EQ Engineering PowerPoint Presentation
EQ Engineering PowerPoint Presentation
EQ Engineering PowerPoint Presentation
Engineering
Durgesh C. Rai
1
Overview
Basic Elements
Seismic hazard
Earthquake effects
Seismic risk problem
Earthquake resistant design
Hurdles to seismic safety
Recent Indian initiatives
Introduction
Ground shaking as a result of complex processes
Ridges
Near-fields &
Rock outcrop Slopes
Spatial variations
Rupture
FOE 2005
Earth processes and fault rupture mechanism
Wave passage effect and ray path incoherency
Source effects and attenuation
Local soil site and topography effects
Introduction
Uncertainties loom large for earthquakes!
Earthquakes can
neither be prevented
nor predicted reliably
as yet!
At most, probabilities
of their occurrence
and location are
known
FOE 2005
PGA with 10% probability of 70% odd 10% of one or more M6.7
exceedance in 50 yr events during 2000-2030
Introduction
Preparedness as a key to disaster mitigation
Earthquake Risk
Hazard Exposure Vulnerability
Earthquake risk
can be mitigated
by reducing
FOE 2005
structural
vulnerability
Effectiveness of Schemes
Seismic Energy Balance Equation
1 2
mu cu 2 dt Fsu dt ( mug ) u dt
2
Reduce
WE WD (W S WH ) I energy
input
FOE 2005
Absorb Viscous
energy WD WH
in Hysteretic
structure
Fixed Base Structural Systems
Building Earthquake Resistance
135
cracks
cracks
Big
crack
Big
crack
Absorb earthquake
energy through
inelastic deformation in
FOE 2005
structural members and
prevent collapse and
loss of lives
Energy Dissipation Systems
Building Earthquake Resistance
Friction
Absorb earthquake energy Damper
in EDDs to reduce damage
to primary structural
members Yielding
Damper
Viscous
Damper
FOE 2005
Seismic Isolation Systems
Building Earthquake Resistance
Fixed Flexible
Base Pads
Friction Pendulum
FOE 2005
Lead Rubber Bearing
Seismic Isolation Systems
Building Earthquake Resistance
FOE 2005
Adaptive Systems
Building Earthquake Resistance
Actuator
Active Tuned
MASS Mass Damper
Adjustment of strength,
stiffness and dynamic
properties of structure during
the earthquake motion
New smart materials Active
Braces Sensors
MEMS
Controller
Actuator
FOE 2005
Active
Variable
Stiffness
Seismic Evaluation & Upgradation
Building Earthquake Resistance
10
6 tM
tD
4
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6
Roof Drift (%)
FOE 2005
Delhi Police HQ Building
Seismic Sources and
Hazards
FOE 2005
Geographical Layout
Himalayas
Indo-
Gangetic
Plains
Narmada
Plains
Mahanadi
Plains
Deccan Shield
Godavari
Plains
Arabian Bay
Sea Peninsular of
India Bengal
14
Tectonic plate boundaries
Micro-Burmese Pacific
Plate African
Plate
Plate
Indo- South
Australian American
Plate Plate
Antarctic Plate
15
Tectonic plate boundaries
Eurasian Plate
Himalayas
Indo-
Gangetic
Plains
Narmada
Plains
Mahanadi
Plains
Deccan Shield
Godavari
Plains
Arabian Bay
Sea Peninsular of
India Bengal
Indo-Australian Plate
16
10 years of GPS
17
Minor intra-plate Major Himalayan
earthquakes
earthquakes
Minor Gangetic
plains earthquake
18
Seismic Hazard
Seismic zones
largely based
on shaking
experienced in
past
earthquakes
Zone Factor, Z
II 0.10
III 0.16
IV 0.24
V 0.36
19
Future Seismic Hazard
Andaman
Fatalities have
significantly 1000/year
increased in the
last century
Greater
population at
risk
100/year
21 [Bilham, 2005]
Global Scenario
Industrialized Nations
Early 1900s :: High human fatalities
& high economic loss
Early 2000s :: High economic loss
Role of Engineers
India
Early 1900s :: High human fatalities
& high economic loss
Early 2000s :: High human fatalities
& high economic loss
22
Earthquake Risk Reduction
23
Some Great Indian
Earthquakes
24
Some Great Indian Earthquakes
2005 Pakistan
1905 Kangra
1934 Bihar-Nepal
2001 Bhuj
Magnitude
<5
5<6
6<7
7<8
>8
26 2004 Sumatra
Magnitude versus Intensity
Near
Bright
(100 lumens)
Normal Intensity
(50 lumens)
Far
Dull
(20 lumens)
27
Magnitude versus Intensity
Magnitude Intensity
MSK Scale
V
Richter Scale VI
VII
6.0 Structural VIII
7.0 Damage IX
8.0 X
XI
XII
28
Seismic Performance of
Structures
30
1897 Assam Earthquake
Upthrow of Boulders
33 GSI Memoirs, Oldham
1897 Assam Earthquake
Manshai Bridge
Stone Buildings
Leveled to ground
Ekra-built Buildings
Wooden framework with walls of san grass covered in
plaster
About half the buildings leveled to ground
Significant damage due to stone chimneys
Plank Buildings
Wooden framework covered with planks
No damages
Led to development of Assam-Type houses
Current housing status
40
1905 Kangra Earthquake
4 April 1905
Magnitude 8.6
About 19,000 lives lost
Very low population density
Maximum Intensity X around Kangra
Intensity at Dehradun VIII
Intensity between Kangra and Dehradun up to VI/VII
Initially thought of as two different earthquakes
41
1934 Bihar-Nepal Earthquake
15 January 1934
Around 2:13pm
Deaths
7253 in India and 3400 in Nepal
Magnitude 8.4
Maximum intensity X in about 80 20 miles
Intensity X also at Munger and in Kathmandu Valley
(about 100 miles from main damage area)
42
1934 Bihar-Nepal Earthquake
Slump Belt
190 mile long, up to 40 miles wide
Excessive liquefaction
Buildings slumped into alluvium
Subsidence of embankments (roads/rails)
Uplift of bottoms in tanks
Fissures / emissions of sand and water
one fissure : 15 deep, 30 wide, 900 long!
43
1934 Bihar-Nepal Earthquake
BBSR City
River Basin
45 Ridge Area
1950 Assam-Tibet Earthquake
Magnitude 8.7
Epicenter near Rima (Tibet)
Maximum intensity XII
Aftershocks M 7.0
More property loss in Assam than in 1897 earthquake
Massive landslides
Blockade of rivers
Later, led to floods as dams burst one by one
46
Some Recent Indian
Earthquakes
47
Some Recent Indian Earthquakes
48
1967 Koyna Earthquake
Magnitude ~ 6.5
Maximum Intensity VIII
Deaths: 200; Injuries: 1500
Area considered non-seismic (Zone I of the prevalent
zone map)
Damage to dam, houses, other structures
49 [Chopra, 2008]
1967 Koyna Earthquake
One strong motion record
In the gallery at mid-height of the dam
Peak vertical acceleration 0.3g
Peak horizontal acceleration 0.45g & 0.39g
Record not very reliable (faint)
50 [Chopra, 2008]
1967 Koyna Earthquake
Koyna Dam
103 m high concrete gravity type
Designed for 5%g (static load)
Damaged, but not disastrous
Retrofitted with new buttresses
Reservoir-Induced Seismicity
Changes in seismic zone map
51 [Chopra, 2008]
1988 Bihar-Nepal Earthquake
52
1988 Bihar-Nepal Earthquake
Liquefaction
Nominal
Damage to
embankments
Damage in Darjeeling
and Sikkim
53
1993 Killari Earthquake
Magnitude 6.4
Maximum Intensity VIII-IX
Death toll ~10,000
Up to 35% in some villages
Earlier estimates up to 30,000
Surface rupture
Intra-plate shallow focus earthquake
Located in Seismic Zone I of the prevalent zone
map!
Astonishingly good rescue and relief
After 2 days
54
1993 Killari Earthquake
Killari
Location of Killari
Earthquake and
the prevalent
Seismic Zone Map
55
1993 Killari Earthquake
56
1993 Killari Earthquake
Magnitude 7.7
Maximum MSK Intensity X
Bhuj in Seismic Zone V of Indian seismic map
8.46 am on 26 January 2001
More than 13,805 dead; 1,67,000 injured
300,000 houses destroyed; 700,000 houses damaged
Numerous multistorey RC buildings collapsed
130 such buildings collapsed in Ahmedabad ~225km
from epicenter (Seismic Zone III)
59
2001 Bhuj Earthquake
X
IX
VIII
VII
60
Liquefaction
61
Liquefaction
62
Slope failures
63
Earth dams
64
2001 Bhuj Earthquake
65
66
The Damage
@ cities
67
The Damage
stark contrasts
68
Open Ground story buildings
Floating Columns
70
Lessons from 2001 Bhuj Earthquake
Lack of Connection
72
Indian railways
73
Schools
75
Elevated Water Tanks
Magnitude 9.3
Massive tsunami in a number of countries
Damages due to:
Tsunami
Earthquake Shaking
Landscape changes
78
Damage Level
Severe
Moderate
Less
New
Delhi
Ichchhapuram
Andhra
Pradesh
Machilipatnam
Moderately
affected
Chennai
Kanchipuram
Pondicherry Little Andaman
Kerala Tamil
Cuddalore Andaman & Nicobar
Nadu Nagapattinam
Kochi Thanjavur Islands
Allapuzha Car
Kollam Puddukottai
Thiruvananthapuram Nicobar
Kanyakumari Severely affected
Tirunelveli
Tuticorin Great
Ramanathpuram Nicobar
79
80
81
82
83
84
2005 Kashmir Earthquake
Magnitude 7.6
In area shown as moderate seismicity in Pakistan
zone map; as zone IV in Indian zone map
The most disastrous earthquake on the Indian sub-
continent
~13,000 dead in India, ~ 53,000 dead in Pakistan
~80,000 injured
Maximum intensity: VIII-IX in Pakistan, VIII in
India
Large deaths caused by poor constructions
85
86
88
www.bbc.co.uk
89
www.bbc.co.uk
90
2006 Sikkim earthquake (Mw 5.7)
CHINA
2011 Sikkim 28 00
Earthquake
M6.9 India-Nepal NEPAL
Border USGS SIKKIM
27 45
18, Sept. 2011 at 6:10 pm IMD
68 km NW of Gangtok at
a depth of 19.7 km
(USGS) Mangan
27 30
Tremor lasted for 30-40 956 m
seconds
3 Aftershock- M5.7, Gangtok
27 15
Namchi
1315 m
Darjeeling
2045 m
WEST BENGAL
NICEE at IIT Kanpur/ 27 00
Statistics
CHINA
28 00
VII
Shaking NEPAL
Intensity on USGS
IMD
SIKKIM
27 45
VI
Mangan
956 m 27 30
Gangtok
Geyzing 1437 m
823 m
V 27 15
NEPAL
Namchi
1315 m
Darjeeling
(V) 2045 m
27 00
A Distant View
Failure of
column
reinforcement
Gangtok, Balwakhani
Performance of Buildings
Secretariat building
constructed in 1979
Splicing Near
Beam-Column
Joint
Offset in Beam
Poor quality
hollow concrete
blocks for infill
walls
Out-of-Plane
Failure of Infill
Severe damage
in column of
ground floor
Cold Joint
Inadequate
confining
reinforcement
Cold Joint Topi
Construction
Opening of
Stirrup; 90 hook
Timber wall
Brick on edge
Concrete blocks
In-situ concrete
Performance of Buildings
Absence of column
at corners
Aggregate Sand
Quality control of materials
Simple Plan
::good
Unusually RC Wall
Tall Storey Discontinued in
Ground Storey
Upper Floor
Plan
Lower Floor
Plan
Importance of Configuration
Henry Degenkolb,
a noted Earthquake Engineer of USA
Gravity Earthquake
Load
Load
Seismic behaviour of RC Frames
Gap
Cracks
Strength
Actual
MediumBehaviour
Poor
0 Elastic Behaviour
Deformability
Ductile Frame Design
All damage
Damage
in one
distributed in
storey
all storeys
Hydrostatic
Pressure
(a)
fc
(b)
fck Initiation
(b)
Initiation
Unconfined
(a)
plain concrete
strain
'
f cc f c' 4.1 f1
No Confinement
90 hook
135
135 The ends of stirrups are
bent at 135 . Such stirrups
do not open during strong
earthquake shaking.
Preferred:
135 hooks in
adjacent stirrups on
alternate sides
Lack of Confinement
?
5mm bars
90 degree hooks
Large spacing
Lack of Confinement !!
Column Reinforcement
IS 13920-1993
Beam Reinforcement : Vertical Stirrups
IS 13920-1993
Beam-Column Joint
Absence of confining
reinforcement
Special confining
reinforcement to be
provided over full length
of the column.
Prone to Damage
Special architectural features
Vulnerable corner
of Partition walls
Uniform
Movement of Floor
Earthquake
Identical Vertical Ground
Members Movement
Different portions at the same floor level move horizontally by
different amounts.
Earthquake
Ground
Movement
These columns are more vulnerable
Pounding between adjacent
buildings
Pounding between adjacent
building blocks due to
inadeqaute seismic gap
Sufficient gap at least 50 mm per storey for regular 3-4
storey building.
Else do fancy dynamics!
Out-of-plane failure of infill wall
In-plane failure of infill wall
Pushed in the plane of the wall
Strong Weak
Direction Direction
Direction of
earthquake
shaking Toppling
Sequence of Design
Practiced in India
Sequence of Design
Sequence of Construction
Soil Investigations
Engineers Role
Preparedness as a key to disaster mitigation
171
Seventy Five Years Ago in India
172
Seventy five years ago in India
Early Zone Map (Kumar, 1933)
Violent
Strong
Weak
Rare
173
Seventy five years ago in India
174
Lost in the Shelves
Novel masonry bond known
as Quetta Bond invented for
reinforced masonry using
solid units
1970
1962
1975
1984
1966 2002
176
The Seismic Hazard
Zone Factor, Z
II 0.10
III 0.16
IV 0.24
V 0.36
GSHAP
Probabilistic map
178
The Seismic Hazard
NDMA
Probabilistic map
10PE50 (500 yr RP)
179
The Indian Earthquake
Problem
180
Early gains were lost
181
RC Frame Buildings in India
182
RC Frame Buildings in India
230mm Columns
230mm
183
RC Frame Buildings in India
187
The Truth!!
Multi-storied buildings
[Jain, 2005]
188
The Truth!!
Multi-storied buildings
[Jain, 2005]
189
The Truth!!
Multi-storied buildings
[Jain, 2005]
190
The Truth!!
Multi-storied buildings
[Jain, 2005]
191
The Truth!!
[Jain, 2005]
192
Ad-hoc Retrofit Activities
:Panicked Response
193
After the Earthquake
196
The frenzy
197
The frenzy
198
The frenzy
199
The frenzy
Band Aid??
200
Masonry Infills
201
Seismic Strengthening
202
seismic Upgradation
Reasons for Deficiency
Up-gradation of seismic design requirements
Deficiencies in design codes
Advancements in engineering knowledge
Lack of understanding by designers
Damaged during past EQs
Learning from experience
Gap between design & construction
203
Restoration of Buildings
Restoration
Retrofitting
(Seismic Capacity)
Strengthen Rehabilitation
(Functional Use)
Restore
Repair
Remodel
204
Seismic retrofitting
THREE Levels of Improvement
Repair (Cosmetic modifications)
Restore (Original performance)
Strengthen (Higher performance)
H H,
Strengthen
Original
Repair
Damaged
205 0
seismic retrofitting
Spall repair
Structural
Repair
Rebar replacement
Wall replacement
Cosmetic repairs only improve the visual appearance of component damage and may
restore non-structural properties (weather protection) but any structural benefit is
negligible.
207 Structural repairs intends to restore structural properties.
Seismic Strengthening Methods
Seismic Increase
Strengthening strength & Brace Compression & tension
ductility Frames & Braces
Walls Steel or concrete
Install
Increase Shear
Cast-in-situ concrete
ductility Precast concrete panel
Walls
University of California
@ Berkeley
209
Steel Bracing
210
Steel Bracing
211
Masonry Infills
212
Steel Bracing
213
Example Building
214
Building
215
Building
216
Building
217
Building
218
Building
219
Earthquake Resistance of Masonry Buildings
/220
Seismic Hazard and Evaluation
Seismic Evaluation:
Allowable seismic drifts (FEMA 356):
2.0% for the concrete frame
0.5% for unreinforced masonry
/221
Lab and In-situ Test on Masonry
6
Five Brick prism test
Stress (MPa)
3
0
0 0.002 0.004 0.006 0.008 0.01 0.012 0.014 0.016
Strain (mm/mm)
120
In-situ shear tests
S8, (105.34)
100
S12, (89.73)
80 S11, (83.89)
S9, (74.50) S3, (76.35)
Load (kN) S2, (70.88)
S15, (69.24)
S18, S16, (67.29)
60 S10, (63.94)
(63.29)
S13, (65.97) S19, (55.75)
S1, (51.35)
S14, (51.50)
40
S7, (27.10)
S6, (24.19) S17, (22.61)
20
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Displacement (mm)
/222
Out-of-plane retrofit
223
implementation
224
implementation
225
implementation
226
implementation
227
implementation
228
Earthquakes
in Andaman & Nicobar Islands
2004 Sumatra earthquake repeats
lessons not learnt from
2002 Diglipur earthquake
229
The Seismic Hazard
Seismic Zones
Four Seismic Zones
V :: Most Severe
230
The Seismic Hazard
All Islands
231
2002 Diglipur Earthquake Magnitude versus Intensity
DIGLIPUR
Magnitude M6.5
Intensity VII
Andaman
Islands
Intensity V
PORTBLAIR
232
2004 Sumatra-Andaman Earthquake
92o
North Diglipur
Andaman
Mayabunder
Intensity VII
Middle Rangat Andaman
Andaman
sea
Long
Havelock
South
Neil
Andaman
Port Blair
Andaman
Islands
Little
Andaman
Andaman& 10o
Nicobar
Car Nicobar
92o
Indira point
ATR
North Diglipur
Diglipur Keralapuram
Smith Island
Andaman
Shibpur
Kalipur
ATR
Kishorinagar
Saddle Peak
Nabagram
Islands
Kalighat
North Andaman
Island
Ramnagar
Mayabunder Jetty
Chengappa Bridge
at Austen Strait
ATR Middle Andaman
Island
234
Modern Constructions:
Load bearing brick and
Reinforced Concrete
235
2002
236
2004
237
2002
238
2002
239
2004
240
2002
2004
241
2004
242
2002
243
2004
244
2004
245
246
247
248
Austen-Creek Bridge
On ATR connecting two
major population centres:
Diglipur and Portblair
249
2002
250
2002
251
2002
252
Inadequate seating of bridge
deck over piers and abutments is
a serious concern for its safety
during a stronger earthquake in
future. The bearings are simple
neoprene pads which are far from
satisfactory for a bridge located
in seismic zone V. Bridge deck
restrainers are the minimum that
need to be provided to ensure
that the spans are not dislodged
from the piers in future
earthquakes. 2002
253
2004
254
2004
255
Bridges
258
BRIDGES
259
BRIDGES
261
Wisdom of Ancient Architects
Seismic isolation
Deformability
Reduced mass
Seismic
Resistance Solid
foundation
Symmetry
Closed Harmony
contour of proportions
263
Traditional Masonry
Building Earthquake Resistance
264
Traditional Masonry
Building Earthquake Resistance
Traditional masonry
for proven earthquake
resistance
Colombage-France
Widely used
throughout the world
in seismically
threatened regions
Gaiola-Portugal Fatchwerk-Germany
265
Traditional Masonry
Building Earthquake Resistance
Built in 1932
266
Confined Masonry
Building Earthquake Resistance
Traditional masonry
for proven earthquake
resistance
Mixed construction
involving dhajji-dewari
and
dressed/undressed
stone masonry and
brick masonry
Reinforced Masonry
Building Earthquake Resistance
Reinforcement in masonry
Reinforced Masonry
Building Earthquake Resistance
[Quinn, Peru]
Confined Masonry
Confined Masonry
Traditional Building Typology
Innovative structural systems offer new possibilities
Equation
Single Degree of Freedom System
mu cu ku mug
of motion
Equivalent
Force
pe mug
u u
m m
c c
k k
ug
Low-cost experiment
FOE 2005
techniques
Shake Table Test
Realistic Simulation of Seismic Environment
FOE 2005
Shake Table Test
Realistic Simulation of Seismic Environment
Platform
Reaction Mass/
Strong Floor
FOE 2005
Velocity (m/s) 10
1 Bare Table
0.1
Full Payload
0.01
0.1 1.0 10.0 100.0
Frequency (Hz)
200
150
100
Acceleration (cm/s )
2
Shaking Table Studies of Shear-Link Braced Frame
50
-50
-100
-150
-200
0
Validation of Novel Concept and Design
10 20
Time
30 40 50 60
(a)
200
150
100
Acceleration (cm/s )
2
Aluminium Shear Link Damper
50
-50
-100
-150
-200
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Time
(b)
0.8 0.8
6
Design
Spectral accln.(g)
6
Spectral accln.
0.7 Orginal
Taft 0.2g
Scaled
0.6 0.6
Prototype fundamental period
Spectral acceleration(g)
4 4
(m/s )
0.5
2
0.4 0.4
0.3
0.2 0.2 2 2
0 0
0 0
3 2
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Time period(s) Time Period
(c)
12 2.5 2.5
Max. Base Shear (kN)
12
Max. Base Shear (kN)
Event 2
10 10
2
Second Floor Peak Acceleration (g)
2
Maximum Base Shear (kN)
8 8
1.5 1.5
6 6
1
Event 1
1
4 4
200
2 2
OCBF
0.5 0.5 150
OCBF
0 SLBF
0
100
SLBF
Acceleration (cm/s 2)
0.1
0
0.1 50 0.2 0.3 0.4
0.5 0.5 0.6
PGA(g) 1
0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4
1.5
1.5 1.6 1.7
PGA(g) 0
PGA(g)
-50
-100
-200
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Time
(a)
FOE 2005
200200 200
0 150
150 150
100100
Accln.(cm/s2)
100
Acceleration (cm/s 2)
5050
Acceleration (cm/s 2)
50
00
0
-50 -50
-50
-200-200 0 10 20 30 40 50 60
-150
0 10 20 30
Time 40 50 60
(a) -200
150
Scaled
50
Shaking Table Studies of Shear-Link Braced Frame
Validation of Novel Concept and Design
FOE 2005
Taft
1.6g
Combined In-plane and Out-of-plane studies
Verifying Seismic Behaviour
Spectral Accl(g)
0.6
Acceleration(g)
FOE 2005
-0.1 0.1
0 0
-0.2 0 1 2 3 4 0 1 2 3 4
Time(s) Time Period (s) Time Period(s)
Out-of-plane
loading White Noise
Level-1
White Noise
Level-II
. White Noise Level-V White Noise
.
Level-V
White Noise
In-plane
loading
0.20 % Drift
0.75 % 1.00 % 1.40 % Till Failure
0.25 % Drift
Drift Drift Drift
0.35 % Drift
0.50 % Drift
FOE 2005
Combined In-Plane and Out-of-Plane Studies
Verifying Seismic Behaviour
1.5 50
Ht.of Specimen(m)
+
Out-of-plane
Acceleration
Hysteresis
1.125
In-plane
FOE 2005
Load (kN)
+
0.75 0
0.375 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3
0 -50
--
0 1 2 3
Average acceleration (g) Drift (%)
Combined In-Plane and Out-of-Plane Studies
Verifying Seismic Behaviour
FOE 2005
Real Time Hybrid Test
Using best of both Worlds!
Actuators
Utilizes low-cost
experimental set-up and
higher resolution Substructure
analytical simulation Shake table
FOE 2005
Linked Multi-Site Testing
Distributed physical and analytical simulation
E1 M E2
Internet latency
Synchronization of
remote controllers
FOE 2005
15 s ground motion
completed in 5 hr
with 1500 cycles of NEES
data exchange Grid
Advanced Sensor Technology
Measurement of data and visualization
FOE 2005
Concluding Remarks
Earthquake need not be deadly & destructive!
Earthquake-resistant structures
are key elements
FOE 2005
protocols for realistic earthquake
simulations
Success of Design!
PEER, Richmond, CA
FOE 2005
Ductile Non-Ductile Ductile
Column Column Column
Hurdles to Seismic Safety
Elements for Risk Reduction
Seismic Codes
Competent professionals to
implement codes
Supporting materials for codes
Training of engineers
Implementation of codes
Enforcement mechanisms for codes
Demand for safety
Awareness generation
Higher priority for safety
293
Structural Engineering Practice
294
Construction Industry
Several internationally-competitive
construction companies
Yet, decay of small-scale construction
industry
Indian masonry was world renowned a
century ago:
Today it is difficult to find competent
masons for small jobs
295
Seismic Codes
IS:1893 (Main code; design seismic force)
1962,1966, 1970, 1975, 1984, and 2002
IS:4326 (Seismic design of buildings)
1967, 1975, 1993
IS:13920 (Ductile detailing of RC structures)
1993
Three codes on non-engineered buildings
296
Reinforcing Steel Code
IS:1786-2008
New revision introduces D class bars
Supposedly for earthquake resistant
construction
Deficient and misleading as it does not have
provisions about upper limit on YS and large
UTS/YS ratio
May lead to unexpected brittle shear failure
mode and poor energy dissipation
297
Reinforcing Steel Code
IS:1786-2008
800 A
C D
600 B
B
Stress (MPa)
A
400 E C
YS UTS/YS
A 421 1.17
200 B 455 1.29 D
C 583 1.16
D 476 1.38
E 354 1.33
0 E
299
Recent Initiatives
300
Agenda on Codes
A number of studies on codes started at IITK around
1986
Numerous papers in Indian journals
A number of draft codes and commentaries
IS:13920 emerged out of one of these
IS:1893 new provisions in 2002
Code on Seismic Evaluation and strengthening
Water tank code (not yet implemented)
301
Codes Project of GSDMA
302
GSDMA Codes project contd
303
Training of Engineers
304
Training of Engineers
Unprecedented successes
Class size
~ 100 persons (before 2001 earthquake)
~ 200 persons (after 2001 earthquake)
Conducted in numerous places in India, and in Nepal and
Bhutan
About 30 courses since 1992
Both ways learning experience
Professionals brought their practical issues; at times
solutions
Created tremendous networking and goodwill
305
Discussion Workshops
Round-Table Discussion Workshops at IITK
Earthquake Resistant Construction in Civil Engineering
Curriculum, 1996
Development of Earthquake Engineering Industry in
India, 1998
Confined Masonry as alternative building typology, 2006
Summary of discussions published in Indian journals
Clarity of issues emerged
Several recommendations implemented
Created networking with other academics and those in
industry
306
National Information Centre of Earthquake
Engineering
307
NICEE ACTIVITIES
Acquisition of Publications
Supply of Literature
Literature Review Workshops
Publication and Distribution of Publications
Earthquake Engineering Practice A Quarterly Periodical
Distance Education Products
Translations into Local Languages
E-Conferences
Short Course
Web Site
Electronic Newsletter
Email Listing
308
Electronic Medium for Conferences and
Continuing Education
309
Publications
310
n
n ii cc ee ee
Short Course on
Seismic Design of Concrete Gravity Dams
36 March 2009, IIT Kanpur
27 February 2009, New Delhi
Resource Faculty :
Resource Persons :
Anil K Chopra Larry K Nuss
University of California Bureau of Reclamation
Berkeley, USA Denver, Colorado , USA
n
n ii cc ee ee
www.nicee.org
311
Anil K Chopra
University of California, Berkeley, USA
312
Earthquake Engineering Practice:
A Quarterly Periodical
313
Earthquake Engineering Practice:
A Quarterly Periodical
314
315
EERI Monographs
316
Large Scale Testing Facility @ IITK
Under Construction
Extension of existing
structural engineering lab
317
In the end
A lot is happening in India, but it is still too
little for needs of a large and diverse country
Fortunately, there is a positive slope of the
activities and
Things look far more hopeful today than was
the case few years back
Please share in our enthusiasm by visiting
www.nicee.org
318
The Professional Choices
DESIGNER
RECOGNISES
TRIES TO
DOES NOT
FOLLOW?
No KNOW? No
Alternate Paths
Yes Yes
ERROR OF ERROR OF with regard to
INTENTION CONCEPT acceptable practices
(Nowak and Arafah, 1994)
TRIES TO
SUCCEEDS?
DETERMINE?
No No
Yes
ERROR OF Yes ERROR OF
EXECUTION INTENTION
SUCCESSFUL
COMPLETION SUCCEEDS?
OF TASK Yes No
319
Long-term human response to EQ
Reaction
Stage Time Event
Positive Negative
Major
1 0-1 minute Panic
Earthquake
Major
7 The next time Repeat stage 1-7
Earthquake
Risk
= Hazard Vulnerability
Moderate NO Seismic Design
322
Implications
Recurrence of Earthquakes
World average:
For every event of M>8.0, ~ 100 M>6.0
events
India:
High frequency of great earthquakes
Low frequency of moderate earthquakes
Moderate earthquake create awareness and lead
to improvements in construction at low human
cost
Performance of buildings and infrastructure not
satisfactory in recent Indian earthquakes
323
Implications
324
Implications
325
Elements of Seismic Safety
Knowledge of hazards
Earthquake Resistant Friendly
Architecture
Quality Materials
Seismic Design and Detailing
326
The Final Question
328
www.nicee.org
[nicee@iitk]
329
Acknowledgements