NEPAL COLLEGE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
(Affiliated to Pokhara University)
Balkumari, Lalitpur
A
PROPOSAL
ON
SEISMIC VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND RETROFITTING OF A MULTI-
STORY REINFORCED CONCRETE BUILDING
SUBMITTED BY: SUBMITTED TO:
Niranjan Kumar Tharu (201825) Department of Civil Engineering
Rustam Rana (201838) NCIT
Shristi Neupane (201840)
Santosh Bhattarai (201848)
Aayush KC (201849)
Date of Submission: May 08,2025
NEPAL COLLEGE OF INFORMATION
TECHNOLOGY
(AFFLIATED TO POKHARA UNIVERSITY)
SUPERVISOR’S APPROVAL
I, Er. Lalit Bhatt, have thoroughly reviewed the project proposal titled “Seismic Vulnerability
Assessment and Retrofitting of a Multi-Story Reinforced Concrete Building” submitted by
Santosh Bhattarai, Rustam Rana, Aayush KC, Niranjan Kumar Tharu, and Shristi Neupane.
I hereby grant my approval for this project and confirm my commitment to supervise them
throughout its duration, providing guidance to ensure its successful completion.
Signature:……………...……..
Er. Lalit Bhatt
Supervisor
Date:05/08/2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1
2.OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................... 2
3. LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................................................... 3
4. METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................ 4
4.1 Resources Required ......................................................................................................... 4
5. EXPECTED OUTCOMES .................................................................................................... 6
6. PROJECT TIMELINE ........................................................................................................... 7
7.CONCLUSION ....................................................................................................................... 9
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................................ 10
iii
1.INTRODUCTION
Nepal is one of the hotspots for disaster and is ranked as 11th most vulnerable country in the world
for earthquake. As Nepal lies in the seismic prone area with frequent occurrence of devastating
earthquakes, so the buildings need to be designed and constructed for seismic safety. The 2015
Gorkha earthquake highlighted the vulnerability of many multi-story buildings, particularly in
Kathmandu Valley. Those buildings were either poorly designed, lack of proper detailing, outdated
design codes, poor construction practices, material degradation or were constructed before the
establishment of modern building codes.
In Nepal, there are numbers of RC buildings which do not comply with the seismic design standards
of Nepal National Building Code (NBC 105:2020). This leads to increase the risk of collapsing
buildings during earthquakes. Retrofitting in vulnerable buildings is essential to improve seismic
resilience, reduce economic losses and protect lives in future earthquakes. This proposal outlines a
comprehensive approach to assess the seismic vulnerability of a multistory RC building and propose
retrofitting solutions to enhance its seismic resilience, ensuring safety, compliance with modern
seismic codes, and cost-effectiveness.
1
2.OBJECTIVES
The main objectives of the project are given below:
To perform the seismic vulnerability assessment of a multistory RC building
To provide retrofit design strategies and detail drawings.
2
3. LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review compiles previous research literature related to seismic vulnerability
assessments and retrofitting of multistory reinforced concrete (RC) buildings that exist in seismic
regions. Nonlinear static pushover analysis is frequently relied upon to assess the seismic capacity
of the buildings, but it may overestimate structural performance in irregular buildings. As a result,
Kappos and Panagopoulos (2010) and Dutta et al. (2016) advocate for nonlinear dynamic analysis
in order to assess the performance of such irregular structures.
Performance-based seismic design is a reliable approach to determine measurable damage in
buildings, but the method is difficult to rely upon in practice because of its complexity (Cardone et
al., 2020).
Retrofitting methods such as concrete jacketing and fiber-reinforced polymers (FRP) wrapping can
improve structural ductility of existing buildings, but in most cases the cost of retrofitting or the
technical challenges associated with retrofitting a structure is too high for developing nations
(Thermou and Elnashai, 2006; Bousias et al., 2019).
Base isolation is a more protective approach to add to a structure, but it is often not cost effective
(Mazza and Vulcano, 2017). Additionally, it generally costs more to insulate than to engineer an
existing structure, although the cost-benefit analyses have shown that the costs are worthwhile
despite the upfront costs.
Local interventions such as steel bracing are a more common proposition to retrofit the structure,
and much of the literature is based on standard models of existing buildings and does not account
for older irregular buildings (Smyth et al., 2004; Calvi et al., 2016).
The current document aims to fill the gaps in the literature by proposing a comprehensive framework
for assessing and retrofitting existing aging multistory RC buildings in developing nations, using
both state-of-the-art methodologies and cost-effective scalable strategies to enhance resilience
against earthquakes.
3
4. METHODOLOGY
The project will follow a systematic approach:
Survey and Data Collection: Select the sample building i.e. multi-Story in high density
urban areas. E.g. Kathmandu, Lalitpur, Bhaktapur.
Stakeholder Consultation: Engage with local communities and stakeholders for qualitative
insights. Collect the feedbacks through surveys or focus groups to ensure the project aligns
with local needs and priorities.
Technical Evaluation: Assess compliance with NBC guidelines for study and survey.
Structural Assessment: Perform visual inspection, material testing and use methods like
Rapid Visual Screening (RVS) based on NBC guidelines.
Seismic Analysis: To evaluate building performance under seismic loads, use various
software tools. E.g. ETABS, SAP2000.
Retrofitting Design: Propose retrofitting techniques like jacketing, shear wall addition or
base isolation.
Environmental Assessment: Conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) focusing
on topographical study and biodiversity.
Economic Feasibility: Perform a cost-benefit analysis to determine the economic viability
of proposed methods.
Report Compilation and Submission: Prepare a detailed report with design adjustments,
recommendations, maintenance schedules and cost estimates. Compile the final report and
submit to the respective departments.
4.1 Resources Required
Human Resources: Engineers, Environmental experts, Surveyors and local stakeholders.
Equipment: Survey tools like rebar scanner, rebound hammer.
Software: ETABS, AutoCAD, etc.
Support: The support and mutual understanding with local stakeholders are necessary.
4
Flowchart of Project Outlines:
Site investigation and Data
Collection
Seismic Preliminary Evaluation
Calculation of base shear.
Calculation shear stress and capacity of RC column
Calculation of axial stress in moment-frame columns.
Criteria
YES Satisfied? NO
Strengthening required
No strengthening
required
Selection and design of retrofit strategies
Comparison of various retrofitting option with reference to:
Cost and time consuming
Disturbance of existing structure
Original aesthetics
Selection of most appropriate retrofitting option
Detail drawing and Report
Relatively safe area drawing
Selection of most
appropriate retrofitting
option
5
5. EXPECTED OUTCOMES
The detailed review of the selected building aims to provide positive outcomes related to
seismic, structural, technical, socio-economic and environmental aspects.
Comprehensive understanding of the current condition of building.
Recommendations for retrofitting measures in the context of Nepal.
Increment on awareness among people about the importance of proper guidelines and
retrofitting.
Cost effective planning for the construction, maintenance and future upgrades.
6
6. PROJECT TIMELINE
The project is estimated to take 5 weeks, with the following milestones:
Week No. Work and Necessary Activities
Week 1 Project initiation, data collection, stakeholder engagement
Week 2 Surveys (topographic, design, floor plans, cross section, condition)
Week 3 Technical analysis, Seismic analysis, Structural analysis, Preliminary design,
economic feasibility
Week 4 Finalizing retrofitting designs, cost estimation, draft of final report preparation
Week 5 Revising, finalizing, and submitting the final report
7
The following bar chart indicates our project schedule:
Gantt Chart of Time Schedule
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Project initiation
Surveys
Technical analysis, preliminary design, economic feasibility
Finalizing designs, cost estimation, draft of report preparation
Revising, finalizing, and submitting the final report
Starting working week Duration
8
7.CONCLUSION
This proposal outlines a robust framework for assessing the seismic vulnerability of a multistory RC
building and designing effective retrofitting solutions. This project aims to create safe urban
development in Nepal by addressing the structural weaknesses of existing RC buildings. By
following National Building Code (NBC) of Nepal and using retrofitting process, it contributes to
make earthquake disaster risk buildings which would be long lasting, strong and long-term resilience
and to ensure occupant safety.
9
REFERENCES
[1]. Nepal National Building code (105:2020), Seismic Design of Buildings in Nepal
[2]. Chopra, A. K. (2017). Dynamics of structures: Theory and applications to earthquake
engineering (5th ed.). Pearson
[3]. fib Bulletin 24. (2003). Seismic assessment and retrofit of reinforced concrete buildings.
International Federation for Structural Concrete.
[4]. Elnashai, A. S., & Di Sarno, L. (2008). Fundamentals of earthquake engineering. Wiley.
[5]. Cardone, D., Perrone, G., & Flora, A. (2020). Performance-based seismic assessment of
RC buildings. Journal of Earthquake Engineering, 24(5), 789–810.
[6]. Calvi, G. M., Sullivan, T. J., & Welch, D. P. (2016). Cost-effective retrofitting strategies for
RC buildings. Bulletin of Earthquake Engineering, 14(3), 717–736.
10
