* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing building in Islamabad
Survey
Document related concepts
1906 San Francisco earthquake wikipedia , lookup
2009 L'Aquila earthquake wikipedia , lookup
1570 Ferrara earthquake wikipedia , lookup
1880 Luzon earthquakes wikipedia , lookup
1985 Mexico City earthquake wikipedia , lookup
Earthquake casualty estimation wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
International Journal of Advanced Structures and Geotechnical Engineering ISSN 2319-5347, Vol. 02, No. 04, October 2013 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing building in Islamabad ZEESHAN ALAM, ABBAS HAIDER, A. Q. BHATTI 1 School of Civil Engineering, University of Lahore, Islamabad, Pakistan 2 NUST Military College of Engineering, Risalpur, Pakistan 3 National University of Sciences and Technology, Islamabad, Pakistan Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract: One of the remedies for earthquake hazards reduction is seismic retrofitting. But without using intervention technique which is based on seismic evaluation of the building structure, it may not be possible to improve the seismic performance of the building structures by the use of retrofitting. In this paper the simulation of a building is performed by using nonlinear static “push over” analysis. The said building is 4storey RC building. In this work the real site based demand spectra is compared with the demand spectra of “ATC 40 procedure”. The simulation performed is then compared for the sake of evaluation with or without retrofitted structure. For various safety margins the plastic hinges are plotted. Keywords: Seismic Evaluation, Nonlinear Static Analysis, SAP2000, Existing Structures, ATC 40 Response Spectrum Capacity 1. Introduction: Earthquake is one of the prominent phenomenon observed and experienced by the mankind since the evaluation of human life on this planet. This phenomenon has caused an extreme level of catastrophe and devastation to the social infrastructure and ruined the shining lives into graveyards. Therefore, the earthquake vulnerability of building structures has remained a key area for the researchers in order to minimize the hazards of earthquake as much as possible. Country like Pakistan is under the threat of moderate and high level of earthquakes. October 8, 2005 earthquake in Pakistan has brought enormous damages and challenges for the researchers to develop measure to reduce the hazards. The said earthquake has also highlighted the importance of redevelopment and improvement of “Building Code of Pakistan 1986” Though an effort has been made in the form of “Building Code of Pakistan 2007” which is derived mainly by the aid of “UBC 97” and “ACI 318-05” BCP 2007 addresses the earthquake hazards in a better way and helps to reduce the losses during earthquakes. It is important to note that BCP2007, focus on the design provisions for new buildings (BCP 2007) but to seismically evaluate and re strengthen the existing developed buildings this code does not help. One of the possible ways to re strengthen the existing buildings is seismic retrofitting but for retrofitting the building should be seismically evaluated. If the building is not seismically evaluated in that case the application of retrofitting is of no use. ASCE 31-03 is one of the recently updated guidelines at USA for “Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings”. This guideline is the assembly of three tiers aiming to enhance analytical detail of existing buildings & also decrease conservativeness, for safety. Before Evaluation of tier 1, it is important to carry a thorough study of available documents and details & degree of desired performance i.e. “Life safety or immediate occupancy”, the seismic Zone “Low, moderate and high” and the type of building is identified. In Tier1 Evaluation, the configurational details & strengths are checked. In this phase the potential deficiencies are noted &observed. In Tier2 Evaluation, the investigation is further preceded regarding the deficiencies noted in Tier 1. It can be done by static linear analysis or dynamic linear analysis. If further investigation is Tier 3 Evaluation is preceded. In Tier 3 Evaluation phase, we conduct detailed nonlinear static analysis (Pushover Analysis) or detailed nonlinear dynamic analysis (Time History Analyses) In terms of simplicity the preferred method for performance based seismic Evaluation is inelastic static or Pushover Analysis (Antoniou,s and pinho , R. ,2004 vol 8 , no . 5, pp 643 – 661 & Gupta,B. and Kunnath,S.K). This paper comprises the static nonlinear Pushover Analysis, with the aid of SAP2000. 1.1 Problem Statement: From the Oct 8, 2005 earthquake, we came to the conclusion that the existing buildings are vulnerable to damage & are earthquake sensitive. Keeping this sensitive issue in mind, the Pakistan Building Code was revised, in order to facilitate the ductility of new building. But the problem regarding previously existing building is still alive because these buildings are non-ductile. To minimize the prevailing risk of these non-ductile buildings, Retrofitting is the proposed technique. Beside the usefulness of retrofitting, it is difficult to create economic resources to retrofit all existing buildings. IJASGE 020406 Copyright © 2013 BASHA RESEARCH CENTRE. All rights reserved ZEESHAN ALAM, ABBAS HAIDER, A. Q. BHATTI The Rawalpindi city being in Seismic Zone 2B is under the seismic risk regarding the buildings constructed before 2007. Therefore, it is important to seismically evaluate the existing buildings Figure 2: Braced Model 1.2 Model Geometric Description: Figure 1: Unbraced Model Table 1: Geometric Configuration of Model Member Beam – B1 Coloum – C1 Coloum – C2 Slab Bracing Size (in) 12 x 18 12 x 16 9 x 16 Thickness = 6 W 12 x 30 2. Analysis Methodology: The building analysis would be performed by using any one of the procedure which is described above but the limitations below should also be kept in mind. When the desired level of nonlinearity is low then the linear procedures could be appropriately used. For irregular and complex buildings the approach of nonlinear analysis is used. If one of the given characteristics in the following is found in a building then the linear analysis approach should not be used. Fundamental time period for a building T ≥ 3.5 x( SD1/ SDS ) When the horizontal dimension of a building is more than 1.4 times the adjacent building’s horizontal dimension. When the torsional irregularities exist in any storey in a building and it occurs when the diaphragm for a considered storey is not flexible. Stiffness irregularity and vertical mass irregularity exist in a building, it occurs when the average drift for a particular storey is more than the storey’s above or below by 150%. There is non- orthogonal system of lateral force resistance. Reinforcement (in2) Top2.2, Bot 2.2 (Stirrup 0.22) 2.64 (Stirrups 0.22) 2.64 (Stirrups 0.22) 3. Static Nonlinear Analysis using FEM Software: SAP2000 nonlinear version offers very strong and significant characteristics for the nonlinear static pushover analysis. Both 2D & 3D structures can be analyzed as pushover analysis on SAP2000 nonlinear version (Edward L Wilson) The nonlinear behavior of the frame members are determined by particular hinges and the structural capacity drop occurs for the said hinges, When these hinges takes a portion of negative slope displacement curve, While performing the pushover analysis. After performing analysis certain point are achieved ranging from A to E, point A shows the unloaded state, Point B shows yielding state of an element, Point C represents nominal strength and co-ordinate of point C on displacement axis shows deformation at which significant amount of strength degradation occurs. The part from C to D in the above figure shows the starting failure of an element and the strength of the element to resist lateral forces is unreliable after point C. The portion D to E on the curve shows that only the gravity loads are sustained by the frame elements. After point E, The structure has no more capacity to sustain gravity loads (Computers and Structures Inc). International Journal of Advanced Structures and Geotechnical Engineering ISSN 2319-5347, Vol. 02, No. 04, October 2013, pp 157-160 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing building in Islamabad 3. As the earthquake gets severe the inertia forces distribution changes, while in pushover analyses they are assumed to be constant. Figure 3: Hinges for UnBraced Model Figure 6: Pushover Curve for Braced Model Figure 4: Hinges for Braced Model Figure 7: ATC 40 Spectrum Capacity for Unbraced Model Figure 5: Pushover Curve for Unbraced Model 4. Limitations of the Adopted Procedure (Static Nonlinear Analysis Pushover Analysis): Though pushover analyses are quite useful, it has following limitations. 1. Due to the higher modes of vibrations, the indication of failure mechanism is an important issue as the accuracy of pushover result is affected. 2. Target displacements are very difficult to be estimated. Figure 8: ATC 40 Spectrum Capacity for Braced Model International Journal of Advanced Structures and Geotechnical Engineering ISSN 2319-5347, Vol. 02, No. 04, October 2013, pp 157-160 ZEESHAN ALAM, ABBAS HAIDER, A. Q. BHATTI Table 2: ATC 40 Spectrum Capacity Table for Unbraced Model Table 3: ATC 40 Spectrum Capacity Table for Braced Model 5. Conclusion: 1. ASCE 31-03 gives a detailed and thorough approach for the seismic evaluation of already constructed buildings. 2. Tier 1 analysis method provided by ASCE 31-03 helps to quantitatively check the existing building & it’s very easy & suitable for countries like Pakistan. 3. In Linear Elastic Analysis ASCE 31-03, instead of using single R factor for the entire structure, different m factors are used depending on the ductility of component being evaluated. This is a more realistic approach. 4. Pushover analysis is preferably used for static nonlinear procedures because of its simplicity. 5. Location of plastic hinges indicates the weak zones in a building which is very helpful for re strengthening the existing buildings. 6. Recommendations: 1. Using the guidelines of ASCE 31-03, building code of Pakistan should be developed for existing buildings. 2. Those buildings whose construction has been made before BCP (2007), Tier 1 evaluation must be carried out under the supervision of different building authorities. References: [1] Antoniou,s and pinho , R. ,2004 b, Development and verification of a displacement-based adaptive pushover procedure . Journal of earthquake engineering vol 8 , no . 5, pp 643 – 661 [2] ATC 40, 1996, Seismic evaluation and retrofit of concrete buildings, ATC-40, Redwood City, CA. [3] Gupta,B. and Kunnath,S.K. ,2000, Adaptive spectra-based pushover procedure for seismic evaluation of structures, Earthquake spectra, 16(2), pp.2666-2684 [4] Applied Technology Council, ATC-40, 1996, Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Concrete Buildings, Volume 1-2, Redwood City, California [5] ASCE/SEI 31-03, Seismic Evaluation of Existing Buildings [6] BCP (2007), “Seismic Provision for Building Code of Pakistan” Ministry of Housing and Works Government of Pakistan Islamabad [7] Computers and Structures Inc CSI, (1995),” ETABS Extended Three Dimensional Analysis of Building Systems Nonlinear Version 9.5”, Berkeley, California USA International Journal of Advanced Structures and Geotechnical Engineering ISSN 2319-5347, Vol. 02, No. 04, October 2013, pp 157-160