seismic evaluation of educational institutions

7/28/2019 Seismic evaluation of Educational institutions

1/10

Seismic evaluation of Educational institutions 2012

National Institute Of Technology, Hazratbal 1

ABSTRACT

Natural phenomenon like earthquakes and cyclones become disasters because of lack of

awareness on how to construct affordable disaster resistant houses by using viable technologies.It has been observed that this ignorance results in the violation of the basic rules of good

construction and hazard resistant technology leading to deaths, injury and un warranted hardship

to the people along with huge losses in terms of houses and infrastructure. In addition to the

direct losses caused by the disaster it has been observed that the people suffer self- inflicted

losses out of ignorance and under the influence of the un scientific myths that there was no future

in their houses built out of stone , wood and mud.

The Kashmir region has witnessed frequent earthquakes in the past. But the earthquake of 2005

demonstrated how extremely vulnerable the buildings in this region are. It also showed that when

people build houses and institutions, they dont seem to be aware of the threats posed by the

earthquakes.

As has been observed in other earthquakes, people are unable to assess the root causes of

earthquake destruction. The 2005 earthquake shook the confidence of many Kashmiris in local

building materials, and even in the techniques they had been using to build houses for many

years. The immediate reaction has been a strong desire to abandon traditional architecture and

building system and adopt cement and steel based construction, without understanding the long

term consequences as well as the viability of such introduced systems in the local context.

Some structures were totally destroyed by the earthquake. But many more were left standing,

either damaged to varying degrees or with no damage at all. People in slightly damaged houses

are likely to simply patch up the damage and continue living in them. But those in moderately

damaged buildings often think that these are beyond repair and thus want to demolish and

rebuild them. Two main questions arise; 1) Is it really necessary to tear such a building down?

2) Are there enough resources and adequate knowledge to build a new earthquake resistant

structure? The solution rather an immediate answer to these popping questions lies in the seismic

evaluation of existing structures.


2/10



Seismic codes for buildings were developed very recently in 1960s.Many buildings which exist

today have not been designed as per codal requirements are earthquake prone. Strengthening of

existing structures is far more important than going for construction of new structures that are

earthquake resistant. We limit our work to evaluation and strengthening of educational buildings.

Educational buildings fall in the category of important buildings and population vulnerable is

youth which is highly undesirable.

Seismic performance evaluation is a formal procedure to qualify and quantify the level of actual

or anticipated seismic performance associated with the direct damage to an individual building

subjected to a specified ground shaking.


3/10



OBJECTIVES

Broader objectives of our study / research are:

1) To determine seismic stability criteria of existing educational institutions.2) To characterize educational institution buildings on the basis of seismic vulnerability. In

other words determine the degree of risk of educational institutions.

3) Primary and detailed seismic survey of educational buildings.4) Identify typical architectural and structural flaws that have been observed in past

earthquakes leading to failure and falling of structural components.

5) To frame or formulate general guidelines for safe seismic design of educationalbuildings.

6) To identify the feasible and necessary methods that can be used for seismic up-gradationof educational buildings.

7) Spread awareness among people regarding safety of educational institutions againstearthquakes.

8) Last but not least; contribute towards the development of society on social, economicaland technical grounds.


4/10



JUSTIFICATION FOR CHOOSING THE TOPIC

The study conducted by Roger Bilham, a seismologist and professor of geology at the University

of Colorado at Boulder US, states that the major earthquake with magnitude 9 is likely to occurin Kashmir valley anytime from now. Professor Roger has already issued a warning about the

major earthquake in Kashmir valley so the responsibility lies on us to work towards making our

buildings earthquake resistant.

Moreover the existing structures prone to earthquakes outnumber recently

constructed structures. More damage can be prevented by retrofitting of existing earthquake

prone structures than going for building of new structures that are earthquake resistant. Here , we

limit our evaluation to educational institutions because they fall under the category of important

buildings. Also their importance increases from the fact that their collapse affects the younger

generation and children.


5/10



METHODOLOGY

Seismic evaluation methodology implies vulnerability analysis of existing structures. A simple

method to carry out vulnerability assessment involves visual evaluation of the building from theviewpoint of damage that it could suffer in the event of an earthquake. This will help in deciding

the retrofitting requirements for the building.

Methodologies available for the evaluation of existing structures can be divided into two

categories:

(1)Quantitative method (2) Analytical methodMethodology that we are going to adopt will be qualitative, based on the background informationavailable of the building and its construction site, which requires some or few documents like

drawings, past performance of the similar buildings under seismic activities, visual inspection

report.

The strategy for seismic evaluation based on visual and survey report will involve:

1) Selection of various educational institutions and collection of necessary data.2) Preliminary and simple survey by site visit and visual inspection.3) Detailed evaluation by comparing the various structural and architectural features with

codal provisions.

4) Using Rapid screening procedure (RSP). The Rapid Screening Procedure (RSP) is aimedfor identifying potentially hazardous buildings in the study area, without going into

detailed analysis. RSP utilizes a methodology based on visual inspection of a building

and noting the structural configuration. The methodology begins with identifying the

primary structural lateral load resisting system and materials of the building. The

method generates a Structural Score S, which consists of a series of scores and

modifiers based on building attributes that can be seen during building survey. The

Structural Score S is related to probability of the building sustaining life - threatening


6/10



damage should a severe earthquake in the region occur. A low S score suggests that the

building is vulnerable and needs detailed analysis, whereas a high S score indicates

that the building is probably safe for defined earthquake loads. Thus, the expression for

structural score is:

S (Structural score) = BSH (Basic Structural Hazard) + PMFs (Performance

Modification Factor).

5) Using specified codal tests and checks wherever required.6) Grouping or classifying buildings as seismically adequate or inadequate.7) Framing a comparative report on seismic status of educational institutions.8) Development of general model of guidelines after complete seismic evaluation.


7/10



Flow chart of methodology

Selection of educational buildings

for seismic evaluation.

Simple survey

Preliminary survey Detailed survey, tests.

Comparing results of survey and

tests with general guidelines.

Evaluating seismic performance on

the basis of comparison.

Solutions provided/ revision of

guidelines/modification of

constructional philosophy.


8/10



WORK DONE

The project work is in its infancy. The project chosen by us involves ideas which havent been

covered in any of our courses. For that matter we have to build our ideas before we proceed with

the project work. However, inspite of that we have done some preliminary work as mentioned

below:

Earmarked various educational institutions for seismic evaluation. Collected necessary required literature and past history of seismic evaluation. Formulated a general checklist guideline for rapid screening of buildings. The guideline

checklist is attached with the report along with their pictorial representation for a general

building in Kashmir.


9/10



LITERATURE REVIEW

Earthquake engineering is the most fast growing field of civil engineering. Tremendous research

has been carried out for earthquake related problems and their solutions. In this regard seismicevaluation of buildings has a formidable importance as it helps in determining the seismic

performance of existing structures. Some noteworthy research in this regard is as follows:

1) Manual for restoration and retrofitting of rural structures in Kashmir. A research carriedout by Govt. of India in association with UNDP and UNESCO that underlines the

guidelines for reducing vulnerability of existing structures in earthquake affected areas of

Jammu and Kashmir.

2) Manual for hazard resistant construction in India; prepared by Govt. of India, UNDP inassociation with ISDR, USAID, DFID.

3) Experimental study for higher seismic performance of masonry walls in developingcountries. A research performed by K.Yoshimura, K.Kikuchi, M.Kuroki,

H.Nonaka,K.T.Kim & L.Ma.

4) Simple ways to earthquake safety for Jammu and Kashmir: An introduction to simple andaffordable steps of earthquake resistant buildings to get maximum safety at minimum

cost. A research performed by Building Materials & Technology Promotion Council;

Ministry OF Urban Employment & Poverty Alleviation , Govt. of India, New Delhi.

5) Seismic upgrading for public school buildings in Taiwan: A research performed on 3621elementary and high schools in Taiwan by Fu Pei Hsiao, Shyh-Jiann Hwang, Wen- Yu

Chein, National Centre for Research on Earthquake Engineering, National Taiwan

University.

6) Seismic evaluation of Marine Elementary School ; prepared for Albany Unified districtAlbany CA, November 2012 by R.P.Gallagher Associates Inc, Structural engineers

Oakland, CA.

7) Seismic evaluation and strengthening of existing structures Dr. Durgesh C. Rai,Department of civil engineering, IIT Kanpur.

8) Rapid structural and Non-structural assessment of school and hospital buildings inSAARC countries by SAARC Disaster Management Centre, New Delhi.


10/10



9) Shunsuke Otani (2004) studied earthquake resistant design of RCC Buildings (Past andFuture). This paper briefly reviews the development of earthquake resistant design of

buildings.

10)Measurement of ground acceleration started in 1930s, and the response calculation wasmade possible in 1940s. Design response spectra were formulated in the late 1950s to

1960s.Non-linear response was introduced in seismic design in 1960s and the capacity

design concept was introduced in 1970s for collapse safety. The damage statistics of

RCC buildings in 1995 Kobe disaster demonstrated the improvement of building

performance with the development of design methodology. Buildings designed and

constructed using outdated methodology should be upgraded. Performance basis

engineering should be emphasized, especially for the protection of building functions

following frequent earthquakes.

seismic evaluation of educational institutions

Documents