Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Evaluation and Upgrading of Building
Evaluation and Upgrading of Building
2 6
2
obtain a “score” for each building based Seismic Evaluation
on the following seismic risk factors: Engineering evaluations can be done using
• seismicity IRC’s Guidelines for Seismic Evaluation of
• ground conditions Existing Buildings.3 This document can pro-
• type and age of construction (both of which vide the means for conducting consistent
influence integrity, strength and ductility) and cost-effective engineering evaluations
• building irregularities of all buildings except small buildings
• use (e.g., hospital or office) falling within the scope of Part 9 of the
• presence of heavy or dangerous non- NBC. It can be applied to most buildings
structural building components, which where the prevention of collapse and loss
may fall, or building services lines and of life is the primary concern, e.g., apart-
equipment, which may fail. ment and office buildings. It can also be
The manual provides: used to evaluate post-disaster buildings
• guidance on how to organize and carry such as hospitals; however, additional
out a seismic screening; requirements must be met to ensure that
• information, or information sources the building can be used for post-disaster
(e.g., for ground conditions), needed services.
to complete an evaluation; This publication enables a quick
• a consistent approach for use by inspectors. evaluation using a checklist of potential
This guideline should not, however, be deficiencies based on life-threatening
used to conduct an engineering evaluation failures during past earthquakes, mainly
of a building. in California and Alaska. Some of the
flexible bearing pads between the foundation often be avoided by incorporating other
and the superstructure (base isolation) to elements, such as shear walls or bracing,
reduce the transmission of horizontal ground into existing frames.
motions to the structure; and soil-stabilization Disruption. If the building must be used
techniques, such as vertical gravel drains, to during the upgrading, disruption becomes
prevent soil liquefaction. a major consideration. For this reason,
The choice of retrofits and their location in seismic retrofits are best carried out during
the building depends not only on correcting a major renovation, when the building is
structural deficiencies (see “Main Factors that scheduled to be unoccupied. If this
Determine Building Failure” above) but also approach is not an option, retrofits must
on the following issues. be carried out in stages, shifting people
and operations, or undertaking work
Accessibility. This refers to the ease or outside business hours, all of which
difficulty with which the contractor is able increase the cost. Alternatively, exterior
to gain access to the building components in retrofits (bracing or foundation systems)
order to carry out the retrofit. The major are less disruptive than interior retrofits.
considerations are as follows: In the case of hospitals, for example,
• type, quantity and location of retrofits; exterior retrofit would likely be the
• need for scaffolding, cranes or other preferred approach.
special equipment; and Building function. New structural compo-
• space available to perform the work. nents, such as shear walls or bracing, can
The more difficult the access, the greater negatively affect the layout of the building
the cost and disruption, and the less choice (and hence traffic flow), daylight, or aes-
there is with respect to retrofits. Foundation thetics. For this reason, moment frames
upgrading is particularly expensive because may be preferable to bracing or shear
access is usually very difficult; however, it can walls in certain locations.
5
Aesthetics/heritage value. The preserva- 3. Guidelines for Seismic Evaluation of
tion of a building’s aesthetics and its Existing Buildings. Institute for Research
heritage value is especially challenging. in Construction, National Research Council
The engineer must work closely with the of Canada, Ottawa, 1993, 150 p.
owner, the architect, the contractor and (NRCC 36941).
any specialists (e.g., a heritage consultant) 4. FEMA 310: Handbook for Seismic
to select a retrofit approach that best Evaluation of Buildings — A Prestandard.
addresses and resolves all these issues. Federal Emergency Management Agency,
New Guideline for Non-Structural Washington, DC, January 1998 (draft of
Components an American Society of Civil Engineers
A new document, Guideline for Seismic Standard to be published in 1999).
Risk Reduction of Operational and 5. FEMA 267. Interim Guidelines: Evaluation,
Functional Components of Buildings,7 Repair, Modification and Design of Welded
which deals with the seismic evaluation Steel Moment Frame Structures. Federal
and upgrading of non-structural building Emergency Management Agency,
components, is now being prepared by Washington, DC, 1995. FEMA-267A.
the Canadian Standards Association. It Interim Guidelines, Advisory No. 1.
will recommend procedures and criteria Supplement to FEMA 267. Federal
to mitigate seismic risk at minimum cost Emergency Management Agency,
and disruption. Washington, DC, 1997.
A separate guideline on non-structural 6. Guideline for Seismic Upgrading of
building components is needed because Building Structures. Institute for Research
non-structural retrofits can often be carried in Construction, National Research Council
out as part of a regular maintenance pro- of Canada, Ottawa, 1995, 47 p.
gram with little disruption to building (NRCC 38857).
activities. In areas of low to medium 7. Guideline for Seismic Risk Reduction of
seismicity, the failure of non-structural Operational and Functional Components of
building components during an earthquake Buildings. Draft CSA Standard S832-2000.
often poses a greater risk than structural Canadian Standards Association, Etobicoke,
failure. The 1988 Saguenay earthquake, Ontario (to be published in 1999).
in which most of the damage was due to
the failure of concrete-block partitions,
is a recent example of this. Dr. D.E. Allen is a guest research officer in the
Building Envelope and Structure Program at the
References National Research Council’s Institute for Research
1. User’s Guide — NBC 1995 Structural in Construction.
Commentaries (Part 4). Canadian
Commission on Building and Fire Codes,
National Research Council of Canada,
Ottawa, 1996. 135 p. (NRCC 38826).
2. Manual for Screening of Buildings for
Seismic Investigation. Institute for
Research in Construction, National
Research Council of Canada, Ottawa,
1993, 88 p. (NRCC 36943).
© 1999
National Research Council of Canada
May 1999
ISSN 1206-1220