Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

SeminarsTopics.com
CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION
Earthquake creates destruction in terms of life, property and failure of structures. In order to
protect from the risk triggered by seismic disaster to the life and property, the performance of
the structure must be improved and thus Seismic Retrofitting plays its role. Retrofit involves
modifications to existing structures that may improve energy efficiency or decrease energy
demand. Seismic retrofitting is the modification of existing structures so as to improve the
seismic behaviour or its components repair or strengthening up to the performance it is
expected. Retrofitting also proves to be a better option catering to the economic considerations
and immediate shelter problems rather than replacement of seismic deficient buildings. Two
alternative approaches are conceptually adopted and implemented in practice for seismic
retrofitting. The first approach focusses on upgrading the structure to resist earthquake induced
forces (i.e. modifying the capacity) and is called Conventional method of retrofitting. The
second approach focusses on reduction of earthquake induced forces (i.e. modifying the
demand) or Unconventional approach. Seismic retrofitting is the collection of modern
techniques for earthquake resistant structure.

The presence of soft and weak storey at the open ground floor, in-plane discontinuity out-of-
plane offset of the ground floor columns and eccentric mass are commonly observed
irregularities in the studied buildings. In absence of collector elements in the slab and proper
detailing of the connections with the building frame, there is lack of integral action of the lateral
load resisting elements, techniques for earthquake resistant structure. The seismic performance
of beam-column joints in an RC framed structure has long been recognized as a dominant factor
that affects its overall behaviour when subjected to earthquake forces, as indicated in earlier
version of design codes and standards. Unsafe designs and deficient detailing that does not
conform to seismic codes within the joint region may result in extra inelastic story drift and
excessive post-yield rotation, which likely causes local failure, and may even lead to
progressive collapse. The potential problems associated with the design deficiencies of the
beam-column joints have been identified in many catastrophic structural failures reported in
past major earthquakes.

Four major objectives are identified to understand the feasibility of seismically retrofitting
existing structures. The first objective is to investigate how building location affects the annual

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |1

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

probability of attaining or exceeding specified performance levels. The second objective is to

develop a framework to determine the economic feasibility of seismic retrofitting. The third
objective is to study the effects that achievable loss reduction, investment return period and
retrofitting. The final objective is to determine the impact of a modest retrofit strategy applied
to identical example buildings.

1.1 Objectives
To provide safety to the occupants by reducing the of structural collapse during severe
earthquakes. This can be done by strengthening the columns and joints so that their flexural
and shear capacities will be adequately stronger. Retrofit strategy refers to options of increasing
the strength, stiffness and ductility of the elements or buildings as whole. Several retrofit
strategies may be selected under a retrofit scheme of a building.

1. Increasing the lateral strength and stiffness of the building.

2. Increasing the ductility and enhancing the energy dissipation capacity.

3. Giving unity to the structure.

4. Eliminating sources of weakness or those that produce concentration of stresses.

5. Enhancement of redundancy in the number of lateral load resisting elements

6. The retrofit scheme should be cost effective.

7. Each retrofit strategy should consistently achieve the performance objective

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |2

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

CHAPTER 2

LITERATURE REVIEW
1. Yan Xiao and Hui Wu - 2003
An improved steel jacketing method to retrofit reinforced concrete columns with a
square or rectangular section for enhanced strength and improved ductility is
introduced. To retrofit an existing column, relatively thin steel plates were welded to
form a rectilinear jacket for shear strength enhancement and then additional
confinement elements with various types of desired configurations were welded to the
potential plastic hinge regions to ensure a ductile behaviour.
2. M. S. Razzaghi and M. Javidnia – 2015
It aims to demonstrate that neglecting the effects of infill walls during the nonlinear
dynamic analysis of the RC frames may lead to the dramatic misunderstanding the
performance of the structure. Results of this study revealed that changing the
arrangement of infill walls may change the damage state of the building during an
earthquake.
3. Hasan Kaplan, Salih Yilmaz, Nihat Cetinkaya and Ergin Atmitay - 2010
A new strengthening alternative for RC Structures, namely exterior shear walls has been
experimentally investigated under reversed cyclic loading. It is possible to strengthen
structures without disturbing their users or vacating the building during renovation.
4. Ze-Jun geng, Michael J. Chajes, Tsu-Wei Chou and David Yen-Cheng Pan– 1998
The local retrofit strategies of column, beam, beam to column joint, wall and foundation
strengthening are reviewed. Under global retrofit strategies, the addition of infill walls,
shear walls and steel braces and the reduction of the building irregularities are
mentioned.
5. Marc Badoux and James O. Jirsa – 2008

The use of steel bracing systems for retrofitting seismically inadequate reinforced
concrete frames is examined. The beam strength can be reduced to produce a more
favourable frame failure mechanism. Combining bracing with beam alterations can
significantly improve inelastic behaviour of the braced frame.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |3

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

6. Dr. R. S. Talikoti, Mr Vinod R Thorat – 2014

As per the analysis with the effect of base isolated structures, it was discovered that the
isolators minimize the lateral load imposed in the structure and in accordance to that it
is tend to reduce the size of the building component.

7. Mohamed Nour El-Din and Jinkoo Kim - 2015

The seismic performances of the fixed base jacket structures with various bracing
configurations were evaluated by non-linear static and dynamic methods, and the
effects of various retrofit schemes were compared. It was observed that the
conventional schemes were compared. It was observed that the conventional retrofit
methods of increasing number size were somewhat effective in increasing the strength
of fixed steel jacket platform structure but were not so effective in increasing ductility.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |4

 Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

CHAPTER 3

CLASSIFICATION OF RETROFITTING
TECHNIQUES

3.1 CLASSIFICATION OF RETROFITTING TECHNIQUES

There are different types of retrofitting techniques, they are global and local techniques. Some
of the global techniques are addition of shear wall, addition of infill wall etc and local
techniques are jacketing of beams, jacketing of columns and jacketing of column –beam joint.

Retrofitting techniques

GLOBAL LOCAL

1.Adding shear wall 1.Jacketing of beams

2.Addition of infill wall 2.Jacketing of columns

3.Addition of bracing 3.Jacketing of beam –column

joint.
4.Addition of wingwall
4.Strenthening of individual
5.Wall thickening
footings.
6.Mass reduction

7.Base isolation

Fig 3.1 Retrofitting techniques

3.1.1 Addition of Shear Wall

New shear walls can be added to control drift. Critical design issues involved in the addition
of shear walls are as follows. a) Transfer of floor diaphragm shears into the new wall through
dowels. b) Adding new collector and drag members to the diaphragm. c) Reactions of the new
wall on existing foundations.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |5

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 3.2 Addition of shear wall [5]

3.1.2 Addition of infill wall

The addition of masonry infill wall is a viable option for the buildings, with open ground
storeys, addressed in the project. Of course, masonry infill walls increase strength and stiffness
of the building, but do not enhance the ductility. Infill walls with reinforced concrete masonry
units can act as shear walls. For cast-in-place RC infill walls, the significant parameter that
defines the lateral strength of the frame is the presence of dowels between a wall and the
bounding frame.

Fig 3.3 Addition of infill wall [8]

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |6

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

3.1.3. Addition of steel braces

A steel bracing system can be designed to provide stiffness, strength, ductility, energy
dissipation, or any combination of these. Connection between the braces and the existing frame
is the most important aspect in this strategy. The uses of prestressed tendons and unbonded
braces have been proposed by some investigators to avoid the problems associated with the
failure of connections and buckling of the braces, respectively.

Fig 3.4 Addition of steel braces [4]

3.1.4 Base Isolation

Base isolation proceeds with a quite different philosophy in the sense that this concept is
fundamentally concerned to reduce the horizontal seismic forces. It is powerful and relatively
cheaper method of seismic rehabilitation of buildings. A typical base isolation system is
evolved by the use of rubber bearing located at the base of the building, most often just below
the first floor, under columns or shear walls. Rubber bearing consists of laminated layers of
rubber and steel plates strongly bound together during the vulcanizing process of rubber. They
are designed with a vertical stiffness, which is usually 300 to 1000 times higher than the
horizontal stiffness. Such a system increases the first natural period in both the horizontal
directions in between the range of 1 to 2.5 seconds and the response acceleration decreases
accordingly. Damping usually comprised between 5% and 10% critical, but can jump to as
high as 20% with the addition of damper. A building filled with well-designed base isolation
behaves like one degree of freedom system.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |7

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 3.5 Base Isolation [6]

3.2 Seismic dampers

Seismic dampers are used in the place of structural elements like diagonal braces for controlling
seismic damage in structures. Dampers resist dynamic motion and remove energy from a
structure during wind or seismic events, allowing it to withstand harsh input energy and reduce
harmful deflections, forces and accelerations to structures and occupants. There are different
types of seismic dampers, they are:

1. Friction dampers

2. Viscous dampers

3.2.1 Friction dampers

Friction dampers are designed to have moving parts that will slide over each other during a
strong earthquake. When the parts slide over each other, they create friction which uses some
of the energy from the earthquake that goes into the building. In this type of damper, seismic
energy is spent in overcoming friction in the contact surface. Among others features of these
dampers can be classified as avoiding fatigue in served loads (due to the non-active dampers
under load) and their performance independent to loading velocity and ambient temperature.

3.2.2 Viscous dampers

Viscous dampers are hydraulic devices that dissipate the kinetic energy of seismic events and
cushion the impact between structures. They are versatile and can be designed to allow free

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |8

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

movement as well as controlled damping of a structure to protect from wind load, thermal
motion or seismic events.

Fig 3.6 Types of seismic dampers [9]

3.2.3 Pall dampers

Pall type dampers is made up of some steel plates laid on each other with high strength bolts
pressing them together, generating friction between them. Contrary to Viscoelastic systems,
Pall system is not sensitive to environmental temperature and state of loading. Pall system’s
hysteretic behaviors are almost rectangular and completely similar to ideal elastoplastic
behavior. Due to high dissipation energy capacity and stability of hysteresis loops, Pall system
seems to show higher seismic performance, than other damping systems.

3.2.4 Mechanism of friction dampers

As mentioned before, a Pall damper is very popular due to its low cost of construction and its
simplicity. Furthermore, considering architectural restrictions, such elements are very easy to
be hidden in internal partitions. Friction based dampers are formed of steel plates tightened
together by means of high strength bolts with either axial or rotational deformation mechanism
leading to transformation of kinetic energy to thermal one.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT Page |9

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

3.3 Application of shotcrete as retrofitting

Shotcrete is sprayed concrete or mortar. Because of difficulty in obtaining good compaction
and fully encasing large or closely spaced bars, it has traditionally been used in thin, relatively
lightly reinforced sections. Unique to seismic repair and retrofit are heavily reinforced and
often thick sections. Because of its ease of application in areas of poor access and the resulting
reduction in construction time and cost, the process can be especially advantageous in seismic
applications. Special procedures are required, however, to obtain good quality work under the
common inherent constraints that often exist and overcome the limitations. Although not
widely recognized, proven procedures are well established and have been successfully used in
seismic repair and retrofit applications for nearly 50 years.

Fig 3.7 Application of Shotcrete []

3.4 Jacketing
Jacketing is the most popularly used methods for strengthening of building columns. The most
common types of jackets are,

3.4.1 Column Jacketing

• Reinforced concrete jacketing

• Steel jacketing

• Fiber reinforced polymer composite jacketing

The main purposes of jacketing are,

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 10

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

• To increase concrete confinement by transverse fiber or reinforcement, especially for circular

cross-sectional columns.

• To increase shear strength by transverse fiber or reinforcement

• To increase flexural strength by longitudinal fiber or reinforcement provided they are well
anchored at critical sections.

Fig 3.8 Various shapes of retrofitting jackets [2]

Fig 3.9 Various types of retrofitting jackets [2]

3.4.1.1 Reinforced concrete jacketing

Reinforced concrete jacketing can be employed as a repair or strengthening scheme. Damaged

regions of the existing members should be repaired prior to their strengthening. There are two
main purposes for jacketing of columns: (a) increase in the shear capacity of columns in order
to accomplish a strong column-weak beam design and (b) to improve the column’s flexural
strength by the longitudinal steel of the jacket made continuous through the slab system and
anchored with the foundation. It is achieved by introducing a new longitudinal reinforcement
through holes drilled in the slab and by placing new concrete in the beam column joints.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 11

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

3.4.1.2 Steel Jacketing

The steel jacket retrofit has been used as a method to enhance the shear strength and ductility.
Confining reinforced concrete column in steel jackets is one of the effective methods to
improve the earthquake resistant capacity. As compared with conventional hoops or spirals,
steel jacket has two more remarkable advantages: (a) to easily provide a large amount of
transverse steel, hence strong confinement to the compressed concrete and (b) to prevent
spalling off of the shell concrete. Spalling of the shell concrete may be considered as the main
reason for the deterioration of bond and buckling of longitudinal bars of columns and is hardly
prevented by conventional hoops. Because of these advantages of the steel jacket, confining
method utilizing steel jacket has been increasingly used to retrofit or strengthen the existing
reinforced concrete columns without adequate detailing.

3.4.1.3 Fiber reinforced polymer composite jacketing

The use of Fiber Reinforced Polymer (FRP) sheets is becoming popular in India. Several
researchers have investigated the possibility feasibility of FRP composite jackets for seismic
strengthening of columns winding them with high strength carbon fibers around column
surface to add spiral hoops. The merits of this method are (a) carbon fiber is flexible and can
be made to contact the surface tightly for a high degree confinement, (b) confinement is of high
degree because carbon fiber is of high strength and high modules of elasticity are used, (c) the
carbon fiber has light weight and rusting does not occur.

Fig 3.10 Column jacketing [2]

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 12

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

3.4.2 Beam Jacketing

• Addition of concrete

• Steel plating

3.4.2.1 Addition of concrete

There are some disadvantages in this traditional retrofit strategy. First, addition of concrete
increases the size and weight of the beam. Second, the new concrete requires proper bonding
to the existing concrete. Third, the effects of drying shrinkage must be considered as it induces
tensile stresses in the new concrete. Instead of regular concrete, fiber reinforced concrete can
be used for retrofit.

3.4.2.2 Steel plating

Clear height significantly and can be applied while the structure is in use. Gluing mild steel
plates to beams is often used to improve the beam flexural and shear performances. The
addition of steel plate is simple and rapid to apply, does not reduce the storey.

Fig 3.11 Beam Jacketing [1]

3.4.3 Beam-Column joint jacketing

A joint may be defined as the part of the column that is located through the depth of the beams,
and which intersect that column. This critical region should have enough confinement and
shear capacity. However, due to lack of space in the joint region it is difficult enough to provide
an adequate confinement. The joint can be strengthened by placing ties through drilled holes

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 13

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

in the beam but the placement of such ties is difficult. The use of a concrete fillet at the joint to
shift the potential hinge region away from the column face to the end of the fillet. Steel
jacketing helps in transferring moments and acquiring ductility through confinement of the
concrete. Ghobarah et al. proposed the use of corrugated steel jackets. Steel plating is simpler
as compared to steel jacketing, where plates in the form of brackets are attached to the soffits
of beams and sides of the columns.

Fig 3.12 Beam-Column Jacketing [1]

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 14

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

CHAPTER 4

CASE STUDY

Fig 4.1 Mani Mandir complex in Gujarat [3]

The Mani Mandir complex is an important historic monument of the town of Morbi in the
western state of Gujarat. It was severely damaged due to earthquake in the year 2001.

4.1 Damage in 2001 Earthquake

The earthquake caused severe damage and collapse of a large number of elements above the
roof, extensive damage at the roof level, moderate damage at the first storey and little damage
on the ground storey. Staircase cap slabs, parapets, arches, portals and above the roof were very
badly damaged; a large number of them were partially or completely destroyed. The bastions
at the extreme corners of the structure sustained severe damage including partial collapse; the
portions standing are precariously balanced and have wide, through-cracks Similar
observations were noted in the temple where the corners have been severely damaged. Stone
weather-sheds at the roof level were broken and destroyed at some places.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 15

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 4.2 Destruction of Arches in Elevational Elements [3]

Fig 4.3 Partial Collapse of Bastions [3]

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 16

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 4.4 Out of Plane Collapse at Corners Portion [3]

At the first storey, almost all joints in arches and pillars opened out. A large number of the
joints in walls also opened out in a typical diagonal pattern. Cornices below steel joists were
damaged at many locations. The arches cracked heavily and the keystone was dislodged in
most arches. Deformation of the arches was also observed. Many decorative galleries and some
walls show a distinct tilt; they have been pushed out and away from the building. Numerous
wide cracks were formed in walls. Many walls opened out at corners.

Fig 4.5 Openings of Joints in Arch [3]

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 17

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 4.6 Diagonal Cracks in Walls [3]

In the ground storey, there was no major seismic damage the overall condition is reasonably
good except for minor cracks in walls and a few separation cracks at the crown of the arches.

4.2 End-pinning of Wall Corners

Many of the external and internal wall corners had opened out during the 2001 earthquake, and
are liable to do so in a future seismic event due to the poor masonry detail at the corner. Thus,
it is proposed to securely connect the perpendicular walls to each other by cross-pinning with
stainless steel rods of 8mm and 10mm diameters at every 600 mm along the height.

Fig 4.7 End pinning of wall corners [3]

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 18

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

4.3 Introducing Horizontal Reinforced Bands to Existing Masonry

Walls
While the new RC walls have been designed to take the full lateral loads, the original structure
was checked for its capacity to take 25% of the design seismic loads. This was found to be
adequate. However, it was necessary to provide seismic features in the form of horizontal
stainless-steel bands to the existing masonry walls to improve their performance and ductility.
Accordingly, 6mm stainless steel reinforcing rods were proposed between the stone courses at
a spacing of about 600 mm along the height.

Fig 4.8 Horizontal Reinforced Bands [3]

4.4 Strengthening of Arches

The arches suffered three types of failures: dislocation of keystone, severe cracking of arches
and movement of supports. Two retrofit details for arch strengthening have been recommended
based on the type of damage. Where there is movement of support and the arches are internal,
a stainless-steel tie with a turnbuckle is proposed. In areas where there is no discernible
movement of supports, the keystone is tied back into the wall above by means of stainless-steel
rods. A lintel is formed by means of providing stainless steel reinforcing bars in the courses
between the stones above the arch.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 19

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 4.9 Strengthening of Arches Using Ties [3]

Fig 4.10 Strengthening of Arches by Pining and Reinforcement Band [3]

4.5 Cross-Pinning of Corridor Columns

The columns in corridors towards the interior courtyards were significantly damaged during
the 2001earthquake. The columns are made of three or more pieces of stone and negligibly
socketed into each other. It is proposed to connect these stones to each other by cross-pinning.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 20

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

Fig 4.11Cross Pining of Corridor Columns [3]

4.6 Stitching and Grouting of Cracks in Walls

The cracks in the walls are to be grouted with a low-strength grout compatible with the stone.
Walls with diagonal cracks are to be stitched using stainless steel bars before the cracks are
grouted. The grout needs to be tested before use for its compatibility with the stone.

Fig 4.12 Detail of Stitching Cracks in Walls [3]

4.7 Roof Slab

The entire roof slab showed considerable corrosion of steel joists and numerous deep cracks
on the roof surface. As mentioned earlier, the waterproofing on roof slab was done in three
layers amounting to about total 300mm thick; this additional load had caused sagging in some

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 21

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

steel joists and subsequent cracking in the adjacent stone slabs. Considering that more than
70% of the slab was partially or completely damaged, it was recommended that the roof slab
be completely removed and replaced with a suitable slab system.

The replacement of the slab provided two challenges. The proposed new slab should be
reminiscent of the original construction methodology as well as provide the necessary
diaphragm action. The use of precast slabs in lieu of the stone slabs was considered but rejected
as it would not provide the necessary diaphragm action and further costs would be entailed to
provide this. Finally, reinforced concrete in-situ slab system spanning between composite
beams of concrete and epoxy coated steel joists was adopted as a compromise solution which
essentially retained the philosophy of the earlier structural system besides appearing similar to
the original ceilings.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 22

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION
The methods of retrofit divided into two major categories, local and global, were presented.
Local methods include addition of concrete, steel, and composite to a specific member to
improve its response in a seismic event.

• All three methods are effective each also has some disadvantages: concrete is labor
intensive, steel requires high maintenance during the life of the structure, and
composites have high initial cost.
• Global methods retrofit the entire structure at once by adding shear walls or steel braces,
or by using base isolation. Shear wall are labor intensive and expensive.
• Steel brace can be easier to implement but present some connection problems. Base
isolation is effective and works well, but cannot be applied to all type of structures
• The choice of the method depends on the building, on its specific requirements, as well
as its condition, location, and geometry.
• Several methods should usually be considered and compared to find the appropriate
best one.
• To provide greater flexibility in the retrofit scheme, several methods can be combined
and implemented together, combining the advantages of each.

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 23

Seismic Retrofit for Reinforced Concrete Structures 2018-19

REFERENCES
1. Ze-Jun geng, Michael J. Chajes, Tsu-Wei Chou and David Yen-Cheng Pan. “The
retrofitting of reinforced concrete column-to-beam connections”. 1297-1305 (1998)
2. Yan Xio, M. ASCE, and Hui Wu. “Retrofit of reinforced concrete columns using
partially stiffened steel jackets.” Vol. 129:725-732 (2003)
3. Alpa sheth, R D Chaudhari, Ejaz khan, Divay gupta and Malvika saini. “Seismic
retrofitting of Mani Mandir complex at Morbi Gujarat” 13th World Conference on
Earthquake Engineering, Paper No. 2430 (2004)
4. Marc Badoux and James O. Jirsa. “Steel bracing of RC frames for seismic retrofitting”
Vol. 116, No. 1 (2008)
5. Hasan Kaplan, Salih Yilmaz, Nihat Cetinkaya and Ergin Atmitay. “Seismic
strengthening of RC structures with exterior shear walls” Vol. 36, pp. 17-34 (2010)
6. Dr. R. S. Talikoti and Mr. Vinod R Thorat, “Base isolation in seismic structural design”.
Vol. 3 issue 7, (2015)
7. Mohamed Nour El-Din and Jinkoo kim. “Seismic performance evaluation and retrofit
of fixed jacket offshore platform structures”. ISSN 0887-3828/0414099 (2015)
8. M. S. Razzaghi and M. Javidnia. “Evaluation of the effect of infill walls on seismic
performance of RC dual frames”. Vol. 7:79-54 (2015)
9. Vasant A. Matsagar and R. S. Jangid. “Base isolation for seismic retrofitting of
structures”. (2015)

Department of Civil Engineering, SIT P a g e | 24