Postdoctoral Fellow · Auburn University

Manoj
Adhikari, Ph.D.

Wind Engineering · Structural Reliability · Machine Learning for Infrastructure

My research quantifies how uncertainty in extreme wind hazards propagates into the safety and serviceability of buildings, and how design standards should account for it.

Manoj Adhikari
How wind directionality works

The strongest wind rarely hits a building's weakest direction.

Drag the rose to set wind direction
Extreme wind speed by direction, with the building in plan and the frame shown at right
Wind alone versus structural response, by direction
Frame cross-section, looking east

Illustrative values for one hypothetical site and building. For the computed results across six U.S. sites, see Research.

4
peer-reviewed journal articles
4
conference presentations, including ICWE16
5
years as a teaching assistant at RPI
6
years of engineering practice in Nepal
About

Background

I completed my Ph.D. in Civil Engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute under Prof. Chris Letchford. My dissertation, A Reliability-Based Framework for Performance Assessment of Low-Rise Buildings Under Directional Wind Loading, links directional extreme value analysis, wind-tunnel pressure data, dynamic response and Monte Carlo reliability in one framework. The degree is formally conferred in December 2026.

Since September 2026 I have been a postdoctoral fellow with Dr. David Roueche at Auburn University, working on wind climate, wind engineering and structural engineering, including individualized structural wind risk for residents.

Before graduate school I spent six years in practice in Nepal: assessing damage after the 2015 Gorkha earthquake with NSET, then designing reinforced-concrete and steel buildings for gravity, wind and seismic loads at Paragon Engineering.

Wind engineeringStructural reliabilityExtreme value analysisPerformance-based designML surrogatesMulti-hazard riskEarthquake engineering
Expertise

Research areas

Recent publications

Selected work

2026

Evaluation of wind directionality factors on moments and displacements of a low-rise building

Adhikari, M., & Letchford, C.W. · Engineering Structures, 369(2), 123833
JournalDOI ↗
2025

Exploring wind load effects on structures: An insight into machine learning applications

Adhikari, M., & Letchford, C.W. · Wind and Structures, 40(3), 167–177
JournalDOI ↗
2026

Reliability assessment of a low-rise structure under wind loading: Implications for serviceability reliability and the wind directionality factor

Adhikari, M., Letchford, C.W., & Li, M. · Engineering Structures
Under review
All publications
Curriculum Vitae

Manoj Adhikari

Postdoctoral Fellow, Auburn University · Ph.D. (defended), Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute; conferral December 2026

PDF version Updated October 2026
Research

Reliability-based assessment of buildings under directional wind loading

ASCE 7-22 applies a single wind directionality factor across all locations and responses. My work shows that the appropriate value depends on location, storm type and response quantity, and that dynamic effects can govern serviceability even for buildings classified as rigid.

The framework

Wind climateThunderstorm and synoptic records at six U.S. sites, separated by storm type.
Directional EVAXIMIS and de Haan/GPD fits, with superstations where data are sparse.
AerodynamicsNIST aerodynamic database pressure histories at 72 orientations.
Structural responseSAP2000 / OpenSeesPy, static and dynamic time-history analysis.
ReliabilityMonte Carlo simulation of strength and serviceability limit states.
Finding 1 · Engineering Structures, 2026

Response-based wind directionality factors

QuestionIs the single ASCE 7-22 directionality factor of 0.85 appropriate for every site and structural response?
MethodDirectional extreme value analysis (XIMIS, de Haan) of separated thunderstorm and synoptic records at six U.S. sites, combined with NIST aerodynamic pressure histories at 72 building orientations.
FindingResponse-based Kd ranged from 0.47 to 0.95 (mean 0.72); about 19% of location–response cases exceeded 0.85.
Why it mattersA fixed factor can be unconservative for some locations and responses and overly conservative for others, which supports site- and response-specific treatment.
0.47–0.95range of computed Kd
0.72mean across sites and responses
≈19%of location–response cases above 0.85

Study sites (click to highlight on the map below):

Kd was computed for eave and ridge moments and displacements of a steel portal frame, using sector-by-sector and multi-sector methods. Map positions are schematic.

Finding 2 · Under review, Engineering Structures

Serviceability reliability with dynamic response

QuestionDoes a frame that passes every ASCE 7-22 LRFD check actually meet target reliability under directional wind?
MethodMonte Carlo simulation with sectoral extreme wind speeds, wind-tunnel pressure histories, and static and dynamic time-history response.
FindingServiceability reliability of eave drift fell from β = 2.56 to 1.81 once dynamic amplification (1.05–1.38) was included.
Why it mattersThe 1 Hz rigid-building threshold and climate-only Kd may need revision; serviceability needs its own reliability targets.
2.56serviceability reliability index β
—failure probability Pf = Φ(−β)
1.05–1.38dynamic amplification, depending on damping

The steel portal frame passes every ASCE 7-22 LRFD check and is classed as rigid. With dynamic response, eave lateral displacement reliability drops from β = 2.56 to 1.81. A directionality factor derived from wind climate alone did not restore the target, which argues for reliability-based calibration.

Finding 3 · Wind and Structures, 2025

Machine learning surrogates for wind load effects

QuestionCan machine learning fill gaps in wind-tunnel databases reliably enough for design use?
MethodDecision Tree, Random Forest and XGBoost trained on NIST–UWO data to predict eave and ridge displacement and moment coefficients for missing eave heights, roof slopes and wind angles.
FindingR² up to 0.99 for interpolation (missing eave heights and wind angles); lower for roof-slope extrapolation, which the study identified as the limit.
Why it mattersSurrogates can cut testing and CFD cost, provided their limits are known before they inform engineering decisions.

Predicted load effects: maximum and minimum coefficients of eave horizontal displacement, eave moment, ridge vertical displacement and ridge moment of the portal frame.

Decision TreeRandom ForestXGBoostHyperparameter tuning

Trained on the NIST–UWO aerodynamic database. The models reach R² up to 0.99 for interpolation, with lower accuracy for roof-slope extrapolation; knowing where predictions break down is the evidence needed before AI supports design decisions.

Finding 4 · Wind and Structures, 2023

Extreme wind climatology of Nepal and northern India

QuestionNepal's building code adopted its design wind speeds from India without local analysis. Are those values supported by the region's own data?
MethodDaily maximum winds at 15 airport stations in Nepal and northern India, corrected for averaging time and terrain, fitted with Type I and Type III (POT) extreme value models, plus a superstation of 435 station-years.
FindingThe 47 m/s basic wind speed for Nepal below 3000 m is appropriate, if slightly conservative. No data exist to support 55 m/s above 3000 m, and Type III fits the composite record better.
Why it mattersIt gave Nepal its first data-based wind climatology. It also showed a 1.5 load factor implies a strength-design MRI of about 260 years, versus 700 years in ASCE 7-22.
15airport stations, Nepal and India
≈44 / ≈41 m/scomposite 50-yr basic wind speed, Type I / Type III
≈260 yrstrength MRI implied by a 1.5 wind load factor

Bars show Type I estimates of the 50-year MRI basic wind speed (3 s gust, 10 m, open terrain) at each station; ticks show the codified value. Nepali stations are highlighted. Composite analysis combined all 15 records into 435 years of annual maxima.

Finding 5 · Journal of Institute of Science and Technology, 2020

Technical resilience of post-earthquake reconstruction in Nepal

DOI ↗
QuestionDid housing reconstruction in Nuwakot district after the 2015 Gorkha earthquake meet the technical requirements for an earthquake-resilient community?
MethodExpert survey of engineers and professionals involved in the reconstruction, evaluated against the Nepal National Building Code and National Reconstruction Authority guidelines: site topography and geology, technical supervision, design and construction, training and capacity building, and use of vulnerable buildings.
FindingMost reconstructed houses were code-compliant and structurally safe, with no major design compromises; mason training and awareness programs were satisfactory, while other technical aspects needed improvement.
Why it mattersLessons for reconstruction policy, including the value of active government supervision, toward building earthquake-resilient communities.
2015Gorkha earthquake, M7.8
63,916of 77,462 eligible houses in Nuwakot reconstructed by May 2020
5technical aspects of resilience evaluated

Adhikari, M., Bhattarai, A. R., & Thapa, R. (2020). My first peer-reviewed paper, drawing on post-earthquake field and reconstruction work in Nepal.

Future research program

Integrating computational and experimental approaches for reliability-based wind design

My long-term goal is to develop the science and tools needed to design and adapt buildings and infrastructure for a changing climate of extremes, combining hazard modeling, structural reliability, laboratory testing and field data in support of performance-based wind engineering.

Thrust 1Computational

Nonstationary, storm-type-resolved wind hazard for design

Hazard models that separate thunderstorm downbursts, extratropical and tropical cyclones, represent their directional structure, and let parameters evolve with climate covariates and projections. Methods combine XIMIS, peaks-over-threshold and superstation analysis with Bayesian nonstationary models, synthetic tropical cyclone datasets and downscaled climate output.

How will shifts between convective and synoptic events change design wind speeds and directionality factors? How should lifetime exceedance probabilities be defined under a nonstationary hazard?

Thrust 2Computational

Reliability-consistent design factors for performance-based wind engineering

Reliability-based calibration of load factors, directionality factors and acceptance criteria for both strength and serviceability limit states, across building classes rather than a single prototype. Time-dependent reliability over a building’s service life will let design targets account for future hazard, and studies of the dynamic behavior of nominally rigid low-rise and long-span light-frame buildings will test where current code criteria fall short.

Goal: evidence that informs the next generation of ASCE 7 provisions and performance-based wind design.

Thrust 3Experimental

Experimental validation of computational predictions

Applying wind-induced structural demands, derived from aerodynamic databases and computational models, as equivalent loads to laboratory specimens, and comparing measured response with predictions to improve understanding of dynamic behavior. Longer term: developing specialized wind-loading capabilities alongside structural testing facilities, and building light-frame wood specimens to extend the work beyond steel low-rise systems.

Builds on hands-on experience in RPI’s hydraulics, structural and wind tunnel laboratories.

Thrust 4Field data

Field-calibrated directional reliability

Calibrating directionality and reliability parameters, currently derived largely from climatology, against observed building performance. Emerging methods for estimating near-surface wind speed and direction from post-disaster damage surveys and imagery provide directional wind information, and observer-level uncertainty in field damage assessments will be treated explicitly.

Draws on my post-earthquake damage assessments in Nepal after the 2015 Gorkha earthquake.

Thrust 5ComputationalMulti-hazard

Compound extremes and regional resilience with physics-informed surrogates

Hurricanes combine wind, rain intrusion and surge; convective storms bring wind, hail and flash flooding. I will develop machine learning surrogates constrained by aerodynamics and structural mechanics, trained on wind tunnel, CFD and field data, that plug into Monte Carlo and multi-hazard risk frameworks at regional scale. Applications include community loss and recovery under compound events, prioritizing retrofit and adaptation investments, extending the framework to multiple structural systems and toward combined wind and seismic risk, and transferring hazard and fragility knowledge to data-scarce regions such as Nepal and the wider Global South through superstation methods and transfer learning.

Applications in practice

The same probabilistic analysis, hazard modeling and computational methods apply directly to infrastructure risk and energy-sector projects, catastrophe modeling, and risk-informed design and retrofit decisions in industry.

Planned funding: NSF CAREER and CMMI, NIST National Windstorm Impact Reduction Program and disaster resilience programs, NOAA, and industry and insurance partners, with experimental validation at NSF NHERI facilities.

Publications

Papers, talks and the dissertation

Full list with DOIs. Citation counts and the latest entries are on Google Scholar.

Experience

Research, teaching and professional practice

Design practice and disaster reconnaissance in Nepal, doctoral research in the U.S., and now postdoctoral research at Auburn.

Teaching

Teaching experience and interests

From 2021 to 2026 I served as a teaching assistant at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute for four undergraduate courses, carrying the same core responsibilities in each.

Responsibilities in every course

Recitations

Led problem-solving recitation sessions independently.

Laboratory supervision

Ran and supervised laboratory sessions, guiding students through experiments and software exercises.

Office hours & mentoring

Held regular office hours and mentored students on coursework and design projects.

Grading

Graded homework assignments and examinations, with feedback to students.

Exam proctoring

Proctored examinations and supported exam preparation.

Instructional support

Helped develop instructional materials and delivered lectures when needed.

Courses

Structural Analysis

Undergraduate course · all core duties, plus SAP2000 instruction for structural modeling and analysis.

Applied Hydrology and Design

Undergraduate course · all core duties, plus HEC-HMS instruction for hydrologic modeling.

Fluid Mechanics

Undergraduate course · all core duties, including laboratory supervision.

Engineering Design

Undergraduate course · all core duties, including mentoring student design teams.

Teaching interests

Undergraduate

Structural AnalysisMechanics of MaterialsSteel DesignConcrete DesignTimber & Masonry DesignStructural DynamicsProbability & Statistics for EngineersFluid MechanicsHydraulics & Hydrology

Graduate and new courses

Wind EngineeringStructural Reliability & RiskEarthquake EngineeringInfrastructure Under Extreme EventsMachine Learning for Infrastructure Decisions

As a first-generation international graduate student, I want my classroom and research group to welcome students from every background, and to train them in both mechanics and data science.

Service & community

Peer review, conferences and professional societies

Contributing to the wind and structural engineering community as a reviewer, speaker and member.

Journal peer review · 4 manuscripts

As listed on my CV
Journal of Structural Engineering (ASCE)3 manuscripts · 2026
Wind and Structures (Techno-Press)1 manuscript · 2026

Manuscript titles are confidential; review topics are shown below.

Conference presentations

Professional memberships

ASCE

American Society of Civil Engineers

NEC

Nepal Engineering Council

NEA

Nepal Engineers' Association

Continuing education & languages

Online courses

Applications in Engineering Mechanics, Georgia Institute of Technology (Coursera), 2019

Mechanics of Materials IV: Deflections, Buckling, Combined Loading & Failure Theories, Georgia Institute of Technology (Coursera), 2019

Languages

EnglishNepaliHindi
Contact

Contact

I welcome inquiries about faculty and research positions, research collaborations and invited talks.

Email
manozadhikari28@gmail.com
Auburn email
maa0186@auburn.edu
Phone
+1 518-960-7651
Location
Dept. of Civil & Environmental Engineering, Auburn University, Auburn, AL
Google Scholar
citations?user=ia4XW-YAAAAJ
LinkedIn
in/manoj-adhikari-b71523110
ORCID
0000-0003-0730-2709
ResearchGate
profile/Manoj-Adhikari-5

Positions of interest

  • Tenure-track faculty positions in structural, wind and infrastructure resilience engineering
  • Research roles in industry and national laboratories: infrastructure risk, catastrophe modeling and multi-hazard resilience
Curriculum vitae (PDF)