Introduction: With over three decades in structural engineering, Pradeep Nair, Senior Vice President, Reliance Industries has witnessed India’s industrial landscape evolve from conservative, code-bound construction to a fast-track, performance-led era. Nair belongs to a generation that learnt design on drawing boards and now delivers mega-facilities through digital twins and modularised construction. His perspective bridges two eras: one rooted in caution and compliance, the other driven by optimisation, speed, and strategic value. In this wide-ranging conversation with SSMB, he reflects on how engineering has shifted from safety-first to strategy-first, why steel has become a business enabler, how Indian codes must evolve, and what young engineers must cultivate to shape the next generation of structures.
You have had an illustrious career spanning over three decades in structural engineering. What, according to you, have been the most significant shifts in the design and execution of industrial and commercial structures?
Having spent over 33 years in the field, I have witnessed a remarkable transformation in how we approach structural design. In the early years of my career, the primary emphasis was on strict code compliance and conservative design. The overriding objective was safety, ensuring that every structure was stable, robust, and reliable under all conceivable conditions. We were trained to design with large margins, often erring on the side of over-conservatism, because tools were limited and uncertainty was high.
That mindset was appropriate for its time. Engineering then was about proving that a structure would not fail. The success of a design was measured almost entirely in terms of safety and compliance. Over the years, however, the context in which we operate has changed dramatically. Projects have become larger, timelines tighter, and business stakes far higher. Today, while safety and compliance remain non-negotiable, they are no longer the only metrics. Clients, project owners, and management teams now expect structures to be safe and economical, reliable and fast to build, robust and optimised.
The real shift has been from “designing to be safe” to “designing to perform within constraints.” Structural engineering has become an exercise in intelligent balance between safety, cost, speed, and constructability. The challenge for senior engineers today is not merely to satisfy the code, but to extract the maximum value from it. We are expected to deliver designs that meet every regulatory requirement while minimising material, compressing schedules, and aligning with business objectives.
This evolution has turned structural engineering into a strategic function. We are no longer just the custodians of safety; we are contributors to project economics. Developing the ability to optimise without compromising reliability has become one of the most critical professional skills in the current era.
“We have moved from designing for safety alone to designing for performance within real-world constraints.”
Over the years, you have transitioned from hands-on design work to leading large-scale projects at Reliance Industries. How has your engineering approach evolved through this journey?
When I began my career, we did not have the luxury of advanced software tools. Every calculation was manual. We relied heavily on handbooks, charts, and engineering judgement. Drawings were drafted painstakingly by hand on drawing boards. A single design iteration could take days. If something changed, we often had to start again from scratch.
From those days, the industry has progressed tremendously. Today, we have access to powerful analysis software, parametric tools, and digital coordination platforms. What once took three to four weeks, producing a complete structural scheme or a detailed drawing set can now be achieved in a matter of days.
But this speed has also changed the role of the engineer. At a leadership level, my focus has shifted from “doing the calculations myself” to “designing the system in which calculations happen.” My responsibility is to ensure that engineering workflows are efficient, that design teams are aligned, and that every decision supports the project’s larger goals.
In large steel structures, three parameters dominate every conversation: time, cost, and constructability. A technically elegant solution that delays the project by months is no longer acceptable. Likewise, a low-cost option that complicates erection or compromises future flexibility can be a strategic mistake.
Today, I look at projects holistically. I ask: How does this design affect the schedule? How will it be built? Can fabrication and foundation work proceed in parallel? Will this structure allow future expansion? Engineering excellence is no longer isolated from project management or business outcomes, it is embedded within them.
“My role today is not to compute faster, but to ensure that every design decision aligns with time, cost, and constructability.”
Sidebar:
With your extensive understanding of both Indian and international steel design codes, how do you ensure design optimisation, code compliance, and constructability in large-scale projects?
One of the persistent challenges we face in India is the infrequency with which our design codes are updated. The primary governing code for structural steel, IS 800:2007, is nearly two decades old. A revised version has been in draft for some time, but the gap between revisions remains significant.
In contrast, American and European codes are updated every three to four years. This ensures that they reflect current research, new materials, evolving construction practices, and lessons from failures and testing.
Despite this, code compliance remains our top priority at Reliance. It is the foundation of safe, credible engineering. However, when Indian codes lack clarity on certain aspects, particularly in complex or non-standard situations, we supplement them with international standards such as AISC or Eurocodes.
The strength of these codes lies in their research-backed, test-based philosophy. They are built on experimental data and continuous validation. Referring to them allows us to bridge gaps, validate assumptions, and ensure that our designs remain globally aligned.
I constantly encourage my teams to go beyond the minimum. When there is uncertainty, I ask them to consult international literature, technical papers, and validated references. This approach not only improves design quality but also cultivates a culture of continuous learning. It prevents engineering from becoming mechanical and keeps our thinking globally relevant.
“Codes should not limit thinking; they should anchor it in knowledge.”
How do you view the current Indian steel design standards in terms of clarity, adaptability, and alignment with global practices?
Indian design codes have undoubtedly progressed over the years. When IS 800:2007 was introduced, it marked a major paradigm shift from the working stress method of IS 800:1984 to the limit state design approach. This brought India closer to international design philosophies.
However, the transition was not without challenges. Certain sections of the code, particularly Chapter 12, left room for multiple interpretations. In practice, this meant that different engineers and sometimes contractors interpreted clauses in ways that suited their objectives. This occasionally led to inconsistencies and optimisation beyond the original intent of the code.
Such ambiguity is risky. Codes must be precise, unambiguous, and uniformly interpretable. They should not become instruments of convenience. That said, there is a positive shift underway. Over the last few years, the Bureau of Indian Standards has become more proactive. A new draft of IS 800 is already in circulation. India is also introducing dedicated codes for seismic detailing and composite steel construction, with the latter being revised after nearly four decades.
These developments indicate a gradual but steady alignment with global standards. Indian codes are beginning to adopt research-based methodologies similar to those used internationally. With sustained momentum, I believe our design standards will evolve into a framework that is clearer, more adaptable, and globally equivalent.
“Codes must guide uniformly, ambiguity is the enemy of safe optimisation.”
Are there any specific gaps in the current Indian steel design codes, or updates you would like to see, to better support modern steel construction, especially for industrial projects?
The most pressing gap, in my view, is the absence of a structured, time-bound revision cycle. In today’s world, waiting 15–20 years between code updates is simply not practical. Construction practices, materials, fabrication technologies, and analytical methods are evolving far too quickly for such long intervals.
What we need is a predictable rhythm, ideally a three-to-four-year cycle, where the core philosophy of the code remains stable, but a portion of it is refreshed to reflect industry advancements. Think of it as evolutionary rather than revolutionary change. Perhaps 70–80 per cent of the code remains untouched, while 20–30 per cent is updated based on new research, field experience, and global benchmarks.
Another crucial aspect is the integration of construction realities into design recommendations. Many clauses are technically correct on paper but do not always translate well on site. A detail that is structurally sound but practically unbuildable leads to inefficiency, delays, and sometimes unsafe improvisation during execution.
If designers, fabricators, and site engineers are involved in the code-development process, we can embed constructability into the DNA of our standards. This would result in designs that are not only safe and optimised, but also realistic and economical to build.
Regular, structured updates would also foster a disciplined design culture. Engineers would no longer “work around” outdated clauses. Instead, they would evolve with the code, just as their international counterparts do.
“Codes must evolve with the industry, otherwise the industry evolves around the codes.”
How crucial is it for clients and engineers to understand material traceability, inspection protocols, and welding standards, especially for mission-critical steel structures?
It is absolutely critical. As design engineers, we can produce highly optimised, sophisticated structures. But if the materials used on site and the workmanship applied do not meet the specified standards, the design exists only on paper.
Material traceability is fundamental. If we specify E350 grade steel, there are multiple sub-grades like Grade B, B0, C each with different impact properties and suitability for various conditions. The correct sub-grade must be selected based on the structure’s criticality, loading, and environment. If a contractor fabricates a mission-critical structure without verifying this, the entire safety framework is compromised.
Welding is equally vital. Along with bolting, it is one of the two primary methods of connecting steel members. Each weld type has its own performance expectations and inspection protocols. For example, Continuous Joint Penetration (CJP) welds require 100 per cent ultrasonic testing, whereas fillet welds do not. Over-testing wastes time and money; under-testing risks failure.
Design engineers must therefore extend their role beyond calculations and drawings. They need to understand fabrication, inspection, and quality assurance. They must actively guide site teams, clarify intent, and ensure that what is built truly reflects what was designed.
“A perfect design collapses if the wrong steel or the wrong weld carries it.”
Are you observing a growing trend in modular steel construction and the adoption of digital delivery tools like BIM and parametric modelling?
Very much so. Modularisation has become a strategic imperative, particularly at Reliance. The industry is facing manpower constraints, rising safety expectations, and increasing project complexity. Modular construction addresses all three.
In large petrochemical projects, our structures integrate steel frames, piping, and equipment. The emerging strategy is to fabricate and assemble these as complete modules off-site, test them in controlled environments, and then lift them onto foundations. This drastically reduces on-site labour, improves quality, and enhances safety.
A few years ago, we executed a 5,000-tonne single modular lift in one of our major projects, complete with equipment and piping. That project demonstrated what is possible when engineering, fabrication, and logistics are aligned.
Today, BIM and parametric modelling are central to this approach. They allow us to simulate assembly, detect clashes, optimise sequences, and ensure that what is fabricated fits precisely on site. Digital tools have transformed modular construction from an ambition into a repeatable methodology.
We are seeing this mindset spread across the industry. Modular steel construction is no longer exceptional, it is becoming the new normal for complex industrial facilities.
“Modularity is not a technique; it is a new construction philosophy.”
With increasing emphasis on decarbonisation, how do you see structural steel design contributing to sustainability, particularly in heavy industries?
Structural steel offers a level of adaptability that concrete simply cannot match. In industrial environments, processes evolve, equipment changes, and layouts are frequently modified. Concrete structures often become waste when such changes occur. Steel structures, on the other hand, can be dismantled, reinforced, reconfigured, and reused.
Bolted steel connections allow us to disassemble entire frames. If a structure cannot handle new loads, we can strengthen it with additional plates or sections. This flexibility drastically reduces material wastage over a project’s lifecycle.
From a sustainability standpoint, this adaptability is powerful. It aligns perfectly with the principles of circular construction. Steel’s recyclability and reuse potential make it inherently suited to long-life, evolving industrial facilities.
Whenever we anticipate future change, we actively promote steel. It allows us to build not just for today’s requirements, but for tomorrow’s uncertainties.
“Sustainability is not only about emissions, it is about not throwing buildings away.”
Having mentored numerous engineers over the years, what key qualities should young structural professionals cultivate today?
The foremost quality is passion. Passion for design and passion for construction. Structural engineering is not just about analysis; it is about seeing your ideas take physical form.
Young engineers today have unprecedented access to tools and information. Software can generate results instantly. But tools alone do not create engineers. What matters is curiosity, creativity, and the desire to understand how things are actually built.
I encourage young professionals to go to site, observe fabrication, question details, and explore alternatives. Push boundaries. Do not be satisfied with being merely correct, aim to be innovative.
India has the opportunity to build some of the world’s most compelling industrial and commercial structures. It will be this generation’s creativity and passion that turns that potential into reality.
“Software gives answers. Passion gives direction.”
SSMB POV:
Pradeep Nair’s journey mirrors the transformation of Indian construction itself, from cautious compliance to strategic engineering. In his world, steel is not a section size; it is a business decision. Codes are not constraints; they are evolving knowledge systems. Sustainability is not an add-on, it is embedded in adaptability, reuse, and time. For SSMB’s readers, this interview is a reminder that the future of steel lies not just in strength, but in intelligence. The next era of construction will belong to those who design not only for load, but for life.
