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.

Damage- AnotherView

 
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
clique
SEFI Member
SEFI Member


Joined: 26 Jan 2003
Posts: 12

PostPosted: Wed Nov 10, 2004 5:07 pm    Post subject: Damage- AnotherView Reply with quote

It was very rightly pointed out by Prof. A R Chandrasekaran that " Whenever structural
damages occur, unfortunately we like to think only Structural Engineers are at fault. The
problem is with the decadent and cynical society in India which gives no
priority to any safety aspects of our life."

Further, it was very correctly pointed out by Dhirendra that "Once an event occurs and
accountability is ill defined then the person lowest in the economic / power hierarchy is
likely to take the blame."  Here, the obvious choice is the poor engineer - poorest among
the players in the Construction Industry.

Our society in general and Enforcement Agencies in particular have devised very simple ways
to Suppress the Symptoms , Leave aside the methods to cure the real problem. To Cancel the
License of  an Engineer is one such method to help save the real culprit.

What is the situation in the Construction Industry ?

Though we have no dearth of engineers practicing unethical ways to survive in the business
, can we really improve the Construction Industry by taking action against such immoral
engineers ? It sounds like punishing a bureaucrat who is compelled to act under the
unwritten instructions of a politician !!!!

Though it is very essential for every human to be ethical , Players in Construction
Industry can easily force ONE engineers to practice unethical ways to the advantage of the
owner.

What is the wayout ?

Hold the owner responsible for each and every incidence of loss of life / loss of property.
Hold him murderer of all those victims who die due to mishaps at his property. Hold him
responsible for economical loss due to mishaps at his property

Is is sounding harsh ?

Someone may claim that owner may not be an engineer to understand the Intricacy of
Engineering and hence he should be spared from such harsh action !!!!!

Let us accept the fact that in his commercial Interest, an Owner can,
hire the best legal brains to protect the TITLE of his property.
hire the best legal brains to SNATCH the property from others.
locate muscle power to protect his property / snatch from others.
hire the best Architect to exploit the Development Rules.
force an Engineer to Violate Professional Ethics at Design / Construction Stage.
locate best health services for self and family.
locate most unethical bureaucats to help him out in crisis.
partner with most unethical politician to Change Development Rules.

If The Law Of  The Land Holds the Owner Responsible for The Crime Practiced by him by way
of occurrence of Mishap at his Property , he will use all his brain and money to :
hire best Architect to plan Safety Compliance,
hire efficient Structural Engineer to Workout Safe and Optimum Structural Designs,
hire Third Party Agency to proof check safety of the Structural Designs,
hire Good Contractor to carryout Construction as per Specifications and Drawings.
hire Professional Quality Inspectors to enforce Contractor's QualityAssurance Plans.
hire Third Party Agency to proof check Contractor's HSE Plans.
hire Professional HSE Inspectors to enforce Contractor's HSE Plans

Let us accept the fact that punishing helpless / poors can not achieve result. Frame the
Laws to Punish The Real Culprit , he will not dare to implement Unsafe Construction. Let us
prepare our society to Force Framing and Implementation of such Laws.

Wishing all a Very Happy Deepavali , Healthy & Prosperous New Year and a Safety Conscious
Society ( and then Safety Conscious Construction Industry )

Regards,

Dhanji Senjalia,
Clique Consultants Pvt. Ltd.,
501 , 3rd Avenue Apartments ,
3rd Kasturba Cross Road ,
Borivli ( East ) , MUMBAI 400 066,
Phone : 2802 0747 , 2862 3058
Fax     : 2805 6903.

dhirendrat@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:
Namaste All,

If I was a relative of a worker killed in the TOI Ahmedabad collapse I would want the
following persons to be held "jointly and severally" ( a legal term implying persons
are liable as a group AND individually too )  responsible for the mishap.

* The Structural Engineer
* The Civil Engineer
* The Contractor

Thereafter if the investigation fails to discern who amongst these is specifically
responsible then they are responsible as a group and face punishment. If a specific
fault of any one is clearly established then the others can be absolved of wrong doing.

Only then accountability can be ensured. It  will force the three to adopt methods that
are demonstrably safe, as against methods that are at best arguably safe. Lack of
adequate accountability is a key factor that people are willing to take chances.

Once an event occurs and accountability is ill defined then the person lowest in the
economic / power hierarchy is likely to take the blame.

One way that SEFI can serve the society is to monitor the investigation into the
collapse and keep the members informed of facts and postures that emerge as the
collapse is investigated.

regards,

Dhirendra Tripathi

skjain@iitk.ac.in wrote:

Dear Kirtesh:

I am not surprised that strucutral engineer is being punished without
confirming whose fault it is. Why?

We as a community have lost credibility. We are willing to give unsafe
design under pressure. Therefore the community has lost respect for us
and we become the targets when something goes wrong.

Structural design practices of Ahmedabad that came to light after 130
collapses left no one in doubt that structural engineers are willing to
give unsafe design when under pressure.

Hence, the entire profession gets a bad name.

It is not important whose fault it was this time: what is important is
to recognize that the "construction industry" as a whole (in which
strucurtral engineer in only one component) is going through a major
crisis due to its lack of professionalism. Today, with a formal
involvement of structural engineers, construction engineers, and a
reputed contractor, one cannot be sure that they all together will do a
good and a safe job. What can be worst than that for the professionals
engaged in this profession?

Regards,

Sudhir K Jain

kirtesh.gandhi@babtieindia.com wrote:

I fully agree with prof. Chandrasekaran that whenever the damage occurs
structural engineers are punished straightway without looking at the facts
of failure.
There was news in today's newspaper that the authorities have cancelled
license of structural engineer involved in TOI building design.
Perhaps the structural engineer is punished without checking his design or
without proving his fault.!!!!!
Major cause of failure during construction is a "bad construction practice"
where a structural engineer is not directly responsible at all.
It is very pity that we are throwing all responsibilities to a structural
engineer who perhaps does not even go to the site in many cases.
It is always contractor's responsibility to look after health and safety on
his site.
Few people were comparing structural engineers with doctors but it is a very
rare occasion when a doctor is punished for his operation failures....
Of course, I am not favoring the unethical design practice, which many
engineers do in our country, but at the same time structural engineers
should be protected from punishment at least before their fault is proven.

Regards,

Kirtesh Gandhi
Jacobs - Babtie India,
Ahmedabad.


-----Original Message-----
Message From  for_prof_arc@hotmail.com [mailto:for_prof_arc@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, 10 November, 2004 5:19 PM
To: kirtesh.gandhi@babtieindia.com
Subject: Building Damage - Another View

Whenever structural damages occur, unfortunately we like to think only
Structural Engineers are at fault.
The problem is with the decadent and cynical society in India which gives no
priority to any safety aspects of our life.

Before taking about buildings, let us look at a few other cases like traffic
& health.
Helmets for two-wheelers and seat belts for four wheelers is not enforced at
all ][exception - Delhi for two wheelers].
One cannot even cycle in USA without wearing a helmet. During my stay in
USA, I have always wondered about the safe way the traffic moves in a four
way crossing in suburban roads where there is no traffic light or cops.
Whatever be the time of the day (or night), the vechicle must come to a
complete stop and only the vehicle which first reaches the junction has the
right of way. Such un-supervised safety rules are followed as a rule in
those countries.

How about public transport like buses & trains in India? No public transport
in those countries can move with doors open.
Does any pedestrian feel safe in Urban India ?  Less said about safety in
health matters of general public which is a sham.

Reverting back to Building Industry, there is an all pervading corruption.
In the chain of Builder-Financier/ Approving Agencies/ Architect / Designers
/ Contractors - those Executing in the field, why should designers should
alone be the Fall Guy. Any way most of the Stilt +4 residential buildings
are not designed as we seem to fondly hope. A building is considered safe if
after removing the shuttering, it stands without falling down.

We must think of remedies which can be implemented and enforced for minimum
safety. Specify minimum sizes of columns and beams, which hopefully can be
verified after construction. Also, Specify minimum reinforcements in columns
and beams and make everyone concerned give affadavits that it has been
provided. [someone must already be responding that false affadavits can be
managed in Bharat].

We must debate about how to implement safety in all aspects of building
construction - totally eliminate the concept of weight of steel per unit
volume of concrete. How to implement quality in the field should be our
focus?

Fortunately, the buildings have a lot of factor of safety and unless natural
calamities like earthquake and fire exposes them, the damages would be
forgotten very soon.

As a realist, I predict a lot of damages to so called engineered buildings
in North East India or any other place where an event above M-6.5 takes
place. It will be a pity if only the designers are punished in such cases.

HOW TO ENFORCE MINUMUM SAFETY SHOULD BE OUR NEW MANTRA !!

A R Chandrasekaran











---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.771 / Virus Database: 518 - Release Date: 28/09/04

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.771 / Virus Database: 518 - Release Date: 28/09/04




















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