In the recent past, a concern regarding the ongoing construction of the Temple of the Vedic Planetarium in Sridham Mayapur was raised within our community. As a result, this led to a view by some devotees that the Main Temple Dome might be structurally unstable.
This issue was addressed in detail in a pre GBC meeting held in Mumbai on Oct 19th 2013, wherein the Structural Engineer, the Contractor and the Architect in presence of the TOVP Managing Director and Ex Site Supervisor had a comprehensive interface which elucidated upon the fact that the dome is absolutely sound. Its engineering design and current stage of construction is complying with all ISO regulations.
The view of the dome’s instability stemmed from raw information which trickled out of the routine channels of the construction team but lacked the proper context. The issue was predominantly about the construction methodology of the main dome, and not regarding its structural design.
Following is a communication between the TOVP and the GBCom, which further elaborates the issue.
To the GBCom Chairman,
Upon the request of Sadbhuja Prabhu, I, Vilasini devi dasi, (serving in the capacity of the head architect for the TOVP) have been asked to send you the pre GBC Meeting Minutes held on Oct 19th 2013 regarding the Dome Stability.
Following is a brief synopsis of the same:
1. The well-meaning concerns poised by Pundarik Govinda Prabhu regarding the dome and superstructure instability, stemmed from work- in- progress letters from Gammon. They (Gammon) undoubtedly agreed those letters to be redundant since appropriate action was already taken to satisfy their routine queries and that there was no truth to the accusations made.
2. The deliberation was to zero down on a construction methodology for pouring of the dome that would best suit a) the timeline and money of Gammon contract, b) increased stability during the construction period.
3. The Structural Consultant is one of the highly reputed professional in India and his designs are complying with all ISO regulations.
4. Gammon is the premier construction company currently, and are executing the work per ISO standards.
5. A follow up meeting on the above subject has taken place in Delhi on Fri, Oct 25th 2013 wherein further details were discussed between Structural Consultant, Architects and Gammon. The meeting touched upon the following points:
a. Casting of the first ring of the dome, will add maximum strength at the base, which will prove the safety of the dome DURING construction.
b. Use of tie bolts at the time of construction.
c. Jump form of shuttering to be adopted.
d. Gammon will revert to TOVP with a detailed proposal for concrete pouring, and its impacts if any on time and money.
Should there be any further questions, please feel free to contact me Vilasini dd (varsha108@gmail.com) or Sadbhuja dasa (sadbhuja.das@pamho.net)
Minutes of the meeting, October 19th 2013
Project Name:
Temple of the Vedic Planetarium, ISKCON, Mayapur.
Attendees:
ISKCON
Gauranga Das
Ananda Gopal Das
Pundarikaskha Govinda Das
ToVP
Sadbhuja Das Managing Director, TOVP
Vilasini DD Head Architect, TOVP
STRUCTURAL CONSULTANT
B.B.Chaudhuri Structural Consultant, PDB
GAMMON INDIA LIMITED (GIL)
P.V. Prasanth COO -Building Division, GIL
Subhankar Sil Project Manager, GIL
Sameer Malvankar Dy. Manager, Engineering Department, GIL
Mukund Butala Sr. GM, Engineering Department, GIL
S. W. Deshpande Vice President, Engineering Department, GIL
Date:
19th October 2013
Venue:
Srila Prabhupada Conference Hall, ISKCON, Juhu
Items discussed:
PV Prashant :
Discussion Points :
1. Gammon serving as a contractor. Scope of work of a contractor is to study: a) GFC (Good for Construction) drawings, b) Detail Drawings and c) Specifications.
2. After which Gammon’s Job Description: a) Create Methodology for execution of work b) Actual Site execution
3. Ensure the building safety at construction phase
Topic - Dome :
Discussion Points :
1. Drawing from PDB given in full to Gammon to chalk out – Sequence of work, methodology, material
2. Discussion with PDB whether to construct Dome:
Ring wise
Bottom to top
3. Sequence is determined by resources – Manpower, equipment, finances, as per Mr. Prashant
Topic - Interface :
Discussion Points :
Protocol of one-point interface
Subhankar Sil
Discussion Points :
1. P V Prashant (Spokesperson ) will talk on behalf of Gammon
2. Methodology of Construction proposed by Gammon was 1.2 m concrete per lift
3. Mr. B.B Chaudhuri mentioned instead of 1.2 m go for 0.6 m concrete in two parts each
Result -> Increased (Time + Cost )
Govinda Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Letter from Butala on July 9th, 2013 – pt 1 and 3 – (Doubts about the ring, strengths, or column ) Answered by Prashant satisfactorily
Gauranga Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Question: Is load of dome easily taken by structure?
Mr. B.B.Chaudhuri :
Discussion Points :
Presentation addressing above question:
1. Expressing concerns that in spite of not been given the time of building design, the weights were considered and over calculated.
2. Analysis of the building was done march 2010
3. Lack of data - No data on Shikhar & Chandelier was available when designing began.
4. March 2010 first set of the piling drawings were made and it was updated regularly
5. Shikhar Load: Inner load=300Kg/m
Outer Face: 800 Kg/m
Chandelier - 24 points- 2MTeach=48
Static Load: increases with rotating
The geometry is most important while designing the dome. All loads have been well considered.
Sadbhuja Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Besides, we have reduced the weight of the structure with carbon fiber chandelier, acoustic panels, GRCL
2. The pressure gets fizzled out with the use of the rods inside
3. Find out a balance for a win-win situation
4. Meeting on 25th October, 2013 to sort out issues
Pundarik Govinda Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Doubts that Gammon is raising
2. Lot of revision by PDB
3. Finishing works – doubts mentioned in letter
Subhankar Sil :
Discussion Points :
Letter for design proof checking was drafted in consultation with Sri Pundari Govinda Das. He has asked this letter to convince ISKCON management for 3rd party checking which he had consent.
Pundarik Govinda Das :
Discussion Points :
I had to do it because I wanted written concerns, not just verbal.
Gauranga Das :
Discussion Points :
Question to Mr. B.B.Chaudhuri: Are loads considered for finishing works?
Mr. B.B.Chaudhuri :
Discussion Points :
1. My mandate – 1000 year life load factor to be used
2. Steel skeleton has nothing to do with the structure. It is only to facilitate the geometry.
3. Remove SS and no harm is done to the structure
Subhankar Sil :
Discussion Points :
Contractor is the soft target in the event of mishap; hence we wanted to clear all apprehension.
Mr. P.V.Prashant :
Discussion Points :
For activities during construction – I have to be extra safe
Mr. B.B.Chaudhuri :
Discussion Points :
Dome concreting to be done in 600mm layer
Or
Dome concreting to be done in 1200mm layer with provision of tie rods
Climbing formwork to be used.
Sadbhuja Das :
Discussion Points :
Details will be worked out with Gammon, Mr. B.B.Chaudhuri and Architects at Oct 25th Meeting.
Gauranga Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Mr. BB Choudhury is a Competent structural engineer
2. Gammon – well executed job so far
3. All are on the same page regarding safety
4. Person designing is aware of our construction methodology
5. Work out difference of opinions regarding details
6. Although it may have few issues, Gammon is willing to work around
Pundarik Govinda Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Why adding drill anchor fasteners and bolting? Adding more rods and plates. 24-32 rods
2. 50 level ring beam 750 x 750. Will take load of all columns. (Earlier drawing had 1200 depth.)
3. Planetarium
4. Breaking of staircases at dome level
5. Finishing load on Kalash
6. Auditorium RCC gallery: The team is not going for RCC gallery for auditorium
7. Staircase in Temple Hall: was asked to be broken
BB Chaudhari :
Discussion Points :
1. Anchor fasteners were used since at that stage of construction, we recommended it. – Situational
Vilasini dd :
Discussion Points :
1. Planetarium Auditorium Gallery not being RCC was a conscious decision.
2. Planetarium projection equipment keeps getting updated every year. At the time of building completion, planetarium vendor will be finalized, thus theater details will correspond to vendor.
3. Lightweight material to be used was a conclusive point made in Oct 2008 meeting.
Gauranga Das :
Discussion Points :
1. Some things are in writing and some oral. But Email by Mr. Butala on dated July 09, 2013 (Point No. 3) is now redundant, since action has already been taken.
Mr. Deshpande :
Discussion Points :
1. Clarified that the discussion with Gammon, B B Chaudhuri, and Gauranga Das till today were focused on the design compatibility with construction sequences, methodology proposed by Gammon.
2. Mr. B B Chaudhuri vide his letter dated Aug 26,2013, confirmed that the designs of various structural component of dome including supporting members are safe and the height of pour need to be restricted to 0.6meter in place of 1.2 meter. Pour height related issues needs to be resolved in the next meeting to be held in New Delhi on 25.10.2013.
3. The independent check by 3rd party will be a client’s call, in view of the above discussion.
Conclusions by the GBC:
1. Gammon and Mr. B.B Chaudhuri write a letter mentioning the structural stability of the dome.
2. Independent audit.
3. Report of 25th October, 2013 to be sent to GBC - The height of the concrete slab for dome will be decided.
4. Follow up of this issue could done by forming a committee consisting of 6 members (2 from TOVP, 2 from GBC, 2 from Subcommittee)
Comments