Hands-on-Experience on Seismic Retrofit in Four Different Countries

Hands-on-Experience on Seismic Retrofit in Four Different Countries

Hazim Yilmaz Thomas Hachmann 

OBERMEYER Planen + Beraten GmbH, Munich, Germany

Page: 
557-567
|
DOI: 
https://doi.org/10.2495/SAFE-V7-N4-557-567
Received: 
N/A
|
Accepted: 
N/A
|
Published: 
8 November 2017
| Citation

OPEN ACCESS

Abstract: 

There are various different seismic vulnerability assessment procedures and seismic retrofit methods that have been applied to existing buildings in seismic regions. After the analytical assessment and design phase, it is of critical importance that the retrofit design is properly applied on-site. Conventional parties such as local authorities, construction culture, construction companies, quality of workmanship and availability of materials play a crucial role in the construction of seismic resistant buildings and in the selection of retrofit method and application. Furthermore there is a lack of experience on the performance of buildings subjected to earthquakes. Authors assessed and retrofitted eight reinforced concrete buildings and one masonry building from one to six stories in Nepal, Djibouti, Turkmenistan and Haïti, respectively, in 2011, 2013, 2015 and 2016. Retrofitted buildings in Nepal were subjected to 7.8 magnitude earthquake in April 2015, which gave authors the opportunity to document the seismic performance. This paper summarizes the hands-on-experience gained from four different seismic assessment and retrofitted projects conducted in four different countries. Performance of the retrofitted buildings subjected to a 7.8 magnitude earthquake and difficulties in the application of retrofit are present.

Keywords: 

implementation of retrofit, retrofit design, Seismic assessment, seismic retrofit, site survey

  References

[1] Holmes, T.W., Risk assessment and retrofit of existing buildings. Proceedings of 12. World Conference of Earthquake Engineering, Auckland, New Zealand, 2000.

[2] Martellota, L., Martens, D. & Teueffel P., Review of seismic retrofitting strategies for residential buildings in an international context. Proceedings of the International Asso- ciation for Shell and Spatial Structures Symposium, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 2015.

[3] Nepal National Building Code NBC 105:1994, Seismic Design of Buildings in Nepal, 1994.

[4] Gebbeken, N., Braun, M., Hachmann, T. & Yilmaz, H., Earthquake engineering – reconnaissance and assessment of existing buildings. International Journal of Protective Structures, 3(4), pp. 375–388, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1260/2041-4196.3.4.375

[5] Règles parasismiques 1969 et annexes, Collections UTI, Union Technique Interprofes- sionnelle des Federations Nationales du Batiment et Travaux Publics (Paris), 1976.

[6] SNIP II-7-81, Building code on construction in seismic areas. The Ministry for Construction, 1996.

[7] ASCE 41-13, Seismic evaluation and upgrade of existing buildings. American Society of Civil Engineers, 2013.

[8] Eurocode 8, Design of structures for earthquake resistance, 2004.

[9] UBC-97, Uniform Building Code, 1997.

[10] Turkish Earthquake Design Code TEC 2007, Specifications for Design of Buildings in Seismic Regions, Ministry of Public Works, 2009.

[11] Pandeya, M.R, Tandukara, J.P., Avouac, J. & Héritier, T., Seismotectonics of the Nepal Himalaya from a local seismic network. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 17, pp. 703– 712, 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1367-9120(99)00034-6

[12] Kit Miyamoto, H. & Amir SJ Gilani., Damage assessment and seismic retrofit of traditional and modern midrise buildings in the aftermath of 2015 Nepal earthquake. Proceedings of the 16th World Conference on Earthquake, 2017.