“SEISMIC STUDY AND RETROFITTING OF

ADMINISTRATIVE BLOCKOF MID-WESTERN

UNIVERSITY”

MID-WESTERN UNIVERSITY
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
CENTRAL CAMPUS OF ENGINEERING
Birendranagar-6, Surkhet
Presented By Group -I
Binod Kumar Tharu
Nabin Kumar Gupta
Prakash Diwakar Karna
Shubash Sah Godh
Sunil Kumar Das
Description of Project

 Location: Mid-Western University, Birendranagar, Surkhet

 Building Type: Masonry Structure
 Story height: Each storey height have different height
 No. of stories: 2 stories with stair cover
 Column: No column are provided
 Beam size : 230mm*350mm
 Slab thickness: 120mm thick slab
 Wall thickness: 350mm ground floor and 230mm in 1st and 2nd storey
 Type of foundation: Load bearing masonry foundation
Structural Assessment Check List

Load Path: Load bearing masonry wall

Redundancy: Beam are provides on first floor under slab
Geometry : Rectangular architecture and similar plan
Weak story/soft: No soft story
Vertical Discontinuities: No vertical discontinuities
Mass: Change in effective mass of different floor
Torsion: No significant torsion
Adjacent Buildings:No adjacent buildings
Short column: No short column effect
Deterioration of concrete: In foundations, on roof, projection slab
Deterioration of masonry joint in wall: In foundation below ground level
 Architectural Plan

A. Ground floor plan B. First floor plan C. Top floor plan

Elevation of Building
Section of Building
 Scope of the Project

 Strengthen load bearing masonry building

 Economise old heritage without affecting it’s cultural value in restoration
 Introduce a new technology in construction practice and control wastage of material
 Develop new skills in design and construction
 Objective of the Project

 To study the seismic evaluation and modelling of load bearing masonry structure
 To perform seismic retrofitting of the load bearing masonry structure (proposed building)
 Limitations of the Project

 This project is limited to the seismic damage identifications and evaluation only
 This project is only limited to modelling the masonry structure and it’s analysis
Methodology Site Visit and collection of data

Configuration- Related checks:

Load path, geometry, redundancy, weak/ soft storey,

vertical discontinuities, mass irregularity, torsion, adjacent buildings,

Seismic preliminary evaluation

Calculation of base shear

Selection and design of retrofit strategies

 

Comparison of various retrofitting option

Detail drawing & report

Construction, Quality Assurance and Control

 Seismic Evaluations

Dead load :
 Total dead load of top floor: 170 KN
 Total dead load of 1st floor: 1122 KN
 Total dead load of ground floor: 1682 KN

Total deal load of the building: 2974 KN

 Seismic Evaluations
Live load :
 Live load per sq. m = 3 kN/m2

Level Floor Floor area LL (kN/m2) 0.25LL (kN/m2)

3 Top floor 13.57 40.71 10.17

2 1st floor 98.615 246.45 61.63

1 Ground Floor 98.615 246.45 61.63

Ʃ  Total     138.56
 Seismic Evaluations

Lump mass :

Level Floor Total Dead Total Live Total Weight

    Load (KN) Load (KN) (KN)

3 Top Floor 170 40.71 210.71
2 First Floor 1122 246.45 1368.45
1 Ground Floor 1682 246.45 1928.45
Ʃ  Total     3508.1
 Seismic Evaluations
Distribution of Base Shear and shear Stress in the wall:

Floor Total weight Height hi Wi*hi^2 Wi*hi/ƩWihi^2 Qi (KN) Story

of building (m) Shear
(KN) Vi (KN)

3 170 8.035 10975.4 0.021 73.5 73.5

2 1122 5.815 37939.5 0.10 350 423.5

1 1684 2.995 15105.5 0.078 275.7 699.2

Ʃ 2974   64020.4 0.1 699.2  

 Modelling of Building

The building is modelled using program analysis software ETABS v17.

 The wall is modelled as thick shell masonry
 The slab is modelled as membrane
 The beam is modelled as rigid frame
 The weight of the floor slabs, corridor slabs, partition wall and outer wall have been
considered for dead load
 The unit weight of brick masonry wall is taken as 20 kN/m3.
 Unit weight of concrete is taken as 24 kN/m3.
 Live load on buildings have been taken as per IS: 875(Part 2)-1987. Earthquake
loads are calculated as per IS: 1893-1975.
 Zone factor (Z) is considered as 1.1
 Importance Factor (I) is taken as 1.5
 Response Reduction factor (R) is considered as 5
 Analysis of Building Before Retrofitting

The building is analysed by dynamic response spectrum method and following results are
obtained:
 Analysis of Building

The building is analysed by dynamic response spectrum method and following results are
obtained:
Max storey displacement due to loading
 Analysis of Building

The building is analysed by dynamic response spectrum method and following results are
obtained:
Base reactions:
Load
Case/Combo FX FY FZ MX MY MZ
  kN kN kN kN-m kN-m kN-m

Dead 0 0 3387.6078 16390.7633 -16014.4059 0

LCase1 Max 192.9425 35.259 0 211.0429 831.4352 1611.7492
Live1 0 0 910.3373 4728.8399 -4188.517 0

EQx -1599.1644 0 0 0 -8061.722 6875.7111

EQy 0 -1599.1644 0 8061.722 0 -8519.1784

Analysis of Building
Story Load Case/Combo Direction Max Drift Avg Drift Ratio
      mm mm  
Story3 Dead Y 0.029 0.008 3.526
Story3 LCase1 Max X 0.56 0.281 1.993
Story3 Live1 X 0.009 0.001 6.536
Story3 Live1 Y 0.02 0.005 3.673
Story3 EQx X 0.114 0.049 2.34
Story3 EQy X 0.108 0.028 3.818
Story3 EQy Y 0.139 0.035 4.028
Story2 Dead X 0.068 0.016 4.259 Table: story drift
Story2 Dead Y 0.016 0.005 3.416
Story2 LCase1 Max X 0.389 0.194 1.999
Story2 LCase1 Max Y 0.114 0.057 2
Story2 Live1 X 0.049 0.011 4.416
Story2 Live1 Y 0.012 0.003 3.405
Story2 EQx X 0.15 0.055 2.738
Story2 EQx Y 0.04 0.018 2.171
Story2 EQy X 0.055 0.012 4.5
Story2 EQy Y 0.136 0.051 2.652
Story1 Dead X 0.058 0.027 2.125
Story1 LCase1 Max X 0.066 0.033 1.999
Story1 LCase1 Max Y 0.012 0.006 2
Story1 Live1 X 0.035 0.017 2.127
Story1 EQx X 0.023 0.011 2.1
Story1 EQy X 0.011 0.005 2.223
Story1 EQy Y 0.01 0.004 2.433
 Retrofitting

After the detailed site measurement, investigation seismic evaluation and modelling the building the results
are compared with the guidelines provided by NRA(National Reconstruction Authority) named as
“REPAIR AND RETROFIT MANUAL FOR MASONRY STRUCTURE” . The most suitable retrofitting
technique splint and bandage method is adopted for retrofitting of the building.

 The Splint and Bandage system is considered as an economic version of jacketing of wall that’s why
this method is adopted
 Splints are vertical elements provided at corners, wall junctions and jambs of openings in the external
and internal faces
 The bandages are horizontal elements running around all the walls and building to integrate various
walls
 Retrofitting
Table: summery for retrofit design of bandage (applicable to RSMM, RDSM, RBMM RBMC1: 2
Plus attic storey and RBMC-2* : Three story)

S.N. Length of wall Rabar reinforcement in seismic belts

with overlapping of Ld mm

  In meter Concrete size mm Rebar no and dia

1 <_ 5.40 300*-40 2#10

Note: Material grade: M20 and Fe 500 or 415, ties 4.75 mm diameter bars @ 150 mm spacing.

Source: National Reconstruction Authority

 Retrofitting
Table: summery for retrofit design of splint (applicable to RSMM, RDSM, RBMM RBMC1: 2 Plus
attic storey and RBMC-2* : Three story)
Split: Rebar in RC seismic splint with overlapping of Ld. mm  
S.N. No. of story Story Concrete At T-junction At- corner junction Near the opening
size
(width*thick
ness)
Concrete grade M20, Rebar Grade Fe 500 thickness) No. Bar No. Bar(mm) No. Bar(mm)
(mm)
1. one   200*40 3 8 3 8 2 8
2. One plus attic attic 200*40 3 8 3 8 2 8
ground 200*40 3 8 3 8 2 8
3. Two First 200*40 3 8(10) 3 8 2 8
Ground 200*40 3 8(10) 3 8 2 8
4. Two plus Attic/second 200*40 3 10 3 8 2 8
attic/second
First 200*40 3 10 3 8 2 8
Ground 200*40 3 10 3 8 2 8

Source: National Reconstruction Authority

Retrofitting
Splint and bandage method

Fig. details splint and bandage

Retrofitting
Splint and bandage method

Fig. Plaster removed for splint and bandage

Retrofitting

Fig. excavation for tie-beam

 Retrofitting

Fig. placing of splint and bandage Fig. micro concreting on mesh

 Analysis of building after retrofitting

The building is analysed by dynamic response spectrum method and following results are
obtained:
Max storey displacement due to loading
Analysis of building after retrofitting
Base reactions:

Load
Case/Combo FX FY FZ MX MY MZ
  kN kN kN kN-m kN-m kN-m

Dead 0 0 2310.7613 11026.951 -10990.2551 0

LCase1 Max 238.3947 48.3949 0 232.2473 1200.2544 1411.4071

Live1 0 0 639.8886 3312.4598 -2938.2501 0

EQx -1039.5613 0 0 0 -5449.113 4470.8328

EQy 0 -1039.5613 0 5449.113 0 -5508.6956

Retrofitting
Story Load Case/Combo Direction Max Drift Avg Drift Ratio
      mm mm  
Story3 Dead X 0.000172 8.11E-05 2.116
Story3 LCase1 Max X 3.83E-05 2.13E-05 1.802
Story3 Lcase1 Max Y 0.000227 0.000117 1.94
Story3 Live1 Y 1.34E-05 3.06E-06 4.37
Story3 Eqx X 0.000354 0.000194 1.824
Story3 Eqx Y 9.69E-05 5.31E-05 1.826
Story3 Eqy Y 0.002 0.001 2.187
Story2 Dead X 2.96E-05 3.22E-06 9.208
Story2 Dead Y 8.57E-05 1.38E-05 6.235
Story2 Lcase1 Max X 0.001 0.000341 1.999
Story2 Lcase1 Max Y 0.000113 5.67E-05 1.994
Story2 Live1 X 1.8E-05 1.78E-06 10.122
Story2 Live1 Y 5.52E-05 1.07E-05 5.153
Story2 Eqx X 0.001 0.000216 2.529
Story2 Eqy Y 0.001 0.00049 2.369
Story1 Dead X 0.000121 2.22E-05 5.456
Story1 Dead Y 0.000249 4E-05 6.225
Story1 Lcase1 Max X 0.000342 0.000171 1.998
Story1 Lcase1 Max Y 4.78E-05 2.4E-05 1.99
Story1 Live1 X 7.29E-05 9.25E-06 7.872
Story1 Live1 Y 0.000178 2.82E-05 6.291
Story1 Eqx X 0.00031 0.000134 2.317 Table: Story drift
Story1 Eqy X 0.000107 3.63E-05 2.963
Story1 Eqy Y 0.000385 0.000129 2.995
 Conclusion

During this project study it has been observed and felt after every earthquake cause failure a number of buildings that has created chaos in

society. A large number of historical deficient structures need to be retrofitted with economical techniques to preserve those structure.

Administrative Block of Mid-Western University has been carried out and for damaged wall has been retrofitted by splint and bandage method

and after retrofitting the building will perform as expected during any seismic activity.

The project has certainly boosted our confidence in tackling the problem that may arises during our professional life which ultimately one of

the goals of the prescription of the course.

Finally, we hope that our report could serve as a reference to perform such work in future, will help our junior students and such other

retrofitting work.

(site work)
THANK YOU !!!