I wrote this article on moment-curvature curve as being a well kept secret in structural engineering, a few years ago and gauging from the interest it had raised, I thought of updating it and complementing it with a video to demonstrate some of the ideas discussed there.

You can find the original article here.

One of the interesting developments since the publications of the previous article is the generation of the “curvature capacity surface” (shown in the background image above), which shows the variation of the maximum curvature capacity of a cross-section along various bending directions and its relationship with axial load. This surface is not widely available or discussed, but can provide a good understanding of the ductility of the cross sections sections, subjected to axial load and bi-axial bending, such as columns and shear walls. It also shows how rapidly a beam behavior changes to column behavior as the axial load crosses about 10% of the capacity

Another valuable insight that the moment curvature curve can help to provide is the understanding of various types of stiffness (initial, tangent and secant) and its variation with moment and curvature, which can reduce rapidly (even becoming negative!) after reaching the yielding capacity. This effective stiffness can then be used for computing rotations and deflections, and for nonlinear modeling and analysis.

In addition to looking at the relationship of curvature to moment, the same procedure and process can also be used to plot the variation of maximum and minimum strain, axial force in compression and tension, corresponding stresses and neutral axis depth with change in curvature. Such plots can provide significant insights into the cross-section response and help improve the design and evaluation of reinforced concrete members.

With increased focus on displacement based and performance based design and evaluation of structures, the role of moment curvature curve and its applications are becoming even more important. So, let us keep exploring this versatile tool, and keep finding more treasures hidden beneath it!

Related post: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/well-kept-secret-structural-design-naveed-anwar

 As a structural engineer, it had me thinking, would it not be great to be able to do such a quick check with our structures as well? How can we treat our structures as doctors treat their patients? Can we check their pulse rates? Can we listen to their heartbeats?

And it occurred to me, that we can and probably, many of us already do. Well not literally, but in a manner of speaking, if we think of the natural frequency of structure as its heartbeat. Just like the number of heartbeat per minute is a reliable, and extensively used indicator of human physical fitness, the natural frequency (number of cycles of vibration per second) of a structure is a fairly reliable indicator of its structure’s stiffness, damage state and overall health. For example, like the normal heartrate of a healthy person at rest should be between 60 to 80, a free vibration frequency of a tall buildings of say 30 stories should be about 0.25-0.35 hz or a period of vibration of 2-3 seconds. If the heart rate is too fast for a human being, it may indicate stress or abnormal conditions, and if too low, may indicate health issues. In the same the way, if the frequency of a structure is too high, it may indicate an abnormally stiff structure, and a low frequency may indicate soft or weak state.

Just to be clear, this free vibration response is often obtained using what is called the “Modal Analysis” of a structure. Before we discuss some of the applications where the vibration characteristics (or the results obtained from the modal analysis) can be extremely useful in structural engineering, let’s first take a quick look how at how it all started. The basic idea and the origin of modal analysis can be traced back to the times of Sir Isaac Newton (1643 – 1727) and Joseph Fourier (1768 – 1830). The essential concept is that the dynamic response of physical objects can be described as a sum of few simple waves. Lord Rayleigh (1842 – 1919) developed the concept further and presented in his book “The Theory of Sound”, published in 1877. Later, an Italian structural engineer, Arturo Danusso (1880 – 1968) made key contributions in earlier 20th century to introduce and apply the basic concepts of modal analysis, originally developed in acoustic theory,  to describe the dynamic response of building structures against earthquakes.

The free vibration analysis of a structure involves the determination of its natural frequencies, mode shapes, and modal participation factors. Vibration mode shapes are the “shapes” in which the structure would like to oscillate (with corresponding natural frequencies), if allowed to vibrate freely. Each mode shape is an inherent property of the structure and is completely defined by its mass and stiffness. If a linear elastic structure is deformed into a linear combination of few mode shapes and released to oscillate freely, every mode will be independently present (with its own natural period) in the resulting combined time history of deformation. This is the key concept behind the notion that the combined vibrational response of any structure can be decomposed into contributions from few vibration modes, each behaving (and can be solved) independently. The degree of participation of a certain mode in the overall vibration is determined by the characteristics of excitation source(s), and spatial distributions of the mass and stiffness of the system.  But I am sure, you already knew that!

You might  also know, that the modal analysis has profound applications in diverse areas, covering civil engineering, mechanical and aeronautical engineering, industrial and manufacturing engineering, biomedical engineering, acoustics, space structures, electrical engineering, and so on. The traditional engineering designs require the structures to be lighter in weight, and yet strong-enough to sustain external excitations. These requirements can easily make them susceptible to undesirable vibrations. In such cases, a proper consideration of dynamic response becomes a key factor in design. Nowadays, the use of versatile finite element solvers have opened a whole new paradigm where the modal analysis is finding its innovative applications – from car manufacturing on one side, to the non-destructive testing of high-rise buildings on the other side – from the design of space structures to scientifically evaluating the violins and guitars, and even studding the human heart and the movement of the brain mass within the skull.

Having said that, I would now like to talk a bit more about the significance of modal analysis as applied to the structures, emphasizing the importance of underlying “heartbeat” for the structures. This can help us to:

• First, and foremost, gain an insight into the complex dynamic response of a structure. The experimentally determined natural periods, damping factors and mode shapes can provide an important information regarding the structural characteristics, which can then be used to convert the detailed structural models in to simple modal models.
• And equally important, it helps to provide a quick check on the analytical structural models. For example, if the natural period computed for the model is not what is expected, then the model data can be checked. Most common errors such as incorrect mass density, or wrong elastic modulus (both caused sometimes due to unit confusion, and sometimes wrong material type,) can be detected.
• The plot and animation of mode shapes of modal analysis, in addition to being fun to watch, can help to detect the disconnected members, structural irregularities, eccentric response, torsional modes etc.

(See Ashraf Habibullah, the President of Computers and Structures Inc, CSi, discussing the role of animations in structural engineering on this link. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SGa1wzZEUsQ)

• The detailed finite element models of structures can be calibrated with the modal data (natural periods, mode shapes etc.) which is either obtained experimentally or is statistically derived based on some large-scale experimental studies. The modal model is expected to represent the close-to-real dynamic behavior of a structure and therefore, can be used to “correct” the finite element model.
• At the design stage of new building structures, the optimum dynamic response can be easily obtained by altering the mass and stiffness distributions. Various modifications, based on the “what-if” analysis, can be proposed, which can then help in selection of an optimum lateral-load resisting system for a building.

And if that is not enough of reasons to do a modal analysis, either analytically through software, or physically through measurement, we have some more advantages:

• The modal analysis can be used to predict the response of linear elastic structures against a given dynamic loading. Similarly, it can also be used in reverse to predict the dynamic forces against a given measured vibrational response of the structure. With a known dynamic response, the fatigue life of a structure can also be predicted with a reasonable accuracy.
• The modal parameters can be used to detect the damage (cracking or yielding etc.) in structure, thus leading to structural health monitoring (SHM). Any reduction in stiffness because can be easily detected, measured and analyzed by the change in modal properties. The systematic comparison of modal properties before and after structural damage can be used to develop useful relationships for this purpose. An important example of such applications is the regular bridge monitoring and maintenance using ambient vibrations.
• And, perhaps, the most important application of modal analysis in structural engineering is in the design of control mechanisms to suppress unwanted dynamic response of structures. The analysis and application of almost all control devices (dampers, actuators, sensors etc.) require a detailed knowledge of free vibration response and modal characteristics. The engineers can play with natural frequencies, shift them to desired values, change the mode shapes, and relative contributions of different modes, to obtain the optimum structural response.

An interesting video showing various mode shapes of a 40-story RC shear-wall buildings can be seen here https://youtu.be/DnBnckVMztg. This example shows how visualizing the free vibration response can be not only fun to watch (music added!), but also helpful in developing the feel of dynamic behavior and the relative contributions of different vibration modes to the total dynamic response.

We can all appreciate that the ever-growing real-life complexities, and structural demands in buildings and infrastructure are posing new challenges to civil and structural designers. These require developing a feel for the structural response, a greater understanding and expertise in analytical and design procedures and development of out-of-the-box solutions

So, let’s start listening to the “heartbeat” of our structures, and understand what they are saying!

An event that will be introducing modern vertical design in high rise buildings while maintaining the heritage feel and local community values, Marcus Evans 6th Annual Vertical Cities is definitely a must attend event in Dubai this March. Don’t miss the Dr Naveed Anwar presenting on ensuring safety and higher performance of tall buildings for rare and strong earthquakes.

In conjunction to the event, Dr Naveed who is a CEO/Executive Director Solutions at Asian Institute of Technology at Thailand shared his thoughts on challenges faced in the ASEAN region as well as mitigate risks in the current environment.

In your opinion what are the challenges faced while introducing cutting edge vertical design in your region?

The continuous population growth, and accelerated urbanization in almost all major large cities and townships in Asia is dictating the need for vertical design and construction solution for housing, work spaces and multiple usage. In the ASEAN region, where most our work is focused, tall buildings are sprouting at an ever-faster rate. However, in many cities, lack of local design expertise, construction technologies as well as the traditional mind set are proving to be challenges to overcome for very tall and vertical solutions. In some cities, the lack of mass transit system provides transportation and commuting difficulties to vertical design clusters. The affordability and need for such hi-tech and cutting edge development is another challenge, with uncertainties in economic development, and memory of collapse of previous real estate bubbles.

How do you develop a systematic approach to avoid implementation bottlenecks?

Many of the challenges are related to the overall urban policy and planning issues, and often difficult to solve only through architectural or engineering solutions. As we work mostly on the safety and improving disaster resilience through application advanced and extended approaches such as performance based design, wind tunnel testing, this is systematically included in the design practice through engagement with the architects, structural engineers, and most importantly with the developer and even the ultimate occupants to raise the awareness of higher safety and performance expectation for tall buildings, as they house many people as well as high value assets. This awareness, and exposure to advanced design approaches and technologies helps to smoothen the adoption and application and raises the overall state of the practice and improves the performance of the vertical built environment

From your past experiences, how do you mitigate risks and deliver results that matches future trends?

Most important is to be aware of the future trends, by keeping a close tab on the developments in various parts of the world, and their present or future relevance to our region and state of local development. Often, adoption of solutions elsewhere in local context, without careful adaptation and localization presents a risk in its long-term success. Being part of an industrial interface arm of an academic institution, provides a great opportunity to do relevant research derived from partial application, and develop solutions, which are well adapted and customized for future application. We generally start a parallel research project for every important design challenge for in-depth understanding and development of solution with local relevance. This significantly reduces the risk with use of new technologies and adoption of upcoming trends and meeting future demands. My current topic in the event on integration of performance based design for strong wind and earthquakes is such an effort.

Any added views that you wish to highlight on your upcoming presentation at this event?

Currently, there is a significant interest and use of performance based design for strong and rare earthquakes. However, the design for wind is still based on traditional or conventional approaches, creating a disparity amongst the design procedures and inconsistent evaluation of expected performance and safety for the occupants, as well for the protection of valuable assets in the tall buildings. This will become more relevant in future, as buildings get taller, and are constructed in high-hazard prone area, as well to mitigate effects of climate change. My current topic in the event on integration of performance based design for strong wind and earthquakes an area of current interest to many engineers, but is not yet part of standard design practices.

How do you find the right balance while designing buildings that are aesthetically pleasing and functional?

This has always been a challenge facing the designers. Creating a balance between the aesthetes and functionality is primarily the role of the architect, and not really my specialization. However, creating balance between aesthetics and structural form and performance is something I can comment. For low rise, or conventional buildings, the architect may preprimary define the aesthetic form, whereas the structural designer may provide the appropriate structural system for safety and serviceability. However, for tall and very tall buildings, a collaborative development of esthetic form and structural form and system is essential. The building aesthetic form effects the wind forces, as well the seismic performance to a large degree. The ideal solution is to integrate structural system and make it part of the aesthetic form. This has been done successfully in many well-known buildings. An attempt to hide structure, in favor of the aesthetic form may impact the performance, as well as cost effectiveness. We often work closely with the architects, understand their aesthetic intention and concept, and offer various solution that fit into or reinforce the concept.

How do you think this conference will contribute as a knowledge platform for this industry?

Planning, conceiving, designing, developing, construction, managing, maintaining and marketing the vertical development and tall buildings requires collaboration and contribution from many experts and stakeholders. Often traditional conferences focus on one or two of these experts and stakeholders, whereas the current event is providing a platform for a wide range of experts, stakeholders including developers and clients. This event will be very useful for developing a common understanding of the issues, as well as to expose each other to the available solutions. It will also help to create network and possibly, teams or collaborations for the future projects. I am looking format to hearing from other speakers, as well interact with the participants.

Click here to read Dr. Naveed’s interview published in Bangkok Post recently.

About 6th Annual Vertical Cities in Conrad Dubai

Happening for the sixth time this year, this Marcus Evans large scale event aims to brings insights on resolving rapid urbanization in highly density cities as a solution for sustainable living. Don’t miss the opportunity of learning how to establish skyscraper buildings as a destination of choice with contemporary designs and unique commercial elements.

Do you know what a moment-curvature curve is? Dr. Naveed Anwar, Structural Engineering Expert asked this question to his post-graduate students in the Advanced Concrete Structures class. Out of forty students, one student raised his hand. He posed the same question to a group of practicing structural engineers, participating in one of the seminars where he was a speaker. He was surprised to find out that very few of them had good knowledge about it.

What is a moment-curvature curve? Dr. Naveed explained this topic in his LinkedIn post titled “Well-kept Secret in Structural Design”

Another interesting post to read related to this topic is the “Is the understanding of Member’s Cross-sectional Behavior, key to understand the Overall Structural Response?”

Engineers who are interested in this subject can also check the book “Structural Cross Sections: Analysis and Design” by Dr. Naveed and Engr. Fawad Najam which focuses on some of the key issues related to the understanding of cross-section behavior, with an emphasis on computer applications.

For those who want to get a copy of Structural Cross Sections: Analysis and Design, you may purchase the book from the following links:
AIT Solutions  | Elsevier |  Google Books |  Amazon

The cross-sections of structural members and their properties are a basic component in almost all aspects of analysis and design of structures. In fact, the primary objective of an efficient design process is to proportion the cross-sections of all structural elements to safely resist the applied load effects and actions. The cross-sectional properties are required a priori to even start the modeling and analysis process for a structure, to prepare initial cost estimates, and even to refine the basic space planning and utilization schemes. Is it then reasonable to conclude that the understanding of cross-sectional behavior of elements is the key to construct efficient, economic and resilient infrastructure? It seems that this may be the case.

The figure on the article header describes the short story of structural engineering, and shows the key position of cross-sections in the overall hierarchy of events involved in an efficient and smart transformation of “materials” in to “structures”. The properties of constituent materials manifest themselves in to the properties (e.g. stiffness and ductility) of cross-sections. The cross-sectional behavior then has a significant role in defining how the member will perform under an applied action/loading. Being an assemblage of individual members, the overall structural performance is determined by the member behavior.

This means that the response of any complex structure against applied loading can be traced back to its cross-sectional and material properties. Therefore, for an effective design of important structural components such as beams, columns and slabs, all issues related to the behavior of cross-sections and their properties need to be addressed in detail. Apart from structural aspects, the cross-sections of beams and columns also affect the planning and construction aspects of an engineering project. In planning context, they affect the space utilization, visibility, lateral clearance, water flow, wind resistance, aesthetics, etc. Similarly, the cross-section sizing and properties also affect rebar cage fabrication, formwork cost and its reuse, construction techniques, and efficiency. If one particular shape may be suitable from structural considerations, it may be unsuitable from planning or construction considerations.

The vital role of cross-sections in overall structural behavior, analysis and design also demands the development of integrated analysis approaches which should have the ability to handle all complex shapes, material behaviors and configurations. With the recent advancements in computing technologies and the applications of information technology in structural analysis and design, several computer-aided cross-section analysis packages are developed. The development of unified analysis procedures to determine axial-flexural capacities and response of cross-sections, is becoming even more important in this scenario.

The growing complexities in structural forms, architectural shapes and the use of materials with innovative properties, are some of the new challenges associated with the analysis of complex cross-sections (e.g. made of composite materials with significantly varying behaviors). For example, the determination of capacity for such a complex cross-section requires to determine stresses in individual constituent materials and then combine to get stress resultants. For a general cross-section, the flexural capacity also depends on the axial load. Due to this interaction of both actions (axial load and moment), we cannot simply determine the flexural capacity of a cross-section under uniaxial bending, as a constant number. Instead, an axial-load vs. moment interaction diagram (also referred to as capacity curve or yield curve) provides all possible combinations of both actions which would result in achievement of a pre-defined limit state. For a relatively more general case of biaxial bending, the axial-flexural capacity is defined by a 3D capacity/yield surface. This interaction of axial load and moment is an important consideration while setting-up a structural model for nonlinear analysis. For the determination of demand-to-capacity ratios for a cross-section against any loading scenario, its complete capacity curve should be defined prior to the detailed analysis.

Another (and perhaps the most important) relationship, showing the action-deformation behavior of a cross-section under flexural action, is the Moment-Curvature relationship. This relationship is the primary input in a nonlinear structural model as a load-deformation behavior assigned to a moment plastic hinge. This accounts for the nonlinear action assumed to be lumped at the location of plastic hinge. It describes the cumulative behavior of all materials and their properties as a combined cross-sectional response. Like any other action-deformation relationship, the moment-curvature curve is also described by different states, each corresponding to a physical condition of cross-section, starting from linear elastic behavior (uncracked) to near-collapse plastic behavior (fully damaged). The valuable insight obtained from the moment-curvature curve in terms of cross-sectional behavior (e.g. brittle, ductile, elasto-plastic, degrading etc.) can be used to predict the member response.

So it would seem that the cross-sectional properties of structural members are in fact the foundation of almost everything, starting from the determination of stiffness, stresses, and capacity, to the computation of response e.g. deflections, curvature and ductility. It is this key contribution of cross-sections that the retrofitting strategies for damaged structures are mainly comprised of increasing the load-carrying capacity and ductility of cross-sections of its members.

A recently published book “Structural Cross-sections: Analysis and Design” focusses on some of the key issues related to the understanding of cross-section behavior, with an emphasis on computer applications. It provides a consolidated and consistent information, insight and explanation of various aspects of cross-section response, analysis and design, irrespective of, but with due consideration to different materials. We hope that such attempts to integrate the textbook knowledge and theoretical concepts with the computer-aided analysis will contribute to better our understanding of structures, and will make the story for structural engineers more interesting, the story starting from “materials” and ending on “structures”.

Also available at Linked in:

For instance, when last April the devastating earthquake hit Nepal, Nepalese students from the Asian Institute of Technology (AIT) set their minds at work to help connect the earthquake victims with the rest of the world, using Digital Ubiquitous Mobile Broadband OLSR (DUMBO) system that uses mobile wireless network to provide Wi-Fi internet students worked tirelessly setting up a mesh network that could be used instead of the traditional networks. They also searched for e-learning and video content for the system to provide interesting educational content for primary school children as the earthquake had destroyed many important infrastructures including schools. Such efforts are often the first step in creating technologies that have the potential to be beneficial for society.

Though investment of R&D in Asia has been steadily increasing, these efforts are mostly concentrated within a few countries in the region such as Japan, China, South Korea, Singapore and India and these countries consistently are represented in the lists of top investors in innovation and technological advancement. For example China is expected to become the world’s largest R&D investor by 2020 (Asian Development Bank, 2014). But what areas of R&D are the governments and big corporations in Asia investing their time and money in? Is it focused on creating more high tech gadgets and software for profit or does it aim to solve pressing problems for people smaller organizations are facing in these countries and in the region as a whole?

A region as diverse as Asia, requires the establishment of a technological roadmap that has to come from within, one rooted in local context and reflective of the region’s diverse needs. This is obvious from the establishment of special ministries and development of STI (Science, Technology and Innovation) policy and masterplans by almost every country. However, two key factors need to be addressed that will support the creation of a smart R&D regional framework. First as many countries transition to knowledge based economies there is expected to be a shortage of highly skilled people with the right education and skills to support these economies. Second, what this means for emerging economies who are not spending as much resources on R&D is they will be left behind and will be unable to use the benefits of innovative ideas and processes, if they are to do it all on their own. And, more importantly, there seems to be a lack of culture for the academia and the industry to work together in the research and development in many of the countries in the region, a process that has been the hallmark of almost all technologically developed nations.

Collaboration is crucial between the academic institutions, where innovation thrives, and the industry, which has the resources, practical knowledge and infrastructure to make innovation become fruitful. By investing in the educational sector, especially in emerging economies we can increase the availability of developed human resources, and fuel innovation at the same time. Consequently, this allows us to steer the direction of R&D within universities, providing an incentive and encouragement to students and researchers to focus on finding strategies and creating technologies that address the region’s most. Academic institutions have and will continue to play a crucial role in generating groundbreaking research by pushing the frontiers of knowledge. Thus, partnering and investing in such institutions is an important step in our coordinated effort to progress our knowledge, skills and tools. We need to nurture this entrepreneurial and philanthropic spirit and integrate this as a goal within the regional R&D framework.

This May an initiative focused on fostering partnerships is the upcoming Collaboration for Innovation where commercial industries, academic institutions, government and international development agencies are invited to identify areas where they can support each other’s work in the future, harnessing their unique strengths, technologies and expertise to contribute in a positive manner to their communities. Such initiatives can be a part of a larger scheme to encourage the engagement of key stakeholders who are essential for driving a more conscientious innovative and collaborative R&D spirit within the region.

A regional R&D and innovation network, that includes the active collaboration between the academic institutions, the industry, the development sector and the public sector can help to shift the focus on generating ideas and innovations relevant to the needs of the Asian region, in its own context, as it has done for the western world and the developed nations.

This article was posted in LinkedIn

This increased need for housing, especially for the lower income groups is evident from three contributing and compounding factors. First, the significant growth in global population. Second and more important, the center of high growth of this population is in the countries which have lesser capacity to provide or invest in housing or in other infrastructures. Third, a lot of the new and existing population is moving to cities (urban or sub-urban areas), creating immense demands for housing, business places and supporting facilities. Traditionally in most developing countries, villages and rural areas have provided the people with local and indigenous way of living there, which has been there for centuries and that works as long as they stay in rural areas; but when they move to towns or sub-urban areas, that particular indigenous technology does not work. This creates a need to provide formal housing to them, in staggering numbers. Lack of such housing creates slums, and highly un-livable environment, leading to social imbalances and related issues.

It is obvious from so many studies that the livable housing available through market mechanisms is not affordable for the low income groups, and the housing they can afford, or is sometimes given to them is un-livable. There have been, and there still are many initiatives, by many stakeholder to come up with solution to this staggering issue. What are we missing then? Does this require re-thinking of the way housing solutions are provided? Do we need to find new ways to increase affordability and reduce the price of housing? Do we need new policies, new ways of the planning of housing communities, more innovative financial models to create viable mechanisms involving many stakeholders, newer technologies for design and construction of disaster resilient, environmentally sustainable communities?

Will the tackling of these challenges require a continued, consorted, integrated and innovative effort by the international and regional organizations, national and local governments, academia and the researchers, planners, architects and engineers, developers and contractors, financial institutions and corporate sector, and most important, the communities themselves?

Will doing all of the above solve this universal, unfulfilled basic need for billions of people, or are we missing something fundamental in solving this issue?

But now, this major event, which thankfully did not become a major disaster, seems to be slipping away from our attention and even memory. We have seen it too often that a catastrophe or disaster leads the public and the government into action, when the damage has already been done. Do we really need big shocks to wake us up? Should we not heed the warning shots and take pro-active actions?

Having moved to Thailand some 20 years ago, I’ve witnessed firsthand how most dismissed seismic risk for a country with minimal fault lines. The general public, and some experts, were confident that no significant earthquake could possibly occur in the Kingdom. At that time, building codes did not make much reference to seismic activity and no specific provisions were made to make the buildings and infrastructure safe from this risk. The eighties and the early nineties saw significant development in the country, with many infrastructure projects and tall buildings being designed and built. But most of these did not (or did not need to) consider the effects of earthquake risk.

It was only after a decade during my stay that I experienced a shocking experience. December 26 2004, a Sunday morning, proved to be a terrifying day when our apartment building started shaking. Water was running down the ducts and a crackling sound was coming clearly from the ceiling. We all rushed downstairs, utterly confused as to what was going on. The thought of an earthquake was the farthest from our minds.

What it was is simply referred to now as the Indian Ocean Earthquake, an undersea mega-thrust earthquake that started near Aceh, Indonesia, thousands of kilometers away. The earthquake triggered a tsunami and ground waves that upon reaching Bangkok were greatly amplified by the soft ground below the surface. This shook our 40-story building, and many others in Bangkok that were not designed to withstand such an event. Unfortunately, my personal experience is a far cry from what many who were by the coast of the Andaman Sea had to endure.

One of my colleagues at the AIT, Dr. Pennung Warnitchai, is one of the few leading experts and advocates who believed that Thailand was in fact prone to earthquake risk, both from within Thailand, and from neighboring countries. He and his team tirelessly led the development of earthquake risk maps and their incorporation into the Thailand Building Code, which in itself is big step towards helping to reduce the risk to human life and extensive damage to properties and communities at large. However, much more needs to be done to create built environments resilient to earthquakes and other natural disasters.

Looking ahead, first and foremost, the public should be the driving force, demanding that the buildings and structures we live and work in be safe from earthquakes and other risks, as a basic right. This needs awareness amongst all walks of life. Next, the government bodies need to make policies and regulations together with the means for enforcement, to ensure this threat is taken seriously. In the academe, experts need to prioritize more research in disaster resilience (and environmental suitability) an integral and important part of what is taught and developed into the curriculum. And then, finally, professionals and the industry responsible for designing and building the structures need to make this a part of their business strategy.

I personally feel a triple responsibility to continue to do something about this issue, being fortunate to be part of three of these four primary stakeholders. At AIT, I have the responsibility to teach a post-graduate course on the design of tall buildings and carry out research on earthquake resistant structures. As the head of the consulting and engineering software development arms of the same Institute, I have the opportunity to be closely involved in seismic safety and disaster risk reduction initiatives in several countries in the Asia-Pacific region amongst many other projects. For more than a decade now, I also have been working with a leading company, based in the United States, that develops well-recognized computer-aided tools and technologies that help engineers design buildings and structures to effectively resist the forces of earthquakes and wind.

Performance-based design (PBD), one of such technologies, is changing the traditional way of designing buildings and structures. In addition to, and sometimes instead of blindly following the prescriptive building codes that do not guarantee a safe structure, a more systematic, explicit, and simulation-based approach, such as PBD, is used to find the most suitable, safe, and cost effective solution. This however requires an advanced level of knowledge and the availability of powerful computing tools that are capable of handling such simulations, in a meaningful manner. This approach is especially suitable for evaluating and fixing millions of existing buildings that have not been designed to resist earthquakes, short of having to tear them down and rebuild.

So, let us, the public, the government, the academia, and the industry, join hands to do more about the impeding disasters from earthquakes and other natural hazards, before they occur. We know there are many challenges in achieving this enormous task, including political, social, economic, and technological. But at least, we have the tools and technologies help us. What we need is increased awareness and the continued will and commitment to improve the resilience of our communities to disasters in order to protect lives and properties and continuity of our livelihood.

Let’s not wait for another big shock to wake us all up.