaves much to be
desired. It is a universal fact that in the name of training workshops,
anything goes.

b) As of now, one does not expect push over analysis to be used for
design of new buildings; certainly not the ordinary buildings. However,
it is emerging as a very important tool for assessment of safety of
existing buildings and for retrofitting of the same. Unfortunately,
serious efforts by Indian structural firms towards retrofitting  jobs
have been lacking: this is evident in Gujarat where a major opportunity
has been lost after the 2001 earthquake for some good retrofitting work.
In fact, I am told that in some of the large contracts by the Govt of
Gujarat, some large structural firms otherwise well respected have given
rather simplistic and general recommendations for retrofitting of
buildings without backing these with any calculations or design
philosophy.

My recommendation is that we all should collectively decide to improve
the state of the practice and for that we need to invest in training of
our people. As we do better quality of work, it will be possible to
charge more money for our services (I know Sangeeta will complain that
clients are not willing to pay!).

Best regards,

Sudhir

sdec@bol.net.in wrote:



Quote:
Dear Vipul,
I guess a time has come when maybe we need to pool resources and form a
couple of formidable consortiums to be able to fight the Big Fish>Any
takers
of the idea?
Sangeeta Wij
----- Original Message -----
Message From  <acpl_sefi@rediffmail.com>
To: <sdec@bol.net.in>
Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 2:00 AM
Subject: Reply to Mr. Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi 's letter
dated 29th October 2004






Quote:
Dear Mr. Amit Dutt

I share your concerns over lack of resources available to the Indian
Consulting engineer in investing in expensive programs. However we must
not forget that we need to be competitive at the global level (both
commercially and technically) in the future &amp; we must start looking
towards that direction sooner than later--soon it may become a survival
issue.

Vipul Ahuja


On Mon, 01 Nov 2004 adutt@desein.com wrote :
Dear Sefians,


I wish to share Mr. Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi 's deep
concern over the neglect of  designing structures with regard to
Routine
Design of Earthquake Resistant Structures. But a Performance Based
Seismic Evaluation ,Push Over Analysis ( Non linear

Analysis) &amp; other sophisticated methods are easier said
than done
because of lack of resources etc.

Firstly the capability of the average  practicing structural
engineers &amp;
consultants in evaluating the ultimate seismic capacities &amp; going
for a
non linear analysis is very limited because a major  portion of
these
topics are  been dealt only at the research level &amp; not well
established


Secondly the above said analysis will require very powerful &amp;
costly
softwares beyond the reach of most of the organizations. The most
commonly &amp; popular software of structural engineering software in
India
seems to be STAAD PRO ,but how many people have really used it for
non
linear analysis is a big question.

Thirdly &amp; probably the most important factor is that the client
is
not
willing to give the time which will be required for the kind of
analysis
you are have suggested.



I feel as the awareness to seismic hazard &amp; seismic risk
increases
over
the years within the engineering community &amp; also the nation as a
whole
the above methods of analysis  shall find their true place.



With regards



Amit Dutt

Structural Engineer










Structural Engineers Forum of
India  




















































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


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 294

PostPosted: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:28 pm    Post subject: Push over analysis and softwares... Reply with quote

Dear Engr.Sangeeta,> Delhi,India

Congratulations to you for your brilliant success.I am really glad at my friend's first ever achievement of this kind.

Wishing you prosperity.

Engr.Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi
Project & Seismic Design Management Engineer
&
Co-ordinator,Earthquake Anti-disaster Defence Management System Initiative (EADMSI)
Dhaka - Bangladesh/Asia
Radio Link International E-mail



--------Original Message---------

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


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 294

PostPosted: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:08 pm    Post subject: Push over analysis and softwares... Reply with quote

Dear Prof.S.K Jain, > Kanpur,India

I support all your views and opinions expressed.
I would like to add few more points,in fact,consulting service is a client oriented business and so through years of practice, self improvement, high tech set up gradually,standard diplomacy, smartness, enough back ground knowledge & information to convince the potential client, carefully selected  word conversation, good client - consultant relationship and commitment (please say, for example, six weeks if you think it can be completed in three weeks) it is possible to incease the level of fee to be charged as suggested by you - para (c), but every one must sign an AGREEMENT out lining fee structure,estimated time of completion, time extension clause for technical reason, technical and non technical details,mode of payment of fee and above all SEISMIC CLAUSES in detail if the project is located in zone III, IV or V to avoid any kind of criss-crossing which may arise a dispute.
AGREEMENT is required as per income tax regulations.

With regards.

Engr.Sikandar Hayat Siddiqi
Project & Seismic Design Management Engineer
&
Co-ordinator,Earthquake Anti-disaster Defence Management System Initiative (EADMSI)
Dhaka - Bangladesh/Asia
Radio Link International E-mail

-----------Original Message---------

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.    www.sefindia.org Forum Index -> Past Discussions Year 2004 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 can 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