After going through the vide, please feel free to share additional comments/feedback/discussion points, etc. in the below comment box. We will workout certain mechanism for responding the same.
What an in depth knowledge on seismic analysis and design... horrible to believe that may caveats in the standards set by Codal guidelines.Ut must be brought to the notice of Prime Minister Modi to cleanse our system of writing codes.
There was a question asked on why in 2016 version 1893 code the clause related to increase in allowable stresses of concrete and steel removed. In fact this was giving good leverage with optimised designs while calculating crackwidth for flexure in seismic combination loads especially in liquid retaining structures. Dr.Jain sir views can be gathered please
Thanks for this detailed explanation. Sir, Should we use Static Equilibrium Forces (Forces by Empirical formula EQX, EQZ ) in load combination while building design by using Response spectrum method with dynamic forces RSX, RSZ horizontal orthogonal forces(Not vertical force considered)? or Should we ignore EQX, EQZ Static forces and participate only with Dynamic forces RSX & RSZ in load combination. Do we use Static Equilibrium Forces only for compare base shear (Static & Dynamic base shear ) to factorize by Vb/VB to Dynamic base shear? My main quarry is ,Should we use Static Equilibrium Forces in Dynamic Response Spectrum in load combination or not? Means to use only dynamic forces RSX, RSZ in load combination with ignoring Static forces EQX, EQZ. Please guide me.
After going through the vide, please feel free to share additional comments/feedback/discussion points, etc. in the below comment box. We will workout certain mechanism for responding the same.
Sir, Fantastic session, Please arrange a Session on IS13920-2016 also . We will be very grateful for you.
Certainly, we will arrange a discussion on IS 13920:2016 as well.
What an in depth knowledge on seismic analysis and design... horrible to believe that may caveats in the standards set by Codal guidelines.Ut must be brought to the notice of Prime Minister Modi to cleanse our system of writing codes.
You may connect with is through email address: contact@sqveconsultants.com for further discussion.
There was a question asked on why in 2016 version 1893 code the clause related to increase in allowable stresses of concrete and steel removed. In fact this was giving good leverage with optimised designs while calculating crackwidth for flexure in seismic combination loads especially in liquid retaining structures. Dr.Jain sir views can be gathered please
You may connect with is through email address: contact@sqveconsultants.com for further discussion.
Thanks for this detailed explanation.
Sir, Should we use Static Equilibrium Forces (Forces by Empirical formula EQX, EQZ ) in load combination while building design by using Response spectrum method with dynamic forces RSX, RSZ horizontal orthogonal forces(Not vertical force considered)? or Should we ignore EQX, EQZ Static forces and participate only with Dynamic forces RSX & RSZ in load combination.
Do we use Static Equilibrium Forces only for compare base shear (Static & Dynamic base shear ) to factorize by Vb/VB to Dynamic base shear? My main quarry is ,Should we use Static Equilibrium Forces in Dynamic Response Spectrum in load combination or not? Means to use only dynamic forces RSX, RSZ in load combination with ignoring Static forces EQX, EQZ. Please guide me.
You may connect with is through email address: contact@sqveconsultants.com for further discussion.
Great Lecture sir
Thank you for the message. We are glad that you have liked the session.
Great 😃👍
Thank you for the message.