Government of Nepal

Ministry of Education, Science and Technology

Center for Education and Human Resource Development

Sanothimi, Bhaktapur

Detailed Seismic Vulnerability Assessment, Detail Design for

Retrofitting, Retrofitting Cost Estimation of the School Buildings
of Different Program Districts of Nepal
Package-B
[Contract: CEHRD/SSDP/NCB/Consultancy/1/2076/2077/(Package-B)]

SHREE MAHENDRA RASTRIYA SECONDARY SCHOOL

RAMGOPALPUR M., MAHOTTARI

Submitted by:

PACE/ERTech J/V
Maharajgunj, Kathmandu

July, 2020
Contents
1. School Overview............................................................................................................................3
1.1 Overview of the existing buildings.........................................................................................3
1.2 General Building Information.................................................................................................3
1.3 Photographs:.........................................................................................................................6
2. Intervention...................................................................................................................................7
2.1 Discussion for Seismic Resilience...........................................................................................7
2.2 Detailed evaluation of the existing block...............................................................................7
1.1 Structural analysis..................................................................................................................7
1.2 Load calculations...................................................................................................................8
1.2.1 Dead load.......................................................................................................................8
1.2.2 Live load.........................................................................................................................8
1.2.3 Earthquake load.............................................................................................................9
2. Retrofit design of the structure...................................................................................................11
2.1 Strengthening option adopted.............................................................................................11
2.2 FEM model of the structure.................................................................................................11
2.3 Load combination................................................................................................................12
2.4 Component level checks......................................................................................................12
2.5 Component Level Checks.....................................................................................................13
2.5.1 In-plane stress check....................................................................................................13
2.5.2 Out-of-Plane stress check............................................................................................16
CONCLUSION.......................................................................................................................................18
3. Bill of Quantity and Cost Estimate...............................................................................................18
4. Drawings......................................................................................................................................18
Annex-1 Bill of Quantity and Cost Estimate.........................................................................................19
Annex-2 Drawings................................................................................................................................20

2|Page
 1. School Overview
1.1Overview of the existing buildings
The school is located on Mahaotari District. Following is the block detail:

Block Structural Typology Function Intervention

1 Steel frame -BMC Classroom Retrofit

1.2General Building Information

Checklist for Collecting Information for Retrofitting (General
Information of Building):
Province: Zone: District: Mahaotari
Munici./ R. Munici. Ram gopal Nagarpalika
Reporting Date: Date Collection/ Report by:
2077/03/02 Er.Abisheak chudhary

1.0 School’s Name: Mahendra ma. Vi

2.0 Full address of School Dipesh chudhary

2.1 Name of Head Teacher/ Contact No. 989819670230

3.0 GPS Co-ordinate 26°45’20”,85°47’39”
4.0 Detail of Buildings
4.3 Number of Storey 1
5.0 Building Purpose/ Use

5.1 Administration/ office Building [ ]

5.2 Training Building []
5.3 Student studying class room [√ ]
5.4 Library/ Laboratory [ ]
5.5 Other (specify…

If multiple use available, mention how many rooms are used for respective purpose

6.0 Building Type

6.1 RCC Frame structure [ ]

3|Page
6.2 Brick/ Stone masonry in cement mortar with RCC roof [ ]
6.3 Brick/ Stone masonry in cement mortar with Asbestos sheet [ ]]
6.4 Brick/ Stone masonry in cement mortar with CGI sheet [ ]
6.5 Steel/ Timber truss with Stone/ Brick masonry infill [√ ]

6.6 Other (Specify…

8.0 General Roof Condition 9.0 Specific Roof Problem

8.1 Good [ √] 9.1 Crack [ ]
8.2 medium [] 9.2 Broken [¯ ]
8.3 poor [ ] 9.3 Leakage [ ]
8.4 Very poor [ ¯] 9.4 Seepage [ ¯]
8.5 Other (Specify… [ ] 6.5 Other (Specify… [ ]
10.0 General Wall Condition 11.0 Specific Wall Problem

10.1 Good [ ] 11.1 Cracks [¯ ]

10.2 Medium [¯√ ] 11.2 Tilt [ ]
10.3 Poor [ ] 11.3 Failure [ ]
10.4 Very poor [ ] 11.4 Other (Specify… [ ]
12.0 General Door & windows 13 Specific problem of Door & Window
condition
12.1 good [ ¯] 13.1 Broken [ ]
12.2 Medium [√ ] 13.2 Broken Locks/ Hinges etc [ ]
12.3 Poor [ ] 13.3 Other (Specify… [ no ]
12.4 Very poor [¯ ]
14.0 General Floor Condition 15.0 Specific Problem of Floors

14.1 Good [√ ] 15.1 Cracks [ ]

14.2 Medium [] 15.2 Seepage [ ]
14.3 Poor [ ] 15.3 Settlement [ ]
14.4 Very Poor [ ] 15.4 Other (Specify…. [ ]

NOTE: make a sketch (with precise dimension) of floor plans, elevation and appropriate wall
section details of the building to be retrofitted.

4|Page
Crack mapping:

1.0 Wall
In-plane Crack
Extent (width) of crack mm No cracks seen in this plane

Length of crack mm
Out of plane Crack
Extent (width) of crack mm
minor hair lines cracks seen in wall this plane
Length of crack mm
Cracking around opening
Extent (width) of crack mm
No cracks seen in opening like doors and windows.
Length of crack mm

2.0 Column/ Beam

Extent (width) of crack mm
Length of crack mm
Exposure of rebars Y/ N
Size and no. of reinforcement
in column
Size and no. of reinforcement
in Beam

3.0 Floor/ Slab

Extent (width) of crack mm
Good condition but required of colouring.
Length of crack mm

5|Page
 Existing Plan of Building:

1.3Photographs:

2. Intervention
The following interventions are proposed in the building:

6|Page
 a. Replace door and window.
b. Provide splint band (250mmx50mm).
c. Provide lintel band (250mmx50mm) and sill band (250mmx50mm).
d. Plastering (20mm) and coloring of block.
e. Painting of truss member.
f. Provision of Cement punning and pointing.

2.1Discussion for Seismic Resilience

This block is Steel frame block, with CGI sheet roofing in steel truss which is in normal condition.
Hence, as per DBR, the structure can be considered safe, provided damaged or deteriorated
members are corrected.

However, because of lack of necessary bands in the wall and consists of minor cracks past, necessary
to integrate all walls with either seismic bands or wall jacketing. Hence, addition of seismic band has
been performed as per the seismic requirement.

2.2Detailed evaluation of the existing block

1.1 Structural analysis
Following steps were adopted for the detailed analysis of the existing structure

 Structural analysis of the blocks has been carried out using a commercial software ETABS
2016.2.1, produced by CSI, California Berkeley. It is a Finite Element Method (FEM) based
software.
 A 3-Dimensional numerical model was prepared using the software, as per the existing site
condition. Center line dimensions were used for numerical model. Beams and columns are
modeled as linear frame element whereas the slabs are modeled as “thin shell” elements;
 Floor slab is assumed to provide rigid floor diaphragm effect;
 The member self-weight are estimated by the software itself based on its provided
member sizes. The finishes to the floors and wall loads were applied as per the existing
site condition. For wall load alongside the beam, loads were applied as line loads. The
imposed loads were applied to the floor and roof slabs;
 Seismic loads were considered acting only in the horizontal directions. Seismic actions in
the vertical direction were not considered. The design seismic force has been estimated
using Equivalent Static Method (Response spectrum method if necessary) and
automatically distributed by the software at various floor levels;
Masonry walls provided in the moment resisting framed building, to protect against environment
and divide internal space, interact with the frame and convert the moment resisting frame into
hybrid system. As no seismic bands were provided in the prevalent structure it is believed that the
walls will separate with the frame at the time of earthquake, and will not have significant effect in
ultimate strength of the frame system, and hence not modelled.

7|Page
1.2 Load calculations

1.2.1 Dead load

All loads/forces due to gravity on the components of the building structure including the structures
self-weight, roofing, flooring, suspended ceiling, wall/partition, services including machinery, piping,
rack with all associated finishing permanently attached thereto are calculated in accordance with IS:
875 (Part 1) - 1987.

Table 1.2.1 Unit Weight as per IS875 (Part 1)-1987

Description Unit Weights

Re-bars 76.97 kN/m3
Stone Masonry 22.55 kN/m3
RCC 25 kN/m3

Table 1.2.2 Floor Finish Calculation

S.N. Screeding Unit wt. Ceiling finish Unit wt. Load/m2

mm kN/m3 mm kN/m3 kN/m2

1 50 21 12.5 20.4 1.31

1.2.2 Live load

The load assumed to be produced by the intended use and occupancy of a building, including the
loads of movable partition, impact, vibration, and dust, but excluding wind, seismic, snow and other
loads due to temperature changes, creep, shrinkage, differential settlement, etc., in accordance with
IS 875 (Part 2) – 1987. A few typical assumed live loads are listed below:

Table 1.2.3 Live loads

Description Live Load

Class Rooms : 3.0 kN/m2

8|Page
Corridor, passages, lobbies and staircase : 4.0 kN/m2
Accessible roof : 1.5 kN/m2

Inaccessible roof : 0.75 kN/m2

1.2.3 Earthquake load

The earthquake load is calculated using static equivalent method in accordance with IS 1893 (Part 1):
2002. The static forces in the structure are derived from the design base shear (Vb) given by:

(Cl. 7.5.3)

Where;

W= Seismic weight of the building equal to the total dead load plus appropriate amounts of
specified imposed load

Ah = Design horizontal seismic coefficient given by:

(Cl. 6.4.2)

Adopted coefficients are as follows:

Z : Seismic zone factor (Zone V) (Cl.6.4.2, table-2)

I : Important factor (Cl. 6.4.2, table -6)
R : Response reduction factor (Cl. 6.4.2, table-7)
Sa/g : Average response acceleration coefficient depending upon soil type and fundamental
natural period of structure (Ta) (Cl.6.4.2, figure 2)
The approximate fundamental natural period of vibration (Ta), in seconds, of a moment resisting
frame building without brick infill panels may be estimated by the empirical expression:

Ta = 0.075 h0.75 for RC frame building

Where;

h = Height of building, in m.

9|Page
Similarly, the approximate fundamental natural period of vibration (Ta), in seconds, of all other
buildings, including moment-resisting frame buildings with brick/stone infill panels, may be
estimated by the empirical expression:

Ta = 0.09*h/√d

Where;

h= Height of building in m as defined in Cl.7.6.1.

d= Base dimension of building at the plinth level in m, along the considered direction of the
lateral force.

Distribution of earthquake load

The design base shear (Vb) computed in Cl.7.5.3 shall be distributed along the height of the building
as per the following expression:

Wihi 2
Qi =Vb*
∑ Wihi 2

Where,

Qi = Design lateral force at floor i,

Wi = Seismic weight of floor i,

hi = Height of floor i measured from base, and

n = Number of storey in the building is the number of levels at which the masses are located.

Note: In calculating the seismic weight of floors, the full dead load at each storey is considered, while
the imposed load (IL) is considered as per following criteria (IS 1893:2002, Table 8)

If IL >3 kN/m2 -consider only 50% of IL

If IL ≤ 3 kN/m2 -consider only 25% of IL

For Roofs - NIL

2. Retrofit design of the structure

10 | P a g e
2.1 Strengthening option adopted
To address the deficiencies in the structure following strengthening measures are adopted.

Horizontal bands provided and splints at necessary locations may be needed for tying up infill
with the frame to the structure.

As the wall is now integrated with the Steel frame, infill is modeled and stresses are again
checked with increased seismic demand. It is assumed that the steel truss are good as assumed
to carry the roofing load as it is designed by DOE.

2.2 FEM model of the structure

Brick Masonry wall along was modelled to idealize integration of walls with the frame.

Fig 1. ETABS Model

Table 2.2.4 Seismic Load Calculation

Seismic Zone Factor Z 1 Cl 8.1.6. NBC105: 1995

Importance Factor I 1.5 Cl. 8.1.7. NBC105:1995

11 | P a g e
 Taking average of
Unreinforced masonry
Strucutural Performance Factor k 2.5
and Ductile masonry
Cl.8.1.8. NBC105:1995

Height of the structure h 2.4 m

Dimension of building along x Dx 16.03 m

Dimension of building along y Dy 4.085 m

Approximate Time Period along the

Tx=0.09h/sqrt(Dx) 0.054
Length sec Cl 7.3 NBC105:1994

Approximate Time Period along the

Ty==0.09h/sqrt(Dy) 0.107
Width sec Cl 7.3 NBC105:1994

Basic Seismic coefficient along the From Figure. 8.1

Cx 0.09
length of the building NBC105 :1994

Basic Seismic coefficient along the From Figure. 8.1

Cy 0.09
length of the building NBC105 :1995

Though from graph it is 0.08, we have taken 0.09 to tally with IS Code

Horizontal seismic Coefficient for the

Cd=CZIK 0.3375
seismic method

2.3 Load combination

Following load combinations has been adopted as per the codal provision of NBC 105: 1994.

1) DL+LLE
2) 0.7DLE
3) DL+LL

2.4 Component level checks

The components level checks include

 In-plane stress checks:

 In-plane flexural stress check
 Shear stress check
 Out-of Plane stress checks

2.5 Component Level Checks

12 | P a g e
2.5.1 In-plane stress check

2.5.1.1 In-plane flexural stress check (Tension)

Case I: Tension in the wall

Tensile force at most of the corners taken by concrete columns but one grid in x direction is not in
closed by columns, which is critical for the tensile stress.

Sample Calculations of critical wall element:

Load Combination: DL+LL+EQX

Calculation of Tension Reinforcement

Combo DL+LL+EQX

Tension Force of Wall (F22) : 43.54725 kN

13 | P a g e
 (58.063*0.75
)

Yield Strength of Steel (fy) : 500 Mpa

Permissible stress : 275 Mpa

mm
Area of Steel required (Ast) : 158.4 2

Diameter of Bar to be provided (ø) 8 mm

No. of Bars Required (n) 4

Hence provide 4 nos of 8mm dia bars at unreinforced corners and junction of cross walls.

2.5.1.2 In-plane flexural stress check (Compression)

IS1905- 1987: Permisible Compressive Stress

Mortar Type M2 3 Mpa Assumption

Crushing Strength of Individual Unit Brick 7.5 Mpa

Basic Compressive Strength fb 0.59 Mpa Cl. 5.4.1.IS1905-1987

Stress reduction factor ks 0.95 Table 9. ; IS1905-1987

Area of the section in m2 to acount

smallness A 0.18 m2 Cl.5.4.1.1;1905-1987

Area reduction factor ka 0.97 Cl.5.4.1.1;1905-1987

Shape modification factor kp 1 Cl. 5.4.1.3; 1905-1987

Permissible Compressive Stress fc=ksxkaxkpxfb 0.4055 Mpa Cl.5.4.1; IS1905-1987

Thickness of Masonry t 250 mm

Capacity of Stone Masonry in kN or

compression fcx1000xt 101.37 kN/m

f'm 1.76 Mpa

Modulus of Elasticity Em 1259 Mpa

IS1893-2016: Permissible Compressive Test

14 | P a g e
Compressive strength of Brick fb 5 Mpa

Compresive strength of mortar fmo 3 Mpa

Compressive strength of masonry prism fm 1.80 Mpa

Modulus of Elasticity Em 990.73 Mpa IS 1893:2016, Cl. 7.9

IS456: 2000: Annex B Permisible Compressive Stress of Concrete

Concrete Grade fck 15 Mpa

Permissible Stress in Compression due to

bending σcbc 5 Mpa IS456-2000-Annex B

Width of concrete t 100 mm

Compressive Strength of Concrete 500 kN/m

Envelope compressive stress in the model is 430 kN/m, thus no

compressive steel is required in band

2.5.1.3 Shear stress check

15 | P a g e
Case I: Shear in Piers (Horizontal)

Horizontal band will be kept to tie the walls with the frame throughout building at sill and lintel level.
Calculation is done for critical front face element.

Fig 2. Shear Demand for Combo. DL+LL+EQX

Avg. Shear Force : 0.24*10.38

: 2.4912 kN
Shear Capacity : fd 11.7
0.1+ =0.1+ =2.05 Mpa, take max, 0.5Mpa
6 6
: 0.5x230x10380 =1193700 N =1193 kN

As the Avg. Shear Force < Shear Capacity band is kept with nominal reinforcement.

2.5.2 Out-of-Plane stress check

As the vertical bending moment is attracted by RC frame there is no need of additional vertical band
except 4 unreinforced front corners at which reinforcement is designed from in plane tensile force.

The capacity of band in flexure for horizontal band is illustrated below:

16 | P a g e
Table 2.5.5. Moment Capacity of Band in horizontal bending
Hoizontal Band Calculation

Seismic Force on Band (Fp )= Cp (1+hi/H) W

Design Seismic coefficient for the

structure Cp : 0.3375

Height of Band hi : 1 m

Height of Building H : 2.4 m

Contributory Strip Width w : 1.2

Length of the band L : 5.1 m

Seismic Force on Band Fp : 3.87 kN/m

Moment M : 10.07 kN/m

Steel Grade fy : 500

Permissible flexural stress of steel fs : 275

Lever arm t : 375 mm

Area of Bar in Each Face Ast : 97.68 mm2

Provide 3-8mm dia bar continuously throughout the wall in sill and
lintel level

Provide: 3-8mm dia bars in horizontal bands of 250mm wide from both side at sill and lintel level
throughout the structure.

CONCLUSION
17 | P a g e
  The structure is modelled considering the building as RC frame structure in which structural
sections were adequate but existing reinforcement slightly exceed the requirement.
Ensuring provision of bands structure is again modeled with infill masonry in which existing
frame reinforcement was found adequate. Again, in the same model infill wall stress
checked and required band strength is calculated for critical elements.

 Band details are as follows:

Ground Floor Horizontal Band

Sill Band : 250mm wide 3-8Dia Bars with

Lintel Band : 4.75@150c/c
250 mm wide 3-8 Dia Bars with
4.75@150c/c

Vertical Band : 3-8mm dia Bars @150mm C/C from

outside and 3-3mm dia bars @150mm
from inside with 4.75@150c/c at 4
unreinforced corners of the building

3. Bill of Quantity and Cost Estimate

Detailed bill of quantity and cost estimate is attached in Annex-1

4. Drawings
All drawings are provided in separate volume as Annex-2.

------------- END OF THE DOCUMENT ---------------

18 | P a g e
Annex-1 Bill of Quantity and Cost Estimate

19 | P a g e
Annex-2 Drawings

20 | P a g e