Structural evaluation of the safety of existing buildings through field

vibration tests
Tarek M. Alguhane is Doctor of structural, King Abdullah WAQF, KSA (phone: 00966505375200; e-mail:
tarijuha@hotmail.com).
Ayman Hussin and M. N. Fayed are Professor of Structural Engineering, Ain Shams University, Egypt (e-mail:
ayman_hh_khalil@yahoo.com, mnourf@yahoo.com).
Ayman M. Ismail is Professor of Structural Engineering, (HBRC and HCCAE), Egypt, (e-mail: ayman.m.ismail@gmail.com)
.
ABSTRACT
Earthquakes are considered the most serious disasters that threaten the world for causing huge losses
to individuals and property, which increases risks occur abruptly prevents adequate precautionary
arrangements by individuals or bodies concerned. For KSA, Saudi building code adopted in years and
which takes into account the size of seismic activity on new installations should be designed to
correspond with seismic activity in every region of the Kingdom. As a result, most of the establishments
created in Saudi Arabia before issuing the Saudi construction codes that did not account the seismic
forces during design, have to be evaluated. Direct in situ measurements systems are the technique used
to evaluate the dynamic properties of exciting structures and even for damage detection. In this paper,
the dynamic properties of two exciting structures have been determined by ambient vibration technique.
Experimental frequencies as well as mode shapes of two building from ambient vibration technique have
been compared with the theoretical ones using two different mathematical models idealized with and
without infill wall. After, updated the mathematical models for each building using field measurement
of building's dynamic properties, each building has been seismically evaluated using nonlinear static
analytical procedure (Pushover). The pushover analysis provide valuable information concerning
performance of building, locate failure mechanism and corresponding damage locations. The response
modification factor (R) is determined for a 5-storey RC old building and 15 story RC duel system and
compared to code requirements. Analysis of the retrofitted members for a 5-storey RC old building by
reinforced concrete jackets or steel plate jackets has been carried out to determine the corresponding
response modification factor. The results of this study are summarized and discussed.

1. INTRODUCTION
The elastic period has a primary role in the seismic assessment of buildings. Reliable calculations
and/or estimates of the fundamental frequency of a building and its site are essential during analysis and
design process. Various code formulas based on empirical data are generally used to estimate the
fundamental frequency of a structure. For existing structures, in addition to code formulas and available
analytical tools such as modal analyses, various methods of testing including ambient and forced
vibration testing procedures may be used to determine dynamic characteristics.
Many existing reinforced concrete structures in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia were built without
considering the effect of seismic loads. With the progression of national building codes, additional load
cases of seismic effects on buildings become essential and have significant effects on safety of structures.
Re-design of these structures has emphasized a number of structural insufficiencies and failure
mechanisms, either for some elements or for the structure system. Therefore, to avoid these weaknesses,
retrofitting technics for those elements should be evaluated.
Using pushover analysis method by many researchers approves the advantages of this method for
checking the ability of existing structure for resisting seismic loads [1]. However, they suffer from the
ability of common programs in analyzing the existing structure. So, many researchers check available
common programs in designing and analyzing the existing buildings [2]. Several researches [3]-[5]
investigated effectiveness of different types of column jackets either by numerical analysis in post-
earthquake and pre-earthquake retrofitting or by experimental test for different types.
Tarek, and el. [6] study the dynamic properties of the 32 buildings located in the Madinah of Saudi
Arabia, Fig. 1, using ambient motions recorded at several, spatially-distributed locations within each
building. Ambient vibration measurements of buildings have been analyzed and the fundamental
longitudinal and transverse periods for all tested buildings are presented in Table 1. The fundamental
mode of vibration has been compared in plots with codes formulae (Saudi Building Code, EC8, and
UBC1997). In a subsequent work, Tarek et al. [7]-[9] evaluated the seismic performance of some existing
buildings in Madinah city KSA using nonlinear static analytical procedure (Pushover) based on ASCE
procedures [ATC-40 [10] and FEMA- 356, 273, 440 [11]-[13]].
 Ayman [14] investigated the seismic performance of a residential building in Cairo using nonlinear
static analysis. He checked the behavior of all columns before retrofitting and after adding additional
layer jackets (carbon fiber reinforced polymer (CFRP), partial steel elements, full steel jackets and
reinforced concrete jackets). The ability of previous jacket types for enhancing seismic performance of
the studied building has been compared and checked. Spoelstra and Monti [15] studied the effects of the
confinement introduced by the FRP wrapping for the reinforced concrete with FRP. Savoia et al. [16]
compared the results obtained from the test program and finite element analyses using two programs
SAP2000 [17] and SeismoStruct [18]. The ability of these programs in analyzing nonlinear static
behavior of retrofitting structures has been evaluated.

In this paper, the system used to evaluate the dynamic properties of exciting structures by ambient
vibration technique has been described. The recorded time history shape obtained by this system to get
the exact mode shape of and corresponding frequencies is given. Experimental frequencies as well as
mode shapes of two building from ambient vibration technique have been compared with the theoretical
ones using two different mathematical models idealized with and without infill wall. After, updated the
mathematical models for each building using field measurement of building's dynamic properties, each
building has been seismically evaluated.

The first building is a 5-storey RC old building type constructed in Madina City 30 years. This building
has insufficiency observed in the planning of the structural system, deficiencies such as low quality of
concrete, inadequate transverse reinforcement, and usage of plain bars with relatively lower yield
strength also exist. The seismic behavior of this building is investigated using nonlinear static analytical
procedure (Pushover), before and after retrofitting. Analysis of the retrofitted members by reinforced
concrete jackets or steel plate jackets was carried out by using a trilinear confined concrete stress–strain
model. The effects of type of retrofitting jackets using steel plates or concrete jackets with different
thickness on the response modification factor (R) was checked using pushover procedure. The second
building is an existing fifteen-storey reinforced concrete dual system in Madinah City. The building has
been seismically evaluated with and without infill wall and their dynamic characteristic are compared
with measured values in the field. The seismic behavior of this building is investigated using nonlinear
static analytical procedure and the response modification factor (R) for the 15 story RC building is
determined. The results of this study are summarized and discussed.

Figure 1 Satellite views of the tested buildings

 Table 1 Fundamental Periods of Measured Buildings

2. DYNAMIC MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS FOR EVALUATION OF

BUILDING VIBRATION CHARACTERISTIC
Direct in situ measurements systems are the technique used to evaluate the dynamic
properties of exciting structures. The system used for structural measurements include three
components:
1- Measurement sensors: Low cost and high sensitivity make accelerometers the most
common equipment for measuring dynamic characteristics. It should be mentioned that
these sensors are also used in combination with other transducers such as velocity meters
or displacement meters.
2- Data acquisition equipment: A Data Acquisition (DAQ) system is an electronic device
designed to collect and store the information that is acquired by the measurement sensors.
3- Remote connection system: The measurement sensors are connected with cables to the
data acquisition system that can be remotely connected to a central station.
Figs. 2 present a general layout of the system.
 Figure 2: Measurement system
For each building test, a reference sensor was placed near the top of the building, away from
the assumed center of rigidity, where most of the lower vibration modes were expected to
participate in the response, and remained there for the entire test. The remaining sensor,
referred to as the roving sensor, was moved to the different locations where data records were
sought.
To get the exact mode shape of and corresponding frequencies, the micro-tremor
measurements were performed at each floor with reference point at top of the buildings. The
data acquisition systems allow the user to adjust many recording parameters, such as record
length, sampling rate, and gain. An example of the recorded time history obtained for one of the
chosen building is shown in Fig. 3.

Figure 3 LMS recorded data and evaluated corresponding natural frequencies

3. EVALUATION OF AN OLD EXISTING 5-STOREY RC BUILDING

3.1 Description of building

The structure is an old existing 5-storey reinforced concrete hotel building in Madinah City, Figs. 4.
Fig. 5 illustrate the plan of a typical story above basement for building. This building consists of
reinforced concrete skeletons i.e. columns, beams and solid slab. The brick wall thickness is equal to
0.12 m and the storey height is about 3.00 m.
\

Fig. 4 Photo of the studied building B-15 in Madinah

.
 Fig. 5 Typical floor plan

The following loading cases for dead and live loads are considered:
1) Total Dead Load is equal to DL+SDL+CL, where: DL = Dead load equal to the self-weight of the
members and slabs. SDL = Super-imposed dead load equals to 3.0 kN/m². CL = Cladding load applied
only on perimeter beams.
2) Live Load (L) is equal to 2.0 kN/m².

3.2 Experimental and Theoretical frequencies as well as mode shapes of 5-story RC

building

A validation of the proposed structural numerical models for this 5-storey RC building can be achieved
by comparing the experimentally measured and the analytically estimated natural frequencies.

From the measured signal records and their normalized power spectra, the fundamental frequencies
and the corresponding mode shapes in transverse, longitudinal and tensional directions were determined.
Table 2 summarizes the first three natural periods measured for the building i.e. 0.32 sec, 0.27 sec and
0.24sec. The corresponding transverse, longitudinal and tensional mode shapes are illustrated in figure
6.

TABLE 2 MEASURED MODES FOR BUILDING B-15

 Figure 6: Experimental Mode Shapes for Building B-15

i. Model I: This model considers the primary lateral-resisting system of the structure as well
as flooring slabs.
ii. Model II: This is developed from Model II by add modeling of infill walls as strut models.

Figure 7 shows the two models for 5-storey building in SAP2000 program.

Model I (Frame element + Slab) Model II (Frame element + Slab + strut clad)

Fig. 7 Building models B-15 in SAP2000

 Material properties for the building are illustrated in Table 3. Stress-strain curves for concrete, steel
bares and brick wall are illustrated in Fig. 8. Mander's model for confined concrete [19] is used for the
old concrete (Fig. 9). Table 4 summarizes the first six natural periods calculated for the two models of
the building.

TABLE 3

MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR BUILDING

concrete strength* 20000 kN/m² F’c
rebar yield strength 243700 kN/m² Fy
modulus of elasticity of concrete 20000000 kN/m² Ec
modulus of elasticity of rebar 2.0E+8 kN/m² Es
Shear modulus 10356491 kN/m² G
Poisson's ratio 0.2 Υ
* These properties were obtained from test on drilled concrete core specimens.

(a) Stress-strain curve for new concrete

(b) Stress-strain curve for old steel bare
(c) Stress-strain curve for jacket steel bare

Fig. 8 Stress-strain curves introduced in SAP2000

Fig. 9 Stress-strain relation for monotonic loading of confined and unconfined concrete - [19]
 Table 4: Theoretical Modes for Building B-15

A validation of the proposed structural numerical models for this 5-storey RC building can be achieved
by comparing the experimentally measured and the analytically estimated natural frequencies. From the
analysis investigations presented in tables 2 and 4, the following remarks can be seen:
- A good agreement was found between the experimentally measured periods and the numerically
calculated periods with the infill wall: Model II. The corresponding mode shapes in transverse,
longitudinal and tensional directions are similar.
- Modeling the building without infill wall, Model I, give different results for both period values and
corresponding mode shapes.
By considering the above facts, the main results of the study is that the contribution of infill walls
should be carefully judged by considering the importance of them in changing dynamic response and
collapse status of RC .

3.3. Hinge status at target displacement for pushover analysis of RC building.

The lateral load pattern in Madinah City is applied according to Saudi Building Code (SBC 301-2008).
The load pattern is calculated using load combination (DL+SDL+0.25LL) for the evaluation of the
seismic load. Following the FEMA 356 guidelines, auto P-M2-M3 interacting hinges are provided at
both ends for the columns, while in case of beams M3 auto hinges are provided.

Pushover analysis has been carried out for the two models of the building using SAP2000 program in
order to determine the performance level and deformation capacity (capacity curve) of the studied
building. These models are: Model I (frame elements without infill wall), and Model II (frame elements
with infill wall as strut elements). Columns isometric shapes of hinge status at target displacement for
the studied model are illustrated in Figs. 10 and 11 for XX and YY directions respectively. Pushover
curves for two different models and the corresponding response modification factors in x and y directions
are illustrated in figures 12 and 13 respectively. From these figures, it is observed that:
 Plastic hinges are located in most of the stories and there will be sever damages throughout the height
of the building during an earthquake.
 Comparison between the base shear-displacement curves and the corresponding plastic hinges of the
building shows more stiffness in Y direction than that in X-direction.
 The performance level of the bare frame Model I structure is mainly in IO-CP range (i.e. Immediate
 occupancy to collapse prevention range) whereas infill masonry structure, Model II is in B – LS (i.e.
operational range to life safety range). Roof displacement for bare frame is considerably greater than
frame with masonry infill.
 There is a weakness for the building ductility X-direction, Model I (frame elements without infill
wall). Tarek et al. [7], [8] give the lowest resultant response reduction factor R about 1.82 in X-
direction. This values of R is lower than that required by the SBC-301(2008) [for ordinary reinforced
concrete moment frame are 2.5] and give a good indication of poor ductility of this building.

(a) Model I (frame element +slab) (b) Model II (frame element +slab+clad strut)

Figure 10: Columns Isometric shape for Hinge status at target displacement, static nonlinear
analysis XX

(a) Model I (frame element +slab) (b) Model II (frame element +slab+clad strut)

Figure 11: Columns Isometric shape for Hinge status at target displacement, static nonlinear
analysis YY
 Fig. 12: Comparison of pushover curves for two different models, static nonlinear
analysis X-X

Fig. 13: Comparison of pushover curves for two different models, static nonlinear
analysis Y-Y

. This means that: Model I (frame elements without infill wall) does not satisfy the code
requirements for response modification factor

3.4 Retrofitting Techniques

Different retrofitting techniques are considered specifically for full steel jacketing and reinforced
concrete jacketing. The retrofitted jacket is assumed to fully contact with the original columns.
i. Full Steel Jackets
Steel jacket is utilized; (Fig. 14 (a)) using welded steel plates with a thickness of 12 mm. The yield
strength for steel plates is considered as 420 MPa.
ii. Reinforced Concrete Jackets
In the last retrofitting alternative, all columns of the building were assumed to be enlarged upon the
well-known reinforced concrete jacketing technique (Fig. 14 (b)). A jacket thickness of 100 mm and 150
mm was considered for this purpose. Both longitudinal and transverse reinforcements were selected in a
way that the minimum requirements stated by the SBC 304-2008 code for design and the construction of
concrete structures [22] are satisfied. The characteristic compressive strength of the concrete jacket was
selected as 35 MPa. Deformed steel bars of 16 mm diameter were longitudinally placed with 100 mm
intervals. The characteristic yield strength of used reinforcement bars was 420 MPa.

(a) Full steel jackets (b) Reinforced concrete jackets

Fig. 14 Typical jacket details for reinforced concrete columns

A mathematical model, for the exciting building (without retrofitting), was created using SAP2000
program, (Frame elements without infill wall). Figs. 15 shows that design requirements as per SBC 304-
2008 are satisfied for the retrofitted columns either using full steel plates or using full concrete jackets
with various thickness. Displacement-controlled pushover analyses were performed on the model for 5-
storey RC building in order to determine the maximum base shear can carry by the structure and
corresponding top deformation before retrofitting versus after retrofitting.

(A) ESIGN STATUS BEFORE RETROFITTING (b) Concrete jacket 100mm thick reinforced
by 16@100mm
 (C) CONCRETE
JACKET 150MM THICK REINFORCED BY 16@100MM
(d) Steel jacket 12 mm thick

Fig. 15 Design status for all jackets types

Figs. 16 (b)-(d) show columns’ isometric shapes for hinge status at target displacement for Design
status before retrofitting and the retrofitting processes of unsafe columns. It is observed that there were
plastic hinges on few sections of the columns at full EQ load level with response modification factors
(R) (first initial yielding of the structure).

(b) Concrete jacket 100mm thick

16@100mm
(a) status before retrofitting
 (c) Concrete jacket 150mm thick (d) Steel jacket thick 12 mm
16@100mm

Fig. 16 Columns hinge status before and after retrofitting at target displacement, static nonlinear analysis
XX for all jackets types

The building capacity response up to failure relationships obtained by pushover analysis for original
and retrofitted structures are presented in Fig. 17 for reinforced concrete jacketing cases with thickness
of 100 mm and 150 mm reinforced by  16 each 100 mm and for full steel jackets with 12 mm thick steel
plates.
The comparative study with the initial building results that all retrofitted techniques improved the
strength and plasticity characteristics of the building. The concrete jacketing with 100 mm thickness
provided sensible displacement capability however less lateral strength than different jacketing thickness.
The structure retrofitted by concrete jacketing with larger thickness gives a lot of rigid behavior,
therefore, structural and non-structural parts may suffer less destruction.

Refer to calculated response modification factor, as shown in Table 5; all retrofitting techniques
improved the maximum base shear of the structure. Although using concrete jackets or full around steel
plates jackets give the safety requirements by the design code, the ductility requirements represent by
response modification factor did not achieve. (2.5 according to Saudi Building Code SBC 301) (Fig. 18).
This depends on the characteristic and dimensional of the retrofitting jacket.
TABLE 5 ANALYSIS RESULTS
Maximum base shear Calculated response
Model
(ton) modification factor (R)
Original model 330 1.82
With full steel jacket 685 2.52
With RC. (100mm) jackets 570 2.25
With RC. (150mm) jackets 595 2.47
 Fig. 18 Values of
response modification factor for studied case
Fig. 17 Static nonlinear analysis (Pushover curve)
X-X

4.0 EVALUATION OF AN DUAL SYSTEM RC BUILDING

4.1 Description of building

The structure is an existing fifteen-storey reinforced concrete dual system building in Madinah City.
The building is characterized by a combination of shear walls and frames in both directions. The building
is used as a hotel, figure 19. Fig. 20 shows plan for building. The thickness of external brick walls are
not less than 200 mm. Material properties and reinforced Concrete Member Sizes and Reinforcement for
the building are illustrated in table 6.

Fig. 19 Elevation of the case study building in Madinah

 Fig. 20 Typical floor plan of the case study building in Madinah
TABLE 6
MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR BUILDING
concrete strength* 35000kN/m² F’c
rebar yield strength 415000 kN/m² Fy
modulus of elasticity of concrete 2.4E+7kN/m² Ec
modulus of elasticity of rebar 2.0E+8 kN/m² Es
Shear modulus 8352348kN/m² G
Poisson's ratio 0.2 Υ
*There properties were obtained from the original drawings
- Total Dead Load (D) is equal to DL+SDL+CL
Dead Load (DL) is equal to the self-weight of the members and slabs.
Super-imposed Dead Load (SDL) is equal to 3.5kN/m². SDL includes partitions, ceiling weight, and
mechanical loads.
Cladding Load (CL) is equal to1.1 kN/m and is applied only on the boarder of building.
Live Load (L) is equal to 2.0 kN/m².

4.2 Experimental and Theoretical frequencies as well as mode shapes of 5-story RC

building

A validation of the proposed structural numerical models for this 15-storey RC building can be
achieved by comparing the experimentally measured and the analytically estimated natural frequencies.
From the measured signal records and their normalized power spectra, the fundamental frequencies
and the corresponding mode shapes in transverse, longitudinal and tensional directions were determined
according to ambient vibration measurements procedure explained by [20]. Table 7 summarizes the first
three natural periods measured for the building i.e. 0.32 sec, 0.27 sec and 0.24sec. The corresponding
transverse, longitudinal and tensional mode shapes are illustrated in figure 21.

Table 7: Measured Modes for Building B-3

 Figure 21: Experimental Mode Shapes for Building B-3

For the 15-story building, two mathematical models, Model I and Model II, were created using
SAP2000 program, Fig. 22. Model I (frame elements without infill wall). Model II (strut infill-update
model from Field test). This model is developed from Model I by add modeling of infill walls as strut
model according to suggested limitation from field test.
(a) Model I (frame element + slab) (b) Model II (frame element + slab + strut clad)

Fig. 22 Building models B-3 in SAP2000

Table 8 summarizes the first six natural periods calculated for the two models of the building.

Table 8: Theoretical Modes for Building B3

Mode number Model I Model II

(Frame elements without (Frame elements with infill wall as
infill wall) strut elements)
1 1.529 (Not Pure Torsion) 0.715 (First Translation Y)
2 1.273 (Not Pure Torsion) 0.581 (First Translation X)
3 0.906 (First Torsion) 0.326 (First Torsion)
4 0.440 (Second Torsion) 0.235 (Trans. Y + Torsion)
5 0.334 0.213
6 0.225 0.208
7 0.207 0.199
8 0.2065 0.188

From the analysis investigations presented in tables 7 and 8, the following remarks can be seen:
- A good agreement was found between the experimentally measured periods and the numerically
calculated periods with the infill wall: Model II. The corresponding mode shapes in transverse,
longitudinal and tensional directions are similar.
- Modeling the building without infill wall, Model I, give different results for both period values and
corresponding mode shapes.

4.3. Hinge status at target displacement for pushover analysis of RC building.

The lateral load pattern in Madinah City corresponding to the Saudi Building Code - Structural
requirements for Loads and Forces - (SBC 301-2008 [21]) is adopted and applied as auto lateral load
pattern in SAP 2000. The load pattern is calculated using DL+SDL+0.25LL for the EQ load case. The
direction of monitoring the behavior of the building is same as the push direction. In case of columns,
program defined auto PM2M3 interacting hinges are provided at both the ends according to FEMA 356,
while in case of beams, M3 auto hinges are provided.
In this study, displacement-controlled pushover analyses were performed on the two models for
15storey RC building using SAP2000 program in order to determine the performance level and
deformation capacity (capacity curve).
Columns isometric shapes for hinge status at target displacement for the two studied models are
illustrated in Figs. 23 and 24 for XX and YY directions respectively. From these figures, it is observed
that:
- In case bare frame Model I, Figs. 23 (a) and 24 (a), all columns are in B-LS range (i.e. operational
range to collapse prevention range) and plastic hinges are distributed along many stories.
- In case of considering masonry wall, Model II, Figs. 23 (b) and 24 (b), most plastic hinges for
columns are concentrated at lower stories and in B range (i.e. operational range) which is acceptable
criteria for hinges.
The following comments for the above results can be deduced:-
1- The participation of RC shear walls in the lateral load resisting mechanism for the studied Models
is considerable and therefore, decreases the formation of plastic hinges and improves their
performance range along this building.
2- The above results show that modeling building with infill walls has greater strength as compared to
building without infill walls. The presence of the infill walls increases the lateral stiffness
considerably. Due to the change in stiffness and mass of the structural system, the dynamic
characteristics change as well. The total storey shear force increases considerably as the stiffness of
the building increases in the presence of masonry infill. This is useful to understand the contribution
of infill walls in formation of plastic hinges in beams and columns in multistory frame.

(a) Model I (frame element +slab) (b) Model II (frame element +slab+ infill walls strut element)
Fig. 23 Columns isometric shape for hinge status at target displacement, static nonlinear analysis XX
(a) Model I (frame element +slab) (b) Model II (frame element +slab+ infill walls strut element
Fig. 24 Columns isometric shape for hinge status at target displacement, static nonlinear analysis YY

Figs. 25 and 26 show the building capacity response up to failure for the two studied models in X
direction and in Y direction respectively. The strength and stiffness of the in-filled frame is significantly
increased due to the presence of infill, but the displacement capacity decreases, which is evident from
the displacement profiles in these figures.
The maximum base shear (VB) and target displacement (δ) values for the two different models are
summarized in Table 9.

Fig. 25 Comparison of pushover curves for the two models, static nonlinear analysis X-X
 Fig. 26 Comparison of pushover curves for the two models, static nonlinear analysis Y-Y

TABLE 9
BASE SHEAR AND TARGET DISPLACEMENT VALUES FOR THE TWO MODEL
Target Value Model I Model II (infill walls)
Case
(No clad) strut element
VB (kN) 18800 20400
Case x-x
δ (m) 0.367 0.061
VB (kN) 15100 18300
Case y-y
δ (m) 0.289 0.086

5.0 CONCLUSION
5-1 Dynamic characteristics for two existing RC buildings in the Madinah through
experimental and theoretical study:
The dynamic characteristics of two existing buildings were identified using ambient motions
recorded at several, spatially-distributed locations within each building. Two different
mathematical models idealized with and without infill wall have been used for each building. The
results showed
-A good agreement was found between the experimentally measured periods and the numerically
calculated periods with the infill wall. The corresponding mode shapes in transverse, longitudinal
and tensional directions are similar.
- On contrast, modeling the building without infill wall give different results for both period values
and corresponding mode shapes. This shows the importance of contribution of infill walls in
changing dynamic characteristic of the building.

5-2 Structural evaluation of the safety of two existing buildings

After, updated the mathematical models for each building using field measurement of building's
dynamic properties, each building has been seismically evaluated. The nonlinear static
analytical procedure (Pushover) was applied and. The effect of modeling the buildings without
infill walls and with infill on the performance level and deformation capacity (capacity curve)
has been investigated. The pushover analysis provide valuable information concerning
performance of building, locate failure mechanism with corresponding damage locations and
response modification factor (R) in expected future seismic events. The results for the studied
building show that:
 (i) An old existing 5-storey reinforced concrete building before and after retrofitting:

-Seismic evaluation of this type of building indicates that modeling the building as skeleton
frame elements does not satisfy the code requirements for response modification factor (2.5
according to Saudi Building Code SBC 301).

- Including infill wall in the analysis, according to updated model from field measurements
and according to the ASCE/SEI 41-06, give increase the stiffness of the building and give
higher value of response modification factor and Over-strength factor satisfying the code
requirements.

- All retrofitted techniques improved the strength and plasticity characteristics of the building.
The structural retrofit enhanced lateral resistance of the building under the required limits of
seismic loads and therefore the risk of structural collapse underneath these loads.

- The columns retrofitted with full steel jackets using steel plates developed the overall
structural performance in terms of ductility and lateral strength more than that by using
reinforced concrete jackets.

- Reinforced concrete jacketing is also additional preferred once lateral drifts are needed to be
restricted; furthermore, that successively limits the damage. Using concrete jackets with 150
mm thick is being more pronounced due to larger cross-sections and additional longitudinal
reinforcement than that of 100 mm thick.

-The design of all columns with all retrofitting types satisfy the safeties design requirements,
however, the response modification factor (R), does not satisfy the code requirements for
some retrofitting types. This depends on the characteristic and dimensional of the retrofitting
jacket.

(ii) An existing fifteen-storey reinforced concrete dual system building

- Seismic evaluation of the studied 15-storey RC building (Duel system with moment frame)
indicates that this building satisfy the code requirements for response modification factor (4.5
according to Saudi Building Code SBC 301).

- Including infill wall in the analysis, according to updated model from field measurements give
increase the stiffness of the building and give higher value of response modification factor R.
The structural performance level and hinge status at target displacement are improved after
accounting for masonry infill walls modeling. However, the studied 15-storey RC building
(Duel system with moment frame) is stiff enough due to the presence of RC shear walls and the
contribution of infill walls has not great strength.

References
[1] B. Ferracuti, R. Pinho, M. Savoia, R. Francia, (2009),"Verification of displacement-based adaptive pushover through multi-
ground motion incremental dynamic analyses", Engineering Structures, 31 1789–1799.
[2] K. Soni Priya, T. Durgabhavani, K. Mounika, M. Nageswari, P. Poluraju, (2012), "Non-linear pushover analysis of flat slab
building by using SAP2000", University Annals ‘‘Eftimie Murgu’’ resil Year 1, 256–266.
[3] Alexander G. Tsonos (2004), "Effectiveness of CFRP-jackets and RC-jackets in post-earthquake and pre-earthquake
retrofitting of beam-column sub assemblages", 13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada,
August, paper No. 2558.
[4] G. Campione, M. Fossetti, C. Giacchino, G. Minafo, (2014), "RC columns externally strengthened with RC jackets",
Materials and Structures, 47:1715–1728.
[5] Mohamed A. Tarkhan, (2015), "Strengthening of loaded reinforced concrete columns using ferrocement jackets", IJIRSET
Vol. 4, Issue 12.
[6] Tarek M. Alguhane, Ayman H. Khalil, M. N. Fayed, Ayman M. Ismail, (2015), " Ambient Vibration Testing of Existing
Buildings in Madinah", World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Civil,
Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:9, No:3.
[7] Tarek M. Alguhane, Ayman H. Khalil, M. N. Fayed, Ayman M. Ismail, (2015), "Seismic Assessment of Old Existing RC
Buildings with Masonry Infilled in Madinah as per ASCE", World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology,
International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:9, No:1, pp.52-63.
[8] Tarek M. Alguhane, Ayman H. Khalil, M. N. Fayed, Ayman M. Ismail, (2015), "Seismic Assessment of Old Existing RC
Buildings on Madinah with Masonry Infilled Using Ambient Vibration Measurements", World Academy of Science,
Engineering and Technology, International Journal of Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural
Engineering Vol:9, No:1,pp.43-51.
[9] Tarek M. Alguhane, Ayman H. Khalil, M. N. Fayed, Ayman M. Ismail, (2015), " Seismic Assessment of an Existing Dual
System RC Buildings in Madinah City", World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, International Journal of
Civil, Environmental, Structural, Construction and Architectural Engineering Vol:9, No:10.
[10] ATC-40 (1996) "Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Building" Report, Applied Technology Council. Redwood
City, California.
[11] Federal Emergency Federal Agency, FEMA-356, (2000), Pre-standard and Commentary for Seismic Rehabilitation of
Buildings. Washington DC.
[12] Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 273, (1997), "Guidelines for the Seismic Rehabilitation of Buildings",
Washington, D.C.
[13] Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA 440, (2005), "Improvement of Nonlinear Static seismic analysis
procedures", Washington, D.C.
[14] Ayman M. Ismail, (2014), "Nonlinear static analysis of a retrofitted reinforced concrete building", HBRC Journal, 10, 100–
107.
[15] M. Spoelstra, G. Monti, (1999), "FRP-confined concrete model, Journal of Composites for Construction", ASCE 3, 143–150.
[16] Marco Savoia, Nicola Buratti, Barbara Ferracuti, Pablo Martı´n, Gustavo Palazzo, (2010),"Considerations about non-linear
static analysis of a reinforced concrete frame retrofitted with FRP", Mechanical Computational XXIX, 10173–10182.
[17] SAP2000, Integrated software for Structural analysis & design, Computers & structures, Inc., Berkeley, California, USA, V.
17.3.0.
[18] Seismostruct, Software applications for analysis of structures subjected to seismic actions, Seismosoft Ltd., Pavia, Italy,
V.4.1.0.
[19] Mander, J.B., Priestley, M.J.N., and Park, R. (1988b) "Theoretical stress-strain model of confined concrete." J. Struct. Eng.,
114(8), 1804-1826.
[20] Tarek M. Alguhane, (2014) "Monitoring of buildings structures in Madinah", Ph.D., Ain Shams University Faculty of
Engineering 2014.
[21] Saudi Building Code (2008), "Structural requirements for Loads and Forces", SBC 301.
[22] Saudi Building Code, (2008), "The Saudi Building Code Requirements for Concrete Structures", SBC 304.
[23] ASCE 7-10 (2010) "Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures", Published.