You are on page 1of 24


INTRODUCTION Indian buildings built over past two decades are seismically deficient because of lack of awareness regarding seismic resisting measures . Also seismic design is not normally practiced in most of the buildings being built in India. Therefore, seismic vulnerability estimation is pre-requisite for disaster mitigation management. The difficulties faced in seismic vulnerability estimation of a building are there is no reliable information/database available for existing building stock, construction practices, in-situ strength of material and components of the building

The aim of evaluation is to assess the seismic capacity of earth quake vulnerable buildings or earthquake damaged buildings for the future use. The evaluation may also prove helpful for degree of intervention required in seismically deficient structures The methodologies available so far for the evaluation of existing buildings can be broadly divided into two categories qualitative methods analytical methods

Methods for seismic evaluation

Qualitative methods

Analytical methods

Condition assessment

Visual inspection

C/D method

Push over analysis

Inelastic time history method

Non destructive testing

I. Qualitative methods
Qualitative methods are based on the background information available like architectural & structural dwg. Condition Assessment means the collection of information about the structure and its past performance characteristics to similar type of structure during past earthquake Data collection Collection of data is an important portion for the seismic evaluation of any existing building. The information required for the evaluated building can be divided as follows.

Building data Architectural, structural and construction drawings Vulnerability parameters: no. of stories, year of construction and total floor area Seismicity of the site. Construction data Identification of gravity load resisting system Identification of lateral load resisting system Maintenance, addition, alteration, or modification in structure Field surveys of the structures existing condition

Structural data Structural concept: vertical and horizontal irregularities, torsional eccentricity, pounding, short column and others Detailing concept: ductile detailing, special confinement reinforcement Pounding- column distress, possibly local collapse Unsymmetrical buildings (U,T,L,V) in plan- torsional effects and concentration of damage at the re entrant corners Unsymmetrical buildings in elevation- abrupt change in lateral resistance Vertical strength discontinuities Short columns

Large tie spacing in columns lack of confinement of core shear failures. Insufficient column lengths concrete to spall. Locations of inadequate splices- brittle shear failure Insufficient column strength for full moment hinge capacity brittle shear failure. Lack of continuous beam reinforcement- hinge formation during load reversals. Inadequate reinforcing of beam column joints or location of beam bar splices at columns joint failures. Improper bent up of longitudinal reinforcing in beams as shear reinforcement shear failure during load reversal Foundation dowels that are insufficient to develop the capacity of the column steel above local column distress.

Seismic evaluation data The criteria of evaluation of building will depend on materials, strength and ductility of structural components and detailing of reinforcement. Materials evaluation Structural detailing
Flexural members, columns, foundations Limitation of sections Limitation of min. & max. flexural reinforcement Restriction of splices Development length requirements Shear reinforcement requirement Special confining requirements Column steel dowelled into the foundation

Field evaluation /Visual inspection method

This is very quick way of assessing the building vulnerability based on visual screening Visual inspection is the most widely used form of non destructive evaluation. This methodology is referred to as a sidewalk survey in which an experienced screener visually examines a building to identify features that affect the seismic performance of the building, such as the building type, seismicity, soil conditions and irregularities

The procedure for visual inspection are described in the following steps Perform a walk through visual inspection to become familiar with the structure Gather background documents and information on the design , construction, maintenance, and operation of the structure


Identify the location of vertical structural elements columns or walls Sketch the elevation with sufficient details dimensions, openings, observed damage such as cracks, spalling, and exposed reinforcing bar, width of cracks After performing a detailed visual inspection, the investigator must be able to distinguish between recent damage and pre existing damage , ensuring that the observed damage may or may noit prove to be dangerous for the structure. Limitations of Visual inspection method Applicable for surface damage that can be visualized No identification of inner damage- health monitoring of building, change of frequency and mode shapes

Non destructive testing

Visual inspection has the obvious limitation that only visible surface can be inspected.: internal defects go unnoticed. So a visual inspection is usually supplemented by NDT methods Some of the non destructive testing methods for condition assessment of structures are described below.


Rebound hammer test It is the most widely used non destructive device for quick surveys to assess the quality of concrete. Penetration resistance method This method is used to determine the quality and compressive strength of in-situ concrete based on the determination of the depth of penetration of probes into the concrete. Rebar locator It is used to determine quality, location, size and condition of reinforcing steel in concrete

Ultrasonic pulse velocity It is used for determining the elastic constants (modulus of elasticity and Poissons ratio) and the density by conducting tests at various points on the structure. Impact echo Impact echo is a method for detecting discontinuities within the thickness of a wall. Penetrating radar It is used to detect the location of reinforcing bars, cracks, voids and other material discontinuities, verify thickness of concrete.

II Analytical methods
Capacity/demand (C/D) method The forces and displacements resulting from an elastic analysis for design earth quake are called demand. These are compared with the capacity of different members to resist these forces and displacements. A (C/D) ratio less than one indicates member failure and thus needs retrofitting. The main difficulty in using this method is that there is no relationship between member and structure ductility factor

Push over analysis

The push over analysis of a static non linear analysis under permanent vertical loads and gradually increasing lateral loads. The equivalent static lateral loads approximately represent earth quake induced forces. A plot of total base shear verses top displacement in a structure is obtained by the analysis that would indicate any premature failure. The analysis is carried out upto failure, thus it enables determination of collapse load and ductility capacity. This type of analysis enables weakness in the 17 structure to be identified.

Inelastic time-history analysis

A seismically deficient building will be subjected to inelastic action during design earthquake motion. The inelastic time history analysis of the building under strong ground motion brings out the regions of weakness and ductility demand in the structure. This is the most rational method available for assessing building performance. There are computer programs available to perform this type of analysis. This methodology is used to ascertain deficiency and post elastic response under strong ground shaking.

Seismic evaluation of RCC columns

Possible damages which are frequently observed after the earth quakes are mainly due to lack of confinement, large tie spacing, insufficient splices length, inadequate splicing at the same section , hook configurations, poor concrete quality etc.

Seismic evaluation of RCC beams

There is little evidence that the buildings have collapsed due to beam failure. Reasons for the possible damages are due to lack of longitudinal compressive reinforcement, infrequent transverse reinforcement, bad anchorage of the bottom reinforcement into the support, bottom steel termination at face of column.

Seismic evaluation of RC beam column joints

Beam column joints are critical element in frame structures and are subjected to high shear and bond slip deformations under earthquake loading Common causes of failure of beam column joints are due to inadequate reinforcement in beam column joint, absence of confinement reinforcement, inappropriate location of bar splices in column etc.

Seismic evaluation of RC slabs

Generally slab on beams performed well during earth quakes and are not dangerous but cracks in slab creates serious aesthetics and functional problems Damage to slab often occurs due to irregularities such as large openings at concentration of earth quake forces, close to widely spaced shear walls.

SUMMARY There are many buildings that have primary structural system, which do not meet the current seismic requirements and suffer extensive damage during the earthquake. The methodology can be implemented to estimate seismic vulnerability of different types of existing building stock in Indian Cities and further extended to investigate the impact of mitigation measures on the consequences of an earthquake.

Based on the vulnerability analysis, risk in the form of casualties and economic losses can further be estimated after collecting wardwise demographic and census information for a city. Further, the vulnerability studies demands special attention with reference to monumental buildings, lifelines like rail/road, water supply, electric supply, sewage, communication, dams, hospitals & schools, vulnerable industries. Also there is a need to identify safe zones/ domains/ structures and secure routes to work as a relief centers and relief dispersion on incidence of 24 future disaster.