Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings For Seismic Hazard

2014
Integrated Rapid Visual

Screening of Buildings
for Seismic Hazard
A GUIDE BOOK FOR INTEGRATED RAPID

VISUAL SCREENINGS OF BUILDINGS
INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING
TARU Leading Edge Private Ltd.

Gurgaon, India.
Disclaimer: This Guidebook is not copyrighted. This guidebook is created to use it as reference
document for the building inspectors in conducting rapid visual screening of buildings. You are
encouraged to use and print any of the materials within it, however original source should be
properly mentioned in copying/reprinting the material.
November 2014
Edited by: Anup Karanth
Author: Shashank Mishra
TARU
Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings
Ver 1.0
Preface
In recent past due to rapid growth of Indian cities, there is a tremendous increase on housing
industry, especially in seismic Zone-IV & V. As most of these constructions are without
earthquake resistant measures, the built environment in these zones has been found seismically
vulnerable. Since Indian cities are built with varied varieties of building typologies, comprising of
poorly designed and less maintained ones, the seismic safety of these constructions became the
most challenging task. Seismic vulnerability is a measure of the seismic strength or capacity of a
structure, hence it is found to be the main component of seismic risk assessment. Detailed seismic
vulnerability evaluation is a technically complex and expensive procedure and can only be
performed on a limited number of buildings. It is therefore very important to use simpler
procedures that can help to rapidly evaluate the vulnerability profile of different types of
buildings, so that the more complex evaluation procedures can be limited to the most critical
buildings.
Different methods for seismic evaluation of existing buildings have developed in various countries.
Most of the methods follow three level assessment procedures, (a) rapid visual screening (RVS),
(b) preliminary assessment, and (c) detailed evaluation. RVS of buildings is the first step of the
building vulnerability assessment. It was observed that few buildings scored well on available
standard RVS format performed poorly in previous earthquake events. It was due to non- inclusion
of building distress issues which severely affect the load carrying capacity of the buildings. An
integrated RVS term is used here to include building distress parameters. Later preliminary and
detailed vulnerability assessment can be carried out on the selected number of buildings according
to the performance score of the buildings.
This guide book is developed on the basis of the TARUs experience of conducting building
vulnerability assessment on large scale across different parts of the country. Their rich experience
of conducting RVS training program in different states of the country contributed effectively in
developing this guide book.
This guide book is intended to serve as guiding document of conducting the RVS of buildings in
India. This guide serves the purpose of a reference book for building inspectors who may use it
during field survey. This book provides detail of seismic safety features of both masonry and
reinforced concrete frame (RC) buildings. Non-structural hazards are also covered briefly in this
guide book as they share a large percentage in terms of economic damage and also pose threat to
human safety. Some examples of RVS format and studies were also cited here.
TARU acknowledges all the people involved in their previous building vulnerability assessment
studies in different states of India who have contributed directly or indirectly in the development
of this guide book. Discussions on different aspect of RVS during training programs have been
very useful in providing the final shape to this guide book.
TARU
Ver 1.0
Table of Content
Abbreviation................................................................................................................................................................ 6
Chapter 1. Introduction ........................................................................................................................................... 7
1.1 Background: ..................................................................................................................................................... 7
1.2 Building Vulnerability Assessment: ......................................................................................................... 7
1.3 Integrated Rapid Visual Screening:.......................................................................................................... 8
1.4 How to Use this Guide Book: .................................................................................................................... 8
Chapter 2. Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings...................................................................... 10
2.1 General Information Required for RVS: ............................................................................................... 10
2.1.1 Building Name and Address:................................................................................................................. 10
2.1.2 Use of Building: ....................................................................................................................................... 10
2.1.3 Building Types: ........................................................................................................................................ 10
2.1.4 Number of Stories:.................................................................................................................................. 11
2.1.5 Built-Up Area: .......................................................................................................................................... 11
2.1.6 Age of Buildings: ..................................................................................................................................... 11
2.1.7 Type of Wall, Roof and Floor Material: .............................................................................................. 12
2.1.8 Type of Roof:........................................................................................................................................... 12
2.1.9 Type of Mortar: ....................................................................................................................................... 13
2.2 Geotechnical Characteristics:................................................................................................................... 13
2.2.1 Site Morphology: ..................................................................................................................................... 13
2.2.2 Depth of Water Table: ........................................................................................................................... 13
2.2.3 Type of Soil: ............................................................................................................................................. 13
2.2.4 Expansive and Non Expansive Soil: .................................................................................................... 14
2.3 Seismic Safety Features of Masonry Buildings: ................................................................................. 14
2.3.1 Horizontal Plan Irregularity: .................................................................................................................. 14
2.3.2 Vertical Irregularities:.............................................................................................................................. 15
2.3.3 Horizontal Bands: ................................................................................................................................... 16
2.3.4 Vertical Reinforcement in Jamb openings: ......................................................................................... 17
2.3.5 Vertical Reinforcement at Corner of the wall:.................................................................................... 17
2.3.6 Diaphragm Opening: .............................................................................................................................. 18
2.3.7 Distance Between two openings:.......................................................................................................... 19
2.3.8 Percentage of Opening in 1, 2 and 3 or more storey Building: ....................................................... 19
2.3.9 Length of Wall Between two cross wall: ............................................................................................. 19
2.4. Seismic Safety Features of RC Frame Buildings: ............................................................................. 20
2.4.1 Frame Action: .......................................................................................................................................... 20
2.4.2 Presence of Soft Storey: ......................................................................................................................... 20
TARU
Ver 1.0
2.4.3 Short Column Effect: ............................................................................................................................. 20

2.4.4 Concept of Weak Beam Strong Column: ............................................................................................ 21
2.4.5 Pounding of Buildings: ........................................................................................................................... 21
2.5 Building Distress and Other important features:............................................................................... 21
2.5.1 Cracks in the Building: ........................................................................................................................... 21
2.5.2 Building Distress: .................................................................................................................................... 21
2.5.3 Water Seepage: ......................................................................................................................................... 23
2.5.4 Corrosion of Reinforcement: ................................................................................................................ 23
2.5.5 Quality of Construction: ........................................................................................................................ 23
2.5.6 Quality of Concrete: ............................................................................................................................... 23
2.6 Non Structural Falling Hazards: ............................................................................................................. 24
Chapter 3. Performance/RVS Score of the Building ................................................................................... 25
3.1 Background:................................................................................................................................................... 25
3.2 Methodology: ................................................................................................................................................ 25
Chapter 4. Preliminary and Detailed Vulnerability Assessment............................................................... 28
4.1 Preliminary Vulnerability Assessment:.................................................................................................. 28
4.2 Detailed Vulnerability Assessment: ....................................................................................................... 28
References ................................................................................................................................................................. 29
Annexure 1: Seismic Zone in India .................................................................................................................... 30
Annexure 2: BIS codes for Seismic Safety of Structures ............................................................................. 31
Annexure 3: RVS Format ...................................................................................................................................... 34
Annexure 4: Example of RVS Scoring of Building ....................................................................................... 40
TARU
Ver 1.0
Abbreviation
FEMA
TARU
Federal Emergency Management Agency
METU
Middle East Technical University
BIS
Bureau of Indian Standard
BVA
Building Vulnerability Assessment
RVS
Rapid Visual Screening
PVA
Preliminary Vulnerability Assessment
DVA
Detailed Vulnerability Assessment
NDT
Non Destructive Testing
NDMA
National Disaster Management Authority
NIDM
National Institute of Disaster Management
FEM
Finite Element Method
AEM
Applied Element Method
NBC
National Building Code
PS
Performance Score
BS
Basic Score
VS
Vulnerability Score
VSM
Vulnerability Score Modifier
Ver 1.0
Chapter 1. Introduction
1.1 Background: Past earthquake events in the last few decades like Jabalpur earthquake (1997),
Uttarkashi earthquake (1991), Latur earthquake (1993), Bhuj Earthquake (2001), Jammu &
Kashmir (J&K) earthquake (2005) and Sikkim earthquake (2011) have widely exposed the
vulnerability of buildings in India. These earthquake events cause massive damage to buildings.
Jammu & Kashmir (J&K) earthquake of 8th October 2005 caused massive destruction to lives and
properties in Pakistan as well as Indian part of J&K. Official report confirms 1300 death and
collapse of 37607 masonry buildings in Indian part of J&K (Source: Arya 2005). Bhuj earthquake
of 26th January 2001 took the lives of 13805 people and 12, 05,198 houses were partially or severely
damaged (Source: Govt. of Gujarat). Sikkim earthquake of magnitude M6.8 damaged around
55000 buildings (NDMA 2011).
Studies on the damage of buildings and other structures during the past earthquakes have clearly
brought out the causes of severe damages which include either lack of earthquake resistant design,
not following the provisions of the Bureau of Indian Standards Building Codes, faulty building
practices and also poor maintenance of buildings. Lack of arrangement of proper drainage help
rainy water to seepage through foundations and deteriorate it. This may cause the settlement of
foundation which increases the risk of developing large cracks in the building. For safety from
earthquake hazards in future, the seismic resistance of most of the existing buildings will need
upgrading by retrofitting procedures. Vulnerability of the various existing buildings need to be
assessed for prioritizing the buildings for seismic upgrading.
1.2 Building Vulnerability Assessment: Building vulnerability assessment (BVA) is required

to assess the condition of building stock present across the state. BVA should be undertaken to
identify the buildings and critical infrastructure which require special attention in order to make
them more resistant against the natural disasters.
Visual examination of building structural and non structural features
Integrated building distress features, cracks details, corrosion of reinforcement and water
seepage problem
Rapid Visual
Screening
Collection of drawings and redraw in AutoCAD

Preliminary Load Calculations and Preliminary Evaluations
Vulnerability Configuration and strength related checks using NDT methods
Assessment
Detailed evaluation of each building component

Linear and Non Linear Analysis using FEM, AEM and Push over analysis
Detailed
Vulnerability Development of Fragility Curve
Assessment
Figure 1: Building Vulnerability Assessment Process (TARU, 2013)
Building vulnerability assessment (BVA) is a three stage process. It includes rapid visual screening
(RVS) of buildings, preliminary vulnerability assessment (PVA) and detailed vulnerability
assessment (DVA). RVS is the first step towards assessing the vulnerability of buildings. RVS is
TARU
Ver 1.0
used as a tool to identify the buildings which require further attention for strengthening their safety.
PVA and DVA is carried out on selected number of buildings only due to their high cost, time
consuming process and technical complexity. PVA procedure requires information obtained from
visual information, architectural/ structural drawings or on-site measurement and material
characteristics obtained from non-destructive testing of buildings. DVA procedure requires
detailed computer analysis hence more complex in nature.
1.3 Integrated Rapid Visual Screening: Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) methodology was first
developed by Applied Technology Council in the late 1980s and published in FEMA 154 in
1988. RVS format was first time introduced for masonry buildings in Indian building code in 2009
i.e. IS 13935:2009 Seismic Evaluation, Repair and Strengthening of Masonry Buildings Guidelines. This RVS format was designed for earthquake.
RVS is a form of survey to identify the buildings which are expected to be more vulnerable under
an earthquake. It is used to prioritize the buildings in a jurisdiction for further evaluation and
retrofit for seismic forces (CPWD 2007). RVS is designed to evaluate the primary lateral load
resisting system and to identify the building attributes that modify the seismic performance of the
lateral load resisting system along with the non-structural components. A building may require 15
to 30 minutes for RVS depending upon the size of the building. Data collection and decision
making process will occur at the building site.
Table 1: Integrated RVS Process for Seismic Hazard
General Information
Use of Building
Geotechnical
Characteristics
Building Types
Vulnerability Factors
Name and Address of Building, Number of Storey, Built up area, Age of Building
Residential, Educational. Institutional, Assembly, Commercial, Emergency, Service,
Important Government Office and Cowsheds
Site Morphology, Soil type, Soil Nature, Liquefaction Potential of soils, Slope of the
ground
Rammed Earth, Brick Masonry, Stone Masonry, RC Frame, Wooden Structures and
Others
Architectural Features: Shape of the building, Dimension of building
Material Characteristics: Material of wall, floor and roof, mortar, ratio of mix
mortar
Structural Features: orthogonal frame, presence of secondary beams, presence of
horizontal band, ratio of wall length and height to the thickness of the wall
Workmanship: Quality of concreting, quality of construction
Building Distress: presence of cracks, cracks width and their shape, different
deformation, level of corrosion
Source: TARU Analysis 2013
Standard RVS format available in India does not capture the building distress features such as type
and width of cracks in the building, foundation settlement, sagging of beam or floor etc. Other
features such as water seepage problem, corrosion of reinforcement, lack of maintenance issues
etc. did not appear in the format which may severely reduce the load carrying capacity of the
buildings. It is found that buildings performed well on these standard RVS format may get severely
damaged during earthquake due to non-inclusion of above mentioned factors. To avoid these
shortcoming, integrated RVS is introduced which includes building distress and other important
parameters also. This information may also be utilized in conducting preliminary and detailed
vulnerability assessment of the buildings.
1.4 How to Use this Guide Book: This guide book has been designed to facilitate the building
inspectors (engineers/ architects) in conducting the integrated rapid visual screening of buildings.
Chapter 1 describes the need of vulnerability assessment of buildings and concept of integrated of
rapid visual screening of buildings. Chapter 2 contains detailed information on the parameters to
TARU
Ver 1.0
be looked upon while conducting integrated RVS. Subsections in chapter 2 describe the parameters
needed about the general information of building, seismic safety of masonry and RC frame
buildings, building distress and conditional assessment of the building and non-structural falling
hazards. Chapter 3 provides guidance on data analysis and interpretation of result of RVS survey.
Chapter 4 provides brief description of PVA and DVA which need to be carried out for selected
buildings on the basis of performance score. Chapter 5 draws the conclusion.
Seismic zonation of India, IS code for seismic safety of buildings and some samples of RVS format
have been described in annexure 1,2 & 3 respectively. Annexure 4 shows example of RVS/
performance scoring of masonry and RC frame buildings.
TARU
Ver 1.0
Chapter 2. Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

This chapter describes the detail information of those structural and non-structural parameters
which are required to be assessed during integrated rapid visual screening of the building.
2.1 General Information Required for RVS:

The first step in conducting the integrated rapid visual screening of buildings is to fill the general
information about the building which is being surveyed. The information consists of name &
address of the building, type of use, built up area, building type, type of mortar and type of material
used in floor, wall and roof construction.
2.1.1 Building Name and Address: Name of the building and name of the owner of the building
should be filled into the RVS form. Address of the building should be entered along with the name
of the village/block, district and the state. This information will help to identify the building if it
has to be further assessed for preliminary and detailed vulnerability assessment.
2.1.2 Use of Building: Purpose of occupancy of the building is important to know. Type of
occupancy helps to prioritize the buildings for risk mitigation measures. Change in the occupancy
of building over a period of time pose a threat as building originally designed to carry a certain
load may cross the limit of designed load.
Building use can be defined in four different classes i.e. Residential, Institutional (schools, college,
hospital, old age homes, training centre etc.), Commercial/office (offices, shops and industrial
building, fire station etc.) and Mixed (buildings used for multiple purposes such as residential and
commercial both).
2.1.3 Building Types: Type of building should be identified as the first most important step
before collecting the various relevant information during RVS. Major Building typologies can be
classified into 6 different groups on the basis of the element which can take lateral load induced
due to earthquakes. These 6 groups are Brick Masonry, Stone Masonry, RC Frame, Mud/Adobe
buildings, Wood/ Bamboo, Hybrid type (polythene, grass, thatch, GI sheet etc.).
Rammed Earth/ Adobe Building (Kangra,2013)
TARU
Stone Masonry Building ( Kinnaur,2013)
Ver 1.0
10
Brick Masonry Building (J&K,2013)
RC Frame Building (Kangra, 2013)
Wooden Structure (Rakcham Village, Kinnaur, 2013)
Hybrid Construction (J&K, 2013)
Figure 2: Type of Buildings (Source: TARU, 2013)
In masonry buildings, load bearing walls bear the lateral load generated due to earthquake while in
RC frame structures, lateral load is taken by RC frame made of beam and column. Infill walls in
RC frame structures are not supposed to carry any lateral load. Hybrid structures are more
dangerous as there is no clear load carrying path in those buildings.
2.1.4 Number of Stories: Number of stories in the buildings are counted by assuming ground
floor as the first storey. Taller building attract large earthquake forces hence they are unsafe in
seismic zone IV and V. National building code of India (NBC2005) specifies that 4 stories
buildings are not allowed in seismic zone V area.
2.1.5 Built-Up Area: It is the amount of space, the building floor plan covers. It is normally
measured in square feet or square meters. If the building has multiple floors, the total built-up area
of all floors is taken into account. All usable interior space is included in the build-up area, apart
from outdoor balconies, but excluding elevator/staircase area.
2.1.6 Age of Buildings: Age of the buildings need to be find out from owner of the building or
from the building drawings if available. Older buildings should be assessed more carefully for
building distress elements. Age of the buildings also helps in getting the information about
presence of seismic safety features in the buildings. Example: masonry buildings built before 1993
TARU
Ver 1.0
11
can be assumed that they do not have any horizontal seismic band as IS code describing horizontal
bands was only published in 1993. Age can be classified into six groups of 10 years span.
Table 2: Age of the Building in years
0-10
11-20
21-30
31-40
41-50
>50
2.1.7 Type of Wall, Roof and Floor Material: A wide variety of building materials are used in
urban and rural areas of India. These include local material such as mud, straw, wood, semi
engineered material such as burnt brick and stone masonry and engineered material such as
concrete and steel. The seismic vulnerability of different building types depend upon the choice
of building materials and construction technology adopted. Generally building vulnerability is
highest with the use of local material without any engineering input and lowest with the use of
engineered materials and skills.
Information about the type of material used in the construction of wall, roof and floor must be
collected. Wall can be made of burnt/ unburnt brick, dressed/undressed stone, bamboo, wood,
grass/thatch, mud/ rammed earth/adobe, GI sheet etc. Floor can be made of mud, cement
concrete, tiles, wood/ bamboo etc. Roof is generally made of reinforced brick concrete, reinforced
concrete, GI/ Asbestos sheet, Wood/bamboo, grass/thatch etc. Heavy roofs are dangerous to
human safety.
2.1.8 Type of Roof: Roofs are divided into two category i.e. flat and slope roof. In masonry
buildings, flat roof act as the roof band to keep the roof intact with all four walls while roof band
has to be provided for sloping roof. Sloping roof may be of different kind such as gable roof, hip
roof, shed roof (single sloped roof) etc. Some roof types are shown below:
Flat Roof (Una, 2013)
TARU
Shed Roof (Kangra, 2013)
Ver 1.0
12
Gable Roof (Dharmsala, 2013)
Hip Roof (Kangra,2013)
Figure 3: Type of Roof (Source: TARU.2013)
2.1.9 Type of Mortar: Type of material used in masonry construction play a major role in defining
the crushing strength. Mortars used in the building construction can be mud, lime or cement. Few
buildings are constructed without using any mortar and hence structurally very weak such as stone
masonry buildings made of dressed stone. Buildings without mortar collapse easily during
earthquake due to poor no bond strength of stones or bricks.
2.2 Geotechnical Characteristics:

This section describes the site morphology and soil characteristics.
2.2.1 Site Morphology: Topography affects the amplification of the ground motion in case of
earthquake. Select the appropriate option whether the site is located in a flat topography,
downward slope, trough or crest.
Flat: Site where the ground slope varies from 0 to 5 degree, is considered as flat.
Crest: Crest is the peak point of the hill.
Downward Slope: Building site located on the slope of the hill or mountain.
Trough: Trough is the narrow depression between two downward slopping hills.
2.2.2 Depth of Water Table: Depth of water table (in feet) has to be recorded for identifying
liquefaction potential and potential damage of foundation both. A higher water table may cause
the settlement of foundation due to softening of soil.
2.2.3 Type of Soil: IS 1893:2002 (Part 1) classifies the soil type into three category i.e. hard,
medium and soft. The appropriate choice is to be selected after examining the soil condition.
Generally soil found near the river bed are soft and soils with presence of boulders are considered
as hard soil elsewhere it is considered as medium.
TARU
Ver 1.0
13
2.2.4 Expansive and Non Expansive Soil: Soils

should be classified according to their expansive nature.
Expansive soils are those soils which have a tendency
to increase in volume whenever water/ moisture
content are increased. Foundations resting on the
expansive soil will heave and cause damage to the
building by settlement or lifting of the building. Black
cotton soil is the example of expansive soils. These soils
can be identified by the cracks developed in the
summers.
Figure 4: Crack pattern of expensive soil
The expansive nature of the soil can be recognized by in dry season
observing the polygonal crack pattern in the dry season.
(Source: www.irrigationtutorials.com)
Expansive soil contains organic material. Expansive soil will stick to the shoes or tires of a vehicle
during the wet season.
All other soils which do not show above mentioned characteristics are termed as non-expansive
soil.
2.2.5 Liquefaction Potential: Liquefaction is a state of soil when the effective stress of the soil
is reduced to zero i.e. the complete loss of shear strength. Liquefaction can occur at the time of
the earthquake when the soil starts behaving like a freely flowing fluid. Sandy soils with high
water table (water table <3m from the ground surface) are susceptible to liquefaction.
Figure 5: Liquefaction (Bhuj Earthquake 2001, India) & Building damage due to liquefaction of soil (Niigata
Earthquake 1964, Japan)
(Source: http://www.ceri.memphis.edu/gujarat/& en.wikipedia.org)
2.3 Seismic Safety Features of Masonry Buildings: This section describes the seismic
safety features of masonry buildings.
2.3.1 Horizontal Plan Irregularity: Buildings with simple and regular plan configuration behave
well in the earthquake. Shape of the building should be judged in the plan view to check whether
its regular or irregular configuration. Rectangular / square or circular buildings are regular
configuration.
TARU
Ver 1.0
14
L Shaped
H Shaped
T Shaped
U Shaped
+ Shaped
Figure 6: Shape of the Buildings (TARU Analysis, 2013)
A building shaped like a box, as rectangular both in plan and elevation, is inherently stronger than
one that is L-shaped or U-shaped, such as a building with wings. An irregularly shaped building
will twist as it shakes, increasing the damage. Buildings with shapes of L, H, U, T, E or + in plan
are undesirable as they invite severe damage due to the presence of re-entrant corners. In these
shapes, each wing of the building starts shaking separately in earthquake which can lead to potential
collapse.
2.3.2 Vertical Irregularities: It is a deficiency of building that can be detected by observation on
the elevation of existing buildings. Presence of step-back and setback in the buildings should be
identified.
Setback is the step like recession of floor of the building in one horizontal direction.
Step-back is step like recession on the ground above which different building stories are
constructed
Buildings constructed in hilly areas have peculiar structural configurations. Successive floors of
such buildings step back towards the hill slope and sometimes, the buildings also set back. The
stepping back of building towards hill slope results in unequal column heights in the same storey,
which causes severe stiffness irregularities in along- and cross-slope directions.
TARU
Ver 1.0
15
Fig. 32 Stepback building

(Source: WCEE, 2012)
Fig.33 Setback and Stepback both

(Source: WCEE, 2012)
2.3.3 Horizontal Bands: Horizontal bands are provided in the masonry buildings to hold building
as a single unit by tying all the walls together. There are four types of horizontal band i.e. plinth,
sill, lintel and roof band. Absence of these bands with poor connection of wall at corner joints is
the primary cause of the collapse of many masonry buildings during the earthquake.
Plinth band is used when there is susceptibility to uneven settlement of foundation soil.
Lintel band is the most important one as it ties the wall together and creates a support for walls
loaded along the weak direction from walls loaded in a strong direction.
Sill band is used to keep the door and window intact with the wall.
Roof band is only required in case of sloped roofs to provide integral action between roof and
wall. In flat reinforced concrete roofs or reinforced brick roofs, roof slab plays a role of roof band.
These horizontal bands should be carefully observed in masonry building. These bands will not be
observed in a plastered building. In such case, rear wall of the building should be observed to
check these bands as people have tendency to leave the rear side of the wall without plaster.
Figure 7: Building with all horizontal bands (Source: CPWD handbook, 2007)
TARU
Ver 1.0
16
2.3.4 Vertical Reinforcement in Jamb openings: Door and window opening reduces the stiffness
of the wall and these areas are more prone to develop diagonal (shear) cracks during earthquake. Vertical
reinforcement at the jamb openings reduces the possibility of developing these cracks.
All door and window openings wider than 600 mm will have vertical reinforcement in jambs as shown in
figure. Vertical reinforcement should start from foundation of the floor and terminate in lintel band.
Figure 8: Details of Providing Vertical Steel Bars at door and windows opening (Source: Earthquake Safe
Construction for seismic zone IV, NDMA)
2.3.5 Vertical Reinforcement at Corner of the wall: Vertical reinforcement at the corner of the
walls forces the masonry pier to undergo bending by delaying the diagonal cracking. Vertical bars enhance
lateral load carrying capacity of walls. If properly embedded, vertical steel bars protect the wall from sliding
as well as from collapsing in weak direction. Vertical reinforcement shall start from foundation, passing
through all seismic bands, it should be tied to roof slab/ roof band. In case of extension of reinforcement
in multiple storey building, atleast 50 times diameter of overlap length should be provided. Diameter of the
vertical bar depend upon the number of storey.
TARU
Ver 1.0
17
Figure 9: Recommended Size of Vertical Steel (Zone IV) & Typical Details of Providing Vertical Bars in
Brick Masonry Buildings (Source: Earthquake Safe Construction for seismic zone IV, NDMA)
Figure 10: Recommended joint details with the vertical reinforcement at corner for masonry walls using
different kind of materials (Source: Earthquake Safe Construction for seismic zone IV, NDMA)
2.3.6 Diaphragm Opening: The horizontal forces generated by the ground motion at different
locations of the floor must be transferred to the vertical elements such as walls. The floor must
act as a diaphragm to accomplish this required action. Discontinuity in the diaphragm due to large
cut outs reduces the ability of diaphragm to transfer lateral forces to the walls.
TARU
Ver 1.0
18
IS 1893:2002 table 3 describes the diaphragm discontinuity in terms of large cut out or opening
more than 50% of the gross diaphragm area. These cut outs are provided for staircase and
sometimes for providing the light with perforated steel sheets in the middle of the floor.
Diaphragm opening can be located in the centre or corner. Opening near the corner is more
dangerous. Diaphragm or diaphragm discontinuity can be identified only if access to a building is
possible.
2.3.7 Distance Between two openings: IS 4326:1993 defines the criteria of minimum distance
for opening from the corner of the wall and minimum distance to be maintained between two
separate openings on a wall. Distance of opening from the corner of the wall should be minimum
450mm for brick masonry and 560 mm for stone masonry buildings. Minimum distance between
two openings should be approximately 560 mm.
Undesirable due to large

opening near the wall corner
Acceptable (small opening and

centrally located)
Figure 11: Distance between Two Openings (Source: TARU Analysis, 2013)
2.3.8 Percentage of Opening in 1, 2 and 3 or more storey Building: Any wall opening more
than 50% is highly undesirable and vulnerable for the earthquake. Large openings reduce the lateral
resistance of the buildings. Opening should be small and centrally located in the buildings.
Opening should be avoided near the column or at the corner of the wall. Large openings lead to
cracking due to concentration of masses.
According to IS 4326:1993, percentage opening of the wall should decrease with the increasing
number of stories. For second and third storey, opening should be restricted to 42% and 33%
respectively.
2.3.9 Length of Wall Between two cross wall: IS 13935:2009 (table 3) defines the limit for
length and height of the wall for a given wall thickness. If length of the wall between two cross
walls is exceeding the defined limit, it is structurally unsafe for building situated in seismic zone IV
and V. Long wall have the tendency of overturning due to out of plane movement. Buttress can
be provided to reduce the length of long wall in existing buildings.
Table 3: Length and Height of wall between two cross wall (as per IS4326:1993)
Maximum length between two cross walls= 35 thickness of wall or 8m whichever less
Maximum height of the wall= 15 thickness of the wall or 4m whichever less
TARU
Ver 1.0
19
2.4. Seismic Safety Features of RC Frame Buildings: This section describe the seismic
safety features of RC Frame building.
2.4.1 Frame Action: Proper frame action is the key to horizontal load transfer mechanism in RC
frame buildings. Having RC frame in the building does not ensure the proper frame action during
an earthquake. For a proper frame action, beams and columns should be orthogonal to each other.
Secondary beams should be provided to transfer the load of the slab to primary beams and then
primary beams transfer the load to columns.
Primary beams run through column to column.
Secondary beams are those beams which support the slab and runs between primary beams.
Figure 12: Arrangement of primary beam, secondary beam and columns (Source: www.petervaldivia.com)
2.4.2 Presence of Soft Storey: IS 1893:2002 defines that soft storey is the one in which the lateral
stiffness is less than 70% of that in the storey above or less than 80% of the average lateral stiffness
of the three storey above. Buildings with open parking area on ground storey, stilt buildings or
buildings with large windows and doors for commercial areas will come under soft storey.
2.4.3 Short Column Effect: Building on the hill slope can have
unequal columns on the ground storey. Short columns being stiffer
attract more horizontal forces and are susceptible to fail in shear if
they are not designed to take care of this effect. Buildings in slope
should be carefully identified for unequal height of the columns. If
a column length cannot be fully utilized during earthquake sway
due to restriction in its movement, it is also called as short column
effect. It is observed in those column where free column length is
reduced due to attached brick wall up to certain length.
Figure 13: Short Column Effect

(Source: TARU, 2013)
TARU
Ver 1.0
20
2.4.4 Concept of Weak Beam Strong Column: Seismic lateral forces generated at the floor level
are transferred through beam and columns to foundation. Failure of beam create a localized effect
while failure of column can collapse the whole building. This is the reason why RC frame buildings
are designed on weak beam-strong column concept. Slender cross section of column with large
section of beam represents the strong beam and weak column concept which is dangerous for the
overall safety of the building.
2.4.5 Pounding of Buildings: Two buildings should not be too close to each other as they have
the possibility of collision to each other in case of vibration caused by earthquake. This effect is
called as pounding and effect is more severe for tall buildings.
Figure 14: Pounding of Buildings during an earthquake (Reference: Learning Earthquake Design and
Construction, IITK-BMTPC Earthquake Tip 6 by Prof. C.V.R. Murty)
2.5 Building Distress and Other important features: This section describes the building
distress and other parameters related to building maintenance which reduces the safety of the
building.
2.5.1 Cracks in the Building: Present condition of the building should be assessed properly.
Cracks in the building elements (wall, beam and column) make buildings more vulnerable to
natural disasters. Crack pattern defines the cause responsible for the formation of these cracks.
Walls, beams and columns should be carefully examined to identify the structural cracks. If present,
shape (horizontal, vertical or diagonal) and size of these cracks should be identified. Crack size is
classified into two categories i.e. M1= Minor (0-5mm), M2= Major (>5mm). M2 size cracks
show the advance state of damage in the buildings which require major interventions to prevent
the partial or full collapse of the buildings.
2.5.2 Building Distress: Building distress can occur due to lack of maintenance, faulty design of
buildings, poor quality of construction, corrosion of reinforcement, settlement of foundation or
extreme loading. Various types of building distress are described below.
Settlement cracks run through the whole length of the wall and they appear on the building
resting on the loose soil with inappropriate foundation.
TARU
Ver 1.0
21
Figure 15: Settlement cracks in the wall of the building (Source: TARU Analysis, 2013)
In stone masonry construction, wythe separation occurs due to lack of through stones and the
use of round boulders which prevent the proper interlocking of stones.
Figure 16: Type of damage: wythe separation and Shear cracks in the columns (from left to right) (Source:
Visual Damage Identification Guide, TARU (1999))
Diagonal cracks develop near the opening of windows and doors due to shear failure. Diagonal
(shear) cracks in columns can be found due to failure of stirrups which are used to bind the
steel bars in RCC columns.
Bulging of the wall or column can occur if the thickness of the wall or column is insufficiently
thick in comparison to the building height that lead to the wall/ column instability. This problem
also occurs when additional floors are added to an existing building.
Figure 17: Bulging of Wall (Source: www.1stchoiceimages.co.uk) & Corner Crack in the wall (left to right)
TARU
Ver 1.0
22
Cracks in the corner of the wall are found if the walls are not jointed together at the corner joint
by providing the sufficient reinforcement.
Wall overturning and column sway should be recorded as these defects reduce the load carrying
capacity of the building elements.
Excess weight on the roof or excessive self-weight of the roof itself causes the roof sagging which
can lead to collapse of the roof in the future. Sagging may also result due to problems in the roof
framing members such as rafters. Rafter is a type of beam which support the roof of the building.
Horizontal cracks in the beam develop due to corrosion of reinforcement in the beam or due
to insufficient concrete cover. Vertical and diagonal cracks in the beam develop due to
increased bending stress and shear stress respectively.
2.5.3 Water Seepage: Buildings should be inspected for water seepage problem. Water seepage
problems may occur due to defective water supply pipes, sanitary fitments or drainage pipes. It
may also occur due to water seeping through roofs or exterior walls. This may cause damping of
the concrete and may pose threat to the structural safety of the buildings.
2.5.4 Corrosion of Reinforcement: If there are cracks in the wall or roof, corrosion of reinforced
steel bars may occur due to its exposure to rain water, moisture and air. If reinforcement is
corroded in column and beam, vertical and horizontal cracks will appear on the column and beam
respectively.
2.5.5 Quality of Construction: Construction of buildings with uniform size and shape of column
and beams, without any structural defects or damages should be considered as good apparent
quality. Construction with minor non-structural cracks but without any tilting of building element
should be considered as moderate and buildings with structural cracks and non-uniform building
elements should be considered of bad quality of construction.
2.5.6 Quality of Concrete:
If there is honeycombing in the concrete, it should be considered poor quality of concrete.
Honeycombing can be seen only in fresh concrete. Concrete with very fine non-structural cracks
is acceptable and can be considered moderate. A uniform non segregated concrete with smooth
finishing should be considered of good quality.
Figure 18: Honeycombing in Concrete (Source: http://www.ecocem.ie)
TARU
Ver 1.0
23
2.6 Non Structural Falling Hazards: Amplification of ground motion occurs along the
height of the structure and long structures attract more seismic force. Non anchored or poorly
anchored things such as parapets, chimney, cladding, water tank, communication tower, heavy
machines, big hoardings, heavy furniture etc., can fall down over the building leading to local
damage or collapse due to increased accelerations or displacements. These falling hazards can
cause both life loss and property damage.
Heavy wooden or steel cupboard and hanging big hoardings are very common falling hazard in
public building like schools, hospitals and offices. In case of hospitals, non-structural elements
contribute a larger percentage of total damage loss. Medical equipment on rollers and medicines
on the racks should be properly anchored to avoid damage of medical facilities (fig.20).
Gangtok, 2013 (Source: TARU)
Hamirpur, 2013 (Source: TARU)
Figure 19: Non-anchored water tank & Big hanging hoardings at the entrance (from left to right)
Gangtok, 2013
Gangtok, 2013
Figure 20: office with no space to escape in emergency & Non-anchored roller supported medical equipment
(From left to right) (Source: TARU)
TARU
Ver 1.0
24
Chapter 3. Performance/RVS Score of the Building

3.1 Background: Indian seismic zone is divided into four category i.e. Zone II, III, IV and V.
RVS scoring methods proposed in FEMA and METU are analysed to see their applicability for
Indian conditions. In RVS score method of USA designed by FEMA, a Pre-Code penalty is given
for buildings designed and constructed before the enforcements of seismic codes. Similarly a PostBenchmark positive attribute is assigned to buildings constructed after the enforcement of seismic
codes. It has heavy reliance on the year of construction and effective enforcement mechanism of
seismic codes in building construction assuming that the building would surely fulfil the codal
requirement applicable at the time of construction. This is not true in cases of India where often
seismic codes are not followed during construction due to absence of effective building code
reinforcement mechanism.
Turkey has the similar situation and hence METU does not take into account the year of
construction in defining the RVS score methodology. As building construction practices in India
are much similar to Turkey, METU method was taken as base to develop rational method for RVS
scoring of Indian buildings.
Basic structural score of the building is based on the type of seismic zone and number of storey in
the building. India seismic zone map (IS1893:2002) is based on past experience or expected
intensity of earthquake ground motion in different parts of the country. It does not address the
seismic hazard in terms of peak ground acceleration or peak ground velocity. Indian seismic zone
V (expected ground motion of IX and above on MSK intensity scale) is assigned same basic scores
as for zone I of METU method, zone IV (MSK intensity VIII) same as zone II of METU method
and zone III (MSK intensity VII) & zone II (MSK intensity VI and lower) same as zone III of
METU method.
3.2 Methodology: The RVS score evaluation is based on a few parameters of buildings. The
parameters of the buildings are building height, frame action, pounding effect, structural
irregularity, short columns, heavy overhang, soil conditions, falling hazard, apparent building
quality, diaphragm action etc. On the basis of above mentioned parameters, performance score of
the buildings has been calculated. The formula of the performance score is given as
PS= (BS) + [(VSM) x (VS)]
Where VSM represents the Vulnerability Score Modifiers and VS represents the Vulnerability
Score that is multiplied with VSM to obtain the actual modifier to be applied to the BS or Basic
Score. For RC Frame building, the base score, vulnerability score and vulnerability modified score
are given in table 4 & 5 whereas the same parameters for masonry buildings are given in table 6
and 7. A building with higher seismic zone and more number of storey will get the low score i.e.
building will be more vulnerable.
TARU
Ver 1.0
25
Table 4: Base Scores (BS) and Vulnerability Scores (VS) for RC Frame Buildings in India
Seismic Zone V
Seismic Zone
IV
Seismic Zone
III or II
Frame Action
Soft Storey
Vertical
Irregularities
Plan
Irregularities
Short Column
Pounding
Soil Condition
Apparent
Quality
Heavy
Overhang
Vulnerability Scores
No. of Storeys
Base Scores
1 or
2
3
4
5
>5
100
90
75
65
60
130
120
100
85
80
150
140
120
100
90
10
10
10
10
10
0
-15
-20
-25
-30
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-5
-5
-5
-5
-5
-5
-5
-5
-5
-5
0
-2
-3
-3
-3
10
10
10
10
10
-5
-10
-10
-15
-15
-5
-10
-10
-15
-15
(Source: Sudhir K. Jain and Keya Mitra 2008)

Table 5: Vulnerability Scores Modifiers (VSM) for RC Frame Building in India
Frame Action
Soft Storey
Vertical Irregularity
Plan irregularity
Short Columns
Pounding Effect
Does not exist = -1; Exists = 1, Not sure = 0

Does not exist=0; Exists = +1
Does not exist=0; Moderate = +1, Extreme=+2
Does not exist=0, Non-aligned Floors=+2,
Poor apparent quality of adjacent buildings = +2
Medium=0, Hard =1, Soft = -1
Good=0, Moderate=+1, Poor=+2
Soil condition
Apparent quality
Heavy Overhang

Table 6: Base Scores (BS) and Vulnerability Scores (VS) of Masonry Buildings in India
Structural
Irregularities
Wall Openings
Wall
Orientation
10
10
10
10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-10
-5
-5
-5
-5
-2
-5
-5
-5
20
20
20
20
-10
-10
-10
-10
10
10
10
10
Pounding
Apparent
Quality
150
125
110
70
Random
Rubble
Masonry
Soil Condition
130
110
90
60
Diaphragm
Action
Seismic Zone
III or II
100
85
70
50
Arches
Seismic Zone
IV
1 or
2
3
4
5
Horizontal
Bands
Seismic Zone V
Vulnerability Scores
No. of Storeys
Basic Scores
-15 0
-15 -3
-15 -5
-15 -5

Table 7: Vulnerability Scores Modifiers (VSM) for Masonry Buildings in India
Soil conditions
Apparent quality
TARU
Medium=0, Hard=+1, Soft = -1

Good=0, Moderate=+1, Poor=+2
Ver 1.0
26
Structural Irregularities
Wall openings
Opening Orientation
Horizontal Bands
Arches
Diaphragm Action
Random Rubble Stone
Masonry
Pounding Effect
Absent/Do not know=0; Exists=+1

Small=0, Moderate=+1, Large=+2
Regular=0, Less regular=+1, Irregular=+2
Present=+1, Absent=-1, Do not know=0
Present=+1, Absent/ Do not know=0
Present/Do not know=0, Absent=-1,
Present=+1, Absent = 0
Does not exist=0, Poor quality of adjacent
buildings=+2
TARU
Ver 1.0
27
Chapter 4. Preliminary and Detailed Vulnerability Assessment

4.1 Preliminary Vulnerability Assessment: Preliminary vulnerability analysis is the second
step of the building vulnerability process. Phase-II can broadly classified into two categories, (a)
configuration-related and (b) strength related checks. The first tier involves a quick assessment of
the earthquake resistance of the building and its potential deficiencies, with the objective to screen
out the significantly vulnerable structures for the second tier detailed analysis and evaluation. The
first tier evaluation typically consists of assessing the configurationally induced deficiencies known
for unsatisfactory performance along with a few global level strength checks, whereas the next
level of evaluation consists of proper force and displacement analysis to assess structural
performance at both global and/or component level.
This phase involves the following tasks:
Collection of drawings and redraw (if possible) in AutoCAD,
Identification of the sizes of all columns and beams,
Load calculations,
Conguration related checks and strength related checks.
Non-destructive test (NDT) such as rebound hammer test, ultra-sonic pulse velocity method and
rebar locator etc. are used to determine the material characteristics and strength related checks.
4.2 Detailed Vulnerability Assessment: Detailed vulnerability assessment (DVA) involves

the modelling of selected buildings using both finite element method (FEM) and applied element
method (AEM) to study the behaviour of buildings under different intensity of earthquake.
Pushover analysis is done to simulate the inelastic behaviour of structures for a more realistic
collapse mechanism. Pushover analysis is a type of nonlinear static analysis where the magnitudes
of the lateral loads are incrementally increased, maintaining a predefined distribution pattern along
the height of the building, until a collapse mechanism develop (CPWD 2007). Finally fragility curve
or vulnerability function will be defined for most predominant building typologies as per the
census 2011. The fragility curve is the graph between seismic ground acceleration in g and
damage. This relationship will estimate loss for different categories of buildings and intensities of
earthquakes.
0.9
Collapse
0.8
0.7
Severe damage
PGA (g)
0.6
0.5
Moderate damage
0.4
Slight damage
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
60
Fig. Fragility Curve (PGA Vs Damage Probability)
No damage
70
80
90
100
110
RVS Score
120
130
140
Fig. Fragility Curve (Relation between RVS score & PGA)

(Source: TARU Analysis, 2014)
Relationship between peak ground acceleration (PGA) and RVS score of the building is established
to find out the probable damage of buildings for a particular intensity of earthquake.
TARU
Ver 1.0
28
References
IITK-BMTPC, Earthquake Tips by Prof. CVR Murthy.
IS 1893:2002 Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of Structures
IS 4326:1993 Earthquake Resistant Design And Construction Of Buildings -Code Of
Practice
IS 13935:2009 Seismic Evaluation, Repair and Strengthening of Masonry Buildings:
Guidelines
18 September 2011 Sikkim Earthquake: Post-Earthquake Reconnaissance Report by
National Disaster Management Authority (NDMA), 2011.
Singh Y., Gade P., Lang D.H. & Erduran E. (2012), Seismic Behaviour of Buildings
Located on Slopes- An Analytical Study and Some Observations from Sikkim Earthquake
of September 18, 2011, World Conference in Earthquake Engineering.
CPWD (2007), Handbook on Seismic Retrofit of Buildings.
Jain S K, Mitra K, KI Praseeda (2010), A proposed rapid Visual Screening Procedure for
Seismic Evaluation of Buildings in India.
National Building Code of India (2005).
TARU
Ver 1.0
29
Annexure 1: Seismic Zone in India

IS 1893:2002 Part1 CRITERIA FOR EARTHQUAKE RESISTANT DESIGN OF
STRUCTURES divide the seismic zone of India into 4 divisions i.e. Zone II, Zone III, Zone IV
and Zone V. It is estimated that 59% of the land area of India is liable to seismic damage. Seismic
zone V is broadly associated with seismic intensity XI or more on MSK intensity scale while Zone
IV, III and II are associate with seismic intensity of VIII, VII and VI respectively. Level of damage
will differ within same zone due to difference in local soil condition which can alter the peak
ground acceleration (PGA) and amplification factor.
(Source: NIDM)
TARU
Ver 1.0
30
Annexure 2: BIS codes for Seismic Safety of Structures

Most of the countries with a history of earthquakes have well developed earthquake codes. It is
only the implementation of codes which is lacking in the seismic safety of buildings. Countries like
USA, Japan, New Zealand have detailed seismic code provisions. Indian seismic code also cover
different type of structures from mud/adobe houses to modern day constructions like brick
masonry and RC frame structures.
Earthquakes cause three dimensional vibrations in the structure. These vibration create forces and
deformation over the structure. Seismic codes have been developed to design the structure to resist
these forces and deformation up to an acceptable level. Enforcement of these codes in actual
construction practices will reduce the significant loss of life and structures. These codes act as
guidelines for the engineering community to refer them in their work and to create awareness
about earthquake safe construction in the society also. Table 1 provides the detail of Indian
standard codes for seismic safety of structures which are currently followed in different type of
structures. IS code 1893 was first published in 1962 which was later updated/ revised many times
to include the new findings/ learnings from the different earthquake events occurred in the
country. IS 1893:2002 is the fifth revision of this code.
Table 1. Bureau of Indian Standard Codes for Earthquake Safety of Structures
IS Code No.
IS 1893 (part1): 2002
IS 4326:1993
IS 13827:1993
IS 13828:1993
IS 13935:2009
IS 13920:1993
IS 15988: 2013
Name of the Code

Indian Standard Criteria for Earthquake Resistant Design of
Structures
Earthquake Resistant Design And Construction Of Buildings -Code
Of Practice
Improving Earthquake Resistance of Earthen Buildings: Guidelines
Improving Earthquake Resistance of Low Strength Masonry
Buildings: Guidelines
Seismic Evaluation, Repair and Strengthening of Masonry Buildings:
Guidelines
Ductile Detailing of Reinforced Concrete Structures subjected to
Seismic forces Code of Practice
Seismic Evaluation and Strengthening of Existing Reinforced
Concrete Buildings-Guidelines
Other IS codes which have to be referred along with above mentioned earthquake safety codes:
IS Code No.
IS 456:2000
IS 800: 1984
IS: 801-1975
IS 875 (Part 2):1987
IS 875 ( Part 3):1987
IS 875 ( Part 4):1987
TARU
Name of the Code

Code of Practice for Plain and Reinforced Concrete
Code of Practice for General Construction in Steel
Code of Practice for Use of Cold Formal Light Gauge Steel
Structural Members in General Building Construction
Design loads ( other than earthquake ) for buildings and structures
Part2 Imposed Loads
Part 3 Wind Loads
Part 4 Snow Loads
Ver 1.0
31
IS 875 ( Part 5):1987

Part 5 special loads and load combination
IS: 883:1966
Code of Practice for Design of Structural Timber in Building
IS: 1904:1987
Code of Practice for Structural Safety of Buildings: Foundation
IS1905:1987
Code of Practice for Structural Safety of Buildings: Masonry Walls
IS 2911 (Part 1): Section Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Pile Foundation
1: 1979
IS 2911 (Part1): Section Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Based Cast in
2: 1979
situ Piles
IS 2911 (Part1): Section Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Driven Precast
3: 1979
Concrete Piles
IS 2911 (Part1): Section Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Based Precast
3: 1979
Concrete Piles
IS 2911 (Part 2): 1979
Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Timber Piles
IS 2911 (Part 3): 1979
Code of Practice for Design and Construction of Under Reamed
Piles
IS 2911 (Part 3): 1979
Load Test on Piles
IS 14458 (Part 1): 1998
Guidelines for retaining wall for hill area: Part 1 Selection of type of
wall
IS 14458 (Part 2): 1997
Guidelines for retaining wall for hill area: Part 2 Design of
retaining/breast walls
IS 14458 (Part 3): 1998
Guidelines for retaining wall for hill area: Part 3 Construction of dry
stone walls
IS 14496 (Part 2): 1998
Guidelines for preparation of landslide Hazard zonation maps in
mountainous terrains: Part 2 Macro-zonation
National Building Code of India (2005): National building code of India (NBC), is a national
instrument providing guidelines for regulating the building construction activities across the
country. It serves as a Model Code for adoption by all agencies (government and private both)
involved in building construction works. The code mainly contains administrative regulations,
development control rules and general building requirements; fire safety requirements; stipulations
regarding materials, structural design and construction (including safety); and building and
plumbing services.
The Code was first published in 1970 at the instance of Planning Commission and then revised in
1983. Thereafter three major amendments were issued, two in 1987 and the third in 1997. The
NBC 2005 contains 11 parts which are:
Part 0 Integrated Approach - Prerequisite for Applying Provisions of the Code
Part 1 Definitions
Part 2 Administration
Part 3 Development Control Rules and General Building Requirements
Part 4 Fire and Life Safety
Part 5 Building Materials
Part 6 Structural Design
Part 7 Constructional Practices and Safety
TARU
Ver 1.0
32
Part 8 Building Services

Part 9 Plumbing Services
Part 10 Landscaping, Signs and Outdoor Display Structures
TARU
Ver 1.0
33
Annexure 3: RVS Format
TARU
Ver 1.0
34
TARU
Ver 1.0
35
TARU
Ver 1.0
36
TARU
Ver 1.0
37
TARU
Ver 1.0
38
TARU
Ver 1.0
39
Annexure 4: Example of RVS Scoring of Building

Brick Masonry
Figure 1 (a). Proforma for Brick Masonry Buildings (First page)
TARU
Ver 1.0
40
Figure 1 (b). Proforma for Brick Masonry Buildings (Second page)
TARU
Ver 1.0
41
RC Frame Building
Figure 2 (a). Proforma for Reinforced Concrete Buildings (First page)
TARU
Ver 1.0
42
Figure 2 (b). Proforma for Reinforced Concrete Buildings (Second page)
TARU
Ver 1.0
43

Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings For Seismic Hazard

Uploaded by

Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings For Seismic Hazard

Uploaded by

2014

Integrated Rapid Visual

A GUIDE BOOK FOR INTEGRATED RAPID

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

TARU Leading Edge Private Ltd.

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

2.4.3 Short Column Effect: ............................................................................................................................. 20

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Federal Emergency Management Agency

Middle East Technical University

Bureau of Indian Standard

Building Vulnerability Assessment

Rapid Visual Screening

Preliminary Vulnerability Assessment

Detailed Vulnerability Assessment

Non Destructive Testing

National Disaster Management Authority

National Institute of Disaster Management

Finite Element Method

Applied Element Method

National Building Code

Vulnerability Score Modifier

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

1.2 Building Vulnerability Assessment: Building vulnerability assessment (BVA) is required

Collection of drawings and redraw in AutoCAD

Detailed evaluation of each building component

Figure 1: Building Vulnerability Assessment Process (TARU, 2013)

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Source: TARU Analysis 2013

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Chapter 2. Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

2.1 General Information Required for RVS:

Rammed Earth/ Adobe Building (Kangra,2013)

Stone Masonry Building ( Kinnaur,2013)

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Brick Masonry Building (J&K,2013)

RC Frame Building (Kangra, 2013)

Wooden Structure (Rakcham Village, Kinnaur, 2013)

Hybrid Construction (J&K, 2013)

Figure 2: Type of Buildings (Source: TARU, 2013)

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Flat Roof (Una, 2013)

Shed Roof (Kangra, 2013)

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Gable Roof (Dharmsala, 2013)

Hip Roof (Kangra,2013)

Figure 3: Type of Roof (Source: TARU.2013)

2.2 Geotechnical Characteristics:

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

2.2.4 Expansive and Non Expansive Soil: Soils

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Fig. 32 Stepback building

Fig.33 Setback and Stepback both

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings

INTEGRATED RAPID VISUAL SCREENING

Guide Book for Integrated Rapid Visual Screening of Buildings